--------------------------------------------- Result 1 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After tracking it down for half a year, I finally found a copy and it was not disappointing.

Not disappointing because I'm one of those die hard SMAP fans who need to see all their works and I finally got to see the so called hot film of Goro. But I couldn't believe Goro was forced to make a movie as such. In his respectable self now, I'm sure he cringes that he made this movie. Nevertheless, they found the perfect person for looking embarrassed, ill at ease and half depressed most of the time.

Man, I still can't believe he made this movie...I had to cover my eyes at many parts not believing he really made such a movie....hahahaha....

But I'm glad to have watched it. Thank goodness he has grown up.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I [[felt]] like I was watching the [[Fast]] and the Furious again, but with [[different]] [[actors]] and a [[little]] bit [[different]] plot. I will [[say]] the [[cars]] in the film are very cool. [[So]], if you [[like]] [[fast]] [[cars]], then you will [[probably]] [[find]] this movie [[mildly]] entertaining. I also liked Nadia Bjorlin because I've [[seen]] her from Days of our [[Lives]]. She is a really good singer, but too bad they [[gave]] her such [[lousy]] [[songs]] to [[sing]] in this movie. I [[mean]] [[songs]] about cars; not exactly what you would here on the radio. Since it is a Hollywood film, you have to give this [[story]] a [[little]] lee [[way]], but in [[real]] [[life]] I don't [[think]] any average joe would come across such a hot [[girl]] as Nadia Bjorlin who can drive a race car, fix a [[car]] engine, and be a lead singer. It's just all very silly.

Another side [[note]], any one willing to wager 25 million on a car race is a nut. But it was kinda of cool at the end when Natasha stops right before the finish line and screws Michael over. Priceless.

FINAL VERDICT: This movie is for car freaks. So, if you like fast cars, then I'd recommend this. I [[smelled]] like I was watching the [[Swift]] and the Furious again, but with [[diversified]] [[protagonists]] and a [[scant]] bit [[diverse]] plot. I will [[tell]] the [[auto]] in the film are very cool. [[Accordingly]], if you [[fond]] [[swiftly]] [[auto]], then you will [[surely]] [[unearthed]] this movie [[gently]] entertaining. I also liked Nadia Bjorlin because I've [[noticed]] her from Days of our [[Vie]]. She is a really good singer, but too bad they [[given]] her such [[rotten]] [[tunes]] to [[singing]] in this movie. I [[imply]] [[tunes]] about cars; not exactly what you would here on the radio. Since it is a Hollywood film, you have to give this [[saga]] a [[scant]] lee [[manner]], but in [[veritable]] [[vie]] I don't [[reckon]] any average joe would come across such a hot [[fille]] as Nadia Bjorlin who can drive a race car, fix a [[autos]] engine, and be a lead singer. It's just all very silly.

Another side [[memo]], any one willing to wager 25 million on a car race is a nut. But it was kinda of cool at the end when Natasha stops right before the finish line and screws Michael over. Priceless.

FINAL VERDICT: This movie is for car freaks. So, if you like fast cars, then I'd recommend this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The story concerns a genealogy researcher (Mel Harris) who is hired by her Estee Lauder-like [[cosmetic]] queen aunt. Her aunt (by [[marriage]] we are left to presume) is trying to [[track]] down her [[long]] lost family in Europe. All they have to go on is a photo of a young girl [[standing]] by an ornate [[music]] box. The [[researcher]] heads to Europe and conducts her search in places like [[Milan]], Budapest, and Vienna. The [[scenery]] is the real thing and is [[actually]] shot on [[location]] (unlike a Murder, She [[Wrote]] where [[Jessica]] is supposed to be [[visiting]] a far-flung locale and Lansbury never left Burbank). Anyway, she [[meets]] a young [[man]] who is [[also]] [[searching]] to [[solve]] a family mystery of his own and they team up to [[track]] down [[clues]] and [[menace]] bad guys. The [[dialogue]], [[particularly]] the romantic dialogue, is [[terrible]]. I [[watched]] this because of the scenery but the script was so [[bad]] that I stayed on just to see if it would get worse. It did. Acting was [[also]] off. I can see why Mel Harris's career never really took off after thirtysomething, but she is adequate (seems too old for her co-star though). But, the supporting players are straight out of the community playhouse. I also [[lost]] count of how many times they say "Budapest" to each other. Yes, it is [[pronounced]] Bood-a-phesht. We know, okay? I realized halfway into the film that this had to be one of those Harlequin movies and sure enough it is. Guess that [[says]] it all. The story concerns a genealogy researcher (Mel Harris) who is hired by her Estee Lauder-like [[aesthetic]] queen aunt. Her aunt (by [[marries]] we are left to presume) is trying to [[tracking]] down her [[lengthy]] lost family in Europe. All they have to go on is a photo of a young girl [[stands]] by an ornate [[musicians]] box. The [[searcher]] heads to Europe and conducts her search in places like [[Milano]], Budapest, and Vienna. The [[panorama]] is the real thing and is [[genuinely]] shot on [[locations]] (unlike a Murder, She [[Texted]] where [[Jennifer]] is supposed to be [[visited]] a far-flung locale and Lansbury never left Burbank). Anyway, she [[satisfies]] a young [[dude]] who is [[apart]] [[looking]] to [[solving]] a family mystery of his own and they team up to [[trails]] down [[cues]] and [[jeopardy]] bad guys. The [[discussions]], [[notably]] the romantic dialogue, is [[frightful]]. I [[observed]] this because of the scenery but the script was so [[unfavourable]] that I stayed on just to see if it would get worse. It did. Acting was [[apart]] off. I can see why Mel Harris's career never really took off after thirtysomething, but she is adequate (seems too old for her co-star though). But, the supporting players are straight out of the community playhouse. I also [[outof]] count of how many times they say "Budapest" to each other. Yes, it is [[uttered]] Bood-a-phesht. We know, okay? I realized halfway into the film that this had to be one of those Harlequin movies and sure enough it is. Guess that [[tells]] it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A still famous but decadent actor (Morgan Freeman) has not filmed for four years. When he is invited to participate in a new project, he asks the clumsy cousin of the director to drop him in a poor Latin neighborhood in Carlson to research the work of the manager of a small supermarket. He sees the gorgeous Spanish cashier Scarlet (Paz Vega) and he becomes attracted with her ability. His driver never returns to catch him and Scarlet gives a ride to the actor. But first she has a job interview for the position of secretary in a construction company and the actor helps her to be prepared; then they spend the afternoon together having a pleasant time.

I am a big fan of Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega. However, the pointless "10 Items or Less" is absolutely disappointing. This low-budget movie does not seem to have a storyline, and is supported by the chemistry and improvisations of Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega and actually nothing happens along 82 minutes. The ambiguous open conclusion is simply ridiculous, with the character of Morgan Freeman returning to his silver spoon world and telling the simple worker that they would never see each other again. Was he afraid to have a love affair with her and destroy his perfect world with his family? Or was a clash of classes, and he realizes that his fancy neighborhood would not be adequate to a simple worker from the lower classes? My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Um Astro em Minha Vida" ("A Star in My Life") --------------------------------------------- Result 5 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I gave 1 to this film. I can't understand how Ettore Scola,one of the greater directors of Italian cinema, made a film like this, so stupid and ridiculous! All the stories of the people involved in the movie are unsubstantial,boring and not interesting. Too long,too boring. The only things I save in this movie are Giancarlo Giannini and Vittorio Gasmann. Hope that Scola will change radically themes and style in his next film. --------------------------------------------- Result 6 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Robert De [[Niro]], Cuba Gooding Jr., Hal Holbrook, and all the [[rest]] of the [[actors]] and actresses in "[[Men]] of [[Honour]]" have [[combined]] to make this a [[fine]] [[movie]]. Mark Isham wrote the filmscore, so you know the [[music]] is truly fine, too.

But: After noticing a slew of goofs, loopholes, and over-dramatic heart-string pluckings right from the start, I had to make a [[vow]] to ignore them and sit back to enjoy the film. If you can do that, it _really_is_ [[good]].

The [[story]] of Carl Brashear, a true-to-life [[hero]], is inspirational [[enough]] to last a [[lifetime]]. [[Look]] him up on the [[internet]]... The [[entire]] [[story]] is more [[amazing]] than the [[film]], as the Director [[admitted]] in his [[comments]]. There were only three African-American U.S. [[Navy]] divers in [[World]] [[War]] II. [[However]], [[none]] [[reached]] the status of U.S. [[Navy]] [[Master]] [[Diver]]. [[Carl]] Brashear was THE first African-American U.S. [[Navy]] Master [[Diver]]. AND he was the first amputee [[diver]] to ever be [[certified]] or recertified as a U.S. [[Navy]] [[diver]]. (Resounding Applause).

On the [[negative]] side of the movie's ledger: [[Should]] I [[tell]] you of only one of the [[many]] "[[loopholes]]"? [[Yeah]], I'll [[mark]] this [[comment]] as containing "[[spoilers]]" and do so... The [[early]], [[pivotal]] scene where the [[helicopter]] hits the radio mast and sinks into the [[sea]]: They'd never have had the [[time]] to suit up a full Mark V diver, [[even]] if he were the [[legendary]] [[Master]] [[Chief]] Billy [[Sunday]], in [[time]] to be only "... a [[couple]] of minutes late" [[saving]] the pilot.

[[So]], for [[loopholes]], goofs, and over-dramatization, I derated "[[Men]] of [[Honor]]" from a perfect 10 down to a 7.

Will Hollywood EVER [[realize]] that the unalloyed truth is so much better that their over-dramatic approach to story-telling? I doubt it. Too [[bad]]! Robert De [[Nero]], Cuba Gooding Jr., Hal Holbrook, and all the [[resting]] of the [[protagonists]] and actresses in "[[Males]] of [[Honours]]" have [[combo]] to make this a [[alright]] [[cinematography]]. Mark Isham wrote the filmscore, so you know the [[musician]] is truly fine, too.

But: After noticing a slew of goofs, loopholes, and over-dramatic heart-string pluckings right from the start, I had to make a [[vows]] to ignore them and sit back to enjoy the film. If you can do that, it _really_is_ [[alright]].

The [[history]] of Carl Brashear, a true-to-life [[heroin]], is inspirational [[adequately]] to last a [[lifespan]]. [[Gaze]] him up on the [[cyber]]... The [[whole]] [[histories]] is more [[noteworthy]] than the [[cinema]], as the Director [[recognised]] in his [[observations]]. There were only three African-American U.S. [[Naval]] divers in [[Global]] [[Warfare]] II. [[Instead]], [[nos]] [[attained]] the status of U.S. [[Marines]] [[Maestro]] [[Diving]]. [[Karl]] Brashear was THE first African-American U.S. [[Marines]] Master [[Diving]]. AND he was the first amputee [[divers]] to ever be [[accredited]] or recertified as a U.S. [[Marines]] [[divers]]. (Resounding Applause).

On the [[bad]] side of the movie's ledger: [[Must]] I [[telling]] you of only one of the [[multiple]] "[[defects]]"? [[Yep]], I'll [[marks]] this [[observing]] as containing "[[troublemakers]]" and do so... The [[prematurely]], [[fundamental]] scene where the [[helicopters]] hits the radio mast and sinks into the [[hai]]: They'd never have had the [[period]] to suit up a full Mark V diver, [[yet]] if he were the [[mythical]] [[Masters]] [[Leader]] Billy [[Thursday]], in [[period]] to be only "... a [[matching]] of minutes late" [[rescuing]] the pilot.

[[Accordingly]], for [[inadequacies]], goofs, and over-dramatization, I derated "[[Male]] of [[Honored]]" from a perfect 10 down to a 7.

Will Hollywood EVER [[attain]] that the unalloyed truth is so much better that their over-dramatic approach to story-telling? I doubt it. Too [[amiss]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 7 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Entertaining]] musical where [[Nathan]] [[Detroit]] needs $1,000.00 to get up a floating [[crap]] [[game]] so he entices [[Sky]] Masterson to [[try]] and get salvation army [[girl]], [[played]] by Jean [[Simmons]], to [[go]] with Masterson to [[Havana]].

5 [[years]] later, Simmons [[would]] be in the missionary again in the [[fabulous]] "Elmer Gantry." There she was sister Sharon and here she is [[Sister]] Sarah. [[Same]] [[temperament]], [[different]] story.

Frank Sinatra is that devilish Nathan Detroit. He has been engaged to Vivian Blaine for 14 years and she [[loathes]] his [[gambling]] habit.

[[In]] a real [[change]] of pace, Sky Masterson was played by Marlon Brando who actually did his own [[singing]] here!

The [[film]] is saved by superlative [[choreography]]. Those [[dance]] and [[singing]] [[routines]] are [[fabulous]]. They are [[especially]] [[realized]] by Stubby Kaye as [[Nicely]] [[Nicely]] ([[Johnson]]).

[[All]] in all, it's a very nice [[production]]. [[Amusing]] musical where [[Natan]] [[Straits]] needs $1,000.00 to get up a floating [[goddamnit]] [[games]] so he entices [[Skye]] Masterson to [[attempted]] and get salvation army [[women]], [[done]] by Jean [[Simons]], to [[going]] with Masterson to [[Habana]].

5 [[ages]] later, Simmons [[should]] be in the missionary again in the [[phenomenal]] "Elmer Gantry." There she was sister Sharon and here she is [[Sisters]] Sarah. [[Identical]] [[installment]], [[various]] story.

Frank Sinatra is that devilish Nathan Detroit. He has been engaged to Vivian Blaine for 14 years and she [[detested]] his [[gaming]] habit.

[[For]] a real [[amend]] of pace, Sky Masterson was played by Marlon Brando who actually did his own [[singer]] here!

The [[cinematography]] is saved by superlative [[choreographer]]. Those [[choreography]] and [[sung]] [[customary]] are [[wondrous]]. They are [[primarily]] [[performed]] by Stubby Kaye as [[Kindly]] [[Kindly]] ([[Johnston]]).

[[Totality]] in all, it's a very nice [[productivity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 8 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It took us a couple of episodes to "get into" Dark Angel as a story and a series, since we were transitioning from The Sopranos, a very different mentality framework. But, once we got with the gist of the series, we were very quickly hooked. It's a shame that the series ended just when it was just starting to past good into the excellent category: Dark Angelwas much more than your average TV series. It kicks ass and rocks as far as action goes, but the interactions of the characters and societal reactions to "mutants" reminds us of the constant prejudices that we face (and make) everyday. That the story is set in the future keeps the mood surreal and prevents the anti-discrimination message from being rubbed in our faces (hence not ruining the "fun" for those who don't like to be lectured during entertainment), but every event and human/societal interaction remains relevant to the present. We all make judgments, face our own prejudices, but, in the end, the question of who you are lies in: do you sit back and shut your mind to it, or do you get up and do something about it? For those who have no choice but to fight, for survival or justice, this series empowers them. For those who've never had to face the question, this series "sneaks in" that message under the guise of pure action entertainment. It is much more well-made and well-written than most TV series; I'm highly disappointed it ended before it could really kick into high gear. --------------------------------------------- Result 9 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I [[simply]] [[could]] not [[finish]] this [[movie]]. I tuned out after what I [[would]] [[say]] is my [[nomination]] for the most [[wretched]] [[attempt]] at sexual [[suggestion]] award: a scene in which Pia Zadora, at a picnic, [[stands]] between two [[boys]] who [[want]] her. One (the good [[boy]]) [[pleads]] for her to [[see]] the [[error]] of her [[ways]]. The other (the [[bad]] [[boy]]) simply [[asks]] if she'd like a hot [[dog]], which he then [[holds]] out for her. [[At]] crotch [[level]]. I hope I'm not [[spoiling]] [[anything]] to [[say]] she turns, and takes the [[hot]] dog, with a [[smile]]. [[Just]] pathetic. I [[straightforward]] [[did]] not [[completed]] this [[filmmaking]]. I tuned out after what I [[could]] [[tell]] is my [[nominate]] for the most [[hapless]] [[try]] at sexual [[propositions]] award: a scene in which Pia Zadora, at a picnic, [[stand]] between two [[guy]] who [[desiring]] her. One (the good [[dude]]) [[admits]] for her to [[seeing]] the [[mistakes]] of her [[methods]]. The other (the [[naughty]] [[dude]]) simply [[requested]] if she'd like a hot [[puppy]], which he then [[held]] out for her. [[For]] crotch [[levels]]. I hope I'm not [[ruining]] [[somethings]] to [[told]] she turns, and takes the [[sexiest]] dog, with a [[grinning]]. [[Virtuous]] pathetic. --------------------------------------------- Result 10 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] My first [[attempt]] at watching this [[ended]] in 8 minutes, roughly after the TV report scene, which I couldn't handle. It went approximately like this:

Reporter 1: Hmm, there's a pyramid in our skies. Reporter 2: I think it's aliens. *awkward silence* Reporter 1: In other news...

A few days later I watched it to the end, and it wasn't as [[horrible]] as I've [[imagined]], but there are serious [[problems]] with this. About half of the plot can be easily discarded. And the other half should be expanded to [[explain]] the [[background]] [[story]] or [[something]].

What [[use]] are the detective, the eugenics people, and the monsters which are disposed of momentarily by [[Horus]]? More amusing was the monopoly scene. "We're all [[powerful]] "Gods", who have lived for aeons, and of all the [[games]] in the multiverse we [[happen]] to play monopoly." Monopoly? Monopoly?! [[Even]] Erich von Dainiken [[looks]] [[coherent]], [[compared]] to that.

The other half is [[terribly]] [[lacking]]. What did our [[protagonist]] do to get himself cryo-frozen? Why was there no big event when he was released at the [[end]]? He had those pesky [[followers]], remember? What happened to normal humans? What's the deal with the masked guy? How did the blue-haired girl appear? What's with her eyesight? Etcetera, etcetera.

Visually it's OK, more or less, if you disregard the Egyptian Gods looking like walking [[turds]] with rotweiller [[heads]]. My first [[try]] at watching this [[ending]] in 8 minutes, roughly after the TV report scene, which I couldn't handle. It went approximately like this:

Reporter 1: Hmm, there's a pyramid in our skies. Reporter 2: I think it's aliens. *awkward silence* Reporter 1: In other news...

A few days later I watched it to the end, and it wasn't as [[frightening]] as I've [[figured]], but there are serious [[hassles]] with this. About half of the plot can be easily discarded. And the other half should be expanded to [[clarified]] the [[backdrop]] [[saga]] or [[algo]].

What [[uses]] are the detective, the eugenics people, and the monsters which are disposed of momentarily by [[Horace]]? More amusing was the monopoly scene. "We're all [[forceful]] "Gods", who have lived for aeons, and of all the [[gaming]] in the multiverse we [[occur]] to play monopoly." Monopoly? Monopoly?! [[Yet]] Erich von Dainiken [[seem]] [[cohesive]], [[likened]] to that.

The other half is [[remarkably]] [[missing]]. What did our [[player]] do to get himself cryo-frozen? Why was there no big event when he was released at the [[termination]]? He had those pesky [[supporters]], remember? What happened to normal humans? What's the deal with the masked guy? How did the blue-haired girl appear? What's with her eyesight? Etcetera, etcetera.

Visually it's OK, more or less, if you disregard the Egyptian Gods looking like walking [[tossers]] with rotweiller [[leiter]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 11 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Revenge]] is one of my favorite themes in [[film]]. Moreso, "the futility of revenge" is one of my favorite themes in [[film]]. Having seen Gaspar Noe's Irreversible (2002), I was [[expecting]] an even more relevant expression of this theme. [[Instead]], this film is a weak half-hearted attempt which [[expressed]] [[nothing]] but the film's [[lack]] of conviction and focus.

*SPOILERS* The end scene, a [[gratuitous]] male-on-male rape/torture scene, [[came]] across as nothing [[less]] than a female [[revenge]] rape [[fantasy]]. However, the film doesn't even follow through with this. Instead, the [[drawn]] out scene (which FAR [[exceeds]] the [[brutality]] of the [[initial]] rape both in the degree to which it was graphic and to which it was ritualized) is crowned with a [[shot]] of Dawson's face in an [[expression]] of either [[regret]] or "This didn't [[fix]] [[anything]]" while the rape of her rapist is heard [[continuing]] in the [[background]].

My [[problem]] with the scene wasn't one of [[shock]], but one of [[confusion]] as to what such a graphic scene was [[trying]] to [[get]] [[across]] to the audience. I [[mean]], do we feel bad for the rapist? [[Do]] we rejoice in Dawson's [[revenge]]? Are we disgusted by the [[brutality]] of it all? Do we feel Dawson's [[moment]] of [[regretful]] clarity? Aside from this [[failing]], the film is [[really]] sort of [[awkwardly]] paced with more [[style]] than [[substance]]. Character's are [[thin]], [[dialog]] is [[monotonous]], etc.

[[Normally]] I [[try]] to [[take]] [[films]] on their own terms but [[Descent]] didn't really [[seem]] to know what those were. [[Thumbs]] down. [[Vengeance]] is one of my favorite themes in [[flick]]. Moreso, "the futility of revenge" is one of my favorite themes in [[flick]]. Having seen Gaspar Noe's Irreversible (2002), I was [[expect]] an even more relevant expression of this theme. [[Alternatively]], this film is a weak half-hearted attempt which [[expresses]] [[nada]] but the film's [[imperfection]] of conviction and focus.

*SPOILERS* The end scene, a [[groundless]] male-on-male rape/torture scene, [[arrived]] across as nothing [[lesser]] than a female [[avenge]] rape [[fantasia]]. However, the film doesn't even follow through with this. Instead, the [[draws]] out scene (which FAR [[surpassing]] the [[bestiality]] of the [[upfront]] rape both in the degree to which it was graphic and to which it was ritualized) is crowned with a [[filmed]] of Dawson's face in an [[expressions]] of either [[deplore]] or "This didn't [[remedy]] [[nada]]" while the rape of her rapist is heard [[continues]] in the [[context]].

My [[issues]] with the scene wasn't one of [[shocks]], but one of [[chaos]] as to what such a graphic scene was [[try]] to [[gets]] [[throughout]] to the audience. I [[imply]], do we feel bad for the rapist? [[Doing]] we rejoice in Dawson's [[vengeance]]? Are we disgusted by the [[barbarism]] of it all? Do we feel Dawson's [[time]] of [[sorrowful]] clarity? Aside from this [[omitting]], the film is [[truly]] sort of [[nervously]] paced with more [[elegance]] than [[substances]]. Character's are [[delgado]], [[dialogues]] is [[dull]], etc.

[[Often]] I [[tried]] to [[taking]] [[cinematography]] on their own terms but [[Ancestry]] didn't really [[appears]] to know what those were. [[Inches]] down. --------------------------------------------- Result 12 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[Years]] ago, when I was a poor [[teenager]], my best [[friend]] and my brother both had a policy that the [[person]] picking the [[movie]] should [[pay]]. And, while I [[would]] never [[pay]] to see some of the [[crap]] they took me to, I couldn't resist a free trip to the movies! That's how I [[came]] to see [[crap]] like the second Conan movie and NEVER [[SAY]] NEVER AGAIN! Now, despite this being a [[wretched]] movie, it is in places entertaining to watch--in a brain dead sort of way. And, technically the stunts and camera-work are good, so this elevates my rating all the way to a 2! So why is the movie so bad? Well, unlike the first Rambo movie, this one has virtually no plot, Rambo himself only says about 3 words (other than grunts and yells), there is a needless and completely irrelevant and undeveloped "romance" and the movie is one giant (and stupid) special effect. And what STUPIFYINGLY AWFUL special [[effects]]. While 12383499143743701 bullets and rockets are shot at Rambo, none have any effect on him and almost every bullet or arrow Rambo shoots hits its mark! And, while the bad guys are using AK-47s, helicopters and rockets, in some scenes all Rambo had is a bow and arrows with what seem like nuclear-powered tips!! The scene where the one bad guy is shooting at him as he slowly and calmly launches one of these exploding arrows is particularly made for dumb viewers! It was wonderfully parodied in UHF starring Weird Al. Plus, HOT [[SHOTS]], PART DEUX also does a funny parody of the genre--not just this stupid scene.

All-in-all, a movie so dumb and [[pointless]], it's almost like self-parody! [[Ages]] ago, when I was a poor [[teenage]], my best [[friends]] and my brother both had a policy that the [[anyone]] picking the [[filmmaking]] should [[payroll]]. And, while I [[could]] never [[salary]] to see some of the [[shit]] they took me to, I couldn't resist a free trip to the movies! That's how I [[arrived]] to see [[baloney]] like the second Conan movie and NEVER [[TOLD]] NEVER AGAIN! Now, despite this being a [[deplorable]] movie, it is in places entertaining to watch--in a brain dead sort of way. And, technically the stunts and camera-work are good, so this elevates my rating all the way to a 2! So why is the movie so bad? Well, unlike the first Rambo movie, this one has virtually no plot, Rambo himself only says about 3 words (other than grunts and yells), there is a needless and completely irrelevant and undeveloped "romance" and the movie is one giant (and stupid) special effect. And what STUPIFYINGLY AWFUL special [[repercussions]]. While 12383499143743701 bullets and rockets are shot at Rambo, none have any effect on him and almost every bullet or arrow Rambo shoots hits its mark! And, while the bad guys are using AK-47s, helicopters and rockets, in some scenes all Rambo had is a bow and arrows with what seem like nuclear-powered tips!! The scene where the one bad guy is shooting at him as he slowly and calmly launches one of these exploding arrows is particularly made for dumb viewers! It was wonderfully parodied in UHF starring Weird Al. Plus, HOT [[PUNCHES]], PART DEUX also does a funny parody of the genre--not just this stupid scene.

All-in-all, a movie so dumb and [[superfluous]], it's almost like self-parody! --------------------------------------------- Result 13 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this has by far been one of the most beautiful portraits of a person that I've ever seen on screen. Andy Goldsworthy is a kind of man that is upon extinction. he views the earth and nature with such admiration and respect that it's primitive in a good sense. his purity, honesty and kindness breathes clearly as you watch him work in such simplistic yet full of life momentary pieces of art. I was amazed how patiently he created his pieces and how patiently he accepted their end. sometimes prematurely, but his Scottish sense of humor covers his disappointments brilliantly. the film is shoot elegantly and contains the same flow that Goldsworthy's art has. it combines nature and art in a minimal way as it is in itself. Fred Frith's score is organic enough that it blends everything together without interfering with it naturalistic sound. this is overall a great piece of work in every aspect. it has no boundaries as far as age goes. --------------------------------------------- Result 14 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Loved Part One, The Impossible Planet, but whoops, what a [[disappointment]] [[part]] two 'The [[Satan]] Pit' is. The cliffhanger of something [[apparently]] rising out of the pit was - nothing coming out of the pit. Then ages spent crawling round [[air]] vents to pad out the [[story]], the Beast a roaring thing [[empty]] of [[intelligence]], so no Doctor/villain confrontation I'd been anticipating. The TARDIS is somehow inside the pit [[despite]] the pit not being open till [[long]] after the TARDIS fell through the planet crust. And [[finally]] another ready made solution which [[existed]] for no logical reason - I [[mean]], why not plunge the Beast into the [[Hole]] as [[soon]] as the pit [[opened]]? Why not plunge him in all those years ago [[instead]] of imprisoning him anyway. Why not - I could go on but I've [[lost]] interest... Loved Part One, The Impossible Planet, but whoops, what a [[frustration]] [[parties]] two 'The [[Lucifer]] Pit' is. The cliffhanger of something [[visibly]] rising out of the pit was - nothing coming out of the pit. Then ages spent crawling round [[aviation]] vents to pad out the [[conte]], the Beast a roaring thing [[emptiness]] of [[intelligentsia]], so no Doctor/villain confrontation I'd been anticipating. The TARDIS is somehow inside the pit [[although]] the pit not being open till [[longer]] after the TARDIS fell through the planet crust. And [[eventually]] another ready made solution which [[prevailed]] for no logical reason - I [[meaning]], why not plunge the Beast into the [[Hellhole]] as [[shortly]] as the pit [[opening]]? Why not plunge him in all those years ago [[conversely]] of imprisoning him anyway. Why not - I could go on but I've [[outof]] interest... --------------------------------------------- Result 15 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] "Cavemen" [[exceeded]] my [[expectations]], and not in a good way. It was [[even]] [[worse]] than I thought it would be. Basically, here's the [[show]]: The Cavemen are an alternate race, they face prejudice, etc. Quite possibly the [[stupidest]] [[idea]] ever created; almost being worthy of [[jail]] time for the writers. One show featured the cavemen going into a club, trying to pick up [[girls]], and then nothing [[else]] [[happened]]. It was reminiscent of listening to a 22 minute Andy [[Rooney]] dialog, followed by death by steak knives via midget cannibals. For those who have not seen this show, here's an example of the dialog: "You're sure you're okay with going out with a [[caveman]]." "Yeah, that's fine. I've had like 10 - thousand!" [[Hilarious]]... Possibly the best writing I've ever witnessed.

22 minutes of cavemen with horrible makeup, tackling tough social issues... Sounds like an entertaining night. I also love how bad the recent ideas are that they're resorted to making a sitcom out of [[car]] insurance [[commercials]]. I wonder if they'll do the Gecko next, so that I can have a [[new]] title for the [[worst]] [[show]] I've ever [[seen]]. I [[would]] even [[say]] that this is worse than "[[Viva]] Laughlin." [[At]] [[least]] "Viva Laughlin" was [[ripped]] off from [[something]] that was [[somewhat]] inspired.

[[Shows]] [[like]] this make me [[hope]] that there's a comet up there [[somewhere]] [[aimed]] for [[Earth]].

(Unratable [[honestly]]...) "Cavemen" [[surpass]] my [[forecasts]], and not in a good way. It was [[yet]] [[pire]] than I thought it would be. Basically, here's the [[exhibit]]: The Cavemen are an alternate race, they face prejudice, etc. Quite possibly the [[silliest]] [[inkling]] ever created; almost being worthy of [[prisons]] time for the writers. One show featured the cavemen going into a club, trying to pick up [[dame]], and then nothing [[otherwise]] [[arrived]]. It was reminiscent of listening to a 22 minute Andy [[Roni]] dialog, followed by death by steak knives via midget cannibals. For those who have not seen this show, here's an example of the dialog: "You're sure you're okay with going out with a [[cave]]." "Yeah, that's fine. I've had like 10 - thousand!" [[Fun]]... Possibly the best writing I've ever witnessed.

22 minutes of cavemen with horrible makeup, tackling tough social issues... Sounds like an entertaining night. I also love how bad the recent ideas are that they're resorted to making a sitcom out of [[motorcars]] insurance [[spots]]. I wonder if they'll do the Gecko next, so that I can have a [[novo]] title for the [[gravest]] [[exposition]] I've ever [[noticed]]. I [[should]] even [[says]] that this is worse than "[[Vivo]] Laughlin." [[For]] [[less]] "Viva Laughlin" was [[torn]] off from [[somethin]] that was [[rather]] inspired.

[[Illustrates]] [[iike]] this make me [[esperanza]] that there's a comet up there [[anywhere]] [[intentioned]] for [[Terra]].

(Unratable [[truthfully]]...) --------------------------------------------- Result 16 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Ask]] yourself where she [[got]] the gun? Remember what she was [[taught]] about the mark's mindset when the con is over? The [[gun]] had blanks and it was [[provided]] to her from the very [[beginning]].

[[When]] the patient [[comes]] back at the [[end]] she was SUPPOSED to [[see]] him [[drive]] away in the red convertible and lead her to the gang splitting up her 80 thousand.

The [[patient]] was in on the con from the [[beginning]].

Mantegna does not [[die]] in the end - the [[gun]] had blanks.

There - [[enough]] [[spoilers]] for you there? This is why people are giving it such [[high]] ratings. It's [[extremely]] [[original]] because of the [[hidden]] ending and how it [[cons]] [[MOST]] of the audience. [[Poser]] yourself where she [[did]] the gun? Remember what she was [[lectured]] about the mark's mindset when the con is over? The [[handgun]] had blanks and it was [[supplied]] to her from the very [[launches]].

[[Whenever]] the patient [[arrives]] back at the [[termination]] she was SUPPOSED to [[behold]] him [[driving]] away in the red convertible and lead her to the gang splitting up her 80 thousand.

The [[ill]] was in on the con from the [[commencing]].

Mantegna does not [[dead]] in the end - the [[handgun]] had blanks.

There - [[adequate]] [[vandals]] for you there? This is why people are giving it such [[highest]] ratings. It's [[unbelievably]] [[upfront]] because of the [[veiled]] ending and how it [[arseholes]] [[PLUS]] of the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 17 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Real cool, smart movie. I loved Sheedy's colors, especially the purple car. Alice Drummond is Wise And Wonderful as Stella. I liked Sheedy's reference to how her face had gotten fatter. The roadside dance scene is brilliant. Really liked this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 18 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Ringmaster, Jerry Springer's [[pathetic]] excuse for [[wasting]] [[film]] that should be recycled as [[toilet]] paper recently [[destroyed]] my confidence in the art of film. [[First]] of all, it was [[made]]. [[Second]] of all, people went to [[see]] it. Third, some people [[voted]] it the [[best]] [[movie]] they have ever seen. If a [[monkey]] could [[make]] a movie, i'm 100 percent sure that it [[would]] be 1 billion times as good. Most [[crappy]] [[movies]] have their moments, (even Godzilla had a few cool [[special]] [[effects]]) this film's [[moment]] was when I [[left]] the [[theater]] [[nauseated]]. The only thing that [[possibly]] could've [[made]] this [[movie]] any worse would be if Jerry Springer was the [[star]]. If I [[want]] to stare at crap for an [[hour]] and a half, i'll [[take]] a dump in a can. [[If]] [[anyone]] didn't [[utterly]] despise this movie, I [[pity]] you, and your [[children]], and your children's children's [[children]]; [[however]], [[contrary]] to Springer's [[beliefs]], I [[clearly]] don't condone [[children]] having [[sex]]. Ringmaster, Jerry Springer's [[deplorable]] excuse for [[losing]] [[cinema]] that should be recycled as [[lavatories]] paper recently [[obliterated]] my confidence in the art of film. [[Fiirst]] of all, it was [[effected]]. [[Secondly]] of all, people went to [[behold]] it. Third, some people [[vote]] it the [[optimum]] [[cinematic]] they have ever seen. If a [[chimp]] could [[deliver]] a movie, i'm 100 percent sure that it [[ought]] be 1 billion times as good. Most [[shitty]] [[kino]] have their moments, (even Godzilla had a few cool [[peculiar]] [[consequences]]) this film's [[time]] was when I [[gauche]] the [[teatro]] [[queasy]]. The only thing that [[maybe]] could've [[effected]] this [[film]] any worse would be if Jerry Springer was the [[stars]]. If I [[wanting]] to stare at crap for an [[hora]] and a half, i'll [[taking]] a dump in a can. [[Though]] [[person]] didn't [[acutely]] despise this movie, I [[compassion]] you, and your [[childhood]], and your children's children's [[kiddies]]; [[conversely]], [[opus]] to Springer's [[convictions]], I [[unequivocally]] don't condone [[childhood]] having [[sexuality]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 19 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I have [[seen]] most, if not all of the Laurel & Hardy [[classic]] films. I have [[always]] enjoyed there [[comical]] stupidly, even after watching it over and over again. This [[new]] [[film]] attempts to bring back the [[classic]] with two new actors who resemble both Laurel & [[Hardy]], however fails miserably for various [[reasons]]. One of which is how out of place their cloths are (still [[early]] 20th century) however are both [[portrayed]] in the 90's setting. Some of the former dialogue was brought back, however it [[also]] [[fails]] [[miserably]] to come close to the classic series. This film [[could]] very well be the [[worst]] [[film]] I have ever [[seen]] and should be pulled off the shelf and locked away [[forever]]. The [[real]] [[Laurel]] & Hardy are surly spinning in their [[graves]] at such a [[bad]] [[imitation]]. I have [[noticed]] most, if not all of the Laurel & Hardy [[typical]] films. I have [[permanently]] enjoyed there [[funny]] stupidly, even after watching it over and over again. This [[newest]] [[films]] attempts to bring back the [[traditional]] with two new actors who resemble both Laurel & [[Sturdy]], however fails miserably for various [[motifs]]. One of which is how out of place their cloths are (still [[swift]] 20th century) however are both [[depicted]] in the 90's setting. Some of the former dialogue was brought back, however it [[apart]] [[fail]] [[spectacularly]] to come close to the classic series. This film [[did]] very well be the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I have ever [[watched]] and should be pulled off the shelf and locked away [[eternally]]. The [[veritable]] [[Laurier]] & Hardy are surly spinning in their [[cemetery]] at such a [[unfavourable]] [[mimicry]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 20 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Barbra]] Streisand's [[debut]] television special is still a pinnacle moment in entertainment history - in any [[media]]. Cleverly divided into three [[separate]] acts (to minimize the [[interruption]] of commercial breaks), Streisand made the bold-yet-masterful decision to [[drop]] the [[typical]] variety [[show]] format of the [[time]] (which is why there is no guest stars nor [[forced]] banter) and [[carry]] the entire show on her shoulders [[alone]]. The risky move [[paid]] off [[enormously]], as MY NAME IS BARBRA set a [[new]] standard for musical programming on television.

[[Filmed]] in [[glorious]] black-and-white (which actually [[adds]] to the [[effectiveness]] of the [[show]]), MY [[NAME]] IS BARBRA is flawlessly-conceived and [[impressively]] shot. However, what makes the [[show]] [[truly]] transcendent is Streisand herself. [[Watching]] the then-23 year old [[performer]] navigate herself through the show's 55 minute runtime is [[nothing]] [[less]] than [[thrilling]]. She is in [[fantastic]] [[voice]] (and [[even]] performs the entire first and third [[acts]] live), and gives [[first]] evidence of the [[immense]] star power that [[would]] [[soon]] follow her to the big screen.

The special's [[biggest]] asset is it's boldness in [[allowing]] Streisand to simply [[stand]] on [[stage]] and [[sing]] some [[great]] [[songs]]. After the [[powerful]] [[opening]] performance of "Much [[More]]" (with a brief [[opening]] snippet from [[Leonard]] Bernstein's "My [[Name]] Is [[Barbara]]"), Barbra [[proceeds]] to wander through a multi-level studio set performing a [[frantic]] [[version]] of the Disney [[classic]] "I'm Late." [[In]] between verses of "I'm Late," Streisand stops at [[various]] levels of the set to sing some [[terrific]] numbers such as the haunting "Make Believe" and the thundering "How Does the [[Wine]] [[Taste]]?" Halfway through the [[Act]] I, Barbra re-enters her own [[childhood]] to the strains of "A Kid Again," and then gives highly energetic performances of "I'm Five" and "Sweet Zoo" while romping among an over-sized set. The [[illusion]] is eventually shattered, however, as Streisand finds herself out of the [[fantasy]] and back in the real world. She then sings about this lost childhood innocence in the lovely "Where Is the Wonder?" Streisand then dashes out onto a platform stage surrounded by an entire room-full of musicians and performs a rousing rendition of "People" before the thunderous applause of a live studio audience.

Act II of the special begins with Streisand hamming it up for the studio audience with a campy rendition of "I've Got the Blues," before delivering a comedy monologue about "Pearl from Istanbul." Streisand then heads off to Bergdorf Goodman's department store, which allows her to sing a medley of poverty songs while parading around in some of the store's elegant fashions. This segment is the brightest highlight of the special for many fans and critics. Some high points of the Act II medley include Streisand singing a restrained version of "Second Hand Rose" to the audience, appearing as a Latin bullfighter to the tune of "Nobody Knows You When You're Down and Out," and portraying a frustrated paperboy while mugging to "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime." The third Act of the special is a straight concert, with no set pieces or concepts. Streisand is a performer who really thrives on the concert stage, and this segment is the most thrilling moment of the special. Streisand enters belting out an almost gravity-defying rendition of "When the Sun Comes Out," and continues to amaze the viewer with a lovely version of THE YEARLING ballad "Why Did I Choose You," a scorching performance of "Lover Come Back to Me," and an impassioned medley of three songs form FUNNY GIRL. Streisand really outdoes herself, however, with a phenomenal rendition of the Fanny Brice/Billie Holiday standard "My Man," which instantly became on of the singer's best-loved signature songs.

Streisand performs her immortal ballad version of "Happy Days Are Here Again" as the closing credits roll by on the left-hand side of the screen. The iconic finish to the number reaffirms to the viewer that he or she has indeed seen something truly special. MY NAME IS BARBRA was a huge rating triumph when first aired, and it eventually picked up five Emmy awards in addition to spawning two Top-Five, Gold-selling soundtrack albums. Watching it all again, it's absolutely no surprise. [[Babs]] Streisand's [[infancy]] television special is still a pinnacle moment in entertainment history - in any [[medium]]. Cleverly divided into three [[seperate]] acts (to minimize the [[suspension]] of commercial breaks), Streisand made the bold-yet-masterful decision to [[tumbles]] the [[symptomatic]] variety [[demonstrate]] format of the [[moment]] (which is why there is no guest stars nor [[obliged]] banter) and [[carrying]] the entire show on her shoulders [[lone]]. The risky move [[salary]] off [[terribly]], as MY NAME IS BARBRA set a [[newer]] standard for musical programming on television.

[[Shot]] in [[brilliant]] black-and-white (which actually [[added]] to the [[efficacy]] of the [[spectacle]]), MY [[NAMING]] IS BARBRA is flawlessly-conceived and [[dramatically]] shot. However, what makes the [[demonstrate]] [[really]] transcendent is Streisand herself. [[Staring]] the then-23 year old [[entertainer]] navigate herself through the show's 55 minute runtime is [[anything]] [[fewest]] than [[intriguing]]. She is in [[great]] [[vowel]] (and [[yet]] performs the entire first and third [[act]] live), and gives [[fiirst]] evidence of the [[considerable]] star power that [[could]] [[rapidly]] follow her to the big screen.

The special's [[strongest]] asset is it's boldness in [[permitting]] Streisand to simply [[standing]] on [[stages]] and [[singing]] some [[huge]] [[hymns]]. After the [[forceful]] [[commencement]] performance of "Much [[Greater]]" (with a brief [[open]] snippet from [[Leonardo]] Bernstein's "My [[Naming]] Is [[Barbarian]]"), Barbra [[receipts]] to wander through a multi-level studio set performing a [[distraught]] [[stepping]] of the Disney [[classical]] "I'm Late." [[At]] between verses of "I'm Late," Streisand stops at [[many]] levels of the set to sing some [[wondrous]] numbers such as the haunting "Make Believe" and the thundering "How Does the [[Vineyard]] [[Aftertaste]]?" Halfway through the [[Legislation]] I, Barbra re-enters her own [[children]] to the strains of "A Kid Again," and then gives highly energetic performances of "I'm Five" and "Sweet Zoo" while romping among an over-sized set. The [[chimera]] is eventually shattered, however, as Streisand finds herself out of the [[utopia]] and back in the real world. She then sings about this lost childhood innocence in the lovely "Where Is the Wonder?" Streisand then dashes out onto a platform stage surrounded by an entire room-full of musicians and performs a rousing rendition of "People" before the thunderous applause of a live studio audience.

Act II of the special begins with Streisand hamming it up for the studio audience with a campy rendition of "I've Got the Blues," before delivering a comedy monologue about "Pearl from Istanbul." Streisand then heads off to Bergdorf Goodman's department store, which allows her to sing a medley of poverty songs while parading around in some of the store's elegant fashions. This segment is the brightest highlight of the special for many fans and critics. Some high points of the Act II medley include Streisand singing a restrained version of "Second Hand Rose" to the audience, appearing as a Latin bullfighter to the tune of "Nobody Knows You When You're Down and Out," and portraying a frustrated paperboy while mugging to "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime." The third Act of the special is a straight concert, with no set pieces or concepts. Streisand is a performer who really thrives on the concert stage, and this segment is the most thrilling moment of the special. Streisand enters belting out an almost gravity-defying rendition of "When the Sun Comes Out," and continues to amaze the viewer with a lovely version of THE YEARLING ballad "Why Did I Choose You," a scorching performance of "Lover Come Back to Me," and an impassioned medley of three songs form FUNNY GIRL. Streisand really outdoes herself, however, with a phenomenal rendition of the Fanny Brice/Billie Holiday standard "My Man," which instantly became on of the singer's best-loved signature songs.

Streisand performs her immortal ballad version of "Happy Days Are Here Again" as the closing credits roll by on the left-hand side of the screen. The iconic finish to the number reaffirms to the viewer that he or she has indeed seen something truly special. MY NAME IS BARBRA was a huge rating triumph when first aired, and it eventually picked up five Emmy awards in addition to spawning two Top-Five, Gold-selling soundtrack albums. Watching it all again, it's absolutely no surprise. --------------------------------------------- Result 21 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this movie in an early preview, and I cannot stress enough how bad I thought this film was. From the very beginning, the audience was groaning over Pacino's awful southern accent. Poor Al looked really, really haggard, and I can't decide whether this was purposely part of his role as a drug addicted publicist, or perhaps he just didn't get any sleep before coming to the set. Much worse than Pacino's close ups, however, is the wretched excuse for a plot. Early in the film we are given indications that Pacino's character is gay, and I suspect that is what the screenwriter had originally intended. Later, however, we are supposed to suspend our incredulity and believe that both Tea Leoni and Kim Basinger (both of whom are sleepwalking through lame roles) lust after this elderly, half dead looking, effeminate man with the ridiculous accent. The worst part overall was the main plot thread, which had to do with some corporate espionage that is never fully explained and we never, ever care about in the slightest. Because this was a preview I will reserve my final judgment, because of the possibility of re-shoots and editing, but you can bet I will not pay a cent to see this in theaters. --------------------------------------------- Result 22 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unfortunately there was not a 0 for a rating or else I would've chosen it. This movie lacks the star power that the original movie had in such abundance. Carol Burnett, Albert Finney, Tim Curry, Bernadette Peters, Edward Hermann, the innocence of newcomer Aileen Quinn, and expert directing from seasoned pro John Huston (father of actress Angelica Huston)is what made this film so charming. Even the 1999 remake with Kathy Bates, Victor Garber, Alan Cumming, and Kristin Chenoweth had more to offer than this sorry excuse for a sequel. Before she did this movie all Ashley Johnson was known for was her role as little Chrissie Seaver on the prime time show Growing Pains. She had a few bit parts in movies but I don't know who thought she had talent enough to carry a movie on her own. And adding Joan Collins as Lady Edwina Hogbottom, ridiculous! They couldn't get good enough actors to play the major roles like Daddy Warbucks, Miss Hannigan, and Annie but they will sign Joan Collins to play some British lady? It doesn't surprise me that this movie was as bad as it was. The critics were right to have not agreed with this movie, even if it was only made for TV, it was a poor sequel to an otherwise lovable movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 23 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First of all, 'St. Ives' the film is only fairly loosely based on the Robert Louis Stevenson story of the same name, but for once, this is not a criticism. The original novel was a work-in-progress, unfinished at the author's death, and in freely adapting it and giving it an ending, the film-makers have brought to life some endearing characters who, although different from Stevenson's originals, would, I am sure, have charmed and amused him.

It is 1813: Capitaine Jacques de Kéroual de Saint-Yves is a Breton aristocrat, orphaned by the Revolution's guillotine, now serving as a hussar in Napoleon's army. We meet him going out for the evening, claiming that since a hussar who is not dead by 30 is "a blackguard", he, at 34, is now "on borrowed time"! Certainly, as he faces a string of challenges to duels, our dashing hero seems in danger, but a surreal prank on his Colonel provides him a way out of the duels and into the bed of a beautiful courtesan/singer. Unfortunately, it also results in losing his commission... Further misadventures result in him being taken prisoner by the British, and sent to a POW camp in a Scottish castle.

While carving toys and boxes, Jacques catches the attention of Flora, the young niece of Miss Susan Gilchrist, a well-travelled woman of the world who lives at Swanston Cottage. They fall in love, and most of the story concerns Flora helping Jacques to escape and to find his emigré grandfather, the old Comte. Of course, there is a problem. Jacques' older brother, Alain, a dissolute alcoholic, is - perhaps understandably - far from pleased when Grandfather disinherits him in front of the whole household, the very instant that Jacques has appeared... Cue treachery! There is also an entertaining subplot of the romance between the awkward, naïf but good-hearted Major Farquhar Chevening and Aunt Susan, who has travelled through most of the Ottoman Empire and been a prisoner of the Turks.

Even allowing for a natural prejudice in favour of any film in which the heroines share my surname, 'St. Ives' is magic! It combines splendidly swashbuckling swordfights, a balloon-flight, comedy and romantic adventure. I would recommend it to anyone who loves 'the kind of film they don't make anymore' - Fairbanks, Colman, Flynn, & co. The acting is splendid. Anna Friel makes Flora a spirited and appealing heroine, and Jean-Marc Barr is delightful as Jacques, a genuinely lovable hero. Miranda Richardson and Richard E. Grant are already great favourites of mine, and have great fun as Susan and Farquhar, whose relationship runs as a comic counterpoint to that of the leads. As the rakish, scheming, but ultimately tragic Alain, Jason Isaacs shows, as he did more recently in 'The Patriot', that he has the classic swashbuckling style, besides the dashing good looks! Please, please will someone cast him as a *hero* in the genre?!!!

My main quibbles with the film concern settings and costumes. In the book, the castle in which Jacques is a prisoner is clearly Edinburgh, but the film, shot in Ireland, Germany and France has 'Highlandised' the setting, making the retention of place names such as Swanston, Inveresk and Queensferry decidedly incongruous. The costumes too are a real hotch-potch, from 1780s through to the period in which it is set. While this would not be implausible with more down-market characters "making do", it seems odd for well-to-do ladies such as the heroines to be wearing 1780s gowns in 1813. Clearly, the costuming decision was æsthetic: these earlier styles are visually far more appealing and elegant than Regency fashions, and they work in the idealised world of the film. As a whole, 'St. Ives' is 90 minutes of pure delight. --------------------------------------------- Result 24 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've read a [[lot]] of [[comments]] about the [[film]] and how it's so [[hard]] for people to [[believe]] that it is a sequel to [[Henry]] [[Fool]], and [[even]] [[though]] it technically is, I [[think]] that Fay Grim [[needs]] to be looked at as an [[entirely]] [[different]] [[film]]. [[Just]] because it is the sequel doesn't [[mean]] that it has to be a direct continuation of the first, and I [[enjoyed]] that so much about it. The [[whole]] point of the [[film]] was to change [[direction]] from the first, which makes sense because the [[movie]] isn't called [[Henry]] [[Fool]] 2, it's Fay Grim. All that [[aside]], the [[film]], I [[thought]], was so well made and [[thought]] out that it [[actually]] [[surprised]] me. I was [[expecting]] to [[rent]] another nearly-released-straight-to-video [[film]] and have to endure 2 [[hours]] of [[bad]] [[editing]] and an [[almost]] [[hard]] to follow story-line ([[aka]] parker's last direct to [[video]] [[feature]] the Oh in Ohio) but this was so [[surprisingly]] well [[focused]] that it [[almost]] doesn't seem so, which I absolutely [[loved]]. There are so many [[nuances]] in the film making and writing that I crave to [[see]] in films, but never do. The cinematography was [[brilliant]] due to it's simplicity and [[truly]] making the film seem 'Grim' throughout - in terms of setting. The writing was so well put [[together]] as well, whoever said this [[movie]] isn't as witty as Henry Fool needs to watch again and actually listen; I almost can't even begin to [[explain]] how actually hilarious it was, and [[pertinent]]. And well, Parker Posey, who could [[complain]]? The scene in which Fool and Jalal were talking in the dark was so [[captivating]] and emotional. And I thought the spy-ness throughout the film was just so hilarious and [[spot]] on (in hindsight because i do agree that at times during you kind of felt [[lost]]). The main thing that struck me so [[powerfully]] about the film, and i believe the point of the film, was Parker's [[love]] and naivety about Fool, which was so [[endearing]] and turned, yes very quickly, from denial to outright passion. The last five [[minutes]] of the film were [[perfect]]. [[Obviously]] there were things that weren't [[excellent]], but nothing is perfect; some of the acting was poor, and at times I did think that some of the new back story and dialogue about terrorism got a little hard to follow and out of hand, but in the end you got it and didn't even mind that at the time it may have slipped from your comprehension. (This may also have to do with Goldblum's tendency to talk extremely fast) On the whole I would say that it was probably one of the best films I've seen this year; stylistically pleasing, clever and witty writing, performances that were so impressive I now have gained new respect for some of the actors, and a truly touching film, and don't forget, a complete departure from Fool. Which was the point. I've read a [[batch]] of [[commentaries]] about the [[kino]] and how it's so [[arduous]] for people to [[reckon]] that it is a sequel to [[Gregg]] [[Butthead]], and [[yet]] [[while]] it technically is, I [[believe]] that Fay Grim [[needed]] to be looked at as an [[totally]] [[diversified]] [[cinematography]]. [[Jen]] because it is the sequel doesn't [[signify]] that it has to be a direct continuation of the first, and I [[liked]] that so much about it. The [[total]] point of the [[cinema]] was to change [[directorate]] from the first, which makes sense because the [[movies]] isn't called [[Heinrich]] [[Butthead]] 2, it's Fay Grim. All that [[sideways]], the [[cinematography]], I [[thoughts]], was so well made and [[thinks]] out that it [[indeed]] [[horrified]] me. I was [[awaiting]] to [[rents]] another nearly-released-straight-to-video [[cinematography]] and have to endure 2 [[hour]] of [[amiss]] [[editorial]] and an [[practically]] [[difficult]] to follow story-line ([[pseudonym]] parker's last direct to [[videotaped]] [[traits]] the Oh in Ohio) but this was so [[unbelievably]] well [[concentrate]] that it [[hardly]] doesn't seem so, which I absolutely [[worshiped]]. There are so many [[niceties]] in the film making and writing that I crave to [[behold]] in films, but never do. The cinematography was [[wondrous]] due to it's simplicity and [[really]] making the film seem 'Grim' throughout - in terms of setting. The writing was so well put [[jointly]] as well, whoever said this [[film]] isn't as witty as Henry Fool needs to watch again and actually listen; I almost can't even begin to [[elucidate]] how actually hilarious it was, and [[germane]]. And well, Parker Posey, who could [[moan]]? The scene in which Fool and Jalal were talking in the dark was so [[riveting]] and emotional. And I thought the spy-ness throughout the film was just so hilarious and [[blot]] on (in hindsight because i do agree that at times during you kind of felt [[forfeited]]). The main thing that struck me so [[furiously]] about the film, and i believe the point of the film, was Parker's [[iike]] and naivety about Fool, which was so [[likeable]] and turned, yes very quickly, from denial to outright passion. The last five [[mins]] of the film were [[irreproachable]]. [[Manifestly]] there were things that weren't [[awesome]], but nothing is perfect; some of the acting was poor, and at times I did think that some of the new back story and dialogue about terrorism got a little hard to follow and out of hand, but in the end you got it and didn't even mind that at the time it may have slipped from your comprehension. (This may also have to do with Goldblum's tendency to talk extremely fast) On the whole I would say that it was probably one of the best films I've seen this year; stylistically pleasing, clever and witty writing, performances that were so impressive I now have gained new respect for some of the actors, and a truly touching film, and don't forget, a complete departure from Fool. Which was the point. --------------------------------------------- Result 25 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a classic action flick from the '80s featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger in one of his most memorable roles. Set in a futuristic police state where the government controls everything, including the television networks. One of their most popular TV shows is "The Running Man", where convicted felons are hunted down and killed for the entertainment of millions. It's set up like a game show, where the audience votes for their favorite "stalkers", trained killers who hunt down and kill the show's unlucky "contestants". Audience members also win prizes for correctly predicting who will be killed by whom. And the host is played by none other than Family Feud's Richard Dawson, who's game show experience makes him well suited for this role. When Ben Richards (Arnold) is falsely accused of mass murder, he is forced to play this sadistic game.

This movie is chock full of classic Arnold one-liners, such as his famous "I'll be back" right before he enters the arena. And he taunts a stalker armed with a flamethrower with "How about a light?" I could go on and on, but I don't want to spoil the movie. It's funny stuff!

Whether it was intended or not, this movie serves as a great parody of today's "Reality TV" craze. Already there are numerous programs that show people enduring pain and humiliation for the entertainment of viewers, and even court cases are televised for their "entertainment value". Running Man demonstrates what would happen if reality TV hit rock bottom, and it is a scary picture. One can only hope that the networks have the common sense not to let it go that far.

Overall, this is a fun film & I highly recommend it. 9 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 26 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film awhile back (while working on a trailer for the film's production company) and it was TERRIBLE. Hewitt is mediocre at best, Hopkins phones his performance in (but still blows away Hewitt in their scenes together) and Alec looks bored. Trust me on this: you should avoid this film like the plague if it ever gets released. It seems to go on forever as the tired plot unfolds at a snail's pace. It is relentlessly unfunny, the cinematography is crappy and the direction is pedestrian. Alec Baldwin should go to film school if he plans to direct again. In terms of his acting, his character is totally unlikable, which makes it impossible to root for him. Dan Ackroyd is pretty funny and the surprising makeup of the jury near the film's end is cute, but this film is just plain awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 27 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I could not agree more with the [[quote]] "this is one of the [[best]] [[films]] ever made." If you [[think]] Vanilla Sky is simply a "re-make," you could not be more [[wrong]]. There is [[tremendous]] [[depth]] in this [[film]]: visually, musically, and [[emotionally]].

Visually, because the [[film]] is [[soft]] and [[delicate]] at [[times]] (early scenes with [[Sofia]]) and at other [[times]] powerful and intense ([[Times]] [[Square]], post-climactic scenes).

The [[music]] and [[sounds]] tie into this [[movie]] so [[perfectly]]. Without the music, the story is only half told. Nancy Wilson created an [[emotional]], [[yet]] eclectic, score for the [[film]] which [[could]] not be more [[suitable]] for such a dream-like theme ([[although]] never [[released]], I was able to get my hands on the original score for about $60. [[If]] you look hard, you may be [[able]] to find a [[copy]] yourself). Crowe's other musical selections, such as The Beach [[Boys]], Josh Rouse, Spiritualized, Sigur Ros, the Monkees, etcetera [[etcetera]], are [[also]] [[perfect]] fits for the film ([[Crowe]] has an [[ear]] for [[great]] music).

More importantly, the [[emotional]] [[themes]] in this [[film]] (i.e. love, [[sadness]], [[regret]]) are very [[powerful]], and are [[amplified]] tenfold by the visual and musical [[experience]], as well as the [[ingenious]] dialogue; I [[admit]], the elevator scene [[brings]] [[tears]] to my eyes time and time again.

The best part of this [[film]] however (as if it [[could]] [[get]] any better) is that it is so [[intelligently]] [[crafted]] such that each [[time]] you see the [[film]], you will [[catch]] [[something]] new--so watch [[closely]], and be [[prepared]] to think! [[Sure]], a theme becomes [[obvious]] after the first or second watch, but there is [[always]] more to the [[story]] than you [[think]].

This is easily Cameron Crowe's [[best]] [[work]], and [[altogether]] a [[work]] of brilliance. Much of my film-making and musical inspiration [[comes]] from this [[work]] [[alone]]. It has [[honestly]] [[touched]] my [[life]], as [[true]] [[art]] has a [[tendency]] of doing. It [[continually]] [[surprises]] me that there are many people that [[cannot]] appreciate this [[film]] for what it is (I [[guess]] to [[understand]] [[true]] art is an art itself).

Bottom line: Vanilla Sky is in a league of its own. I could not agree more with the [[quotes]] "this is one of the [[finest]] [[movies]] ever made." If you [[believe]] Vanilla Sky is simply a "re-make," you could not be more [[amiss]]. There is [[gigantic]] [[depths]] in this [[movie]]: visually, musically, and [[excitedly]].

Visually, because the [[cinematography]] is [[mild]] and [[fragile]] at [[time]] (early scenes with [[Sofie]]) and at other [[moments]] powerful and intense ([[Time]] [[Squares]], post-climactic scenes).

The [[musician]] and [[noises]] tie into this [[flick]] so [[altogether]]. Without the music, the story is only half told. Nancy Wilson created an [[sentimental]], [[however]] eclectic, score for the [[movie]] which [[wo]] not be more [[appropriate]] for such a dream-like theme ([[albeit]] never [[freed]], I was able to get my hands on the original score for about $60. [[Unless]] you look hard, you may be [[capable]] to find a [[copying]] yourself). Crowe's other musical selections, such as The Beach [[Guy]], Josh Rouse, Spiritualized, Sigur Ros, the Monkees, etcetera [[cetera]], are [[apart]] [[faultless]] fits for the film ([[Crow]] has an [[ree]] for [[huge]] music).

More importantly, the [[sentimental]] [[subject]] in this [[flick]] (i.e. love, [[grief]], [[lament]]) are very [[mighty]], and are [[exacerbated]] tenfold by the visual and musical [[experiences]], as well as the [[artful]] dialogue; I [[confess]], the elevator scene [[bring]] [[rip]] to my eyes time and time again.

The best part of this [[cinematography]] however (as if it [[did]] [[obtains]] any better) is that it is so [[rationally]] [[devised]] such that each [[times]] you see the [[movie]], you will [[catches]] [[anything]] new--so watch [[intimately]], and be [[prepped]] to think! [[Convinced]], a theme becomes [[manifest]] after the first or second watch, but there is [[continuously]] more to the [[narratives]] than you [[ideas]].

This is easily Cameron Crowe's [[better]] [[cooperates]], and [[utterly]] a [[works]] of brilliance. Much of my film-making and musical inspiration [[arrives]] from this [[collaborate]] [[lonely]]. It has [[openly]] [[poked]] my [[iife]], as [[truthful]] [[artistry]] has a [[inclination]] of doing. It [[systematically]] [[stuns]] me that there are many people that [[notable]] appreciate this [[cinematography]] for what it is (I [[presume]] to [[comprehend]] [[truthful]] art is an art itself).

Bottom line: Vanilla Sky is in a league of its own. --------------------------------------------- Result 28 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yeah, that about sums it up. This movie was horrifying. Two minutes in I wanted to gouge my eyes out. This has been praised as an "innovative LDS comedy," but it's not even good for members of that church! I don't think any human being should be so victimized as to watch a movie of this low quality.

First of all, you can tell that absolutely no effort whatsoever went into this movie. It seems as if the horribly drab, glib, trite plot was thrown together by two crazy weasels somehow imbued with the gift for coherent (at least semi-coherent) thought. Then, there's the acting, which is dismal from *everybody* involved. Even the cameos fail to liven anything up.

And let's not forget the fact that our protagonist is a shallow jerk who we would like to believe can change, but that road is full of embarrassingly bad dialogue, appallingly hideous "gags," and a lot of Mormon "in-jokes" that anyone in their right mind, LDS or not, should consider purely *stupid*! This has to be one of the worst films I've ever seen! --------------------------------------------- Result 29 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] the [[ravaged]] [[wasteland]] of the future, [[mankind]] is [[terrorized]] by Cyborgs—[[robots]] with human [[features]]—that have [[discovered]] a [[new]] source of [[fuel]]: human blood. Commanded by their [[vicious]] [[leader]] Jōb (Lance Henriksen), the Cyborgs [[prepare]] to overtake Taos, a [[densely]] populated human [[outpost]].

Only one force can stop Jōb's death march—the Cyborg [[Gabriel]] (Kris Kristofferson), who is [[programmed]] to [[destroy]] Jōb and his army.

[[In]] the [[ruins]] of a [[ransacked]] village, Gabriel [[finds]] Nea ([[Kathy]] Long), a [[beautiful]] [[young]] woman whose parents were [[killed]] by Cyborgs ten [[years]] [[earlier]]. [[Now]] she [[wants]] [[revenge]]. They [[strike]] a [[pact]]: Gabriel will [[train]] Nea how to fight the Cyborgs and Nea will [[lead]] Gabriel to Taos.

Five-time kick-boxing [[champion]] [[Kathy]] [[Long]] has all the right moves in this high-speed adventure that [[delivers]] plenty of action. Also stars Gary Daniels (as David) and Scott Paulin (as Simon). [[Throughout]] the [[plagued]] [[sandlot]] of the future, [[human]] is [[terrorised]] by Cyborgs—[[bots]] with human [[idiosyncrasies]]—that have [[discovery]] a [[nuevo]] source of [[fuels]]: human blood. Commanded by their [[cruel]] [[head]] Jōb (Lance Henriksen), the Cyborgs [[formulate]] to overtake Taos, a [[intensely]] populated human [[bastion]].

Only one force can stop Jōb's death march—the Cyborg [[Gabrielle]] (Kris Kristofferson), who is [[planning]] to [[destroying]] Jōb and his army.

[[Throughout]] the [[rubble]] of a [[plundered]] village, Gabriel [[discoveries]] Nea ([[Catherine]] Long), a [[sumptuous]] [[youthful]] woman whose parents were [[assassinated]] by Cyborgs ten [[olds]] [[formerly]]. [[Currently]] she [[wanted]] [[reprisals]]. They [[hit]] a [[treaty]]: Gabriel will [[forming]] Nea how to fight the Cyborgs and Nea will [[culminate]] Gabriel to Taos.

Five-time kick-boxing [[slugger]] [[Baroness]] [[Prolonged]] has all the right moves in this high-speed adventure that [[provides]] plenty of action. Also stars Gary Daniels (as David) and Scott Paulin (as Simon). --------------------------------------------- Result 30 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There [[really]] isn't much to say about this [[movie]]....it's [[crude]], but fun.

Plot [[outline]] (From IMDB)

_____________________________________

Two losers from Milwaukee, Coop & Remer ([[Parker]] & Stone), [[invent]] a [[new]] game [[playing]] basketball, using baseball [[rules]]. [[When]] the game becomes a huge [[success]], they, along with a billionaire's [[help]], form the [[Professional]] Baseketball League where [[everyone]] [[gets]] the same [[pay]] and no team can [[change]] [[cities]]. Coop & Remer's team, the Milwaukee Beers is the only team [[standing]] in the way of [[major]] [[rule]] changes that the [[owner]] of the Dallas [[Felons]] (Vaughn) [[wants]] to institute.

_____________________________________

The Acting is pretty good, [[since]] there arn't [[many]] [[big]] [[stars]] in this [[movie]]. [[Although]] I am not a [[big]] fan of 'Southpark', [[Parker]] and Stone do a pretty good [[job]] in their [[first]] [[real]] movie.

There are so [[many]] [[funny]] [[moments]] in this [[movie]] I can't [[come]] close to [[naming]] them all. It never really [[lets]] up, and they don't [[try]] to put some cruddy drama in to make it more [[serious]].

And my favorite aspect of this movie: The Soundtrack. It's [[GREAT]]. I [[especially]] like "Take me on" and "[[Beer]]" by [[Reel]] [[Big]] Fish. [[Very]] [[underrated]].

Overall, a crude, but [[extremely]] [[funny]], [[movie]]. 10/10

James "[[Black]] [[Wolf]]" Johnston There [[truthfully]] isn't much to say about this [[kino]]....it's [[coarse]], but fun.

Plot [[outlines]] (From IMDB)

_____________________________________

Two losers from Milwaukee, Coop & Remer ([[Barker]] & Stone), [[fabricate]] a [[novel]] game [[gaming]] basketball, using baseball [[provisions]]. [[Whenever]] the game becomes a huge [[avail]], they, along with a billionaire's [[assistance]], form the [[Vocational]] Baseketball League where [[somebody]] [[receives]] the same [[payroll]] and no team can [[shifting]] [[towns]]. Coop & Remer's team, the Milwaukee Beers is the only team [[permanent]] in the way of [[significant]] [[ordinance]] changes that the [[proprietor]] of the Dallas [[Lawbreakers]] (Vaughn) [[wanted]] to institute.

_____________________________________

The Acting is pretty good, [[because]] there arn't [[various]] [[substantial]] [[star]] in this [[film]]. [[While]] I am not a [[enormous]] fan of 'Southpark', [[Barker]] and Stone do a pretty good [[jobs]] in their [[outset]] [[actual]] movie.

There are so [[multiple]] [[comical]] [[times]] in this [[cinematography]] I can't [[arrived]] close to [[names]] them all. It never really [[entitles]] up, and they don't [[endeavour]] to put some cruddy drama in to make it more [[gravest]].

And my favorite aspect of this movie: The Soundtrack. It's [[HUGE]]. I [[namely]] like "Take me on" and "[[Casket]]" by [[Coil]] [[Enormous]] Fish. [[Hugely]] [[underestimated]].

Overall, a crude, but [[unbelievably]] [[amusing]], [[kino]]. 10/10

James "[[Negra]] [[Wolves]]" Johnston --------------------------------------------- Result 31 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a more interesting than usual porn movie, because it is a fantasy adventure.The production values are high and the acting is(believe it or not) pretty good,especially Jenna Jameson.It`s also in widescreen which helps,it gives a feeling of a real motion picture and NOT a porn movie.But,of course it is a porn and a really good one with nice costumes,fine atmosphere and scenery.And by the way,the sex IS hot.

Watch out for this one... --------------------------------------------- Result 32 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The great cinematic musicals were made between 1950 and 1970. This twenty year spell can be rightly labelled the “Golden Era” of the genre. There were musicals prior to that, and there have been musicals since… but the true classics seem invariably to have been made during that period. Singin’ In The Rain, An American In Paris, The Band Wagon, Seven Brides For Seven Brothers, Oklahoma, South Pacific, The King And I, and many more, stand tall as much cherished products of the age. Perhaps the last great musical of the “Golden Era” is Carol Reed’s 1968 “Oliver”. Freely adapted from Dickens’ novel, this vibrant musical is a film version of a successful stage production. It is a magnificent film, winner of six Oscars, including the Best Picture award.

Orphan Oliver Twist (Mark Lester) lives a miserable existence in a workhouse, his mother having died moments after giving birth to him. Following an incident one meal-time, he is booted out of the workhouse and ends up employed at a funeral parlour. But Oliver doesn’t settle particularly well into his new job, and escapes after a few troubled days. He makes the long journey to London where he hopes to seek his fortune. Oliver is taken under the wing of a child pickpocket called the Artful Dodger (Jack Wild) who in turn works for Fagin (Ron Moody), an elderly crook in charge of a gang of child-thieves. Despite the unlawful nature of the job, Oliver finds good friends among his new “family”. He also makes the acquaintance of Nancy (Shani Wallis), girlfriend of the cruellest and most feared thief of them all, the menacing Bill Sikes (Oliver Reed). After many adventures, Oliver discovers his true ancestry and finds that he is actually from a rich and well-to-do background. But his chances of being reunited with his real family are jeopardised when Bill Sikes forcibly exploits Oliver, making him an accomplice in some particularly risky and ambitious robberies.

“Oliver” is a brilliantly assembled film, consistently pleasing to the eye and excellently acted by its talented cast. Moody recreates his stage role with considerable verve, stealing the film from the youngsters with his energetic performance as Fagin. Lester and Wild do well too as the young pickpockets, while Wallis enthusiastically fleshes out the Nancy role and Reed generates genuine despicableness as Sikes. The musical numbers are staged with incredible precision and sense of spectacle – Onna White’s Oscar-winning choreography helps make the song-and-dance set pieces so memorable, but the lively performers and the skillful direction of Carol Reed also play their part. The unforgettable tunes include “Food Glorious Food”, “Consider Yourself”, “You’ve Got To Pick A Pocket Or Two”, “I’d Do Anything” and “Oom-Pah-Pah” – all immensely catchy songs, conveyed via very well put together sequences. The film is a thoroughly entertaining experience and never really loses momentum over its entire 153 minute duration. Sit back and enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 33 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was an exteremely good historical drama. John Turturro is excellent as the tortured genius Luzhin and brilliantly portrays the character's manic affectations such as his strange dancing. Emily Watson is fine in her support role as the sensitive lover Natalia.

The relatonship between chess and near madness is well explored by Gorris and familiar Nabokov preoccupations such as 'eternal innocence' (i.e. 'Lolita') are evident in this film. I think I will now go on to read the novel. It was a touching and tragic ending and it was hard to keep a dry eye. Brilliant movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 34 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was an incredibly stupid movie. It was possibly the worst movie I've ever had the displeasure of sitting through. I cannot fathom how it ranks a rating of 5 or 6............. --------------------------------------------- Result 35 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Exquisite]] comedy starring Marian Davies (with the affable William Haines). Young Peggy arrives in Hollywood seeking stardom. Cameo performances [[showcase]] "all the stars in MGM's [[heaven]]" in the [[famous]] commissary scene, plus [[lots]] of vintage [[film]] making detail for the scholar. Pic also [[captures]] for posterity Davies' famous, wickedly sarcastic impersonations of the top stars of the day (her Swanson is a beaut!).

"Peggy," even catches herself as she encounters the famous star Marian Davies at tennis, turns up her nose and comments, "Ohh, I don't like her!"

My print was perfect. Story, direction, acting an authentic charm and a [[must]] for all silent afficinados. [[Wondrous]] comedy starring Marian Davies (with the affable William Haines). Young Peggy arrives in Hollywood seeking stardom. Cameo performances [[demonstrating]] "all the stars in MGM's [[ciel]]" in the [[famed]] commissary scene, plus [[lot]] of vintage [[films]] making detail for the scholar. Pic also [[caught]] for posterity Davies' famous, wickedly sarcastic impersonations of the top stars of the day (her Swanson is a beaut!).

"Peggy," even catches herself as she encounters the famous star Marian Davies at tennis, turns up her nose and comments, "Ohh, I don't like her!"

My print was perfect. Story, direction, acting an authentic charm and a [[ought]] for all silent afficinados. --------------------------------------------- Result 36 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Why should you watch this? There are certainly no [[reasons]] why you shouldn't watch it! [[Superbly]] and amusingly directed by [[Albert]] and David Maysles, [[Grey]] [[Gardens]] was [[originally]] [[intended]] to be a [[film]] on the gentrification of [[East]] Hampton, but it turned out to the [[brothers]] that it [[would]] be more interesting to produce a [[study]] on the eccentric [[life]] of the two [[Edith]] Bouvier Beales, the [[aunt]] and [[cousin]] of Jacqueline [[Kennedy]] Onassis. [[Their]] [[life]] was certainly an amusing one ([[Edith]] [[spent]] most of her day in bed [[singing]] operas, Edie performing pirouettes and majorette [[dances]] with their [[many]] [[cats]], one was named Ted Z. Kennedy) The [[film]] is interesting because it is both funny and [[sad]] - [[Edith]] [[died]] [[shortly]] after the film was [[released]] (in [[February]] 1977) aged 82 after experiencing some of the fame that she and [[Edie]] [[received]] after the film (she [[danced]] and sang in a [[nightclub]] Edie Beale Jr was born in 1925 and is [[still]] living in Miami Beach.This [[film]] is both engaging and spellbounding. Why should you watch this? There are certainly no [[motivations]] why you shouldn't watch it! [[Astonishingly]] and amusingly directed by [[Alberto]] and David Maysles, [[Gray]] [[Garden]] was [[initially]] [[aimed]] to be a [[kino]] on the gentrification of [[Eastward]] Hampton, but it turned out to the [[plymouth]] that it [[ought]] be more interesting to produce a [[investigate]] on the eccentric [[lifetime]] of the two [[Gertrude]] Bouvier Beales, the [[queer]] and [[kinsman]] of Jacqueline [[Jfk]] Onassis. [[Hun]] [[living]] was certainly an amusing one ([[Mabel]] [[spends]] most of her day in bed [[sing]] operas, Edie performing pirouettes and majorette [[danse]] with their [[multiple]] [[chats]], one was named Ted Z. Kennedy) The [[cinematography]] is interesting because it is both funny and [[deplorable]] - [[Mabel]] [[succumbed]] [[soon]] after the film was [[liberated]] (in [[December]] 1977) aged 82 after experiencing some of the fame that she and [[Caballero]] [[benefited]] after the film (she [[dances]] and sang in a [[cabaret]] Edie Beale Jr was born in 1925 and is [[however]] living in Miami Beach.This [[filmmaking]] is both engaging and spellbounding. --------------------------------------------- Result 37 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] [[blows]] my mind how this [[movie]] [[got]] [[made]]. i watched it while i [[worked]] at [[home]] writing emails and [[answering]] the [[phone]] -- i [[ONLY]] [[watched]] it because i hoped the "[[revenge]]" part [[would]] be good. needless to say, the [[revenge]] and the [[forced]] plot [[twists]] were not worth the emails during which they were watched. in fact, i'm not [[even]] sure what happened at the [[end]] any more. the acting was as bad as re-enactment scenarios on the "FBI [[Files]]" [[show]] -- by far, the [[worst]] re-enactments (really only "[[Arrest]] and Trial" can [[possibly]] be as bad at re-enactments). i didn't even know that the [[leading]] [[man]] was in [[Third]] Eye Blind until i [[looked]] the [[movie]] up here on IMDb, but its [[obvious]] why he hasn't [[made]] any [[movies]] since. i hope he is a good [[singer]]. [[strokes]] my mind how this [[filmmaking]] [[gets]] [[effected]]. i watched it while i [[working]] at [[households]] writing emails and [[responds]] the [[telephone]] -- i [[EXCLUSIVELY]] [[seen]] it because i hoped the "[[vendetta]]" part [[could]] be good. needless to say, the [[avenge]] and the [[coerced]] plot [[spins]] were not worth the emails during which they were watched. in fact, i'm not [[yet]] sure what happened at the [[terminate]] any more. the acting was as bad as re-enactment scenarios on the "FBI [[File]]" [[displays]] -- by far, the [[worse]] re-enactments (really only "[[Arrested]] and Trial" can [[probably]] be as bad at re-enactments). i didn't even know that the [[culminating]] [[males]] was in [[Thirds]] Eye Blind until i [[seemed]] the [[films]] up here on IMDb, but its [[evident]] why he hasn't [[introduced]] any [[movie]] since. i hope he is a good [[songbird]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 38 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Necessarily [[ridiculous]] [[film]] version the literary [[classic]] "Moby Dick". [[John]] Barrymore is Captain Ahab, who falls in [[love]] with the pastor's [[daughter]], Joan Bennett. His brother [[Derek]] is a rival for [[Ms]]. Bennett's [[affections]]. When [[Mr]]. Barrymore loses his leg in a [[whaling]] accident, Bennett rejects him. He [[must]] slay the [[whale]] and [[win]] Bennett back...

There are several scenes which may have [[thrilled]] 1930 [[theater]] audiences; [[particularly]] the scenes [[involving]] Barrymore [[losing]] his leg. The film hasn't aged well, however; there are much [[better]] [[films]] from the [[time]], both 1920s silents and 1930s talkies. The two name attractions, [[John]] Barrymore and Joan Bennett aren't at their [[best]].

**** Moby Dick (8/14/30) Lloyd Bacon ~ [[John]] Barrymore, Joan [[Bennett]], Lloyd Hughes Necessarily [[absurd]] [[movies]] version the literary [[typical]] "Moby Dick". [[Jon]] Barrymore is Captain Ahab, who falls in [[amour]] with the pastor's [[maid]], Joan Bennett. His brother [[Derrick]] is a rival for [[Corinne]]. Bennett's [[passions]]. When [[Herr]]. Barrymore loses his leg in a [[whales]] accident, Bennett rejects him. He [[needs]] slay the [[whales]] and [[wins]] Bennett back...

There are several scenes which may have [[delighted]] 1930 [[theatres]] audiences; [[principally]] the scenes [[encompassing]] Barrymore [[loses]] his leg. The film hasn't aged well, however; there are much [[optimum]] [[film]] from the [[times]], both 1920s silents and 1930s talkies. The two name attractions, [[Jon]] Barrymore and Joan Bennett aren't at their [[nicest]].

**** Moby Dick (8/14/30) Lloyd Bacon ~ [[Jon]] Barrymore, Joan [[Bennet]], Lloyd Hughes --------------------------------------------- Result 39 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Wow]], what can I [[say]] about this [[film]]? It's a [[lousy]] piece of [[crap]]. I'm [[surprised]] that it got rated as high as it did. What's wrong with this [[film]]? Here's a [[better]] [[question]]: What's NOT wrong with this film.

The [[story]] itself is just crap and cliché. Here's pretty much what it's about...Some kinda nerdy kid with no friends gets [[picked]] on, gets [[killed]], and [[comes]] back as a scarecrow for [[revenge]]. "[[All]]" of that is packed into 86 minutes of [[worthless]] [[film]]. [[If]] you haven't seen this movie don't waste your [[time]] [[watching]] it. [[Also]], the second one isn't much [[better]], so don't [[bother]] [[watching]] that [[either]]...I rated this movie a three because I liked the scarecrow's [[outfit]], not because there was [[anything]] [[good]] about the movie. I [[think]] you [[get]] the picture. [[Whew]], what can I [[says]] about this [[filmmaking]]? It's a [[rotten]] piece of [[dammit]]. I'm [[surprises]] that it got rated as high as it did. What's wrong with this [[cinema]]? Here's a [[improved]] [[issue]]: What's NOT wrong with this film.

The [[history]] itself is just crap and cliché. Here's pretty much what it's about...Some kinda nerdy kid with no friends gets [[pick]] on, gets [[killing]], and [[happens]] back as a scarecrow for [[vengeance]]. "[[Entire]]" of that is packed into 86 minutes of [[fruitless]] [[movies]]. [[Though]] you haven't seen this movie don't waste your [[period]] [[staring]] it. [[Similarly]], the second one isn't much [[best]], so don't [[disturb]] [[staring]] that [[neither]]...I rated this movie a three because I liked the scarecrow's [[costume]], not because there was [[something]] [[alright]] about the movie. I [[believe]] you [[got]] the picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 40 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Daniel]] Day [[Lewis]] is one of the best [[actors]] of our time and one of my favorites. It is [[amazing]] how much he [[throws]] himself in each of the characters he plays making them [[real]].

I [[remember]], [[many]] years ago, we had a party in our [[house]] - the [[friends]] [[came]] over, we were [[sitting]] [[around]] the table, [[eating]], [[drinking]] the wine, [[talking]], [[laughing]] - having a [[good]] [[time]]. The TV was on - there was a [[movie]] which we did not [[pay]] much attention to. Then, suddenly, all of us [[stopped]] [[talking]] and [[laughing]]. The [[glasses]] did not [[clink]], the forks did not move, the [[food]] was [[getting]] cold on the [[plates]]. We could not take our eyes off the screen where the young crippled [[man]] [[whose]] [[entire]] [[body]] was against him and who only had a [[control]] over his [[left]] [[foot]], [[picked]] up a piece of chalk with his [[foot]] and for what [[seemed]] the eternity [[tried]] to [[write]] just one word on the [[floor]]. When he [[finished]] writing that one word, we all knew that we had [[witnessed]] not one but three [[triumphs]] - the [[triumph]] of a human will and spirit, the [[triumph]] of the [[cinema]] which was [[able]] to [[capture]] the [[moment]] like this on the [[film]], and the [[triumph]] of an [[actor]] who did not act but who [[became]] his [[character]].

Jim Sheridan's "My Left Foot" is an [[riveting]], unsentimental bio-drama about [[Christy]] Brown, the [[man]] who was born with cerebral [[palsy]] in a [[Dublin]] [[slum]]; who [[became]] an [[artist]] and a [[writer]] and who [[found]] a [[love]] of his [[life]].

I [[like]] [[every]] one of Day Lewis's performances (I have mixed [[feelings]] about his performance in GONY) but I [[believe]] that his [[greatest]] role was [[Christy]] [[Brown]] in "My Left Foot" [[Danielle]] Day [[Louie]] is one of the best [[actresses]] of our time and one of my favorites. It is [[dazzling]] how much he [[castings]] himself in each of the characters he plays making them [[actual]].

I [[reminisce]], [[several]] years ago, we had a party in our [[homes]] - the [[homies]] [[became]] over, we were [[seated]] [[roundabout]] the table, [[catering]], [[drank]] the wine, [[discussing]], [[giggling]] - having a [[buena]] [[period]]. The TV was on - there was a [[movies]] which we did not [[payroll]] much attention to. Then, suddenly, all of us [[stop]] [[speaking]] and [[kidding]]. The [[bifocals]] did not [[cheers]], the forks did not move, the [[nutritional]] was [[obtain]] cold on the [[plate]]. We could not take our eyes off the screen where the young crippled [[dawg]] [[who]] [[total]] [[agencies]] was against him and who only had a [[supervising]] over his [[gauche]] [[feet]], [[opted]] up a piece of chalk with his [[feet]] and for what [[sounded]] the eternity [[attempting]] to [[writing]] just one word on the [[flooring]]. When he [[finish]] writing that one word, we all knew that we had [[saw]] not one but three [[triumph]] - the [[clockwork]] of a human will and spirit, the [[victoire]] of the [[teatro]] which was [[capable]] to [[caught]] the [[time]] like this on the [[kino]], and the [[triumphant]] of an [[actress]] who did not act but who [[was]] his [[nature]].

Jim Sheridan's "My Left Foot" is an [[intriguing]], unsentimental bio-drama about [[Christie]] Brown, the [[guy]] who was born with cerebral [[paralysis]] in a [[Belfast]] [[squatter]]; who [[was]] an [[artiste]] and a [[scriptwriter]] and who [[discovered]] a [[loves]] of his [[lifetime]].

I [[fond]] [[any]] one of Day Lewis's performances (I have mixed [[sentiments]] about his performance in GONY) but I [[reckon]] that his [[bigger]] role was [[Kristy]] [[Brun]] in "My Left Foot" --------------------------------------------- Result 41 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Considering]] all the [[teen]] [[films]] [[like]] "the Breakfast Club" and "[[Pretty]] In Pink" that are lionized. It is [[surprising]] that this one is so [[ignored]].

There is no [[sex]] in it, but sex is [[thought]] of, [[including]] the idea that it may matter what others think about it. The kids do not [[always]] get along with their parents, but neither the parents or the kids are seen as always right or wrong, and the parents are not seen as monsters.

It deals with hero-worship. How one [[girl]] does a [[dangerous]] [[thing]], which [[could]] have lead to real dustier, before [[realizing]] that she was [[wrong]].

The movie is kind of ahead of its' [[time]]. One [[kid]] [[asks]] another kid what birth [[control]] she [[uses]]. She [[says]] she is doing [[nothing]] to [[need]] birth [[control]]. She replies (wrongly) "oral sex". [[Scrutinize]] all the [[youths]] [[cinematographic]] [[iike]] "the Breakfast Club" and "[[Quite]] In Pink" that are lionized. It is [[unbelievable]] that this one is so [[unheeded]].

There is no [[sexuality]] in it, but sex is [[figured]] of, [[consisting]] the idea that it may matter what others think about it. The kids do not [[repeatedly]] get along with their parents, but neither the parents or the kids are seen as always right or wrong, and the parents are not seen as monsters.

It deals with hero-worship. How one [[women]] does a [[unsafe]] [[stuff]], which [[wo]] have lead to real dustier, before [[realising]] that she was [[amiss]].

The movie is kind of ahead of its' [[times]]. One [[child]] [[applications]] another kid what birth [[monitors]] she [[employs]]. She [[tells]] she is doing [[none]] to [[requisite]] birth [[supervising]]. She replies (wrongly) "oral sex". --------------------------------------------- Result 42 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] Sometimes it [[takes]] a film-making [[master]] like Kubrick to [[bring]] that [[extra]] little something, that unique, untractable and elusive [[ingredient]] that [[transforms]] a [[great]] [[movie]] or a [[great]] [[script]] into a masterpiece, one for the [[ages]].

It's not just that Stephen King's [[story]] has enough meat and potatoes making it [[difficult]] for [[even]] the most workmanlike of [[directors]] to [[miss]]. Heck, [[even]] King himself didn't [[fare]] so [[bad]]. It's how Kubrick perceives King's universe, how he [[transforms]] the [[page]] into screen [[time]], that [[renders]] THE [[SHINING]] both a [[visual]] [[feast]] and a [[compacted]] masterclass in directing.

Kubrick's miss-en-scene is, as [[usually]], [[terrific]]. The [[movie]] progresses with a brisk, sharp, lively pace, even [[though]] it's neither [[fast]] nor [[heavily]] [[edited]] and it clocks at no [[less]] than 160 minutes. The camera prowls through the lavish corridors of the [[Overlook]] Hotel like it is some [[kind]] of mystic labyrinth rife for exploration, linear [[tracking]] [[shots]] exposing the impeccably decorated [[interiors]] in all their [[grandeur]]. There's a symmetry and [[geometrical]] [[approach]] in how Kubrick perceives space that [[reminds]] me very much of how Japanese [[directors]] [[worked]] in the sixties. As if what is depicted is inconsequential to how all the [[different]] [[elements]] are balanced [[inside]] the [[frame]].

Certain [[images]] [[definitely]] [[stand]] out. The first shot of Jack's typewriter, [[accompanied]] off screen from the thumps of a ball, like drums of doom coming from some other floor or produced by the typewriter itself as [[though]] it is an [[instrument]] of doom all by itself, later on proving to be [[nothing]] short of just that. A red river flowing through the hotel's [[elevators]] in [[slow]] [[motion]]. Jack [[hitting]] the door with the axe, the camera moving along with him, [[tracking]] the action as it [[happens]] [[instead]] of remaining static, as [[though]] it's the camera piercing through the [[door]] and not the [[axe]]. The ultra [[fast]] zoom in the kid's [[face]] [[thrusting]] us [[inside]] his head before we [[see]] the two dead [[girls]] from his POV. And of course, the [[bathroom]] scene.

Much has been [[said]] of [[Jack]] Nicholson's obtrusive overacting. His [[mad]] is not [[entirely]] successful, because, well, he's Jack Nicholson. The [[guy]] looks half-mad anyway. Playing [[mad]] turns him into an [[exaggerated]] caricature of himself. Shelley Duvall on the other hand is one of the most inspired casting choices Kubrick ever had. Coming from a streak of fantastic performances for Robert Altman in the seventies (3 WOMEN, THIEVES LIKE US, NASHVILLE), she brings to her character the right amounts of fragility and emotional distress. A terrific and very underrated actress. Sometimes it [[pick]] a film-making [[maestro]] like Kubrick to [[bringing]] that [[supplemental]] little something, that unique, untractable and elusive [[element]] that [[converted]] a [[super]] [[filmmaking]] or a [[huge]] [[scripts]] into a masterpiece, one for the [[centuries]].

It's not just that Stephen King's [[storytelling]] has enough meat and potatoes making it [[troublesome]] for [[yet]] the most workmanlike of [[administrators]] to [[missed]]. Heck, [[yet]] King himself didn't [[tariffs]] so [[unhealthy]]. It's how Kubrick perceives King's universe, how he [[transformations]] the [[pages]] into screen [[times]], that [[emits]] THE [[BRIGHTNESS]] both a [[optic]] [[festival]] and a [[wrapped]] masterclass in directing.

Kubrick's miss-en-scene is, as [[popularly]], [[stunning]]. The [[movies]] progresses with a brisk, sharp, lively pace, even [[despite]] it's neither [[prompt]] nor [[extensively]] [[editing]] and it clocks at no [[lowest]] than 160 minutes. The camera prowls through the lavish corridors of the [[Ignore]] Hotel like it is some [[type]] of mystic labyrinth rife for exploration, linear [[tracing]] [[punches]] exposing the impeccably decorated [[indoor]] in all their [[greatness]]. There's a symmetry and [[geometric]] [[approaching]] in how Kubrick perceives space that [[remembered]] me very much of how Japanese [[administrators]] [[acted]] in the sixties. As if what is depicted is inconsequential to how all the [[various]] [[ingredients]] are balanced [[inner]] the [[framework]].

Certain [[photographed]] [[indubitably]] [[standing]] out. The first shot of Jack's typewriter, [[accompanying]] off screen from the thumps of a ball, like drums of doom coming from some other floor or produced by the typewriter itself as [[although]] it is an [[instruments]] of doom all by itself, later on proving to be [[anything]] short of just that. A red river flowing through the hotel's [[lifts]] in [[slower]] [[motions]]. Jack [[knock]] the door with the axe, the camera moving along with him, [[tracks]] the action as it [[arrives]] [[alternatively]] of remaining static, as [[although]] it's the camera piercing through the [[doorway]] and not the [[ax]]. The ultra [[prompt]] zoom in the kid's [[confront]] [[overlapping]] us [[within]] his head before we [[behold]] the two dead [[females]] from his POV. And of course, the [[toilet]] scene.

Much has been [[say]] of [[Jacques]] Nicholson's obtrusive overacting. His [[crazed]] is not [[downright]] successful, because, well, he's Jack Nicholson. The [[bloke]] looks half-mad anyway. Playing [[livid]] turns him into an [[exaggerating]] caricature of himself. Shelley Duvall on the other hand is one of the most inspired casting choices Kubrick ever had. Coming from a streak of fantastic performances for Robert Altman in the seventies (3 WOMEN, THIEVES LIKE US, NASHVILLE), she brings to her character the right amounts of fragility and emotional distress. A terrific and very underrated actress. --------------------------------------------- Result 43 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Action]], horror, sci-fi, exploitation director Fred Olen Ray shows he has some talent as a director. Character [[actor]] William Smith is one of the best tough/bad guys in the industry. He [[treats]] the viewer with the [[best]] acting performance of his [[career]]. As for Randy Travis he gives his [[best]] Lee Van Cleef [[impression]]. He's not bad in the [[film]]. [[Smith]] and [[Travis]] [[make]] the [[movie]]. As for the rest of the cast none of them really stand out. Ray did a great job directing this flick, Smith and Travis were good, I'd give this B [[western]] on a scale of one to ten(ten being the [[best]]) a seven. [[Measures]], horror, sci-fi, exploitation director Fred Olen Ray shows he has some talent as a director. Character [[protagonist]] William Smith is one of the best tough/bad guys in the industry. He [[addresses]] the viewer with the [[better]] acting performance of his [[quarry]]. As for Randy Travis he gives his [[finest]] Lee Van Cleef [[printout]]. He's not bad in the [[movie]]. [[Tremblay]] and [[Trav]] [[deliver]] the [[cinematography]]. As for the rest of the cast none of them really stand out. Ray did a great job directing this flick, Smith and Travis were good, I'd give this B [[ouest]] on a scale of one to ten(ten being the [[nicest]]) a seven. --------------------------------------------- Result 44 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]]

[[In]] anticipation of Ang Lee's [[new]] [[movie]] "Crouching [[Tiger]], [[Hidden]] [[Dragon]]," I [[saw]] this at [[blockbuster]] and figured I'd give it a try. A [[civil]] war [[movie]] is not the [[typical]] [[movie]] I watch. [[Luckily]] though, I had a good feeling about this [[director]]. This movie was [[wonderfully]] written. The dialogue is in the old [[southern]] [[style]], [[yet]] doesn't sound cornily out of place and outdated. The [[spectacular]] acting [[helped]] that aspect of the movie. Toby [[Maguire]] was awesome. I thought he was good (but nothing special) in Pleasantville, but here he [[shines]]. I have always thought of Skeet Ulrich as a good actor (but nothing special), but here he is [[excellent]] as well. The big shocker for me was Jewel. She was amazingly good. Jeffrey Wright, who I had never heard of before, is also [[excellent]] in this movie. It seems to me that great acting and great writing and directing go hand in hand. A movie with bad writing makes the actors [[look]] bad and visa versa. This movie had the [[perfect]] combination. The actors look brilliant and the character development is [[spectacular]]. This movie keeps you wishing and hoping good things for some and bad things for others. It lets you really get to know the [[characters]], which are all very [[dynamic]] and interesting. The plot is complex, and keeps you on the edge of your seat, guessing, and ready for anything at any time. Literally dozens of times I was sure someone was going to get killed on silent parts in the movie that were "too quiet" (brilliant directing). This was also a [[beautifully]] shot movie. The scenery was not breath taking (It's in Missouri and Kansas for goodness sakez) but there was clearly much attention put into picking great nature settings. Has that rough and [[rugged]] feel, but keeps an elegance, which is very pleasant on the eyes. The movie was deep. It told a story and in doing so made you think. It had layers underneath that exterior civil war [[story]]. [[Specifically]], it focused on two [[characters]] that were not quite sure what they were fighting for. There were [[many]] more deep issues [[dealt]] with in this [[movie]], too many to [[pick]] out. It was like a beautifully written short story, filled with symbolism and artistic extras that leaves you thinking during and after the story is done. If you like great acting, writing, lots of action, and some of the best directing ever, see this movie! Take a chance on it.

[[For]] anticipation of Ang Lee's [[newer]] [[flick]] "Crouching [[Tigers]], [[Stealth]] [[Dragons]]," I [[noticed]] this at [[blockbusters]] and figured I'd give it a try. A [[civilian]] war [[flick]] is not the [[classic]] [[flick]] I watch. [[Merrily]] though, I had a good feeling about this [[headmaster]]. This movie was [[beautifully]] written. The dialogue is in the old [[south]] [[styling]], [[still]] doesn't sound cornily out of place and outdated. The [[wondrous]] acting [[supporting]] that aspect of the movie. Toby [[Mcguire]] was awesome. I thought he was good (but nothing special) in Pleasantville, but here he [[glows]]. I have always thought of Skeet Ulrich as a good actor (but nothing special), but here he is [[wondrous]] as well. The big shocker for me was Jewel. She was amazingly good. Jeffrey Wright, who I had never heard of before, is also [[phenomenal]] in this movie. It seems to me that great acting and great writing and directing go hand in hand. A movie with bad writing makes the actors [[gaze]] bad and visa versa. This movie had the [[faultless]] combination. The actors look brilliant and the character development is [[awesome]]. This movie keeps you wishing and hoping good things for some and bad things for others. It lets you really get to know the [[nature]], which are all very [[vibrant]] and interesting. The plot is complex, and keeps you on the edge of your seat, guessing, and ready for anything at any time. Literally dozens of times I was sure someone was going to get killed on silent parts in the movie that were "too quiet" (brilliant directing). This was also a [[admirably]] shot movie. The scenery was not breath taking (It's in Missouri and Kansas for goodness sakez) but there was clearly much attention put into picking great nature settings. Has that rough and [[manly]] feel, but keeps an elegance, which is very pleasant on the eyes. The movie was deep. It told a story and in doing so made you think. It had layers underneath that exterior civil war [[tale]]. [[Specially]], it focused on two [[features]] that were not quite sure what they were fighting for. There were [[several]] more deep issues [[treated]] with in this [[cinematography]], too many to [[taking]] out. It was like a beautifully written short story, filled with symbolism and artistic extras that leaves you thinking during and after the story is done. If you like great acting, writing, lots of action, and some of the best directing ever, see this movie! Take a chance on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 45 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] (SPOILERS [[AHEAD]]) Russian [[fantasy]] "actioner" (and I use the term loosely) that I've been trying to watch for over a year. I've finally gotten to the end and now I wish I didn't put in the [[repeated]] effort.

In an effort to save two hours of your life I'm going to tell you he plot- a [[guy]] who has the [[ability]] to project a long blade out of his arm returns home to see his mom. Things turn ugly after he is beaten up by the mafia [[boyfriend]] of an old girl friend. He takes revenge on the [[guy]] when he brings the girl home. The guys mafia mom sends her men out to get revenge while the cops begin looking for him as well.

Very little is said. no explanation is really given for anything (like why they lock id girlfriend in an [[asylum]]) and the action, for the most part is all off screen. The [[film]] [[essentially]] [[consists]] of a guy who looks like Adrian Brody looking intense and not [[saying]] anything, killing people (off screen-most of the [[action]] happens off screen). It looks good, is well acted and had there been some form of [[reason]] for what is [[going]] on it might have been a good [[film]]. Hell, I would have [[liked]] some [[sense]] of real [[character]] [[development]] or back [[story]] (all we know is that the [[guy]] was [[picked]] on as a [[kid]]). The [[movie]] runs the [[better]] [[part]] of two hours and it feels like its six. [[If]] they weren't [[going]] to tell us [[anything]] they [[could]] have at [[least]] [[picked]] up the [[pace]] so it [[seemed]] like it was moving too [[fast]]. No instead we [[get]] the [[hero]] on a [[boat]]. The [[hero]] in a bus, the hero walking, the [[hero]] looking [[disturbed]].[[Hero]] with his girl. It [[really]] [[annoyed]] me [[since]] I [[think]] this [[could]] have been a [[good]] [[film]] if they had [[simply]] [[done]] something or had [[someone]] actually [[say]] something meaningful other than give [[instructions]] to "[[get]] this [[guy]]".

4 out of 10. Its about four hours (all my attempts to see this) I'll never get back. Only for those who want to see a brooding Russian action film with very [[little]] action (SPOILERS [[FORTHCOMING]]) Russian [[fantasia]] "actioner" (and I use the term loosely) that I've been trying to watch for over a year. I've finally gotten to the end and now I wish I didn't put in the [[repetitive]] effort.

In an effort to save two hours of your life I'm going to tell you he plot- a [[boys]] who has the [[proficiency]] to project a long blade out of his arm returns home to see his mom. Things turn ugly after he is beaten up by the mafia [[friend]] of an old girl friend. He takes revenge on the [[man]] when he brings the girl home. The guys mafia mom sends her men out to get revenge while the cops begin looking for him as well.

Very little is said. no explanation is really given for anything (like why they lock id girlfriend in an [[sanctuary]]) and the action, for the most part is all off screen. The [[filmmaking]] [[mostly]] [[includes]] of a guy who looks like Adrian Brody looking intense and not [[telling]] anything, killing people (off screen-most of the [[activities]] happens off screen). It looks good, is well acted and had there been some form of [[motif]] for what is [[go]] on it might have been a good [[filmmaking]]. Hell, I would have [[wished]] some [[feeling]] of real [[characters]] [[evolution]] or back [[stories]] (all we know is that the [[buddy]] was [[choosing]] on as a [[child]]). The [[movies]] runs the [[optimum]] [[portions]] of two hours and it feels like its six. [[Though]] they weren't [[go]] to tell us [[something]] they [[would]] have at [[lowest]] [[opted]] up the [[tempo]] so it [[sounded]] like it was moving too [[expeditiously]]. No instead we [[gets]] the [[superhero]] on a [[vessel]]. The [[superhero]] in a bus, the hero walking, the [[superhero]] looking [[troubled]].[[Superhero]] with his girl. It [[genuinely]] [[irritable]] me [[because]] I [[ideas]] this [[would]] have been a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] if they had [[exclusively]] [[performed]] something or had [[everyone]] actually [[tell]] something meaningful other than give [[guidelines]] to "[[gets]] this [[buddy]]".

4 out of 10. Its about four hours (all my attempts to see this) I'll never get back. Only for those who want to see a brooding Russian action film with very [[scant]] action --------------------------------------------- Result 46 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] ### Spoilers! ###

What is this movie [[offering]]? [[Out]] of control editing and [[cinematography]] that [[matches]] up with a [[terrible]] plot. It is sad to [[see]] Denzel Washington's talents go wasted in trashes [[like]] this.We are certainly [[hinted]] how the Mexicans cannot save themselves, outside forces [[needed]], [[possibly]] [[militaristic]], American ones. And we know the father is a shady [[character]], he is a Mexican after all, unlike the [[wife]] who appreciates Creasey more because he is American. He [[killed]] all of them thinking she died. And did she? Of course, she won't, she is a young kid and you are not supposed to hurt the sensibilities of the Hollywood fan. The trade off scene was the only [[thing]] that prevents me from rating it below the "implausibly successful"(as some critic pointed out)'Taken'. The nausea of such [[movies]] will take [[time]] to [[go]]. It is in the rating of such movies that we have to doubt IMDb's credulity.7.7 for a [[movie]] like this and 7.0 for My [[Own]] Private [[Idaho]]. Go [[figure]]! [[Mine]] will be in the range of 3.5-4.0 ### Spoilers! ###

What is this movie [[offered]]? [[Outward]] of control editing and [[film]] that [[match]] up with a [[abysmal]] plot. It is sad to [[consults]] Denzel Washington's talents go wasted in trashes [[iike]] this.We are certainly [[brandished]] how the Mexicans cannot save themselves, outside forces [[needs]], [[maybe]] [[militarism]], American ones. And we know the father is a shady [[personage]], he is a Mexican after all, unlike the [[femme]] who appreciates Creasey more because he is American. He [[kills]] all of them thinking she died. And did she? Of course, she won't, she is a young kid and you are not supposed to hurt the sensibilities of the Hollywood fan. The trade off scene was the only [[stuff]] that prevents me from rating it below the "implausibly successful"(as some critic pointed out)'Taken'. The nausea of such [[filmmaking]] will take [[period]] to [[going]]. It is in the rating of such movies that we have to doubt IMDb's credulity.7.7 for a [[filmmaking]] like this and 7.0 for My [[Belonged]] Private [[Oregon]]. Go [[silhouette]]! [[Mines]] will be in the range of 3.5-4.0 --------------------------------------------- Result 47 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Surreal]] [[film]] noir [[released]] soon after the "real," genre-defining classics "The Maltese Falcon," "Double Indemnity" and "The Postman Always Rings Twice." [[Welles]] [[films]] shouldn't be evaluated against others. He was playing by [[different]] rules. In [[fact]], he was [[playing]]. This [[starts]] where other femme fatale films [[leave]] off, so the vaguely [[logical]] (but interesting) whodunit is [[embellished]] with a [[display]] of Wellesian scenes (typical rapid-fire style), dialog (lots of "hard-boiled" philosophy), and [[unusual]] acting (good Hayworth presumably intentionally one-dimensional). To Welles "genre" may have meant "formula" but he seemed to like using "mysteries" as backgrounds for his "entertainments." [[Unreal]] [[cinematography]] noir [[publicized]] soon after the "real," genre-defining classics "The Maltese Falcon," "Double Indemnity" and "The Postman Always Rings Twice." [[Orson]] [[cinematography]] shouldn't be evaluated against others. He was playing by [[multiple]] rules. In [[facto]], he was [[replay]]. This [[begins]] where other femme fatale films [[walkout]] off, so the vaguely [[reasonable]] (but interesting) whodunit is [[adorned]] with a [[displayed]] of Wellesian scenes (typical rapid-fire style), dialog (lots of "hard-boiled" philosophy), and [[strange]] acting (good Hayworth presumably intentionally one-dimensional). To Welles "genre" may have meant "formula" but he seemed to like using "mysteries" as backgrounds for his "entertainments." --------------------------------------------- Result 48 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If Bob Ludlum was to see this mini series, he would have cried. This was complete waste of time and money. I have read the book and even though movies are not exactly what the book may be, CBS wasted time and money on this and it is embarrassing to claim that this was Ludlum's work.

May be the creator should check out the Bourne Identity with Richard Chamberlain and see how good that TV series was.

Poor Mira, Blair, Anjelica and Colm, why did they sign to stoop this low?

Horrible!! --------------------------------------------- Result 49 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I [[started]] to watch this [[movie]] with [[high]] [[expectations]]. [[However]], after one [[hour]] I [[gave]] up on this movie as it only [[instilled]] lots of [[unanswered]] [[questions]] [[upon]] me. This already started in the opening [[sequence]] and only [[got]] [[worse]].

Why [[would]] they bury the Hollander under a statue? Why is there an Italian comediant present? Why did the [[farmers]] [[wife]] save the Hollander? Why did he, upon being saved, not run for his life instead of starting to [[make]] love to the farmers [[wife]]? Why did the farmers [[wife]] not save the Hollander at a time when the [[farmer]] wouldn't be [[around]]? Why did these [[presumably]] [[illiterate]] farmers [[understand]] Italian? Why did the Italian comediant know about the Hollanders gold? Why did he [[hide]] it in the [[cesspool]] in the midst of the evil farmers property? These and many more questions popped up, and [[none]] of them [[seemed]] to get [[answered]] in an [[acceptable]] [[way]]. So I [[guess]] I am totally missing the point of this movie, and I am not connecting to the story in any way.... I [[starting]] to watch this [[filmmaking]] with [[supremo]] [[prognosis]]. [[Conversely]], after one [[hora]] I [[provided]] up on this movie as it only [[imparted]] lots of [[unanswerable]] [[matters]] [[after]] me. This already started in the opening [[sequences]] and only [[gets]] [[pire]].

Why [[could]] they bury the Hollander under a statue? Why is there an Italian comediant present? Why did the [[peasants]] [[women]] save the Hollander? Why did he, upon being saved, not run for his life instead of starting to [[deliver]] love to the farmers [[women]]? Why did the farmers [[woman]] not save the Hollander at a time when the [[farmers]] wouldn't be [[throughout]]? Why did these [[possibly]] [[illiteracy]] farmers [[understood]] Italian? Why did the Italian comediant know about the Hollanders gold? Why did he [[masked]] it in the [[abyss]] in the midst of the evil farmers property? These and many more questions popped up, and [[nos]] of them [[sounded]] to get [[replied]] in an [[agreeable]] [[ways]]. So I [[reckon]] I am totally missing the point of this movie, and I am not connecting to the story in any way.... --------------------------------------------- Result 50 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] Well, I would [[consider]] [[Police]] Story as one of [[Jackie]] Chan's best film. The plot, the [[fighting]] scenes and the stunt works are [[excellent]]. [[In]] this film, Jackie himself [[acted]] as a police officer called Chan Ka [[Kui]] (Kevin Chan in some versions) who [[successfully]] [[arrested]] a [[crime]] [[lord]]. [[After]] the [[crime]] lord was released due to lack of [[evidence]] , he framed Chan for the [[killing]] of a police [[officer]]. Due to this, he became [[wanted]] by the police. [[Later]] on, Salina (Brigitte Lin), who was the secretary of the [[crime]] [[lord]], went to a [[shopping]] mall and started to [[steal]] the [[evidence]] of the [[crime]] lord's [[crimes]] from his computer and [[preparing]] to pass them to Chan. [[However]], the [[crime]] lord knew that Salina had [[downloaded]] his incriminating data and hired his henchmen to [[capture]] her. [[Later]] on, Chan [[appeared]] at the scenes and [[began]] to [[fight]] all of the henchmen, [[defeating]] them one by one. [[At]] the [[last]] scene, Chan was [[seen]] punching the [[crime]] [[lord]]. [[Lastly]], this is the best [[action]] and [[comedy]] [[movie]]. Everyone should watch it. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. Well, I would [[contemplating]] [[Cop]] Story as one of [[Melanie]] Chan's best film. The plot, the [[firefight]] scenes and the stunt works are [[wondrous]]. [[For]] this film, Jackie himself [[behaved]] as a police officer called Chan Ka [[Cui]] (Kevin Chan in some versions) who [[satisfactorily]] [[imprisoned]] a [[crimes]] [[god]]. [[Afterwards]] the [[felony]] lord was released due to lack of [[testimonial]] , he framed Chan for the [[slaying]] of a police [[officials]]. Due to this, he became [[wished]] by the police. [[Afterwards]] on, Salina (Brigitte Lin), who was the secretary of the [[offence]] [[god]], went to a [[shopper]] mall and started to [[fly]] the [[testimonial]] of the [[crimes]] lord's [[felony]] from his computer and [[drafting]] to pass them to Chan. [[Still]], the [[felony]] lord knew that Salina had [[download]] his incriminating data and hired his henchmen to [[captures]] her. [[Subsequently]] on, Chan [[arose]] at the scenes and [[starts]] to [[tussle]] all of the henchmen, [[conquer]] them one by one. [[For]] the [[final]] scene, Chan was [[watched]] punching the [[offences]] [[god]]. [[Latter]], this is the best [[efforts]] and [[parody]] [[films]]. Everyone should watch it. [[Crucially]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 51 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] This movie "[[Joshua]]" is extremely [[disturbing]], and [[downright]] [[pointless]]. It actually makes me shudder to [[think]] there are people who would [[enjoy]] watching it. Without giving away the [[story]] it is about a young boy's reaction to his newborn sister, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. During the entirety of this movie the viewer is subjected to some of the most unsettling [[child]] behavior imaginable. Adding insult to injury, by the end of this movie there is absolutely no real outcome except the fruition of pure evil at the hands of a child no less, who outsmarted a whole group of dumb adults. There is no redemption, no justice served, and a whole group of adults who are not smart enough to see what is going on around them. Frankly, I did not [[enjoy]] watching this movie. It was extremely unsettling. Even for those who might enjoy horror movies, this movie could be too much. Despite the fact this movie was well [[acted]], the story itself is so disturbing that watching it was equivalent to a 90 minute wait in a dentist's waiting room in anticipation of some painful dental procedure. This movie "[[Gideon]]" is extremely [[disconcerting]], and [[utterly]] [[senseless]]. It actually makes me shudder to [[believing]] there are people who would [[enjoys]] watching it. Without giving away the [[narratives]] it is about a young boy's reaction to his newborn sister, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. During the entirety of this movie the viewer is subjected to some of the most unsettling [[enfants]] behavior imaginable. Adding insult to injury, by the end of this movie there is absolutely no real outcome except the fruition of pure evil at the hands of a child no less, who outsmarted a whole group of dumb adults. There is no redemption, no justice served, and a whole group of adults who are not smart enough to see what is going on around them. Frankly, I did not [[enjoys]] watching this movie. It was extremely unsettling. Even for those who might enjoy horror movies, this movie could be too much. Despite the fact this movie was well [[worked]], the story itself is so disturbing that watching it was equivalent to a 90 minute wait in a dentist's waiting room in anticipation of some painful dental procedure. --------------------------------------------- Result 52 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Fury of the Wolfman is a very good film that has a good cast which includes Paul Naschy/Jacinto Molina, Perla Cristal, Verónica Luján, Mark Stevens, Francisco Amorós, Fabián Conde, Miguel de la Riva, Ramón Lillo, José Marco, Javier de Rivera, and Pilar Zorrilla! The acting by all of these actors is very good. The Wolfman is really cool! He looks great and he sound like the Looney Tunes character the Tazmainian devil! There are some really hilarious scenes in this film! The thrills is really good and some of it is surprising. The movie is filmed very good. The music is good. The film is quite interesting and the movie really keeps you going until the end. This is a very good and thrilling film. If you like Paul Naschy/Jacinto Molina, Perla Cristal, Verónica Luján, Mark Stevens, Francisco Amorós, Fabián Conde, Miguel de la Riva, Ramón Lillo, José Marco, Javier de Rivera, Pilar Zorrilla, the rest of the cast in the film, Werewold films, Horror, Sci-Fi, Thrillers, Dramas, and interesting classic films then I strongly recommend you to see this film today!

Movie Nuttball's NOTE:

I got this film on a special DVD that has Doctor Blood's Coffin, The Brainiac, and The Fury of the Wolfman from Vintage Home Entertainment! See if you can find this winner with three bizarre but classic films on one DVD at Amazon.com today!

If you like Werewolf films I strongly recommend these: Werewolf of London (1935), The Wolf Man (1941), Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943), House of Frankenstein (1944), Abbott an d Costell Meets Frankenstein (1948), The Curse of the Werewolf (1961), An American Werewolf in London (1981), Silver Bullet (1985), Werewolf (1987), The Monster Squad (1987), My Mom's a Werewolf (1989), Project: Metalbeast (1995), Bad Moon (1996), Werewolf (1996), Dog Soldiers (2002), Underworld (2003), and Van Helsing (2004)! --------------------------------------------- Result 53 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[If]] you want to learn the basics of quantum mechanics, [[spend]] your $9 on a used textbook, not this [[movie]]. I'm a little worried that the money I spent is being used to [[buy]] Kool-Aid for [[shipment]] to Guyana.

I don't [[think]] the directors really got any point across, but it [[looks]] like maybe they were [[trying]] to make several: 1) Science can explain everything we do, meaning that our lives are deterministic; 2) Science can't be used to explain everything we do, meaning that we have free will; 3) Science is, like, really cool, brother; 4) We are [[God]]; 5) The world exists only in our minds; 6) Sarah Norman is a tough role to follow and 7) here, put this tiny paper square in your mouth and you'll see some really groovy stuff. [[Though]] you want to learn the basics of quantum mechanics, [[spending]] your $9 on a used textbook, not this [[filmmaking]]. I'm a little worried that the money I spent is being used to [[procured]] Kool-Aid for [[consignment]] to Guyana.

I don't [[believe]] the directors really got any point across, but it [[seems]] like maybe they were [[try]] to make several: 1) Science can explain everything we do, meaning that our lives are deterministic; 2) Science can't be used to explain everything we do, meaning that we have free will; 3) Science is, like, really cool, brother; 4) We are [[Gods]]; 5) The world exists only in our minds; 6) Sarah Norman is a tough role to follow and 7) here, put this tiny paper square in your mouth and you'll see some really groovy stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 54 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] It really boggles my mind when someone comes across a [[movie]] like this and claims it to be one of the worst slasher films out there. This is by far not one of the [[worst]] out there, still not a good movie, but not the worst [[nonetheless]]. Go [[see]] [[something]] like [[Death]] [[Nurse]] or Blood [[Lake]] and then come back to me and [[tell]] me if you think the Night [[Brings]] [[Charlie]] is the worst. The film has [[decent]] camera [[work]] and editing, which is way more than I can [[say]] for [[many]] more [[extremely]] [[obscure]] slasher [[films]].

The film doesn't [[deliver]] on the on-screen deaths, there's one death where you [[see]] his pruning saw rip into a [[neck]], but all other [[deaths]] are [[hardly]] interesting. But the [[lack]] of on-screen graphic violence doesn't mean this isn't a slasher [[film]], just a [[bad]] one.

The [[film]] was [[obviously]] intended not to be taken too [[seriously]]. The [[film]] [[came]] in at the [[end]] of the second slasher cycle, so it [[certainly]] was a reflection on [[traditional]] slasher elements, done in a tongue in cheek way. [[For]] [[example]], after a [[kill]], Charlie goes to the town's 'welcome' sign and [[marks]] the [[population]] down one less. This is something that can only get a laugh.

If you're into slasher films, definitely give this film a watch. It is [[slightly]] different than your usual slasher film with possibility of two killers, but not by much. The comedy of the movie is pretty much telling the audience to relax and not take the movie so god darn serious. You may forget the movie, you may remember it. I'll remember it because I love the [[name]]. It really boggles my mind when someone comes across a [[filmmaking]] like this and claims it to be one of the worst slasher films out there. This is by far not one of the [[meanest]] out there, still not a good movie, but not the worst [[still]]. Go [[seeing]] [[anything]] like [[Die]] [[Infirmary]] or Blood [[Lakes]] and then come back to me and [[say]] me if you think the Night [[Puts]] [[Charley]] is the worst. The film has [[dignified]] camera [[cooperation]] and editing, which is way more than I can [[told]] for [[innumerable]] more [[exceptionally]] [[fuzzy]] slasher [[kino]].

The film doesn't [[make]] on the on-screen deaths, there's one death where you [[behold]] his pruning saw rip into a [[collar]], but all other [[death]] are [[practically]] interesting. But the [[absence]] of on-screen graphic violence doesn't mean this isn't a slasher [[cinematographic]], just a [[unfavourable]] one.

The [[filmmaking]] was [[definitely]] intended not to be taken too [[severely]]. The [[filmmaking]] [[became]] in at the [[termination]] of the second slasher cycle, so it [[definitely]] was a reflection on [[classic]] slasher elements, done in a tongue in cheek way. [[Onto]] [[examples]], after a [[assassination]], Charlie goes to the town's 'welcome' sign and [[branded]] the [[demographics]] down one less. This is something that can only get a laugh.

If you're into slasher films, definitely give this film a watch. It is [[moderately]] different than your usual slasher film with possibility of two killers, but not by much. The comedy of the movie is pretty much telling the audience to relax and not take the movie so god darn serious. You may forget the movie, you may remember it. I'll remember it because I love the [[behalf]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 55 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently saw this at the 2009 Palm Springs International Film. This is the feature length directorial debut of veteran Dutch actress Monique van de Ven and based on my observation it should be her last. I hate movies that are so implausible that you are picking apart practically every scene. This film immediately leaves you scratching your head. as it begins a young photographer and his girlfriend who works for an international aid organization are having a leisurely drive through the Taliban-controlled mountains Afghanistan having a conversation about their love when a rocket stops a truck in front of them. They get out of their vehicle to watch as Talliban fighters equipped with rocket launchers, machine guns, rifles, handguns and grenades execute all five people in the truck. Bob (Waldemar Torenstra) starts taking pictures of all this when he is spotted by one of the insurgents who lobs a hand grenade at them that kills his girlfriend. since they are with hand throwing distance they can't be more than 50 yards away yet he somehow gets away. His girlfriend is blown up and he takes a picture of the moment of the grenade impact that kills her and wins a prize as photographer of the year for the photo. Every scene and situation in this film as as ridiculous as it's opening. The following year Bob finds himself on assignment for National Geographic on a Dutch resort island where he meets Kathleen (Sophie Hilbrand) and inserts himself into her seedy underworld of international drug smugglers. Avoid this film. I would give it a 4.0 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 56 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] As a [[collector]] of movie [[memorabilia]], I had to buy the movie poster for this [[film]] which, now that I've [[finally]] [[seen]] it, has to be the [[best]] thing about it. There's [[nothing]] more attractive to hang on your wall than a 27x41 inch image of the melting man. [[However]], there's [[nothing]] more awful to put in your VCR than an hour and a half long image of the melting man. [[At]] [[first]] I [[thought]] this [[movie]] was pure [[garbage]] but then I [[realized]] that it did have some [[qualities]] which made me laugh. The character of Dr. Ted Nelson has to be the most wishy-washy persona ever brought to the big screen. His dialogue is so trite it's unbelievable! ("It's incredible! He seems to be getting stronger as he melts!)

And could somebody tell me please how the heck they know exactly how much time Steve has left before he melts completely and exactly what their plan is to "help" him? [[If]] this movie was meant to scare its audience, I think it missed its calling. As a [[gatherer]] of movie [[keepsakes]], I had to buy the movie poster for this [[cinematography]] which, now that I've [[ultimately]] [[saw]] it, has to be the [[nicest]] thing about it. There's [[anything]] more attractive to hang on your wall than a 27x41 inch image of the melting man. [[Still]], there's [[anything]] more awful to put in your VCR than an hour and a half long image of the melting man. [[During]] [[frst]] I [[brainchild]] this [[movies]] was pure [[detritus]] but then I [[performed]] that it did have some [[qualifications]] which made me laugh. The character of Dr. Ted Nelson has to be the most wishy-washy persona ever brought to the big screen. His dialogue is so trite it's unbelievable! ("It's incredible! He seems to be getting stronger as he melts!)

And could somebody tell me please how the heck they know exactly how much time Steve has left before he melts completely and exactly what their plan is to "help" him? [[Though]] this movie was meant to scare its audience, I think it missed its calling. --------------------------------------------- Result 57 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Red Rock West (1993)

[[Nicolas]] Cage gets [[embroiled]] in a [[deadly]] [[crime]] without at first knowing it, and the dominos lead to [[increasing]] [[peril]], [[adventure]] and [[misadventure]] in the wild forlorn American [[West]] of the 1990s. [[Red]] [[Rock]] West is [[often]] [[brutal]] and sometimes [[hilarious]], and Cage [[pulls]] off the [[mixture]] with his usual sardonic wit and [[wary]] ease.

Is the plot over the top? [[Yes]]. Is Dennis Hopper [[perfect]] as a crazed, almost [[likable]] killer? Yes. Does Cage stand a [[chance]]? Well, you have to watch and see. It never [[lets]] up, and it took me by surprise the [[first]] [[time]] I [[saw]] it. On second [[viewing]] yesterday, I was [[surprised]] at how well it held up, how well constructed it was, and how [[macabre]] and funny it was at the same time.

Director Ron Dahl (who [[also]] helped write) is [[known]] more for his TV [[work]], but with Rounders and this [[film]] he shows a deft hand with [[sensational]] plots. It's saved by its humor by the way, and by the caricatures. The bar is sleazy, the [[cops]] questionable. And don't [[miss]] a really inspired cameo by Dwight Yoakam as a truck driver. Red Rock West (1993)

[[Nicola]] Cage gets [[participating]] in a [[mortal]] [[offense]] without at first knowing it, and the dominos lead to [[widening]] [[perils]], [[fling]] and [[misfortune]] in the wild forlorn American [[Western]] of the 1990s. [[Rojo]] [[Rocks]] West is [[normally]] [[ferocious]] and sometimes [[fun]], and Cage [[pulled]] off the [[mix]] with his usual sardonic wit and [[distrustful]] ease.

Is the plot over the top? [[Yea]]. Is Dennis Hopper [[perfection]] as a crazed, almost [[sympathetic]] killer? Yes. Does Cage stand a [[opportunity]]? Well, you have to watch and see. It never [[entitles]] up, and it took me by surprise the [[firstly]] [[moment]] I [[watched]] it. On second [[opinion]] yesterday, I was [[horrified]] at how well it held up, how well constructed it was, and how [[ghoulish]] and funny it was at the same time.

Director Ron Dahl (who [[further]] helped write) is [[renowned]] more for his TV [[cooperation]], but with Rounders and this [[cinematic]] he shows a deft hand with [[tabloid]] plots. It's saved by its humor by the way, and by the caricatures. The bar is sleazy, the [[policing]] questionable. And don't [[missed]] a really inspired cameo by Dwight Yoakam as a truck driver. --------------------------------------------- Result 58 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] They [[filmed]] this movie out on [[long]] [[Island]], where I [[grew]] up. My brother and his girlfriend were extras in this movie. Apparently there is some party scene where they are all drinking beer, (which they told me was colored water, tasted disgusting, and was very hard to keep swallowing over and over again, especially in the funnel scenes). [[Yet]] [[none]] of us ever heard of the movie being [[released]] anywhere in any form. It never came out in the [[theaters]] (obviously) and it, as far as I [[knew]], was never [[released]] on video, and I'm [[sure]] wasn't [[released]] on [[DVD]]. Yet it looks [[like]] it was [[seen]] by some people, [[albeit]] it [[probably]] very few. [[So]] there [[must]] be something. I would [[absolutely]] love to purchase this for my brother, yet there is no way I can find it [[anywhere]]. Does anybody [[know]] anything about when/where/how this [[movie]] [[could]] be [[purchased]]? And which [[format]] that would be? They [[shot]] this movie out on [[prolonged]] [[Insular]], where I [[raising]] up. My brother and his girlfriend were extras in this movie. Apparently there is some party scene where they are all drinking beer, (which they told me was colored water, tasted disgusting, and was very hard to keep swallowing over and over again, especially in the funnel scenes). [[Again]] [[nil]] of us ever heard of the movie being [[freed]] anywhere in any form. It never came out in the [[theater]] (obviously) and it, as far as I [[knowed]], was never [[publicized]] on video, and I'm [[convinced]] wasn't [[liberated]] on [[DVDS]]. Yet it looks [[iike]] it was [[watched]] by some people, [[nevertheless]] it [[undeniably]] very few. [[Therefore]] there [[should]] be something. I would [[abundantly]] love to purchase this for my brother, yet there is no way I can find it [[nowhere]]. Does anybody [[savoir]] anything about when/where/how this [[cinema]] [[wo]] be [[buying]]? And which [[formatted]] that would be? --------------------------------------------- Result 59 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I'm not kidding about that summary and vote! The video [[distributors]] have packaged this as just another typical '80s werewolf [[movie]], but it is in fact the [[greatest]] [[parody]] of the horror genre that you can imagine, having done for the [[horror]] movie what "Blazing Saddles" did for the western. I have seen plenty of comedies - good, bad, stupid, weird, etc. ([[usually]] walking away unimpressed), and I think that comedy must be the most difficult genre for filmmakers and actors to work in - it takes just the right kind of [[touch]] to make things successful, and part of that is having good ideas. "Full Moon High" is bulging with good ideas - so many, in fact, that it can easily put the Zucker/Abrams team of "Airplane" and "Naked Gun" to shame. One of the best of these is the very presence of Ed McMahon in a starring role as a John Birch-style right-wing crackpot. The [[jokes]], non-sequiturs, wisecracks and word-play are literally non-stop and everything, including the kitchen sink, has been thrown in. The ironic tone is very similar to that of "Back to the Future."

Some people (i.e. almost every reviewer here) must have been turned off by the spirit of anarchy here, but I almost died of laughter, and this is one of those movies in which you never know what kind of insane situation will transpire next. [[Since]] B-movie extraordinaire Larry Cohen had not made a straight comedy before this, one gets the sense that he was making up for lost time by including any joke he or his collaborators could think of. If Mel [[Brooks]] had made this, the critics would have [[labelled]] it a comic masterpiece, but because it was made by Cohen, it has been dismissed as schlock. [[Critical]] [[reviews]] have [[called]] this movie too "silly." [[SILLY]]? What is a comedy supposed to be - serious?! Anyway, I laughed out loud more for this movie than any other I can think of. Cohen makes fun of [[everyone]] - himself included, with plenty of references to his usual brand of low-rent film-making; he and the actors must have had a complete [[blast]] making this.

The humor is very Mel Brooks-ish, and anyone who loves Jewish humor or watches a lot of B-movies (especially horror) will love this. Trust me: the movie isn't too hard to find, and as long as you accept it for what it is - a roller-coaster of belly laughs with no pretense of social value whatsoever - then you'll truly enjoy it!!

One sidenote: this movie should somehow go down in history as the one thing Bob Saget ever starred in (albeit briefly) that was actually funny. I'm not kidding about that summary and vote! The video [[distributor]] have packaged this as just another typical '80s werewolf [[cinematography]], but it is in fact the [[higher]] [[charade]] of the horror genre that you can imagine, having done for the [[abomination]] movie what "Blazing Saddles" did for the western. I have seen plenty of comedies - good, bad, stupid, weird, etc. ([[popularly]] walking away unimpressed), and I think that comedy must be the most difficult genre for filmmakers and actors to work in - it takes just the right kind of [[toque]] to make things successful, and part of that is having good ideas. "Full Moon High" is bulging with good ideas - so many, in fact, that it can easily put the Zucker/Abrams team of "Airplane" and "Naked Gun" to shame. One of the best of these is the very presence of Ed McMahon in a starring role as a John Birch-style right-wing crackpot. The [[pranks]], non-sequiturs, wisecracks and word-play are literally non-stop and everything, including the kitchen sink, has been thrown in. The ironic tone is very similar to that of "Back to the Future."

Some people (i.e. almost every reviewer here) must have been turned off by the spirit of anarchy here, but I almost died of laughter, and this is one of those movies in which you never know what kind of insane situation will transpire next. [[Because]] B-movie extraordinaire Larry Cohen had not made a straight comedy before this, one gets the sense that he was making up for lost time by including any joke he or his collaborators could think of. If Mel [[Creek]] had made this, the critics would have [[tagging]] it a comic masterpiece, but because it was made by Cohen, it has been dismissed as schlock. [[Imperative]] [[scrutinize]] have [[drew]] this movie too "silly." [[PREPOSTEROUS]]? What is a comedy supposed to be - serious?! Anyway, I laughed out loud more for this movie than any other I can think of. Cohen makes fun of [[someone]] - himself included, with plenty of references to his usual brand of low-rent film-making; he and the actors must have had a complete [[detonation]] making this.

The humor is very Mel Brooks-ish, and anyone who loves Jewish humor or watches a lot of B-movies (especially horror) will love this. Trust me: the movie isn't too hard to find, and as long as you accept it for what it is - a roller-coaster of belly laughs with no pretense of social value whatsoever - then you'll truly enjoy it!!

One sidenote: this movie should somehow go down in history as the one thing Bob Saget ever starred in (albeit briefly) that was actually funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 60 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has to be the most brutally unfunny "comedy" I've ever seen in my life. Ben Stiller, Jack Black, and Christopher Walken as a crazed homeless man CAN'T make me laugh? Something's got to be wrong with this picture. This is the only movie I've ever felt like walking out of. I used free passes, and still felt like I wanted my money back. I can wholeheartedly say that the only movie I've ever seen worse than this one was HOUSE OF THE DEAD. The. ONLY. worse. movie. I laughed very slightly at the merry-go-round scene, and that's it. Spending 2 hours in something billed as a comedy should get you more than one laugh, right? I don't know, I guess the filmmakers thought that "flan" was a funny word, or something. And the other running joke really is beating a dead horse--literally. --------------------------------------------- Result 61 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] A sentimental school [[drama]] set in Denmark, 1969, "We Shall Overcome" offers a [[pathetic]] [[Danish]] take on US culture. Frits (Janus Dissing Rathke), a flower-power obsessed, naive 13-year-old, exits with half his ear hanging off from brutal master Lindum-Svendsen's (Bent Mejding) office. Lindum-Svendsen, a school director, portrayed as a fascistoid tyrant, has the local community in control. Lindum-Svendsen's gone too far this time, and with his father, recovering from a mental breakdown (sure, there wasn't enough drama already..), and overly stereotyped hippie music teacher Mr Svale ('Hi, call me Freddie'), Frits stands up for justice.

Tell you what. It's so [[unconvincing]], over-(method-)acted, and so full of misery, that as a 'family' [[picture]] this grotesque -filled with cliché's- excuse for a movie fails [[miserably]] to convince non-Scandinavian audiences. Sorry, kind danish readers, to crash like this into your sentimental journeys.. But it's definitely NOT a tale about a 'boy becoming a man by fighting the system'. The boy never becomes a man, but rather remains a naive, big eyed cry-face. If you call a church of small minded small town folk, led by a dictator like cartoonish character "the system", I'm sorry if I'm missing something.

If you're into family pictures, go see Happy Feet instead.. A sentimental school [[tragedy]] set in Denmark, 1969, "We Shall Overcome" offers a [[unfortunate]] [[Danes]] take on US culture. Frits (Janus Dissing Rathke), a flower-power obsessed, naive 13-year-old, exits with half his ear hanging off from brutal master Lindum-Svendsen's (Bent Mejding) office. Lindum-Svendsen, a school director, portrayed as a fascistoid tyrant, has the local community in control. Lindum-Svendsen's gone too far this time, and with his father, recovering from a mental breakdown (sure, there wasn't enough drama already..), and overly stereotyped hippie music teacher Mr Svale ('Hi, call me Freddie'), Frits stands up for justice.

Tell you what. It's so [[inconclusive]], over-(method-)acted, and so full of misery, that as a 'family' [[photographs]] this grotesque -filled with cliché's- excuse for a movie fails [[woefully]] to convince non-Scandinavian audiences. Sorry, kind danish readers, to crash like this into your sentimental journeys.. But it's definitely NOT a tale about a 'boy becoming a man by fighting the system'. The boy never becomes a man, but rather remains a naive, big eyed cry-face. If you call a church of small minded small town folk, led by a dictator like cartoonish character "the system", I'm sorry if I'm missing something.

If you're into family pictures, go see Happy Feet instead.. --------------------------------------------- Result 62 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Does this film suck!! Horrible acting, horrible script, horrible effects, horrible horrible horrible!! Nothing redeeming here for even the most die-hard of horror fans! A crazy killer stalks students at a college. People are showing up dead in the hallways, but still, class carries on as normal??? After about the 4th body, I would think that they could allow the students a few days break! LOL. This about as bad as it gets folks. This film should be shown as a means of torture to criminals. You have been warned! --------------------------------------------- Result 63 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The husband-and-wife team of Bennie Fields and Blossom Seeley were [[huge]] [[stars]] in vaudeville, [[yet]] they [[made]] very few [[films]]. As is the [[case]] for some other [[performers]] of their era ([[George]] M. Cohan, Fanny Brice, [[Gertrude]] [[Lawrence]]) the most accessible [[piece]] of film footage for [[Fields]] and [[Seeley]] is the biopic [[ABOUT]] them, in which they're portrayed by other [[actors]]: '[[Somebody]] Loves Me', starring Betty Hutton and that inimitable song-and-dance man Ralph Meeker.

[[In]] their heyday, Fields and Seeley were so [[hugely]] popular that another husband-and-wife vaudeville [[act]] -- [[Jesse]] [[Block]] and Eve Sully -- achieved nearly as much stardom [[performing]] an almost [[identical]] [[act]], effectively [[becoming]] the "second-team" [[Fields]] and Seeley. Offstage, though, there was a [[major]] [[difference]] in the couples' living [[arrangements]]. Fields and Seeley lived in hotel suites, paying room-service rates for [[every]] [[meal]] they [[ate]], and eventually [[running]] out of [[money]]. Block and Sully lived [[modestly]] and invested their [[earnings]] wisely, [[ending]] in comfortable [[retirement]].

The first 30 [[seconds]] of this Vitaphone short are occupied by two spats-wearing pianists. [[Apparently]] these two [[men]] had some slight [[name]] [[value]] of their own in 1930, [[although]] I've never [[heard]] of them. [[Finally]], Fields and Seely [[rush]] in and [[start]] performing. They both have plenty of pep, and she's [[fairly]] [[attractive]].

I was [[annoyed]] that both performers [[keep]] [[making]] movements as if they're about to break into a [[dance]], but they never [[quite]] do so until the third of the three [[songs]] they [[perform]] in this short. When they finally [[start]] hoofing, the [[results]] are not [[impressive]].

I was delighted to have this [[opportunity]] to [[see]] these two [[major]] [[performers]] doing their vaude [[act]]. Now that I've [[seen]] it, I [[understand]] why they never became [[stars]] in [[movie]] musicals. My [[rating]] for this one: just 4 out of 10, and I'll [[stick]] with Block and Sully. The husband-and-wife team of Bennie Fields and Blossom Seeley were [[monumental]] [[celebrity]] in vaudeville, [[even]] they [[effected]] very few [[filmmaking]]. As is the [[lawsuits]] for some other [[performer]] of their era ([[Giorgi]] M. Cohan, Fanny Brice, [[Edith]] [[Laurence]]) the most accessible [[slice]] of film footage for [[Domains]] and [[Seely]] is the biopic [[TOWARD]] them, in which they're portrayed by other [[protagonists]]: '[[Everybody]] Loves Me', starring Betty Hutton and that inimitable song-and-dance man Ralph Meeker.

[[Among]] their heyday, Fields and Seeley were so [[immensely]] popular that another husband-and-wife vaudeville [[legislation]] -- [[Jess]] [[Bloc]] and Eve Sully -- achieved nearly as much stardom [[perform]] an almost [[similar]] [[legislation]], effectively [[become]] the "second-team" [[Campos]] and Seeley. Offstage, though, there was a [[significant]] [[dispute]] in the couples' living [[agreement]]. Fields and Seeley lived in hotel suites, paying room-service rates for [[all]] [[lunch]] they [[consumed]], and eventually [[execution]] out of [[cash]]. Block and Sully lived [[moderately]] and invested their [[income]] wisely, [[ended]] in comfortable [[pensions]].

The first 30 [[second]] of this Vitaphone short are occupied by two spats-wearing pianists. [[Visibly]] these two [[male]] had some slight [[names]] [[values]] of their own in 1930, [[despite]] I've never [[audition]] of them. [[Ultimately]], Fields and Seely [[haste]] in and [[started]] performing. They both have plenty of pep, and she's [[rather]] [[seductive]].

I was [[upset]] that both performers [[retain]] [[doing]] movements as if they're about to break into a [[dances]], but they never [[very]] do so until the third of the three [[lyrics]] they [[performing]] in this short. When they finally [[starter]] hoofing, the [[result]] are not [[resplendent]].

I was delighted to have this [[luck]] to [[seeing]] these two [[considerable]] [[performer]] doing their vaude [[ley]]. Now that I've [[noticed]] it, I [[realise]] why they never became [[celebrity]] in [[flick]] musicals. My [[ratings]] for this one: just 4 out of 10, and I'll [[twig]] with Block and Sully. --------------------------------------------- Result 64 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] My husband and I bought the [[Old]] [[School]] Sesame Street DVD's for our [[daughter]] and I have to [[say]], I don't [[let]] her watch the [[new]] episodes on [[TV]], because I find ALL of the characters annoying. Baby [[Bear]] AND Telly? OMgosh, How ANNOYING and useless [[blabber]] can [[someone]] think of for their 'skits'? Elmo? Give it a rest not [[every]] kid likes him, once again, [[annoying]] and doesn't teach my [[child]] ANYTHING. Mr. Noodle? what a [[reject]]. I think the one time I turned the 'new' show on for her, she and I were left [[dumber]] than before. The [[show]] has [[Definitely]] [[taken]] a [[wrong]] turn. I remember the Yip Yips, Kermit's [[Breaking]] News, 1-2 2 [[Little]] Dolls, Mumford the [[Magician]], Bert and Ernie, Grover the Waiter, all the [[GREAT]] [[EDUCATIONAL]] skits of [[OLD]] SCHOOL S.S. Sesame [[Street]] has suffered a direct hit of boredom and dumbness [[since]] Jim Henson's passing in 1990. The [[show]] no [[longer]] has the [[educational]], funny and interactive skits it used to. I find the [[new]] versions [[simply]] [[unbearably]] annoying and full of [[useless]] non-educational [[blabber]]. Way to [[go]] S.S. producers/writers you have [[yet]] another cartoony [[show]] for the [[parents]] to [[sit]] there non-creative, non-exercised kids in front of so they'll [[get]] out of their hair. Per [[Producers]]/[[Writers]] : I suggest you [[whip]] out the [[old]] muppets and [[start]] taping [[similar]] content to that of the first Sesame Street's. [[Lord]] knows I sure don't want my [[child]] talking like Baby Bear or Elmo. My husband and I bought the [[Antique]] [[Tuition]] Sesame Street DVD's for our [[girls]] and I have to [[said]], I don't [[allowing]] her watch the [[newest]] episodes on [[TELEVISION]], because I find ALL of the characters annoying. Baby [[Bears]] AND Telly? OMgosh, How ANNOYING and useless [[blab]] can [[everyone]] think of for their 'skits'? Elmo? Give it a rest not [[any]] kid likes him, once again, [[irritating]] and doesn't teach my [[kid]] ANYTHING. Mr. Noodle? what a [[denying]]. I think the one time I turned the 'new' show on for her, she and I were left [[stupider]] than before. The [[shows]] has [[Decidedly]] [[picked]] a [[incorrect]] turn. I remember the Yip Yips, Kermit's [[Breach]] News, 1-2 2 [[Petit]] Dolls, Mumford the [[Warlock]], Bert and Ernie, Grover the Waiter, all the [[AWESOME]] [[TEACHING]] skits of [[ELDERLY]] SCHOOL S.S. Sesame [[Thoroughfare]] has suffered a direct hit of boredom and dumbness [[because]] Jim Henson's passing in 1990. The [[demonstrate]] no [[most]] has the [[instructional]], funny and interactive skits it used to. I find the [[newer]] versions [[exclusively]] [[freakishly]] annoying and full of [[superfluous]] non-educational [[blather]]. Way to [[going]] S.S. producers/writers you have [[even]] another cartoony [[exhibition]] for the [[parent]] to [[assis]] there non-creative, non-exercised kids in front of so they'll [[got]] out of their hair. Per [[Makers]]/[[Authors]] : I suggest you [[whipping]] out the [[former]] muppets and [[outset]] taping [[comparable]] content to that of the first Sesame Street's. [[God]] knows I sure don't want my [[kid]] talking like Baby Bear or Elmo. --------------------------------------------- Result 65 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was a waste of time, even rented on DVD. If super-speedy camera shots get any faster than this, we might as well pay twenty bucks to get in the laundromat, get popcorn, and watch the dryer spin. Jet Li is so much better than this. One can only hope that he won't be making deals anytime soon to make another cliche-ridden film like The One.

If there's one film you should avoid, this is "The One". --------------------------------------------- Result 66 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I finally caught up to "Starlight" last [[night]] on [[television]] and all I can say is. . . wow! It's hard to know where to [[begin]] -- the incredibly hokey special effects (check out the laser beams shooting out of Willie's eyes!), the [[atrocious]] acting, the ponderous dialogue, the mismatched [[use]] of stock footage, or the air of earnest pretentiousness that infuses the entire production. This truly is a one-of-a-kind experience, and we should all be thankful for that. I [[nominate]] Jonathon [[Kay]] as the [[true]] heir to Ed [[Wood]]! I finally caught up to "Starlight" last [[overnight]] on [[tv]] and all I can say is. . . wow! It's hard to know where to [[launched]] -- the incredibly hokey special effects (check out the laser beams shooting out of Willie's eyes!), the [[outrageous]] acting, the ponderous dialogue, the mismatched [[utilizes]] of stock footage, or the air of earnest pretentiousness that infuses the entire production. This truly is a one-of-a-kind experience, and we should all be thankful for that. I [[appointments]] Jonathon [[Cay]] as the [[veritable]] heir to Ed [[Madeira]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 67 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well I guess it supposedly not a classic because there are only a few easily recognizable faces, but I personally think it is... It's a very beautiful sweet movie, Henry Winkler did a GREAT job with his character and it really impressed me. --------------------------------------------- Result 68 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Boy this movie had me [[fooled]]. I honestly [[thought]] it [[would]] be a campy [[horror]] film with [[absolutely]] no [[humor]] in it whatsoever, [[boy]] I got the [[cold]] shoulder that [[time]]. This [[movie]] was, and I'm [[truthful]], pretty [[damn]] good. It was not scary at all but the campiness and the sly [[humor]] [[really]] [[mad]] this movie interesting. Some to the [[horrible]] acting and cliché killings were so painful to watch, I almost laughed at how bad it was, but to some extent I enjoyed it. The [[killings]] all vaguely relate to snow sports and Christmas, which made things more [[intriguing]]. The POV camera angles were awesome.

The movie is about a viscous killer who dies in a car accident collision with a chemical truck while being transported to prison. He is later resurrected in that very same chemical with snow spliced into the mixture. These were the ingredients chosen to make the perfect killer snowman. He than takes his revenge, as the snowman, on the police officer who convicted him.

This movie had such bad acting, with the exception of Christopher Allport, that is was funny. I will say that I am also pretty disappointed that this movie was not a horror, but in fact a dark sitcom. They had a great story with a good plot but it wasn't executed right. All in all I like the movie at first but now it is really annoying. But this movie is way better and darker than the sequel. Boy this movie had me [[hoodwinked]]. I honestly [[brainchild]] it [[ought]] be a campy [[abomination]] film with [[abundantly]] no [[mood]] in it whatsoever, [[guy]] I got the [[frigid]] shoulder that [[period]]. This [[filmmaking]] was, and I'm [[veritable]], pretty [[goddam]] good. It was not scary at all but the campiness and the sly [[comedy]] [[genuinely]] [[crazy]] this movie interesting. Some to the [[scary]] acting and cliché killings were so painful to watch, I almost laughed at how bad it was, but to some extent I enjoyed it. The [[homicide]] all vaguely relate to snow sports and Christmas, which made things more [[mesmerizing]]. The POV camera angles were awesome.

The movie is about a viscous killer who dies in a car accident collision with a chemical truck while being transported to prison. He is later resurrected in that very same chemical with snow spliced into the mixture. These were the ingredients chosen to make the perfect killer snowman. He than takes his revenge, as the snowman, on the police officer who convicted him.

This movie had such bad acting, with the exception of Christopher Allport, that is was funny. I will say that I am also pretty disappointed that this movie was not a horror, but in fact a dark sitcom. They had a great story with a good plot but it wasn't executed right. All in all I like the movie at first but now it is really annoying. But this movie is way better and darker than the sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 69 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow. I thought this might be insipid but it was even worse than I imagined! Sometimes I like to watch a good "car-crash" movie: those that are so bad that you can't look away because you want to see how bad they can possibly get. This is really the only reason I could leave the television on - morbid fascination. It wasn't so much the acting, which was only mediocre or slightly worse than one would expect from this cast, but the premise and the plot which never should have seen the light of day. The script, too, is groan-inducing. As for cinematography, did anyone else notice that they used a "curtains drawing" segue device, like in an old 50's TV show...but without irony? At first I thought they must be kidding but the movie takes itself too seriously to have used this in a tongue-in-cheek manner. Don't even ask me about the score...the only high point is the final song, by Morcheeba. I guess they wanted to leave people with something for their $8...glad I saw it on TV!!!!! Just silly! I wonder if this is why Timothy Hutton has had trouble finding much work recently? I guess if you don't expect much, and want to watch a mindless thriller, it would be better than spending an evening clipping your toenails, which is why it merits a 2. --------------------------------------------- Result 70 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this version of "A Christmas Carol" when it first appeared on television. I actually anticipated seeing the film when it was advertised and it more than lived up to my expectations. I have now purchased the DVD and plan to watch it every year. With the exception of "It's A Wonderful Life" I consider this version of "A Christmas Carol" one of the best Christmas movies ever made. George C. Scott is excellent and a superb cast led by Roger Rees surrounds him! Scott proves once again that he is one of finest actors of our time. Scott has the artistic talent and acting ability to play any role and keep the character unique to himself. How can someone be remembered as both Patton and Scrooge? Scott does so easily. The direction is marvelous with the fine sets, costumes and music that give the movie a special feeling of the time, place and era depicted. You will simply love this movie and will place it among your favorites to watch during the holiday season. --------------------------------------------- Result 71 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Before we begin, I have a fear of [[dentists]]. This movie gives me the creeps and even makes me cringe. That is what I [[love]] about this film. The movie is [[kind]] of [[boring]]. For that, I take 3 [[stars]] off!

*Spoiler Alert*

The movie revolves around Dr. Alan Feinstone who has just found out his wife has been cheating on him. Soon, he begins to have hallucinations and begins torturing his patients, killing co-workers, and he has even tortured his wife to death and killed the man he was having an affair with.

*End Spoiler*

The movie is very [[bloody]] and gory. I would recommend it if you are into gore.

I give this film 7 stars out of 10. Dr. Alan Feinstein Is Not Your Normal Everyday Dentist! Before we begin, I have a fear of [[dental]]. This movie gives me the creeps and even makes me cringe. That is what I [[amour]] about this film. The movie is [[genus]] of [[bored]]. For that, I take 3 [[superstar]] off!

*Spoiler Alert*

The movie revolves around Dr. Alan Feinstone who has just found out his wife has been cheating on him. Soon, he begins to have hallucinations and begins torturing his patients, killing co-workers, and he has even tortured his wife to death and killed the man he was having an affair with.

*End Spoiler*

The movie is very [[bloodied]] and gory. I would recommend it if you are into gore.

I give this film 7 stars out of 10. Dr. Alan Feinstein Is Not Your Normal Everyday Dentist! --------------------------------------------- Result 72 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This film could be one of the most [[underrated]] [[film]] of Bollywood [[history]].This 1994 blockbuster had all of it good performances,music and direction.I remember I was in Allahabad when this movie was [[running]] and it was somewhere in March at [[Holi]] [[time]] , the people there were playing its song "Ooe Amma" at their loudspeakers in [[highest]] [[volume]]. If someone who likes to watch Some Like It [[Hot]] and drools over Marilyn Monroe he should [[see]] this movie.[[Thumbs]] Up to Govinda.How [[many]] of you know that this film was shot in [[South]] of [[India]] and after Sholay could be one of the very few blockbuter to [[hit]] Silver Screen.With [[films]] like these Indian [[comedy]] could never be dead. This film could be one of the most [[understated]] [[cinematographic]] of Bollywood [[historian]].This 1994 blockbuster had all of it good performances,music and direction.I remember I was in Allahabad when this movie was [[executing]] and it was somewhere in March at [[Hawley]] [[moment]] , the people there were playing its song "Ooe Amma" at their loudspeakers in [[higher]] [[volumes]]. If someone who likes to watch Some Like It [[Scorching]] and drools over Marilyn Monroe he should [[seeing]] this movie.[[Inches]] Up to Govinda.How [[numerous]] of you know that this film was shot in [[Southward]] of [[Hindustan]] and after Sholay could be one of the very few blockbuter to [[slugged]] Silver Screen.With [[movie]] like these Indian [[farce]] could never be dead. --------------------------------------------- Result 73 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[actually]] like the original, and this [[film]] has its ups and [[downs]]. Here's just a few:

[[Ups]]: [[Most]] of the [[original]] [[voice]] cast [[returned]].

Downs: I didn't like the [[voice]] of Timon's [[Ma]]. I know she did a [[voice]] in The [[Simpsons]], but that [[show]] is just [[plain]] [[stupid]].

[[Ups]]: We [[get]] to [[see]] Simba as a "[[teenager]]."

Downs: They [[wasted]] it with a slug-slurping [[contest]] between Timon and Simba.

Ups: It was Rafiki who [[told]] Timon about "[[Hakuna]] Matata."

Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?

Ups: Songs again. (some of the original [[songs]] were there, but they were just background music.)

Downs: But stupid songs. (a.k.a. Timon's solo.)

[[Overall]], this is a pretty good movie. I'd recommend it for [[fans]] of the original. But if you don't like the original, chances are you won't like this one.

My [[Score]]: 7/10 I [[genuinely]] like the original, and this [[cinema]] has its ups and [[nylons]]. Here's just a few:

[[Ubs]]: [[Plus]] of the [[upfront]] [[vowel]] cast [[repatriated]].

Downs: I didn't like the [[voices]] of Timon's [[Momma]]. I know she did a [[voices]] in The [[Simpson]], but that [[exhibition]] is just [[lowland]] [[dolt]].

[[Ubs]]: We [[obtains]] to [[behold]] Simba as a "[[youth]]."

Downs: They [[squandered]] it with a slug-slurping [[eurovision]] between Timon and Simba.

Ups: It was Rafiki who [[tell]] Timon about "[[Matata]] Matata."

Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?

Ups: Songs again. (some of the original [[hymns]] were there, but they were just background music.)

Downs: But stupid songs. (a.k.a. Timon's solo.)

[[Holistic]], this is a pretty good movie. I'd recommend it for [[enthusiasts]] of the original. But if you don't like the original, chances are you won't like this one.

My [[Scoring]]: 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 74 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] An [[annoying]] [[experience]]. Improvised dialogue, handheld cameras for no [[effect]], directionless plot, contrived romance, ick! to the whole [[mess]]. Ron Silver was the only [[real]] actor. Gretta Sacchi was TERRIBLE! Henry Jaglom did better with Eating which suited his style much more. An [[exasperating]] [[enjoying]]. Improvised dialogue, handheld cameras for no [[consequences]], directionless plot, contrived romance, ick! to the whole [[confusion]]. Ron Silver was the only [[veritable]] actor. Gretta Sacchi was TERRIBLE! Henry Jaglom did better with Eating which suited his style much more. --------------------------------------------- Result 75 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this film. It's one of those I can watch again and again. It is acted well by a good cast that doesn't try too hard to be star studded.

The premise of a newly widowed housewife who turns to selling pot to make ends meet could have been made into an Americanised turd of a movie or an action thriller. Either would have killed the film completely.

The film plays out like an Ealing Comedy with a terrific feel-good factor throughout.

It is worth watching just for the scene with the two old ladies and a box of cornflakes... (no that's not a spoiler!) --------------------------------------------- Result 76 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dana Andrews stands "Where the Sidewalk Ends" in this 1950 film that also stars Gene Tierney, Gary Merrill, Karl Malden and Neville Brand. Andrews plays New York City Detective Sgt. Mark Dixon, a cop with a bad temper who has gotten into trouble in the past for beating suspects. When a man is murdered at a gambling club owned by a mobster, Scalise (Merrill), Dixon and his partner go to investigate. Scalise blames the murder on Ken Paine (Stevens), who has now left the club after fighting not only with his wife, Morgan (Tierney) but the victim. Dixon thinks the victim won a lot of money and was killed as a result by the mobster's men. He goes to see Paine and, not realizing he has a plate in his head from the war, knocks him to the floor and inadvertently kills him. Now he must cover up the murder. As a further complication, he falls for Morgan; her father (Ken Tully), who went to Paine's apartment after he saw that Paine had hit his daughter, is arrested for the crime.

This is a really terrific, gritty noir with some good performances. The ruggedly handsome and weathered Andrews is convincing as a tough yet nervous detective who has to stay one step ahead of his colleagues. The movie reunites him with his fabulous "Laura" costar, Gene Tierney, and she looks lovely as a model with bad taste in men who apparently is used to being roughed up. Little does she know, she's got another one on her hands. Ken Tully does a terrific job as her father, who protests his innocence despite some damning evidence. Karl Malden is very tough as Dixon's boss.

My only problem with this well-directed, fast-moving and absorbing film is the ending. Pure Hollywood and, putting myself in Tierney's place, I doubt I would react the same way. A minor criticism for a film written by Ben Hecht and directed by Otto Preminger. I didn't find it as awe-inspiring as "Laura," but few things in this world are. If you like film noir, this is a must-see. --------------------------------------------- Result 77 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was just horrible the plot was just OK, but the rest of the was was bad . I mean come on puppet and then they even tried to make the movie digital and that made it even worse! Normally I would like low-budget movie but this was just a waste of time and almost made me want to return the set that it came on. I have about ten low-budget movie set with like 6-8 movies on them and I would have to say this is the worse movie out of all of them. Also the wording is off and they use a fake plastic machetes that doesn't even look like a real one, they could of used one that looked even a little close to a real one so save your time and money and don't watch this horrorible movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 78 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This move is about as bad as they come. I was, however forced to give it a 2 for the scenery. There are many great shots of the southwest including many in Monument Valley, one of the most breathtaking places in the US. It is also, starting with John Ford, one of the most filmed. In fact one scene with Kris and the girl was filmed on a place called John Ford point. --------------------------------------------- Result 79 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stylishly directed, picturesquely photographed and brilliantly acted — Crosby's interpretation seems exactly right, Hardwicke has his best role ever, while Bendix is a treat too — this Yankee's appeal is universal and irresistible.

One of the principal joys of the movie, of course, are the songs. As might be expected, Bing is in fine voice. And although Hardwicke's solo has been cut, we can still hear him sing heartily as he dances merrily with Crosby and Bendix in their famous novelty number, "Busy Doing Nothing". It's also a treat to hear Rhonda Fleming, who, although she enjoyed an extensive stage and concert career as a singer, was rarely given a chance to be heard in the cinema. She has a lovely voice that more than matches her ravishing looks—and she looks very fetching indeed in her Mary Kay Dodson costumes.

Director Tay Garnett gets the most out of his lavish budget, using all the resources at his command to present every fabulous scene as effectively as possible. (Perhaps the eclipse looks a trifle too contrived, but who's complaining?)

In short, as the trailer actually describes, an entertainment delight from start to finish. --------------------------------------------- Result 80 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Offbeat and [[rather]] entertaining sleeper concerning two very [[different]] [[brothers]] who are both not only so-called "fire starters" ([[think]] [[Stephen]] King's snore-fest of a [[book]] with the same [[name]]), but [[also]] [[forever]] at odds with each other over a [[woman]] who has a [[rather]] [[nasty]] habit of being a pyromaniac! [[Good]] [[special]] effects ([[especially]] [[towards]] the [[end]]), [[quirky]] performances from a [[pretty]] talented trio of actors and [[topped]] by a really interesting and [[oddly]] [[appropriate]] soundtrack [[ultimately]] make "Wilder Napalm" a [[unique]] [[treat]] of a [[film]] to watch...if you can [[find]] it that is! [[On]] a personal [[note]], I was [[fortunate]] [[enough]] to snatch it up (so to [[speak]]) from the two-dollar bin at my local video-rental [[store]]. (*** out of *****) Offbeat and [[comparatively]] entertaining sleeper concerning two very [[diverse]] [[plymouth]] who are both not only so-called "fire starters" ([[ideas]] [[Steven]] King's snore-fest of a [[books]] with the same [[names]]), but [[apart]] [[eternally]] at odds with each other over a [[women]] who has a [[fairly]] [[ugly]] habit of being a pyromaniac! [[Buena]] [[especial]] effects ([[namely]] [[toward]] the [[terminating]]), [[fickle]] performances from a [[quite]] talented trio of actors and [[exceeded]] by a really interesting and [[suspiciously]] [[adequate]] soundtrack [[eventually]] make "Wilder Napalm" a [[especial]] [[addressing]] of a [[kino]] to watch...if you can [[found]] it that is! [[Onto]] a personal [[notes]], I was [[lucky]] [[adequately]] to snatch it up (so to [[talking]]) from the two-dollar bin at my local video-rental [[shop]]. (*** out of *****) --------------------------------------------- Result 81 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[remarkable]] film can be [[summed]] up very easily. First of all, while the comparisons to "Princess Bride" are inevitable, it's [[almost]] futile to do so. While both films combine adult wit and humor with a fairy tale backdrop, "Stardust" is so much [[different]] than any other fantasy/sci-fi film I've ever seen. It's such a hybrid of those genres, but its plot and script are so [[unique]] that--along with the performances, special effects, cinematography, and score--the finished product is simply not all that comparable to anything that has ever appeared on the silver screen. Secondly, the score is very effective at simultaneously pulling us into the story and the fantasy world in which it takes place and pushing the story along, while creating just the right amount of awe and excitement necessary to make the magic believable within the realm where the characters exist. Thirdly, I did not find the film to be even remotely difficult to follow or confusing in any way. In fact, the interesting interplay between the three main subplots actually made it even that much more compelling to watch. [[Wonderfully]] casted, and superbly acted across the board. This fantasy adventure (with sci-fi elements) was the [[best]] one I've seen since "Return of the King" (not that I am comparing the two at all). OK, so its not that easy to sum up, but don't let any crude and/or heartless and cynical review nor the film's pathetic PR prevent you from partaking in the best time you could have at the movies this summer (or even possibly in a long time)! This [[wondrous]] film can be [[summarized]] up very easily. First of all, while the comparisons to "Princess Bride" are inevitable, it's [[virtually]] futile to do so. While both films combine adult wit and humor with a fairy tale backdrop, "Stardust" is so much [[several]] than any other fantasy/sci-fi film I've ever seen. It's such a hybrid of those genres, but its plot and script are so [[particular]] that--along with the performances, special effects, cinematography, and score--the finished product is simply not all that comparable to anything that has ever appeared on the silver screen. Secondly, the score is very effective at simultaneously pulling us into the story and the fantasy world in which it takes place and pushing the story along, while creating just the right amount of awe and excitement necessary to make the magic believable within the realm where the characters exist. Thirdly, I did not find the film to be even remotely difficult to follow or confusing in any way. In fact, the interesting interplay between the three main subplots actually made it even that much more compelling to watch. [[Surprisingly]] casted, and superbly acted across the board. This fantasy adventure (with sci-fi elements) was the [[nicest]] one I've seen since "Return of the King" (not that I am comparing the two at all). OK, so its not that easy to sum up, but don't let any crude and/or heartless and cynical review nor the film's pathetic PR prevent you from partaking in the best time you could have at the movies this summer (or even possibly in a long time)! --------------------------------------------- Result 82 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] ********Spoilers--Careful*********

What can I [[say]]? I'm biased when it [[comes]] to Urban [[Cowboy]]. I love it and have [[watched]] it [[countless]] times--and [[usually]] find out something [[new]] about it with each viewing.

I [[think]] one of the things I [[like]] about it is that Urban [[Cowboy]] is about working class people, not rich people who [[live]] in either L.[[A]]. or [[New]] York. Well, it is true except for Pam.

Travolta plays Bud, a [[small]] [[town]] Texas [[boy]] who [[moves]] to Houston to [[work]] in the [[oil]] fields. And this is when Travolta [[actually]] [[played]] in [[good]] [[dramatic]] [[movies]] like Saturday [[Night]] [[Fever]] [[instead]] of [[playing]] stereotypical bad [[guys]]/good [[guys]] in [[big]] [[budget]] [[movies]]. This is a [[really]] good movie--the mechanical [[bull]] riding contest and two-step [[dancing]] may be silly, but you have to enjoy this for what it is.

[[Bud]] [[meets]] [[Sissy]] ([[played]] by Debra Winger with [[slutty]] brilliance)--and soon after, they are [[married]] and [[living]] in their dream [[trailer]]. But their [[relationship]] [[becomes]] a real life [[battle]] of the sexes. Bud [[wants]] to be a [[real]] cowboy. [[Sissy]] wants to be with a [[real]] cowboy. But in [[modern]] [[times]], men's roles are not as [[clear]]. Where can Bud [[prove]] he's a [[real]] [[man]]? He can [[work]] his [[dangerous]] [[job]] by day and ride the [[mechanical]] bull by night--he can be a "urban cowboy." But [[Sissy]] [[wants]] to drive his pick-up truck, and she [[wants]] to ride the mechanical [[bull]], too. [[So]] where does this [[leave]] Bud? As Sissy [[asserts]] her [[independence]], she lies about riding the bull and flirts with the ex-con and [[prison]] rodeo star--a [[real]] bull rider--, Wes ([[played]] [[wonderfully]] greasy by Scott [[Glenn]]). [[Bud]] is [[threatened]], and Bud and [[Sissy]] [[break]] up.

[[Sissy]] [[shacks]] up with Wes, who [[abuses]] her. Emasculating himself further, Bud [[becomes]] the [[boy]] [[toy]] of Pam, a [[rich]] [[girl]] whose [[Daddy]] is in [[oil]] and all that [[implies]]. [[Sissy]] comes by the [[trailer]] to clean it up--Pam doesn't do that kind of [[thing]]. She [[writes]] a make up letter to [[Bud]], but evil Pam [[tears]] it up and takes the credit for Sissy's housework.

Bud's Uncle Bob dies tragically at work when lightening strikes and causes an explosion. Bud and Sissy have a chance at reconciliation, but are too stubborn. Later the mechanical bull riding competition is at Gilley's, and you know Bud is going to win. Pam realizes that Bud doesn't love her, but Sissy--he did it for her. Wes tries to rob Gilleys, but wouldn't you know that urban cowboy, Bud, saves the day and wins back the woman he loves.

Of course, you may ask yourself why Bud and Sissy would go to Gilleys about every night and "live like pigs." Maybe that contributed to their bad marriage. Or why didn't Bud stay with Pam--she wasn't that bad and had money. Or why they had to kill off Uncle Bob. Or why Bud and Sissy had such stupid friends like Marshall and Jessie who were always trying to break them up: Marshall says to Bud, "She {Sissy} rides that bull better than you do!" But part of the fun of Urban Cowboy is making fun of it a little bit--and saying, isn't that Bonnie Raitt on the stage! ********Spoilers--Careful*********

What can I [[said]]? I'm biased when it [[occurs]] to Urban [[Denim]]. I love it and have [[observed]] it [[many]] times--and [[traditionally]] find out something [[novel]] about it with each viewing.

I [[reckon]] one of the things I [[loves]] about it is that Urban [[Denim]] is about working class people, not rich people who [[living]] in either L.[[una]]. or [[Novel]] York. Well, it is true except for Pam.

Travolta plays Bud, a [[minimal]] [[towns]] Texas [[boys]] who [[shift]] to Houston to [[collaborate]] in the [[petroleum]] fields. And this is when Travolta [[genuinely]] [[served]] in [[buena]] [[tremendous]] [[cinematic]] like Saturday [[Nocturnal]] [[Classical]] [[alternatively]] of [[gaming]] stereotypical bad [[boys]]/good [[buddies]] in [[immense]] [[budgets]] [[cinematic]]. This is a [[genuinely]] good movie--the mechanical [[ox]] riding contest and two-step [[dancers]] may be silly, but you have to enjoy this for what it is.

[[Budd]] [[satisfies]] [[Weakling]] ([[served]] by Debra Winger with [[skanky]] brilliance)--and soon after, they are [[marry]] and [[residing]] in their dream [[caravan]]. But their [[relation]] [[becoming]] a real life [[battling]] of the sexes. Bud [[desires]] to be a [[authentic]] cowboy. [[Wuss]] wants to be with a [[actual]] cowboy. But in [[contemporary]] [[period]], men's roles are not as [[unambiguous]]. Where can Bud [[demonstrate]] he's a [[authentic]] [[dude]]? He can [[collaborate]] his [[unsafe]] [[labor]] by day and ride the [[mechanistic]] bull by night--he can be a "urban cowboy." But [[Wuss]] [[wanting]] to drive his pick-up truck, and she [[desires]] to ride the mechanical [[ox]], too. [[Therefore]] where does this [[let]] Bud? As Sissy [[confirms]] her [[autonomy]], she lies about riding the bull and flirts with the ex-con and [[prisons]] rodeo star--a [[actual]] bull rider--, Wes ([[done]] [[astonishingly]] greasy by Scott [[Glen]]). [[Budd]] is [[compromised]], and Bud and [[Weakling]] [[blackout]] up.

[[Wuss]] [[cabins]] up with Wes, who [[misused]] her. Emasculating himself further, Bud [[becoming]] the [[boys]] [[toys]] of Pam, a [[storied]] [[chick]] whose [[Papi]] is in [[petroleum]] and all that [[involves]]. [[Wuss]] comes by the [[caravan]] to clean it up--Pam doesn't do that kind of [[stuff]]. She [[writing]] a make up letter to [[Budd]], but evil Pam [[sobs]] it up and takes the credit for Sissy's housework.

Bud's Uncle Bob dies tragically at work when lightening strikes and causes an explosion. Bud and Sissy have a chance at reconciliation, but are too stubborn. Later the mechanical bull riding competition is at Gilley's, and you know Bud is going to win. Pam realizes that Bud doesn't love her, but Sissy--he did it for her. Wes tries to rob Gilleys, but wouldn't you know that urban cowboy, Bud, saves the day and wins back the woman he loves.

Of course, you may ask yourself why Bud and Sissy would go to Gilleys about every night and "live like pigs." Maybe that contributed to their bad marriage. Or why didn't Bud stay with Pam--she wasn't that bad and had money. Or why they had to kill off Uncle Bob. Or why Bud and Sissy had such stupid friends like Marshall and Jessie who were always trying to break them up: Marshall says to Bud, "She {Sissy} rides that bull better than you do!" But part of the fun of Urban Cowboy is making fun of it a little bit--and saying, isn't that Bonnie Raitt on the stage! --------------------------------------------- Result 83 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I rated this [[movie]] a 1 [[since]] the plot is so [[unbelievable]] [[unbelievable]]. [[Judge]] for yourself. [[Be]] [[warned]], the following will not only give away the plot, but will [[also]] spoil your [[appetite]] for [[watching]] the [[movie]].

A [[computer]] [[virus]], [[designed]] by a frustrated nerd, sends out a [[code]] through [[television]] screens and computer [[monitors]]. [[When]] the [[code]] - in the [[form]] of light - enters the [[eye]] it can access the '[[electrical]] system' of your [[body]]. What it does is forcing the [[body]] [[cells]] into excretion of calcium. [[Within]] seconds after infection the patient reaches for his neck, develops [[tunnel]] vision, his skin will [[turn]] white of the calcium, after which he [[falls]] and his hand and scull will [[crack]] in a [[cloud]] of chalk.

This [[virus]] is very [[intelligent]]. When it finds out that a blind computer expert is [[trying]] to disassemble the [[code]] with a braille output [[device]] - [[operated]] by hands - the [[device]] is set on a very [[high]] [[voltage]], which causes [[severe]] burning [[wounds]] on the skin of the expert's [[head]]. The [[virus]] [[also]] senses [[aggression]] against [[remote]] [[controls]] and the keyboard of an ATM. [[Fortunately]] it could be [[stopped]] by throwing over outdated desktop pc's in a rack and electrocuting the [[nerd]] with his back on a broken [[computer]] and his [[feet]] in some [[spilled]] water.

[[Oh]] [[dear]]... I rated this [[kino]] a 1 [[because]] the plot is so [[awesome]] [[unimaginable]]. [[Judges]] for yourself. [[Are]] [[warns]], the following will not only give away the plot, but will [[similarly]] spoil your [[anorexia]] for [[staring]] the [[filmmaking]].

A [[computers]] [[viral]], [[destined]] by a frustrated nerd, sends out a [[encryption]] through [[tv]] screens and computer [[supervisors]]. [[Whenever]] the [[encryption]] - in the [[forma]] of light - enters the [[ojo]] it can access the '[[electric]] system' of your [[agency]]. What it does is forcing the [[agency]] [[cell]] into excretion of calcium. [[Inside]] seconds after infection the patient reaches for his neck, develops [[tunnels]] vision, his skin will [[transforming]] white of the calcium, after which he [[waterfalls]] and his hand and scull will [[cracking]] in a [[clouds]] of chalk.

This [[antivirus]] is very [[shrewd]]. When it finds out that a blind computer expert is [[try]] to disassemble the [[cipher]] with a braille output [[appliance]] - [[functioned]] by hands - the [[devices]] is set on a very [[supreme]] [[tension]], which causes [[harsh]] burning [[lesions]] on the skin of the expert's [[leader]]. The [[antivirus]] [[additionally]] senses [[aggressiveness]] against [[aloof]] [[supervision]] and the keyboard of an ATM. [[Lucky]] it could be [[stops]] by throwing over outdated desktop pc's in a rack and electrocuting the [[geek]] with his back on a broken [[computers]] and his [[magpies]] in some [[flipped]] water.

[[Ah]] [[sweetie]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 84 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[romantic]] [[comedy]] isn't too bad. There are some [[funny]] things happening here and there, and there are some rather memorable characters in it.

The acting, however, is [[amateurish]] (with the exception of the banker). While some scenes are [[great]] fun, others are [[simply]] [[embarrassing]]. In [[particular]], I [[found]] the "[[romantic]]" part of the [[story]] poor.

All in all, I guess it's worth seeing if you like football and romantic comedies. It's not really a bad movie, and the ending did feel quite [[good]]. [[Just]] don't [[expect]] anything out of the [[ordinary]]. Fair [[enough]] if you have an [[hour]] and a quarter to [[kill]]. This [[sentimental]] [[parody]] isn't too bad. There are some [[droll]] things happening here and there, and there are some rather memorable characters in it.

The acting, however, is [[unprofessional]] (with the exception of the banker). While some scenes are [[resplendent]] fun, others are [[exclusively]] [[distracting]]. In [[unique]], I [[discoveries]] the "[[sentimental]]" part of the [[conte]] poor.

All in all, I guess it's worth seeing if you like football and romantic comedies. It's not really a bad movie, and the ending did feel quite [[buena]]. [[Jen]] don't [[expecting]] anything out of the [[everyday]]. Fair [[satisfactorily]] if you have an [[hora]] and a quarter to [[kiiled]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 85 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] [[Fantastic]] movie. One to excite all 5 senses. Is not a true historical report and not all information is to be taken as factual information. True Hollywood conventions used, like playing A list and VERY attractive actors as the 'heroes', such as Naomi Watts (Julia Cook - Ned Kelly's lover), Heath Ledger (Ned) and Orlando Bloom (Joe Byrne - Ned's right hand man), and unattractive (sorry Geoffrey Rush) actors play the drunken and corrupt Victorian Police Force. This also instills a very unreliable love story into the mix between Ned (Ledger) and Julia Cook (Watts) to entice all the romantics, females being especially susceptible. Even from the first scene, when Ned saves the fat youth from drowning and his dad calls him "sunshine" and had a "glint in his eye as he looked down at me, his hand on me shoulder," it is very romanticized and persuades viewers to side with Ned Kelly, the underdog. Besides, don't all Aussies love an underdog? [[Wondrous]] movie. One to excite all 5 senses. Is not a true historical report and not all information is to be taken as factual information. True Hollywood conventions used, like playing A list and VERY attractive actors as the 'heroes', such as Naomi Watts (Julia Cook - Ned Kelly's lover), Heath Ledger (Ned) and Orlando Bloom (Joe Byrne - Ned's right hand man), and unattractive (sorry Geoffrey Rush) actors play the drunken and corrupt Victorian Police Force. This also instills a very unreliable love story into the mix between Ned (Ledger) and Julia Cook (Watts) to entice all the romantics, females being especially susceptible. Even from the first scene, when Ned saves the fat youth from drowning and his dad calls him "sunshine" and had a "glint in his eye as he looked down at me, his hand on me shoulder," it is very romanticized and persuades viewers to side with Ned Kelly, the underdog. Besides, don't all Aussies love an underdog? --------------------------------------------- Result 86 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Gene Tierney and Dana Andrews, who were both so memorable in 1944's "Laura, re-teamed for this [[excellent]] 1950 film-noir.

An embittered policeman, [[Andrews]] as Mark, can't get over the [[fact]] that his father was a hoodlum who died in a police shootout while trying to break out of jail. As a result of his bitterness, Mark doesn't know when to stop using his hands. It's this [[inability]] that [[leads]] to the accidental death of a small-time hood.(Craig Stevens)

In trying to frame gangster Gary Merrill, Mark unintentionally puts the heat on innocent cab-drive, Tom Tully, who is the father of Gene Tierney, who was [[separated]] by Stevens.

This is a well-thought out film dealing with the conscience of a basically decent human being.

The ending is not exactly upbeat as Mark will have to face the music. At least, he finally admits to what he has done. Gene Tierney and Dana Andrews, who were both so memorable in 1944's "Laura, re-teamed for this [[wondrous]] 1950 film-noir.

An embittered policeman, [[Andrew]] as Mark, can't get over the [[facto]] that his father was a hoodlum who died in a police shootout while trying to break out of jail. As a result of his bitterness, Mark doesn't know when to stop using his hands. It's this [[incompetence]] that [[leeds]] to the accidental death of a small-time hood.(Craig Stevens)

In trying to frame gangster Gary Merrill, Mark unintentionally puts the heat on innocent cab-drive, Tom Tully, who is the father of Gene Tierney, who was [[seperated]] by Stevens.

This is a well-thought out film dealing with the conscience of a basically decent human being.

The ending is not exactly upbeat as Mark will have to face the music. At least, he finally admits to what he has done. --------------------------------------------- Result 87 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watching "Speak Easily" is painful for fans of Buster Keaton. Seeing such a phenomenal writer, actor, comic, director, and stunt man subjected to this humiliating spectacle is like seeing a Picasso used as a drop cloth, or perhaps more like seeing the finest Camembert adulterated with whey solids and processed into Cheez-Whiz.

Keaton is ill-cast as Professor Post, whose overblown vocabulary is the only thing keeping him from saying, "Tell me about the rabbits, George." (Post would have said something like, "Kindly inform me as to the status of the small mammals in the family Leporidae of the order Lagomorpha, kind sir, who I believe is primarily addressed with the epithet 'George'.") When Keaton created his own characters, they might be situationally clueless but they weren't stupid. They were quick studies and became masters of their worlds. Not so with Post, who never stops stumbling and bumbling and who who has no more control of his destiny than a bilge rat had of the Titanic. And while Keaton's original characters had a charming naiveté and innocence, Post comes across as such a profound sexual retardate that if he ever did become physically aroused, he'd put an ice bag on the swelling and seek medical help.

There are a couple of small, redeeming moments, such as Keaton's attempts to get rid of the vampish Thema Todd or his suggestion as to appropriate attire for a Greek dance, but it's just not worth enduring the entire film to see them.

If you're a fan of bad movies, get drunk and watch "Speak Easily" with friends, a la "Mystery Science Theater 3000". But other than that, stick with the silents. Let them be 100% of what Buster Keaton is remembered for. --------------------------------------------- Result 88 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Although I've long been a fan of [[Peter]] [[Weir]], I hadn't [[watched]] any of his Australian [[movies]] until I watched The Last [[Wave]]. And it was a [[pleasant]], [[unpredictable]] surprise.

[[Richard]] Chamberlain plays David, a [[lawyer]] [[invited]] to [[defend]] five aborigines [[charged]] with [[murdering]] another Aborigine. For David's [[peers]] it's a [[clear]] case of drunken [[disorder]] and they [[think]] they should [[plead]] guilty and [[serve]] a [[quick]] sentence. But David [[believes]] there's a mystery underneath the murder, [[linked]] to tribal [[rituals]]. As his [[investigation]] proceeds he [[learns]] not only [[things]] about his [[clients]] but about himself too.

To [[reveal]] more [[would]] be to [[spoil]] one of the [[strangest]] [[movies]] I've ever [[seen]]. I can only [[say]] that this [[movie]] goes in directions that no one will be [[expecting]].

There are [[many]] [[elements]] that make this a [[fascinating]] [[movie]]: Chamberlain's acting, for [[instance]]; but [[also]] the performances by David Gulpilil, who plays a young aborigine who [[introduces]] David into [[tribal]] mysteries; and Nandjiwarra Amagula, who plays an [[old]] aborigine who's a [[spiritual]] guide. The [[relationships]] between these three characters make the [[heart]] of the [[movie]].

But there's [[also]] the way Weir [[suggests]] the supernatural in the [[movie]]. David has [[dreams]] that [[warn]] him of the future. [[Australia]] is [[undergoing]] awful [[weather]], with storms, hail falling and [[even]] a [[mysterious]] black rain that may be [[nothing]] more than pollution. But it's [[also]] [[related]] to the [[case]] David is [[defending]]. How it's [[related]] is one of the [[great]] revelations of the movie. Out of little [[events]] Weir [[manages]] to [[create]] an [[atmosphere]] of dread and oppression, suggesting [[future]] horrors without really [[showing]] anything.

Charles Wain's [[score]] is [[fantastic]], [[especially]] the [[use]] of the didgeridoo. The [[photography]] is [[also]] quite good. Russell Boyd, Weir's [[longtime]] DP who won an Oscar in 2004 for [[Master]] and [[Commander]], [[depicts]] a [[dark]], [[creepy]] [[world]] full of [[mystery]].

I [[also]] [[find]] it [[remarkable]] that for a [[movie]] [[centered]] on [[aborigines]], it doesn't [[turn]] into an [[indictment]] against white [[culture]] or into a sappy [[celebration]] of the their [[traditions]], like [[Dances]] With Wolves or The Last Samurai. This [[movie]] is too clever to be that simplistic.

Sometimes it can be frustrating, and it may upset viewers who expect to finish a movie with everything making sense; but for those who don't mind some strangeness or ambiguity, The Last Wave is a great movie to watch. Although I've long been a fan of [[Pedro]] [[Spillway]], I hadn't [[saw]] any of his Australian [[movie]] until I watched The Last [[Waving]]. And it was a [[nice]], [[erratic]] surprise.

[[Richie]] Chamberlain plays David, a [[solicitor]] [[invites]] to [[defender]] five aborigines [[blamed]] with [[killed]] another Aborigine. For David's [[pairs]] it's a [[definite]] case of drunken [[disorders]] and they [[believing]] they should [[argue]] guilty and [[serves]] a [[rapids]] sentence. But David [[thinks]] there's a mystery underneath the murder, [[associated]] to tribal [[sacraments]]. As his [[probe]] proceeds he [[teaches]] not only [[items]] about his [[customers]] but about himself too.

To [[disclose]] more [[should]] be to [[ruin]] one of the [[oddest]] [[films]] I've ever [[watched]]. I can only [[tell]] that this [[movies]] goes in directions that no one will be [[expects]].

There are [[various]] [[components]] that make this a [[enthralling]] [[film]]: Chamberlain's acting, for [[case]]; but [[additionally]] the performances by David Gulpilil, who plays a young aborigine who [[introducing]] David into [[tribe]] mysteries; and Nandjiwarra Amagula, who plays an [[longtime]] aborigine who's a [[mental]] guide. The [[relationship]] between these three characters make the [[heartland]] of the [[film]].

But there's [[apart]] the way Weir [[proposing]] the supernatural in the [[cinematography]]. David has [[dream]] that [[warns]] him of the future. [[Australians]] is [[experiencing]] awful [[climate]], with storms, hail falling and [[yet]] a [[opaque]] black rain that may be [[anything]] more than pollution. But it's [[apart]] [[tied]] to the [[lawsuit]] David is [[defence]]. How it's [[linked]] is one of the [[wondrous]] revelations of the movie. Out of little [[event]] Weir [[runs]] to [[creating]] an [[atmospheric]] of dread and oppression, suggesting [[upcoming]] horrors without really [[shows]] anything.

Charles Wain's [[notation]] is [[unbelievable]], [[namely]] the [[usage]] of the didgeridoo. The [[photographer]] is [[apart]] quite good. Russell Boyd, Weir's [[ancient]] DP who won an Oscar in 2004 for [[Masters]] and [[Commanders]], [[describes]] a [[darkened]], [[frightening]] [[globe]] full of [[puzzle]].

I [[apart]] [[found]] it [[tremendous]] that for a [[cinema]] [[focusing]] on [[natives]], it doesn't [[converting]] into an [[prosecution]] against white [[cultivation]] or into a sappy [[celebrations]] of the their [[tradition]], like [[Choreography]] With Wolves or The Last Samurai. This [[films]] is too clever to be that simplistic.

Sometimes it can be frustrating, and it may upset viewers who expect to finish a movie with everything making sense; but for those who don't mind some strangeness or ambiguity, The Last Wave is a great movie to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 89 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this movie. Haven't seen Andy Griffith in ages and felt he fit this role perfectly. I've associated him with comedy but am pleased to see that he's versatile.

I wasn't troubled that Dotty's "anxiety disorder" may not have been verbatim from a psychiatric textbook. There are zillions of whatever-phobias and neuroses, and these can take on a broad variety of quantitative and qualitative forms. She is clearly a sensitive with extra-sensory powers as was understood by the local Indians but not by any Anglos. It is not surprising that this character is vulnerable and nominally eccentric.

Although this is taken to be a light "family movie", it is actually more sophisticated than it seems. Also, Hiram's twist at the end came as a pleasant surprise to me and tied all the preceding action together in a bundle. It's fun to contemplate the possibility of such spiritual guidance. --------------------------------------------- Result 90 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Imagine]] [[turning]] out the [[lights]] in your [[remote]] farmhouse on a [[cold]] [[night]], and then [[going]] to bed. There's no [[need]] to [[lock]] the [[doors]]. The only [[sound]] is the [[wind]] whistling through the [[trees]]. [[Sometime]] after midnight a [[car]] with [[lights]] off [[inches]] up the [[driveway]]. [[Moments]] [[later]] an intruder beams a [[flashlight]] into your darkened [[living]] [[room]].

What makes this [[image]] so scary is the setting: a remote [[farmhouse]] ... at night. [[Based]] on Truman Capote's best-selling book, and with B&W lighting [[comparable]] to the [[best]] 1940's [[noir]] films, "[[In]] [[Cold]] Blood" [[presents]] a [[terrifying]] story, especially in that first Act, as the plot takes place [[largely]] at night and on [[rain]] [[drenched]] country [[roads]]. It's the stuff of [[nightmares]]. But this is no dream. The [[events]] really happened, in 1959.

Two con men with [[heads]] full of [[delusions]] [[kill]] an entire Kansas [[family]], [[looking]] for a stash of [[cash]] that doesn't exist. Director [[Richard]] Brooks [[used]] the [[actual]] [[locations]] where the real-life [[events]] [[occurred]], [[even]] the farmhouse ... and its [[interior]]! It makes for a [[memorable]], and haunting, [[film]].

Both of the lead actors closely resemble the two real-life [[killers]]. [[Robert]] Blake is more than convincing as Perry Smith, short and stocky with a bum [[leg]], who [[dreams]] of finding Cortez' buried treasure. Scott Wilson is [[almost]] as good as [[Dick]] [[Hickock]], the smooth-talking con [[artist]] with an all-American [[smile]].

[[After]] their [[killing]] spree, the duo [[head]] to [[Mexico]]. [[Things]] [[go]] [[awry]] there, so they [[come]] back to the U.S., stealing [[cars]], hitchhiking, and [[generally]] being [[miserable]] as they roam from place to place. But it's a fool's [[life]], and the two outlaws [[soon]] [[regret]] their [[actions]]. The film's [[final]] twenty [[minutes]] are [[mesmerizing]], as the [[rain]] [[falls]], the [[rope]] [[tightens]], and all we [[hear]] is the [[pounding]] of a [[beating]] heart.

Even with its somewhat mundane middle Act, "[[In]] [[Cold]] Blood" stages in [[riveting]] [[detail]] a real-life [[story]] that [[still]] hypnotizes, [[nearly]] half a century [[later]]. It's that setting that does it. [[Do]] you suppose people in [[rural]] Kansas [[still]] [[leave]] their doors [[unlocked]] ... at [[night]]? [[Suppose]] [[turn]] out the [[illumination]] in your [[outlying]] farmhouse on a [[chilled]] [[overnight]], and then [[gonna]] to bed. There's no [[necessity]] to [[latch]] the [[portals]]. The only [[audible]] is the [[turbine]] whistling through the [[tree]]. [[Sometimes]] after midnight a [[automobiles]] with [[illumination]] off [[centimeters]] up the [[walkway]]. [[Times]] [[then]] an intruder beams a [[flashlights]] into your darkened [[residing]] [[salle]].

What makes this [[visuals]] so scary is the setting: a remote [[farm]] ... at night. [[Predicated]] on Truman Capote's best-selling book, and with B&W lighting [[analogous]] to the [[finest]] 1940's [[negro]] films, "[[Throughout]] [[Chilly]] Blood" [[presented]] a [[alarming]] story, especially in that first Act, as the plot takes place [[substantially]] at night and on [[rainfall]] [[soaked]] country [[lane]]. It's the stuff of [[dreams]]. But this is no dream. The [[phenomena]] really happened, in 1959.

Two con men with [[leaders]] full of [[illusions]] [[assassinated]] an entire Kansas [[families]], [[researching]] for a stash of [[money]] that doesn't exist. Director [[Ritchie]] Brooks [[using]] the [[real]] [[site]] where the real-life [[phenomena]] [[arose]], [[yet]] the farmhouse ... and its [[domestic]]! It makes for a [[eventful]], and haunting, [[films]].

Both of the lead actors closely resemble the two real-life [[assassins]]. [[Roberto]] Blake is more than convincing as Perry Smith, short and stocky with a bum [[paw]], who [[nightmares]] of finding Cortez' buried treasure. Scott Wilson is [[approximately]] as good as [[Penis]] [[Hickok]], the smooth-talking con [[performers]] with an all-American [[kidd]].

[[Upon]] their [[assassinate]] spree, the duo [[leader]] to [[Mexican]]. [[Matters]] [[going]] [[amiss]] there, so they [[arriving]] back to the U.S., stealing [[automobiles]], hitchhiking, and [[often]] being [[pathetic]] as they roam from place to place. But it's a fool's [[lifetime]], and the two outlaws [[rapidly]] [[sorrow]] their [[action]]. The film's [[ultimate]] twenty [[mins]] are [[riveting]], as the [[acidic]] [[drops]], the [[twine]] [[tightening]], and all we [[heard]] is the [[banging]] of a [[beat]] heart.

Even with its somewhat mundane middle Act, "[[During]] [[Icy]] Blood" stages in [[exciting]] [[clarification]] a real-life [[fairytales]] that [[however]] hypnotizes, [[roughly]] half a century [[subsequently]]. It's that setting that does it. [[Doing]] you suppose people in [[agrarian]] Kansas [[however]] [[let]] their doors [[unlock]] ... at [[nighttime]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 91 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] ([[contains]] [[slight]] spoilers)

It's interesting how Anthony Mann [[uses]] James [[Stewart]] here. Stewart is, of course, remembered by [[many]] as George Bailey from Frank Capra's "It's a Wonderful Life", so it's easy to find parallels between the two films. In "It's a [[Wonderful]] [[Life]]", Bailey gets to [[see]] the [[world]] as it [[would]] have been if he had never been born. [[In]] "The Far Country", Stewart's Jeff Webster, by not [[getting]] involved to help anyone [[else]] (except himself), [[gets]] to [[see]] essentially the same [[thing]]: A [[world]] in which he (for all [[practical]] [[matters]]) doesn't exist.

By not [[getting]] involved (and by [[attempting]] not to care about anyone), [[Webster]] is forced to [[see]] those for whom he can't help but care get hurt, [[pushed]] [[around]], and even killed while he [[stands]] by and does nothing. This reminds the [[viewer]] of [[George]] Bailey watching a [[world]] that has turned upside-down because he has [[also]] decided not to get involved by not ever having been [[born]].

Both movies end with the same image - a close-up of a [[ringing]] bell. [[Stewart]], by turning [[around]] his philosophy of non-involvement, has, it [[would]] seem, [[earned]] his "wings". ([[involves]] [[lightweight]] spoilers)

It's interesting how Anthony Mann [[utilized]] James [[Stuart]] here. Stewart is, of course, remembered by [[multiple]] as George Bailey from Frank Capra's "It's a Wonderful Life", so it's easy to find parallels between the two films. In "It's a [[Awesome]] [[Vida]]", Bailey gets to [[consults]] the [[worldwide]] as it [[could]] have been if he had never been born. [[At]] "The Far Country", Stewart's Jeff Webster, by not [[obtain]] involved to help anyone [[otherwise]] (except himself), [[got]] to [[behold]] essentially the same [[stuff]]: A [[worldwide]] in which he (for all [[concrete]] [[issues]]) doesn't exist.

By not [[obtain]] involved (and by [[trying]] not to care about anyone), [[Sarge]] is forced to [[seeing]] those for whom he can't help but care get hurt, [[relegated]] [[throughout]], and even killed while he [[standing]] by and does nothing. This reminds the [[bystander]] of [[Georges]] Bailey watching a [[globe]] that has turned upside-down because he has [[additionally]] decided not to get involved by not ever having been [[birthed]].

Both movies end with the same image - a close-up of a [[doorbell]] bell. [[Stuart]], by turning [[roundabout]] his philosophy of non-involvement, has, it [[should]] seem, [[profited]] his "wings". --------------------------------------------- Result 92 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Released]] in December of 1957, [[Sayonara]] went on to earn 8 [[Oscar]] [[nominations]] and would pull in 4 [[wins]]. Red [[Buttons]] won the Oscar for Best Supporting [[Actor]] in his role as airman Joe Kelly who falls in [[love]] with a Japanese woman while stationed in Kobe during the [[Korean]] War. [[Oscar]] nominated for [[Best]] Leading Actor, Marlon Brando plays [[Major]] Lloyd Gruver, a [[Korean]] War flying [[ace]] [[reassigned]] to [[Japan]], who staunchly supports the military's opposition to marriages between American [[troops]] and Japanese [[women]] and tries without any [[success]] to talk his [[friend]] Joe [[Kelly]] out of getting married. [[Ironically]] Marlon Brandos character [[soon]] [[finds]] [[love]] of his own in a [[woman]] of Japanese [[descent]]. This [[movie]] [[highlights]] the prejudices and cultural differences of that time. Filmed in [[beautiful]] [[color]] and with [[stunning]] backgrounds I [[found]] this [[movie]] to be well worth [[watching]] just for these effects [[alone]]. Good [[movie]], gimme more...GimmeClassics [[Publicized]] in December of 1957, [[Adios]] went on to earn 8 [[Oskar]] [[designation]] and would pull in 4 [[earn]]. Red [[Poppers]] won the Oscar for Best Supporting [[Actress]] in his role as airman Joe Kelly who falls in [[likes]] with a Japanese woman while stationed in Kobe during the [[Korea]] War. [[Oskar]] nominated for [[Better]] Leading Actor, Marlon Brando plays [[Considerable]] Lloyd Gruver, a [[Korea]] War flying [[aces]] [[diverted]] to [[Japanese]], who staunchly supports the military's opposition to marriages between American [[soldiers]] and Japanese [[daughters]] and tries without any [[avail]] to talk his [[boyfriend]] Joe [[Kelley]] out of getting married. [[Sarcastically]] Marlon Brandos character [[promptly]] [[found]] [[likes]] of his own in a [[women]] of Japanese [[ancestry]]. This [[cinematography]] [[stress]] the prejudices and cultural differences of that time. Filmed in [[excellent]] [[coloring]] and with [[superb]] backgrounds I [[find]] this [[movies]] to be well worth [[staring]] just for these effects [[lonely]]. Good [[kino]], gimme more...GimmeClassics --------------------------------------------- Result 93 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I was recently online looking at a site that featured public domain movies. In their long list of films was this film and I thought I must be hallucinating at such an offensive title and premise. But, no, that's really what it was. And since the film was only about 27 minutes long, I decided to give it a try. If it had turned out to be some porno movie, I would have stopped watching. Instead, it turned out to be the most [[bizarre]] film I have ever seen. The Danish production crew tried, with a budget of about $49, to make a Star Trek-style film about a crew of very gay men traveling about the galaxy wiping out female oppression by killing all the women--like they proceeded to do on the Earth! And in every case, they were met with cheers and thanks from the now gay men of the planet.

Subtle, this ain't. With some of the most obscene and juvenile names of characters I've ever heard, I don't even think I can write them on IMDb without having my review removed! However, despite the utter crappiness of it all, it was strangely watchable and worth a peek. But, as I mentioned already, due to the crude names and odd subject matter (though no nudity), it's a film for adults only.

By the way, this movie left me with 1001 questions as to WHO would make this, WHY make it and WHO was the intended audience?! It may not be the absolute [[worst]] thing I have ever seen, but it probably is the weirdest and possibly the most offensive! I was recently online looking at a site that featured public domain movies. In their long list of films was this film and I thought I must be hallucinating at such an offensive title and premise. But, no, that's really what it was. And since the film was only about 27 minutes long, I decided to give it a try. If it had turned out to be some porno movie, I would have stopped watching. Instead, it turned out to be the most [[weird]] film I have ever seen. The Danish production crew tried, with a budget of about $49, to make a Star Trek-style film about a crew of very gay men traveling about the galaxy wiping out female oppression by killing all the women--like they proceeded to do on the Earth! And in every case, they were met with cheers and thanks from the now gay men of the planet.

Subtle, this ain't. With some of the most obscene and juvenile names of characters I've ever heard, I don't even think I can write them on IMDb without having my review removed! However, despite the utter crappiness of it all, it was strangely watchable and worth a peek. But, as I mentioned already, due to the crude names and odd subject matter (though no nudity), it's a film for adults only.

By the way, this movie left me with 1001 questions as to WHO would make this, WHY make it and WHO was the intended audience?! It may not be the absolute [[meanest]] thing I have ever seen, but it probably is the weirdest and possibly the most offensive! --------------------------------------------- Result 94 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] most of the [[bad]] [[reviews]] on this website blame "Hood of the [[Living]] Dead" for one (or more) of the following [[reasons]]: 1) it is a low-budget [[movie]] with [[virtually]] no acting; 2) it was so bad it made me laugh 3) it is [[something]] I could do myself. I won't [[even]] [[discuss]] the first point because it is a very subjective matter whether you like low-budget and [[independent]] [[stuff]] or not. I [[must]] say, however, that I still [[fail]] to [[understand]] people renting such a movie as "Hood of the [[Living]] [[Dead]]" and then looking surprised when they realize it is not as polished and cute as a romantic comedy with Lindsay Lohan or Matthew Mc Conaughey. As for the second point, I really don't see what's so [[wrong]] with [[laughing]]. I personally like to [[laugh]], and love [[movies]] that make me to, be they comedies or [[horror]] flicks. When in "Hammerhead" I saw this girl stepping into a PUDDLE and the shark-man came out of it to eat her, I just [[cracked]] up. And I was [[grateful]] that the director made such a stupid scene and gave me ten seconds of [[pure]] [[fun]]. Honestly, laughing just makes me feel good, while it seems that many people writing reviews [[see]] it as a bad bad [[thing]]. If you only want to feel sad and scared while watching a movie, "[[Hood]] of the Living Dead" and low-budget flicks are definitely not for you. But please don't come and tell us that you [[find]] them laughable. We already know it. This is most probably why we decided to watch the movie in first place. However, it is the third point that leaves totally baffled. Just several years ago people were lining up out of theaters to see "Blair Witch Project", which is a way more rudimentary, boring, plot-less and bad-acted movie than "Hood of the Living Dead" (and takes itself way too seriously too). Moreover, half a million people go on YouTube every day to see the short films of "Lonelygirl15", which is certainly something everyone with a cute girlfriend, a room and a webcam could do! Not to [[talk]] about all of the even more amateurish videos you can find there. Why don't people blame those clips for bad acting and non-existing plot? I think it is one of the best [[things]] of our times that everyone, with affordable technology and a bunch of friends, can make their own movies and share them with people that have similar interests. And I feel a certain admiration for people who spend their weekends with their friends making a honestly bad (yet refreshing) piece of trash like this rather than shopping at the mall or playing video games alone. Leave aside your biases and your desire to sound like a smart film critic by attacking b-movies, and you'll see that "Hood of the Living Dead" can bring you almost as much fun as it did to its makers! If you have a taste for refreshing and enjoyable home-made horror movies, I recommend "Zombiez", "The Ghosts of Edendale", "The Killer Eye", "Monster Man", "Don't Look in the Basement", "The Worst Horror Movie Ever Made", "Redneck Zombies", "Jesus Christ Vampyre-Slayer" and "Habit". most of the [[rotten]] [[exams]] on this website blame "Hood of the [[Inhabit]] Dead" for one (or more) of the following [[motif]]: 1) it is a low-budget [[cinema]] with [[almost]] no acting; 2) it was so bad it made me laugh 3) it is [[anything]] I could do myself. I won't [[yet]] [[examines]] the first point because it is a very subjective matter whether you like low-budget and [[autonomous]] [[thing]] or not. I [[ought]] say, however, that I still [[fails]] to [[fathom]] people renting such a movie as "Hood of the [[Iife]] [[Deaths]]" and then looking surprised when they realize it is not as polished and cute as a romantic comedy with Lindsay Lohan or Matthew Mc Conaughey. As for the second point, I really don't see what's so [[improper]] with [[kidding]]. I personally like to [[laughing]], and love [[films]] that make me to, be they comedies or [[terror]] flicks. When in "Hammerhead" I saw this girl stepping into a PUDDLE and the shark-man came out of it to eat her, I just [[ruptured]] up. And I was [[thankful]] that the director made such a stupid scene and gave me ten seconds of [[pur]] [[funny]]. Honestly, laughing just makes me feel good, while it seems that many people writing reviews [[seeing]] it as a bad bad [[stuff]]. If you only want to feel sad and scared while watching a movie, "[[Parasol]] of the Living Dead" and low-budget flicks are definitely not for you. But please don't come and tell us that you [[unearthed]] them laughable. We already know it. This is most probably why we decided to watch the movie in first place. However, it is the third point that leaves totally baffled. Just several years ago people were lining up out of theaters to see "Blair Witch Project", which is a way more rudimentary, boring, plot-less and bad-acted movie than "Hood of the Living Dead" (and takes itself way too seriously too). Moreover, half a million people go on YouTube every day to see the short films of "Lonelygirl15", which is certainly something everyone with a cute girlfriend, a room and a webcam could do! Not to [[speaking]] about all of the even more amateurish videos you can find there. Why don't people blame those clips for bad acting and non-existing plot? I think it is one of the best [[matters]] of our times that everyone, with affordable technology and a bunch of friends, can make their own movies and share them with people that have similar interests. And I feel a certain admiration for people who spend their weekends with their friends making a honestly bad (yet refreshing) piece of trash like this rather than shopping at the mall or playing video games alone. Leave aside your biases and your desire to sound like a smart film critic by attacking b-movies, and you'll see that "Hood of the Living Dead" can bring you almost as much fun as it did to its makers! If you have a taste for refreshing and enjoyable home-made horror movies, I recommend "Zombiez", "The Ghosts of Edendale", "The Killer Eye", "Monster Man", "Don't Look in the Basement", "The Worst Horror Movie Ever Made", "Redneck Zombies", "Jesus Christ Vampyre-Slayer" and "Habit". --------------------------------------------- Result 95 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]]

[[Presenting]] Lily Mars is one of a genre of film that [[sadly]] [[seems]] to have [[disappeared]] with the studio system. Ok now that you know my bias, here are some [[reasons]] I think this movie does [[stand]] out.

1. Although the [[basic]] plot - Lily [[Mars]] (Judy [[Garland]]) goes to [[New]] York, [[becomes]] a [[star]], and [[wins]] the heart of her director (Van Heflin) is a pretty [[stock]] Hollywood [[story]] of the [[period]], the writers do vary the theme her a [[bit]] more than usual. [[Although]] Lily [[gets]] her [[big]] break when the [[star]] [[quits]], she isn't successful and has to swallow her pride and [[go]] back to playing a [[minor]] role in the [[show]].

2. Judy [[Garland]] (enough [[said]]!)

3. The supporting cast [[includes]] some really [[great]] performances. Spring Byington as Lily's [[mother]] is truely [[wonderful]], as is [[Fay]] Bainter (the [[mother]] of the [[director]] - [[John]] Thornway (Van Heflin)). The standout [[supporting]] performance [[though]] goes to [[character]] actress Connie Gilchrist as Frankie, a one [[time]] actress turned [[theater]] [[custodian]].

Worth a watch for sure. One of those [[movies]] that are designed to make you feel better about the [[world]] and your [[dreams]].

[[Submitting]] Lily Mars is one of a genre of film that [[tragically]] [[looks]] to have [[gone]] with the studio system. Ok now that you know my bias, here are some [[grounds]] I think this movie does [[standing]] out.

1. Although the [[fundamental]] plot - Lily [[Mar]] (Judy [[Coronet]]) goes to [[Newer]] York, [[become]] a [[superstar]], and [[victories]] the heart of her director (Van Heflin) is a pretty [[stocks]] Hollywood [[storytelling]] of the [[timeline]], the writers do vary the theme her a [[bitten]] more than usual. [[Despite]] Lily [[receives]] her [[substantial]] break when the [[superstar]] [[resigning]], she isn't successful and has to swallow her pride and [[going]] back to playing a [[minimal]] role in the [[demonstrating]].

2. Judy [[Wreath]] (enough [[asserted]]!)

3. The supporting cast [[involves]] some really [[wondrous]] performances. Spring Byington as Lily's [[mommy]] is truely [[handsome]], as is [[Fey]] Bainter (the [[mommy]] of the [[superintendent]] - [[Johannes]] Thornway (Van Heflin)). The standout [[helps]] performance [[while]] goes to [[characteristics]] actress Connie Gilchrist as Frankie, a one [[moment]] actress turned [[theatre]] [[guardian]].

Worth a watch for sure. One of those [[movie]] that are designed to make you feel better about the [[monde]] and your [[nightmares]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 96 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] For some reason, in the late 70's and early 80's the local CBS affiliated station in New York kept playing this movie in it's late-night slot on Friday or Saturday nights for several years, usually at 2 a.m. or some such time. It's a fitting movie for that time slot since it's really hard to follow and quite odd (see the other reviews for specific story info). Anyway, after catching it numerous times in those days just before cable TV (And even after it hit but before they offered much all night programming), I [[kept]] [[catching]] this little [[oddity]]. After not seeing it for many years I decided to see if I could find it on DVD. Well, it is only available (from every search i've conducted anyway)in a pretty [[lousy]] grainy print on the budget label "Brentwood Video" as part of a 4-pack of movies (4 movies on 2 double sided discs)called "Alien Worlds" if anyone is interested. It's usually available for around $10-but even much less if you shop around. The other 3 movies on this set are readily available in numerous other collections of public domain movies, so no need to comment on them here. But I haven't seen "Eyes" available anywhere else. Though hardly a "restored" version in any way, this print runs exactly 92 minutes, so for once IMDb's stated running time of 90 minutes is not correct. Even with the 92 minute running time it's not unusual for a movie dubbed into English from another language to also have some of the running time trimmed. It seems to be a common budget-conscience practice to sometimes save money by not bothering to dub some scenes at all if they are not considered to be important to the story. Would a longer version make in any less confusing? Who really knows-unless you've seen it in it's native language... By the way, my attempts to watch this during the day don't work and I end up just turning it off. There's something about watching this in the middle of the night that just fits this movie..or maybe it's just from my earlier experiences, who know?? For some reason, in the late 70's and early 80's the local CBS affiliated station in New York kept playing this movie in it's late-night slot on Friday or Saturday nights for several years, usually at 2 a.m. or some such time. It's a fitting movie for that time slot since it's really hard to follow and quite odd (see the other reviews for specific story info). Anyway, after catching it numerous times in those days just before cable TV (And even after it hit but before they offered much all night programming), I [[maintained]] [[captured]] this little [[peculiarity]]. After not seeing it for many years I decided to see if I could find it on DVD. Well, it is only available (from every search i've conducted anyway)in a pretty [[rotten]] grainy print on the budget label "Brentwood Video" as part of a 4-pack of movies (4 movies on 2 double sided discs)called "Alien Worlds" if anyone is interested. It's usually available for around $10-but even much less if you shop around. The other 3 movies on this set are readily available in numerous other collections of public domain movies, so no need to comment on them here. But I haven't seen "Eyes" available anywhere else. Though hardly a "restored" version in any way, this print runs exactly 92 minutes, so for once IMDb's stated running time of 90 minutes is not correct. Even with the 92 minute running time it's not unusual for a movie dubbed into English from another language to also have some of the running time trimmed. It seems to be a common budget-conscience practice to sometimes save money by not bothering to dub some scenes at all if they are not considered to be important to the story. Would a longer version make in any less confusing? Who really knows-unless you've seen it in it's native language... By the way, my attempts to watch this during the day don't work and I end up just turning it off. There's something about watching this in the middle of the night that just fits this movie..or maybe it's just from my earlier experiences, who know?? --------------------------------------------- Result 97 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Let me start off by saying that after watching this episode for the first time on DVD at 10 o'clock P.M. one night, I could not fall asleep until about 3:00 A.M.

This brief review may contain spoilers.

I'm a long-time fan of The Sopranos and I can safely say this is the best episode I've seen. I'm not saying everyone should feel this way, but I do. This episode is identical to the weekend I spent with my family, watching over my own father, comatose in the ICU before he passed.

The episode begins with Tony in an alternate reality: he is a salesman who's identity has been mistaken for that of a man named Kevin Finnerty.

By the time ten minutes had gone by, I knew either Tony was dreaming, or I was watching some other show. It wasn't like the normal Sopranos and I loved it.

Option 1 is confirmed when Anthony (or "Kevin") looks into the sky at a "helicopter spotlight" and we see prodding through it, a doctor with a flashlight. We see this only for a moment and the sequence plays out until we go back to real life in a situation similar to the one I just stated.

Tony has come out of the coma for only a moment. His boys take A.J. home and Carmella, overcome by stress, breaks down in the hallway: a signature moment in the episode.

For the remainder of the episode, we cut in between the real world: the family dealing with the potential negative outcome of this coma, and Tony's alternate reality, which parallels what's going on both in his mind and in the real world around him.

Then comes the stellar point in the episode: after A.J. finishes telling his mother he's flunked school, she walks in to see Meadow sitting at Anthony's side.

She approaches Tony, and utters the best line of the episode: "Anthony, can you hear us?" In Tony's world, he enters a dark hotel room and turns on a light. He takes off his shoes and goes to the phone. He tries to dial, but he cannot--as if he were trying to say something back to Carmella, but couldn't physically bring himself to do so. Not yet.

He sits down and looks out his window. A shimmering light that has reoccurred throughout the episode now seems to call to him from the other side of the city.

"When It's Cold I'd Like To Die" by Moby marries perfectly with these last images and helps in creating an emotional roller-coaster of an episode.

10 out of 10.

P.S.: Watch the next episode. You find out what the light is. It's wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 98 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh, how we have a misfire here; a film so bad that your mind will wonder and drift away onto other things as it wastes your time with brain numbingly poor production values; character stereotypes of the worst and racist kind since D.W. Griffith referred to the Chinese character in Broken Blossoms as 'the yellow man'; characters so unimaginative and un-engaging that it's difficult to watch as well as a narrative that plods along at such a slow, stupid and pointless pace that you will question the very people who say they like this film.

Prizzi's Honor is a film that ends up being an absolute post-modern disaster in every which way possible. The film is a messy and senseless disaster that has John Huston directing; Kathleen Turner and Jack Nicholson staring and everybody else filling in the gaps as either dumb stereotypes or supporting characters that weep on a phone now and again or bicker with a main character. Prizzi's Honor is a film that falls into a genre of neo-noir, comedy, romance, action, gangster and overall crime – this twinned with its director and cast should be enough to propel it through some sort of a story; some sort of a sequence of good scenes; some sort of intelligence in the form of a screenplay or something else but no – what we get is a nasty and ugly film revolving around nothing at all.

I'll give a couple of examples of how shoddy this horror show of a film actually is. Firstly, the film thinks it's a love story and it thinks this for about an hour of its time: of MY time. Charley Partanna (Nicholson) is an assassin who kills people for a family that he works for in New York and yet he resembles his character out of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest more than an international hit-man. He meets and falls in love with Irene Walker (Turner) who is another assassin and they hit it off but as the poor excuse for a plot plays out, it appears all is not right. I read that the plot for this film is: "A professional hit man and hit woman fall in love, only to discover that they have each been hired to kill the other." Well, yes that's true but that actual revelation doesn't happen until about twenty minutes to the end! Nicholson plays Partanna like someone with an IQ of 60: he walks around; seemingly making observations and talking out loud about things he sees; he talks like he is either drunk or has a more serious problem from within and worse of all we never get the feeling he is an assassin – one really poorly shot assassination early on (that actually happens off screen) is not enough to suggest this guy is a hard-bodied, best of the best, international hit-man.

So with a main character who is un-likable and un-realistic, we move to the script. The first hour and a half is just a cinematic dead zone with what ever there is to suggest traces of life merely poor conventions: Partanna slouches around on the phone or in person asking the same things over and over again: "Do I marry her?; Do I love her? What is love? What do I do?" and it gets so repetitive, it's not even able to act as good humour. This twinned with the way he always seemed to be on the phone to someone: a girl called Maerose Prizzi (Huston) played by director John's daughter; which served absolutely no purpose to the plot whatsoever and seemed to be there for laughs as was the scene in which she tells her father about how she slept with Partanna and loved it – that got me thinking, was this supposed to be funny? Should I be laughing? The film felt like a smart mafia picture what with its opening scene of a wedding (alá The Godfather) and consequential scenes with a touch of noir as gangsters, police men and assassins were introduced into the film. But what we get is something very, very different.

The second hour revolves around some sort of a kidnap plot; right, the love and romance is dealt with – maybe the film will kick-start. I was so very wrong: with more characters continuously talking very slowly and very deliberately in a monotone way, we have a kidnap scene involving some guy coming out of his office: this scene sums the film up. Everything is briefly planned and then executed in a heavy handed and dumb way that just makes it look cheesy. We do not get to see them arrive to some dramatic music; perhaps they have to get through security to get to the elevators; maybe they have to be careful of civilians when they hide in their chosen places and when that random woman steps out of the elevator and the gunshot occurs – the scene isn't even edited correctly. Some suspense, some drama: "Do I shoot or don't I?"; maybe some slow motion as the character has to quick draw before it's too late – anything but how it was actually executed. Prizzi's Honor continues its monotonous and uninteresting decent into filmic oblivion as it nears its climax. It's a film where cameras reflect in windows; lights reflect in sides of cars and 'dead' chauffeurs blink when nudged. Prizzi's Honor is a jumbled and messy film that will try the patients of any film-goer and don't say it was a comedy because I didn't laugh with it – AT it is another matter. The film is repetitive, drawn out and colourless in its vision and scope for originality - there is no Honour here. --------------------------------------------- Result 99 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I remember this [[movie]] from when i was 12, it was [[amazing]].. i remember it to the day not like most thing i watched back then, i have even tried to [[buy]] it but its like rocking horse sh*t! Anyway, the acting is a bit chewy but the [[story]] is amazing [[considering]] it was a real B movie with a low budget and event the [[fighting]] scenes were [[amazing]] to watch, i [[must]] have watched it about 20 [[times]]. It was a very well made movie and i loved the idea of fighting [[giant]] [[man]] controlled robots, [[pity]] they had to spoil it by making a crappy [[spin]] off "[[Crash]] and [[Burn]]", don't watch that movie by the way it is total pants! If your a real Sci-Fi movie fan then watch this, if it was re-made today it would be a [[winner]].. i really would love to see a remake or even release the DVD of it. I remember this [[movies]] from when i was 12, it was [[astounding]].. i remember it to the day not like most thing i watched back then, i have even tried to [[buys]] it but its like rocking horse sh*t! Anyway, the acting is a bit chewy but the [[history]] is amazing [[examining]] it was a real B movie with a low budget and event the [[struggles]] scenes were [[striking]] to watch, i [[should]] have watched it about 20 [[moments]]. It was a very well made movie and i loved the idea of fighting [[gigantic]] [[dude]] controlled robots, [[compassion]] they had to spoil it by making a crappy [[spinning]] off "[[Collisions]] and [[Combustion]]", don't watch that movie by the way it is total pants! If your a real Sci-Fi movie fan then watch this, if it was re-made today it would be a [[finalist]].. i really would love to see a remake or even release the DVD of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Before the release of [[George]] Romero's genre-defining Night of the [[Living]] [[Dead]], zombies were [[relatively]] well-behaved creatures. They [[certainly]] had much better table-manners in the [[old]] days. But [[social]] [[etiquette]] aside what thrills did these early zombies [[offer]] to the movie-going public? [[Judging]] by this film, none whatsoever.

The [[story]] is about an [[expedition]] to [[Cambodia]], [[whose]] [[purpose]] is to [[find]] and [[destroy]] the [[secret]] of zombiefication. One of the party [[discovers]] the [[secrets]] on his own and sets about building his zombie army.

This [[film]] is [[basically]] a love [[triangle]] with zombies. But [[seeing]] as this is a 30's movie, the said zombies are more like somnambulists than the flesh-eating [[variety]] we [[think]] of [[today]]. They seem to respond to mind-control, [[rather]] than insatiable appetites. And, [[quite]] frankly, the 'revolt' is somewhat underwhelming too. The [[whole]] [[thing]] is really very [[dull]]. [[Aside]] from the [[lack]] of [[horror]], there isn't any over-the-top [[melodramatic]] theatrics to keep us [[entertained]]. It [[seems]] unlikely that this could've [[provided]] much [[entertainment]] even 70 [[years]] ago. See it if you have to [[see]] everything with 'zombie' in the title but otherwise I [[would]] [[advise]] [[skipping]] this one. Before the release of [[Giorgi]] Romero's genre-defining Night of the [[Inhabit]] [[Death]], zombies were [[comparatively]] well-behaved creatures. They [[admittedly]] had much better table-manners in the [[elderly]] days. But [[societal]] [[label]] aside what thrills did these early zombies [[offered]] to the movie-going public? [[Verdict]] by this film, none whatsoever.

The [[storytelling]] is about an [[sent]] to [[Cambodian]], [[who]] [[target]] is to [[found]] and [[ruin]] the [[secrecy]] of zombiefication. One of the party [[detect]] the [[secretive]] on his own and sets about building his zombie army.

This [[filmmaking]] is [[mainly]] a love [[triangular]] with zombies. But [[see]] as this is a 30's movie, the said zombies are more like somnambulists than the flesh-eating [[assortment]] we [[thought]] of [[nowadays]]. They seem to respond to mind-control, [[quite]] than insatiable appetites. And, [[very]] frankly, the 'revolt' is somewhat underwhelming too. The [[together]] [[stuff]] is really very [[boring]]. [[Sideways]] from the [[shortage]] of [[monstrosity]], there isn't any over-the-top [[operatic]] theatrics to keep us [[distracted]]. It [[looks]] unlikely that this could've [[supplied]] much [[amusement]] even 70 [[olds]] ago. See it if you have to [[behold]] everything with 'zombie' in the title but otherwise I [[could]] [[counselor]] [[omitting]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] a few months [[ago]] on [[cable]], and it was [[fantastic]]. [[William]] H Macy is one of my [[favorite]] actors, and his performance was just amazing. He makes you [[care]] for his [[character]], [[even]] when he is [[clearly]] doing the [[wrong]] [[thing]], and [[Neve]] Campbell gives a performance that is with out a [[doubt]] the best performance I have [[seen]] by an [[actress]] this year. She is [[fantastic]] as a wild young [[woman]] who is [[wise]] [[beyond]] her [[years]].

Donald Sutherland is just plain [[creepy]] as Macy's father, and [[John]] [[Ritter]] is fine as a shrink [[stuck]] in the middle of everything that is happening.

I [[wish]] that this was in the [[theater]] because I feel that it's a [[movie]] that should be [[view]] by a wider [[audience]]. That's a [[shame]], because it's a [[hell]] of [[allot]] better that most of the new [[movies]] [[coming]] into the [[theater]] now.

I [[noticed]] this [[kino]] a few months [[formerly]] on [[cabled]], and it was [[wondrous]]. [[Guillaume]] H Macy is one of my [[preferential]] actors, and his performance was just amazing. He makes you [[healthcare]] for his [[trait]], [[yet]] when he is [[definitely]] doing the [[amiss]] [[stuff]], and [[Neff]] Campbell gives a performance that is with out a [[duda]] the best performance I have [[noticed]] by an [[actor]] this year. She is [[beautiful]] as a wild young [[wife]] who is [[sensible]] [[afterlife]] her [[ages]].

Donald Sutherland is just plain [[spooky]] as Macy's father, and [[Jon]] [[Knight]] is fine as a shrink [[pasted]] in the middle of everything that is happening.

I [[wants]] that this was in the [[drama]] because I feel that it's a [[cinema]] that should be [[vista]] by a wider [[audiences]]. That's a [[embarrass]], because it's a [[dammit]] of [[dedicate]] better that most of the new [[film]] [[upcoming]] into the [[theatre]] now.

--------------------------------------------- Result 102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] To me A Matter of Life and Death is just that- simply the best film ever made.

From beginning to end it oozes class. It is stimulating, thought provoking, a mirror to the post war world and the relations between peoples.

The cinematography is simply stunning and the effect of mixing monochrome and Technicolour to accent the different worlds works seamlessly. The characters and plot development are near perfect and the attention to detail promotes a thoroughly believable fantasy.

No matter how many times I watch the film - and I have watched it a lot - it never fails to touch me. It makes me smile, it makes me laugh, it makes me think, it makes me cry. It is as fresh today as it was in 1946.

If I were allowed just one film to keep and watch again A Matter of Life and Death would be that film. --------------------------------------------- Result 103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Dr. Seuss would sure be mad right now if he was [[alive]]. Cat in the Hat proves to [[show]] how movie productions can take a classic [[story]] and turn it into a mindless [[pile]] of goop. We have Mike Myers as the infamous Cat in the Hat, [[big]] [[mistake]]! Myers proves he can't [[act]] in this film. He acts like a prissy show girl with a thousand tricks up his sleeve. The [[kids]] in this [[movie]] are all right, [[somewhere]] in between the lines of dull and annoying. The story is just like the original with a couple of tweaks and like most movies based on other stories, never tweak with the original story! Bringing in the evil neighbor Quin was a bad idea. He is a stupid villain that would never get anywhere in life.This movie is like a rejected comic strip from the newspaper if you think about it. The film sure does [[look]] tacky! Sure there are a funny adult jokes like where the cat cuts of his tail and the censor goes off before he says a naughty word, mildly funny. At [[least]] the Grinch had [[spunk]], and the film was actually good! This film is a cartoonish piece of snot with [[bright]] colors and bad [[mediocre]] acting. Was Mike Myers even in this movie actually? And another thing, the fish. What is with that stupid fish! First time you [[see]] him, he's an actual fish. Next time you [[see]] him, he's all animated and talking. But he [[looks]] like an animated [[piece]] of rubber play dough! This film is a [[total]] off [[target]] wreck. [[Good]] [[joke]], bad [[joke]], bad, bad, [[bad]], good [[joke]]! I'm [[surprised]] it even had good jokes like the water park ride joke, that was good. [[So]] please if you have the [[choice]], watch the Grinch [[instead]] of this [[mess]]. Dr. Seuss would sure be mad right now if he was [[vivo]]. Cat in the Hat proves to [[display]] how movie productions can take a classic [[narratives]] and turn it into a mindless [[heap]] of goop. We have Mike Myers as the infamous Cat in the Hat, [[wide]] [[mistaken]]! Myers proves he can't [[law]] in this film. He acts like a prissy show girl with a thousand tricks up his sleeve. The [[juvenile]] in this [[films]] are all right, [[anywhere]] in between the lines of dull and annoying. The story is just like the original with a couple of tweaks and like most movies based on other stories, never tweak with the original story! Bringing in the evil neighbor Quin was a bad idea. He is a stupid villain that would never get anywhere in life.This movie is like a rejected comic strip from the newspaper if you think about it. The film sure does [[gaze]] tacky! Sure there are a funny adult jokes like where the cat cuts of his tail and the censor goes off before he says a naughty word, mildly funny. At [[less]] the Grinch had [[moxie]], and the film was actually good! This film is a cartoonish piece of snot with [[lustrous]] colors and bad [[lackluster]] acting. Was Mike Myers even in this movie actually? And another thing, the fish. What is with that stupid fish! First time you [[seeing]] him, he's an actual fish. Next time you [[behold]] him, he's all animated and talking. But he [[seem]] like an animated [[slice]] of rubber play dough! This film is a [[whole]] off [[goal]] wreck. [[Well]] [[giggle]], bad [[prank]], bad, bad, [[unfavourable]], good [[farce]]! I'm [[flabbergasted]] it even had good jokes like the water park ride joke, that was good. [[Accordingly]] please if you have the [[wahl]], watch the Grinch [[however]] of this [[chaos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film has renewed my interest in French cinema. The story is enchanting, the acting is flawless and Audrey Tautou is absolutely beautiful. I imagine that we will be seeing a lot more of her in the States after her upcoming role in Amelie. --------------------------------------------- Result 105 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is the [[movie]] that epitomizes the D&D fear of the 80s (and [[even]] today). The fear being that people who play D&D (or any other role-playing [[game]] for that matter) will be "sucked in" and lose their ability to [[distinguish]] [[reality]] from [[fantasy]] (and go on killing sprees, [[child]] sacrifices, suicide, etc). [[Great]] movie for anyone who likes to [[blame]] the [[problems]] of society on inanimate objects, but anyone who has [[played]] a role-playing [[game]], a video [[game]], or [[even]] [[acted]] in a [[play]] will see this as an [[insult]] to their [[intelligence]]. It is to D&D what Wargames was to computers. Plus as a movie, it just kinda [[sucks]]. This is the [[filmmaking]] that epitomizes the D&D fear of the 80s (and [[yet]] today). The fear being that people who play D&D (or any other role-playing [[ballgame]] for that matter) will be "sucked in" and lose their ability to [[discern]] [[realism]] from [[chimera]] (and go on killing sprees, [[enfant]] sacrifices, suicide, etc). [[Resplendent]] movie for anyone who likes to [[guilt]] the [[disorders]] of society on inanimate objects, but anyone who has [[served]] a role-playing [[games]], a video [[games]], or [[yet]] [[reacted]] in a [[gaming]] will see this as an [[snub]] to their [[intelligentsia]]. It is to D&D what Wargames was to computers. Plus as a movie, it just kinda [[stinks]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] You have to see it to [[believe]] it! Directors [[Alastair]] Fothergill and Mark Linfield have [[done]] a thing [[really]] great, it is a 10 out of 10 so I can not [[believe]] that other user of this web had [[rate]] it so poor, unless they were [[expecting]] to see just a [[normal]] movie, with people, [[love]] scenes, and so on. I am also convinced that this [[kind]] of [[documentaries]] are an [[excellent]] way to wake up us in order to save our beautiful planet. Finally, it has [[nothing]] to do with Al Gore's documentary-movie "An [[inconvenient]] truth" mainly made of long [[monologues]], painfully and with "truths" not always accurate, as many scientists have pointed already.

The best thing you can do on earth is not miss Earth. You have to see it to [[reckon]] it! Directors [[Ulster]] Fothergill and Mark Linfield have [[performed]] a thing [[genuinely]] great, it is a 10 out of 10 so I can not [[reckon]] that other user of this web had [[rates]] it so poor, unless they were [[hoping]] to see just a [[customary]] movie, with people, [[adored]] scenes, and so on. I am also convinced that this [[kinds]] of [[documentary]] are an [[wondrous]] way to wake up us in order to save our beautiful planet. Finally, it has [[anything]] to do with Al Gore's documentary-movie "An [[clumsy]] truth" mainly made of long [[monologue]], painfully and with "truths" not always accurate, as many scientists have pointed already.

The best thing you can do on earth is not miss Earth. --------------------------------------------- Result 107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] People [[criticise]] Disney's animated features of the 1950s for being overly [[glossy]], set in landscapes that are much too pristine. That [[criticism]] is just. And yet it can't be the [[whole]] story, because the two least glossy - "Alice in Wonderland" and "Peter Pan" - are also the [[weakest]]. "Cinderella", on the other hand, set in a [[world]] in which the very dirt [[sparkles]], is [[clearly]] the [[best]].

It DOES look good. The backgrounds are subtle and consistent; the [[colours]] are pure without being too bright. The animation varies a bit. I'll swear that some of the [[humans]] are rotoscoped - but then, the rotoscoped [[humans]] ([[including]] Cinderella herself) aren't full-blooded characters in the [[script]], so this approach [[works]] well enough. It's really the [[animals]] that make the [[movie]]. I [[think]] the studio had never [[quite]] [[used]] [[animals]] in this [[way]] before, as totems rather than sidekicks. The [[mice]], for [[instance]], are the creatures who [[draw]] us into the [[story]]; but they are really [[representatives]] or [[allies]] of the more colourless Cinderella. The cat, [[Lucifer]], is a [[kind]] of witch's familiar to the [[Wicked]] Stepmother. (The cat is [[brilliantly]] [[conceived]] and animated - one of the [[best]] feline [[creations]] of all time. The supervising animator was Ward Kimball and he [[modelled]] it on his own [[cat]]. I wonder how he put up with the animal.) This [[approach]] [[allows]] the [[animals]] to [[steal]] the [[show]] without drawing our attention from the [[main]] story. Their [[actions]] are of maximum interest only in the [[light]] of the [[main]] [[story]].

[[Among]] the [[supporting]] cast the [[notable]] [[humans]] are the [[King]] and the Grand Duke. The [[King]] is a one note [[character]] - he [[wants]] grandchildren and [[appears]] to have no other [[desires]] at all - but the [[note]] is [[struck]] in a [[pleasing]] [[fashion]]. The Grand Duke is a put-upon [[character]] who [[deserves]] to be [[lifted]] out of his [[sphere]] as much as Cinderella does. ([[Although]] he, of [[course]], is [[richer]].)

"Cinderella" is Disney's [[return]] to [[features]] after an eight-year [[hiatus]], and neither with it nor with any [[subsequent]] movie would he recapture the [[raw]] brilliance of his [[early]] years. [[Moreover]] he made things hard for himself by picking "Cinderella". She's a passive [[heroine]] and there's not much [[anyone]] can do about that. ([[Maybe]] I'm wrong on this [[score]] - I haven't seen the recent "Ever After".) Nonetheless it is remarkable how successful Disney was in bringing this unpromising [[story]] to life, without cutting across the grain of its spirit. People [[criticised]] Disney's animated features of the 1950s for being overly [[luminous]], set in landscapes that are much too pristine. That [[criticise]] is just. And yet it can't be the [[overall]] story, because the two least glossy - "Alice in Wonderland" and "Peter Pan" - are also the [[weaker]]. "Cinderella", on the other hand, set in a [[globe]] in which the very dirt [[ignites]], is [[apparently]] the [[nicest]].

It DOES look good. The backgrounds are subtle and consistent; the [[coloring]] are pure without being too bright. The animation varies a bit. I'll swear that some of the [[beings]] are rotoscoped - but then, the rotoscoped [[mankind]] ([[containing]] Cinderella herself) aren't full-blooded characters in the [[screenplay]], so this approach [[collaborating]] well enough. It's really the [[beasts]] that make the [[film]]. I [[ideas]] the studio had never [[utterly]] [[utilize]] [[animal]] in this [[routing]] before, as totems rather than sidekicks. The [[mouse]], for [[case]], are the creatures who [[attract]] us into the [[tale]]; but they are really [[delegates]] or [[ally]] of the more colourless Cinderella. The cat, [[Satan]], is a [[genera]] of witch's familiar to the [[Malicious]] Stepmother. (The cat is [[beautifully]] [[devised]] and animated - one of the [[finest]] feline [[establishment]] of all time. The supervising animator was Ward Kimball and he [[model]] it on his own [[kitten]]. I wonder how he put up with the animal.) This [[approaching]] [[allowed]] the [[beasts]] to [[theft]] the [[illustrating]] without drawing our attention from the [[principal]] story. Their [[action]] are of maximum interest only in the [[lighting]] of the [[principal]] [[tale]].

[[In]] the [[aiding]] cast the [[sizable]] [[mankind]] are the [[Emperor]] and the Grand Duke. The [[Emperor]] is a one note [[trait]] - he [[desires]] grandchildren and [[seems]] to have no other [[aspirations]] at all - but the [[memo]] is [[slugged]] in a [[pleasant]] [[manner]]. The Grand Duke is a put-upon [[trait]] who [[deserved]] to be [[hoisting]] out of his [[zona]] as much as Cinderella does. ([[Though]] he, of [[cours]], is [[wealthy]].)

"Cinderella" is Disney's [[returnee]] to [[feature]] after an eight-year [[pausing]], and neither with it nor with any [[resultant]] movie would he recapture the [[untreated]] brilliance of his [[precocious]] years. [[Additionally]] he made things hard for himself by picking "Cinderella". She's a passive [[heroin]] and there's not much [[whoever]] can do about that. ([[Might]] I'm wrong on this [[notation]] - I haven't seen the recent "Ever After".) Nonetheless it is remarkable how successful Disney was in bringing this unpromising [[conte]] to life, without cutting across the grain of its spirit. --------------------------------------------- Result 108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When I was little my parents took me along to the theater to see Interiors. It was one of many movies I watched with my parents, but this was the only one we walked out of. Since then I had never seen Interiors until just recently, and I could have lived out the rest of my life without it. What a [[pretentious]], ponderous, and painfully [[boring]] piece of 70's wine and cheese tripe. Woody Allen is one of my [[favorite]] [[directors]] but [[Interiors]] is by far the [[worst]] [[piece]] of [[crap]] of his [[career]]. In the unmistakable style of Ingmar Berman, Allen gives us a dark, angular, muted, insight in to the lives of a family wrought by the psychological damage caused by divorce, [[estrangement]], career, love, non-love, halitosis, whatever. The film, intentionally, has no comic relief, no music, and is drenched in shadowy pathos. This film style can be best defined as expressionist in nature, using an [[improvisational]] method of dialogue to illicit a "more pronounced depth of meaning and truth". But Woody Allen is no Ingmar Bergman. The film is painfully slow and dull. But beyond that, I [[simply]] had no connection with or [[sympathy]] for any of the characters. Instead I [[felt]] only [[contempt]] for this [[parade]] of shuffling, [[whining]], nicotine [[stained]], martyrs in a [[perpetual]] quest for identity. [[Amid]] a backdrop of cosmopolitan [[affluence]] and [[baked]] Brie intelligentsia the [[story]] looms like a fart in the [[room]]. Everyone speaks in affected [[platitudes]] and elevated [[language]] between [[cigarettes]]. [[Everyone]] is "lost" and "[[struggling]]", desperate to [[find]] [[direction]] or [[understanding]] or whatever and it just goes on and on to the point where you just want to slap all of them. It's never about resolution, it's only about interminable introspective [[babble]]. It is nothing more than a [[psychological]] [[drama]] [[taken]] to an [[extreme]] beyond the audience's [[ability]] to [[connect]]. Woody Allen [[chose]] to make [[characters]] so immersed in themselves we feel [[left]] out. And for that [[reason]] I [[found]] this movie painfully self [[indulgent]] and spiritually [[draining]]. I [[see]] what he was [[going]] for but his [[insistence]] on [[promoting]] his [[message]] through [[Prozac]] prose and [[distorted]] [[film]] techniques jettisons it past the point of relevance. I highly recommend this one if you're feeling a [[little]] too [[happy]] and [[need]] something to [[remind]] you of [[death]]. [[Otherwise]], let's just pretend this [[film]] never [[happened]]. When I was little my parents took me along to the theater to see Interiors. It was one of many movies I watched with my parents, but this was the only one we walked out of. Since then I had never seen Interiors until just recently, and I could have lived out the rest of my life without it. What a [[ostentatious]], ponderous, and painfully [[dull]] piece of 70's wine and cheese tripe. Woody Allen is one of my [[preferred]] [[managers]] but [[Indoors]] is by far the [[pire]] [[slice]] of [[dammit]] of his [[quarries]]. In the unmistakable style of Ingmar Berman, Allen gives us a dark, angular, muted, insight in to the lives of a family wrought by the psychological damage caused by divorce, [[alienation]], career, love, non-love, halitosis, whatever. The film, intentionally, has no comic relief, no music, and is drenched in shadowy pathos. This film style can be best defined as expressionist in nature, using an [[improv]] method of dialogue to illicit a "more pronounced depth of meaning and truth". But Woody Allen is no Ingmar Bergman. The film is painfully slow and dull. But beyond that, I [[exclusively]] had no connection with or [[empathy]] for any of the characters. Instead I [[deemed]] only [[defiance]] for this [[parades]] of shuffling, [[griping]], nicotine [[colored]], martyrs in a [[nonstop]] quest for identity. [[Amidst]] a backdrop of cosmopolitan [[riches]] and [[baking]] Brie intelligentsia the [[history]] looms like a fart in the [[salle]]. Everyone speaks in affected [[trivia]] and elevated [[vocabulary]] between [[tobacco]]. [[Anyone]] is "lost" and "[[fighting]]", desperate to [[finds]] [[orientation]] or [[understood]] or whatever and it just goes on and on to the point where you just want to slap all of them. It's never about resolution, it's only about interminable introspective [[yada]]. It is nothing more than a [[psychiatric]] [[theatrical]] [[picked]] to an [[utmost]] beyond the audience's [[dexterity]] to [[connecting]]. Woody Allen [[picked]] to make [[attribute]] so immersed in themselves we feel [[exited]] out. And for that [[cause]] I [[unearthed]] this movie painfully self [[tolerant]] and spiritually [[drainage]]. I [[behold]] what he was [[go]] for but his [[persistence]] on [[promoted]] his [[messages]] through [[Valium]] prose and [[twisty]] [[flick]] techniques jettisons it past the point of relevance. I highly recommend this one if you're feeling a [[petite]] too [[joyous]] and [[needed]] something to [[reminded]] you of [[fatalities]]. [[Alternately]], let's just pretend this [[filmmaking]] never [[sweated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 109 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] 1927, and Hollywood had been on the map as the centre of the cinematic world for a little over a decade. Now that it had become the site of a multi-million dollar industry and the vertically integrated studio system had been established, some of those in the calmer quarters of this film-making factory were taking the time for a little self-reflection. The Last [[Command]], while its [[heart]] may be the classic story of a once prestigious [[man]] fallen on hard times, [[frames]] that [[tale]] [[within]] a [[bleak]] look at how [[cinema]] unceremoniously recreates reality, and how its production process could be mercilessly impersonal. It was written by Lajos Biro, who had been on the scene long enough to know.

Taking centre stage is a man who was at the time among Hollywood's most celebrated immigrants – Emil Jannings. Before coming to the States Jannings had worked mainly in comedy, being a [[master]] of the hammy [[yet]] hilariously well-timed performance, often as pompous authority figures or doddering old has-beens. He makes his entrance in The Last [[Command]] as the latter, and at [[first]] it looks as if this is to be another of Jannings's scenery-chomping [[caricatures]]. [[However]], as the [[story]] progresses the actor [[gets]] to demonstrate his [[range]], [[showing]] by turns [[delicate]] frailty, [[serene]] dignity and eventually [[awesome]] power and [[presence]] in the finale. He never [[quite]] stops being a blustering [[exaggeration]] (the German acting [[tradition]] knowing [[nothing]] of [[subtlety]]), but he constantly [[holds]] our attention with absolute [[control]] over [[every]] facet of his performance.

The director was another [[immigrant]], [[albeit]] one who had been around Hollywood a bit longer and had no background in the European film industry. Nevertheless Joseph von Sternberg cultivated for himself the image of the artistic and [[imperious]] Teutonic [[Kino]] Meister (the "von" was made up, by the way), and took a very distinctive approach to the craft. Of note in this picture is his handling of pace and tone, a [[great]] example being the first of the Russian flashback scenes. We open with a carefully-constructed chaos with movement in converging directions, which we the audience become part of as the camera pulls back and extras dash across the screen. Then, when Jannings arrives, everything settles down. Jannings's performance is incredibly sedate and measured, and when the players around him begin to mirror this the effect is as if his mere presence has restored order.

Sternberg appears to show a distaste for violence, allowing the grimmest moments to take place off screen, and yet implying that they have happened with a flow of images that is almost poetic. In fact, he really seems to have an all-round lack of interest in action. In the scene of the prisoners' revolt Sternberg takes an aloof and objective stance, his camera eventually retreating to a fly-on-the-wall position. Compare this to the following scenes between Jannings and Evelyn Brent, which are a complex medley of point-of-view shots and intense close-ups, thrusting us right into the midst of their interaction.

As a personality on set, it would seem that Sternberg was much like the cold and callous director played on the screen by William Powell, and in fact Powell's portrayal is probably something of a deliberate parody that even Sternberg himself would have been in on. Unfortunately this harsh attitude did not make him an easy man to work with, and coupled with his focus on his technical resources over his human ones, the smaller performances in his pictures leave a little to be desired. While Jannings displays classic hamming in the Charles Laughton mode that works dramatically, it appears no-one told his co-stars they were not in a comedy. Evelyn Brent is fairly good, giving us some good emoting, but overplaying it here and there. The only performance that comes close to Jannings is that of Powell himself. It's a little odd to see the normally amiable star of The Thin Man and The Great Ziegfeld playing a figure so stern and humourless, like a male Ninotchka, but he does a good job, revealing a smouldering emotional intensity beneath the hard-hearted exterior.

The Last Command could easily have ruffled a few feathers in studio offices, as tends to happen with any disparaging commentary on the film-making process, even a relatively tame example like this. At the very least, I believe many studio heads would have been displeased by the "behind-the-scenes" view, as it threatened the mystique of movie-making which was still very much alive at this point. As it turned out, such was the impact of the picture that Jannings won the first ever Academy Award for Best Actor, as well as a Best Writing nomination for Lajos Biro and (according to some sources, although the issue is a little vague) a nomination for Best Picture. This is significant, since the Academy was a tiny institution at this time and the first awards were more than ever a bit of self-indulgent back-slapping by the Hollywood elite. But elite or not, they recognised good material when they saw it, and were willing to reward it. 1927, and Hollywood had been on the map as the centre of the cinematic world for a little over a decade. Now that it had become the site of a multi-million dollar industry and the vertically integrated studio system had been established, some of those in the calmer quarters of this film-making factory were taking the time for a little self-reflection. The Last [[Commanding]], while its [[heartland]] may be the classic story of a once prestigious [[guy]] fallen on hard times, [[frame]] that [[saga]] [[inside]] a [[morose]] look at how [[cinemas]] unceremoniously recreates reality, and how its production process could be mercilessly impersonal. It was written by Lajos Biro, who had been on the scene long enough to know.

Taking centre stage is a man who was at the time among Hollywood's most celebrated immigrants – Emil Jannings. Before coming to the States Jannings had worked mainly in comedy, being a [[maestro]] of the hammy [[even]] hilariously well-timed performance, often as pompous authority figures or doddering old has-beens. He makes his entrance in The Last [[Commanding]] as the latter, and at [[fiirst]] it looks as if this is to be another of Jannings's scenery-chomping [[caricature]]. [[Conversely]], as the [[storytelling]] progresses the actor [[receives]] to demonstrate his [[assortment]], [[proving]] by turns [[tricky]] frailty, [[peaceful]] dignity and eventually [[great]] power and [[attendance]] in the finale. He never [[utterly]] stops being a blustering [[overstatement]] (the German acting [[traditions]] knowing [[anything]] of [[finesse]]), but he constantly [[held]] our attention with absolute [[monitors]] over [[any]] facet of his performance.

The director was another [[migrant]], [[though]] one who had been around Hollywood a bit longer and had no background in the European film industry. Nevertheless Joseph von Sternberg cultivated for himself the image of the artistic and [[despotic]] Teutonic [[Cinematographic]] Meister (the "von" was made up, by the way), and took a very distinctive approach to the craft. Of note in this picture is his handling of pace and tone, a [[huge]] example being the first of the Russian flashback scenes. We open with a carefully-constructed chaos with movement in converging directions, which we the audience become part of as the camera pulls back and extras dash across the screen. Then, when Jannings arrives, everything settles down. Jannings's performance is incredibly sedate and measured, and when the players around him begin to mirror this the effect is as if his mere presence has restored order.

Sternberg appears to show a distaste for violence, allowing the grimmest moments to take place off screen, and yet implying that they have happened with a flow of images that is almost poetic. In fact, he really seems to have an all-round lack of interest in action. In the scene of the prisoners' revolt Sternberg takes an aloof and objective stance, his camera eventually retreating to a fly-on-the-wall position. Compare this to the following scenes between Jannings and Evelyn Brent, which are a complex medley of point-of-view shots and intense close-ups, thrusting us right into the midst of their interaction.

As a personality on set, it would seem that Sternberg was much like the cold and callous director played on the screen by William Powell, and in fact Powell's portrayal is probably something of a deliberate parody that even Sternberg himself would have been in on. Unfortunately this harsh attitude did not make him an easy man to work with, and coupled with his focus on his technical resources over his human ones, the smaller performances in his pictures leave a little to be desired. While Jannings displays classic hamming in the Charles Laughton mode that works dramatically, it appears no-one told his co-stars they were not in a comedy. Evelyn Brent is fairly good, giving us some good emoting, but overplaying it here and there. The only performance that comes close to Jannings is that of Powell himself. It's a little odd to see the normally amiable star of The Thin Man and The Great Ziegfeld playing a figure so stern and humourless, like a male Ninotchka, but he does a good job, revealing a smouldering emotional intensity beneath the hard-hearted exterior.

The Last Command could easily have ruffled a few feathers in studio offices, as tends to happen with any disparaging commentary on the film-making process, even a relatively tame example like this. At the very least, I believe many studio heads would have been displeased by the "behind-the-scenes" view, as it threatened the mystique of movie-making which was still very much alive at this point. As it turned out, such was the impact of the picture that Jannings won the first ever Academy Award for Best Actor, as well as a Best Writing nomination for Lajos Biro and (according to some sources, although the issue is a little vague) a nomination for Best Picture. This is significant, since the Academy was a tiny institution at this time and the first awards were more than ever a bit of self-indulgent back-slapping by the Hollywood elite. But elite or not, they recognised good material when they saw it, and were willing to reward it. --------------------------------------------- Result 110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Thunderbirds (2004)

[[Director]]: Jonathan Frakes

[[Starring]]: [[Bill]] Paxton, Ben Kingsley, Brady Corbet

5…4…3…2…1! Thunderbirds are [[GO]]!

And so [[began]] Thunderbirds, a [[childhood]] [[favorite]] of mine. When I heard that they were [[going]] to [[make]] a Thunderbirds [[movie]], I was ecstatic. I couldn't [[wait]] to see Thunderbird 2 roar in to [[save]] people, while Thunderbird 4 would [[dive]] deep into the…you get the [[idea]]. I just couldn't wait. Then came August 2004, when the movie was finally released. Critics panned it, but I still wanted to go. After all, as long as the heart was in the same place, that was all that mattered to me. So I sat down in the theater, the only teenager in a crowd of 50…everyone else was over thirty and under ten. [[Quite]] [[possibly]] the most [[awkward]] [[theater]] experience that I have ever had…

The movie (which is intended to be a prequel) focuses on Alan Tracy (Brady Corbet), the youngest of the Tracy family. He spends his days wishing that he could be rescuing people like the rest of his family, but he's too young. One day, he finally gets his chance when The Hood (Ben Kingsley) traps the rest of his family up on Thunderbird 5 (the space station). This involves him having to outsmart The Hood's henchmen and rescue his family in time before The Hood can steal all of the money from the Bank of England.

Trust me, the plot sounds like a regular episode of Thunderbirds when you read it on paper. Once it gets put on to film…what a [[mess]] we have on our hands. First off, the film was intended for children, much like the original show was. However, [[Gerry]] Anderson treated us like adults, and gave us plots that were fairly advanced for children's programming. This on the other hand, dumbs down the plot as it tries to make itself a ripoff of the Spy Kids franchise. The final product is a movie that tries to appeal to fans of the Thunderbirds series and children, while missing both entirely. Lame jokes, cartoonish sounds, and stupid antics that no one really finds amusing are all over this movie, and I'm sure that Jonathan Frakes is wishing he'd never directed this.

Over all, everyone gave a solid performance, considering the script that they were all given. Ben Kingsley was exceptional as The Hood, playing the part extremely well. My only complaint about the characters is about The Hood's henchmen, who are reduced to leftovers from old Looney Tunes cartoons, bumbling about as, amazingly enough, the kids take them on with ease.

What's odd about this movie is that while I was watching the movie, I had fun. But once the lights went up, I realized that the movie was fairly bad, I was $8 lighter, and two hours of my time were now gone. A guilty pleasure? Perhaps. Nonetheless, Thunderbirds is a forgettable mess. Instead of a big "go", I'm going to have to recommend that you stay away from this movie. If the rest of movie could have been like the first ten minutes of it, it would have been an incredible film worthy of the Thunderbirds name. However, we get a movie that only die-hard Thunderbirds fans (if you'd like to watch your childhood torn to pieces) or the extremely bored should bother with.

My rating for Thunderbirds is 1 ½ stars. Thunderbirds (2004)

[[Headmaster]]: Jonathan Frakes

[[Championship]]: [[Invoices]] Paxton, Ben Kingsley, Brady Corbet

5…4…3…2…1! Thunderbirds are [[GOING]]!

And so [[begun]] Thunderbirds, a [[children]] [[favourites]] of mine. When I heard that they were [[go]] to [[deliver]] a Thunderbirds [[filmmaking]], I was ecstatic. I couldn't [[expecting]] to see Thunderbird 2 roar in to [[saving]] people, while Thunderbird 4 would [[delve]] deep into the…you get the [[brainchild]]. I just couldn't wait. Then came August 2004, when the movie was finally released. Critics panned it, but I still wanted to go. After all, as long as the heart was in the same place, that was all that mattered to me. So I sat down in the theater, the only teenager in a crowd of 50…everyone else was over thirty and under ten. [[Rather]] [[potentially]] the most [[tricky]] [[drama]] experience that I have ever had…

The movie (which is intended to be a prequel) focuses on Alan Tracy (Brady Corbet), the youngest of the Tracy family. He spends his days wishing that he could be rescuing people like the rest of his family, but he's too young. One day, he finally gets his chance when The Hood (Ben Kingsley) traps the rest of his family up on Thunderbird 5 (the space station). This involves him having to outsmart The Hood's henchmen and rescue his family in time before The Hood can steal all of the money from the Bank of England.

Trust me, the plot sounds like a regular episode of Thunderbirds when you read it on paper. Once it gets put on to film…what a [[chaos]] we have on our hands. First off, the film was intended for children, much like the original show was. However, [[Jerry]] Anderson treated us like adults, and gave us plots that were fairly advanced for children's programming. This on the other hand, dumbs down the plot as it tries to make itself a ripoff of the Spy Kids franchise. The final product is a movie that tries to appeal to fans of the Thunderbirds series and children, while missing both entirely. Lame jokes, cartoonish sounds, and stupid antics that no one really finds amusing are all over this movie, and I'm sure that Jonathan Frakes is wishing he'd never directed this.

Over all, everyone gave a solid performance, considering the script that they were all given. Ben Kingsley was exceptional as The Hood, playing the part extremely well. My only complaint about the characters is about The Hood's henchmen, who are reduced to leftovers from old Looney Tunes cartoons, bumbling about as, amazingly enough, the kids take them on with ease.

What's odd about this movie is that while I was watching the movie, I had fun. But once the lights went up, I realized that the movie was fairly bad, I was $8 lighter, and two hours of my time were now gone. A guilty pleasure? Perhaps. Nonetheless, Thunderbirds is a forgettable mess. Instead of a big "go", I'm going to have to recommend that you stay away from this movie. If the rest of movie could have been like the first ten minutes of it, it would have been an incredible film worthy of the Thunderbirds name. However, we get a movie that only die-hard Thunderbirds fans (if you'd like to watch your childhood torn to pieces) or the extremely bored should bother with.

My rating for Thunderbirds is 1 ½ stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am oh soooo glad I have not spent money to go to the cinema on it :-). It is nothing more than compilation of elements of few other classic titles like The Thing, Final Fantasy, The Abyss etc. framed in rather dull and meaningless scenario. I really can not figure out what was the purpose of creating this movie - it has absolutely nothing new to offer in its storyline which additionally is also senseless. Moreover there is nothing to watch - the FX'es look like there were taken from a second hand store, you generally saw all of them in other movies. But it is definitely a good lullaby. --------------------------------------------- Result 112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Once again [[Jet]] Li [[brings]] his charismatic [[presence]] to the [[movie]] screen in the film Black [[Mask]]. [[In]] this [[film]] Li plays [[Tsui]], an escapee from a [[super]] soldier [[program]] who [[seeks]] to [[regain]] the [[humanity]] that the [[program]] had taken away from him. To do this [[Tsui]] [[decides]] to [[become]] a librarian in [[order]] to [[live]] a normal and peaceful [[life]], but fate [[demands]] that he clean up [[problems]] from his past before he can [[continue]] to seek [[peace]]. [[Other]] members of the super [[soldier]] [[program]] had escaped at the same [[time]] as [[Tsui]], but they want to [[get]] [[even]] with the [[world]] [[rather]] than find [[inner]] peace. [[Thus]] [[Tsui]] [[becomes]] the only [[thing]] that can [[prevent]] his [[former]] team [[mates]] from releasing [[information]] that [[could]] [[cost]] [[many]] innocent people their [[lives]]. This [[film]] [[screams]] [[across]] the screen at a [[frantic]] pace and never [[lets]] its [[audience]] [[go]]. The martial [[arts]] is [[amazing]], but because it [[uses]] [[wires]] it may not be [[appreciated]] as much as it [[deserves]] by American [[audiences]]. [[If]] you like action [[movies]] that have an interesting [[story]] and demand good acting performances because they deal with psychological as well as [[physical]] [[conflicts]], then [[Black]] [[Mask]] is for you. I am [[glad]] to [[see]] that some of [[Jet]] Li's [[movies]] are finally [[getting]] [[main]] stream release in the United States and look forward to [[seeing]] how the [[changes]] that that release will [[require]] ([[things]] [[like]] dubbing and soundtrack) will affect the film. This is one of Li's [[best]] [[films]], go out and see it on May 14 when it is [[released]] in America. Once again [[Jett]] Li [[bring]] his charismatic [[attendance]] to the [[cinematography]] screen in the film Black [[Hide]]. [[Across]] this [[cinematography]] Li plays [[Suh]], an escapee from a [[mega]] soldier [[programming]] who [[attempting]] to [[retrieved]] the [[human]] that the [[programmed]] had taken away from him. To do this [[Choi]] [[decided]] to [[becoming]] a librarian in [[edict]] to [[living]] a normal and peaceful [[vie]], but fate [[require]] that he clean up [[disorders]] from his past before he can [[persist]] to seek [[serene]]. [[Else]] members of the super [[servicemen]] [[programming]] had escaped at the same [[period]] as [[Suh]], but they want to [[got]] [[yet]] with the [[globe]] [[fairly]] than find [[inland]] peace. [[Therefore]] [[Choi]] [[becoming]] the only [[stuff]] that can [[deter]] his [[past]] team [[homies]] from releasing [[info]] that [[would]] [[expense]] [[countless]] innocent people their [[life]]. This [[movie]] [[howling]] [[during]] the screen at a [[distraught]] pace and never [[enable]] its [[viewers]] [[going]]. The martial [[humanities]] is [[noteworthy]], but because it [[use]] [[wiring]] it may not be [[complimented]] as much as it [[deserved]] by American [[audience]]. [[Though]] you like action [[movie]] that have an interesting [[tale]] and demand good acting performances because they deal with psychological as well as [[corporal]] [[controversies]], then [[Negro]] [[Conceal]] is for you. I am [[delighted]] to [[behold]] that some of [[Airliner]] Li's [[cinematographic]] are finally [[obtaining]] [[principal]] stream release in the United States and look forward to [[see]] how the [[modification]] that that release will [[demand]] ([[items]] [[iike]] dubbing and soundtrack) will affect the film. This is one of Li's [[finest]] [[cinema]], go out and see it on May 14 when it is [[publicized]] in America. --------------------------------------------- Result 113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Being born in the 1960's I grew up watching the TV "Movies of the Week" in the early 70's and loved the creepy movies that were routinely shown including "Crowhaven Farm", "Bad Ronald", "Satan's School for Girls", "Kolchak the Night Stalker", etc, but this one is just plain dumb.This is obviously the writer's trying to capitalize on the horrific Manson murders from a few years earlier. The movie stars Dennis Weaver of "McCloud" and "Duel" fame as a father who takes his family camping on a beach. The family encounters some hippies who for some reason decide to terrorize the family. The reason for this is never explained, and Weaver's pacifistic stance is hard to swallow. For God's sake, call the police, beat the hell of them or something, just don't sit there and whine about it. The acting is pretty lame, the story unbelievable, etc. Susan Dey looks cute in a bikini but that's about it. Ignore this if it ever airs on TV. --------------------------------------------- Result 114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There has been a political documentary, of recent vintage, called Why We Fight, which tries to examine the infamous Military Industrial Complex and its grip on this nation. It is considered both polemical and incisive in making its case against both that complex and the war fiasco we are currently involved in in Iraq. Yet, a far more famous series of films, with the same name, was made during World War Two, by Hollywood director Frank Capra. Although considered documentaries, and having won Oscars in that category, this series of seven films is really and truly mere agitprop, more in the vein of Leni Reifenstal's Triumph Of The Will, scenes of which Capra recycles for his own purposes. That said, that fact does not mean it does not have vital information that subsequent generations of World War Two documentaries (such as the BBC's lauded The World At War) lacked, nor does that mean that its value as a primary source is any the less valuable. They are skillfully made, and after recently purchasing some used DVDs at a discount store, I found myself with the opportunity to select a free DVD with my purchase. I chose Goodtimes DVD's four DVD collection of the series.

Rarely has something free been so worth invaluable. While there are no extras on the DVDs, and the sound quality of the prints varies, these films provide insight into the minds of Americans two thirds of a century ago, when racism was overt (as in many of the classic Warner Brothers pro-war cartoons of the era), and there was nothing wrong with blatant distortion of facts. The seven films, produced between 1942 and 1945, are Prelude To War, The Nazis Strike, Divide And Conquer, The Battle Of Britain, The Battle Of Russia, The Battle Of China, and War Comes To America.

Overall, the film series is well worth watching, not only for the obvious reasons, but for the subtle things it reveals, such as the use of the plural for terms like X millions when referring to dollars, rather than the modern singular, or the most overused graphic in the whole series- a Japanese sword piercing the center of Manchuria. Yet, it also shows the complexities of trying to apply past standards to current wars. The lesson of World War One (avoid foreign entanglements) was not applicable to World War Two, whose own lesson (act early against dictatorships) has not been applicable in the three major wars America has fought since: Korea, Vietnam, nor Iraq. The fact that much of this series teeters on the uncertainties of the times it was made in only underscores its historic value in today's information-clogged times. It may not help you sort out the truth from the lies and propaganda of today, but at least you'll realize you are not the first to be in such a tenuous position, nor will you be the last. --------------------------------------------- Result 115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] after seeing other comments on IMDb, [[even]] [[convincing]] my wife that it was a "[[unique]] horror [[movie]]." I [[wanted]] to [[like]] this movie, but was unable to.

The "[[love]] story" was good, but the [[horror]] aspect was [[quite]] [[bad]]. If the story was just about a [[young]] man who fell in love with a girl suffering from parasomnia, then it would have been a better movie.

The [[care]] [[centre]] stretched credulity well past the [[limits]], in fact it was [[quite]] ridiculous. The doctor happily ignors [[privacy]] [[laws]] and professionalism. A nurse goes into a [[room]] for a [[routine]] [[feeding]] of a dangerous patient (without security [[escort]]), and [[drops]] the tray and [[runs]] out of the [[room]] screaming for no [[apparent]] reason. The forensic [[patient]] (and the film's villain) is tied up in a standing position fully clothed - apparently for [[years]]? None of it makes much [[sense]].

The movie even had some actors that I've liked in other things, such as the detectives, but still I can't recommend this movie. I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] after seeing other comments on IMDb, [[yet]] [[convince]] my wife that it was a "[[particular]] horror [[movies]]." I [[wished]] to [[adores]] this movie, but was unable to.

The "[[likes]] story" was good, but the [[monstrosity]] aspect was [[rather]] [[negative]]. If the story was just about a [[youthful]] man who fell in love with a girl suffering from parasomnia, then it would have been a better movie.

The [[caring]] [[center]] stretched credulity well past the [[restrictions]], in fact it was [[rather]] ridiculous. The doctor happily ignors [[intimacy]] [[law]] and professionalism. A nurse goes into a [[salas]] for a [[usual]] [[eating]] of a dangerous patient (without security [[accompany]]), and [[descartes]] the tray and [[manages]] out of the [[salle]] screaming for no [[obvious]] reason. The forensic [[ailing]] (and the film's villain) is tied up in a standing position fully clothed - apparently for [[ages]]? None of it makes much [[sensing]].

The movie even had some actors that I've liked in other things, such as the detectives, but still I can't recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[film]] released at the [[start]] of 2000 alongwith [[MELA]] both [[disasters]] [[So]] sad to [[start]] a millennium with such [[nonsense]]

The [[film]] [[seems]] to suit 70's but looks like an [[unintentional]] comedy for 2000

Anywayz some classic gems from the film: Paresh Rawal I don't understand to laugh at his role or cry [[Reason]]: He goes searching his [[mother]] in the village [[worst]] [[part]] is when he realises a secret of Anil he keeps the secret in his stomach which becomes big and makes him look [[pregnant]] I remember in my childhood my teacher told me the same joke Urrf!!!! as a child i [[laughed]] at it that time but here?

The whole [[film]] is a joke can't explain We have Anil in a dual role(One older and younger) and Rekha playing the older's wife and Raveena the youngers We also have reject Harish while Shakti playing the son of Aruna Irani who both fight on who has the worst wig

[[Direction]] is [[outdated]] [[Music]] is bad

Anil tries hard looks too old in the younger role and too young in the older role yet good effort Rekha is adequate, Raveena too is okay Harish is bad Shakti Kapoor is terrible Aruna Irani is as usual Rajnikant is okay in a cameo The [[filmmaking]] released at the [[commenced]] of 2000 alongwith [[MELO]] both [[catastrophe]] [[Thus]] sad to [[outset]] a millennium with such [[senseless]]

The [[flick]] [[appears]] to suit 70's but looks like an [[involuntary]] comedy for 2000

Anywayz some classic gems from the film: Paresh Rawal I don't understand to laugh at his role or cry [[Motif]]: He goes searching his [[mommy]] in the village [[hardest]] [[party]] is when he realises a secret of Anil he keeps the secret in his stomach which becomes big and makes him look [[expectant]] I remember in my childhood my teacher told me the same joke Urrf!!!! as a child i [[smiled]] at it that time but here?

The whole [[filmmaking]] is a joke can't explain We have Anil in a dual role(One older and younger) and Rekha playing the older's wife and Raveena the youngers We also have reject Harish while Shakti playing the son of Aruna Irani who both fight on who has the worst wig

[[Orientation]] is [[outmoded]] [[Musicians]] is bad

Anil tries hard looks too old in the younger role and too young in the older role yet good effort Rekha is adequate, Raveena too is okay Harish is bad Shakti Kapoor is terrible Aruna Irani is as usual Rajnikant is okay in a cameo --------------------------------------------- Result 117 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] We [[always]] watch American [[movies]] with their [[particular]] accents from each region (south, [[west]], etc). We have the same here. [[All]] foreign people [[must]] to watch this [[movie]] and need to have a open [[mind]] to [[accept]] another culture, besides American and European almost [[dominate]] the cinematographic industry.

This movie [[tell]] us about a parallel [[world]] which it isn't figured even for those who live in a big city like São [[Paulo]]. [[All]] actors are improvising and they are very [[realistic]]. The camera give us an idea of their confuse world, the loneliness of each [[character]] and [[invite]] us to share their world.

It's a real [[great]] [[movie]] and worst a [[rent]] even have it at home. We [[invariably]] watch American [[theater]] with their [[specific]] accents from each region (south, [[western]], etc). We have the same here. [[Entire]] foreign people [[owe]] to watch this [[cinematography]] and need to have a open [[intellect]] to [[admit]] another culture, besides American and European almost [[dominated]] the cinematographic industry.

This movie [[say]] us about a parallel [[globe]] which it isn't figured even for those who live in a big city like São [[Paul]]. [[Entire]] actors are improvising and they are very [[practical]]. The camera give us an idea of their confuse world, the loneliness of each [[nature]] and [[calls]] us to share their world.

It's a real [[wondrous]] [[kino]] and worst a [[rentals]] even have it at home. --------------------------------------------- Result 118 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[problem]] with THE CONTRACTER is [[summed]] up by the [[opening]] scene . The CIA want an [[international]] [[terrorist]] dead so [[contact]] black ops assassin [[James]] Dial . The terrorist is [[appearing]] at the [[Old]] Bailey court in London which begs the question why do they [[want]] to bump off a terrorist if he's [[going]] to [[spend]] the [[rest]] of his [[life]] in jail ? He's [[going]] to be out of circulation [[either]] [[way]] . Didn't the CIA have a chance before he was arrested ? [[If]] by some chance he gets a not guilty verdict then kill him . There's no logical reason to [[kill]] someone who is going to spend life in a maximum [[security]] [[prison]]

Since the [[premise]] sets up the [[story]] an audience might be choose to ignore the plot hole but the assination itself pours [[fuel]] upon the fire . Dial's colleague is killed by a police bullet and the taxi they're driving in crashes but Dial manages to escape . So the police were close enough to shoot someone but too far away to [[apprehend]] someone from a car crash ? The [[film]] of this [[type]] of plot [[connivance]] . Later Dial [[finds]] a [[police]] inspector pointing a gun at him saying " this airport is surrounded by armed [[coppers]] " yet Dial manages to escape very easily without explanation . The whole film [[cheats]] its audience by relying on [[things]] that are never explained . This includes an important [[supporting]] character called Emily Day . Why does she help Dial even though he's a wanted fugitive ? Your [[guess]] is as good as mine

This is a fairly [[poor]] [[thriller]] and don't be taken in by the " big name " [[cast]] . Wesley Snipes used to [[qualify]] as a film [[star]] but killed his [[career]] by starring in more and more inconsequental films . [[Charles]] [[Dance]] also [[appeared]] in big budget Hollywood productions such as LAST ACTION HERO and ALIEN 3 but again he's [[someone]] best known for appearing in straight to DVD fare these days , and he's basically playing a cameo role anyway . The likes of Lena Headey may go on to [[become]] [[big]] [[players]] in cinema but they'l [[certainly]] fail to put THE CONTRACTER on their [[resume]] The [[troubles]] with THE CONTRACTER is [[summarize]] up by the [[initiation]] scene . The CIA want an [[internationale]] [[terrorism]] dead so [[liaison]] black ops assassin [[Jacques]] Dial . The terrorist is [[appears]] at the [[Archaic]] Bailey court in London which begs the question why do they [[wish]] to bump off a terrorist if he's [[go]] to [[spending]] the [[resting]] of his [[vida]] in jail ? He's [[go]] to be out of circulation [[neither]] [[path]] . Didn't the CIA have a chance before he was arrested ? [[Though]] by some chance he gets a not guilty verdict then kill him . There's no logical reason to [[mata]] someone who is going to spend life in a maximum [[assurance]] [[imprisonment]]

Since the [[hypothesis]] sets up the [[tales]] an audience might be choose to ignore the plot hole but the assination itself pours [[fuels]] upon the fire . Dial's colleague is killed by a police bullet and the taxi they're driving in crashes but Dial manages to escape . So the police were close enough to shoot someone but too far away to [[arresting]] someone from a car crash ? The [[filmmaking]] of this [[genre]] of plot [[assent]] . Later Dial [[discoveries]] a [[policemen]] inspector pointing a gun at him saying " this airport is surrounded by armed [[sheriffs]] " yet Dial manages to escape very easily without explanation . The whole film [[crooks]] its audience by relying on [[items]] that are never explained . This includes an important [[aiding]] character called Emily Day . Why does she help Dial even though he's a wanted fugitive ? Your [[suppose]] is as good as mine

This is a fairly [[deficient]] [[thrillers]] and don't be taken in by the " big name " [[casting]] . Wesley Snipes used to [[qualifying]] as a film [[superstar]] but killed his [[quarry]] by starring in more and more inconsequental films . [[Karel]] [[Ballet]] also [[arose]] in big budget Hollywood productions such as LAST ACTION HERO and ALIEN 3 but again he's [[person]] best known for appearing in straight to DVD fare these days , and he's basically playing a cameo role anyway . The likes of Lena Headey may go on to [[becomes]] [[grandes]] [[gamblers]] in cinema but they'l [[unquestionably]] fail to put THE CONTRACTER on their [[reboot]] --------------------------------------------- Result 119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Almost]] from the word go this film is poor and [[lacking]] [[conviction]] but then again most people would struggle to show [[commitment]] to a [[script]] as [[uninspiring]] as this. The dialogue really does not [[flow]] and [[sometimes]] as in this [[case]] more is less (or should have been). This is also backed-up by odd scenes (e.g. the Cemetry slow-motion walk) that you think might lead somewhere but only seem to waste a few more seconds of your life.

The plot is a strange combination of gangster / situation [[comedy]] which I am sure seemed a good idea at the time but if ever there was a case for someone needing to be honest with the scriptwriter then here was it.

Martin Freeman is okay but then he seems to have one character which always plays so I am beginning to wonder if he was given a script or just filmed and told to react as normal.

Finally - humour. This reminds me of the 'Python (I think) quote about Shakespere, of his 'comedies' - If he had meant it to be humorous he would have put a joke in it. Well I didn't see one.

Don't waste your time - I did because I was watching it with a friend and kept [[hoping]] that it was going to get better.

It didn't. [[Hardly]] from the word go this film is poor and [[lacked]] [[condemnation]] but then again most people would struggle to show [[promises]] to a [[hyphen]] as [[dull]] as this. The dialogue really does not [[flux]] and [[sometime]] as in this [[example]] more is less (or should have been). This is also backed-up by odd scenes (e.g. the Cemetry slow-motion walk) that you think might lead somewhere but only seem to waste a few more seconds of your life.

The plot is a strange combination of gangster / situation [[farce]] which I am sure seemed a good idea at the time but if ever there was a case for someone needing to be honest with the scriptwriter then here was it.

Martin Freeman is okay but then he seems to have one character which always plays so I am beginning to wonder if he was given a script or just filmed and told to react as normal.

Finally - humour. This reminds me of the 'Python (I think) quote about Shakespere, of his 'comedies' - If he had meant it to be humorous he would have put a joke in it. Well I didn't see one.

Don't waste your time - I did because I was watching it with a friend and kept [[expecting]] that it was going to get better.

It didn't. --------------------------------------------- Result 120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Literally [[every]] [[aspect]] of this science-fiction low-budget flick falls under the categories that have been classified for its predecessors, contemporaries, and those to follow. [[Bad]] [[special]] [[effects]], a [[weak]] storyline, [[ridiculous]] [[amounts]] of blood and [[gore]], [[annoying]] and [[pointless]] [[characters]], all that you can [[expect]]. "[[Attack]] of the Sabretooth" is about a [[new]] vacation resort where the [[proprietors]] are genetically engineering Smilodon cats for an [[attraction]]. The cats escape and [[begin]] to [[kill]] people, the [[guy]] [[running]] the [[show]] [[wants]] to [[save]] them and not [[warn]] the unsuspecting [[visitors]] about them, and there is a [[band]] of [[visitors]] and some [[employees]] who [[rebel]] and plan to [[kill]] the cats.

Special effects-wise, the [[film]] is about an [[average]] [[achievement]] given its budget. The sabretooths are portrayed through poor CGI. [[Amazingly]], though, the cats [[look]] more realistic in an up-close, [[detailed]] [[shot]] [[rather]] than the [[longer]], more distant [[shots]] where the CGI is better [[concealed]]. Their attacks are recklessly bloody and distasteful. Just as you'd [[expect]], they [[attack]], rip off some arms and legs, and [[leave]] very little behind. This is part of the reason why the [[film]] descends into poor schlock.

The [[plot]] and [[characters]] are just as [[horrendous]]. We have some college [[kids]] who come to the [[island]] and they [[plan]] a scavenger [[hunt]]. And take it very, [[VERY]] seriously. Even so much as to trespass on private property, tamper with [[security]] [[systems]], and [[steal]]. Why are they [[taking]] a [[simple]] [[game]] so seriously? Did I [[miss]] something? [[Was]] there [[money]] involved? Or were they [[sent]] to do it? I don't know, I [[could]] [[barely]] follow the [[film]]. But it [[seemed]] to me [[like]] they were just doing it for the [[fun]] of doing it. Even so, they went too far for normal.

"[[Attack]] of the Sabretooth" is a very [[poor]] [[film]]. Even for a low-budget sci-fi flick, it is a very poor and [[cheap]] [[example]]. It will [[bore]] most [[viewers]] to tears, might be attractive for some, and will make you chuckle and laugh all the [[way]] through. And [[keep]] in [[mind]], this is not a [[comedy]], this is a [[cheap]] [[horror]] flick, so it's not [[suppose]] to be comical. Literally [[each]] [[element]] of this science-fiction low-budget flick falls under the categories that have been classified for its predecessors, contemporaries, and those to follow. [[Rotten]] [[peculiar]] [[consequences]], a [[feeble]] storyline, [[farcical]] [[sums]] of blood and [[gora]], [[exasperating]] and [[vain]] [[trait]], all that you can [[expects]]. "[[Attacking]] of the Sabretooth" is about a [[nouveau]] vacation resort where the [[homeowner]] are genetically engineering Smilodon cats for an [[seduction]]. The cats escape and [[embark]] to [[mata]] people, the [[man]] [[implementing]] the [[illustrating]] [[wanting]] to [[savings]] them and not [[alerted]] the unsuspecting [[travelers]] about them, and there is a [[bands]] of [[travelers]] and some [[employee]] who [[uprising]] and plan to [[mata]] the cats.

Special effects-wise, the [[flick]] is about an [[averages]] [[successes]] given its budget. The sabretooths are portrayed through poor CGI. [[Beautifully]], though, the cats [[peek]] more realistic in an up-close, [[careful]] [[offed]] [[somewhat]] than the [[long]], more distant [[punches]] where the CGI is better [[hidden]]. Their attacks are recklessly bloody and distasteful. Just as you'd [[expecting]], they [[attacks]], rip off some arms and legs, and [[let]] very little behind. This is part of the reason why the [[filmmaking]] descends into poor schlock.

The [[intrigue]] and [[features]] are just as [[frightful]]. We have some college [[youths]] who come to the [[isle]] and they [[planning]] a scavenger [[manhunt]]. And take it very, [[MUCH]] seriously. Even so much as to trespass on private property, tamper with [[assurance]] [[regimes]], and [[stole]]. Why are they [[adopting]] a [[easy]] [[gaming]] so seriously? Did I [[mademoiselle]] something? [[Became]] there [[cash]] involved? Or were they [[transmitted]] to do it? I don't know, I [[would]] [[hardly]] follow the [[filmmaking]]. But it [[looked]] to me [[iike]] they were just doing it for the [[droll]] of doing it. Even so, they went too far for normal.

"[[Attacks]] of the Sabretooth" is a very [[poorest]] [[flick]]. Even for a low-budget sci-fi flick, it is a very poor and [[inexpensive]] [[cases]]. It will [[bored]] most [[onlookers]] to tears, might be attractive for some, and will make you chuckle and laugh all the [[manner]] through. And [[retain]] in [[intellect]], this is not a [[travesty]], this is a [[inexpensive]] [[monstrosity]] flick, so it's not [[imagining]] to be comical. --------------------------------------------- Result 121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I am quite the [[Mitchell]] Leisen fan so it was a great anticipation that I [[rented]] this movie but the [[print]] I [[got]] was [[extremely]] [[bad]], so worn down from [[use]] and [[scorched]] [[seemingly]] beyond repair, the [[movie]] was so dark. So [[dark]] that in certain scenes that are cinematographed in the dark, you can't see a [[single]] thing. That [[said]], I believe I share the same [[opinion]] as the [[first]] review of this movie. It starts out unusually and does not tote the lines and [[rhythms]] of your typical Hollywood 30's movie. Heck, not even your [[typical]] Hollywod movie of any era. It seems the director has been influenced by the Europeans because there is a certain caustic realism to the proceedings from the opening shot which is so [[crafted]] in camera movement and placement as Maggie (Carole Lombard) and Skid (Fred Macmurray) meet. You half expect them to start singing "Make believe" from [[Show]] boat.It starts with a few laughs and poor Anthony in a one scene role where he speaks not a word of English gets slapped around by Freddie. Skids is a bum who doesn't care that he's a bum. That's why he signs up in the army where he can hide from the world. He's just been released though and in a set of screenplay shenanigans, she misses her boat for New York. This is when the movie kicks into high gear and we begin to get those French movie of the sixties vibes to the whole proceedings. The scenes are so well acted by Lombard and Cecil Cunningham, the movie gains a pulse. MacMurray is good too as he and Lombard fall for each other as she nurtures his talent for the trumpet. Then the temptress arrives in the form of Dorothy Lamour. Enough with plot. The movie has fantastic montage sequences that dazzled me. They are very good. And Lombard scores a home run in this movie but in the second half, a bit more is called of Freddie and he fails to deliver the goods. With a heavily melodramatic ending and an actor you don't believe, the movie falls [[short]] but since it is not your typical movie in structure, set design, and direction. It is worth a look. For what is what it was one of the 37 hits of the 1936-37 season. I don't know its exact rank though. I am quite the [[Michelle]] Leisen fan so it was a great anticipation that I [[leasing]] this movie but the [[fingerprints]] I [[get]] was [[unimaginably]] [[amiss]], so worn down from [[employs]] and [[burned]] [[supposedly]] beyond repair, the [[movies]] was so dark. So [[gloomy]] that in certain scenes that are cinematographed in the dark, you can't see a [[exclusive]] thing. That [[told]], I believe I share the same [[avis]] as the [[fiirst]] review of this movie. It starts out unusually and does not tote the lines and [[paces]] of your typical Hollywood 30's movie. Heck, not even your [[symptomatic]] Hollywod movie of any era. It seems the director has been influenced by the Europeans because there is a certain caustic realism to the proceedings from the opening shot which is so [[conceived]] in camera movement and placement as Maggie (Carole Lombard) and Skid (Fred Macmurray) meet. You half expect them to start singing "Make believe" from [[Showings]] boat.It starts with a few laughs and poor Anthony in a one scene role where he speaks not a word of English gets slapped around by Freddie. Skids is a bum who doesn't care that he's a bum. That's why he signs up in the army where he can hide from the world. He's just been released though and in a set of screenplay shenanigans, she misses her boat for New York. This is when the movie kicks into high gear and we begin to get those French movie of the sixties vibes to the whole proceedings. The scenes are so well acted by Lombard and Cecil Cunningham, the movie gains a pulse. MacMurray is good too as he and Lombard fall for each other as she nurtures his talent for the trumpet. Then the temptress arrives in the form of Dorothy Lamour. Enough with plot. The movie has fantastic montage sequences that dazzled me. They are very good. And Lombard scores a home run in this movie but in the second half, a bit more is called of Freddie and he fails to deliver the goods. With a heavily melodramatic ending and an actor you don't believe, the movie falls [[succinct]] but since it is not your typical movie in structure, set design, and direction. It is worth a look. For what is what it was one of the 37 hits of the 1936-37 season. I don't know its exact rank though. --------------------------------------------- Result 122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A new way to enjoy Goldsworthy's work, Rivers and Tides allows fans to see his work in motion. Watching Goldsworthy build his pieces, one develops an appreciation for every stone, leaf, and thorn that he uses. Goldsworthy describes how the flow of life, the rivers, and the tides inspires and affects his work. Although, I was happy the film covered the majority of Goldsworthy's pieces (no snowballs), I do feel it was a bit long. The film makers did a wonderful job of bringing Goldsworthy's work to life, and created a beautiful film that was a joy to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] How can a [[movie]] have Ozzy Osbourne and [[still]] suck? I just don't [[get]] it. Trick or Treat [[managed]] to do it. This sucks and [[likes]] it.

[[Trick]] or [[Treat]] is one of those [[movies]] I have to [[warn]] people about. It is a vomit-inducing [[vile]] [[atrocity]] just [[begging]] to be [[viewed]] so you can feel that much [[worse]] about yourself. Trick or Treat has no redeeming factors.

[[For]] a [[movie]] about [[heavy]] [[metal]], it sure doesn't [[seem]] to grasp what [[heavy]] [[metal]] is or what it represents. This [[movie]] [[manages]] to make heavy [[metal]] [[look]] lame and this was in 1986, [[probably]] one of [[heavy]] metal's [[strongest]] hours. That is [[quite]] a feat, [[however]] negative.

Trick or [[Treat]] = so bad you will be [[angry]] at yourself for having [[watched]] it. That simple equation will hopefully [[keep]] you away from this [[brainless]] and [[gutless]] [[film]]. How can a [[filmmaking]] have Ozzy Osbourne and [[however]] suck? I just don't [[obtain]] it. Trick or Treat [[administered]] to do it. This sucks and [[iike]] it.

[[Stratagem]] or [[Deal]] is one of those [[cinema]] I have to [[ultimatum]] people about. It is a vomit-inducing [[repellent]] [[ruthlessness]] just [[beg]] to be [[perceived]] so you can feel that much [[worst]] about yourself. Trick or Treat has no redeeming factors.

[[During]] a [[filmmaking]] about [[onerous]] [[mittal]], it sure doesn't [[seems]] to grasp what [[hefty]] [[metallurgy]] is or what it represents. This [[filmmaking]] [[administered]] to make heavy [[metals]] [[glance]] lame and this was in 1986, [[unquestionably]] one of [[ponderous]] metal's [[grandest]] hours. That is [[very]] a feat, [[instead]] negative.

Trick or [[Dealing]] = so bad you will be [[irate]] at yourself for having [[seen]] it. That simple equation will hopefully [[conserving]] you away from this [[doofus]] and [[coward]] [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I'm gettin' sick of movies that sound [[entertaining]] in a one-line [[synopsis]] then [[end]] up being [[equal]] to what you'd find in the bottom [[center]] of a compost [[heap]].

Who knows: "Witchery" may have sounded interesting in a pitch to the studios, even with a "big name cast" (like Blair and Hasselhoff - wink-wink, nudge-nudge) and the effervescent likes of Hildegard Knef (I dunno, some [[woman]]...).

But on film, it just [[falls]] apart [[faster]] than a papier-mache [[sculpture]] in a rainstorm. Seems these unfortunate folks are trapped in an island mansion off the Eastern seaboard, and one of them (a [[woman]], I'd [[guess]]) is being targeted by a satanic [[cult]] to bear the child of hell while the others are offed in grotesque, tortuous [[ways]].

[[Okay]], right there you have a cross-section of plots from "The Exorcist", "The Omen", "Ten [[Little]] [[Indians]]" and a few other [[lesser]] movies in the satanic-worshippers-run-amok line. [[None]] of it is very entertaining and for the most [[part]], you'll cringe your [[way]] from scene to scene until it's over.

[[No]], not even Linda Blair and David Hasselhoff [[help]] [[matters]] much. They're just in it to [[pick]] up a paycheck and don't seem very intent on giving it their "all".

From the looks of it, Hasselhoff [[probably]] [[wishes]] he were back on the beack with Pam [[Anderson]] (and who can blame him?) and Linda... well, who knows; a [[celebrity]] PETA benefit or pro-am golf tour or whatever it is she's in to nowadays.

And the torture scenes! Ecchhhh. You'll see people [[get]] their mouths sewn [[shut]], dangled up inside roaring fireplaces, strung up in [[trees]] during a [[violent]] [[storm]], [[vessels]] bursting out of their [[necks]], etc, etc. Sheesh, and I [[thought]] "[[Mark]] of the [[Devil]]" was the most [[sadistic]] [[movie]] I'd [[seen]]....

Don't bother. It's not worth your time. I can't believe I told you as much as I did. If you do watch it, just see if you can count the cliches. And yes, Blair gets possessed, as if you didn't see THAT coming down Main Street followed by a marching band.

No stars. "Witchery" - these witches will give you [[itches]]. I'm gettin' sick of movies that sound [[amusing]] in a one-line [[outline]] then [[ceases]] up being [[wager]] to what you'd find in the bottom [[centering]] of a compost [[stack]].

Who knows: "Witchery" may have sounded interesting in a pitch to the studios, even with a "big name cast" (like Blair and Hasselhoff - wink-wink, nudge-nudge) and the effervescent likes of Hildegard Knef (I dunno, some [[dame]]...).

But on film, it just [[autumn]] apart [[quickly]] than a papier-mache [[engraving]] in a rainstorm. Seems these unfortunate folks are trapped in an island mansion off the Eastern seaboard, and one of them (a [[femme]], I'd [[reckon]]) is being targeted by a satanic [[heretic]] to bear the child of hell while the others are offed in grotesque, tortuous [[methods]].

[[Ok]], right there you have a cross-section of plots from "The Exorcist", "The Omen", "Ten [[Petit]] [[Indian]]" and a few other [[fewer]] movies in the satanic-worshippers-run-amok line. [[Nothingness]] of it is very entertaining and for the most [[portion]], you'll cringe your [[paths]] from scene to scene until it's over.

[[None]], not even Linda Blair and David Hasselhoff [[assist]] [[questions]] much. They're just in it to [[picked]] up a paycheck and don't seem very intent on giving it their "all".

From the looks of it, Hasselhoff [[perhaps]] [[desires]] he were back on the beack with Pam [[Andersson]] (and who can blame him?) and Linda... well, who knows; a [[celebrities]] PETA benefit or pro-am golf tour or whatever it is she's in to nowadays.

And the torture scenes! Ecchhhh. You'll see people [[obtains]] their mouths sewn [[closure]], dangled up inside roaring fireplaces, strung up in [[tree]] during a [[ferocious]] [[blizzard]], [[boats]] bursting out of their [[throats]], etc, etc. Sheesh, and I [[ideology]] "[[Flagged]] of the [[Fiend]]" was the most [[vicious]] [[filmmaking]] I'd [[noticed]]....

Don't bother. It's not worth your time. I can't believe I told you as much as I did. If you do watch it, just see if you can count the cliches. And yes, Blair gets possessed, as if you didn't see THAT coming down Main Street followed by a marching band.

No stars. "Witchery" - these witches will give you [[steals]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 125 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I am not one of those people that will walk out of a movie that was [[based]] on source [[material]] and automatically say, "The book was better." I [[know]] better than to demote the value of a movie just because it wasn't a [[faithful]] adaptation. There is a [[lengthy]] [[process]] and lots of decisions that go into making a [[movie]] that are sometimes out of the director's/editor's/cinematographer's/producer's control and certainly out of the original author's control. Therefore, it is [[unreasonable]] to expect a movie to be exactly the same, word for word, as a book or play or video [[game]] or Disneyland Ride, or [[whatever]]! A [[movie]] should be judged on its own [[standard]] and how it fits in society. [[Moreover]], a successful [[movie]] should be made because the [[material]] is relevant to the [[society]] which it [[belongs]] and, if it is [[based]] on source material, its relevance [[needs]] to be reexamined and enhanced by the filmmakers.

[[Films]] like There Will Be Blood follow this paradigm because while it was based on a novel [[written]] at the turn of the century, [[Oil]]!, it feels relevant because of things like the Iraq war and energy concerns that the film's country of origin, the US, was and is experiencing. Even King [[Kong]], based on the original film, benefits from [[using]] new [[technology]] and [[concerns]] of [[animal]] [[rights]] that people have.

With that [[said]], I just don't understand why they even [[bothered]] to make this movie? [[Besides]] the great performances, guaranteed Oscar nods and Shanley's director/writers fee and [[royalties]] he will get, this movie [[seems]] to come from [[nowhere]]. It should have simply stayed as a play. The movie (which is essentially the same as the play) says nothing new about the reprehensible sexual atrocities committed and in many cases covered up by the Catholic church here and abroad. It says nothing new or [[different]] than the original play. I can't help but [[compare]] this movie to another movie that came out at around the same time: Frost/Nixon, which was also based on a play. Frost/Nixon, while about Nixon's regrets, [[seems]] relevant because it [[seems]] to have [[come]] at a time when President Bush was about to [[leave]] office. The regrets that Nixon had, as depicted in the play/movie, about the [[war]] and his [[presidency]] [[could]] just as easily [[reflected]] on [[Bush]] and his [[presidency]]. In that respect Frost/Nixon [[seemed]] more relevant and actually benefited from a wider distribution via film because it got people talking and reflecting about the political status quo in the country at the time. In contrast, Doubt felt like it was yesterday's news and didn't seem to offer anything that the play didn't offer.

Of course the movie is "good," the performances are outstanding, and the screenplay adaptation is apt, but so what? Why didn't it just stay as a play? Why, besides marketing and financial reasons, make it into a movie? It gave audiences nothing new to discus about the awful subject. I am not one of those people that will walk out of a movie that was [[base]] on source [[materials]] and automatically say, "The book was better." I [[savoir]] better than to demote the value of a movie just because it wasn't a [[fiel]] adaptation. There is a [[extended]] [[processes]] and lots of decisions that go into making a [[filmmaking]] that are sometimes out of the director's/editor's/cinematographer's/producer's control and certainly out of the original author's control. Therefore, it is [[senseless]] to expect a movie to be exactly the same, word for word, as a book or play or video [[jeu]] or Disneyland Ride, or [[regardless]]! A [[filmmaking]] should be judged on its own [[norms]] and how it fits in society. [[Additionally]], a successful [[flick]] should be made because the [[materials]] is relevant to the [[societal]] which it [[belonging]] and, if it is [[base]] on source material, its relevance [[gotta]] to be reexamined and enhanced by the filmmakers.

[[Filmmaking]] like There Will Be Blood follow this paradigm because while it was based on a novel [[typed]] at the turn of the century, [[Petrol]]!, it feels relevant because of things like the Iraq war and energy concerns that the film's country of origin, the US, was and is experiencing. Even King [[Hong]], based on the original film, benefits from [[use]] new [[technique]] and [[worries]] of [[animals]] [[right]] that people have.

With that [[told]], I just don't understand why they even [[disturbed]] to make this movie? [[Furthermore]] the great performances, guaranteed Oscar nods and Shanley's director/writers fee and [[royalty]] he will get, this movie [[seem]] to come from [[everywhere]]. It should have simply stayed as a play. The movie (which is essentially the same as the play) says nothing new about the reprehensible sexual atrocities committed and in many cases covered up by the Catholic church here and abroad. It says nothing new or [[distinct]] than the original play. I can't help but [[comparative]] this movie to another movie that came out at around the same time: Frost/Nixon, which was also based on a play. Frost/Nixon, while about Nixon's regrets, [[looks]] relevant because it [[appears]] to have [[arrived]] at a time when President Bush was about to [[letting]] office. The regrets that Nixon had, as depicted in the play/movie, about the [[warfare]] and his [[presidential]] [[wo]] just as easily [[mirrored]] on [[Busch]] and his [[chair]]. In that respect Frost/Nixon [[appeared]] more relevant and actually benefited from a wider distribution via film because it got people talking and reflecting about the political status quo in the country at the time. In contrast, Doubt felt like it was yesterday's news and didn't seem to offer anything that the play didn't offer.

Of course the movie is "good," the performances are outstanding, and the screenplay adaptation is apt, but so what? Why didn't it just stay as a play? Why, besides marketing and financial reasons, make it into a movie? It gave audiences nothing new to discus about the awful subject. --------------------------------------------- Result 126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Lock Up Your Daughters is one of the [[best]] high-spirited comedies I have ever seen.

It is misunderstood since it lacks the "social [[commentary]]" values that [[many]] [[films]] of the day (1969) required to be successful.

The characters are over-the-top satires of [[everyday]] people and [[played]] to that [[purpose]] by all of the [[actors]].

Christopher Plummer [[shines]] [[especially]] bright as [[Lord]] Foppington, a noble with [[hair]] too [[big]] to [[fit]] in the door.

The plot [[involves]] the [[usual]] 18th century [[stuff]]; [[mistaken]] identities, [[thwarted]] romances, [[corrupt]] [[government]] [[officials]], and [[jokes]] at [[every]] turn.

It [[answers]] the questions: What [[happens]] when 4 rambunctious, [[eager]] to [[party]] [[sailors]] are on leave in a small British coastal [[town]]? And, who do they [[get]] [[involved]] with and how does it all [[turn]] out?

[[Despite]] doing poorly at the box office, it has [[great]] costumes, [[excellent]] [[music]]([[based]] on the Mermaid [[Theatre]] musical of the same [[name]]), [[great]],lively acting and sets that are obviously [[authentic]].

That it has never been [[released]] on either VHS or [[DVD]] is [[truly]] a [[shame]], since so [[many]] bad movies are released [[every]] day. Lock Up Your Daughters is one of the [[nicest]] high-spirited comedies I have ever seen.

It is misunderstood since it lacks the "social [[comments]]" values that [[numerous]] [[cinema]] of the day (1969) required to be successful.

The characters are over-the-top satires of [[routine]] people and [[done]] to that [[intending]] by all of the [[actresses]].

Christopher Plummer [[glitters]] [[mainly]] bright as [[Senor]] Foppington, a noble with [[headdress]] too [[substantial]] to [[fitting]] in the door.

The plot [[implies]] the [[ordinary]] 18th century [[thing]]; [[mistake]] identities, [[thwart]] romances, [[corrupted]] [[govt]] [[servants]], and [[pleasantries]] at [[each]] turn.

It [[reaction]] the questions: What [[arises]] when 4 rambunctious, [[keen]] to [[part]] [[mariners]] are on leave in a small British coastal [[municipality]]? And, who do they [[obtain]] [[implicated]] with and how does it all [[converting]] out?

[[Though]] doing poorly at the box office, it has [[large]] costumes, [[extraordinary]] [[musicians]]([[founded]] on the Mermaid [[Cinema]] musical of the same [[denomination]]), [[wondrous]],lively acting and sets that are obviously [[vera]].

That it has never been [[publicized]] on either VHS or [[DVDS]] is [[genuinely]] a [[embarrassment]], since so [[numerous]] bad movies are released [[all]] day. --------------------------------------------- Result 127 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First of all, let me say the I am LDS or rather, I am a Mormon. So when I watched this film, I automatically gave it the benefit of the doubt. I can usually find something redeeming in every movie I watch. And this one was no exception. It does have its redeeming moments. But they are few and far between.

One of the first things I noticed that bothered me very greatly was that it seemed as though Halestorm was ashamed of our Church! In the LDS Church, congregations are called "wards" and the basketball court is in the "cultural hall". NEVER ONCE are either of these two names mentioned. The Church is never referred to by name and "the standards" is as far as it goes in mentioning what our Church believes.

It makes me wonder if the directors are really LDS or LDS wannabes? This film had so much potential! It could have really shown our Church in a positive light and helped the public to see not only what we have to offer, but also what we believe. Instead it was only mildly entertaining and left much to be desired. If I were not already LDS, I'd be left thinking Mormons are stupid, idiotic and ashamed of their beliefs.

It is NOT a film I will recommend to my nonLDS friends.

Sorry Halestorm. You can do better than this! --------------------------------------------- Result 128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this movie, but can't get what is in this movie tht is not to like. People who don't like this movie must be Richard Roeper and Roger Ebert. But I can't believe that is Mr. Carrey behind all that makeup. And I am sure that most of the actors and actresses in the movie has made film before this. And there is a new face in the movie. Taylor Momsen who plays Cindy Lou Who. As the opens, the Grinch (Jim Carrey) comes out of hiding. And causes some mean fun to the whos in Whoville. Sicne we know that the whos love Christmas. While The Grinch does not like christmas. And even makes fun of little Cindy Lou Who (Taylor Momsen) who is the daughter of the town's postmaster (Bill Irwin). The movie was directed by Ron Howard. And the narrtor's voice is done by Anthony Hopkins. And Jeffrey Tambor (Muppets From Space) is cast as the mayor of whoville. Who doesn't like talking about the Grinch close to Christmas time. --------------------------------------------- Result 129 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] No [[mention]] if Ann [[Rivers]] Siddons adapted the material for "The House [[Next]] Door" from her 1970s novel of the same title, or [[someone]] [[else]] did it. This Lifetime-like [[movie]] was [[directed]] by Canadian [[director]] Jeff Woolnough. Having read the book a [[long]] time ago, we [[decided]] to [[take]] a [[chance]] when the film [[showed]] on a [[cable]] version of what was [[clearly]] a movie [[made]] for [[television]]. You know that when the critical [[moments]] [[precede]] the [[commercials]], which of course, one can't find in this version we watched.

The film's [[star]] is Lara Flynn Boyle who sports a [[new]] look that threw this viewer a [[curve]] because of the [[cosmetic]] [[transformation]] this actress has gone through. From the new eyebrows to other parts of her body, Ms. Boyle is [[hardly]] recognizable as Col Kennedy, the character at the center of the mystery. This was not one of the actress better moments in front of the camera. That goes for the rest of the mainly Canadian actors that deserved better.

The film has a feeling of a cross between "Desperate Houswives" with "The Stepford Wives" and other better [[known]] features, combined with a mild dose of creepiness. The best thing about the movie was the house which serves as the setting. No [[cite]] if Ann [[Waterways]] Siddons adapted the material for "The House [[Impending]] Door" from her 1970s novel of the same title, or [[everybody]] [[elsewhere]] did it. This Lifetime-like [[filmmaking]] was [[geared]] by Canadian [[superintendent]] Jeff Woolnough. Having read the book a [[prolonged]] time ago, we [[deciding]] to [[taking]] a [[opportunity]] when the film [[shown]] on a [[wire]] version of what was [[definitely]] a movie [[accomplished]] for [[tv]]. You know that when the critical [[times]] [[preceded]] the [[spots]], which of course, one can't find in this version we watched.

The film's [[stars]] is Lara Flynn Boyle who sports a [[nuevo]] look that threw this viewer a [[curvature]] because of the [[aesthetic]] [[transforming]] this actress has gone through. From the new eyebrows to other parts of her body, Ms. Boyle is [[almost]] recognizable as Col Kennedy, the character at the center of the mystery. This was not one of the actress better moments in front of the camera. That goes for the rest of the mainly Canadian actors that deserved better.

The film has a feeling of a cross between "Desperate Houswives" with "The Stepford Wives" and other better [[renowned]] features, combined with a mild dose of creepiness. The best thing about the movie was the house which serves as the setting. --------------------------------------------- Result 130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] So that´s what I [[called]] a [[bad]], [[bad]] [[film]]... Poor acting, poor directing, [[terrible]] writing!!!! I just can´t [[stop]] laughing at some scenes, because the [[story]] is [[meaningless]]!!! Don´t waste your [[time]] [[watching]] this [[film]]... [[Well]], I must [[recognize]] it has one or two good [[ideas]] but it´s sooooo [[badly]] writen... So that´s what I [[phoned]] a [[unfavorable]], [[negative]] [[flick]]... Poor acting, poor directing, [[scary]] writing!!!! I just can´t [[stopping]] laughing at some scenes, because the [[tales]] is [[senseless]]!!! Don´t waste your [[period]] [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]]... [[Good]], I must [[acknowledgement]] it has one or two good [[think]] but it´s sooooo [[sorely]] writen... --------------------------------------------- Result 131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] H.G. Wells in 1936 was past his prime and the books of his that will survive were long gone by. He was coming to the end of his life and he was confronted to his dream gone sour. At the very beginning of the 20th century he defended the idea that the world was doomed because the evolution of species, natural biology, on one side, and Marxism, market economy on the other side, were necessarily leading to the victory of the weaker over the stronger due to the simple criterion of number. The weaker were the mass of humanity and the stronger were the minority elite. He defended then a strict eugenic policy with the elimination of all those who were in a way or another weakening the human race. First of all the non-Caucasian, with the only exception of the Jews who would disappear thanks to mixed marriages. Then, within the Caucasian community all those who were not healthy, the alcoholics, the mentally disabled, all those who were genetically disabled, etc. That was not Hitler. That was H.G. Wells and that was not after the first world war. That was more than ten years before. And twenty years before the first world war he had published The Time Machine that defended the idea that the human "race", left to its own means and due to the vaster cosmological evolution of life on earth, would see the differentiation of the human "race" into two "species": the working class would become a subterranean laborious species and the bourgeoisie would become an idle surface species. The point was in the novel that the surface sophisticated and weak idle species was the prey of the other species who were the predators. Wells was convinced humanity was in danger and politicians were supposed to stop this evolution by imposing a strict eugenic policy. The first countries to follow this injunction were the Scandinavian countries who were also the last to drop it only very recently for some of them. The film here proposes a vision of 2036 with a world government that is absolutely dictatorial in the fact that there is no election, no parliament, no really democratic institution, only peace imposed by military conquest, and the government is dominated by one man or at the most one man and his few councilors. And in that future world all, absolutely all human beings are Caucasians. Wells was able to imagine humanity being completely white by 2036. Amazing. Wells envisaged some kind of a rebellion but that would be short lived and lead to nothing at all. The last sentences are the vision of this white civilization conquering the whole universe when contemplating the sky and its stars and planets. Frightening. And that was produced in 1936. All the more frightening since nowhere the slightest mention of Hitlerism, fascism, Japanese imperialism or Stalinism can be found. But it is essential to have that film in a good restored edition because it is crucial to have a full vision of H.G. Wells. We are obviously very far away from the Brave New World of absolute "democratic" social selection, or the Animal Farm of the dictatorship of the porcine proletariat, or the 1984 of the abstract mediatic dictatorship of Big Brother. This vision is at least just as much frightening as the three others. And I only want to compare Wells with the British science fiction writers of his days. It would be unfair to go beyond. This reveals that in England in these first three decades of the 20th century there was a tremendous fear among intellectuals: the fear that the future would only be somber, bleak and in the form of an impasse of some kind.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines --------------------------------------------- Result 132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] This may be the [[worst]] film [[adaptation]] of a Broadway musical ever. [[Even]] the [[music]] has been [[destroyed]]. Attenborough knows nothing about [[theater]] - [[almost]] every [[shot]] and moment ring false. I will say, [[though]], that it is [[almost]] bad enough to be [[funny]].

The hairstyles are [[remarkably]] [[dated]]. I can not for the life of me [[understand]] what is [[meant]] (conceptually) by opening the film with an [[exterior]] of the theater where "A Chorus Line" is playing. Are we to think that these people are auditioning for "A Chorus Line," which [[contains]] the [[stories]] about the people who are auditioning? Oh no, the show is collapsing on itself.

I [[saw]] the [[original]] [[production]], and have [[listened]] to the album hundreds of times. Why, [[oh]], why, did they do this? This may be the [[meanest]] film [[readjust]] of a Broadway musical ever. [[Yet]] the [[musician]] has been [[obliterated]]. Attenborough knows nothing about [[cinema]] - [[hardly]] every [[offed]] and moment ring false. I will say, [[if]], that it is [[practically]] bad enough to be [[fun]].

The hairstyles are [[marvellously]] [[dating]]. I can not for the life of me [[understanding]] what is [[intend]] (conceptually) by opening the film with an [[outer]] of the theater where "A Chorus Line" is playing. Are we to think that these people are auditioning for "A Chorus Line," which [[encompasses]] the [[history]] about the people who are auditioning? Oh no, the show is collapsing on itself.

I [[observed]] the [[upfront]] [[productivity]], and have [[heeded]] to the album hundreds of times. Why, [[ah]], why, did they do this? --------------------------------------------- Result 133 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Autobiography of founder of zoo in NYC starts out by being very cute and would be great family movie if it stayed there. however we get more and more involved with reality as gorilla grows up to be a wild thing not easily amenable to his "mother's" wishes - this might scare younger children, esp. scenes where Buddy tries to injure Gertrude. rather quick resolution at the end. below average. --------------------------------------------- Result 134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stargate SG-1 follows and expands upon the Egyptian mythologies presented in Stargate. In the Stargate universe, humans were enslaved and transported to habitable planets by the Goa'uld such as Ra and Apophis. For millennia, the Goa'uld harvested humanity, heavily influencing and spreading human cultures. As a result, Earth cultures such as those of the Aztecs, Mayans, Britons, the Norse, Mongols, Greeks, and Romans are found throughout the known habitable planets of the galaxy. Many well-known mythical locations such as Avalon, Camelot, and Atlantis are found, or have at one time existed.

Presently, the Earth stargate (found at a dig site near Giza in 1928) is housed in a top-secret U.S. military base known as the SGC (Stargate Command) underneath Cheyenne Mountain. Col. Jack O'Neill (Anderson), Dr. Daniel Jackson (Shanks), Capt. Samantha Carter (Tapping) and Teal'c (Judge) compose the original SG-1 team (a few characters join and/or leave the team in later seasons). Along with 24 other SG teams, they venture to distant planets exploring the galaxy and searching for defenses from the Goa'uld, in the forms of technology and alliances with friendly advanced races.

The parasitic Goa'uld use advanced technology to cast themselves as Egyptian Gods and are bent on galactic conquest and eternal worship. Throughout the first eight seasons, the Goa'uld are the primary antagonists. They are a race of highly intelligent, ruthless snake-like alien parasites capable of invading and controlling the bodies of other species, including humans. The original arch-enemy from this race was the System Lord Apophis (Peter Williams). Other System Lords, such as Baal and Anubis, play pivotal roles in the later seasons. In the ninth season a new villain emerges, the Ori. The Ori are advanced beings with unfathomable technology from another galaxy, also bent on galactic conquest and eternal worship. The introduction of the Ori accompanies a departure from the primary focus on Egyptian mythology into an exploration of the Arthurian mythology surrounding the Ori, their followers, and their enemies—the Ancients. --------------------------------------------- Result 135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] No redeeming features, this film is rubbish. Its jokes don't begin to be funny. The humour for children is pathetic, and the attempts to appeal to adults just add a tacky smuttishness to the whole miserable package. Sitting through it with my children just made me uncomfortable about what might be coming next. I couldn't enjoy the film at all. Although my child for whom the DVD was bought enjoyed the fact that she owned a new DVD, neither she nor her sisters expressed much interest in seeing it again, unlike with Monsters inc, Finding Nemo, Jungle Book, Lion King, etc. which all get frequent requests for replays. --------------------------------------------- Result 136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Fact: [[Stargate]] SG-1 is a cheesy sci-fi TV series.

There's no escaping [[facts]]. How much you [[try]] to excuse yourself or [[explain]] it Stargate SG-1 remains a cheesy sci-fi TV [[series]].

Stargate SG-1 does borrow and steal [[ideas]] briskly. [[Special]] FX aren't [[nearly]] as impressive as they could have been and the [[action]] isn't going to blow you out of the [[chair]]. [[Or]] [[couch]] for that [[matter]] either.

But, and this is where I really think Stargate SG-1 [[deserves]] all the credit it can [[get]], for each and [[every]] episode or stolen idea I [[think]] you can count at [[least]] one cheesy sci-fi movie that's [[actually]] worse than a one hour [[TV]] episode.

In fact some episodes [[actually]] [[could]] [[probably]] have been 90 minutes long and [[still]] have been better than most [[movies]].

And being [[able]] to [[keep]] that quality [[throughout]] the show and keep [[delivering]] and pushing the storyline further is what makes Stargate SG-1 [[special]].

I am very [[picky]] with my [[selections]]. I follow [[perhaps]] one or two TV [[series]] at most and I [[hold]] [[pretty]] high [[standards]] which [[made]] me even more [[surprised]] when I [[found]] myself caught.

So for those who [[decide]] to brush of Stargate SG-1 as [[yet]] another tacky sci-fi show, don't. Stick with it and you'll see what I'm talking about. Fact: [[Porte]] SG-1 is a cheesy sci-fi TV series.

There's no escaping [[truths]]. How much you [[trying]] to excuse yourself or [[clarification]] it Stargate SG-1 remains a cheesy sci-fi TV [[serial]].

Stargate SG-1 does borrow and steal [[reflections]] briskly. [[Specially]] FX aren't [[around]] as impressive as they could have been and the [[efforts]] isn't going to blow you out of the [[chairman]]. [[Orr]] [[sofa]] for that [[issue]] either.

But, and this is where I really think Stargate SG-1 [[merits]] all the credit it can [[obtain]], for each and [[all]] episode or stolen idea I [[thought]] you can count at [[fewer]] one cheesy sci-fi movie that's [[genuinely]] worse than a one hour [[TELEVISION]] episode.

In fact some episodes [[genuinely]] [[would]] [[possibly]] have been 90 minutes long and [[yet]] have been better than most [[films]].

And being [[capable]] to [[conserve]] that quality [[in]] the show and keep [[deliver]] and pushing the storyline further is what makes Stargate SG-1 [[particular]].

I am very [[selective]] with my [[choosing]]. I follow [[conceivably]] one or two TV [[serial]] at most and I [[held]] [[belle]] high [[norms]] which [[brought]] me even more [[stunned]] when I [[find]] myself caught.

So for those who [[decides]] to brush of Stargate SG-1 as [[still]] another tacky sci-fi show, don't. Stick with it and you'll see what I'm talking about. --------------------------------------------- Result 137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Highly regarded at release, but since rather neglected. Immense importance in the history of performing arts. A classic use of embedded plots. One of my favourite films. Why hasn't the soundtrack been re-released? --------------------------------------------- Result 138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I [[like]] end-of-days movies. I like B-movies. I was [[hoping]] I [[would]] like this [[movie]].

I [[could]] ignore the poor effects, the often [[atrocious]] music, the cringe-inducing lines. I [[could]] [[ignore]] the [[unexplained]] events, and the fact that the movie [[constantly]] relies on deus ex machina is excusable, [[given]] the [[subject]] [[matter]]. I [[could]] [[ignore]] the fact that the people who [[fight]] [[hunger]] and try to [[reach]] world peace are the bad guys. None of these things kill the movie. What [[kills]] this [[movie]] is that it's just plain and [[simple]] [[boring]]. [[Nothing]] actually happens; [[almost]] all scenes in the [[movie]] are designed to push the [[movie]] creators' [[morals]] on the [[viewers]], at the [[cost]] of actually having a [[coherent]] story, or any [[kind]] of suspense.

If you're looking for an [[entertaining]] B-movie, [[look]] [[elsewhere]]. This [[movie]] is just [[boring]]. I [[likes]] end-of-days movies. I like B-movies. I was [[expecting]] I [[should]] like this [[filmmaking]].

I [[did]] ignore the poor effects, the often [[horrible]] music, the cringe-inducing lines. I [[did]] [[ignores]] the [[impenetrable]] events, and the fact that the movie [[steadily]] relies on deus ex machina is excusable, [[awarded]] the [[subjected]] [[question]]. I [[would]] [[omit]] the fact that the people who [[struggling]] [[appetite]] and try to [[reaching]] world peace are the bad guys. None of these things kill the movie. What [[mata]] this [[filmmaking]] is that it's just plain and [[easy]] [[dull]]. [[Nothin]] actually happens; [[nearly]] all scenes in the [[filmmaking]] are designed to push the [[cinematography]] creators' [[morale]] on the [[onlookers]], at the [[costs]] of actually having a [[consistent]] story, or any [[genre]] of suspense.

If you're looking for an [[entertain]] B-movie, [[gaze]] [[else]]. This [[filmmaking]] is just [[dull]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The Ruth Snyder - Judd Gray murder in 1927 inspired Ogden Nash to write a Broadway play called Machinal. [[More]] famously, it inspired James M. Cain to write two short novels which anyone who has actually reached the point where they are reading this review [[would]] be familiar with - Double Indemnity and The Postman Always Rings Twice. Both became film noir classics of the 1940's, Double Indemnity being [[arguably]] the most [[perfect]] [[noir]] ever [[made]]. Some of the real-life elements of the Snyder-Gray story were [[captured]] by Cain - the [[old]] age and indifference of [[Albert]] [[Gray]], Ruth's high sex [[drive]], [[Ruth]] and Judd's [[passionate]] affair and [[complicity]] in the murder and that [[famous]] double indemnity insurance [[clause]]. Missing [[elements]] included the fact that the actual [[setting]] was a very urban Manhattan - [[Albert]] Snyder being a respected newspaper [[editor]]. The [[numerous]] incompetent and failed [[attempts]] were [[also]] [[ignored]] in [[order]] to [[cut]] to the [[chase]].

Cain's [[Double]] Indemnity was [[filmed]] [[perfectly]] by Billy Wilder - let's ignore Stanwyck's ridiculous wig as one of those interesting accidents of film lore! The Postman Always Rings Twice, however, was filmed thrice and Ossessione, an Italian version and Luchino Visconti's first film, was the first of three versions. Before commenting on it, I'll recommend the Lana Turner - John Garfield version of 1946 in its entirety and five minutes of the 1981 Jack Nicholson - Jessica Lange version for the great sex scene on the dining table.

Ossessione is not as noirish as The Postman Always Rings Twice. It has a strong neo-realist look which makes it a [[great]] movie, but a [[lot]] of the [[essential]] noir [[elements]] are [[missing]]. It does not have low-key [[lighting]] and unconventional camera [[angles]]. The [[dialog]] is not hard-boiled and instead the film concentrates more on characterization. This is the longest [[version]] of the story and goes [[deeply]] into characterization. Its also a lot more sexual than the Lana Turner version. We have a very [[obvious]] adulterous relationship and Giovanna is very [[obviously]] a nymphomaniac. A new character is [[introduced]] into the story - [[La]] Spagnola - with very [[obvious]] homosexual [[overtones]]. There is also a [[small]], but very well-played role for a [[dancer]] who moonlights as a [[prostitute]].

This is a far [[greater]] [[study]] of the working class than of crime. The audience really [[gets]] the feeling of poverty and grime. The drifter is a complete tramp, the wife is no Lana Turner and may even have been a prostitute before marriage. Her husband is an obscene capitalist - obese, rude and arrogant. I think the casting was brilliant for this film. My only beef is with the overlong running time. Everything is drawn out too long and it would have been more effective if it had been more economical. Nevertheless, fans of noir and realism will definitely like Ossessione, as I did. The Ruth Snyder - Judd Gray murder in 1927 inspired Ogden Nash to write a Broadway play called Machinal. [[Most]] famously, it inspired James M. Cain to write two short novels which anyone who has actually reached the point where they are reading this review [[could]] be familiar with - Double Indemnity and The Postman Always Rings Twice. Both became film noir classics of the 1940's, Double Indemnity being [[presumably]] the most [[perfecting]] [[negro]] ever [[brought]]. Some of the real-life elements of the Snyder-Gray story were [[catch]] by Cain - the [[elderly]] age and indifference of [[Hugh]] [[Grey]], Ruth's high sex [[drives]], [[Roth]] and Judd's [[avid]] affair and [[collusion]] in the murder and that [[prestigious]] double indemnity insurance [[provisions]]. Missing [[element]] included the fact that the actual [[settings]] was a very urban Manhattan - [[Alberto]] Snyder being a respected newspaper [[editorial]]. The [[myriad]] incompetent and failed [[endeavor]] were [[further]] [[forgotten]] in [[edict]] to [[slice]] to the [[hunts]].

Cain's [[Doubling]] Indemnity was [[shot]] [[completely]] by Billy Wilder - let's ignore Stanwyck's ridiculous wig as one of those interesting accidents of film lore! The Postman Always Rings Twice, however, was filmed thrice and Ossessione, an Italian version and Luchino Visconti's first film, was the first of three versions. Before commenting on it, I'll recommend the Lana Turner - John Garfield version of 1946 in its entirety and five minutes of the 1981 Jack Nicholson - Jessica Lange version for the great sex scene on the dining table.

Ossessione is not as noirish as The Postman Always Rings Twice. It has a strong neo-realist look which makes it a [[wondrous]] movie, but a [[batch]] of the [[pivotal]] noir [[ingredients]] are [[lacks]]. It does not have low-key [[illumination]] and unconventional camera [[angle]]. The [[dialogue]] is not hard-boiled and instead the film concentrates more on characterization. This is the longest [[stepping]] of the story and goes [[bitterly]] into characterization. Its also a lot more sexual than the Lana Turner version. We have a very [[blatant]] adulterous relationship and Giovanna is very [[unmistakably]] a nymphomaniac. A new character is [[tabled]] into the story - [[Las]] Spagnola - with very [[flagrant]] homosexual [[harmonics]]. There is also a [[tiny]], but very well-played role for a [[dancers]] who moonlights as a [[slut]].

This is a far [[most]] [[investigate]] of the working class than of crime. The audience really [[attains]] the feeling of poverty and grime. The drifter is a complete tramp, the wife is no Lana Turner and may even have been a prostitute before marriage. Her husband is an obscene capitalist - obese, rude and arrogant. I think the casting was brilliant for this film. My only beef is with the overlong running time. Everything is drawn out too long and it would have been more effective if it had been more economical. Nevertheless, fans of noir and realism will definitely like Ossessione, as I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 140 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Okay, I'll admit the [[casting]] in the film is REALLY strange--part of this is due to the plot, but I [[still]] had a [[bit]] of trouble [[believing]] [[Pierce]] Brosnan playing this lead ([[though]] he [[really]] did a pretty good [[job]]).

It's based on a [[true]] [[story]] of an Englishman who went to [[live]] with the Canadian [[Indians]] in the early 20th century. He claimed to be a mixed blood Indian. He was, in [[fact]], so successful and well thought of that people came from all over to hear his lectures and be taken on his wilderness treks--even [[though]] he was not a mixed blood Indian and all his knowledge was from books or [[faked]]! The [[movie]] centers on this and what [[occurred]] when the hoax was [[uncovered]].

The acting and settings were [[great]] and I [[really]] liked the [[film]] (once I suspended disbelief about Brosnan). It didn't [[get]] [[widespread]] distribution--probably because it was pretty cerebral--not a [[Bond]] [[film]] nor a romance--just a really odd film about a [[remarkable]] man. Okay, I'll admit the [[foundry]] in the film is REALLY strange--part of this is due to the plot, but I [[nonetheless]] had a [[bite]] of trouble [[think]] [[Pearce]] Brosnan playing this lead ([[despite]] he [[truthfully]] did a pretty good [[labour]]).

It's based on a [[real]] [[fairytales]] of an Englishman who went to [[inhabit]] with the Canadian [[Indian]] in the early 20th century. He claimed to be a mixed blood Indian. He was, in [[facto]], so successful and well thought of that people came from all over to hear his lectures and be taken on his wilderness treks--even [[although]] he was not a mixed blood Indian and all his knowledge was from books or [[falsified]]! The [[kino]] centers on this and what [[occured]] when the hoax was [[detected]].

The acting and settings were [[wondrous]] and I [[genuinely]] liked the [[films]] (once I suspended disbelief about Brosnan). It didn't [[obtain]] [[prevalent]] distribution--probably because it was pretty cerebral--not a [[Bonding]] [[kino]] nor a romance--just a really odd film about a [[wondrous]] man. --------------------------------------------- Result 141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I've tried to [[like]] this film, really. In watching it, all I can think is, "This guy gives me the creeps, I would have gotten a restraining order". It also [[calls]] out CODEPENDENCE in capital letters. [[Was]] this really the conversation before making the movie? "Let's make a [[film]] that [[puts]] two chronically depressed, socially inept people into a relationship which deepens their isolation and encourages them to complain about how bad their lives are!" From what I've seen in life is that the [[last]] [[thing]] on earth we [[find]] [[attractive]] in a potential mate is constant self-pity.

The [[mood]] of the movie is distinctly 80-ish; brooding and [[slow]]. Don't get me wrong, the film has its [[moments]], just very few of them. I've tried to [[iike]] this film, really. In watching it, all I can think is, "This guy gives me the creeps, I would have gotten a restraining order". It also [[requested]] out CODEPENDENCE in capital letters. [[Became]] this really the conversation before making the movie? "Let's make a [[filmmaking]] that [[evokes]] two chronically depressed, socially inept people into a relationship which deepens their isolation and encourages them to complain about how bad their lives are!" From what I've seen in life is that the [[latter]] [[stuff]] on earth we [[found]] [[seductive]] in a potential mate is constant self-pity.

The [[ambiance]] of the movie is distinctly 80-ish; brooding and [[slowing]]. Don't get me wrong, the film has its [[times]], just very few of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] One Star. That's all this documentary deserves. I haven't [[felt]] this [[disappointed]] in [[watching]] a [[movie]], let [[alone]] a [[documentary]], in [[quite]] some [[time]].

I'm a [[BIG]] [[fan]] of the "[[Walking]] With..." [[series]], [[including]] it's Nigel Marvin spin-offs, for all their gleeful fun [[yet]] informative information. And although the [[subject]] of prehistoric [[man]] has never interested me [[nearly]] as much as other prehistoric [[creatures]], the subject is [[still]] interesting and [[unique]] to explore. Having seen all the other [[docs]] from the [[series]], I [[figured]] I need to see this one as well, especially after seeing relatively good reviews in other places.

Well for those of you who put up a good review of this doc... what were you thinking?! lol.

Though the information that they were able to get through was interesting, the presentation failed in every other way possible. It had a terrible flow, was incredibly unfocused in what it was trying to say (with information scrambled and sometimes out of of place), horrible effects (that includes the few moments of CGI and especially the makeup effects), and overused MTV-style camera effects.

Speaking of the makeup effects, one reviewer here mentioned how laughable the scene was when the cavemen come across this giant ape and how it looks a lot like a 70s man-in-suit horror movie. Well there are plenty of moments just like that were the people portraying the ape men looked ridiculous and acted ridiculous. None of this is helped by horrible camera positions and compositions.

The worst part of all is none of it is shown in an interesting or dynamic way, or looks remotely real. It doesn't even look like it was taken seriously. It also lacked any emotional punch that the predecessors of the series had. Remember the episode in "Walking With Dinosaurs" of the fate of the Ornithochirus (sp?)? That episode still gets me on the verge of tears every time I watch it. It's this sort of engagement with the subject that [[lacks]] here most of all. When you are more engaged in the subject and it's own personal story, even one that is just speculation, you care more about the facts surrounding it.

The only saving [[graces]] of this production are the fairly good narration (at least in the BBC version I saw) and the music. Otherwise, DO NOT bother even renting this one unless you want to have a good laugh (which I did frequently, but usually followed by rolling eyes). This does not belong on the shelf with the other "Walking With..." docs.

And does it make sense to learn that this doc was NOT produced or directly involved with the same people who did the others in the series? Hmmm... One Star. That's all this documentary deserves. I haven't [[deemed]] this [[frustrated]] in [[staring]] a [[movies]], let [[merely]] a [[documentaries]], in [[rather]] some [[moment]].

I'm a [[MAMMOTH]] [[breather]] of the "[[Marching]] With..." [[serials]], [[encompassing]] it's Nigel Marvin spin-offs, for all their gleeful fun [[still]] informative information. And although the [[themes]] of prehistoric [[males]] has never interested me [[approximately]] as much as other prehistoric [[creature]], the subject is [[nevertheless]] interesting and [[particular]] to explore. Having seen all the other [[doc]] from the [[serials]], I [[thought]] I need to see this one as well, especially after seeing relatively good reviews in other places.

Well for those of you who put up a good review of this doc... what were you thinking?! lol.

Though the information that they were able to get through was interesting, the presentation failed in every other way possible. It had a terrible flow, was incredibly unfocused in what it was trying to say (with information scrambled and sometimes out of of place), horrible effects (that includes the few moments of CGI and especially the makeup effects), and overused MTV-style camera effects.

Speaking of the makeup effects, one reviewer here mentioned how laughable the scene was when the cavemen come across this giant ape and how it looks a lot like a 70s man-in-suit horror movie. Well there are plenty of moments just like that were the people portraying the ape men looked ridiculous and acted ridiculous. None of this is helped by horrible camera positions and compositions.

The worst part of all is none of it is shown in an interesting or dynamic way, or looks remotely real. It doesn't even look like it was taken seriously. It also lacked any emotional punch that the predecessors of the series had. Remember the episode in "Walking With Dinosaurs" of the fate of the Ornithochirus (sp?)? That episode still gets me on the verge of tears every time I watch it. It's this sort of engagement with the subject that [[lacking]] here most of all. When you are more engaged in the subject and it's own personal story, even one that is just speculation, you care more about the facts surrounding it.

The only saving [[wonders]] of this production are the fairly good narration (at least in the BBC version I saw) and the music. Otherwise, DO NOT bother even renting this one unless you want to have a good laugh (which I did frequently, but usually followed by rolling eyes). This does not belong on the shelf with the other "Walking With..." docs.

And does it make sense to learn that this doc was NOT produced or directly involved with the same people who did the others in the series? Hmmm... --------------------------------------------- Result 143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A girl is showering unknowing that a serial [[rapist]] is staring at her through the skylight. Detectives Martin Manners and Orville Stone is hot on his trail, but not [[hot]] [[enough]] as they find him after he [[kills]], rapes, and eats a nipple of the girl.He's the shot to death. One would hope that this would be the [[end]] of the [[film]]. Not because it's too horrifying, but because the [[level]] of acting is [[atrociously]] [[horrid]]. Sadly it's not the end and [[months]] later the rapist is [[resurrected]] as a zombie by a coven of satanists. So he [[continues]] where he left off, with the detectives on the [[case]] again, this time a flying [[baby]] is after him too (don't [[ask]]). There has been VERY [[good]] VERY low-budget [[movies]] (Street Trash and [[Filthy]] McNasty spring to mind), but this one is [[scraping]] the bottom of the [[barrel]]. Horrible acting, crappy dime [[store]] special effects, lame [[attempt]] at [[comedy]] and [[oh]] yeah, and the ending sucks too.

My Grade: [[F]]

[[Eye]] [[Candy]]: [[Theresa]] Bestul [[gets]] [[fully]] [[nude]]; Anne [[R]]. [[Key]] [[gets]] topless A girl is showering unknowing that a serial [[violator]] is staring at her through the skylight. Detectives Martin Manners and Orville Stone is hot on his trail, but not [[hottest]] [[suitably]] as they find him after he [[kill]], rapes, and eats a nipple of the girl.He's the shot to death. One would hope that this would be the [[ends]] of the [[filmmaking]]. Not because it's too horrifying, but because the [[echelon]] of acting is [[appallingly]] [[frightful]]. Sadly it's not the end and [[mois]] later the rapist is [[revived]] as a zombie by a coven of satanists. So he [[persists]] where he left off, with the detectives on the [[lawsuits]] again, this time a flying [[honey]] is after him too (don't [[calls]]). There has been VERY [[alright]] VERY low-budget [[theater]] (Street Trash and [[Squalid]] McNasty spring to mind), but this one is [[scrape]] the bottom of the [[canon]]. Horrible acting, crappy dime [[shops]] special effects, lame [[try]] at [[charade]] and [[ohhh]] yeah, and the ending sucks too.

My Grade: [[e]]

[[Eyeball]] [[Sweets]]: [[Therese]] Bestul [[attains]] [[totally]] [[nudes]]; Anne [[rs]]. [[Fundamental]] [[attains]] topless --------------------------------------------- Result 144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How is it possible that a movie this bad can be made. Bad acting. Bad script. Just an embarrassment all around. This is just one bad cliché after another.

This movie actually has some big name stars in it. Unfortunately they're singers and not actors.

This movie made hardly any money for a good reason. The appeal of black cowboy movies just isn't there. It's a shame they didn't have a good story to tell.

This movie actually has some big name stars in it. Unfortunately they're singers and not actors.

This movie made hardly any money for a good reason. The appeal of black cowboy movies just isn't there. It's a shame they didn't have a good story to tell. --------------------------------------------- Result 145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[managed]] to see this at the New York [[International]] Film Festival in [[November]] 2005 with my [[boyfriend]]. We were both [[quite]] impressed with the complexity of the plot and found it to be [[emotionally]] moving. It was very well [[directed]] with strong [[imagery]]. The visual [[effects]] were [[amazing]] - [[especially]] for a short. It had an [[original]] fantasy [[approach]] to a very [[real]] and serious [[topic]]: This [[film]] is about a young [[girl]] who is [[visited]] by a demon [[offering]] to [[help]] her situation with her [[abusive]] [[father]]. There is [[also]] a surprise twist at the end which [[caught]] me off guard. This leans [[towards]] the [[Gothic]] feel. I would love to [[see]] this as a full [[feature]] [[film]]. -- Carrie I [[administering]] to see this at the New York [[Global]] Film Festival in [[June]] 2005 with my [[chum]]. We were both [[rather]] impressed with the complexity of the plot and found it to be [[romantically]] moving. It was very well [[aimed]] with strong [[visuals]]. The visual [[consequences]] were [[breathtaking]] - [[mostly]] for a short. It had an [[initial]] fantasy [[approaches]] to a very [[true]] and serious [[subject]]: This [[cinematographic]] is about a young [[women]] who is [[visiting]] by a demon [[offer]] to [[assistance]] her situation with her [[offensive]] [[fathers]]. There is [[apart]] a surprise twist at the end which [[capturing]] me off guard. This leans [[vers]] the [[Goth]] feel. I would love to [[seeing]] this as a full [[idiosyncrasies]] [[cinematography]]. -- Carrie --------------------------------------------- Result 146 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[wanted]] to watch this movie because of [[Eliza]] Dushku, but she only has a smaller [[part]] in it, and her character isn't very [[likable]]. However, the main [[character]], played by [[Melissa]] Sagemiller, is [[extremely]] [[beautiful]] and a [[perfect]] [[delight]] to [[look]] at [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. This is really [[nothing]] but a [[showcase]] for her [[looks]] and talent. She does a very good job.

The story itself is, on the [[face]] of it, pretty [[nonsensical]]. After a car crash, some friends are possibly dead, but keeps on living their previous lives, while all sorts of mysterious things happen. Some bad guys are after them, but we never really find out who they are (possibly they were the ones in the other car, but we certainly don't hear anything about why they are after them). The final scenes especially seem filmically ambitious, but I can't get anything coherent out of it. The opening scene, where the bad guys (who wear some strange masks) cut a blond girl's wrist and gather up some of her blood is never explained or followed up on. Unless the bad guys are supposed to be a representation of the surgeons who're trying to pull Cassie (Sagemiller) back from the dead... but no, that doesn't seem to [[work]]. The bad guys are just bad guys; they really just mess up a [[story]] that might otherwise have been interesting. In a supernatural story about death and love and sacrifice, who the hell needs bad guys?

3 out of 10. I [[want]] to watch this movie because of [[Liza]] Dushku, but she only has a smaller [[parte]] in it, and her character isn't very [[sympathetic]]. However, the main [[personages]], played by [[Mireille]] Sagemiller, is [[unbelievably]] [[sumptuous]] and a [[irreproachable]] [[rejoicing]] to [[gaze]] at [[across]] the [[filmmaking]]. This is really [[anything]] but a [[illustrate]] for her [[seem]] and talent. She does a very good job.

The story itself is, on the [[confronts]] of it, pretty [[mindless]]. After a car crash, some friends are possibly dead, but keeps on living their previous lives, while all sorts of mysterious things happen. Some bad guys are after them, but we never really find out who they are (possibly they were the ones in the other car, but we certainly don't hear anything about why they are after them). The final scenes especially seem filmically ambitious, but I can't get anything coherent out of it. The opening scene, where the bad guys (who wear some strange masks) cut a blond girl's wrist and gather up some of her blood is never explained or followed up on. Unless the bad guys are supposed to be a representation of the surgeons who're trying to pull Cassie (Sagemiller) back from the dead... but no, that doesn't seem to [[collaborated]]. The bad guys are just bad guys; they really just mess up a [[conte]] that might otherwise have been interesting. In a supernatural story about death and love and sacrifice, who the hell needs bad guys?

3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 147 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If only ALL animation was this great. This film is classic because it is strong is two simple aspects: Story and Character. The characters in this film are beautifully personified. I felt for all of the characters, and human-animal relationship in the movie works perfectly. The beautiful animation and 3-D computer animation hasn't worked better in any other film. This is a great movie for kids, and for adults who want a classic hero's journey. 8 of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 148 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are so many reasons as to why I rate the sopranos so highly, one of its biggest triumphs being the cast and character building. Each character unfolds more and more each series. Also each series has an array of different 'small time characters' as well as the main. A good example of a character (who was only in three episodes) who you can feel for is David the compulsive gambler played brilliantly by Robert Patrick. Every little detail builds the perfect TV series. The show revolves round mob boss Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) who attempts to balance his life of crime with his role as father of two. The show is not afraid to be bold and powerful with its dialogue and imagery and this is what makes it so believable. Whilst Tony runs things with capos Paulie (Tony Sirico) and Silvio (Steve Van Zant) his nephew Christopher (Michael imperioli) looks for a promotion. Every episode also features Tony's other family in some way which includes his children and wife carmela soprano (Edie Falco). On top of these problems is his uncle Junior soprano (Dominic Chianese) is trying to get what he can out of Tony's businesses despite being under house arrest. All the acting is powerful and characters complex, but the two who stand out the most are; James Gandolfini who 'is' Tony Soprano. Also Michael Imperioli who plays Christopher, representing the younger (20-30) generation in crime. If David Chase had not created this masterpiece modern TV dramas of such caliber may not have existed, such as The Wire and Dexter. So the Sopranos is definitely the Godfather, Goodfellas and Pulp fiction of TV --------------------------------------------- Result 149 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] THE JIST: See something else.

This film was highly rated by Gene Siskel, but after [[watching]] it I can't figure out why. The film is [[definitely]] [[original]] and [[different]]. It even has interesting dialogue at times, some cool moments, and a creepy "noir" feel. But it just isn't [[entertaining]]. It [[also]] doesn't make a whole lot of sense, in plot but especially in character motivations. I don't know anyone that behaves like these characters do.

This is a difficult movie to [[take]] on -- I suggest you don't accept the challenge. THE JIST: See something else.

This film was highly rated by Gene Siskel, but after [[staring]] it I can't figure out why. The film is [[indubitably]] [[upfront]] and [[several]]. It even has interesting dialogue at times, some cool moments, and a creepy "noir" feel. But it just isn't [[amusing]]. It [[apart]] doesn't make a whole lot of sense, in plot but especially in character motivations. I don't know anyone that behaves like these characters do.

This is a difficult movie to [[taking]] on -- I suggest you don't accept the challenge. --------------------------------------------- Result 150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm a [[Christian]] who [[generally]] [[believes]] in the [[theology]] [[taught]] in Left [[Behind]]. That being [[said]], I think Left [[Behind]] is one of the [[worst]] [[films]] I've [[seen]] in some [[time]].

To have a [[good]] [[movie]], you [[need]] to have a well-written [[screenplay]]. Left Behind [[fell]] [[woefully]] short on this. For one thing, it [[radically]] deviates from the [[book]]. Sometimes this is done to condense a 400-page novel down to a two-hour [[film]], but in this [[film]] I saw changes that made no [[sense]] whatsoever.

Another [[thing]], there is zero character [[development]]. [[When]] characters in the [[story]] get [[saved]] (I won't [[say]] who), the book makes it [[clear]] that it's a long, soul-searching process. In the [[film]] it's [[quick]] and artificial. The book is [[written]] decently [[enough]] where people like Rayford Steele, Buck [[Williams]] and Hattie Durham [[seem]] [[real]], but in the [[movie]] [[scenarios]] are [[consistently]] given the [[quick]] treatment without [[anything]] [[substantial]]. [[In]] another scene where one [[character]] gets [[angry]] about being left behind (again, I won't [[say]] who), it seems artificial.

I [[realize]] as a Christian it's unedifying for me to say I disliked this film, but I can't in a good conscience [[recommend]] a [[film]] that I feel was horribly [[done]]. [[Perhaps]] it would've been better to make the first book into 2-3 [[films]]. Either [[way]], [[Christians]] [[need]] to realize that to be [[taken]] [[seriously]] as filmmakers, we need to [[start]] by putting together a film in a quality way. I [[realize]] a lot of [[effort]] [[probably]] went into [[Left]] [[Behind]], but that's the way I [[see]] it. I'm a [[Christians]] who [[habitually]] [[feels]] in the [[deity]] [[learning]] in Left [[Posterior]]. That being [[says]], I think Left [[Posterior]] is one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I've [[watched]] in some [[period]].

To have a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], you [[needed]] to have a well-written [[scenarios]]. Left Behind [[dips]] [[sadly]] short on this. For one thing, it [[noticeably]] deviates from the [[ledger]]. Sometimes this is done to condense a 400-page novel down to a two-hour [[filmmaking]], but in this [[filmmaking]] I saw changes that made no [[feeling]] whatsoever.

Another [[stuff]], there is zero character [[evolution]]. [[Whenever]] characters in the [[history]] get [[saving]] (I won't [[tell]] who), the book makes it [[unmistakable]] that it's a long, soul-searching process. In the [[filmmaking]] it's [[fast]] and artificial. The book is [[authored]] decently [[adequately]] where people like Rayford Steele, Buck [[William]] and Hattie Durham [[looks]] [[actual]], but in the [[film]] [[scripts]] are [[steadily]] given the [[timely]] treatment without [[nothing]] [[vast]]. [[Among]] another scene where one [[characters]] gets [[upset]] about being left behind (again, I won't [[says]] who), it seems artificial.

I [[achieve]] as a Christian it's unedifying for me to say I disliked this film, but I can't in a good conscience [[recommends]] a [[flick]] that I feel was horribly [[played]]. [[Possibly]] it would've been better to make the first book into 2-3 [[filmmaking]]. Either [[ways]], [[Cristiano]] [[needed]] to realize that to be [[took]] [[deeply]] as filmmakers, we need to [[initiating]] by putting together a film in a quality way. I [[achieve]] a lot of [[endeavors]] [[unquestionably]] went into [[Gauche]] [[Backside]], but that's the way I [[behold]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Really an amazing [[pile]] of pap!

A predictable, [[slow]] moving, soul [[destroying]], mind numbing movie to which, slitting your own wrists with a rusty bread knife seems... well, [[almost]] necessary.

The acting is over [[done]] for the thin [[dialogue]], every scene is at least twice as long as it needs to be, the intricate details of how this career is collapsing or that career is [[rising]] is just far too [[dreary]] and [[mundane]] for [[words]]. The [[music]] would be good if you didn't have to [[sit]] through the [[movie]], but really, three [[good]] [[songs]] is not [[enough]] [[reward]] for the [[effort]] required to watch the [[movie]].

[[Watching]] this [[film]] I [[prayed]] to [[God]] for narcolepsy or for [[someone]] to shoot me.

Never, ever, ever again. Really an amazing [[battery]] of pap!

A predictable, [[sluggish]] moving, soul [[razing]], mind numbing movie to which, slitting your own wrists with a rusty bread knife seems... well, [[hardly]] necessary.

The acting is over [[played]] for the thin [[talks]], every scene is at least twice as long as it needs to be, the intricate details of how this career is collapsing or that career is [[climbing]] is just far too [[depressing]] and [[commonplace]] for [[mots]]. The [[musica]] would be good if you didn't have to [[seated]] through the [[filmmaking]], but really, three [[alright]] [[ballads]] is not [[suffice]] [[bonuses]] for the [[endeavour]] required to watch the [[filmmaking]].

[[Staring]] this [[filmmaking]] I [[prays]] to [[Deities]] for narcolepsy or for [[everybody]] to shoot me.

Never, ever, ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Some people [[loved]] "The [[Aristocrats]]" and others [[hated]] it, [[frequently]] walking out in the middle. [[Reactions]] to [[Eddie]] Izzard aren't [[likely]] to be that extreme -- if you can handle a transvestite comedian (who says he [[likes]] girls) and has a vocabulary that makes, shall we say, [[enough]] use of the "f" word that his program [[would]] be one long beep if presented on [[network]] television. Many of Izzard's fans are so [[devoted]] that they [[see]] no [[flaws]] whatsoever in his performances. On the other hand, I thought this [[show]] was occasionally [[flatter]] than Izzard's [[chest]] but [[also]] more [[often]] than not funny and, in spots, [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]]. He has a [[way]] of [[connecting]] references from routines [[early]] in the [[show]] to his [[later]] routines. He's not a story teller. He's not a [[joke]] [[maker]]. He's not a [[frenetic]] fantasist like Robin Williams. He plays around with [[ideas]], some of which [[work]] and some of which -- a routine with the San [[Francisco]] [[cable]] [[car]] and Alcatraz, for [[instance]] -- are completely unfunny. He has a way, [[however]], of [[moving]] [[gracefully]] past the flopped [[routines]] and [[extending]] the ones that connect. I gave this performance a 7 and might be [[persuaded]] to raise it to an 8. But a 10? No [[way]]. Some people [[love]] "The [[Aristocracy]]" and others [[abhor]] it, [[periodically]] walking out in the middle. [[Answering]] to [[Eddy]] Izzard aren't [[probable]] to be that extreme -- if you can handle a transvestite comedian (who says he [[loves]] girls) and has a vocabulary that makes, shall we say, [[sufficient]] use of the "f" word that his program [[could]] be one long beep if presented on [[networks]] television. Many of Izzard's fans are so [[dedicated]] that they [[behold]] no [[demerits]] whatsoever in his performances. On the other hand, I thought this [[display]] was occasionally [[patronize]] than Izzard's [[torso]] but [[apart]] more [[generally]] than not funny and, in spots, [[downright]] [[comical]]. He has a [[path]] of [[linking]] references from routines [[prematurely]] in the [[showing]] to his [[subsequent]] routines. He's not a story teller. He's not a [[prank]] [[producer]]. He's not a [[frantic]] fantasist like Robin Williams. He plays around with [[reflections]], some of which [[jobs]] and some of which -- a routine with the San [[Franz]] [[wire]] [[vehicle]] and Alcatraz, for [[lawsuits]] -- are completely unfunny. He has a way, [[yet]], of [[shifting]] [[delicately]] past the flopped [[routine]] and [[expands]] the ones that connect. I gave this performance a 7 and might be [[convinced]] to raise it to an 8. But a 10? No [[manner]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] gone in 60 seconds is a very good action comedy film that made over $100 million but got blasted by most critics. I personally thought this was a great film. The story was believable and has probobly the greatest cast ever for this type of movie including 3 academy award winners nicolas cage, robert duvall and the very hot anjolina jolie. other than the lame stunt at the end this is a perfect blend of action comedy and drama. my score is **** (out of ****) --------------------------------------------- Result 154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] From the beginning of the [[movie]] I had a feeling like its a [[movie]] about another Jason's from [[Friday]] the 13th. And It is... Dispute that the [[movie]] starts interesting. But as the [[times]] goes by its just a [[pointless]] [[movie]] about muted, [[supernatural]], [[silent]] serial killer. I mean he goes under the guy's bed without making any sound, not [[seen]] by [[anyone]]. He was [[supposed]] to be blind after failed [[execution]] but he walks and [[kills]] people like he [[used]] to. I'm tired of it. For me it's all over the same [[thing]].

In another words - [[unreal]]. Too [[many]] [[mistakes]] and [[confusing]] [[information]].

Well scene with [[tide]] up [[woman]] looked impressive but just at first time :} For that and for intriguing intro 2 [[stars]]. From the beginning of the [[filmmaking]] I had a feeling like its a [[filmmaking]] about another Jason's from [[Fridays]] the 13th. And It is... Dispute that the [[kino]] starts interesting. But as the [[period]] goes by its just a [[superfluous]] [[kino]] about muted, [[uncanny]], [[quiet]] serial killer. I mean he goes under the guy's bed without making any sound, not [[noticed]] by [[person]]. He was [[suspected]] to be blind after failed [[executions]] but he walks and [[killing]] people like he [[utilised]] to. I'm tired of it. For me it's all over the same [[stuff]].

In another words - [[surreal]]. Too [[multiple]] [[faults]] and [[disconcerting]] [[informations]].

Well scene with [[tides]] up [[mujer]] looked impressive but just at first time :} For that and for intriguing intro 2 [[superstar]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 155 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] It seems evident from this [[adaptation]] that he did not. Not only did he leave the plot behind, he made up his own! The things that he chose to leave in were so [[ridiculously]] unbelievable that I was happy he chose to [[leave]] out some of the most important parts of the novel. The plot was hazy, inconsistent and [[choppy]] to say the [[least]]. I don't want to say anything mean-spirited about the [[actors]], but they can't [[act]]! Dickens is [[difficult]], of [[course]], but this is [[pathetic]]! Micawber was nothing more than a mid-nineteenth century [[Kramer]], and the less said about Betsy Trotwood the better! If you want to see the real Copperfield, watch the wonderful 1999 BBC adaptation. As for the screenplay writer,I think he read the Cliff's Notes! It seems evident from this [[coping]] that he did not. Not only did he leave the plot behind, he made up his own! The things that he chose to leave in were so [[appallingly]] unbelievable that I was happy he chose to [[letting]] out some of the most important parts of the novel. The plot was hazy, inconsistent and [[troubled]] to say the [[fewer]]. I don't want to say anything mean-spirited about the [[players]], but they can't [[ley]]! Dickens is [[complex]], of [[cours]], but this is [[unfortunate]]! Micawber was nothing more than a mid-nineteenth century [[Kremer]], and the less said about Betsy Trotwood the better! If you want to see the real Copperfield, watch the wonderful 1999 BBC adaptation. As for the screenplay writer,I think he read the Cliff's Notes! --------------------------------------------- Result 156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sorry, gave it a 1, which is the rating I give to movies on which I walk out or fall asleep. In this case I fell asleep 10 minutes from the end, really, really bored and not caring at all about what happened next. --------------------------------------------- Result 157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you're as huge of a fan of an author as I am of Jim Thompson, it can be pretty dodgy when their works are converted to film. This is not the case with Scott Foley's rendition of AFTER DARK MY SWEET. A suspenseful, sexually charged noir classic that closely follows and does great justice to the original text. Jason Patrick and Rachel Ward give possibly the best performances of their careers. And the always phenomenal Bruce Dern might have even toped him self with this one. Like Thompson's book this movie creates a dark and surreal world where passion overcomes logic and the double cross is never far at hand. A must see for all fans of great noir film. ****!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I have had the pleasure of reading Martin Torgoff's book "Can't Find My [[Way]] [[Home]]" which is chock full of info on the drug [[culture]] of [[America]], spanning the [[years]] 1945-2000. This [[guy]] knows his stuff!! I [[found]] him to be an excellent [[spokesperson]] for this documentary. I [[particularly]] enjoyed watching the film clips from the hippie era, and the 70's stoner culture. The soundtrack was [[excellent]]. Whoever compiled it [[definitely]] was in [[touch]] with the [[tunes]] of each era. Hopefully they will [[package]] them and sell them as a CD set. I would [[highly]] [[recommend]] this to [[anyone]] interested in how the 1960's experiments with LSD [[forever]] [[changed]] American [[culture]] as we [[know]] it. One [[thing]] that was [[missing]] was any [[mention]] of George [[Jung]] ([[played]] by Johnny [[Depp]] in the [[movie]] "Blow"), who was supposedly responsible for much of the [[marijuana]] and [[cocaine]] coming into this [[country]] in the 60's-80's. I have had the pleasure of reading Martin Torgoff's book "Can't Find My [[Ways]] [[Dwelling]]" which is chock full of info on the drug [[cultures]] of [[Americans]], spanning the [[ages]] 1945-2000. This [[fella]] knows his stuff!! I [[find]] him to be an excellent [[spokesman]] for this documentary. I [[peculiarly]] enjoyed watching the film clips from the hippie era, and the 70's stoner culture. The soundtrack was [[wondrous]]. Whoever compiled it [[obviously]] was in [[touches]] with the [[hymns]] of each era. Hopefully they will [[packaging]] them and sell them as a CD set. I would [[inordinately]] [[recommendations]] this to [[somebody]] interested in how the 1960's experiments with LSD [[endlessly]] [[modifying]] American [[cultures]] as we [[savoir]] it. One [[stuff]] that was [[gone]] was any [[mentioning]] of George [[Zheng]] ([[done]] by Johnny [[Dib]] in the [[kino]] "Blow"), who was supposedly responsible for much of the [[marihuana]] and [[coca]] coming into this [[nations]] in the 60's-80's. --------------------------------------------- Result 159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] SPOILER ALERT ! ! ! Personally I don't understand why Pete did not help to save Williams life,I [[mean]] that [[would]] be [[great]] to know why [[William]] was motivated,or forced.I think [[Secret]] Service members are every day people,and there is a rumor the [[writer]] was a [[member]] of the [[Secret]] Service,now he's [[motivations]] are [[clear]],well known.But as a rental this [[film]] will not [[satisfy]] you,cause the [[old]] but [[used]] twists,the average acting -these are just [[things]] in this film,only for [[keep]] you [[wait]] the end.Clark Johnson as the director of S.W.A.T. did a far better work [[like]] this time,and I still wondering how the producers (for example Michael Douglas)left this film to theaters. SPOILER ALERT ! ! ! Personally I don't understand why Pete did not help to save Williams life,I [[meaning]] that [[could]] be [[huge]] to know why [[Guillaume]] was motivated,or forced.I think [[Secrets]] Service members are every day people,and there is a rumor the [[screenwriter]] was a [[members]] of the [[Secrecy]] Service,now he's [[grounds]] are [[lucid]],well known.But as a rental this [[filmmaking]] will not [[meet]] you,cause the [[former]] but [[usage]] twists,the average acting -these are just [[matters]] in this film,only for [[preserving]] you [[expectation]] the end.Clark Johnson as the director of S.W.A.T. did a far better work [[iike]] this time,and I still wondering how the producers (for example Michael Douglas)left this film to theaters. --------------------------------------------- Result 160 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Casting]] aside many of the [[favorable]] comments that have obviously come from friends and/or relatives that pepper this and many other low budget independents listed on IMDb, one is lost when it comes to using these reviews as an accurate gauge. So eventually you have to go out and [[rent]] the flick just to see for yourself. One of the first things you [[must]] understand are the catch phrases that camouflage the [[reality]] of the movie. In this [[case]] the term "dark [[psychological]] thriller." Read: "hack [[writer]]/[[director]] who [[thinks]] he's an auteur, who [[replaces]] plot, [[story]], and [[action]], with what he [[believes]] is a deep insight into the human soul. His [[great]] insight? Festering and repressed childhood traumas emerge to [[wreck]] [[havoc]] when we [[become]] [[adults]]. [[Wow]], I bet [[Freud]] would be really [[impressed]]! Too many [[would]] be [[film]] [[makers]] like Kallio, who were raised on low budget horror flicks of the [[last]] few decades, fail to [[dig]] their own fresh [[grave]]. [[Instead]], they [[fall]] into the pre-dug [[graves]] of the [[many]] other [[directors]] that came before them. They are content with rehashing [[old]] and tired horror [[clichés]] that they [[borrowed]] from a [[dozen]] or more [[films]]. The [[result]] is an unoriginal, [[uninspired]], [[unbelievable]] [[waste]] of [[film]] stock. [[Moulding]] aside many of the [[affirmative]] comments that have obviously come from friends and/or relatives that pepper this and many other low budget independents listed on IMDb, one is lost when it comes to using these reviews as an accurate gauge. So eventually you have to go out and [[rented]] the flick just to see for yourself. One of the first things you [[owes]] understand are the catch phrases that camouflage the [[realities]] of the movie. In this [[cases]] the term "dark [[psychiatric]] thriller." Read: "hack [[novelist]]/[[superintendent]] who [[thoughts]] he's an auteur, who [[supersedes]] plot, [[storytelling]], and [[activity]], with what he [[sees]] is a deep insight into the human soul. His [[marvellous]] insight? Festering and repressed childhood traumas emerge to [[wrecking]] [[devastation]] when we [[gotten]] [[adult]]. [[Whoo]], I bet [[Floyd]] would be really [[surprising]]! Too many [[could]] be [[movie]] [[manufacturers]] like Kallio, who were raised on low budget horror flicks of the [[final]] few decades, fail to [[dug]] their own fresh [[graves]]. [[However]], they [[decreased]] into the pre-dug [[gravestones]] of the [[various]] other [[administrators]] that came before them. They are content with rehashing [[longtime]] and tired horror [[clichéd]] that they [[loaned]] from a [[twelve]] or more [[cinema]]. The [[findings]] is an unoriginal, [[unimaginative]], [[awesome]] [[wastes]] of [[kino]] stock. --------------------------------------------- Result 161 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[John]] Ford is one of the most influential and [[best]] remembered American filmmakers in the [[history]] of [[film]], his [[name]] [[usually]] [[associated]] with the western film [[genre]]. However, John Ford's [[arguably]] best [[film]] is not a western at all but a seedy drama set in the Irish fight for independence in the early 1920s: 1935's The [[Informer]].

Times are tough on many in Ireland and the burnt out Gypo Nolan is caught in a web of poverty and [[desperation]] - and the walls are closing in. Gypo is [[big]] but he is not the brightest bulb on the tree, has a [[warm]] [[heart]] but a short fuse, and never seems to really think things all the way through but he is not a criminal or a self-centered pig. Walking the streets starving with no where to live, the hulking Gypo Nolan finds the prime lady in his life, Katie Madden, on the streets soliciting herself because of her own desperate situation and starts to dream about taking her to the United States if he only had the 20 Pounds to pay for it. As luck would have it, his friend Frankie is back in town with a 20 Pound price over his head and Gypo is desperate enough to inform the [[police]] of Frankie's whereabouts. Gypo, with the new 20 Pounds of blood money earned, finds this [[foggy]] night particularly foggier as guilt swells all over him and the IRA invests all their resources to [[find]] Frankie's [[informer]].

Victor McLaglen portrays the fallen Gypo Nolan and [[definitely]] deserved the Best Actor Oscar he was [[awarded]] for this film. His [[brutish]], [[stupid]], and [[tender]] turns [[give]] the [[character]] dimension and McLaglen is only second to Dudley Moore's [[character]] Arthur Bach from the 1981 film Arthur as the most [[entertaining]] cinematic drunk. [[Margot]] Grahame's performance as Katie Madden is also [[excellent]] but she and McLaglen are the only [[members]] of the [[cast]] who [[truly]] impress. Preston [[Foster]] is especially miscast as an IRA head, [[mainly]] because he is most obviously not Irish, and J. [[M]]. Kerrigan borders on irritating throughout his role in the film but this disappointing supporting [[cast]] is the film's only [[poor]] point.

[[Often]] [[overshadowed]] by some of Ford's better [[known]] westerns like The Searchers or The [[Man]] [[Who]] Shot Liberty Valance, The [[Informer]] is easily one of John Ford's best [[films]] - if not his very best. Beginning what would be a long career of Oscar nominations and wins for John Ford, The Informer won four Oscars including one for him for best director in 1936. Ford and company's use of shadows and light in the film is particularly engaging and vital to telling the story. Gypo's walk through the streets is narrated by the gloomy state of the town and the glaring accusations of the street lamps, each shadow constantly reminding him of his dark deed. Ford's command of this [[technique]] was amazing to watch; if The Informer was made 10 [[years]] later (thus making the genre requirements) it would probably be considered one of the best films noir of all time but that does not hinder it from being remembered as an [[excellent]] classic [[film]]. [[Giovanni]] Ford is one of the most influential and [[finest]] remembered American filmmakers in the [[historian]] of [[flick]], his [[behalf]] [[routinely]] [[tied]] with the western film [[genera]]. However, John Ford's [[surely]] best [[movie]] is not a western at all but a seedy drama set in the Irish fight for independence in the early 1920s: 1935's The [[Narc]].

Times are tough on many in Ireland and the burnt out Gypo Nolan is caught in a web of poverty and [[distress]] - and the walls are closing in. Gypo is [[overwhelming]] but he is not the brightest bulb on the tree, has a [[warming]] [[heartland]] but a short fuse, and never seems to really think things all the way through but he is not a criminal or a self-centered pig. Walking the streets starving with no where to live, the hulking Gypo Nolan finds the prime lady in his life, Katie Madden, on the streets soliciting herself because of her own desperate situation and starts to dream about taking her to the United States if he only had the 20 Pounds to pay for it. As luck would have it, his friend Frankie is back in town with a 20 Pound price over his head and Gypo is desperate enough to inform the [[policeman]] of Frankie's whereabouts. Gypo, with the new 20 Pounds of blood money earned, finds this [[grainy]] night particularly foggier as guilt swells all over him and the IRA invests all their resources to [[found]] Frankie's [[narc]].

Victor McLaglen portrays the fallen Gypo Nolan and [[surely]] deserved the Best Actor Oscar he was [[allotted]] for this film. His [[barbarous]], [[idiot]], and [[bids]] turns [[lend]] the [[nature]] dimension and McLaglen is only second to Dudley Moore's [[nature]] Arthur Bach from the 1981 film Arthur as the most [[droll]] cinematic drunk. [[Astrid]] Grahame's performance as Katie Madden is also [[noteworthy]] but she and McLaglen are the only [[member]] of the [[casting]] who [[really]] impress. Preston [[Promoted]] is especially miscast as an IRA head, [[especially]] because he is most obviously not Irish, and J. [[meters]]. Kerrigan borders on irritating throughout his role in the film but this disappointing supporting [[casting]] is the film's only [[pauper]] point.

[[Normally]] [[clouded]] by some of Ford's better [[renowned]] westerns like The Searchers or The [[Men]] [[Whom]] Shot Liberty Valance, The [[Squealer]] is easily one of John Ford's best [[movie]] - if not his very best. Beginning what would be a long career of Oscar nominations and wins for John Ford, The Informer won four Oscars including one for him for best director in 1936. Ford and company's use of shadows and light in the film is particularly engaging and vital to telling the story. Gypo's walk through the streets is narrated by the gloomy state of the town and the glaring accusations of the street lamps, each shadow constantly reminding him of his dark deed. Ford's command of this [[tech]] was amazing to watch; if The Informer was made 10 [[ages]] later (thus making the genre requirements) it would probably be considered one of the best films noir of all time but that does not hinder it from being remembered as an [[admirable]] classic [[cinema]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Watching this again after a [[gap]] of many years and [[remembering]] the [[flop]] it was upon its original release, I am surprised at how well it has [[held]] up. One of the [[reasons]] for its [[failure]] was that one generation just [[thought]] it was over [[indulgent]] [[crap]] and a younger one was disappointed that it did not [[show]] the full hippy glory. [[Seen]] now it is clear that Antonioni was already aware of and [[fascinated]] by the heady [[mix]] of [[fervent]] enthusiasm for [[change]] and a [[lack]] of any [[clear]] [[vision]] for the [[future]]. The lead pair are [[excellent]] and it is [[shameful]] that they took so much [[flak]] for the film's [[perceived]] [[failure]]. They are ideal and convey [[perfectly]] the [[various]] contradictions and [[demonstrate]] a [[pure]] [[delight]] in lovemaking. I blame others for the over [[emphasis]] on the [[student]] [[revolt]] sequences at the [[start]] but have to [[say]] that from there on in this is one of the directors most [[beautiful]] looking [[pictures]] and he [[certainly]] got the very [[best]] out of the [[man]] [[made]] and [[natural]] [[landscapes]]. Oh, and I haven't even [[mentioned]] the [[highly]] explosive ending. Watching this again after a [[deficiencies]] of many years and [[reminds]] the [[fiasco]] it was upon its original release, I am surprised at how well it has [[hold]] up. One of the [[motivations]] for its [[deficit]] was that one generation just [[think]] it was over [[tolerant]] [[dammit]] and a younger one was disappointed that it did not [[demonstrate]] the full hippy glory. [[Noticed]] now it is clear that Antonioni was already aware of and [[preoccupied]] by the heady [[mixing]] of [[devout]] enthusiasm for [[shift]] and a [[shortage]] of any [[unmistakable]] [[insight]] for the [[futur]]. The lead pair are [[wondrous]] and it is [[contemptible]] that they took so much [[bulletproof]] for the film's [[viewed]] [[deficiency]]. They are ideal and convey [[quite]] the [[diversified]] contradictions and [[proves]] a [[pur]] [[pleasure]] in lovemaking. I blame others for the over [[concentration]] on the [[pupils]] [[disobedience]] sequences at the [[initiating]] but have to [[said]] that from there on in this is one of the directors most [[wondrous]] looking [[picture]] and he [[probably]] got the very [[better]] out of the [[males]] [[introduced]] and [[naturel]] [[scenery]]. Oh, and I haven't even [[talked]] the [[crucially]] explosive ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] I do find it a bit overrated. Maybe it's just because I've never seen a subtitled version (dubbing stinks!), but I just don't get into it like a lot of other people do. The finale is really [[great]] though as [[Jackie]] trashes a mall, a scene that plays in my head every time i go shopping! I do find it a bit overrated. Maybe it's just because I've never seen a subtitled version (dubbing stinks!), but I just don't get into it like a lot of other people do. The finale is really [[wondrous]] though as [[Melanie]] trashes a mall, a scene that plays in my head every time i go shopping! --------------------------------------------- Result 164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] [[In]] Bridgeport, the [[deranged]] [[high]] school teacher [[Richard]] Fenton (Johnathon Schaech) is obsessed by the [[teenager]] [[student]] Donna Keppel (Brittany Snow); she witnesses him [[murder]] her family to [[stay]] with her, but [[Richard]] is [[arrested]] and [[sent]] to prison for life. [[Three]] [[years]] later, the traumatized Donna is feeling better but is [[still]] under [[psychological]] [[treatment]] and taking pills. On her [[prom]] night, she goes with her [[boyfriend]] Bobby (Scott Porter) and two [[couples]] of friends to the [[Pacific]] Grad Hotel for the party. But the psychopath [[Richard]] has [[escaped]] from [[prison]] and is [[lodged]] in the same floor in the hotel [[chasing]] Donna, stabbing her [[friends]] and [[staff]] of the [[hotel]] that [[cross]] his [[path]].

The forgettable [[slash]] "Prom [[Night]]" is a [[collection]] of clichés with a [[total]] [[lack]] of originality. The [[stupid]] [[story]] is shallow and [[silly]], with a [[bad]] acting of Johnathon Schaech in the role of an insane [[killer]]. The predictable [[screenplay]] is amazing since it is [[possible]] to [[foresee]] what is [[going]] to [[happen]] in the next scenes. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "A Morte Convida Para Dançar" ("The [[Death]] [[Invites]] to [[Dance]]") [[Throughout]] Bridgeport, the [[crazy]] [[alto]] school teacher [[Richie]] Fenton (Johnathon Schaech) is obsessed by the [[youths]] [[pupil]] Donna Keppel (Brittany Snow); she witnesses him [[assassination]] her family to [[stays]] with her, but [[Richie]] is [[arresting]] and [[sends]] to prison for life. [[Tre]] [[ages]] later, the traumatized Donna is feeling better but is [[again]] under [[psychiatric]] [[processing]] and taking pills. On her [[homecoming]] night, she goes with her [[fella]] Bobby (Scott Porter) and two [[couple]] of friends to the [[Peace]] Grad Hotel for the party. But the psychopath [[Richie]] has [[fled]] from [[internment]] and is [[filed]] in the same floor in the hotel [[chases]] Donna, stabbing her [[friendships]] and [[workforce]] of the [[motel]] that [[croix]] his [[way]].

The forgettable [[reduces]] "Prom [[Overnight]]" is a [[collects]] of clichés with a [[whole]] [[scarcity]] of originality. The [[idiot]] [[conte]] is shallow and [[idiot]], with a [[unfavourable]] acting of Johnathon Schaech in the role of an insane [[assassin]]. The predictable [[scripts]] is amazing since it is [[achievable]] to [[anticipated]] what is [[go]] to [[emerge]] in the next scenes. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "A Morte Convida Para Dançar" ("The [[Fatality]] [[Invitation]] to [[Choreography]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed a lot watching this movie. It has a great direction, by the already know Bigas Luna, born in Spain. And it is precisely in Spain that the movie takes place, in Cataluña, to be more precise.

Luna explores once more the theme of an obcession, in this case the obcession of a young boy for the women's milk. There are some psychological concepts in this story such as the rejection complex that the elder son feels with the birth of his brother. In the movie this is what leads to the obcession of the young boy who suddenly sees all his mother's milk go to the recently born son. So he starts trying to find a breast who is able to feed him. He finds it in a woman recently arrived and from here on the movie is all around this.

This movie lives a lot on imagery, more than the story itself, the espectator captures certain moments (unforgettable moments) and certain symbols (the movie deserves a thourough analyses on almost everything that happens because it usually means something...). The surroundings, the landscapes, typical from the region as well as the surreal behaviors of the characters, also symbolic, and the excelent ambiguous soundtrack by Nicola Piovani transport us to another dimension, not parallel to the real world, but which intersects it from times to times... Worth living in that world, worth watching this movie, even though we may eventually and for moments get tired and a bit sick with the excessive obcession, which is perhaps taken beyond the limits...

I also enjoyed the performance of the protagonist... 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Did you know, that Anthony Kiedis, ([[singer]] from the Red Hot Chili Peppers) [[father]] is in this [[movie]]. Blackie Dammit, is Anthony's [[father]]. I noticed this after reading "Scar Tissue" Anthony's autobiography, and saw a picture of his father. I thought, "well, that guy kinda looks like that guy from that movie I saw in the eighties. Then I read more and it said his [[father]] was an actor that had a few small [[roles]]. After [[checking]] this [[site]], and [[comparing]] with a search on the net, I [[realized]] it [[really]] is his father in the movie. It's [[funny]], because nowhere in the [[book]] does it mention him being in this movie. [[Perhaps]] his son was [[ashamed]] of his father's acting [[job]] in this [[flick]], but he [[need]] not be. I think his father, Blackie, did a [[great]] job in the show. Did you know, that Anthony Kiedis, ([[songbird]] from the Red Hot Chili Peppers) [[fathers]] is in this [[cinematography]]. Blackie Dammit, is Anthony's [[fathers]]. I noticed this after reading "Scar Tissue" Anthony's autobiography, and saw a picture of his father. I thought, "well, that guy kinda looks like that guy from that movie I saw in the eighties. Then I read more and it said his [[pere]] was an actor that had a few small [[functions]]. After [[audited]] this [[venue]], and [[compares]] with a search on the net, I [[performed]] it [[genuinely]] is his father in the movie. It's [[amusing]], because nowhere in the [[ledger]] does it mention him being in this movie. [[Probably]] his son was [[humiliating]] of his father's acting [[jobs]] in this [[gesture]], but he [[gotta]] not be. I think his father, Blackie, did a [[wondrous]] job in the show. --------------------------------------------- Result 167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] If I could give this film a real [[rating]], it would likely be in the minus [[numbers]]. [[While]] I respect the fact that [[somebody]] has to [[keep]] making these [[terrible]] "horror" films, [[seriously]], people, [[buying]] a [[ticket]] for this film is a waste of money you could be [[spending]] on something far more worth your [[time]].

Despite it being a horror [[film]], there is nothing scary about it, unless the idea of seeing how many horror cliché's you can fit in one movie scares you. If the rating had been higher, it probably would have made for a better film in the long run.

Whoever made this version of "Prom Night", you screwed up. The actors could probably have done a decent job if it weren't for the questionable scripting. This was a [[terrible]] [[waste]] of a cinema trip. I'd sooner go and see "One Missed Call" again, at least that had some plot. If I could give this film a real [[evaluation]], it would likely be in the minus [[digit]]. [[Though]] I respect the fact that [[anyone]] has to [[retain]] making these [[horrific]] "horror" films, [[harshly]], people, [[bought]] a [[tickets]] for this film is a waste of money you could be [[expenditure]] on something far more worth your [[moment]].

Despite it being a horror [[filmmaking]], there is nothing scary about it, unless the idea of seeing how many horror cliché's you can fit in one movie scares you. If the rating had been higher, it probably would have made for a better film in the long run.

Whoever made this version of "Prom Night", you screwed up. The actors could probably have done a decent job if it weren't for the questionable scripting. This was a [[dreaded]] [[squandering]] of a cinema trip. I'd sooner go and see "One Missed Call" again, at least that had some plot. --------------------------------------------- Result 168 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Overall]] I was rather impressed with the pilot. The [[initial]] first fifteen minutes were worrying, as it did feel the creators were [[trying]] to create a science fiction [[version]] of The O.C but this fear is [[rectified]] when a terrorist [[incident]] occurs and from here the show [[steps]] into [[themes]] and [[situations]] that I very rarely see [[television]] tackle.

BSG dealt with themes such as monotheism, existentialism, reality, death and terrorism but they were [[primarily]] subtext, there for the viewer to contemplate on or [[ignore]] if they so choose. Here on the other hand these [[subjects]] are the focus of the show and I personally found myself [[evoking]] such works as Ghost [[In]] The Shell and The Matrix as reference points while watching and being [[surprised]] by how well the [[themes]] were being discussed. I [[think]] if you are a fan of the two I just [[mentioned]] or other films/television [[shows]], which [[deal]] with the [[subjects]] I [[referenced]], I think you will find at least something here.

[[In]] terms of a starting point to [[explain]] how the situation we know in BSG [[came]] about I [[believe]] they [[handled]] it in a very interesting [[way]], I [[especially]] liked how they explained where the Cylon's belief in one God came from and the creation of Caprica had just enough advanced and contemporary technology thrown in to make it appear in the future but not completely alien to us as viewers.

The only real [[weak]] points I [[noticed]] were the relationship between the Greystone parents and the actress who plays 'Lacy Rand'. While I like Eric Stoltz and Paula Malcomson individually, together their scenes seemed to lack chemistry, at this point it could simply be down to developing their [[characters]], but this is [[something]] I think needs [[work]]. I also found Magda Apanowicz to be unconvincing in her role. This again [[could]] be down to experience and [[time]] [[needed]] to [[develop]], but throughout the episode her acting appeared forced and not [[completely]] confident.

[[Based]] on the [[pilot]] I [[greatly]] look forward to seeing where 'Caprica' goes in the future and hopefully it will [[touch]] the greatness that BSG once did. [[Whole]] I was rather impressed with the pilot. The [[preliminary]] first fifteen minutes were worrying, as it did feel the creators were [[seeking]] to create a science fiction [[stepping]] of The O.C but this fear is [[remedied]] when a terrorist [[mishap]] occurs and from here the show [[measuring]] into [[topic]] and [[instances]] that I very rarely see [[televisions]] tackle.

BSG dealt with themes such as monotheism, existentialism, reality, death and terrorism but they were [[basically]] subtext, there for the viewer to contemplate on or [[ignoring]] if they so choose. Here on the other hand these [[questions]] are the focus of the show and I personally found myself [[invoke]] such works as Ghost [[Onto]] The Shell and The Matrix as reference points while watching and being [[astounded]] by how well the [[topic]] were being discussed. I [[thought]] if you are a fan of the two I just [[talked]] or other films/television [[exhibitions]], which [[addresses]] with the [[questions]] I [[quoted]], I think you will find at least something here.

[[Onto]] terms of a starting point to [[clarify]] how the situation we know in BSG [[became]] about I [[believing]] they [[manipulated]] it in a very interesting [[paths]], I [[notably]] liked how they explained where the Cylon's belief in one God came from and the creation of Caprica had just enough advanced and contemporary technology thrown in to make it appear in the future but not completely alien to us as viewers.

The only real [[flimsy]] points I [[seen]] were the relationship between the Greystone parents and the actress who plays 'Lacy Rand'. While I like Eric Stoltz and Paula Malcomson individually, together their scenes seemed to lack chemistry, at this point it could simply be down to developing their [[attribute]], but this is [[anything]] I think needs [[jobs]]. I also found Magda Apanowicz to be unconvincing in her role. This again [[wo]] be down to experience and [[period]] [[need]] to [[elaborate]], but throughout the episode her acting appeared forced and not [[fully]] confident.

[[Founded]] on the [[flyboy]] I [[vastly]] look forward to seeing where 'Caprica' goes in the future and hopefully it will [[toque]] the greatness that BSG once did. --------------------------------------------- Result 169 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] I saw this little magnum opus for the first time very recently, on one of those dollar DVD's that seem to be everywhere nowadays, and was so moved by it that I cannot contain myself. For those who have never seen this mesmerizingly [[miserable]] Mexican import, and wish to view it without being prejudiced by anyone else's jaundiced commentary, there are undoubtedly substantial spoilers in what follows. So if you are one of those reckless individuals, stop reading at once and go and watch it for yourself. If you get drunk enough in advance, you might be fortunate enough to pass out before it's over.

Begin with the premise that a man may become a werewolf after being bitten by a yeti. No one in the film ventures an explanation as to how this sort of cross-species implantation could occur, and the rest of the movie is even more hopelessly nonsensical. But pour yourself another glass of wine (or whatever you're drinking), and let us proceed.

Paul Naschy (our werewolf) has the look of a man fighting a toothache, in a town where the only dentist has traded his supply of Novocaine for a case of cheap whiskey, and has been drunk ever since. (Ain't he the lucky one?) Naschy's facial expression never varies, whether in or out of makeup, and apparently no one gave him any coaching on how to act like a werewolf. Occasionally he tries to imitate the Lon Chaney Jr. crouch, but most of the time he simply strolls around in his black mafia shirt, like just another cool dude with a tad too much facial hair. To be fair, the makeup is actually better than the actor inside of it, but the continuity is infinitely worse. Naschy's werewolf is the only one I can think of that changes shirts twice in the middle of a prowl. He goes from black shirt to red shirt, then back to black, then back to red, then back to black, all in a single, frenzied night. Interestingly enough, he always does the Chaney crouch while wearing the red shirt, and the cool dude walk while wearing the black shirt. And it's only while he is wearing the red shirt that we see much of the fury alluded to in the title. Presumably there's something about that red shirt that just brings out the animal in him.

So anyway, after being bitten by the cross-pollinating yeti, the poor schmuck returns home from Tibet to learn that his wife has been sleeping with one of his students. The two illicit lovers try to murder him by adjusting the brakes on his car. He survives the wreck, and makes it home just in time for a full moon. Then, after chewing up his wife and her lover, he wanders off again, and somehow manages to get himself electrocuted. But is that enough? Can they let this tormented wretch rest in peace? Not a chance. He is resurrected by a supposed female scientist with a hardcore S/M fetish, otherwise known as "The Doctor" (and definitely not a new incarnation of Doctor Who). She digs him up and whisks him away to her kinky kastle, takes him down to the dungeon, chains him to the wall, and gives him a damn good flogging. Presumably such a string of indignities ought to be enough to put a little fury into any wolfman.

After his two-shirted rampage, our wolfman spends most of the rest of the film wandering around the castle, trying to find a way out. (And who can blame him?) In the course of his wanderings, he encounters a bewilderingly incoherent assortment of clichés, including a man dressed in medieval armor, a curiously inept Phantom of the Opera impersonator (supposedly The Doctor's father), and a hard-partying cadre of bondage slaves.

So what's it all about, one may reasonably ask? One gets the vague impression that it has something to do with mind control, and involves something The Doctor calls "chemotrodes." (Best guess. I really have no idea how it's spelled, if there even is such a thing.) Mercifully, the experiment ends in failure, and most importantly, it ends...before one has time to gnaw one's own leg off.

Of course, one doesn't really expect any sense from a film like this, but at least it ought to be good for laughs. This one isn't. Forget it, buddy. There is a creeping sort of anarchy about this film, from its patched-together, tequila-drenched ambiance to its atrocious cinematography and agonizing musical score, that defies even the most sozzled attempts to get any MST3K type laughs out of it. If it's not even good for that, what the hell is it good for? If Montezuma's revenge could have somehow been digitally remastered and put on a DVD, it would have looked exactly like this movie. I saw this little magnum opus for the first time very recently, on one of those dollar DVD's that seem to be everywhere nowadays, and was so moved by it that I cannot contain myself. For those who have never seen this mesmerizingly [[sorrowful]] Mexican import, and wish to view it without being prejudiced by anyone else's jaundiced commentary, there are undoubtedly substantial spoilers in what follows. So if you are one of those reckless individuals, stop reading at once and go and watch it for yourself. If you get drunk enough in advance, you might be fortunate enough to pass out before it's over.

Begin with the premise that a man may become a werewolf after being bitten by a yeti. No one in the film ventures an explanation as to how this sort of cross-species implantation could occur, and the rest of the movie is even more hopelessly nonsensical. But pour yourself another glass of wine (or whatever you're drinking), and let us proceed.

Paul Naschy (our werewolf) has the look of a man fighting a toothache, in a town where the only dentist has traded his supply of Novocaine for a case of cheap whiskey, and has been drunk ever since. (Ain't he the lucky one?) Naschy's facial expression never varies, whether in or out of makeup, and apparently no one gave him any coaching on how to act like a werewolf. Occasionally he tries to imitate the Lon Chaney Jr. crouch, but most of the time he simply strolls around in his black mafia shirt, like just another cool dude with a tad too much facial hair. To be fair, the makeup is actually better than the actor inside of it, but the continuity is infinitely worse. Naschy's werewolf is the only one I can think of that changes shirts twice in the middle of a prowl. He goes from black shirt to red shirt, then back to black, then back to red, then back to black, all in a single, frenzied night. Interestingly enough, he always does the Chaney crouch while wearing the red shirt, and the cool dude walk while wearing the black shirt. And it's only while he is wearing the red shirt that we see much of the fury alluded to in the title. Presumably there's something about that red shirt that just brings out the animal in him.

So anyway, after being bitten by the cross-pollinating yeti, the poor schmuck returns home from Tibet to learn that his wife has been sleeping with one of his students. The two illicit lovers try to murder him by adjusting the brakes on his car. He survives the wreck, and makes it home just in time for a full moon. Then, after chewing up his wife and her lover, he wanders off again, and somehow manages to get himself electrocuted. But is that enough? Can they let this tormented wretch rest in peace? Not a chance. He is resurrected by a supposed female scientist with a hardcore S/M fetish, otherwise known as "The Doctor" (and definitely not a new incarnation of Doctor Who). She digs him up and whisks him away to her kinky kastle, takes him down to the dungeon, chains him to the wall, and gives him a damn good flogging. Presumably such a string of indignities ought to be enough to put a little fury into any wolfman.

After his two-shirted rampage, our wolfman spends most of the rest of the film wandering around the castle, trying to find a way out. (And who can blame him?) In the course of his wanderings, he encounters a bewilderingly incoherent assortment of clichés, including a man dressed in medieval armor, a curiously inept Phantom of the Opera impersonator (supposedly The Doctor's father), and a hard-partying cadre of bondage slaves.

So what's it all about, one may reasonably ask? One gets the vague impression that it has something to do with mind control, and involves something The Doctor calls "chemotrodes." (Best guess. I really have no idea how it's spelled, if there even is such a thing.) Mercifully, the experiment ends in failure, and most importantly, it ends...before one has time to gnaw one's own leg off.

Of course, one doesn't really expect any sense from a film like this, but at least it ought to be good for laughs. This one isn't. Forget it, buddy. There is a creeping sort of anarchy about this film, from its patched-together, tequila-drenched ambiance to its atrocious cinematography and agonizing musical score, that defies even the most sozzled attempts to get any MST3K type laughs out of it. If it's not even good for that, what the hell is it good for? If Montezuma's revenge could have somehow been digitally remastered and put on a DVD, it would have looked exactly like this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Dominick ([[Nicky]]) Luciano [[wears]] a 'Hulk' T-shirt and trudges off [[everyday]] to perform his [[duties]] as a [[garbage]] [[man]]. He uses his [[physical]] power in picking up other's trash and hauling it to the [[town]] dump. He reads comic-book [[hero]] [[stories]] and [[loves]] wrestlers and wrestling, Going to WrestleMania with his [[twin]] brother [[Eugene]] on their birthday is a [[yearly]] tradition. He [[talks]] kindly with the [[many]] people he [[comes]] in [[contact]] with during his day. He reads comic books, which he [[finds]] in the trash, with a young boy who he [[often]] passes by while on the garbage [[route]]. Unfortunately, Dominick has a [[diminished]] ability to [[use]] his [[mind]]. He has a [[disability]].

Dominick's [[disability]] [[came]] as a result of an injury to the [[head]] in which he [[suffered]] traumatic brain injury (TBI). This [[injury]] [[left]] him slower, [[though]] it did not [[change]] his core [[characteristic]] as a [[strong]] [[individual]] who helps to [[protect]] others. Dominick is actually more [[able]] to [[live]] [[independently]] than he may seem at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. He lives with [[Eugene]] who is [[studying]] to [[become]] a doctor. Dominick [[provides]] the [[main]] [[source]] of [[income]], while [[Eugene]] is off [[studying]]. Eugene [[must]] [[face]] the [[fact]] that he is to [[continue]] his [[education]] in a [[different]] [[city]], and that he [[must]] move away from Dominick. Eugene [[also]] develops a romance which [[begins]] to [[separate]] him from his [[twin]] brother.

The film [[deals]] [[specifically]] with domestic abuse and how this can [[impact]] [[individuals]], families, and then [[society]] as a [[whole]]. The [[strain]] that [[escalates]] between [[Eugene]] and Dominick as [[Eugene]] [[realizes]] that he must eventually [[leave]] [[Nicky]], [[exploded]] on their birthday night. [[Eugene]] yells at Dominick and throws him against the wall. [[In]] this [[moment]], [[Eugene]] must [[confront]] his own [[fears]] of being like his [[abusive]] father, the father which [[Dominick]] [[protected]] him against while he himself became the victim of the [[abuse]]. This [[event]] [[cemented]] the [[love]] between the two brothers, who from then on became the [[best]] of [[friends]]. [[Though]] they [[needed]] each other, they [[also]] both needed independence and the [[ability]] to [[grow]] and [[develop]] [[relationship]] with others. The [[fact]] that they [[must]] part [[ways]] became a very real emotional strain. However, by the [[end]] of the [[film]], Dominick is able to [[say]] [[good]] [[bye]] to his brother and wish him [[luck]]. [[Eugene]] is [[able]] to [[leave]] his brother with the confidence that he has [[started]] to [[make]] a [[social]] [[network]] of people who care about him and will help him with his independence.

When Dominick witnesses the abuse of his friend he is forced to come face to face with the cause of his own trauma. In this state of extreme stress, Dominick almost completely shuts down. He then runs after the ambulance to the hospital to see what happened to his friend. After learning that the boy has died, he is confronted by the abusive father who, fearing his testimonial, tells him he didn't see nothing, doesn't know anything, and not to say anything, and that if he does he will kill him. Now that his own life has been threatened, he goes and find the hand gun that Larry used to kill the rats. He goes to the wake of the deceased boy and at gunpoint, kidnaps the baby of the grieving family. He runs away from the scene and [[hides]] in a building. When the police surround him, Eugene goes in the building to talk to his brother. Eugene then reveals the cause of Dominick's disability and they bring the baby back. The abusive father then wields a gun of his own threatening to kill Dominick, but Eugene stops him and Dominick tells the crowd that he saw the father throw his son down the stairs.

Through the climactic ending, the issue of dysfunctional behavior comes into view. Though Dominick's instinct to save the baby can be understood, we also see how damaging this response is. Dominick put the baby's life and his own life in grave danger. The larger societal consequences of these events is not directly implicated, but rather shown through the films ending. Despite the more optimistic ending portrayal, another sequence of events might just have likely occurred, in which Dominick is charged with kidnapping and possession of a firearm. It is somewhat difficult to believe that this went completely unaccounted. Furthermore, even if Dominick is not charged, there may still be a stigma against him within the community, not that there wasn't one before these events. Instead, the film shows that we must be able to recognize problematic behavior and act to curb it.

Dominick and Eugene was released in 1988, the same year as another film, Rainman, which won 5 Academy Awards. While Rainman was an achievement and helped increase the visibility with person with disabilities, it could be argued that Dominick and Eugene holds more valuable lessons for society. Whereas, Rainman demonstrated that mainstream American society might be able to learn from and care for a 'savant', if the 'savant' is the inheritor of a large estate. Dominick and Eugene show that a person with a disability might be able to care for and help save members of American society. The message of an independent person with disabilities may have been too strong for 1988. Hopefully someday society will see the strengths of individuals with disabilities, not as a threat, but as imperative for the strength of society. Dominick ([[Nick]]) Luciano [[door]] a 'Hulk' T-shirt and trudges off [[daily]] to perform his [[roles]] as a [[junk]] [[men]]. He uses his [[bodily]] power in picking up other's trash and hauling it to the [[municipality]] dump. He reads comic-book [[superhero]] [[story]] and [[love]] wrestlers and wrestling, Going to WrestleMania with his [[doubles]] brother [[Buchanan]] on their birthday is a [[annual]] tradition. He [[debates]] kindly with the [[several]] people he [[arrives]] in [[liaison]] with during his day. He reads comic books, which he [[discovers]] in the trash, with a young boy who he [[traditionally]] passes by while on the garbage [[road]]. Unfortunately, Dominick has a [[lowered]] ability to [[utilizing]] his [[intellect]]. He has a [[inability]].

Dominick's [[disabilities]] [[arrived]] as a result of an injury to the [[leader]] in which he [[endured]] traumatic brain injury (TBI). This [[lesions]] [[exited]] him slower, [[nevertheless]] it did not [[amend]] his core [[feature]] as a [[forceful]] [[person]] who helps to [[protecting]] others. Dominick is actually more [[capable]] to [[viva]] [[regardless]] than he may seem at the [[begin]] of the [[movie]]. He lives with [[Agnes]] who is [[exploring]] to [[becoming]] a doctor. Dominick [[delivers]] the [[primary]] [[origin]] of [[revenues]], while [[Genevieve]] is off [[examining]]. Eugene [[should]] [[confront]] the [[facto]] that he is to [[sustained]] his [[upbringing]] in a [[differing]] [[town]], and that he [[should]] move away from Dominick. Eugene [[additionally]] develops a romance which [[launches]] to [[separated]] him from his [[doubles]] brother.

The film [[treats]] [[especially]] with domestic abuse and how this can [[influence]] [[person]], families, and then [[societies]] as a [[entire]]. The [[tensions]] that [[escalating]] between [[Genevieve]] and Dominick as [[Geraldine]] [[realises]] that he must eventually [[letting]] [[Nikki]], [[exploding]] on their birthday night. [[Geraldine]] yells at Dominick and throws him against the wall. [[For]] this [[time]], [[Buchanan]] must [[confronting]] his own [[feared]] of being like his [[offensive]] father, the father which [[Dominic]] [[protects]] him against while he himself became the victim of the [[abuses]]. This [[events]] [[hardened]] the [[loves]] between the two brothers, who from then on became the [[better]] of [[mates]]. [[If]] they [[necessity]] each other, they [[similarly]] both needed independence and the [[skills]] to [[raising]] and [[elaborate]] [[relationships]] with others. The [[facto]] that they [[owe]] part [[mode]] became a very real emotional strain. However, by the [[ends]] of the [[cinematography]], Dominick is able to [[told]] [[alright]] [[ciao]] to his brother and wish him [[likelihood]]. [[Buchanan]] is [[capable]] to [[letting]] his brother with the confidence that he has [[launching]] to [[deliver]] a [[societal]] [[grids]] of people who care about him and will help him with his independence.

When Dominick witnesses the abuse of his friend he is forced to come face to face with the cause of his own trauma. In this state of extreme stress, Dominick almost completely shuts down. He then runs after the ambulance to the hospital to see what happened to his friend. After learning that the boy has died, he is confronted by the abusive father who, fearing his testimonial, tells him he didn't see nothing, doesn't know anything, and not to say anything, and that if he does he will kill him. Now that his own life has been threatened, he goes and find the hand gun that Larry used to kill the rats. He goes to the wake of the deceased boy and at gunpoint, kidnaps the baby of the grieving family. He runs away from the scene and [[cache]] in a building. When the police surround him, Eugene goes in the building to talk to his brother. Eugene then reveals the cause of Dominick's disability and they bring the baby back. The abusive father then wields a gun of his own threatening to kill Dominick, but Eugene stops him and Dominick tells the crowd that he saw the father throw his son down the stairs.

Through the climactic ending, the issue of dysfunctional behavior comes into view. Though Dominick's instinct to save the baby can be understood, we also see how damaging this response is. Dominick put the baby's life and his own life in grave danger. The larger societal consequences of these events is not directly implicated, but rather shown through the films ending. Despite the more optimistic ending portrayal, another sequence of events might just have likely occurred, in which Dominick is charged with kidnapping and possession of a firearm. It is somewhat difficult to believe that this went completely unaccounted. Furthermore, even if Dominick is not charged, there may still be a stigma against him within the community, not that there wasn't one before these events. Instead, the film shows that we must be able to recognize problematic behavior and act to curb it.

Dominick and Eugene was released in 1988, the same year as another film, Rainman, which won 5 Academy Awards. While Rainman was an achievement and helped increase the visibility with person with disabilities, it could be argued that Dominick and Eugene holds more valuable lessons for society. Whereas, Rainman demonstrated that mainstream American society might be able to learn from and care for a 'savant', if the 'savant' is the inheritor of a large estate. Dominick and Eugene show that a person with a disability might be able to care for and help save members of American society. The message of an independent person with disabilities may have been too strong for 1988. Hopefully someday society will see the strengths of individuals with disabilities, not as a threat, but as imperative for the strength of society. --------------------------------------------- Result 171 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say? I know this movie from start to finish. It's hilarious. It's an strong link to my past and will change the way I view film in the future. Hypothetically speaking :) The down-fall? There's no Socrates Johnson! --------------------------------------------- Result 172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Good sequel to Murder in a Small Town. In this one Cash and his police Lt. buddy unravel a sticky plot involving a Nazi criminal, a philanthropic witch, and a family of screw-ups and their wierdo helpers. As in the original, the viewer is treated to a nice little mystery with distinctive sights and sounds of pre-war America. Go see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not even Bob Hope, escorted by a raft of fine character actors, can save this poorly written attempt at wartime comedy, as his patented timing has little which which to work. The plot involves a Hollywood film star named Don Bolton (Hope), and his attempt to evade military service at the beginning of World War II, followed by his enlistment by mistake in a confused attempt to court a colonel's daughter (Dorothy Lamour). Bolton's agent, played by Lynne Overman, and his assistant, portrayed by Eddie Bracken, enlist with him and the three are involved in various escapades regarding training exercises, filmed in the Malibu, California, hills. Paramount budgeted handsomely for this effort, employing some of its top specialists, but direction by the usually reliable David Butler was flaccid, and this must be attributed to a missing comedic element in the scenario. A shift toward the end of the film to create an opportunity for heroism by Bolton is still-born with poor stunt work and camera action in evidence. Oddly, Lynne Overman is given the best lines and this veteran master of the sneer does very well by them. Dorothy Lamour looks lovely and acts nicely, as well, and it is ever a delight to see and hear Clarence Kolb, as her father, whose voice is unique on screen or radio, but there is little they can do to save this film, cursed as it is with an error in script assignment. --------------------------------------------- Result 174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I studied Charlotte Bronte's novel in high school, and it left me with a stunning impression. Here was a beautiful novel about a young woman's struggle to find love and acceptance in the dark times of Victorian England. This young woman was Jane Eyre, a poor and plain character with a strong mind and will of her own. Her story, which Bronte told through Jane's own eyes, was both sad and inspiring.

As part of our study, we watched the 1983 adaptation of the story, and it blew me away. The mini-series not only made the effort to stay true to Bronte's original text and the essence of the story, but the actors who portrayed the characters were just great. Both Zelah Clarke (Jane Eyre) and Timothy Dalton (Jane's lover, by the name of Rochester) captured brilliantly the essence of their characters. I cannot imagine anyone else in their roles. (The other performances of Rochester in other versions such as the 2006 version lack the passion, energy, and tenderness needed to portray Rochester accurately. I say that Timothy Dalton comes out on top because he possesses all these characteristics in his portrayal of Rochester. Zelah Clarke not only looks like Jane Eyre, but she captures Jane's quiet, but firm and passionate nature brilliantly. She holds in her emotions, like the Jane of the book, at the appropriate moments in the story but allows her fire to come out in Jane's passionate scenes. The chemistry that Clarke and Dalton portray in their scenes together is also credible and true to Jane and Rochester's devoted relationship.) As well, the supporting actors also fit their roles perfectly, and the sets fit the Gothic nature of the story.

I strongly recommend this version of the classic Bronte tale. If you have not read the book before, then you can watch this production as a faithful introduction to this beautiful story. --------------------------------------------- Result 175 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] It's been close to ten years since I've seen either of the last two sequels to "Phantasm" - surely due to my still vivid remembrance of them not being very good. That being acknowledged to this day, I'm still a huge [[fan]] of the [[first]] two installments so I thought I'd [[go]] back and re-experience the 'final chapters'. Part three is [[definitely]] the [[worst]] of the series since it obviously takes itself less seriously and throws in a bunch of [[confusing]] stuff that doesn't make much [[sense]]... Again, kicking off right where the previous movie left us, [[Reggie]] saves Mike from the Tall Man who vows to come back for him later, but things aren't safe for long when they come across Jody who is [[inexplicably]] able to the take the form of a sphere. Apparently his soul is held prisoner by the Tall Man so Mike is then dragged into the sinister double-pronged [[Netherworld]] and Reg has to find him... Along the way, he meets up with a ten year-old kid and a nun-chuck wielding black chick named Rocky who assist him throughout his journey.

There's really [[nothing]] memorable about "Phantasm III" other than how stupid and forcefully "humorous" it tries to be. Only one positive aspect that didn't even help the movie and that was the return of A. Michael Baldwin and Bill Thornbury who reprise their roles for the first time since the original 1978 classic. The problem is, they pretty much make cameo appearances... Reggie [[Banister]] is of course back in his starring role, but his bumbling, love-sick attitude makes his presence far too [[annoying]] to like. Angus Scrimm also just didn't seem entirely "into" his role. He talks too much here and is nowhere near as menacing and creepy in contrast with the "quirkiness" that the movie seemed to carelessly resort to. Most people's opinion on this flick seem pretty [[impassive]] and tend to think "it's still entertaining". Maybe I'm just too much of a nit picker but I just couldn't get into this one. I remember disliking it when I was a kid and after re-watching it - I can safely say - nothing has changed. Don Coscarelli rocked the scene with his original low-budget, nightmarish, legendary film "Phantasm", which I still rank as my top favorite horror flick and his respectable sequel kept things moving and darkly surreal and GORY, but "Lord of the Dead" (stupid title) just looked too rushed and slapped together to me... The inclusion of the two new characters, Tim and Rocky (the only thing missing was Scrappy Doo!!), was a strong indication of Coscarelli running out of ideas and seeing how far he could ride the franchise...

So, it's a "Phantasm" movie with very little gore, nudity, and quadruple-barrel shot guns. Need I say more? It's been close to ten years since I've seen either of the last two sequels to "Phantasm" - surely due to my still vivid remembrance of them not being very good. That being acknowledged to this day, I'm still a huge [[breather]] of the [[frst]] two installments so I thought I'd [[going]] back and re-experience the 'final chapters'. Part three is [[obviously]] the [[gravest]] of the series since it obviously takes itself less seriously and throws in a bunch of [[disconcerting]] stuff that doesn't make much [[sensing]]... Again, kicking off right where the previous movie left us, [[Reg]] saves Mike from the Tall Man who vows to come back for him later, but things aren't safe for long when they come across Jody who is [[inextricably]] able to the take the form of a sphere. Apparently his soul is held prisoner by the Tall Man so Mike is then dragged into the sinister double-pronged [[Underworld]] and Reg has to find him... Along the way, he meets up with a ten year-old kid and a nun-chuck wielding black chick named Rocky who assist him throughout his journey.

There's really [[anything]] memorable about "Phantasm III" other than how stupid and forcefully "humorous" it tries to be. Only one positive aspect that didn't even help the movie and that was the return of A. Michael Baldwin and Bill Thornbury who reprise their roles for the first time since the original 1978 classic. The problem is, they pretty much make cameo appearances... Reggie [[Handrail]] is of course back in his starring role, but his bumbling, love-sick attitude makes his presence far too [[exasperating]] to like. Angus Scrimm also just didn't seem entirely "into" his role. He talks too much here and is nowhere near as menacing and creepy in contrast with the "quirkiness" that the movie seemed to carelessly resort to. Most people's opinion on this flick seem pretty [[unconcerned]] and tend to think "it's still entertaining". Maybe I'm just too much of a nit picker but I just couldn't get into this one. I remember disliking it when I was a kid and after re-watching it - I can safely say - nothing has changed. Don Coscarelli rocked the scene with his original low-budget, nightmarish, legendary film "Phantasm", which I still rank as my top favorite horror flick and his respectable sequel kept things moving and darkly surreal and GORY, but "Lord of the Dead" (stupid title) just looked too rushed and slapped together to me... The inclusion of the two new characters, Tim and Rocky (the only thing missing was Scrappy Doo!!), was a strong indication of Coscarelli running out of ideas and seeing how far he could ride the franchise...

So, it's a "Phantasm" movie with very little gore, nudity, and quadruple-barrel shot guns. Need I say more? --------------------------------------------- Result 176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Dumb is as dumb does, in this thoroughly uninteresting, supposed black comedy. [[Essentially]] what starts out as [[Chris]] Klein trying to [[maintain]] a low profile, eventually morphs into an [[uninspired]] version of "The Three Amigos", only without any [[laughs]]. In order for black [[comedy]] to work, it must be outrageous, which "Play Dead" is not. In order for black [[comedy]] to work, it cannot be mean spirited, which "Play Dead" is. What "Play Dead" really is, is a [[town]] full of [[nut]] jobs. Fred Dunst does however do a pretty fair imitation of Billy Bob Thornton's character from "A Simple Plan", while Jake Busey does a pretty fair imitation of, well, Jake Busey. - MERK Dumb is as dumb does, in this thoroughly uninteresting, supposed black comedy. [[Broadly]] what starts out as [[Chrissy]] Klein trying to [[conserving]] a low profile, eventually morphs into an [[unimaginative]] version of "The Three Amigos", only without any [[giggling]]. In order for black [[humor]] to work, it must be outrageous, which "Play Dead" is not. In order for black [[humor]] to work, it cannot be mean spirited, which "Play Dead" is. What "Play Dead" really is, is a [[city]] full of [[nuts]] jobs. Fred Dunst does however do a pretty fair imitation of Billy Bob Thornton's character from "A Simple Plan", while Jake Busey does a pretty fair imitation of, well, Jake Busey. - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I found myself at sixes and sevens while [[watching]] this one. Altman's [[touch]] with zooms in and out were there, and I [[expected]] those [[devices]] to [[comment]] on [[characters]] and situations. Unfortunately, as far as I could [[see]], they [[sometimes]] were [[gratuitous]], [[sometimes]] witty, [[often]] barren for failing to point out some ironic or other connection. [[In]] [[particular]], two zoom-outs from the gilt dome in [[savannah]] [[merely]] [[perplexed]]. To be fair, [[though]], a few zooms (outs and ins) to Branagh [[heightened]] his character's [[increasing]] [[bewilderment]], a [[la]] Pudgy McCabe's or [[Philip]] Marlow's. [[On]] the [[whole]], the zooms were, well, [[inconsistent]], and sometimes even [[trite]].

Other Almanesque [[devices]], such as [[multiple]] panes of glass between camera and [[subject]], succeeded in [[suggesting]] characters' sollipsism or narcissism or [[opaque]] states of [[knowledge]]. [[Car]] [[windshields]], [[house]] [[windows]], and other screens were [[used]] effectively and [[fairly]] [[consistently]], I [[felt]], harking back to THE PLAYER and [[even]] THE [[LONG]] GOODBYE. A few catchy jump-cuts, [[especially]] to a suggestive [[tv]] [[commercial]], reminded me of such [[usage]] in SHORT CUTS, to [[sardonic]] [[effect]].

But [[finally]], the mismatch between Altman's very personal [[style]] and the sheer [[weight]] of the Grisham-genre [[momentum]], failed to [[excite]] me. This director's 1970s [[masterpieces]] revised and deconstructed [[various]] classic [[genres]], [[including]] the chandler detective [[film]] which this resembled in some [[ways]]; this [[time]] [[around]], the director seemed to have too few [[arrows]] in his analytic quiver to strike any meaningful blow to the soft underbelly of this beastly [[genre]]. [[Was]] he muzzled in by mammonist [[producers]], perhaps? Or am I missing [[something]], due to my [[feeble]] [[knowledge]] of the [[genre]] he takes on here?

Nonetheless, the casting was [[excellent]] all around: [[Tom]] Berenger (for his terrifying ferality), Branagh for his (deflated) [[hubris]], Robert Downey Jr's pheromonal haze, [[Robert]] Duvall's [[method]] of [[trash]], and Davidtz's lurking femme-fatality were near [[perfect]] [[choices]] all. And except for a few [[slips]] out of Georgia into Chicago on the [[part]] of (brunette?) [[Daryl]] Hannah, accents were convincingly [[southern]].

Suspense and mood were engrossing, even if the story didn't quite rivet viewers. The moodiness of a coastal pre-hurricane barometric plunge was exquisitely, painstakingly rendered--I felt like yelling at the usher to turn on the swamp cooler pronto.

Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.

I found myself at sixes and sevens while [[staring]] this one. Altman's [[touches]] with zooms in and out were there, and I [[hoped]] those [[instruments]] to [[observing]] on [[nature]] and situations. Unfortunately, as far as I could [[seeing]], they [[intermittently]] were [[baseless]], [[occasionally]] witty, [[generally]] barren for failing to point out some ironic or other connection. [[Onto]] [[singular]], two zoom-outs from the gilt dome in [[savanna]] [[just]] [[befuddled]]. To be fair, [[if]], a few zooms (outs and ins) to Branagh [[risen]] his character's [[heighten]] [[chagrin]], a [[angeles]] Pudgy McCabe's or [[Philippe]] Marlow's. [[Onto]] the [[ensemble]], the zooms were, well, [[incoherent]], and sometimes even [[petty]].

Other Almanesque [[equipment]], such as [[several]] panes of glass between camera and [[themes]], succeeded in [[implying]] characters' sollipsism or narcissism or [[shadowy]] states of [[expertise]]. [[Motor]] [[windscreen]], [[home]] [[window]], and other screens were [[employs]] effectively and [[rather]] [[invariably]], I [[believed]], harking back to THE PLAYER and [[yet]] THE [[LANG]] GOODBYE. A few catchy jump-cuts, [[specifically]] to a suggestive [[television]] [[trade]], reminded me of such [[utilize]] in SHORT CUTS, to [[wry]] [[consequence]].

But [[ultimately]], the mismatch between Altman's very personal [[styling]] and the sheer [[weighs]] of the Grisham-genre [[impetus]], failed to [[exciting]] me. This director's 1970s [[antiques]] revised and deconstructed [[diversified]] classic [[genera]], [[containing]] the chandler detective [[movies]] which this resembled in some [[methods]]; this [[times]] [[about]], the director seemed to have too few [[arrow]] in his analytic quiver to strike any meaningful blow to the soft underbelly of this beastly [[genera]]. [[Became]] he muzzled in by mammonist [[producer]], perhaps? Or am I missing [[anything]], due to my [[flimsy]] [[acquaintance]] of the [[genres]] he takes on here?

Nonetheless, the casting was [[wondrous]] all around: [[Thom]] Berenger (for his terrifying ferality), Branagh for his (deflated) [[arrogance]], Robert Downey Jr's pheromonal haze, [[Roberta]] Duvall's [[methodology]] of [[wastebasket]], and Davidtz's lurking femme-fatality were near [[faultless]] [[selects]] all. And except for a few [[slip]] out of Georgia into Chicago on the [[portion]] of (brunette?) [[Darry]] Hannah, accents were convincingly [[southerly]].

Suspense and mood were engrossing, even if the story didn't quite rivet viewers. The moodiness of a coastal pre-hurricane barometric plunge was exquisitely, painstakingly rendered--I felt like yelling at the usher to turn on the swamp cooler pronto.

Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.

--------------------------------------------- Result 178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Bored with the normal, run-of-the-mill staple [[films]] to watch this Halloween that I've [[seen]] over and over again, I [[took]] a chance on "The Sentinel", hoping it could [[get]] my horror juices flowing again. Mind you, I had just come back from seeing the [[Dark]] [[Castle]] remake of "The House on [[Haunted]] Hill" - complete and utter crap. [[Thankfully]], "The [[Sentinel]]" BLEW ME AWAY! [[In]] a riviting [[story]] about a model who moves into a creepy building in Brooklyn Hights, the [[film]] offered everything that I hope to find in a good movie - (1) Campy and fantasically [[juicy]] characters, [[exchanges]] and [[dialogue]], [[including]] hilaraious turns by [[Christopher]] Walken, [[Jeff]] Goldblum and [[especially]], [[Martin]] Balsam, as an [[absent]] minded professor - (2) [[Horrifying]] Terror! Not to [[give]] a [[frame]] away, but there are scenes in this [[film]] that [[chilled]] me to my pancreas - (3) [[Fantastic]] [[gore]], [[terrific]] make-up and [[wacky]] (if very [[uneven]]) direction from [[Michael]] Winner, which flows [[rather]] [[nicely]] with this [[unreal]] [[treat]]. If you [[loved]] "Evil Dead 2", "Dead Alive" and "Deep [[Rising]]" - this will be your queen of favourites. Just to emphasize my [[love]] for this film - after I [[watched]] it for the first time, jaw-dropped, I rewound it and watched it again. It is now one of favourites of all time. Do yourself a favour and check it out! Bored with the normal, run-of-the-mill staple [[kino]] to watch this Halloween that I've [[noticed]] over and over again, I [[taken]] a chance on "The Sentinel", hoping it could [[got]] my horror juices flowing again. Mind you, I had just come back from seeing the [[Darkness]] [[Castillo]] remake of "The House on [[Tormented]] Hill" - complete and utter crap. [[Hopefully]], "The [[Sentry]]" BLEW ME AWAY! [[During]] a riviting [[conte]] about a model who moves into a creepy building in Brooklyn Hights, the [[films]] offered everything that I hope to find in a good movie - (1) Campy and fantasically [[earner]] characters, [[share]] and [[dialog]], [[comprising]] hilaraious turns by [[Christophe]] Walken, [[Geoff]] Goldblum and [[mostly]], [[Martins]] Balsam, as an [[absence]] minded professor - (2) [[Awful]] Terror! Not to [[lend]] a [[framework]] away, but there are scenes in this [[cinematography]] that [[cold]] me to my pancreas - (3) [[Super]] [[gora]], [[wondrous]] make-up and [[demented]] (if very [[ragged]]) direction from [[Micheal]] Winner, which flows [[comparatively]] [[politely]] with this [[unrealistic]] [[handling]]. If you [[adore]] "Evil Dead 2", "Dead Alive" and "Deep [[Climbing]]" - this will be your queen of favourites. Just to emphasize my [[iike]] for this film - after I [[saw]] it for the first time, jaw-dropped, I rewound it and watched it again. It is now one of favourites of all time. Do yourself a favour and check it out! --------------------------------------------- Result 179 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Howling II (1985) was a complete 180 from the first [[film]]. [[Whilst]] the first [[film]] was campy and creepy. The second one was sleazy and cheesy. The production values on this one are pretty bad and the acting is [[atrocious]]. The brother of the anchorwoman [[werewolf]] from [[part]] one wants to find out what happened to his sis'. The "scene" from the first film was badly re-created. A skinny [[plain]] looking woman accompanies bro' (Reb [[Brown]]) to the old country (Romania) to uncover the mystery to her sister's murder/transformation/death. Christopher Lee appears and disappears over now and then as sort of a sage/guide to the two. Sybil Danning and her two biggest [[assets]] appear as Stirba, the head werewolf of the Romania. She also suffers from a bad case of morning [[face]], ewww!

[[Bad]] movie. There's [[nothing]] good about this [[stinker]]. I'm [[surprise]] [[Philippe]] Mora [[directed]] this [[picture]] because he's [[usually]] a [[good]] film-maker. The film is so [[dark]] that you need a [[flashlight]] to watch it (no, not the content but the [[film]] [[stock]] itself). To [[round]] the [[movie]] off you get a [[lousy]] "[[punk]]" performance from a Damned wannabe "Babel". Maybe if they forked over a [[couple]] of [[extra]] bucks they could've [[got]] the [[real]] [[deal]] [[instead]] of an [[imitation]].

[[Best]] to [[avoid]] [[unless]] you're [[desperate]] or you [[lost]] the [[remote]] and you're too lazy to [[change]] the [[channel]]. Howling II (1985) was a complete 180 from the first [[filmmaking]]. [[Whereas]] the first [[cinematographic]] was campy and creepy. The second one was sleazy and cheesy. The production values on this one are pretty bad and the acting is [[horrible]]. The brother of the anchorwoman [[werewolves]] from [[parties]] one wants to find out what happened to his sis'. The "scene" from the first film was badly re-created. A skinny [[lowlands]] looking woman accompanies bro' (Reb [[Brun]]) to the old country (Romania) to uncover the mystery to her sister's murder/transformation/death. Christopher Lee appears and disappears over now and then as sort of a sage/guide to the two. Sybil Danning and her two biggest [[possessions]] appear as Stirba, the head werewolf of the Romania. She also suffers from a bad case of morning [[encounter]], ewww!

[[Inclement]] movie. There's [[none]] good about this [[tosser]]. I'm [[amazement]] [[Philip]] Mora [[geared]] this [[visuals]] because he's [[generally]] a [[buena]] film-maker. The film is so [[blackness]] that you need a [[lantern]] to watch it (no, not the content but the [[filmmaking]] [[stocks]] itself). To [[ronda]] the [[flick]] off you get a [[crummy]] "[[thug]]" performance from a Damned wannabe "Babel". Maybe if they forked over a [[matches]] of [[supplemental]] bucks they could've [[gets]] the [[veritable]] [[addresses]] [[conversely]] of an [[impersonation]].

[[Optimum]] to [[preventing]] [[if]] you're [[hopeless]] or you [[outof]] the [[aloof]] and you're too lazy to [[adjustments]] the [[chanel]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I [[wish]] kids movies were [[still]] made this way; [[dark]] and deep. There was (get this) character development (and Charlie is the [[epitome]] of the [[dynamic]] [[character]]), plot [[development]], superb animation, [[emotional]] [[involvement]], and a [[rational]], relatable, and [[consistent]] [[theme]]. If not for the [[handful]] of song-and-dance routines, you would never have thought this was a [[kids]] [[movie]], and this is why I [[give]] it such a [[high]] rating. This [[movie]] is an [[excellent]] film, let alone for a kids' movie. Which brings me to my second point: this has got to be the darkest "kids'" movie I've seen in quite some time, this coming from a 22-year-old. I'd be shocked to see any child under the age of 8 not completely terrified throughout a great deal of the latter half and some of the first half of the movie, and it all ends with one of the saddest endings you could ever come across (ala "Jurassic Bark", for those of you who are 'Futurama' fans), and this is what makes this movie so good. Just because the movie universally evokes emotions we don't normally like to feel and assume are bad does not make the movie itself bad; in fact, it means it succeeded. Good funny movies are supposed to make us laugh; good horror movies are supposed to make us scared; good sad movies are supposed to make us sad. My point is, good movies are supposed to MOVE you, not simply entertain; this movie moved me.

Also, this movie is incredibly violent by today's standards for a kids' movie and contains subject matter that, by today's standards, may not be suitable for some children. Parents, I'd say watch it first. I'm not usually one to say anything about this kind of thing, but I just saw this yesterday and it came as a surprise even to me. I [[want]] kids movies were [[yet]] made this way; [[darkness]] and deep. There was (get this) character development (and Charlie is the [[archetype]] of the [[vibrant]] [[characters]]), plot [[developments]], superb animation, [[sentimental]] [[attendance]], and a [[reasonable]], relatable, and [[coherent]] [[subject]]. If not for the [[fistful]] of song-and-dance routines, you would never have thought this was a [[brats]] [[cinematography]], and this is why I [[lend]] it such a [[higher]] rating. This [[movies]] is an [[wondrous]] film, let alone for a kids' movie. Which brings me to my second point: this has got to be the darkest "kids'" movie I've seen in quite some time, this coming from a 22-year-old. I'd be shocked to see any child under the age of 8 not completely terrified throughout a great deal of the latter half and some of the first half of the movie, and it all ends with one of the saddest endings you could ever come across (ala "Jurassic Bark", for those of you who are 'Futurama' fans), and this is what makes this movie so good. Just because the movie universally evokes emotions we don't normally like to feel and assume are bad does not make the movie itself bad; in fact, it means it succeeded. Good funny movies are supposed to make us laugh; good horror movies are supposed to make us scared; good sad movies are supposed to make us sad. My point is, good movies are supposed to MOVE you, not simply entertain; this movie moved me.

Also, this movie is incredibly violent by today's standards for a kids' movie and contains subject matter that, by today's standards, may not be suitable for some children. Parents, I'd say watch it first. I'm not usually one to say anything about this kind of thing, but I just saw this yesterday and it came as a surprise even to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 181 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Strangler of the [[Swamp]] was [[made]] by low budget studio PRC and is [[certainly]] one of their [[best]] [[movies]] I've [[seen]].

A [[man]] who was hanged for a [[murder]] he didn't commit [[returns]] as a [[ghost]] for revenge on the people who [[accused]] him. He [[uses]] a [[rope]] to strangle his victims and after [[several]] [[deaths]], [[including]] the [[old]] [[man]] who operates the ferry across the [[swamp]], he disappears. The [[old]] man's [[granddaughter]] takes over the ferry herself and also falls in love with one of the local [[men]] and they [[decide]] to get married.

This [[movie]] has plenty of [[foggy]] [[atmospheres]], which makes it very creepy too.

The cast [[includes]] Rosemary [[La]] Planche, Blake Edwards and Charles Middleton (Flash [[Gordon]]) as the Strangler.

Strangler of the [[Swamp]] is a [[must]] for [[old]] [[horror]] [[fans]] like myself. [[Excellent]].

[[Rating]]: 3 and a half stars out of 5. Strangler of the [[Swamps]] was [[accomplished]] by low budget studio PRC and is [[obviously]] one of their [[better]] [[kino]] I've [[noticed]].

A [[men]] who was hanged for a [[murders]] he didn't commit [[revert]] as a [[phantom]] for revenge on the people who [[indicted]] him. He [[utilizes]] a [[strings]] to strangle his victims and after [[multiple]] [[killings]], [[consisting]] the [[ancient]] [[guy]] who operates the ferry across the [[swamps]], he disappears. The [[archaic]] man's [[grandson]] takes over the ferry herself and also falls in love with one of the local [[males]] and they [[decides]] to get married.

This [[films]] has plenty of [[blurry]] [[climates]], which makes it very creepy too.

The cast [[involves]] Rosemary [[Las]] Planche, Blake Edwards and Charles Middleton (Flash [[Gordo]]) as the Strangler.

Strangler of the [[Swamps]] is a [[should]] for [[elderly]] [[monstrosity]] [[followers]] like myself. [[Wondrous]].

[[Scoring]]: 3 and a half stars out of 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] On a distant [[planet]] a [[psychopath]] is [[saved]] from execution by a [[space]] monk. He releases a few fellow [[inmates]] and breaks out of the prison in a [[spaceship]]. They [[dock]] [[onto]] a ludicrously [[enormous]] spacecraft that is orbiting a supernova star. This [[massive]] [[craft]] is [[populated]] by only three people, [[presumably]] because the [[budget]] of the [[film]] did not [[extend]] to [[hiring]] [[many]] [[actors]]. Anyway, to cut a long [[story]] short, the three goodies [[end]] up in a game of cat and [[mouse]] with the baddies.

The psychopath in this movie is curious in that he is annoying. 'Annoying' is generally not a term one would use to describe a lunatic - unhinged, frightening, dangerous maybe but not 'annoying' but he is. The three people [[manning]] the giant ship are seriously [[unconvincing]] as warranting such important roles - this ship is practically the size of a city! Considering that the film is set approximately 50 years in the future, it is somewhat optimistic that such a huge man-made craft could exist, never mind the fact that it is used for such a relatively mundane task. Despite the vast size of the spaceship, the crew all have appallingly kitted out, tiny rooms and the dining room consists of what appears to be a plastic table and chairs. But there are a lot of corridors.

The film is fairly well [[acted]] and it works as an averagey sci-fi thriller. But nothing great. On a distant [[globe]] a [[sociopath]] is [[save]] from execution by a [[spacing]] monk. He releases a few fellow [[inmate]] and breaks out of the prison in a [[spacecraft]]. They [[wharf]] [[during]] a ludicrously [[prodigious]] spacecraft that is orbiting a supernova star. This [[formidable]] [[workmanship]] is [[manned]] by only three people, [[arguably]] because the [[budgetary]] of the [[filmmaking]] did not [[stretching]] to [[recruit]] [[various]] [[protagonists]]. Anyway, to cut a long [[conte]] short, the three goodies [[termination]] up in a game of cat and [[smile]] with the baddies.

The psychopath in this movie is curious in that he is annoying. 'Annoying' is generally not a term one would use to describe a lunatic - unhinged, frightening, dangerous maybe but not 'annoying' but he is. The three people [[endowment]] the giant ship are seriously [[inconclusive]] as warranting such important roles - this ship is practically the size of a city! Considering that the film is set approximately 50 years in the future, it is somewhat optimistic that such a huge man-made craft could exist, never mind the fact that it is used for such a relatively mundane task. Despite the vast size of the spaceship, the crew all have appallingly kitted out, tiny rooms and the dining room consists of what appears to be a plastic table and chairs. But there are a lot of corridors.

The film is fairly well [[behaved]] and it works as an averagey sci-fi thriller. But nothing great. --------------------------------------------- Result 183 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Wow, praise IMDb and Google, for I have been trying to [[remember]] the [[name]] of this f'ing [[awesome]] movie for over 15 years now. Slaughter [[High]], man! Hells yeah!

I'm not going to bore you with a plot summary, and actors, and yadda yadda yadda, 'cause you all know what's up. That's why you're here anyway. What I will do, however, is explain the fond memory I have of this quintessential 80's D-Movie slasher joint.

In 1987, when I was around the age of 7, my father used to rent all these horror movies. Would he care that his kids were watching them with him? No. So, at that young age i saw Slaughter High. What I saw in that movie stuck with me big time. I haven't seen it since, but I remember to this day most of the ridiculous kills in the movie. For example, the post-sex scene (why is there a metal bed in a school?) gets electrocuted. Or, the guy being drowned in a cess pool. Come on! My personal favorite, though...the exploding stomach from the tainted beer. Amazing! How can you honestly hate on a movie where one of the characters finds a beer in an abandoned school, like, 10 or 15 years later and thinks it would be a good idea to drink it? Then his stomach explodes? What!? And that great line: Let's take my car...it always starts. Classic crap all the way.

I mean, I look back now, almost 20 years later, and laugh at it. But when I was 7, I was scared sh!tless. That jester hat (or was it a [[mask]]?) that the killer rocks throughout freaked me the f*ck out!

All in all, yes, a crappy movie. But for nostalgia purposes and for humor factor this movie gets a 9 out of 10 from me. Either stay up every night real late and hope to catch this on same Late Late Late Movie show, or hunt down a VHS copy and dust off your VCR. Wow, praise IMDb and Google, for I have been trying to [[reminisce]] the [[denomination]] of this f'ing [[wondrous]] movie for over 15 years now. Slaughter [[Supremo]], man! Hells yeah!

I'm not going to bore you with a plot summary, and actors, and yadda yadda yadda, 'cause you all know what's up. That's why you're here anyway. What I will do, however, is explain the fond memory I have of this quintessential 80's D-Movie slasher joint.

In 1987, when I was around the age of 7, my father used to rent all these horror movies. Would he care that his kids were watching them with him? No. So, at that young age i saw Slaughter High. What I saw in that movie stuck with me big time. I haven't seen it since, but I remember to this day most of the ridiculous kills in the movie. For example, the post-sex scene (why is there a metal bed in a school?) gets electrocuted. Or, the guy being drowned in a cess pool. Come on! My personal favorite, though...the exploding stomach from the tainted beer. Amazing! How can you honestly hate on a movie where one of the characters finds a beer in an abandoned school, like, 10 or 15 years later and thinks it would be a good idea to drink it? Then his stomach explodes? What!? And that great line: Let's take my car...it always starts. Classic crap all the way.

I mean, I look back now, almost 20 years later, and laugh at it. But when I was 7, I was scared sh!tless. That jester hat (or was it a [[conceals]]?) that the killer rocks throughout freaked me the f*ck out!

All in all, yes, a crappy movie. But for nostalgia purposes and for humor factor this movie gets a 9 out of 10 from me. Either stay up every night real late and hope to catch this on same Late Late Late Movie show, or hunt down a VHS copy and dust off your VCR. --------------------------------------------- Result 184 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] to be honest, i didn't watch all of the [[original]] 'howling', but those scenes i [[saw]] made it obvious that the [[first]] [[howling]] was a [[great]] [[movie]]. so great, that seven [[horrible]] sequels had to be [[made]]. they [[started]] off with "Howling [[II]]: Your [[Sister]] Is A Werewolf". i [[got]] this [[movie]] on VHS from my uncle [[sometime]] [[ago]] when he was [[giving]] away a bunch of [[old]] [[movies]] he [[bought]] back when Atari was brand new. i just watched it [[last]] night, and it wasn't really BAD, it was just weird. i [[mean]], the [[whole]] [[thing]] with Sybil Danning going three-way with two of her [[werewolf]] minions was just out of place and [[quite]] disturbing (but kinda [[hot]]), [[Christopher]] lee about to [[stab]] a dead [[karen]] as if she's a [[vampire]], etc. actually, this [[movie]] was [[actually]] like some [[sort]] of mish-mash of Dracula and The Lost Boys...except with werewolves, because everything Christopher Lee (whom [[played]] Dracula himself) was saying about werewolves pretty [[much]] ripped off from [[every]] other vampire movie (stake in the heart, garlic, the [[creature]] of the [[night]] [[must]] [[die]] [[AT]] [[NIGHT]], and the ruler of werewolves lives in TRANSYLVANIA). not [[much]] for the acting, but the worst of it [[came]] from [[Annie]] McEnroe. i [[swear]], at some point in the [[film]] i found myself rooting for the werewolves to rip her [[throat]] out, because that damn throat always had to say SOMETHING. [[Anyway]], the plot is pretty silly and [[clichéd]], so there's no [[real]] point in telling you, you [[could]] just read about it on Wikipedia. By the way, the [[thing]] that [[really]] makes me [[nauseous]] about this [[movie]] is the [[fact]] that it's the ONLY [[film]] out of all the seven sequels thats [[related]] in any [[way]] to the [[original]] (not [[counting]] [[Howling]] IV (1988), which was a [[remake]] of the original, or in other words, a sequel [[based]] on the same [[novel]]). so don't see this movie. there's no real horror, [[hardly]] any [[werewolves]], and just [[horrible]] special fx. 3/10 to be honest, i didn't watch all of the [[preliminary]] 'howling', but those scenes i [[watched]] made it obvious that the [[frst]] [[shout]] was a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]]. so great, that seven [[scary]] sequels had to be [[introduced]]. they [[beginning]] off with "Howling [[SECONDLY]]: Your [[Sisters]] Is A Werewolf". i [[gets]] this [[filmmaking]] on VHS from my uncle [[occasionally]] [[before]] when he was [[confer]] away a bunch of [[archaic]] [[movie]] he [[purchase]] back when Atari was brand new. i just watched it [[final]] night, and it wasn't really BAD, it was just weird. i [[meaning]], the [[together]] [[stuff]] with Sybil Danning going three-way with two of her [[werewolves]] minions was just out of place and [[rather]] disturbing (but kinda [[sexy]]), [[Christophe]] lee about to [[knife]] a dead [[karin]] as if she's a [[vamp]], etc. actually, this [[filmmaking]] was [[indeed]] like some [[genre]] of mish-mash of Dracula and The Lost Boys...except with werewolves, because everything Christopher Lee (whom [[accomplished]] Dracula himself) was saying about werewolves pretty [[very]] ripped off from [[all]] other vampire movie (stake in the heart, garlic, the [[monster]] of the [[soir]] [[needs]] [[dying]] [[FOR]] [[NOCTURNE]], and the ruler of werewolves lives in TRANSYLVANIA). not [[very]] for the acting, but the worst of it [[became]] from [[Annette]] McEnroe. i [[oath]], at some point in the [[filmmaking]] i found myself rooting for the werewolves to rip her [[larynx]] out, because that damn throat always had to say SOMETHING. [[Writ]], the plot is pretty silly and [[cliché]], so there's no [[true]] point in telling you, you [[did]] just read about it on Wikipedia. By the way, the [[stuff]] that [[genuinely]] makes me [[queasy]] about this [[filmmaking]] is the [[facto]] that it's the ONLY [[movie]] out of all the seven sequels thats [[pertaining]] in any [[routing]] to the [[initial]] (not [[recount]] [[Shouting]] IV (1988), which was a [[redo]] of the original, or in other words, a sequel [[bases]] on the same [[newer]]). so don't see this movie. there's no real horror, [[almost]] any [[werewolf]], and just [[scary]] special fx. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Although]] the recent re-telling of part of Homer's epic "Troy" with Brad Pitt was entertaining once, "Iphigenia" with the incandescent [[Irene]] Pappas is breathtaking. Unfolding in a [[natural]] setting with Greek actors speaking their own [[language]] lends such authenticity. A chance [[encounter]] with this film on one of DirecTV's [[many]] movie channels kept me interested in spite of my [[concentration]] [[problems]]. There is no glitter or "[[bling]]" in this movie, just a [[fabulously]] [[rich]] [[story]] impeccably [[told]] by actors so [[real]] one feels they are eavesdropping on a [[real]] [[family]] in [[turmoil]]. I think even Homer, if he really [[existed]], would be [[proud]] of this telling.

JLH [[Though]] the recent re-telling of part of Homer's epic "Troy" with Brad Pitt was entertaining once, "Iphigenia" with the incandescent [[Irina]] Pappas is breathtaking. Unfolding in a [[naturel]] setting with Greek actors speaking their own [[parlance]] lends such authenticity. A chance [[confrontation]] with this film on one of DirecTV's [[innumerable]] movie channels kept me interested in spite of my [[concentrate]] [[difficulty]]. There is no glitter or "[[jewellery]]" in this movie, just a [[fantastically]] [[wealthy]] [[conte]] impeccably [[say]] by actors so [[actual]] one feels they are eavesdropping on a [[authentic]] [[families]] in [[disturbance]]. I think even Homer, if he really [[exists]], would be [[prideful]] of this telling.

JLH --------------------------------------------- Result 186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Cry in the Dark" is a masterful piece of cinema, haunting, and incredibly though provoking. The true story of Lindy Chamberland, who, in 1980, witnessed a horrific sight, seeing her 3-month-old baby being brutally taken from their family's tent, while camping on the Austrailian outback. Azaria (the baby) was never seen again, and the result of her horrendous disappearance caused a true life frenzy all around the world. Meryl Streep does immaculate justice to the role of Lindy, as she always does. But the one thing that helps "A Cry in the Dark" never fall flat is the brilliant direction. A truly inspired and accurate outlook on this baffeling case, tears are brought to the eyes. The concept is nothing less then terrifying, and afterwards you are left haunted, but also inspired. --------------------------------------------- Result 187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When reading a review from another user, saying that it's a terrible game, I could not stand idle and do nothing!

Well, this game is great, from the news clips (with two real persons, full of humour sense and credibility!), to the story, I find it very good! I only complain about the enemies start blinking when they die, until they disappear; and some frustrating situations on the LEILA VR missions, when riding the bike, here and there...

Except that, it's a great game, with a great story, good graphics, excellent characters, great soundtrack... I recommend it! Surely! It can be a bit old, but still enjoyable! At least, on the Dreamcast... but the PS2 version shall be the same. --------------------------------------------- Result 188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film features Ben Chaplin as a bored bank employee in England who orders a mail order bride from Russia, recieves Nicole Kidman in the mail and gets more than he bargained for when, surprise, she isn't what she appears to be. The story is fairly predictible and Chaplin underacts too much to the point where he becomes somewhat anoying. Kidman is actualy rather good in this role, making her character about the only thing in this film that is interesting. GRADE: C --------------------------------------------- Result 189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] A Chinese scholar who criticizes harshly the [[arrogant]] [[nationalist]], warmongering policies of the ruling clique around the [[emperor]] in pre-war Japan, is accused of being a 'communist' and [[jailed]] for life. His loving [[wife]], who supports [[totally]] her husband and his [[ideas]], is [[left]] [[alone]] to [[save]] her family from starvation. This movie is a [[huge]] statue [[erected]] in praise of the role of the mother in the [[history]] of mankind. Sayuri Yoshinaga is not [[less]] than [[sublime]] in the title role and it was a [[monumental]] [[scandal]] that she didn't [[get]] an Asian [[Oscar]] for the [[best]] female role in 2009. It went to a young [[girl]] with very limited acting potential.

This deeply [[moving]] and most 'human' [[feature]] is a must [[see]] for all '[[true]] children' on earth. A Chinese scholar who criticizes harshly the [[presumptuous]] [[nationalism]], warmongering policies of the ruling clique around the [[king]] in pre-war Japan, is accused of being a 'communist' and [[incarcerated]] for life. His loving [[femme]], who supports [[abundantly]] her husband and his [[brainchild]], is [[exited]] [[lonely]] to [[rescue]] her family from starvation. This movie is a [[jumbo]] statue [[constructing]] in praise of the role of the mother in the [[historian]] of mankind. Sayuri Yoshinaga is not [[lowest]] than [[impressive]] in the title role and it was a [[giant]] [[ignominy]] that she didn't [[obtain]] an Asian [[Oskar]] for the [[better]] female role in 2009. It went to a young [[fille]] with very limited acting potential.

This deeply [[relocating]] and most 'human' [[attribute]] is a must [[seeing]] for all '[[truthful]] children' on earth. --------------------------------------------- Result 190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Michael Jackson is not very popular in USA anymore, [[however]] in Europe (especially [[Germany]]) he has [[still]] got lots of fans. [[Many]] will [[say]] that this is a [[bad]] movie, and it is: it has no plot, it's full of cliches, [[Michael]] [[praises]] himself [[constantly]].

[[BUT]], you can't [[expect]] a plot or non-cliches in this [[kind]] of movie! It has [[entertaining]] visual effects and the music is perfect. The Smooth [[Criminal]] [[fragment]] - the [[greatest]] song ever, full of Moonwalks, [[group]] [[dance]] [[acts]] and even the [[famous]] "Michael Jackson's Bench-over" - makes this [[film]] one of Jackson's [[masterpieces]] with an even good-looking (and white...) [[Michael]] Jackson!

A [[must]] for Jackson [[fans]], a [[must]] for music fans, a [[must]] for dance [[act]] [[fans]].

[[However]], as I'm an [[MJ]] fan, I should [[warn]] all Michael Jackson [[haters]] out there: DON'T watch this [[movie]], you'd only [[make]] your [[hate]] [[increase]]... Michael Jackson is not very popular in USA anymore, [[nevertheless]] in Europe (especially [[German]]) he has [[yet]] got lots of fans. [[Numerous]] will [[tell]] that this is a [[inclement]] movie, and it is: it has no plot, it's full of cliches, [[Micheal]] [[hailed]] himself [[continuously]].

[[THOUGH]], you can't [[hopes]] a plot or non-cliches in this [[genre]] of movie! It has [[fun]] visual effects and the music is perfect. The Smooth [[Felon]] [[snippet]] - the [[biggest]] song ever, full of Moonwalks, [[panels]] [[dancers]] [[act]] and even the [[proverbial]] "Michael Jackson's Bench-over" - makes this [[cinematography]] one of Jackson's [[classics]] with an even good-looking (and white...) [[Michele]] Jackson!

A [[should]] for Jackson [[followers]], a [[should]] for music fans, a [[should]] for dance [[law]] [[followers]].

[[Still]], as I'm an [[DJ]] fan, I should [[alert]] all Michael Jackson [[enemies]] out there: DON'T watch this [[kino]], you'd only [[deliver]] your [[resent]] [[augmentation]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 191 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I spotted in the guide to [[films]] [[list]] for the Santa [[Barbara]] Film [[Festival]], where I went when I was in Hollywood, that this [[film]] was in screening. Basically there is an [[election]] for the new chairman of the [[Hong]] Kong Triads [[Wo]] [[Sing]] Society [[coming]] up, so you can imagine how much violence that is going to occur during this. The [[struggle]] is between "[[candidates]]" [[Lam]] Lok ([[Simon]] Yam) and [[Big]] D (Tony [[Leung]] Ka Fai) for [[control]] of the [[oldest]] and most powerful Triad parts of the society. Also [[starring]] [[Louis]] Koo as [[Jimmy]] Lee, [[Nick]] [[Cheung]] as [[Jet]], [[Cheung]] [[Siu]] Fai as [[Mr]]. [[So]], [[Lam]] Suet as [[Big]] Head and [[Lam]] Ka Tung as Kun. There are some good realistic corruption [[themes]] and moments, just about [[enough]] [[action]], [[apart]] from [[maybe]] when the [[cops]] [[get]] involved, but a sequel followed, so it's a pretty [[worthwhile]] [[crime]] drama thriller. [[Very]] good! I spotted in the guide to [[film]] [[lists]] for the Santa [[Barbarian]] Film [[Feast]], where I went when I was in Hollywood, that this [[kino]] was in screening. Basically there is an [[elect]] for the new chairman of the [[Kong]] Kong Triads [[Ca]] [[Singing]] Society [[arriving]] up, so you can imagine how much violence that is going to occur during this. The [[wrestling]] is between "[[contestants]]" [[Rugby]] Lok ([[Simeon]] Yam) and [[Mammoth]] D (Tony [[Liang]] Ka Fai) for [[monitors]] of the [[older]] and most powerful Triad parts of the society. Also [[championships]] [[Louie]] Koo as [[Jimi]] Lee, [[Nikki]] [[Jang]] as [[Jett]], [[Jang]] [[Shiu]] Fai as [[Mister]]. [[Therefore]], [[Rugby]] Suet as [[Wide]] Head and [[Rugby]] Ka Tung as Kun. There are some good realistic corruption [[matters]] and moments, just about [[adequate]] [[efforts]], [[additionally]] from [[presumably]] when the [[police]] [[got]] involved, but a sequel followed, so it's a pretty [[actionable]] [[offence]] drama thriller. [[Tremendously]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 192 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just saw this movie for the first time ever and I liked it. Her dancing was very entertaining. I read somewhere that she got the part in this movie because she knew how to dance. The scenery was great too. Yvonne is such a talented woman and beautiful. WE laughed at the silly kissing scenes, but that is what is great about old movies! I grew up with her on The Munsters and I am enjoying watching her in her earlier movies. They may not all be the best out there but still worth watching to see her act and sing. I am slowly purchasing all her movies and watching them as I receive them. I have a large collection of her memorabilia. --------------------------------------------- Result 193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Also known as "[[Stairway]] to Heaven" in the US. [[During]] WWII British Peter Carter's (David Niven) plane is shot down in combat but he survives. He meets and falls in love with lovely June (Kim Hunter). But it seems a mistake was made in Heaven--he should have died! A [[French]] spirit comes to get him but he refuses. He is soon to plead his case in front of a Heavenly Tribunal that he should be allowed to live.

[[Sounds]] [[ridiculous]] but this is actually an [[incredible]] [[film]]. The script is good with the actors playing the [[roles]] [[completely]] straight-faced and it's beautifully directed--the scenes on [[Earth]] are in breath-taking Technicolor (I've never [[seen]] such [[beautiful]] blue skies) and the scenes in [[Heaven]] are in [[black]] and [[white]]! Niven is a [[little]] [[stiff]] at times but Hunter is just great (and very [[beautiful]]) and Roger Livesey is [[superb]] as a [[doctor]] [[trying]] to [[help]] Niven. The [[imagery]] [[throughout]] is [[amazing]] ([[especially]] the [[staircase]] and during the final [[trial]] sequence) and the special effects are [[truly]] [[great]] (considering the [[age]] of the film). There's [[also]] a very [[strange]] sequence when Niven runs into a [[totally]] nude young [[boy]] herding [[sheep]]! This is an [[absolutely]] [[beautiful]], thought [[provoking]] film--highly [[recommended]]. This remains [[unknown]] in the [[US]] which is a shame. Also known as "[[Escalators]] to Heaven" in the US. [[In]] WWII British Peter Carter's (David Niven) plane is shot down in combat but he survives. He meets and falls in love with lovely June (Kim Hunter). But it seems a mistake was made in Heaven--he should have died! A [[Frenchman]] spirit comes to get him but he refuses. He is soon to plead his case in front of a Heavenly Tribunal that he should be allowed to live.

[[Noises]] [[nonsensical]] but this is actually an [[awesome]] [[kino]]. The script is good with the actors playing the [[duties]] [[entirely]] straight-faced and it's beautifully directed--the scenes on [[Overland]] are in breath-taking Technicolor (I've never [[noticed]] such [[gorgeous]] blue skies) and the scenes in [[Sky]] are in [[negra]] and [[branca]]! Niven is a [[petit]] [[fierce]] at times but Hunter is just great (and very [[leggy]]) and Roger Livesey is [[extraordinaire]] as a [[doctors]] [[attempts]] to [[succour]] Niven. The [[photograph]] [[during]] is [[startling]] ([[notably]] the [[stairwell]] and during the final [[trials]] sequence) and the special effects are [[really]] [[huge]] (considering the [[aged]] of the film). There's [[further]] a very [[nosy]] sequence when Niven runs into a [[altogether]] nude young [[dude]] herding [[sheeps]]! This is an [[fully]] [[wondrous]], thought [[arousing]] film--highly [[suggested]]. This remains [[unrecognized]] in the [[AMERICANS]] which is a shame. --------------------------------------------- Result 194 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] These reviews that [[claim]] this [[movie]] is so [[bad]] its good are going [[way]] overboard with that one. This [[movie]] does not have the [[guilty]] pleasure badness that Leonard Part 6, Battlefield [[Earth]] and Gigli had. Those movies were [[entertaining]] in their awfulness but this [[pile]] of [[dinosaur]] dung is so bad its painful. I haven't been in this much pain [[watching]] a bad [[movie]] [[since]] I [[watched]] Baby [[Geniuses]] and Superbabies. Before I start the review [[let]] me tell you the story. [[Theodore]] Rex is a $35 million dollar bust The [[New]] Line [[Cinema]] [[refused]] to put in theaters. They [[cut]] the losses [[sending]] it straight to video making it the most [[expensive]] straight-to-video movie in decades. Whoopi caved in to be in this [[disaster]] after a huge [[paycheck]].

Plot: a millionaire [[clones]] dinosaurs so he can [[launch]] [[missiles]] at the [[sun]] which would kill mankind and [[start]] another Ice Age. A female [[cop]] named Katie Coltrane and an [[idiotic]] [[dinosaur]] named [[Theodore]] Rex reluctantly team up to [[stop]] him after the [[death]] of a [[buddy]] dinosaur.

The plot is given to you in the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]] which [[robs]] the [[movie]] of all its [[mystery]]. [[Then]] you have to [[deal]] with the fact that this movie is actually [[quite]] [[awful]]. Whoopi [[looks]] agitated and is [[trying]] to wing it with her performance but to no avail. Theodore Rex is flat out [[annoying]] and his bumbling [[behavior]] [[wears]] [[thin]] after five minutes on screen. Most of the jokes [[revolve]] around him [[threatening]] to [[bite]] people and hitting people with his tail(on [[accident]] and on purpose). I [[thought]] Burglar was bad but it [[takes]] a backseat to Theodore Rex: the [[worst]] movie of Whoopi's [[career]].

Don't let anybody tell you this [[monstrosity]] is [[bad]] enough to be [[enjoyable]]. I didn't see that when I [[watched]] this movie. All I saw was a train [[wreck]] that was written by people that must have had some [[sick]] [[admiration]] for movie Howard The Duck. The humor is on that level and [[Theodore]] Rex looks like the inbred cousin of Barney. [[Utterly]] painful from start to [[finish]]. These reviews that [[claiming]] this [[filmmaking]] is so [[mala]] its good are going [[pathways]] overboard with that one. This [[film]] does not have the [[culpable]] pleasure badness that Leonard Part 6, Battlefield [[Lands]] and Gigli had. Those movies were [[amusing]] in their awfulness but this [[piling]] of [[dinosaurs]] dung is so bad its painful. I haven't been in this much pain [[staring]] a bad [[films]] [[because]] I [[observed]] Baby [[Genies]] and Superbabies. Before I start the review [[leave]] me tell you the story. [[Theodor]] Rex is a $35 million dollar bust The [[Nouveau]] Line [[Filmmaking]] [[refuses]] to put in theaters. They [[cutting]] the losses [[sent]] it straight to video making it the most [[costly]] straight-to-video movie in decades. Whoopi caved in to be in this [[catastrophe]] after a huge [[wages]].

Plot: a millionaire [[clone]] dinosaurs so he can [[starts]] [[projectile]] at the [[sunshine]] which would kill mankind and [[begins]] another Ice Age. A female [[constabulary]] named Katie Coltrane and an [[moronic]] [[dinosaurs]] named [[Theodor]] Rex reluctantly team up to [[stops]] him after the [[fatality]] of a [[pal]] dinosaur.

The plot is given to you in the [[starts]] of the [[cinematography]] which [[steals]] the [[filmmaking]] of all its [[puzzle]]. [[Later]] you have to [[dealing]] with the fact that this movie is actually [[rather]] [[horrific]]. Whoopi [[seems]] agitated and is [[try]] to wing it with her performance but to no avail. Theodore Rex is flat out [[irritating]] and his bumbling [[conduct]] [[gate]] [[delgado]] after five minutes on screen. Most of the jokes [[rotate]] around him [[menace]] to [[bitten]] people and hitting people with his tail(on [[incident]] and on purpose). I [[ideas]] Burglar was bad but it [[pick]] a backseat to Theodore Rex: the [[hardest]] movie of Whoopi's [[quarry]].

Don't let anybody tell you this [[horror]] is [[rotten]] enough to be [[congenial]]. I didn't see that when I [[saw]] this movie. All I saw was a train [[wreckage]] that was written by people that must have had some [[unwell]] [[awe]] for movie Howard The Duck. The humor is on that level and [[Teodoro]] Rex looks like the inbred cousin of Barney. [[Quite]] painful from start to [[finis]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This was really a very [[bad]] movie. I am a huge [[fan]] of [[Italian]] Horror, Argento, Mario Bava, Fulci and [[yes]], even our good friend here Lamberto sometimes comes out with a good one. I found the [[first]] two 'Demons' [[films]] to be highly [[entertaining]] - they were so bad they were [[great]] but this one is just so bad that it is really, really [[bad]]. It is intensely boring, the [[story]] never goes anywhere and I [[hated]] the characters - the wife slapping husband and whiny cry-baby pain in the *** wife [[drove]] me mad, there was [[nowhere]] near enough of the story devoted to the Ogre who was [[probably]] the best actor in the whole film. I [[turned]] it off about three quarters of the way through because I was very, very [[BORED]]! Don't bother. This was really a very [[unfavourable]] movie. I am a huge [[breather]] of [[Ltalian]] Horror, Argento, Mario Bava, Fulci and [[yup]], even our good friend here Lamberto sometimes comes out with a good one. I found the [[fiirst]] two 'Demons' [[kino]] to be highly [[amusing]] - they were so bad they were [[large]] but this one is just so bad that it is really, really [[naughty]]. It is intensely boring, the [[conte]] never goes anywhere and I [[abhor]] the characters - the wife slapping husband and whiny cry-baby pain in the *** wife [[pushed]] me mad, there was [[somewhere]] near enough of the story devoted to the Ogre who was [[unquestionably]] the best actor in the whole film. I [[revolved]] it off about three quarters of the way through because I was very, very [[DRILLED]]! Don't bother. --------------------------------------------- Result 196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[While]] the 3-D animation (the highlight of the show) did it's job well, most other elements [[fell]] flat. It was as [[though]] the [[filmmakers]] thought "well, it's gonna be 3-D so we don't have to [[work]] that [[hard]] on the plot or [[character]] [[development]]." And the [[fact]] that it's a children's movie is [[absolutely]] no excuse. The [[public]] is drawn to three dimensional characters ([[Shrek]], Nemo's Dad) just as much as they are drawn to three dimensional [[graphics]]. The only dimension any of the main [[characters]] [[showed]] was two dimensional [[Scooter]] who twists the plot from time to [[time]] with his [[compulsion]] to [[eat]] everything in [[sight]].

And the absolute kicker? Buzz Aldrin's [[appearance]] at the very end (after watching a very robotic [[cartoon]] [[version]] of the same historical [[figure]] for an hour and half) comes on the screen and [[ruins]] everyone's good time by [[calling]] the film's [[main]] [[characters]] "contaminants" and [[announcing]] that the situation put forth on screen was actually an impossibility.

???!!!??? [[Did]] you just wanna tell the [[kids]] the [[Easter]] [[Bunny]] and Santa [[Claus]] don't exist while you're at it? [[Though]] the 3-D animation (the highlight of the show) did it's job well, most other elements [[decreased]] flat. It was as [[albeit]] the [[cinematographers]] thought "well, it's gonna be 3-D so we don't have to [[collaborate]] that [[tough]] on the plot or [[trait]] [[evolution]]." And the [[facto]] that it's a children's movie is [[entirely]] no excuse. The [[populace]] is drawn to three dimensional characters ([[Fiona]], Nemo's Dad) just as much as they are drawn to three dimensional [[graphs]]. The only dimension any of the main [[personages]] [[proved]] was two dimensional [[Motorbike]] who twists the plot from time to [[times]] with his [[coercion]] to [[devour]] everything in [[eyesight]].

And the absolute kicker? Buzz Aldrin's [[apparition]] at the very end (after watching a very robotic [[toon]] [[stepping]] of the same historical [[silhouette]] for an hour and half) comes on the screen and [[wrack]] everyone's good time by [[phoning]] the film's [[primary]] [[personage]] "contaminants" and [[advertises]] that the situation put forth on screen was actually an impossibility.

???!!!??? [[Got]] you just wanna tell the [[kid]] the [[Pasqua]] [[Rabbits]] and Santa [[Eaton]] don't exist while you're at it? --------------------------------------------- Result 197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[Horror]] Channel plays nothing but erotic [[soft]] porn Gothic flicks each [[night]] from 10pm till about 4 in the morning, but their 'scare' factor is very [[limited]], if one exists at all. [[In]] [[fact]] I am sure I will find a multi-million pound lottery [[win]] more [[scary]] than [[anything]] this [[channel]] has to [[offer]].

The Bloodsucker Leads the Dance deserves special [[mention]] because it is I feel, the [[undisputed]] low of a channel full of lows. I cannot even [[begin]] to tell you how [[bad]] this film is, but for the [[purpose]] of completing the [[minimum]] 10 lines [[demanded]] by this site, I will at least give it a go.

Firstly the title is misleading and bears no resemblance to the action on the screen. In fact the film might as well have been called 'Toothbrush' or 'Wallpaper' for all it has to do with the plot. At least they used toothbrushes...at least they had wallpaper.

There are no bloodsuckers for miles around and whats even worse there are no dances, not one. I'm sure they were making two different films by mistake here.

A more suitable title would have been, 'Horny Italian Count Leads Five People to a Scary Castle and Bores us Silly for Ninety Minutes.' Yes that fits better.

The acting is [[terrible]] and and the dubbing appalling, and that guy who plays Seymour was almost as [[wooden]] in his walk as he was in his character....abysmal.

The only saving [[graces]] of this film are a small but slightly interesting lesbian sex scene, two small and very interesting heterosexual sex scenes, and the added attraction in that every single female character gets her kit off. Bonus.

[[Otherwise]] [[steer]] a [[wide]] birth away from this one. [[No]] [[vampires]], no dancing, no scenes of a brutal or [[gruesome]] [[nature]] and no [[way]] on [[Gods]] [[earth]] I will ever, ever, ever watch this one again.

[[No]] word of a lie, this [[film]] could put you off motion [[pictures]] for [[life]]. The [[Terror]] Channel plays nothing but erotic [[gentle]] porn Gothic flicks each [[overnight]] from 10pm till about 4 in the morning, but their 'scare' factor is very [[restrained]], if one exists at all. [[For]] [[facto]] I am sure I will find a multi-million pound lottery [[wins]] more [[fearful]] than [[something]] this [[chanel]] has to [[furnishes]].

The Bloodsucker Leads the Dance deserves special [[cite]] because it is I feel, the [[undeniable]] low of a channel full of lows. I cannot even [[launching]] to tell you how [[unfavourable]] this film is, but for the [[aims]] of completing the [[lowest]] 10 lines [[requested]] by this site, I will at least give it a go.

Firstly the title is misleading and bears no resemblance to the action on the screen. In fact the film might as well have been called 'Toothbrush' or 'Wallpaper' for all it has to do with the plot. At least they used toothbrushes...at least they had wallpaper.

There are no bloodsuckers for miles around and whats even worse there are no dances, not one. I'm sure they were making two different films by mistake here.

A more suitable title would have been, 'Horny Italian Count Leads Five People to a Scary Castle and Bores us Silly for Ninety Minutes.' Yes that fits better.

The acting is [[horrific]] and and the dubbing appalling, and that guy who plays Seymour was almost as [[wood]] in his walk as he was in his character....abysmal.

The only saving [[wonders]] of this film are a small but slightly interesting lesbian sex scene, two small and very interesting heterosexual sex scenes, and the added attraction in that every single female character gets her kit off. Bonus.

[[Alternatively]] [[guiding]] a [[large]] birth away from this one. [[Nos]] [[bloodsuckers]], no dancing, no scenes of a brutal or [[abysmal]] [[personage]] and no [[camino]] on [[Lords]] [[terra]] I will ever, ever, ever watch this one again.

[[Nope]] word of a lie, this [[filmmaking]] could put you off motion [[images]] for [[lives]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I argued with myself whether to rent this or not. I'm always afraid of renting something I've never heard of (don't remember this being in theaters). Great cast...that's what tipped the scales. 30 minutes in, I almost stopped watching it. The first few minutes are fun to watch, but unbelievable. It only gets worse after that. The writers of this movie could do a little research on future projects if they want to make their movies even a little better. Or they could just try writing something just a little bit believable. I give it a 3....a 1 for the writing (only because there are words)and a 2 for being able to get so many good actors to agree to do this movie despite having to read the script. Oh my god this movie sucks. --------------------------------------------- Result 199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Of course, the story line for this [[movie]] isn't the [[best]], but the [[dances]] are [[wonderful]]. This story [[line]] is [[different]] from other Astaire-Rogers [[movies]] in that neither one is "[[chasing]]" the other. The [[dancing]] of Fred and [[Ginger]] is what makes this [[movie]]. Of course, the story line for this [[movies]] isn't the [[better]], but the [[choreography]] are [[wondrous]]. This story [[iine]] is [[various]] from other Astaire-Rogers [[cinematography]] in that neither one is "[[chases]]" the other. The [[dancer]] of Fred and [[Kang]] is what makes this [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 200 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's [[curious]] that the two stars of [[Meet]] The People were a [[pair]] of movie stars who went into the [[new]] [[medium]] of [[television]] and became even [[bigger]] [[successes]] and who both went into the production end of [[things]] and [[enjoyed]] [[tycoon]] status on the small screen. Lucille Ball however was not a [[major]] star, that [[would]] come with [[television]]. As for [[Dick]] Powell he [[desperately]] [[wanted]] to get out of doing [[films]] like [[Meet]] The People and his [[career]] [[salvation]] would be [[coming]] in his [[next]] [[film]].

I think the only reason that Dick Powell did the film was because a young player from MGM was cast in a specialty number and he was seeing her at the time. His private time with [[June]] Allyson was far better than what we [[see]] on the screen. Powell looks crashingly [[bored]] and can't summon up any kind of emotion at all.

He was probably tired of doing these musicals with silly plots, the [[kind]] he ran from Warner Brothers from. The original show Meet The People was not a book show, it was a revue and it ran in the 1940-41 season on Broadway for 160 performances. When MGM bought it, they scrapped everything but the title and the title song. The rest of the score was patched together from various and sundry songwriters, [[none]] of the songs is memorable. Odd when you consider some of the source material is from Burton Lane, E.Y. Harburg, Harold Arlen, and Rodgers&Hart. These guys just must have emptied the trunk for material.

The plot is sillier than even most of the musical [[propaganda]] pieces of the time. Powell is the writer of a revue called Meet The People and he's a shipyard worker who wins a lottery date with movie star Lucille Ball. She's interested, he's interested, they're both interested in the revue, but creative differences keep them apart of course until the finale. That's the film in a nutshell.

MGM did give Powell and Ball some good musical acts which are the main reason for watching Meet The People. The big bands of Vaughn Monroe and Spike Jones are here and the highlight of the film for me is Bert Lahr dressed in a commodore's suit like Lou Costello had in the dream sequence in In The Navy. The song Heave Ho is written by [[Arlen]] and Harburg who wrote for Lahr, the Courage number from The Wizard Of Oz. And as just about everyone in the world has seen that film, you have an idea of Heave Ho is like.

Dick Powell's next film was Murder My Sweet in which he finally bid a not so fond adieu to musicals. And Lucy would have to wait for television before the world got to see what she really could do. It's [[unusual]] that the two stars of [[Satisfy]] The People were a [[couple]] of movie stars who went into the [[newest]] [[middle]] of [[tv]] and became even [[stronger]] [[success]] and who both went into the production end of [[items]] and [[liked]] [[mogul]] status on the small screen. Lucille Ball however was not a [[substantial]] star, that [[should]] come with [[tv]]. As for [[Tail]] Powell he [[badly]] [[wants]] to get out of doing [[cinematography]] like [[Cater]] The People and his [[quarries]] [[salut]] would be [[incoming]] in his [[upcoming]] [[filmmaking]].

I think the only reason that Dick Powell did the film was because a young player from MGM was cast in a specialty number and he was seeing her at the time. His private time with [[November]] Allyson was far better than what we [[behold]] on the screen. Powell looks crashingly [[drilled]] and can't summon up any kind of emotion at all.

He was probably tired of doing these musicals with silly plots, the [[genera]] he ran from Warner Brothers from. The original show Meet The People was not a book show, it was a revue and it ran in the 1940-41 season on Broadway for 160 performances. When MGM bought it, they scrapped everything but the title and the title song. The rest of the score was patched together from various and sundry songwriters, [[nos]] of the songs is memorable. Odd when you consider some of the source material is from Burton Lane, E.Y. Harburg, Harold Arlen, and Rodgers&Hart. These guys just must have emptied the trunk for material.

The plot is sillier than even most of the musical [[advocacy]] pieces of the time. Powell is the writer of a revue called Meet The People and he's a shipyard worker who wins a lottery date with movie star Lucille Ball. She's interested, he's interested, they're both interested in the revue, but creative differences keep them apart of course until the finale. That's the film in a nutshell.

MGM did give Powell and Ball some good musical acts which are the main reason for watching Meet The People. The big bands of Vaughn Monroe and Spike Jones are here and the highlight of the film for me is Bert Lahr dressed in a commodore's suit like Lou Costello had in the dream sequence in In The Navy. The song Heave Ho is written by [[Arlene]] and Harburg who wrote for Lahr, the Courage number from The Wizard Of Oz. And as just about everyone in the world has seen that film, you have an idea of Heave Ho is like.

Dick Powell's next film was Murder My Sweet in which he finally bid a not so fond adieu to musicals. And Lucy would have to wait for television before the world got to see what she really could do. --------------------------------------------- Result 201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Unless]] you are between the [[ages]] of 10 and 14 (except for the R rating), there are very few [[things]] to [[like]] here. One or two lines from Kenan Thompson, [[David]] Koechner (we really should see him more) and Sam Jackson are [[humorous]] and Julianna Margulies is as [[good]] as she can be [[considering]] her surroundings, but sadly, that's it. Poor plot. Poor acting. [[Worse]] writing and delivery. The special [[effects]] are dismal. As [[much]] as the [[entire]] situation is an [[odd]] and awful [[joke]], the [[significant]] individual [[embedded]] [[situations]] are all equally [[terrible]]. If we [[consider]] the [[action]] [[portions]], well there are [[unbelievable]] [[action]] sequences in some [[films]] that make you giddy and there are some that make you groan. This [[movie]] only [[contains]] the latter [[kind]]. This [[leaves]] little left. I'm so [[glad]] I did not [[pay]] for this.

Despite any [[hype]], I can read and [[think]], so as I sat down to watch, I did not expect [[anything]] [[good]]. I had no expectations, but was [[somewhat]] [[worried]] [[going]] in. [[Yet]], like a train wreck, one cannot [[merely]] [[look]] away. And even with no [[expectations]], I was [[let]] down. [[Bad]]. Not [[even]] 'so bad, it's good' [[material]]. I'm _very_ [[tolerant]] of [[bad]] [[movies]], but this makes "Six [[String]] Samurai" (which I [[liked]]) [[Oscar]] [[worthy]].

[[No]], this [[piece]] of over CGI'd [[rubbish]] is in the same company as Battlefield [[Earth]], [[Little]] Man and Gigli. [[How]] this is [[currently]] rated a 7.2 [[completely]] mystifies me. Brainwashing or somehow stacking the [[voting]] system is all that I can [[think]] of as [[answers]].

I [[could]] [[go]] on and on but suffice to [[say]] that tonight, I witnessed a train [[wreck]]. I [[need]] to go [[wash]] my [[eyes]]. 1 of 10 [[If]] you are between the [[years]] of 10 and 14 (except for the R rating), there are very few [[matters]] to [[fond]] here. One or two lines from Kenan Thompson, [[Dawood]] Koechner (we really should see him more) and Sam Jackson are [[humour]] and Julianna Margulies is as [[alright]] as she can be [[contemplating]] her surroundings, but sadly, that's it. Poor plot. Poor acting. [[Pire]] writing and delivery. The special [[impacts]] are dismal. As [[very]] as the [[overall]] situation is an [[peculiar]] and awful [[kidding]], the [[momentous]] individual [[integrated]] [[circumstances]] are all equally [[abysmal]]. If we [[considering]] the [[activities]] [[servings]], well there are [[surprising]] [[activities]] sequences in some [[filmmaking]] that make you giddy and there are some that make you groan. This [[cinema]] only [[therein]] the latter [[sort]]. This [[departs]] little left. I'm so [[gratified]] I did not [[payrolls]] for this.

Despite any [[fanfare]], I can read and [[thinking]], so as I sat down to watch, I did not expect [[something]] [[buena]]. I had no expectations, but was [[slightly]] [[apprehensive]] [[go]] in. [[Though]], like a train wreck, one cannot [[only]] [[glance]] away. And even with no [[prognosis]], I was [[allowing]] down. [[Negative]]. Not [[yet]] 'so bad, it's good' [[materials]]. I'm _very_ [[indulgent]] of [[negative]] [[filmmaking]], but this makes "Six [[Strings]] Samurai" (which I [[enjoyed]]) [[Oskar]] [[laudable]].

[[Nos]], this [[slice]] of over CGI'd [[poppycock]] is in the same company as Battlefield [[Overland]], [[Petit]] Man and Gigli. [[Mode]] this is [[now]] rated a 7.2 [[absolutely]] mystifies me. Brainwashing or somehow stacking the [[poll]] system is all that I can [[ideas]] of as [[reactions]].

I [[would]] [[going]] on and on but suffice to [[says]] that tonight, I witnessed a train [[shipwreck]]. I [[requisite]] to go [[cleanse]] my [[eye]]. 1 of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Holes (2003, Dir Andrew Davis)

When Stanley Yelnats IV is wrongfully convicted of stealing, he is sent to 'Camp Green Lake'. At this camp, the Warden, and her two henchman, Mr. Sir and Dr. Pendanski command the campmates to dig holes after hole after hole. But for what reason? Stanley plans to find out.

I never really had any intention in watching 'Holes', and i must admit, i only really watched the film, because i'm such a fan of Shia LaBeouf, but even if you are not a fan of him, then it doesn't matter. 'Holes' is one of those Disney film that the whole family can enjoy. The story is lovely written and incorporates a wonderful idea of including flashbacks to the past. These are not distracting and really gives a great back story. All the cast are great. The young stars act well and the addition of Jon Voight and Sigourney Weaver are a joy. Shia LaBeouf shows that even at 17, he can act without any flaws. This is one Disney film, you definitely would enjoy as a family.

"I learn from failure." - Stanley Yelnats III (Henry Winkler) --------------------------------------------- Result 203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] If I have to give this movie a score on a linear scale, then I have to give it a low [[score]] 3/10.

But it was entertaining, and there are [[several]] [[good]] things to say about the movie.

The psychiatrist candidate James Bishop is assigned to St. Andrews Hospital for his resident, and is exited and eager to "change the world".

From the beginning of the movie you know that the hospital is hiding an evil truth, but James thinks he can make a difference and doesn't recognise this evil.

The story builds fairly well, you know all the time that there is a truth in what the patients are telling about some resident evil, and wonder when and how James will discover this. Also when the break comes, James is in a way hunted by the evil, and you feel some suspense until "the fight" is over.

Add an innocent beautiful girlfriend that arrives at the worst possible time and other standard horror elements, and you get the picture.

The character buildup is actually fairly good, you are introduced to most of the people that gets killed, some of them you "get to know".

The film sets an unpleasant scene, this is also done fairly well. There are mysteries that are unveiled - in an acceptable way.

The main character, James is very believable - the story about an eager student starting to work is good in this setting.

What kills this movie is: * Stupid special effects - a modern version of "Plan 9 from outer space"-type bad (the evil monster looks like a red scarecrow) * Some bad acting (or probably very few takes when filming) - The main characters sometimes acts badly, and somtimes good. * The sound is at times very cheap.

I kept thinking "I could make a movie like this with my home video camera" throughout the film. If I have to give this movie a score on a linear scale, then I have to give it a low [[notation]] 3/10.

But it was entertaining, and there are [[dissimilar]] [[buena]] things to say about the movie.

The psychiatrist candidate James Bishop is assigned to St. Andrews Hospital for his resident, and is exited and eager to "change the world".

From the beginning of the movie you know that the hospital is hiding an evil truth, but James thinks he can make a difference and doesn't recognise this evil.

The story builds fairly well, you know all the time that there is a truth in what the patients are telling about some resident evil, and wonder when and how James will discover this. Also when the break comes, James is in a way hunted by the evil, and you feel some suspense until "the fight" is over.

Add an innocent beautiful girlfriend that arrives at the worst possible time and other standard horror elements, and you get the picture.

The character buildup is actually fairly good, you are introduced to most of the people that gets killed, some of them you "get to know".

The film sets an unpleasant scene, this is also done fairly well. There are mysteries that are unveiled - in an acceptable way.

The main character, James is very believable - the story about an eager student starting to work is good in this setting.

What kills this movie is: * Stupid special effects - a modern version of "Plan 9 from outer space"-type bad (the evil monster looks like a red scarecrow) * Some bad acting (or probably very few takes when filming) - The main characters sometimes acts badly, and somtimes good. * The sound is at times very cheap.

I kept thinking "I could make a movie like this with my home video camera" throughout the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I have been known to [[fall]] asleep during [[films]], but this is usually due to a combination of things [[including]], really tired, being warm and comfortable on the sette and having just [[eaten]] a lot. [[However]] on this occasion I [[fell]] [[asleep]] because the [[film]] was rubbish. The plot development was [[constant]]. [[Constantly]] [[slow]] and [[boring]]. Things seemed to [[happen]], but with no [[explanation]] of what was causing them or why. I [[admit]], I may have missed [[part]] of the [[film]], but i [[watched]] the majority of it and everything just seemed to happen of its own accord without any [[real]] [[concern]] for [[anything]] [[else]]. I [[cant]] [[recommend]] this [[film]] at all. I have been known to [[decrease]] asleep during [[film]], but this is usually due to a combination of things [[include]], really tired, being warm and comfortable on the sette and having just [[eat]] a lot. [[Nevertheless]] on this occasion I [[declined]] [[slept]] because the [[filmmaking]] was rubbish. The plot development was [[steady]]. [[Always]] [[lento]] and [[dull]]. Things seemed to [[emerge]], but with no [[explanations]] of what was causing them or why. I [[concede]], I may have missed [[portion]] of the [[flick]], but i [[seen]] the majority of it and everything just seemed to happen of its own accord without any [[actual]] [[anxiety]] for [[nothing]] [[otherwise]]. I [[thats]] [[recommends]] this [[flick]] at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 205 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If this series supposed to be an improvement over Batman - The [[Animated]] [[Series]], I, for one, think it [[failed]] [[terribly]]. The [[character]] drawing is [[lousy]]... (Catwoman, for [[instance]], looks [[awful]]...) But what really [[annoyed]] me is that it made Batman look like a [[sort]] of wimp who just can't take [[care]] of himself in a battle, without the help of two, even three sidekicks. I [[mean]], he's Batman, for God's sake! I know the comic books, I know that Nightwing and Batgirl are [[supposed]] to be Batman's allies, besides Robin, but still... [[making]] Batman [[say]] that he [[needs]] [[help]] from them... What, he can't handle a few punches? In BTAS, he [[could]] face a dozen adversaries without any [[problem]]... He's getting old? Come on...

And another thing: I really don't think that Batman would [[allow]] a kid like Tim Drake to go into battle that soon, without years of [[hard]] training. One, it's irresponsible (and Batman is everything, but irresponsible), and two, it's not what happened in the comics, if we are to remain faithful to them.

Batman - The Animated Series made history, with its animation, its stories and its characters... That really was a legend of Batman. The New Adventures series [[turned]] the legend into just another Batman flick. If this series supposed to be an improvement over Batman - The [[Animate]] [[Serials]], I, for one, think it [[faulted]] [[freakishly]]. The [[nature]] drawing is [[rotten]]... (Catwoman, for [[instances]], looks [[horrible]]...) But what really [[irritable]] me is that it made Batman look like a [[sorts]] of wimp who just can't take [[caring]] of himself in a battle, without the help of two, even three sidekicks. I [[imply]], he's Batman, for God's sake! I know the comic books, I know that Nightwing and Batgirl are [[suspected]] to be Batman's allies, besides Robin, but still... [[doing]] Batman [[says]] that he [[gotta]] [[aid]] from them... What, he can't handle a few punches? In BTAS, he [[wo]] face a dozen adversaries without any [[issues]]... He's getting old? Come on...

And another thing: I really don't think that Batman would [[permitting]] a kid like Tim Drake to go into battle that soon, without years of [[tough]] training. One, it's irresponsible (and Batman is everything, but irresponsible), and two, it's not what happened in the comics, if we are to remain faithful to them.

Batman - The Animated Series made history, with its animation, its stories and its characters... That really was a legend of Batman. The New Adventures series [[revolved]] the legend into just another Batman flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Brazilian [[films]] [[often]] get more positive [[appraisals]] than they actually deserve. Rather [[incredibly]], Contra Todos (Against Everybody) (original title, which the producers discarded: God Against Everybody) got very low GPA (grade point average) in this website. It [[seems]] to be bluntly [[rejected]] by female spectators at large. Actually, it is not so [[brutal]]. I mean as far as graphical violence is concerned. Its [[brutality]] is [[intrinsic]] as it [[portrays]] would-be lumpens, I mean underdog citizens who in fact possess high-tech equipment, who coldly perform murder orders in exchange of "grana graúda". Is this post-modern man? Is his/her only worry a quick, almost impersonal, ultra permissive lay, amidst over satiating meals ? The picture is probably the [[best]] Brazilian film of 2004, so far. Its shining editing style, à la Godard, its curious soundtrack counterpoints, its more than efficient overall cast and, above all, its original narration, with subtle non-chronological hidden points that only come to light in the epilogue, deserve at least an 8 mark. Brazilian [[movie]] [[ordinarily]] get more positive [[reviews]] than they actually deserve. Rather [[freakishly]], Contra Todos (Against Everybody) (original title, which the producers discarded: God Against Everybody) got very low GPA (grade point average) in this website. It [[looks]] to be bluntly [[refusal]] by female spectators at large. Actually, it is not so [[barbarous]]. I mean as far as graphical violence is concerned. Its [[barbarity]] is [[inalienable]] as it [[indicates]] would-be lumpens, I mean underdog citizens who in fact possess high-tech equipment, who coldly perform murder orders in exchange of "grana graúda". Is this post-modern man? Is his/her only worry a quick, almost impersonal, ultra permissive lay, amidst over satiating meals ? The picture is probably the [[nicest]] Brazilian film of 2004, so far. Its shining editing style, à la Godard, its curious soundtrack counterpoints, its more than efficient overall cast and, above all, its original narration, with subtle non-chronological hidden points that only come to light in the epilogue, deserve at least an 8 mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Okay, I [[know]] I shouldn't like this movie but I do. From Pat Morita's loveable interpretation of a Japanese [[stereotype]] to Jay Leno's annoying yell, I laughed throughout this [[movie]].As long as you [[take]] into [[account]] that this is not the best [[movie]] in the [[world]], it's a good mvie.

My [[favorite]] part is Morita talking to his [[boss]] in [[Tokyo]] with the drinking a close second. Okay, I [[savoir]] I shouldn't like this movie but I do. From Pat Morita's loveable interpretation of a Japanese [[stereotypes]] to Jay Leno's annoying yell, I laughed throughout this [[kino]].As long as you [[taking]] into [[accountancy]] that this is not the best [[kino]] in the [[worldwide]], it's a good mvie.

My [[preferential]] part is Morita talking to his [[chef]] in [[Tokio]] with the drinking a close second. --------------------------------------------- Result 208 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In fact, Marc Blitzstein's off-Broadway adaptation of "Threepenny" was not so "bowdlerised" as is generally believed.

(I have a special interest in "Threepenny"; my dad was part of the first full production in the US; U of Illlinois Theatre Guild did it around the end of WW2. HJitler had been so nearly successful in suppressing the play that they had to reconstruct the script and score from recordings in two different languages {neither English}, a German prompter's script and similar sources.) Blitzstein's adaptation -- not a "translation" -- which had the full approval of Lotte Lenya -- was a lot closer to the original than generally believed.

The problem is that the version thereof that most people know is the MGM cast recording (recently available on Polygram on CD)(which includes Beatrice Arthur {as Lucy, the "big complete girl", and can't i see her hands on hips and shoulders thrown back on that line -- Bea was a major babe in the 50's}, Paul Dooley and John Astin) was heavily censored by Mike Curb, head of MGM Records -- i mean, 17 (i think it was) "Goddamn"s got cut to just "damn".

(At one time, MGM also offered a 2-LP set of the *entire* play, doubtless as heavily censored.) --------------------------------------------- Result 209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] The [[opening]] scenes move as fluidly as [[frozen]] velveeta. The attempt at [[dramatic]] dialogue only makes me [[wish]] I had better control of the [[fast]] forward control. [[Vampires]] are [[usually]] [[portrayed]] as sexy and [[intelligent]] or mangy disgusting [[creatures]]. This vampire tries to seduce his prey by [[imitating]] a lost puppy. I [[usually]] tally a [[body]] [[count]], so there was a cat (which doesn't count) a bum, a girl who [[fell]] out of the [[sky]] with a [[sword]] in her ([[whatever]] that was about) and then the plot. [[Foley]] [[artists]] are respected for using [[celery]] to [[create]] the [[sound]] of a [[broken]] arm, but [[using]] the [[sound]] of biting into an apple for a vampire biting a victim is just plain silly. I [[liked]] Warlock, but this [[movie]] just stunk so bad that we turned it off, and it was so forgettable we [[rented]] it a year [[later]] only to [[turn]] it off again. The [[initiation]] scenes move as fluidly as [[froze]] velveeta. The attempt at [[prodigious]] dialogue only makes me [[wanna]] I had better control of the [[swifter]] forward control. [[Vampire]] are [[often]] [[depicted]] as sexy and [[smarter]] or mangy disgusting [[beasts]]. This vampire tries to seduce his prey by [[mimicking]] a lost puppy. I [[often]] tally a [[agencies]] [[comte]], so there was a cat (which doesn't count) a bum, a girl who [[plunged]] out of the [[heavens]] with a [[sabres]] in her ([[regardless]] that was about) and then the plot. [[Volley]] [[entertainers]] are respected for using [[broccoli]] to [[creations]] the [[sounds]] of a [[ruptured]] arm, but [[use]] the [[audible]] of biting into an apple for a vampire biting a victim is just plain silly. I [[wished]] Warlock, but this [[filmmaking]] just stunk so bad that we turned it off, and it was so forgettable we [[rents]] it a year [[afterwards]] only to [[turning]] it off again. --------------------------------------------- Result 210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This [[movie]] is a [[great]] example of how [[even]] some very [[funny]] jokes can go [[terribly]] [[wrong]]. i really [[expected]] at least [[something]] from this [[movie]] after [[seeing]] the add which was [[funny]] as [[hell]] but the [[movie]] wasn't half as good.

The [[weird]] [[part]] is that the [[jokes]] are actually funny, the spoofs of the smoking [[ban]], [[Jo]] Bole... etc. are [[genuinely]] good [[jokes]] but i don't know whom to [[blame]] this movie flop on.

The prime [[candidates]] [[may]] be:- 1) The hammers ( [[actors]]) and hammeresses (actresses) and not even the [[funny]] [[kind]] 2) The director 3)The [[guy]] who cast the [[actors]] and/or the director [[Anyway]] if you are really really [[bored]] and i [[mean]] really [[see]] this [[movie]], or [[else]] [[get]] a [[copy]] of each and every [[ad]] or teaser of this [[movie]] and laugh your [[butt]] of because those will be far funnier than the [[film]].

p.s the only [[saving]] [[grace]] of this [[film]] is mahesh manjrekar and the funny chappu bhai This [[cinema]] is a [[resplendent]] example of how [[yet]] some very [[fun]] jokes can go [[unimaginably]] [[improper]]. i really [[hoped]] at least [[somethin]] from this [[filmmaking]] after [[see]] the add which was [[hilarious]] as [[dammit]] but the [[movies]] wasn't half as good.

The [[strange]] [[party]] is that the [[gags]] are actually funny, the spoofs of the smoking [[prohibition]], [[Chao]] Bole... etc. are [[really]] good [[gags]] but i don't know whom to [[blamed]] this movie flop on.

The prime [[contestants]] [[maggio]] be:- 1) The hammers ( [[actresses]]) and hammeresses (actresses) and not even the [[comical]] [[types]] 2) The director 3)The [[guys]] who cast the [[protagonists]] and/or the director [[Anyways]] if you are really really [[boring]] and i [[imply]] really [[consults]] this [[cinematography]], or [[elsewhere]] [[got]] a [[copied]] of each and every [[advert]] or teaser of this [[filmmaking]] and laugh your [[ass]] of because those will be far funnier than the [[cinematography]].

p.s the only [[rescues]] [[gracia]] of this [[filmmaking]] is mahesh manjrekar and the funny chappu bhai --------------------------------------------- Result 211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The film is almost [[laughable]] with Debbie Reynolds and Shelley Winters teaming up as the mothers of convicted murderers. With the horrible notoriety after the trial, the two women team up and leave N.Y. for California in order to open and song and dance studio for Shirley Temple-like girls.

From the beginning, it becomes apparent that Reynolds has made a mistake in taking Winters with her to California. Winters plays a deeply [[religious]] woman who increasingly seems to be going off her rocker.

To make matters worse, the women who live together, are receiving menacing phone calls. Reynolds, who puts on a blond wig, is soon romanced by the wealthy father of one of her students, nicely played by Dennis Weaver.

Agnes Moorehead, in one of her last films, briefly is seen as Sister Alma, who Winters is a faithful listener of.

The film really belongs to Shelley Winters. She is heavy here and heaviness seemed to make her acting even better. Winters always did well in roles testing her nerves.

The ending is of the macabre and who can forget Winters at the piano banging away with that totally [[insane]] look? The film is almost [[ridicule]] with Debbie Reynolds and Shelley Winters teaming up as the mothers of convicted murderers. With the horrible notoriety after the trial, the two women team up and leave N.Y. for California in order to open and song and dance studio for Shirley Temple-like girls.

From the beginning, it becomes apparent that Reynolds has made a mistake in taking Winters with her to California. Winters plays a deeply [[nuns]] woman who increasingly seems to be going off her rocker.

To make matters worse, the women who live together, are receiving menacing phone calls. Reynolds, who puts on a blond wig, is soon romanced by the wealthy father of one of her students, nicely played by Dennis Weaver.

Agnes Moorehead, in one of her last films, briefly is seen as Sister Alma, who Winters is a faithful listener of.

The film really belongs to Shelley Winters. She is heavy here and heaviness seemed to make her acting even better. Winters always did well in roles testing her nerves.

The ending is of the macabre and who can forget Winters at the piano banging away with that totally [[loca]] look? --------------------------------------------- Result 212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I like this presentation - I have read Bleak House and I know it is so difficult to present the entire book as it should be, and even others like Little Dorrit - I have to admit they did a very good show with the staged Nicholas Nickelby. I love Diana Rigg and I could see the pain of Lady Dedlock, even through the expected arrogance of the aristocracy. I am sorry, I think she is the best Lady Dedlock... I am not sure who could have made a better Jarndyce, but I am OK with Mr. Elliott. It is not easy to present these long Dickens' books - Oliver Twist would be easier - this is a long, and if you don't care for all the legal situations can be dreary or boring. I think this presentation is entertaining enough not to be boring. I just LOVED Mr. Smallweed - it can be entertaining. There is always a child - Jo will break your heart here... I think we should be given a chance to judge for ourselves...

I have to say I loved the show. Maybe if I read the book again, as I usually do, after seeing the movie, maybe I can be more critical. In the meantime - I think it is a good presentation. --------------------------------------------- Result 213 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So many educational films are nothing more than mind-numbing drudgery, saved only by the fact that "MST3K" mocks them ("Why Study Industrial Arts?" comes to mind). "Hemo the Magnificent" is actually quite well done. It's all about blood, the heart, and the circulatory system. I admit that I don't remember everything from it, but it does a good job explaining everything, keeping it serious but entertaining. I guess that you can always count on June Foray (most famously the voice of Rocky the Squirrel, she plays a deer here).

Since "Hemo the Magnificent" itself may be hard to find, probably the best place to see it is in "Gremlins": a class is watching it while a gremlin is forming. --------------------------------------------- Result 214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]]

Human Body --- WoW.

There are about 27,000 Sunrises in human life....

Hardly one thousand Sunrises will be watched by 90% of Humans on this planet....

Our days are limited...

[[Excellent]] [[movie]] for all women.... makers of human body...

Thanks and Regards.



Human Body --- WoW.

There are about 27,000 Sunrises in human life....

Hardly one thousand Sunrises will be watched by 90% of Humans on this planet....

Our days are limited...

[[Wondrous]] [[movies]] for all women.... makers of human body...

Thanks and Regards.

--------------------------------------------- Result 215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The tragedy of the doomed [[ship]] Titanic has inspired many [[books]] and movies. The [[battle]] between nature and [[technology]] always [[caught]] man's [[imagination]]. The latest film concerning this tragedy in the [[Atlantic]] [[Ocean]] was written and [[directed]] by famous action movie filmmaker James Cameron. The story of "Titanic" [[involves]] two [[fictional]] characters (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet) from different backgrounds (one is a hobo-artist, the other is an [[aristocrat]]) and how their love [[triumphs]] over societal barriers and the tragedy of a sinking ship that they happen to be on.

First of all, although using a [[historical]] [[name]], this movie had [[little]] regard to history. The plot was [[built]] around two fictional [[lovers]], French diamond, and treasure hunters. The [[deaths]] of over a thousand of people on the greatest luxury ship of its time became a [[mere]] [[background]]. Many [[historical]] [[facts]] were [[simply]] [[forgotten]]. Where was the radio operator that ignored the [[iceberg]] warnings? Why was there no mention of the ship that was only 5 miles away from the Titanic but did not come to the [[rescue]] because its captain failed to identify the [[distress]] signal? Omitting these facts is an insult to the tragedy. And what was the point of flavoring this historical [[disaster]] with fictional [[cheesy]] romance when the [[story]] is already as [[sad]] as it is.

The [[overall]] plot was rather shallow; [[rich]] equals greed and corruption, poverty equals compassion and [[heroism]]. It is very ironic to [[spend]] $200 million to make a [[movie]] about how money corrupts. There was [[absolutely]] no [[human]] side [[shown]] in anti-heroes. It [[seemed]] like [[Billy]] Zane was [[playing]] a [[part]] of the [[devil]]. [[Casting]] was [[also]] very poor. If DiCaprio was 2 [[inches]] shorter than Winslet, you [[could]] swear she was his baby-sitter. The [[length]] of the movie was [[unnecessarily]] stretched to over 3 hours. First hour and the half was wasted on establishing the relationships between the [[characters]] that were known to audience long before they went to theater and the [[dialogue]] that was used to do so made it even worse. Hearing corny pick up lines such as "I see you" and "This is my side of the ship" generated more pain than the screams of drowning people. Also, jokes were too abundant and rather lame.

"Titanic" did involve some [[moving]] scenes such as the [[part]] when the musicians were playing while the [[ship]] was [[sinking]] but they were no [[way]] near [[anything]] original. The best thing about this film were its special effects, and that is the only thing that truly deserved an award.

Although this film lacked artistical value in [[overall]] sense, the public could not resist a sentimental story starring Romeo (DiCaprio), and so the movie became a success. Now it is safe to say that the [[industry]] will be less hesitant to invest large amounts of money in a single motion picture, so it seems that "[[Titanic]]" did achieve something after all. The tragedy of the doomed [[ships]] Titanic has inspired many [[livres]] and movies. The [[struggles]] between nature and [[technique]] always [[capturing]] man's [[creativity]]. The latest film concerning this tragedy in the [[Atlantica]] [[Oceana]] was written and [[geared]] by famous action movie filmmaker James Cameron. The story of "Titanic" [[consists]] two [[imaginary]] characters (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet) from different backgrounds (one is a hobo-artist, the other is an [[nobleman]]) and how their love [[victorious]] over societal barriers and the tragedy of a sinking ship that they happen to be on.

First of all, although using a [[historic]] [[denomination]], this movie had [[scant]] regard to history. The plot was [[builds]] around two fictional [[fans]], French diamond, and treasure hunters. The [[mortality]] of over a thousand of people on the greatest luxury ship of its time became a [[simple]] [[context]]. Many [[historic]] [[truths]] were [[sheer]] [[disregarded]]. Where was the radio operator that ignored the [[iceman]] warnings? Why was there no mention of the ship that was only 5 miles away from the Titanic but did not come to the [[saves]] because its captain failed to identify the [[heartbreak]] signal? Omitting these facts is an insult to the tragedy. And what was the point of flavoring this historical [[catastrophe]] with fictional [[corny]] romance when the [[history]] is already as [[sorrowful]] as it is.

The [[entire]] plot was rather shallow; [[richest]] equals greed and corruption, poverty equals compassion and [[gallantry]]. It is very ironic to [[spending]] $200 million to make a [[filmmaking]] about how money corrupts. There was [[totally]] no [[mankind]] side [[showed]] in anti-heroes. It [[looked]] like [[Billie]] Zane was [[replay]] a [[portion]] of the [[fiends]]. [[Foundry]] was [[apart]] very poor. If DiCaprio was 2 [[thumbs]] shorter than Winslet, you [[did]] swear she was his baby-sitter. The [[lifespan]] of the movie was [[recklessly]] stretched to over 3 hours. First hour and the half was wasted on establishing the relationships between the [[trait]] that were known to audience long before they went to theater and the [[conversation]] that was used to do so made it even worse. Hearing corny pick up lines such as "I see you" and "This is my side of the ship" generated more pain than the screams of drowning people. Also, jokes were too abundant and rather lame.

"Titanic" did involve some [[shifting]] scenes such as the [[party]] when the musicians were playing while the [[boat]] was [[drowning]] but they were no [[ways]] near [[something]] original. The best thing about this film were its special effects, and that is the only thing that truly deserved an award.

Although this film lacked artistical value in [[aggregate]] sense, the public could not resist a sentimental story starring Romeo (DiCaprio), and so the movie became a success. Now it is safe to say that the [[industria]] will be less hesitant to invest large amounts of money in a single motion picture, so it seems that "[[Herculean]]" did achieve something after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] The Wicker Man Has [[Done]] The Impossible! It replaced Cat Woman as the [[worst]] recent movie in my steel trap cinema mind. YES it's really that [[bad]]. So [[bad]] that when sitting down to write this review I thought to myself "If I had a choice to either see this movie again or to have red hot needles [[shoved]] in my eyes" I might actually go for the red hot needles.

Neil LaBute created a rare movie where Joel Schumacher could sit back and say with comfort and a guilt free mind "Yeah that's some bad direction right there".

I think the first clue for myself should have been the tag line: "Some Sacrifices Must Be Made". Sure it might sound sort of cheeky ominous line to intrigue you but the sacrifice will be all on the audience side of the screen. Trust me on this the people responsible for this movie should be charged with a hate crime..or at least fraud for trying to pass this off as anything resembling entertainment. Seriously! The movie is about an island where men are just there for breeding and I would still rather with be stuck on Gilligans Island with only pictures of Condoleezza Rice then find myself stranded there.

The most entertaining part about this movie was the guy who ripped the loudest fart I've ever heard in a movie theater. That's not a joke nor is it fictional. I've never been to a "thriller" and heard so much laughter through out the entire film. I can't tell you with an certainty if the laughs were intentional in some effort to lighten the cinematic tension or if they just really thought this crud would actual fly. I honestly found myself routing for a power outage or a perhaps a fight to break out in the movie theater, [[anything]] to make this more interesting which is pretty sad since Deez, Powder and I pounded 2 beers each before the film just for a little mental anesthesia (soon to be a law before all Nic Cage films, write to your congressman today, don't delay). At one point I actually thought perhaps this movie is really a spoof and Anna Ferris is going to show up…oh how I wish.

Nic Cage throws out so much ham per frame I'm thinking of having a cholesterol test done today. To think that I ever thought Sean Penn was a d*ck for slamming Nic's acting, oh he's still a d*ck just lesser of one…yes Sean Penn's d*ck was lessened because of this film. Do us all a favor Nic play your strengths and stick to being pathetic losers and drunks. You cannot play superman you do not get to play strong hunky roles go straight to jail do not pass go do not collect 200 dollars. His best moments in this film are when he finally comes unhinged and actually punches out a burly woman to steal her bear suit (like the fart, not a joke or a functional moment during this review) then proceeds to run amok like Conan O'Brian's masturbating bear, but with half the hilarity of a bear knocking his junk around. Thankfully he meets his end shortly after when it turns out he's to be a sacrifice to the crowd at the new tour hybrid show of Burning Man and Lilith Fair. Yes!!!! I just spoiled the ending for you…and if you knew any better you'd build statues of me in worship and sing songs of my legend. I sat through this crap-fest so you don't have to.

About half way through this little misadventure I kept thinking to myself Jack Bauer would have wrapped this case up in 20 minutes of real time..OK 35 minutes if Kim gets attacked by a mountain lion first. Even Steve Martin as Inspector Clouseau could have figured this out in under an hour…and you Sir are no Inspector Clouseau.

If for some reason you are taken captive and you have a choice to see this film or take a bullet, take the bullet.

Somewhere Uwe Boll is laughing at us all. The Wicker Man Has [[Accomplished]] The Impossible! It replaced Cat Woman as the [[meanest]] recent movie in my steel trap cinema mind. YES it's really that [[unfavourable]]. So [[unfavourable]] that when sitting down to write this review I thought to myself "If I had a choice to either see this movie again or to have red hot needles [[pushed]] in my eyes" I might actually go for the red hot needles.

Neil LaBute created a rare movie where Joel Schumacher could sit back and say with comfort and a guilt free mind "Yeah that's some bad direction right there".

I think the first clue for myself should have been the tag line: "Some Sacrifices Must Be Made". Sure it might sound sort of cheeky ominous line to intrigue you but the sacrifice will be all on the audience side of the screen. Trust me on this the people responsible for this movie should be charged with a hate crime..or at least fraud for trying to pass this off as anything resembling entertainment. Seriously! The movie is about an island where men are just there for breeding and I would still rather with be stuck on Gilligans Island with only pictures of Condoleezza Rice then find myself stranded there.

The most entertaining part about this movie was the guy who ripped the loudest fart I've ever heard in a movie theater. That's not a joke nor is it fictional. I've never been to a "thriller" and heard so much laughter through out the entire film. I can't tell you with an certainty if the laughs were intentional in some effort to lighten the cinematic tension or if they just really thought this crud would actual fly. I honestly found myself routing for a power outage or a perhaps a fight to break out in the movie theater, [[something]] to make this more interesting which is pretty sad since Deez, Powder and I pounded 2 beers each before the film just for a little mental anesthesia (soon to be a law before all Nic Cage films, write to your congressman today, don't delay). At one point I actually thought perhaps this movie is really a spoof and Anna Ferris is going to show up…oh how I wish.

Nic Cage throws out so much ham per frame I'm thinking of having a cholesterol test done today. To think that I ever thought Sean Penn was a d*ck for slamming Nic's acting, oh he's still a d*ck just lesser of one…yes Sean Penn's d*ck was lessened because of this film. Do us all a favor Nic play your strengths and stick to being pathetic losers and drunks. You cannot play superman you do not get to play strong hunky roles go straight to jail do not pass go do not collect 200 dollars. His best moments in this film are when he finally comes unhinged and actually punches out a burly woman to steal her bear suit (like the fart, not a joke or a functional moment during this review) then proceeds to run amok like Conan O'Brian's masturbating bear, but with half the hilarity of a bear knocking his junk around. Thankfully he meets his end shortly after when it turns out he's to be a sacrifice to the crowd at the new tour hybrid show of Burning Man and Lilith Fair. Yes!!!! I just spoiled the ending for you…and if you knew any better you'd build statues of me in worship and sing songs of my legend. I sat through this crap-fest so you don't have to.

About half way through this little misadventure I kept thinking to myself Jack Bauer would have wrapped this case up in 20 minutes of real time..OK 35 minutes if Kim gets attacked by a mountain lion first. Even Steve Martin as Inspector Clouseau could have figured this out in under an hour…and you Sir are no Inspector Clouseau.

If for some reason you are taken captive and you have a choice to see this film or take a bullet, take the bullet.

Somewhere Uwe Boll is laughing at us all. --------------------------------------------- Result 217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] By Hook or By [[Crook]] is a [[tremendously]] innovative film from a pair of [[immensely]] smart and talented filmmakers, Harry Dodge and Silas Howard. They manage to tell an original [[story]] in a distinctive cinematic style, and it's beautifully shot by Ann T. Rosetti, and wonderfully [[written]] -- truly [[poetic]].

The lead characters are [[true]] heroes and [[serve]] as a [[rare]] kind of role model/inspiration for [[butch]] dykes and trannies everywhere. This film has so much [[energy]], so much [[poignant]] [[passion]] and [[scruffy]] San [[Francisco]] [[heart]] to it. I can't recommend it [[highly]] [[enough]]!

The best butch buddy movie of all time! By Hook or By [[Bandit]] is a [[terribly]] innovative film from a pair of [[infinitely]] smart and talented filmmakers, Harry Dodge and Silas Howard. They manage to tell an original [[stories]] in a distinctive cinematic style, and it's beautifully shot by Ann T. Rosetti, and wonderfully [[authored]] -- truly [[poetry]].

The lead characters are [[real]] heroes and [[serving]] as a [[few]] kind of role model/inspiration for [[dyke]] dykes and trannies everywhere. This film has so much [[energies]], so much [[agonizing]] [[fascination]] and [[unkempt]] San [[Franz]] [[crux]] to it. I can't recommend it [[very]] [[suffice]]!

The best butch buddy movie of all time! --------------------------------------------- Result 218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is just as good as the original 101 if not better. Of course, Cruella steals the show with her outrageous behaviour and outfits, and the movie was probably made because the public wanted to see more of Cruella. We see a lot more of her this time round. I also like Ioan Gruffudd as Kevin, the rather bumbling male lead. To use Paris as the climax of the movie was a clever idea. The movie is well worth watching whatever your age, provided you like animals. --------------------------------------------- Result 219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[got]] this movie from Netflix after a long waiting time, so I was anticipating it greatly when it [[arrived]]. My worst [[fears]] were that it would be plodding, as well as... well, you know what all the screaming fan girls were babbling about? GACKTnHYDE=hawt yaoi love? That sort of thing? Dreading it. I was very, very [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. The movie was surprisingly watchable, even if the filming and music did make it feel like someone was going to bust out a pair of nun-chucks every two scenes, and the acting on Gackt's part was quite good. Hyde, being, um, Hyde, acted as a quasi-romantic friend/gang member character that anyone who saw him on stage would hardly be surprised by. He's one of my two major beefs with the film itself. But the rest of the cast (including the child actors in the opening scene) were very good at doing what they did- which was, mostly, get shot at and yelled at. But my second problem was very minor, having to do with the goriness. It seemed way too suspense-horror to me- like every scene where someone is shot they either slump over, really most sincerely dead, or lay there burbling for a rather long time. But Sho just... takes the shots, repeatedly, keels over, bubbles a LOT while he talks, and makes Hyde cry. All in all, if you're a fan of any of the actors or just a j-film fan, it's [[definitely]] worth a watch. I [[ai]] this movie from Netflix after a long waiting time, so I was anticipating it greatly when it [[happened]]. My worst [[misgivings]] were that it would be plodding, as well as... well, you know what all the screaming fan girls were babbling about? GACKTnHYDE=hawt yaoi love? That sort of thing? Dreading it. I was very, very [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. The movie was surprisingly watchable, even if the filming and music did make it feel like someone was going to bust out a pair of nun-chucks every two scenes, and the acting on Gackt's part was quite good. Hyde, being, um, Hyde, acted as a quasi-romantic friend/gang member character that anyone who saw him on stage would hardly be surprised by. He's one of my two major beefs with the film itself. But the rest of the cast (including the child actors in the opening scene) were very good at doing what they did- which was, mostly, get shot at and yelled at. But my second problem was very minor, having to do with the goriness. It seemed way too suspense-horror to me- like every scene where someone is shot they either slump over, really most sincerely dead, or lay there burbling for a rather long time. But Sho just... takes the shots, repeatedly, keels over, bubbles a LOT while he talks, and makes Hyde cry. All in all, if you're a fan of any of the actors or just a j-film fan, it's [[surely]] worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 220 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] An [[excellent]] example of "cowboy [[noir]]", as it's been called, in which [[unemployed]] [[Michael]] ([[Nicolas]] Cage) loses out on a [[job]] because he insists on being honest (he's [[got]] a bum [[leg]]). With really [[nothing]] [[else]] he can do, he [[decides]] that for once he's going to lie. When he [[walks]] into a [[bar]], and the [[owner]] Wayne (the late, [[great]] J.[[T]]. [[Walsh]]) [[mistakes]] him for a hit-man whom Wayne has [[hired]] to do in his [[sexy]] young wife [[Suzanne]] ([[Lara]] Flynn Boyle in [[fine]] [[form]]), Michael plays along and accepts Waynes' money. *Then* he goes to Suzanne and [[informs]] her of her husbands' [[intentions]], and accepts *her* money to get rid of Wayne! If that didn't complicate things [[enough]], the [[real]] hit-man, "Lyle from [[Dallas]]" ([[Dennis]] Hopper, in a [[perfect]] role for him) [[shows]] up and [[Michael]] is in even more [[trouble]] than before.

"[[Red]] [[Rock]] [[West]]" [[gets]] a lot out of the [[locations]]. [[Director]] [[John]] Dahl, who co-wrote the [[script]] with his brother Rick, was [[smart]] in [[realizing]] the [[potential]] of a story set in a [[truly]] isolated [[small]] [[town]] that may have [[seen]] [[better]] days and in which the residents could be [[involved]] in any [[manner]] of schemes. It's [[also]] an amusing [[idea]] of the kind of [[trouble]] an honest [[person]] [[could]] get into if they decided to abandon their [[principles]] and [[give]] in to any [[level]] of [[temptation]]. It's an appreciably [[dark]] and twist-laden story with an assortment of main [[characters]] that are if not corrupt, have at [[least]] been morally [[compromised]] like [[Michael]]. The lighting by [[cinematographer]] Marc Reshovsky is superb in its moodiness; [[even]] the [[climax]] set in a [[graveyard]] lends a nice morbid quality to the [[whole]] thing. [[Even]] if the writing isn't particularly "[[logical]] or [[credible]]", the [[film]] has a nice [[way]] of intriguing the viewer and just drawing them right in.

Cage does a good [[job]] in the lead, but his co-stars have a [[grand]] [[old]] time [[sinking]] their [[teeth]] into their meaty and greed-motivated [[characters]]. Hopper, Boyle, and Walsh are all fun to watch in these parts. Timothy Carhart and [[Dan]] Shor are fine as Walshs' [[deputies]] (in one [[especially]] good twist, [[Walsh]] is [[also]] the local [[sheriff]]), and there's an [[entertaining]] cameo role for [[country]] & western [[star]] Dwight Yoakam, who also graces the film with an enjoyable end credits tune.

It's quite a good little film worth checking out. It moves forward at an impressive pace, and if nothing else is certainly never boring.

8/10 An [[noteworthy]] example of "cowboy [[negro]]", as it's been called, in which [[jobless]] [[Michel]] ([[Nicola]] Cage) loses out on a [[employment]] because he insists on being honest (he's [[did]] a bum [[paw]]). With really [[anything]] [[further]] he can do, he [[decided]] that for once he's going to lie. When he [[walking]] into a [[solicitors]], and the [[owning]] Wayne (the late, [[awesome]] J.[[ton]]. [[Welch]]) [[error]] him for a hit-man whom Wayne has [[engaged]] to do in his [[scorching]] young wife [[Suzan]] ([[Larissa]] Flynn Boyle in [[fined]] [[shape]]), Michael plays along and accepts Waynes' money. *Then* he goes to Suzanne and [[inform]] her of her husbands' [[purposes]], and accepts *her* money to get rid of Wayne! If that didn't complicate things [[satisfactorily]], the [[authentic]] hit-man, "Lyle from [[Wallace]]" ([[Denny]] Hopper, in a [[faultless]] role for him) [[exhibit]] up and [[Michaela]] is in even more [[problem]] than before.

"[[Reid]] [[Boulder]] [[Western]]" [[get]] a lot out of the [[site]]. [[Superintendent]] [[Giovanni]] Dahl, who co-wrote the [[scripts]] with his brother Rick, was [[clever]] in [[achieve]] the [[possibilities]] of a story set in a [[genuinely]] isolated [[minimal]] [[ville]] that may have [[watched]] [[best]] days and in which the residents could be [[engaged]] in any [[way]] of schemes. It's [[similarly]] an amusing [[concept]] of the kind of [[difficulty]] an honest [[someone]] [[would]] get into if they decided to abandon their [[principle]] and [[lend]] in to any [[levels]] of [[seduction]]. It's an appreciably [[darkness]] and twist-laden story with an assortment of main [[character]] that are if not corrupt, have at [[lowest]] been morally [[undermined]] like [[Michaela]]. The lighting by [[photographer]] Marc Reshovsky is superb in its moodiness; [[yet]] the [[pinnacle]] set in a [[cemetery]] lends a nice morbid quality to the [[entire]] thing. [[Yet]] if the writing isn't particularly "[[reasonable]] or [[believable]]", the [[movies]] has a nice [[routes]] of intriguing the viewer and just drawing them right in.

Cage does a good [[labour]] in the lead, but his co-stars have a [[big]] [[archaic]] time [[wrecking]] their [[dentures]] into their meaty and greed-motivated [[hallmarks]]. Hopper, Boyle, and Walsh are all fun to watch in these parts. Timothy Carhart and [[Dana]] Shor are fine as Walshs' [[mps]] (in one [[concretely]] good twist, [[Welch]] is [[furthermore]] the local [[lawman]]), and there's an [[amusing]] cameo role for [[nations]] & western [[superstar]] Dwight Yoakam, who also graces the film with an enjoyable end credits tune.

It's quite a good little film worth checking out. It moves forward at an impressive pace, and if nothing else is certainly never boring.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 221 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In a summer that also boasted such repugnant stinkers as Snakes on a Plane and The Da Vinci Code, that's a pretty bold statement. But I stand by it nonetheless. Superman Returns, like King Kong 6 months before it, is overlong, hyper-indulgent and with CGI up to the eyeballs. My God, this stuff is doing my head in.

Richard Donner had the idea of 'keep it real' for his 2 outings. And I do find his approach to the special and optical effects to be the most appropriate. Brian Singer bombards us with so much CGI that it really takes you out of the story and constantly reminds you that you are watching a wannabe blockbuster that thinks that the only way to impress an audience is to spend $250 million (a totally irresponsible amount of money) on obnoxious visual effects that don't live up to the hype. We've seen everything and been everywhere that CGI can take us. There's no real atmosphere or involvement in this. And for a film that is 95% made up of this crap...well you figure it out.

I've read so many reviews from fanboy critics about how the movie has 'soul' or 'a human heart' or 'tender character moments'. Puh-lease! We've already had brooding superheros silently screaming 'you'd love me if you knew who I am' dozens of times already in recent years and SR offers absolutely NOTHING new in this regard. Even the plot is recycled garbage. Lex Luthor (a seriously mis-cast and hammy Kevin Spacey) plotting to destroy the landmass of America was done in the first film already! And, well...that's your lot! It's amazing that they managed to draw out this junk to 2.5 painful hours! Even if the cast were likable it would make it less unbearable. But Brandon Routh has the on screen personality of a mahogany hat-stand, Kate Bosworth is completely unconvincing as a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, James Marsden is 250% wooden, as usual and Kevin Spacey really needs to either fire his agent or acquire some better judgement. The only cast member I liked was the lovely Parker Posey. But I'm into weird-looking girls.

Every year films like this get bigger and more bombastic. Pretty soon we'll have $300 million films. Studios need to realise that maybe they should start looking down instead of looking up. For all the money that Warner spent on this pile of crap, for all the resources that this movie cost to make...was it worth it? In my opinion, certainly not! This garbage has put me of Superman for life! --------------------------------------------- Result 222 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] ... so what's in those [[missing]] 10 minutes that were so horrible they had to cut them out from the original film? We were three years into the film production code... Barbara Stanwyck had starred in the [[original]] [[play]], but here, [[Carole]] Lombard plays Maggie King. Co [[star]] Fred MacMurray is [[probably]] best known for "[[Double]] Indemnity", with Stanwyck, as well as his hit TV show "My Three Sons". [[Keep]] an [[eye]] out for a young Dorothy Lamour ([[Bob]] [[Hope]] [[movies]]) and the too-fabulous Franklin Pangborn, who spiced up just about [[every]] film put on [[tape]]. Of course, he works in the beauty salon on the [[ship]]! Add the [[sublime]] Charles Butterworth and [[Anthony]] [[Quinn]]. [[Good]] [[timing]] and [[clever]] [[banter]] at the beginning. Maggie's [[buddy]] Ella is [[played]] by Jean Dixon, who was the [[best]] [[friend]] in "[[Holiday]]" and "My [[Man]] Godfrey". [[In]] "Swing [[High]]", Maggie the tourist meets a [[soldier]] who is [[leaving]] the army. Maggie [[misses]] her [[boat]] when it leaves port and [[gets]] tangled up with the soldier. The dashing 20-something [[Quinn]] has a [[small]] scene at the local [[bar]] in Panama where [[Johnson]] (MacMurray) has been [[playing]] the [[trumpet]]. Maggie, [[Harry]] (Butterworth), and Skid [[band]] [[together]] and [[try]] to figure out how to [[get]] back to the States. Some good [[singing]] by Lamour. [[Good]] (but [[brief]]) acting performance by Cecil Cunningham as "Murph", the wise, helpful owner of the local saloon in Panama. While others have lamented at how bad it is, it wasn't so awful, and is [[even]] a little [[exotic]], with the fake Central [[America]] locale setting for the [[first]] half of the film. ... so what's in those [[lacking]] 10 minutes that were so horrible they had to cut them out from the original film? We were three years into the film production code... Barbara Stanwyck had starred in the [[preliminary]] [[playing]], but here, [[Carol]] Lombard plays Maggie King. Co [[superstar]] Fred MacMurray is [[potentially]] best known for "[[Twin]] Indemnity", with Stanwyck, as well as his hit TV show "My Three Sons". [[Retain]] an [[ojo]] out for a young Dorothy Lamour ([[Spongebob]] [[Hopes]] [[cinema]]) and the too-fabulous Franklin Pangborn, who spiced up just about [[any]] film put on [[cassette]]. Of course, he works in the beauty salon on the [[vessel]]! Add the [[super]] Charles Butterworth and [[Antony]] [[Queen]]. [[Alright]] [[timeline]] and [[smarter]] [[chitchat]] at the beginning. Maggie's [[pal]] Ella is [[done]] by Jean Dixon, who was the [[better]] [[boyfriend]] in "[[Holidays]]" and "My [[Men]] Godfrey". [[At]] "Swing [[Supreme]]", Maggie the tourist meets a [[servicemen]] who is [[departing]] the army. Maggie [[lack]] her [[boats]] when it leaves port and [[get]] tangled up with the soldier. The dashing 20-something [[Queen]] has a [[minimal]] scene at the local [[solicitor]] in Panama where [[Johnston]] (MacMurray) has been [[play]] the [[trumpeter]]. Maggie, [[Hari]] (Butterworth), and Skid [[bands]] [[jointly]] and [[trying]] to figure out how to [[obtain]] back to the States. Some good [[sung]] by Lamour. [[Well]] (but [[terse]]) acting performance by Cecil Cunningham as "Murph", the wise, helpful owner of the local saloon in Panama. While others have lamented at how bad it is, it wasn't so awful, and is [[yet]] a little [[extraterrestrial]], with the fake Central [[Latina]] locale setting for the [[frst]] half of the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 223 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm a big fan of Pacino movies. He's one of, if not the best, actors of this [[genre]]. However, this movie could've been a whole lot better even though it had a poor cast. All they had to do was tell the story of Carlito Brigante up until he went to jail. [[Instead]] it [[seemed]] [[like]] this was just one of many stories that could be told of Carlito. All or even some of the questions about his past that we wondered about in the [[original]] could've been answered. As far as I'm concerned, thats the only [[way]] you can make this [[movie]]. [[Instead]] we get this prequel that has almost [[NONE]] of the [[original]] [[characters]] in it, a character that plays a different part from the [[original]] ([[horrible]] move), and a totally different [[love]] interest for Carlito. Don't even get me [[started]] with Puffy. No [[way]] can I take that cat seriously as a gangsta after watching him dance in all his artists videos. Evertytime that dude opened his mouth I was waiting for him to start [[dancing]]. He made me laugh if anything. Mario Van Peeples surprised me with his role. I thought he was gonna give a lackluster performance due to his recent history. He did rather well. He was probably the most "[[believable]]" out of the entire cast in my opinion. Jay Hernandez did his best but doesn't have the [[skills]] right now in his career to take on this role. I appreciated his energy and his [[efforts]] [[though]]. Hard to follow up Pacino. The only [[way]] you could even have a clue about what kind of person Carlito was, is to watch the original. Otherwise, Carlito [[looks]] like a cold blooded killer in one scene then a spineless wimp in another. He was one of the baddest gangstas of his time but you would only see flashes of that in this movie. Maybe this is a [[pitiful]] [[way]] for Hollywood to try and make a 2nd prequel to cash in on this [[failure]]. Wouldn't surprise me.

Overall, in my opinion, this movie [[fell]] well short or what it could've been. The only reason I gave it a 3 was because I laughed a lot and Mario Van Peeples earned some respect back with me. A serious director should've taken this movie and actually put time into the story and turned it into an actual prequel. I'm extremely disappointed that this movie wasn't taken seriously. They would've been better off making this into a mini-series on HBO and actually telling the story like the original suggests. At the end of the movie, they had the nerve to suggest that Carlito would have to come back to the city. HEEELLLLO....thats the part everyone wants to see!!! Then again, this is all just my opinion. I can't tell you how to waste your money. I'm a big fan of Pacino movies. He's one of, if not the best, actors of this [[genus]]. However, this movie could've been a whole lot better even though it had a poor cast. All they had to do was tell the story of Carlito Brigante up until he went to jail. [[However]] it [[sounded]] [[iike]] this was just one of many stories that could be told of Carlito. All or even some of the questions about his past that we wondered about in the [[upfront]] could've been answered. As far as I'm concerned, thats the only [[camino]] you can make this [[filmmaking]]. [[However]] we get this prequel that has almost [[NOS]] of the [[preliminary]] [[nature]] in it, a character that plays a different part from the [[preliminary]] ([[scary]] move), and a totally different [[amore]] interest for Carlito. Don't even get me [[begins]] with Puffy. No [[routing]] can I take that cat seriously as a gangsta after watching him dance in all his artists videos. Evertytime that dude opened his mouth I was waiting for him to start [[danced]]. He made me laugh if anything. Mario Van Peeples surprised me with his role. I thought he was gonna give a lackluster performance due to his recent history. He did rather well. He was probably the most "[[dependable]]" out of the entire cast in my opinion. Jay Hernandez did his best but doesn't have the [[jurisdiction]] right now in his career to take on this role. I appreciated his energy and his [[action]] [[yet]]. Hard to follow up Pacino. The only [[route]] you could even have a clue about what kind of person Carlito was, is to watch the original. Otherwise, Carlito [[seems]] like a cold blooded killer in one scene then a spineless wimp in another. He was one of the baddest gangstas of his time but you would only see flashes of that in this movie. Maybe this is a [[regretful]] [[ways]] for Hollywood to try and make a 2nd prequel to cash in on this [[impossibility]]. Wouldn't surprise me.

Overall, in my opinion, this movie [[dipped]] well short or what it could've been. The only reason I gave it a 3 was because I laughed a lot and Mario Van Peeples earned some respect back with me. A serious director should've taken this movie and actually put time into the story and turned it into an actual prequel. I'm extremely disappointed that this movie wasn't taken seriously. They would've been better off making this into a mini-series on HBO and actually telling the story like the original suggests. At the end of the movie, they had the nerve to suggest that Carlito would have to come back to the city. HEEELLLLO....thats the part everyone wants to see!!! Then again, this is all just my opinion. I can't tell you how to waste your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Seven young people go to the forest looking for a bear.Soon they are all stalked and viciously murdered by a crazy Vietnam veteran."Trampa Infernal" is a pretty entertaining Mexican slasher that reminds me a lot "The Zero Boys".The film is fast-paced and there are some good death scenes like throat slashing or axe in the neck.Unfortunately there is not much gore,so fans of grand-guignol will be disappointed.However if you are a fan of slasher movies give this rarity a look.Mexican horror flicks are quite obscure(I have seen only "Alucarda" and "Don't Panic"),so this should be another reason to see this enjoyable slasher.My rating:7 out of 10.Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Wes Craven has been [[created]] a most successful killer-thriller [[movies]] of all time. After [[watching]] he's movies, you will find your [[new]] fears. People don't know, which Wes Craven's [[thriller]] [[movie]] is the best, because they all [[different]].

[[In]] this [[movie]], Lisa is [[terrorize]] by fellow-traveler. He coercible her to kill and if she don't do this, Jack will [[kill]] her father. Lisa is in the huge mess, because whatever she [[choose]], she will [[kill]].

Acting was unreal. Rachel McAdams and Cillian Murphy [[acted]] [[unbelievable]] good. The [[emotions]] was in right [[choose]]. [[Idea]] and script of this movie is [[great]] too...

Sometimes it [[reminds]] a "[[Scream]]", but he [[definitely]] better, than both "[[Screams]]" sequels together.

And what can I [[say]] - this is the [[best]] killer-thriller [[movie]] in 21's century [[yet]]... Wes Craven has been [[engendered]] a most successful killer-thriller [[theater]] of all time. After [[staring]] he's movies, you will find your [[newer]] fears. People don't know, which Wes Craven's [[thrillers]] [[movies]] is the best, because they all [[several]].

[[Onto]] this [[cinema]], Lisa is [[terrify]] by fellow-traveler. He coercible her to kill and if she don't do this, Jack will [[kiiled]] her father. Lisa is in the huge mess, because whatever she [[opted]], she will [[mata]].

Acting was unreal. Rachel McAdams and Cillian Murphy [[behaved]] [[inconceivable]] good. The [[sentiments]] was in right [[opt]]. [[Brainchild]] and script of this movie is [[wondrous]] too...

Sometimes it [[reminding]] a "[[Howling]]", but he [[surely]] better, than both "[[Shrieking]]" sequels together.

And what can I [[told]] - this is the [[nicest]] killer-thriller [[movies]] in 21's century [[however]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I'm an [[admirer]] of Hal Hartley's [[films]], [[especially]] 1997's "Henry Fool." "Fay Grim" is a sequel to that [[film]], and has a [[similar]] style and sense of [[humor]]. The plot, [[however]], is [[completely]] [[different]]. [[Fay]] [[Grim]] ([[played]] [[brilliantly]] by the [[iconic]] [[Parker]] [[Posey]]) [[tries]] to [[track]] down her [[missing]] husband's [[notebooks]], and finds herself amid [[conspiracies]] and [[espionage]]. The [[supporting]] cast (most of the folks from the first [[film]] as well as [[Jeff]] Goldblum, Saffron [[Burrows]], and a much-welcomed [[return]] from 90s indie-darling Elina Lowensohn) is [[excellent]] and the [[film]] has [[lots]] of [[surprises]]. The director claims this is part of a "[[Star]] [[Wars]]"-like trilogy, serving as the "Empire [[Strikes]] Back" of the series If this is true, I can't [[wait]] to [[see]] the [[third]] [[installment]]! I just hope I don't have to [[wait]] 10 more [[years]] for it. I'm an [[groupie]] of Hal Hartley's [[movies]], [[namely]] 1997's "Henry Fool." "Fay Grim" is a sequel to that [[movie]], and has a [[equivalent]] style and sense of [[comedy]]. The plot, [[still]], is [[altogether]] [[assorted]]. [[Fey]] [[Bleak]] ([[accomplished]] [[excellently]] by the [[symbolic]] [[Barker]] [[Posse]]) [[attempted]] to [[trails]] down her [[gone]] husband's [[mobile]], and finds herself amid [[conspiracy]] and [[spies]]. The [[helping]] cast (most of the folks from the first [[cinematography]] as well as [[Geoffrey]] Goldblum, Saffron [[Dens]], and a much-welcomed [[returns]] from 90s indie-darling Elina Lowensohn) is [[wondrous]] and the [[kino]] has [[alot]] of [[astonishment]]. The director claims this is part of a "[[Superstar]] [[War]]"-like trilogy, serving as the "Empire [[Bombarded]] Back" of the series If this is true, I can't [[waiting]] to [[behold]] the [[thirdly]] [[instalment]]! I just hope I don't have to [[suspense]] 10 more [[olds]] for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Every]] once in a long while a [[movie]] will come along that will be so [[awful]] that I feel [[compelled]] to [[warn]] people. [[If]] I labor all my days and I can [[save]] but one soul from [[watching]] this [[movie]], how [[great]] will be my [[joy]].

[[Where]] to [[begin]] my discussion of [[pain]]. For starters, there was a musical [[montage]] every five minutes. There was no character [[development]]. [[Every]] character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy [[foreign]] guy, etc. The [[script]] felt as if it were being written as the [[movie]] was being shot. The [[production]] [[value]] was so [[incredibly]] low that it [[felt]] like I was watching a junior [[high]] video [[presentation]]. [[Have]] the [[directors]], [[producers]], etc. ever [[even]] seen a [[movie]] before? Halestorm is getting worse and [[worse]] with every [[new]] [[entry]]. The [[concept]] for this [[movie]] [[sounded]] so funny. How could you go wrong with [[Gary]] Coleman and a handful of somewhat [[legitimate]] [[actors]]. But trust me when I say this, things went [[wrong]], [[VERY]] WRONG. [[All]] once in a long while a [[filmmaking]] will come along that will be so [[dire]] that I feel [[forced]] to [[alert]] people. [[Though]] I labor all my days and I can [[savings]] but one soul from [[staring]] this [[film]], how [[marvellous]] will be my [[pleasure]].

[[Wherever]] to [[startup]] my discussion of [[painless]]. For starters, there was a musical [[fitting]] every five minutes. There was no character [[evolution]]. [[Any]] character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy [[alien]] guy, etc. The [[hyphen]] felt as if it were being written as the [[filmmaking]] was being shot. The [[productivity]] [[valuing]] was so [[surprisingly]] low that it [[deemed]] like I was watching a junior [[highest]] video [[submissions]]. [[Has]] the [[administrators]], [[growers]], etc. ever [[yet]] seen a [[filmmaking]] before? Halestorm is getting worse and [[worst]] with every [[newest]] [[entries]]. The [[conception]] for this [[filmmaking]] [[rang]] so funny. How could you go wrong with [[Garry]] Coleman and a handful of somewhat [[justified]] [[protagonists]]. But trust me when I say this, things went [[flawed]], [[QUITE]] WRONG. --------------------------------------------- Result 228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sucked ! They took something from my childhood ,and raped it in an outhouse! This movie was so bad I wanted to go home and hold my "Dukes" dvds and cry in a corner. The cast was terrible ! It wasn't "The Dukes", it was Stiffler and Jackass driving a car. When was Boss Hogg evil? When was Rosco a tough guy? They never were ! Boss Hogg was greedy and Rosco was an idiot. When did Jesse smoke pot? He never did ! Now don't get me wrong,I'm very liberal and there's nothing wrong with a little chiba, but it had no place in this movie! The only thing good about this movie was the trailers before the movie and the end credits. It was a waste of money time and air. Avoid at all costs!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] First of all, the [[reason]] I'm giving this film 2 [[stars]] [[instead]] of 1 is because at [[least]] [[Peter]] Falk [[gave]] his usual [[fantastic]] performance as Lieutenant Columbo. He [[alone]] can get 10 [[stars]] for trying to save this otherwise utterly [[worthless]] [[attempt]] at making a [[movie]].

I was [[initially]] all fired up at reading one poster's [[comment]] that [[Andrew]] Stevens in this movie [[gave]] "the performance of his [[career]]." To me, it was the [[abysmal]] performance by Stevens that absolutely [[ruined]] this movie, and so I was all prepared to hurl all sorts of insults at the person who [[made]] the aforementioned comment. Then I thought to myself, what else has Stevens done? So I [[checked]] and, you know, that person was absolutely right. In the 17 years since this Columbo movie was made, apparently every one of the 33 projects that Stevens has been in since then has been utter crap, so it is doubtful that anybody has even seen the rest of his career.

If you like Columbo, see every other of the 69 titles before watching this one. Do yourself a favor and save the worst for last. First of all, the [[cause]] I'm giving this film 2 [[celebrity]] [[however]] of 1 is because at [[lowest]] [[Petr]] Falk [[delivered]] his usual [[sumptuous]] performance as Lieutenant Columbo. He [[only]] can get 10 [[celebrity]] for trying to save this otherwise utterly [[fruitless]] [[endeavor]] at making a [[filmmaking]].

I was [[originally]] all fired up at reading one poster's [[comments]] that [[Andreu]] Stevens in this movie [[given]] "the performance of his [[professions]]." To me, it was the [[shocking]] performance by Stevens that absolutely [[obliterated]] this movie, and so I was all prepared to hurl all sorts of insults at the person who [[introduced]] the aforementioned comment. Then I thought to myself, what else has Stevens done? So I [[audited]] and, you know, that person was absolutely right. In the 17 years since this Columbo movie was made, apparently every one of the 33 projects that Stevens has been in since then has been utter crap, so it is doubtful that anybody has even seen the rest of his career.

If you like Columbo, see every other of the 69 titles before watching this one. Do yourself a favor and save the worst for last. --------------------------------------------- Result 230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't understand how "2 of us" receive such a high rating... I thought that the first half dragged on and the second half didnt make sense, followed by an unresolved climax which was not worth the trouble. However, I did like Jared Harris' performance of John Lennon which was worth the wasted 2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Hint number one - read the title as "the Time of the Mad Dog," or [[perhaps]] dogs. This is a pretty good ensemble piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're [[curious]] already), and first-time director Bishop gives them their chance, taking his time, [[letting]] the [[characters]] [[interact]] and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the [[return]] of "the [[big]] boss" and whatever revenge ensues.

[[For]] some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding [[film]] [[presence]]. And [[yes]], with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and [[Richard]] Pryor involved, this IS the "Wild in the Streets" [[reunion]] [[party]]! Hint number one - read the title as "the Time of the Mad Dog," or [[potentially]] dogs. This is a pretty good ensemble piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're [[weird]] already), and first-time director Bishop gives them their chance, taking his time, [[leaving]] the [[features]] [[imparting]] and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the [[restitution]] of "the [[sizeable]] boss" and whatever revenge ensues.

[[During]] some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding [[kino]] [[attendance]]. And [[yea]], with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and [[Richards]] Pryor involved, this IS the "Wild in the Streets" [[reunite]] [[part]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Mark Frechette stars as [[Mark]], a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of [[killing]] a cop during a [[campus]] riot, and he flees all the way to the [[desert]]. He does so by stealing a [[small]] plane at the local [[airport]], and [[flies]] it himself.

Once out [[flying]] over the desert, [[Mark]] [[spots]] a [[car]] from the [[air]]. A [[young]] [[woman]] named Daria steps out, and sees [[Mark]] [[circling]] in the plane. [[Mark]] swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to [[duck]] or get hit. When he [[lands]], he [[becomes]] acquainted with Daria, who is [[strangely]] [[charmed]] by Mark's aerial highjinks.

After engaging in soulful conversation for [[hours]], Mark and Daria get naked, and [[make]] [[love]] in the sand. But with [[Mark]] evading the [[law]], they realize that he needs to keep running. [[So]] [[Mark]] and Daria's brief tryst is [[quite]] [[poignant]], because it doesn't [[get]] to develop into a full-blown romance.

Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. [[Both]] films have a rambling, vague quality, along with [[complicated]] meanings and [[characters]]. Frechette was as reckless in [[person]], as his [[character]] was in this [[film]]. A few years after [[making]] Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in [[real]] [[life]]. [[While]] serving his [[prison]] [[sentence]], [[Mark]] [[died]] an [[ignoble]] [[death]]. He was [[killed]] by a 150 [[lb]]. [[weight]], which [[fell]] on him when he was weightlifting.

The best thing about this movie was the [[splendid]] cinematography, and special [[visual]] effects. The [[incredible]], slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a [[stroke]] of [[genius]]. Although not as ground-breaking a film as [[Easy]] [[Rider]] was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the [[early]] 70s counterculture. I [[recommend]] it, for those who like avant-guard films which [[showcase]] the [[upheaval]], of the youth rebellion during the early 70s. Mark Frechette stars as [[Brand]], a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of [[murdering]] a cop during a [[campuses]] riot, and he flees all the way to the [[deserts]]. He does so by stealing a [[minimal]] plane at the local [[airfield]], and [[flying]] it himself.

Once out [[hovering]] over the desert, [[Branded]] [[stains]] a [[vehicles]] from the [[airspace]]. A [[youths]] [[female]] named Daria steps out, and sees [[Marks]] [[circle]] in the plane. [[Branded]] swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to [[ducks]] or get hit. When he [[territory]], he [[becoming]] acquainted with Daria, who is [[suspiciously]] [[seduced]] by Mark's aerial highjinks.

After engaging in soulful conversation for [[hour]], Mark and Daria get naked, and [[deliver]] [[loves]] in the sand. But with [[Brands]] evading the [[ley]], they realize that he needs to keep running. [[Consequently]] [[Branded]] and Daria's brief tryst is [[very]] [[heartbreaking]], because it doesn't [[obtain]] to develop into a full-blown romance.

Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. [[Whether]] films have a rambling, vague quality, along with [[tricky]] meanings and [[hallmarks]]. Frechette was as reckless in [[persons]], as his [[characters]] was in this [[movie]]. A few years after [[doing]] Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in [[actual]] [[vie]]. [[Though]] serving his [[jail]] [[condemnation]], [[Branded]] [[dying]] an [[outrageous]] [[killings]]. He was [[killings]] by a 150 [[lbs]]. [[weights]], which [[declined]] on him when he was weightlifting.

The best thing about this movie was the [[spectacular]] cinematography, and special [[optic]] effects. The [[unthinkable]], slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a [[apoplexy]] of [[engineering]]. Although not as ground-breaking a film as [[Easily]] [[Mustang]] was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the [[precocious]] 70s counterculture. I [[recommendation]] it, for those who like avant-guard films which [[demonstrate]] the [[ferment]], of the youth rebellion during the early 70s. --------------------------------------------- Result 233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the Germans all stand out in the open and get mowed down with a machine gun. the Good guys never die, unless its for dramatic purposes. the "plot" has so many holes its laughable. (Where did the German soldiers go once they rolled the fuel tank towards the train? Erik Estrada? Please!) And the whole idea, hijacking a train? How moronic is that! The Germans KNOW where you are going to go, its not like you can leave the track and drive away! What a waste. I would rather bonk myself on the head with a ball peen hammer 10 times then have to sit through that again. I mean, seriously, it FELT like it was made in the 60s, but it was produced in 88!! 1988!! the A-Team is more believable than this horrid excuse for a movie. Only watch it if you need a good laugh. This movie is to Tele Sevalas what Green Beret was to John Wayne. --------------------------------------------- Result 234 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] As far as I know, this [[show]] was never repeated on [[UK]] television after its original [[run]] in the late '60s / [[early]] '70s, and most [[episodes]] are now [[sadly]] "[[missing]] [[presumed]] [[wiped]]".

[[Series]] 6 from 1971 however [[still]] exists in its entirety, and I [[recently]] [[got]] the [[chance]] to watch it all, the [[best]] part of 4 decades on.

[[After]] [[rushing]] [[home]] from [[school]], Freewheelers was [[essential]] viewing for me and [[many]] of my contemporaries back in those halcyon [[days]] of [[flared]] [[trousers]], Slade and Chicory Tip. And watching it again [[brought]] a nostalgic lump to the throat.

Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally [[amusing]] [[fight]] scenes, plot holes [[wide]] enough to [[pilot]] a [[large]] ocean-going yacht through and the "[[frightfully]], [[frightfully]]" RADA accents of the lead players.

No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a [[bygone]] (dare I say "golden") age of kids' TV drama, when the shows were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't take themselves so seriously. Before they became obsessed with all the angst-laden "ishoos" that today's screenwriters have their young protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, drugs, STIs etc.

No doubt if it were "remade for a modern audience" in these days of all-pervasive political correctness, the boss figure would be a black female, one of the young male heroes would be a Muslim, the other would be a white lad confused about his sexuality and the girl would be an all-action go-getter with an IQ off the scale, who'd be forever getting the lads out of [[scrapes]] and making them look foolish - in other words a million miles removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.

It's a show that's very much "of its time". But is that a [[bad]] [[thing]]? I for one don't [[think]] so. As far as I know, this [[exhibition]] was never repeated on [[BRITS]] television after its original [[executing]] in the late '60s / [[prematurely]] '70s, and most [[bouts]] are now [[woefully]] "[[lacks]] [[supposed]] [[obliterated]]".

[[Serials]] 6 from 1971 however [[however]] exists in its entirety, and I [[newly]] [[ai]] the [[likelihood]] to watch it all, the [[better]] part of 4 decades on.

[[Upon]] [[hurrying]] [[dwellings]] from [[tuition]], Freewheelers was [[key]] viewing for me and [[several]] of my contemporaries back in those halcyon [[jours]] of [[erupted]] [[panties]], Slade and Chicory Tip. And watching it again [[lodged]] a nostalgic lump to the throat.

Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally [[funny]] [[struggle]] scenes, plot holes [[large]] enough to [[experiment]] a [[sizable]] ocean-going yacht through and the "[[excruciatingly]], [[shockingly]]" RADA accents of the lead players.

No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a [[bygones]] (dare I say "golden") age of kids' TV drama, when the shows were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't take themselves so seriously. Before they became obsessed with all the angst-laden "ishoos" that today's screenwriters have their young protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, drugs, STIs etc.

No doubt if it were "remade for a modern audience" in these days of all-pervasive political correctness, the boss figure would be a black female, one of the young male heroes would be a Muslim, the other would be a white lad confused about his sexuality and the girl would be an all-action go-getter with an IQ off the scale, who'd be forever getting the lads out of [[abrasions]] and making them look foolish - in other words a million miles removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.

It's a show that's very much "of its time". But is that a [[amiss]] [[stuff]]? I for one don't [[believe]] so. --------------------------------------------- Result 235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In 1594 in Brazil, the Tupinambas Indians are friends of the Frenches and their enemies are the Tupiniquins, friends of the Portugueses. A Frenchman (Arduíno Colassanti) is captured by the Tupinambás, and in spite of his trial to convince them that he is French, they believe he is Portuguese. The Frenchman becomes their slave, and maritally lives with Seboipepe (Ana Maria Magalhães). Later, he uses powder in the cannons that the Portuguese left behind to defeat the Tupiniquins in a battle. In order to celebrate the victory, the Indians decide to eat him.

"Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês" is another great low budget movie of the great Brazilian director Nélson Pereira dos Santos. The screenplay is very original and the story is spoken in Tupi. The film is shot using natural light most of the time and is very realistic. The actors and actresses perform naked and Ana Maria Magalhães is magnificent, showing a wonderful body and giving a stunning performance. The sound is produced by the Brazilian musician Zé Rodrix. This movie shows the beginning of the exploitation of my country by Europeans, focusing in the Portuguese and French at that time, trading with the Indians and exchanging combs and mirrors by our natural resources. This movie was awarded in the national festivals, such as the 1971 Brazilian Cinema Festival of Brasília (Festival de Brazília do Cinema Brasileiro) with Best Screenplay (Nelson Pereira dos Santos), Best Dialog (Nelson Pereira dos Santos and Humberto Mauro) and Best Cenograph (Régis Monteiro); Art Critics Association of São Paulo (Associação Paulista dos Críticos de Arte), with best Revelation of the Year (Ana Maria Magalhães) and some other prizes. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês" ("How Tasty Was My Frenchman") --------------------------------------------- Result 236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The sects that capitalise on this film are well known for their claim to take the 'message' of the bible without any alteration or extra-biblical influence. The existence of this film is solely due to the fact that there is no such thing.

If you want to know what the born-again branch of Christianity were harping on about in the seventies just look up the word 'rapture' in a dictionary of cults and sects. It's quicker than sitting through this waste of celluloid.

Poor acting, uneven sound quality and a script that could just as easily have been written by Jack T Chick (paranoid Christian conspiracy theorist for those not familiar with the Evangelical scene). You could not really put this into the 'so bad it's good' category so its only audience are either those with a pamphlet collection looking to branch out or the extremely paranoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although she is little known today, Deanna Durbin was one of the most popular stars of the 1930s, a pretty teenager with a perky personality and a much-admired operatic singing voice. This 1937 was her first major film, and it proved a box-office bonanza for beleaguered Universal Studios.

THREE SMART GIRLS concerns three daughters of a divorced couple who rush to their long-unseen father when their still-faithful mother reveals he may soon remarry--with the firm intention of undermining his gold-digger girlfriend and returning him to their mother. Although the story is slight, the script is witty and the expert cast plays it with a neat screwball touch. Durbin has a pleasing voice and appealing personality, and such enjoyable character actors as Charles Winninger, Alice Brady, Lucile Watson, and Mischa Auer round out the cast. A an ultra-light amusement for fans of 1930s film.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film about secret government mind experiments and the corrupt use of the citizenry by secretive and vile shadowy figures had the potential for being a really interesting movie. But for me, it failed. I won't elaborate much on the rather confusing plot line, but if you are looking for a detailed explanation, the comment by user "reluctantpopstar" gives a good description of it.

But it didn't work for me. I found it slow, which would be okay but for the fact that it seemed to go nowhere. The viewer is left in the dark about too many things to really be able to get a handle on this movie-in some films, one can argue that the filmmakers intended to provoke thought and left things ambiguous for that reason. I don't think that this is the case here.

As for the frequent long shots of two buildings that have been frequently mentioned by other users...I see that they do have a point-they give the viewer time to get another drink without missing any of the "action". And I suspect many viewers would welcome the opportunity to have several beverages on board to get through this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most boring horror films I have ever seen, as it's absolutely god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time. All the characters are boring, and the story is terrible, plus I could see the two twists at the end coming miles away!. The great setting and the creepy house definitely would have helped if it wasn't so damn boring, and there isn't one character to root for either, plus I hope it makes it's way to the bottom 100, because it deserves to be there in my opinion. When John Carradine finally shows up at the end, it's a pretty good scene but it's already way too late, and the only other screen time he had was in flashbacks, plus the only really gory scene in the movie is when a character gets his face messed up by Bee's, as it was rather gory. I got this in a DVD Horror set called Back From The Grave and everyone really overacts in my opinion, plus it's lucky this was included in a set I bought otherwise I would have chucked this out the window!. This is one of the most boring Horror films I have ever seen, as It's absolutely god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time, and I say avoid it like the plague!, you don't want to go through the torture. The Direction is absolutely terrible!. Carl Monson does an absolutely terrible! job here, making every thing look cheap, wasting his potential on making creepy atmosphere and just keeping the film at an incredibly dull pace. The Acting is just as bad. John Carradine is good in his scene, but other then that he's hardly in the film other then flashback scenes. (Carradine Ruled!!). Merry Anders overacts here terribly as Laura, as she didn't convince me at all. Ivy Bethune is OK, and somewhat creepy, but also overacted, she did have a creepy smile at the end though. Rest of the cast, I didn't pay enough attention too, as I had a lot of trouble getting through it, but they were all really bad. Overall please avoid this,It's not worth the agony!. BOMB out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Though I've yet to review the [[movie]] in about two years, I remember [[exactly]] what [[made]] my opinion [[go]] as low as it did. Having loved the original Little Mermaid, and having been obsessed with mermaids as a child could be, I decided I'd take the time to sit down and watch the sequel.

Disney, I've got a little message for you. [[If]] you don't have the original [[director]] and [[actors]] [[handy]]...you're just looking to get your [[butt]] whooped.

In the sequel, our story begins with a slightly older Ariel and her daughter, Melody. My first big [[issue]] was that Eric and the rest of the crew sang. Yes, I understand that Disney is big on sing-and-dance numbers, but really, that's what made Eric my favorite prince. He was calm, collected, and a genuine gentleman that knew how to have fun. And he DID. NOT. SING.

And then there's the villain. Oh, how could we forget the shivers that coursed down our spines whenever Ursula slunk onto the screen, terrifying both Ariel and audiences around the world? Unfortunately, that gene was not passed on to her seemingly useless sister, Morgana. Nothing was ever, EVER said about Morgana in the first movie; she just pops out of nowhere, trying to steal the baby. Oh, how cute. The younger sister is ticked off and instead of going after the trident, decides to kidnap a month-old baby. Gag me.

Other than being a flat character with no sense of originality in her, Morgana was just very unorthodox. The same [[plan]] as her sister, the same [[minions]] (who, by the [[way]], did not scare [[anyone]]. I had a three [[year]] old on my lap when I [[watched]] this [[movie]], and she laughed hysterically.) She had no [[purpose]] being in there; I'd like to have [[seen]] [[Mom]] be the [[villain]]. I'm sure she would have [[done]] a [[better]] [[job]] than [[Little]] Miss Tish over there.

King Triton held [[none]] of the respect he'd earned from me in the first movie, and don't even get me started on [[Scuttle]], Sebastian and [[Flounder]]. Triton was a stern but loving father in the first movie, and in the second, it's almost like he's lost his will to knock fear into the hearts of his subjects. Scuttle, once a comic relief that made everyone laugh with his 'dingle-hopper' (yes, I'll admit it; I did call my fork a dingle-hopper from time to time after that). In this film, Scuttle's all but forgotten. A supporting character even in the first, he at least added something to the movie. He was rich with a flavor the others didn't have, and in the sequel, they all but stripped it from him entirely. Sebastian was still the same, but twice as worrisome as before. Disney, don't do that. Don't even try to mess with our favorite crab. Or our favorite little fat fish, who becomes a dad and has a multitude of very annoying children. He's fat, and he's bland, and he looks like he's going to flat line any second.

The walrus and penguin were unneeded, and after a while, you just start to resent everyone. Especially Melody, who has no depth to her whatsoever.

And one of these days, Disney, I'm kicking out of my life.

If I didn't love your originals so much. Though I've yet to review the [[filmmaking]] in about two years, I remember [[precisely]] what [[effected]] my opinion [[going]] as low as it did. Having loved the original Little Mermaid, and having been obsessed with mermaids as a child could be, I decided I'd take the time to sit down and watch the sequel.

Disney, I've got a little message for you. [[Unless]] you don't have the original [[headmaster]] and [[players]] [[convenient]]...you're just looking to get your [[ass]] whooped.

In the sequel, our story begins with a slightly older Ariel and her daughter, Melody. My first big [[issuing]] was that Eric and the rest of the crew sang. Yes, I understand that Disney is big on sing-and-dance numbers, but really, that's what made Eric my favorite prince. He was calm, collected, and a genuine gentleman that knew how to have fun. And he DID. NOT. SING.

And then there's the villain. Oh, how could we forget the shivers that coursed down our spines whenever Ursula slunk onto the screen, terrifying both Ariel and audiences around the world? Unfortunately, that gene was not passed on to her seemingly useless sister, Morgana. Nothing was ever, EVER said about Morgana in the first movie; she just pops out of nowhere, trying to steal the baby. Oh, how cute. The younger sister is ticked off and instead of going after the trident, decides to kidnap a month-old baby. Gag me.

Other than being a flat character with no sense of originality in her, Morgana was just very unorthodox. The same [[planning]] as her sister, the same [[lackeys]] (who, by the [[camino]], did not scare [[everyone]]. I had a three [[annum]] old on my lap when I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]], and she laughed hysterically.) She had no [[intents]] being in there; I'd like to have [[noticed]] [[Ammi]] be the [[hoodlum]]. I'm sure she would have [[effected]] a [[optimum]] [[jobs]] than [[Petite]] Miss Tish over there.

King Triton held [[nos]] of the respect he'd earned from me in the first movie, and don't even get me started on [[Sabotaged]], Sebastian and [[Flatfish]]. Triton was a stern but loving father in the first movie, and in the second, it's almost like he's lost his will to knock fear into the hearts of his subjects. Scuttle, once a comic relief that made everyone laugh with his 'dingle-hopper' (yes, I'll admit it; I did call my fork a dingle-hopper from time to time after that). In this film, Scuttle's all but forgotten. A supporting character even in the first, he at least added something to the movie. He was rich with a flavor the others didn't have, and in the sequel, they all but stripped it from him entirely. Sebastian was still the same, but twice as worrisome as before. Disney, don't do that. Don't even try to mess with our favorite crab. Or our favorite little fat fish, who becomes a dad and has a multitude of very annoying children. He's fat, and he's bland, and he looks like he's going to flat line any second.

The walrus and penguin were unneeded, and after a while, you just start to resent everyone. Especially Melody, who has no depth to her whatsoever.

And one of these days, Disney, I'm kicking out of my life.

If I didn't love your originals so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] When I [[heard]] that Adrian Pasdar was in [[drag]] in this [[movie]], my [[expectations]] that I [[would]] watch the entire [[movie]] were low. The only reasons I gave it a [[chance]] were the magnificent [[Julie]] Walters and the recommendation of a friend.

What i [[thought]] [[would]] be a [[broad]] "[[Mrs]]. Doubtfire" type of farce [[turned]] out to be a gentle and insightful comedy. Pasdar is [[entirely]] [[credible]] and empathetic as the ambitious business man who needs to [[release]] the female [[part]] of his being by cross-dressing on occasions. He [[transmits]] these [[needs]] to the audience in a [[thoroughly]] [[believable]] fashion. [[Julie]] Walters is [[magnificent]], is as her habit, as the [[landlady]] who [[teaches]] him [[unconditional]] [[love]]. When I [[listened]] that Adrian Pasdar was in [[trawl]] in this [[cinematography]], my [[prospects]] that I [[should]] watch the entire [[flick]] were low. The only reasons I gave it a [[possibilities]] were the magnificent [[Jolly]] Walters and the recommendation of a friend.

What i [[figured]] [[could]] be a [[extensive]] "[[Ms]]. Doubtfire" type of farce [[revolved]] out to be a gentle and insightful comedy. Pasdar is [[perfectly]] [[plausible]] and empathetic as the ambitious business man who needs to [[released]] the female [[portions]] of his being by cross-dressing on occasions. He [[airs]] these [[require]] to the audience in a [[carefully]] [[credible]] fashion. [[Jolly]] Walters is [[wondrous]], is as her habit, as the [[janitor]] who [[learns]] him [[undivided]] [[iike]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a [[degree]] of verite and cinematic [[skill]] that disarms the viewer, and then hypnotizes as well.

Acting--The dialogue is [[minimal]], but the [[pauses]] and silence [[poignant]].

Story--The [[conflict]] in a 'balkanized' Denmark is [[volatile]], as we [[saw]] recently jihad [[murders]] in the Netherlands and [[riots]] in France. [[While]] I harbor no [[love]] for [[Islam]], the departure from the West from Christian values [[holds]] no [[cause]] for [[celebration]].

The director of this [[film]] managed to mirror the two [[societies]] in a [[way]] that belabored neither, [[emphasizing]] the [[development]] of [[Aicha]] as an [[individual]] who [[became]] a [[champion]], not so much in the [[ring]], but to all those [[around]] her. [[Even]] her [[worst]] . . . I will stop here to avoid the [[spoiler]]. Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a [[degrees]] of verite and cinematic [[capacities]] that disarms the viewer, and then hypnotizes as well.

Acting--The dialogue is [[minuscule]], but the [[pausing]] and silence [[heartbreaking]].

Story--The [[dispute]] in a 'balkanized' Denmark is [[shaky]], as we [[watched]] recently jihad [[killings]] in the Netherlands and [[disturbances]] in France. [[Although]] I harbor no [[amour]] for [[Islamist]], the departure from the West from Christian values [[possesses]] no [[reason]] for [[celebratory]].

The director of this [[movies]] managed to mirror the two [[company]] in a [[routing]] that belabored neither, [[emphasize]] the [[evolution]] of [[Ayse]] as an [[person]] who [[was]] a [[hotshot]], not so much in the [[rings]], but to all those [[about]] her. [[Yet]] her [[lousiest]] . . . I will stop here to avoid the [[deflector]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] For people interested in business and the corporate [[world]], this [[show]] is [[simply]] the best of the [[best]]. As one of the [[former]] [[contestants]] of the show [[wrote]] in his [[blog]] about this innovative [[show]]: People in [[business]] [[finally]] had an [[audience]]. The [[whole]] idea is [[perfect]]; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related [[tasks]], set in the best [[place]] in the world, New York [[City]]. Donald Trump is [[perfect]] as the [[boss]], even [[though]] his ego is bigger than the [[whole]] universe times infinity. He [[also]] makes a lot of [[questionable]] [[decisions]] about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.

Season 1: [[Great]] season [[overall]], the best season of the "[[normal]]" ones. This season was the one that was most about [[actual]] business [[skills]]. [[Later]] on the series [[almost]] [[drowned]] in marketing [[related]] [[tasks]] with [[way]] too many [[product]] placements. [[Great]] and interesting contestants [[overall]], with the most [[likable]] [[character]] ever in this [[series]]: [[Troy]]. I know I'm not the only [[person]] who suspect that the Trump [[World]] Tower-episode where he [[got]] fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick [[win]] this [[particular]] [[task]].

Season 2: [[Also]] a [[great]] season. The [[tasks]] were still [[pretty]] much [[OK]], and it had [[many]] interesting contestants. [[Jen]] M was [[terrible]] and should never had [[made]] it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the [[worst]] [[firing]] ever (Pamela).

Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of [[book]] [[smarts]] [[vs]]. street [[smarts]], but the cast was so utterly terrible (it [[turned]] out that Trump [[hated]] the cast as well) that the [[whole]] season was a total disaster. [[Best]] moments was the second episode ([[motel]] [[renovation]]), with PM [[Brian]] fired, a [[guy]] who [[added]] [[nothing]] but [[huge]] [[amounts]] of comedy value.

Season 4: An [[excellent]] season, much because of the interesting and [[entertaining]] contestants this season ([[especially]] Randall, Alla, Marcus and the [[total]] [[disaster]] whose [[name]] was Toral). The "Take me out to the Boardroom" episode is one of the absolute classics of this [[show]], [[ending]] with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I [[think]] we [[got]] [[robbed]] for the [[Randall]] [[vs]]. Alla [[final]]. I [[think]] Trump was [[afraid]] that she could have won, and prevented that from [[happening]].

Season 5: A boring season with [[really]] no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.

Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.

Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!

For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version. For people interested in business and the corporate [[globe]], this [[illustrating]] is [[straightforward]] the best of the [[nicest]]. As one of the [[antigua]] [[contestant]] of the show [[texted]] in his [[blogger]] about this innovative [[demonstrate]]: People in [[businesses]] [[eventually]] had an [[viewers]]. The [[entire]] idea is [[faultless]]; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related [[mission]], set in the best [[placing]] in the world, New York [[Ville]]. Donald Trump is [[irreproachable]] as the [[chef]], even [[if]] his ego is bigger than the [[total]] universe times infinity. He [[similarly]] makes a lot of [[dodgy]] [[decision]] about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.

Season 1: [[Super]] season [[whole]], the best season of the "[[routine]]" ones. This season was the one that was most about [[real]] business [[jurisdiction]]. [[Then]] on the series [[practically]] [[drowning]] in marketing [[tied]] [[mission]] with [[manner]] too many [[merchandise]] placements. [[Grand]] and interesting contestants [[total]], with the most [[sympathetic]] [[nature]] ever in this [[serials]]: [[Trojan]]. I know I'm not the only [[individual]] who suspect that the Trump [[Worldwide]] Tower-episode where he [[did]] fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick [[wins]] this [[special]] [[chore]].

Season 2: [[Similarly]] a [[grand]] season. The [[functions]] were still [[quite]] much [[OKAY]], and it had [[multiple]] interesting contestants. [[Just]] M was [[awful]] and should never had [[accomplished]] it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the [[lousiest]] [[gunfire]] ever (Pamela).

Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of [[books]] [[brainy]] [[versus]]. street [[brainy]], but the cast was so utterly terrible (it [[transformed]] out that Trump [[hate]] the cast as well) that the [[overall]] season was a total disaster. [[Finest]] moments was the second episode ([[hotel]] [[redevelopment]]), with PM [[Bryan]] fired, a [[pal]] who [[adds]] [[anything]] but [[hefty]] [[quantities]] of comedy value.

Season 4: An [[super]] season, much because of the interesting and [[amusing]] contestants this season ([[notably]] Randall, Alla, Marcus and the [[aggregate]] [[disasters]] whose [[naming]] was Toral). The "Take me out to the Boardroom" episode is one of the absolute classics of this [[demonstrate]], [[terminated]] with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I [[believing]] we [[ai]] [[burgled]] for the [[Randal]] [[v]]. Alla [[definitive]]. I [[believing]] Trump was [[fearful]] that she could have won, and prevented that from [[occurring]].

Season 5: A boring season with [[truthfully]] no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.

Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.

Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!

For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version. --------------------------------------------- Result 244 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Right, then, he's [[absolutely]] [[brilliant]]. But you [[must]] be intelligent and [[quick]] to [[understand]] his [[humor]]. He [[covers]] ([[attacks]]?) all [[sorts]] of [[topics]], such as the [[first]] moon landing, Easter/Christmas, transvestitism, movies, and Herr [[Doktor]] Heimlich.

For those of you are averse to swearing, this isn't for you. While some of us punctuate with commas and periods, he uses the f-word. Also, if you can't laugh at yourself, never watch this; you will feel the fool.

Incidentally, I've watched his other stuff and even saw him perform live, and this is by far his [[best]] [[work]]. He [[simply]] [[shines]].

What might go so far as to say he is Glorious. Right, then, he's [[fully]] [[wondrous]]. But you [[should]] be intelligent and [[timely]] to [[realise]] his [[mood]]. He [[cover]] ([[aggressions]]?) all [[kinds]] of [[items]], such as the [[frst]] moon landing, Easter/Christmas, transvestitism, movies, and Herr [[Doctor]] Heimlich.

For those of you are averse to swearing, this isn't for you. While some of us punctuate with commas and periods, he uses the f-word. Also, if you can't laugh at yourself, never watch this; you will feel the fool.

Incidentally, I've watched his other stuff and even saw him perform live, and this is by far his [[bestest]] [[cooperates]]. He [[merely]] [[glows]].

What might go so far as to say he is Glorious. --------------------------------------------- Result 245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] what a [[preposterous]] [[story]] ,murder blackmail,[[child]] [[sex]] [[allegations]] ,[[gays]] and the catholic church.....absolute [[tripe]]. How is it that most [[UK]] based [[TV]] dramas ,sit coms etc have to [[include]] the obligortory Gay,its [[really]] getting [[tiresome]] now. Everybody [[accepts]] that there are Gay people in [[society]] just has there are other minority [[groups]],but we don't [[want]] it ramming down our throats(i'll pass on this one) in every [[single]] show. [[Apart]] from the above, the [[drama]] went from what could have been an interesting [[little]] [[story]] into a pantomime,the [[priest]] was a [[paedophile]] and there are [[gays]] [[running]] about [[every]] where,oh yes just to be totally [[PC]] one of the [[gay]] [[couple]] was [[black]].i am surprised at c ecclestone for [[even]] [[contemplating]] this when he read the [[script]]. what a [[absurd]] [[tales]] ,murder blackmail,[[kid]] [[sexuality]] [[complaints]] ,[[queers]] and the catholic church.....absolute [[gut]]. How is it that most [[ENGLAND]] based [[TELEVISIONS]] dramas ,sit coms etc have to [[including]] the obligortory Gay,its [[genuinely]] getting [[dull]] now. Everybody [[accepting]] that there are Gay people in [[societies]] just has there are other minority [[panel]],but we don't [[wanna]] it ramming down our throats(i'll pass on this one) in every [[exclusive]] show. [[Irrespective]] from the above, the [[opera]] went from what could have been an interesting [[small]] [[tales]] into a pantomime,the [[preacher]] was a [[pedophile]] and there are [[queers]] [[executing]] about [[all]] where,oh yes just to be totally [[PCS]] one of the [[homosexual]] [[couples]] was [[negro]].i am surprised at c ecclestone for [[yet]] [[recital]] this when he read the [[scripts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] These things have been floating around in my head for damn near 10 years now. Some [[pieces]] of this [[work]] were [[really]] [[memorable]]. - [[Id]] love to [[see]] another more current [[example]] of cg showy offy stuff. Actually I'd [[love]] to be [[part]] of it.

If I'd would of had the chance to just say what i wanted and thats it, I wouldn't have to write all this [[extra]] in order to make "10 lines if text" as this website requires. I [[mean]] really? This almost discourages me, I mean luckily for the guys that made the movie I really liked the Minds Eye - and it took me 3 times to have enough lines, I hope you don't get me on the misspelling. - yup you did. These things have been floating around in my head for damn near 10 years now. Some [[smithereens]] of this [[cooperate]] were [[truthfully]] [[eventful]]. - [[Ids]] love to [[consults]] another more current [[cases]] of cg showy offy stuff. Actually I'd [[iove]] to be [[parties]] of it.

If I'd would of had the chance to just say what i wanted and thats it, I wouldn't have to write all this [[additional]] in order to make "10 lines if text" as this website requires. I [[signify]] really? This almost discourages me, I mean luckily for the guys that made the movie I really liked the Minds Eye - and it took me 3 times to have enough lines, I hope you don't get me on the misspelling. - yup you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 247 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] A [[lot]] of [[talk]] has been [[made]] about "psychological [[Westerns]]", but this is one of the very few that is [[truly]] in that [[genre]]. It has big name [[stars]] who [[perform]] very well, but it is the [[director]] who makes this such a good [[movie]]. [[Stewart]] Granger loses his British safari hunter stereotype to [[play]] a haggard retired buffalo [[hunter]] who is revered in the West as one of the best. [[Robert]] Taylor plays the upstart (in contrast to the [[usual]] young upstart, Taylor's [[character]] is [[middle]] aged, too), who [[wants]] to [[slaughter]] buffalo, and lures Granger into [[business]] with him. They [[hire]] two other big [[name]] [[actors]], Lloyd Nolan and [[Russ]] Tamblyn, into being their skinners. Granger is [[haunted]] by the buffalo he has killed, [[knowing]] that he may be to blame if they become extinct, knowing if they [[become]] extinct, the [[Native]] American [[way]] of [[life]] will [[greatly]] [[suffer]]. Taylor [[soon]] [[reveals]] a [[sadistic]] side, but it is a [[realistic]] saidism, unlike the one dimensional sadists of modern [[film]], created by [[nerds]] and [[dorks]]. He is insecure, and [[needs]] human companionship. Still, he won't [[stop]] at [[murder]]. The end pits the two against each other, with a [[startling]] conclusion. The psychological [[effects]] of what they're doing are well depicted. A [[batch]] of [[schmooze]] has been [[brought]] about "psychological [[Westerners]]", but this is one of the very few that is [[really]] in that [[sort]]. It has big name [[superstar]] who [[performed]] very well, but it is the [[headmaster]] who makes this such a good [[movies]]. [[Steward]] Granger loses his British safari hunter stereotype to [[gaming]] a haggard retired buffalo [[bellboy]] who is revered in the West as one of the best. [[Roberto]] Taylor plays the upstart (in contrast to the [[routine]] young upstart, Taylor's [[characters]] is [[oriente]] aged, too), who [[wanting]] to [[slaughtered]] buffalo, and lures Granger into [[firms]] with him. They [[recruiting]] two other big [[denomination]] [[protagonists]], Lloyd Nolan and [[Rus]] Tamblyn, into being their skinners. Granger is [[obsessed]] by the buffalo he has killed, [[realise]] that he may be to blame if they become extinct, knowing if they [[becomes]] extinct, the [[Indigenous]] American [[routes]] of [[living]] will [[severely]] [[suffering]]. Taylor [[shortly]] [[reveal]] a [[vicious]] side, but it is a [[practical]] saidism, unlike the one dimensional sadists of modern [[kino]], created by [[morons]] and [[fuckheads]]. He is insecure, and [[needed]] human companionship. Still, he won't [[halted]] at [[killings]]. The end pits the two against each other, with a [[uncanny]] conclusion. The psychological [[consequences]] of what they're doing are well depicted. --------------------------------------------- Result 248 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] From the [[first]] scene you are given clues as to what may be going on here. It becomes more and more obvious as the story [[rolls]] on. The acting is [[excellent]] throughout and these actors touch your soul. Even though I knew what was going to happen I was extremely puzzled by the motive. I'm still [[puzzled]] as to why [[Ben]] did what he did. We could see in his [[face]] "second [[thoughts]]", but the [[ultimate]] sacrifice seemed to go against his emotion and feelings. It was a very interesting and [[touching]] story but it left me [[confused]]. [[Maybe]] that was the point of the film. I did like the [[film]] and Wil Smith can wrack up another good film [[choice]]. This guy knows how to entertain an audience! From the [[outset]] scene you are given clues as to what may be going on here. It becomes more and more obvious as the story [[spools]] on. The acting is [[wondrous]] throughout and these actors touch your soul. Even though I knew what was going to happen I was extremely puzzled by the motive. I'm still [[muddled]] as to why [[Bin]] did what he did. We could see in his [[confronts]] "second [[reflections]]", but the [[final]] sacrifice seemed to go against his emotion and feelings. It was a very interesting and [[touches]] story but it left me [[muddled]]. [[Probably]] that was the point of the film. I did like the [[kino]] and Wil Smith can wrack up another good film [[wahl]]. This guy knows how to entertain an audience! --------------------------------------------- Result 249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I did not have too much interest in watching The Flock.Andrew Lau co-directed the masterpiece trilogy of Infernal Affairs but he had been fired from The Flock and he had been replaced by an emergency director called Niels Mueller.I had the feeling that Lau had made a good film but it had not satisfied the study,so they fired him and hired another director.This usually does not work well (let's remember The Invasion).But The Flock resulted to be better than what I expected.It's not a great film but it's an interesting and entertaining thriller.The character development is very well done and I could know the characters very well.Also,the relationship between the two main characters is natural and credible.Richard Gere and Claire Danes bring competent performances.Now,let's go to the negative points.One element which really bothered me (there was a moment in which it irritated me) was the excess of edition tricks to give the movie more "attitude" and style.That tricks feel out of place and their presence is arbitrary.Plus,I think the film should have been more ambitious.In spite of that,I recommend The Flock as a good thriller.It's not memorable at all,but it's entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ray Liotta and Tom Hulce shine in this sterling example of brotherly love and commitment. Hulce plays Dominick, (Nicky) a mildly mentally handicapped young man who is putting his 12 minutes younger, twin brother, Liotta, who plays Eugene, through medical school. It is set in Baltimore and deals with the issues of sibling rivalry, the unbreakable bond of twins, child abuse and good always winning out over evil. It is captivating, and filled with laughter and tears. If you have not yet seen this film, please rent it, I promise, you'll be amazed at how such a wonderful film could go un-noticed. --------------------------------------------- Result 251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bah. Another tired, desultory reworking of an out of copyright work never designed to be filmed.

On the plus side, Toni Collette is superb as always (being an actual actress, you see), and there are some nicely handled handover cuts between scenes. There are even a few genuinely funny lines, and the filmwork, score and editing is competent, apart from a bizarre lapse into voiceover and speaking to the camera towards the conclusion.

But, ah, but. Much of the cast seems to be on autopilot, and they are almost all very clearly too old (and in one case too young) for their declared ages. Worse, they are all speaking "Austinese", that peculiar falsetto self satisfied sing song that couldn't be further from the way people actually spoke in Austen's day (think Yosemite Sam, I kid you not). This is particularly sad, considering that we seem to finally be seeing the demise of the equally farcial "Fakespearan" that Olivier and his cronies were so fond of bellowing at the top of their lungs.

And worst of all is Gwyneth Paltrow. She's only ever played one character in her films, and she stays true to form here, running through her entire range (smirking to sulking) in the first ten minutes, then just repeating herself for the rest of the overlong film. There is absolutely no chemistry between herself and any of her admirers, nor any apparent reason why they would be interested in her apart.

In short, there is very little reason to watch Emma. It's an amiable enough adaptation, but if you're going to pack a film full of anacronisms (i.e. an appalingly thin lead who can't shoot a bow or handle a period accent) then you might as well do it properly, as with the vastly superior "Clueless". --------------------------------------------- Result 252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I can only [[believe]] that Garson Kanin [[must]] have been two people. The one who [[wrote]] the [[brilliant]] "A [[Double]] [[Life]]" and the [[funny]] "Born [[Yesterday]]" and co-wrote such excellent screenplays as "Adam's Rib" and "[[Pat]] And [[Mike]]" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such [[tiresome]], sad [[drivel]] as "Bachelor [[Mother]]", "Some [[Kind]] Of A [[Nut]]", and this. The [[cast]] [[tries]], but the [[script]] is so [[tired]] and [[clichéd]] that even the [[efforts]] of the [[always]] [[wonderful]] [[Brenda]] Vaccaro are [[defeated]]. The [[script]] [[sinks]] to it's nadir in the [[truly]] offensive [[sequence]] in which Janssen's [[character]] [[tests]] Drivas's [[character]] to make [[sure]] he's not [[gay]]. An [[ugly]] [[sequence]], but [[sadly]] one which [[could]] [[easily]] [[play]] in a film today. "[[Ethnic]]" jokes are now totally verboten, but "fag" [[jokes]] are still "good, clean, [[family]] fun". I can only [[think]] that Garson Kanin [[should]] have been two people. The one who [[authored]] the [[beautiful]] "A [[Doubles]] [[Vie]]" and the [[comical]] "Born [[Thursday]]" and co-wrote such excellent screenplays as "Adam's Rib" and "[[Patricia]] And [[Mick]]" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such [[boring]], sad [[whim]] as "Bachelor [[Mommy]]", "Some [[Genera]] Of A [[Nuts]]", and this. The [[casting]] [[strives]], but the [[screenplay]] is so [[mangy]] and [[cliché]] that even the [[action]] of the [[permanently]] [[sumptuous]] [[Cynthia]] Vaccaro are [[blanked]]. The [[screenplay]] [[drown]] to it's nadir in the [[really]] offensive [[sequences]] in which Janssen's [[trait]] [[test]] Drivas's [[nature]] to make [[convinced]] he's not [[gays]]. An [[horrendous]] [[sequences]], but [[regrettably]] one which [[did]] [[readily]] [[playing]] in a film today. "[[Ethnicity]]" jokes are now totally verboten, but "fag" [[gags]] are still "good, clean, [[familia]] fun". --------------------------------------------- Result 253 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Frankly I'm rather incensed that on the basis of the dazzling reviews attributed to Steven Smith I wasted nearly two hours on his debut offering. Have they all been written by his pals? The action clunks along, the music is irritating and over used, the script is simply dire and the actors (with the exception of the gardener) mediocre at best. I do think we should support the efforts of a young filmmaker but saying it's brilliant when it's not will surely only encourage him to make the same mistakes again i.e. continuing to write his own scripts and using the same actors for another venture. Yes, it's his first film, low budget etc. - I get it, but it's also out there for members of the public to purchase and it's just not up to scratch. --------------------------------------------- Result 254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Burlinson and Thornton give an outstanding performance in this movie, along with Dennehy. Although it is at first thought to be only about love, it really goes down deeper than that. The beauty of nature captures this movie, placing among one of the best I have ever seen. The horse scenes are absolutely fantastic!! Any horse-lovers out there will love this movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] As I am no fan of [[almost]] any post-"[[Desperate]] Living" [[John]] Waters [[films]], I [[warmed]] to "[[Pecker]]". After he emerged from the [[underground]], Waters produced trash-lite versions of his earlier works ("Cry Baby", "Polyester", Hairspray") that to die-hard [[fans]] looked and tasted like watered down liqueur. "[[Pecker]]", which doesn't attempt to regurgitate early successes, is a slight, quiet, [[humble]] [[commentary]] on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. [[Waters]] clearly knows this subject well because he has also [[exhibited]] and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters "name". Edward Furlong is fine as "Pecker" and Waters' non-histrionic [[style]] is at [[ease]] with the [[subject]]. As I am no fan of [[practically]] any post-"[[Distraught]] Living" [[Johannes]] Waters [[cinema]], I [[heated]] to "[[Prick]]". After he emerged from the [[subterranean]], Waters produced trash-lite versions of his earlier works ("Cry Baby", "Polyester", Hairspray") that to die-hard [[followers]] looked and tasted like watered down liqueur. "[[Dick]]", which doesn't attempt to regurgitate early successes, is a slight, quiet, [[modest]] [[comment]] on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. [[Aguas]] clearly knows this subject well because he has also [[display]] and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters "name". Edward Furlong is fine as "Pecker" and Waters' non-histrionic [[styling]] is at [[lighten]] with the [[topic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This first installment of Crispin Glover's personal magnum opus asks you to think a little, and so can't be recommended for any viewer who doesn't want to sit and puzzle over Glover's imagery or follow the surprisingly simple—but weirdly obfuscated—thread of his narrative. To the more casual viewer, yes, it's probably going to come off as a confusing mish-mash of odd, startling, and disturbing imagery for imagery's sake.

You get the sense that Glover doesn't mind that this is the case, and he'll almost as gladly listen to why someone hated the film as to why they enjoyed it. Glover's innate eagerness for and about his work and how audiences interpret it is strongly communicated not only through the film itself, but also through the unusual question and answer sessions that he frequently conducts following showings; he clearly hopes that people will continue to think about what he has presented.

The easiest way to interpret and dismiss the film is to label it as Dada or nihilist, a juvenile attack on the modern movie industry from an actor who's worked both without and within. But there's a reason why Glover performs his slideshow before showing his movie, and it's not only to sell books; his books juxtapose and create a narrative from images and text that Glover pieced together, and What Is It? does similarly with imagery drawn from Western culture.

What Is It? is an endearing and compelling film in ways one hardly expects while viewing. Much has already been made about Glover's use of actors with Down's syndrome, and indeed that is one of the most initially striking aspects of the film. So jarring, in fact, that many seem to interpret it as some sort of far-reaching crusade to see a more realistic and/or dignified portrayal of the disabled in movies and television—or, on the absolute other end of the spectrum, as a kind of direct exploitation of the disabled. But it's not either, and maybe that's part of what makes this film so uncomfortable for many: the underlying agenda is not a political one or one of hatred, but one of looking beyond the mainstream culture into a kind of outsider ugliness. It's not a film about Down's syndrome, but it is a film that is owned by the actors with Down's syndrome who appear in it.

I'm the sort of person who is entirely gung-ho when it comes to ugliness and strangeness being portrayed so starkly that it is beautiful; happily for me, this is pretty much exactly how What Is It? presents itself to viewers. Glover uses the strange images of snails, death, and the disabled in part because he wants his audience to feel discomfort at either the sheer oddness of the imagery or the visceral reaction one has to the dying screams of an anthropomorphized snail. In some ways, the weirdly compelling (and occasionally downright grotesque) elements of What Is It? remind me of the work of the painter Francis Bacon… he of the infamous popes, yes, and the odd distortions of the human figure that inevitably make viewers cringe and want to look away. Like Bacon's paintings, Glover's film manages to be opulent and humble, grainy and polished, chaotic and well-realized… and the contradictions help to make it all the more disconcerting. But still this is not an entirely serious film, and it largely manages to sidestep the greatest pitfalls of pretension through the use of humor that, for the most part, derives from the use (and juxtaposition) of familiar items, images, and names of popular culture. And when What Is It? is funny, it is very funny.

Overall, What Is It? is an impressive first film from Glover as a director and writer, and his presence as an actor in the film proves not to be nearly the distraction one might expect it to be. Watching it is like being an observer in the kind of dream that isn't exactly good or bad, but just strange… and that leaves you feeling slightly grimy when you wake up. If that's the kind of art you enjoy, What Is It? is likely to exceed your expectations and be well-worth the effort of catching it in the theatre, along with The Big Slide Show and Glover himself. All in all, it's an experience you're unlikely to forget any time soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Some [[moron]] who read or saw some [[reference]] to angels coming to [[Earth]], decided to [[disregard]] what he'd [[heard]] about the [[offspring]] of [[humans]] and angels being [[larger]] than normal [[humans]]. Reinventing them as [[mythical]] giants that were 40 [[feet]] tall, is beyond [[ridiculous]]. There was some [[historical]] references to housing and furniture in parts of the world, that were [[much]] [[larger]] than [[would]] be [[needed]] for standard [[humans]]. These were [[supposedly]] [[built]] on a scale that would [[lend]] itself to a 10 to 14 [[foot]] human, somewhat [[supporting]] the "[[David]] and Goliath" [[tale]] from the [[bible]]. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or [[artifacts]] that would [[support]] the [[idea]] of a 40 foot tall being. [[If]] I was rating this [[movie]] on my own scale, it [[would]] have been a negative [[value]] [[instead]] of a one... Some [[doofus]] who read or saw some [[references]] to angels coming to [[Tierra]], decided to [[ignore]] what he'd [[overheard]] about the [[descent]] of [[beings]] and angels being [[broader]] than normal [[beings]]. Reinventing them as [[mythic]] giants that were 40 [[foot]] tall, is beyond [[foolish]]. There was some [[historic]] references to housing and furniture in parts of the world, that were [[very]] [[broader]] than [[should]] be [[require]] for standard [[beings]]. These were [[reportedly]] [[constructed]] on a scale that would [[render]] itself to a 10 to 14 [[feet]] human, somewhat [[succour]] the "[[Davide]] and Goliath" [[story]] from the [[biblical]]. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or [[artifact]] that would [[supports]] the [[concept]] of a 40 foot tall being. [[Though]] I was rating this [[filmmaking]] on my own scale, it [[could]] have been a negative [[values]] [[however]] of a one... --------------------------------------------- Result 258 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I can't say I'm all that [[experienced]] in misty Mundae flicks having seen only a handful, but it's [[obvious]] that this was made on a shoestring, and while it might have been [[respectable]] that the filmmakers were able to make a Tomb Raider rip-off inside a garage, it isn't because it's completely [[obvious]] that this is what they were doing. The film only runs for forty five minutes, and this is definitely a [[good]] [[thing]] as there isn't [[nearly]] [[enough]] [[plot]] here to stretch it out for any longer. It has something to do with an evil [[Nazi]] scientist (who looks about as evil as a porn [[star]] playing a Nazi scientist ever [[could]]), a mummy, which is clearly a man wrapped up in [[toilet]] roll and Misty - this film's [[version]] of Tomb Raider, who keeps her top on for much [[less]] time than Angelina [[Jolie]] did in the big budget version. I have to say that even in spite of its [[shortcomings]], this [[film]] [[could]] have been better. It's got Misty Mundae for a [[start]], and even better than that if you ask me is the fact that it also stars the even [[hotter]] Darian Caine. The pair gets to [[engage]] in all the lesbian [[sex]] that you would [[expect]] from a Seduction [[Cinema]] film and this is at the [[expense]] of the nonexistent [[plot]], [[although]] that isn't [[really]] a [[bad]] [[thing]]. Obviously, this is a [[rubbish]] film - but the fact that it's short is to its credit, and if you're after a [[bit]] of lesbian [[sex]], you could do worse. I can't say I'm all that [[endured]] in misty Mundae flicks having seen only a handful, but it's [[noticeable]] that this was made on a shoestring, and while it might have been [[reputable]] that the filmmakers were able to make a Tomb Raider rip-off inside a garage, it isn't because it's completely [[manifest]] that this is what they were doing. The film only runs for forty five minutes, and this is definitely a [[buena]] [[stuff]] as there isn't [[almost]] [[satisfactorily]] [[intrigue]] here to stretch it out for any longer. It has something to do with an evil [[Hitler]] scientist (who looks about as evil as a porn [[stars]] playing a Nazi scientist ever [[did]]), a mummy, which is clearly a man wrapped up in [[wc]] roll and Misty - this film's [[stepping]] of Tomb Raider, who keeps her top on for much [[least]] time than Angelina [[Julie]] did in the big budget version. I have to say that even in spite of its [[drawbacks]], this [[filmmaking]] [[did]] have been better. It's got Misty Mundae for a [[launching]], and even better than that if you ask me is the fact that it also stars the even [[hot]] Darian Caine. The pair gets to [[embark]] in all the lesbian [[sexuality]] that you would [[expecting]] from a Seduction [[Filmmaking]] film and this is at the [[spending]] of the nonexistent [[intrigue]], [[while]] that isn't [[genuinely]] a [[unfavourable]] [[stuff]]. Obviously, this is a [[trash]] film - but the fact that it's short is to its credit, and if you're after a [[bite]] of lesbian [[sexuality]], you could do worse. --------------------------------------------- Result 259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All this talk about this being a bad movie is nonsense. As a matter of fact this is the best movie I've ever seen. It's an excellent story and the actors in the movie are some of the best. I would not give criticism to any of the actors. That movie is the best and it will always stay that way. --------------------------------------------- Result 260 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In what could have been an otherwise run of the mill, mediocre film about infidelity in the sixties (the subtle "free-love" period), the creators of this film pile on ridiculous scenario after ridiculous scenario and top it all off with a trite little cherry on top, happily ever after ending. At no time did I ever feel sympathy for Diane Lane or Anna Paquin in their troublesome middle-class care free life, nor did I feel for the emasculated Liev Shrieber. The story line plods along slowly to its predictable, pathetic conclusion and the only thing interesting and watchable about this film is the stunning Diane Lane topless. Here's a hint, it occurs about 30 minutes into the film. Fast forward to that part and skip the rest. --------------------------------------------- Result 261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] A [[lot]] of the [[comments]] people have made strike me as ([[sorry]]) [[missing]] the point. Kasdan [[wants]] to [[present]] life, simply, [[ordinary]] life. The conventionally structured [[story]], where [[characters]] have insights that [[change]] their lives, and then fade out, music up, and the film is over, is absorbed into this [[much]] larger canvas. Several [[characters]] in this movie have just such illuminations, and then they [[move]] on. Sometimes they can [[hold]] [[onto]] their insights, [[sometimes]] they can't, and that's the way life [[really]] is. In other [[words]], Kasdan jettisons [[conventional]] [[dramatic]] [[structure]] in favor of an [[exploration]] of the the ongoingness of [[life]] – there is no [[happy]] ending, only an eventual [[ending]]; and everything before that is [[still]] in process, [[still]] [[always]] up for [[grabs]] – and, if you [[absolutely]] [[insist]] on a [[theme]], an [[exploration]] of the role of the miraculous in our lives. What is a [[miracle]]? Well, life itself, for a [[start]]. Then [[add]] in all the random incidents and cross-connections that make up a [[life]], or [[several]] interconnected lives, and you have miracles by the bucketful. Kasdan underscores this [[theme]] [[lightly]], [[rather]] than insisting on it, and bolsters it in [[various]] [[ways]], most memorably by the [[device]], right in the [[center]] of the [[film]], of having Mac and his [[wife]], lying in bed, each [[dreaming]] their own [[dreams]], but as well [[showing]], [[later]] on in the [[film]], how those dreams have the power, [[within]] the [[film]], to shape reality. This is not a [[film]] with an [[easy]] or [[obvious]] [[message]]. You just have to [[let]] it [[play]] out in [[front]] of you, and then [[let]] it [[sit]] in your mind for a few days, a [[month]], a few years, and see what it has wrought there. This is, without a doubt, Kasdan's [[best]] [[film]], his most [[mature]], his most [[humane]]. A [[major]] meditation on [[life]] from one of our most [[gifted]] [[writers]] and [[directors]]. The tragedy is, of course, that he has not been [[allowed]] to [[work]] for a number of years now, [[mostly]] due to studio [[constraints]] [[around]] "Dreamcatcher." [[Hopefully]] we haven't [[heard]] the [[last]] from [[Larry]] Kasdan. A [[great]] [[film]] from a [[great]] [[artist]]. [[Keep]] in [[mind]] that art does not have to [[rationalize]] itself [[completely]] in order to [[succeed]]. A [[batch]] of the [[observations]] people have made strike me as ([[apologies]]) [[lacks]] the point. Kasdan [[wanting]] to [[presenting]] life, simply, [[banal]] life. The conventionally structured [[narratives]], where [[nature]] have insights that [[amendments]] their lives, and then fade out, music up, and the film is over, is absorbed into this [[very]] larger canvas. Several [[character]] in this movie have just such illuminations, and then they [[budge]] on. Sometimes they can [[holds]] [[in]] their insights, [[sometime]] they can't, and that's the way life [[genuinely]] is. In other [[expression]], Kasdan jettisons [[classic]] [[noteworthy]] [[architecture]] in favor of an [[crawling]] of the the ongoingness of [[lifetime]] – there is no [[cheerful]] ending, only an eventual [[ended]]; and everything before that is [[nonetheless]] in process, [[however]] [[repeatedly]] up for [[grab]] – and, if you [[fully]] [[insists]] on a [[themes]], an [[crawling]] of the role of the miraculous in our lives. What is a [[miracles]]? Well, life itself, for a [[starts]]. Then [[adding]] in all the random incidents and cross-connections that make up a [[vida]], or [[many]] interconnected lives, and you have miracles by the bucketful. Kasdan underscores this [[themes]] [[loosely]], [[fairly]] than insisting on it, and bolsters it in [[dissimilar]] [[methods]], most memorably by the [[appliance]], right in the [[centres]] of the [[cinematography]], of having Mac and his [[women]], lying in bed, each [[dreamed]] their own [[daydream]], but as well [[proving]], [[then]] on in the [[cinema]], how those dreams have the power, [[inside]] the [[cinematography]], to shape reality. This is not a [[movie]] with an [[easier]] or [[glaring]] [[messages]]. You just have to [[leaving]] it [[gaming]] out in [[newsweek]] of you, and then [[leaving]] it [[sitting]] in your mind for a few days, a [[months]], a few years, and see what it has wrought there. This is, without a doubt, Kasdan's [[better]] [[cinema]], his most [[adulthood]], his most [[humanity]]. A [[principal]] meditation on [[living]] from one of our most [[prodigy]] [[authors]] and [[administrators]]. The tragedy is, of course, that he has not been [[authorizing]] to [[working]] for a number of years now, [[basically]] due to studio [[hurdles]] [[about]] "Dreamcatcher." [[Luckily]] we haven't [[listened]] the [[final]] from [[Lar]] Kasdan. A [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] from a [[phenomenal]] [[painters]]. [[Conserve]] in [[esprit]] that art does not have to [[rationalized]] itself [[abundantly]] in order to [[succeeds]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] This was a [[horrible]] [[film]]! I [[gave]] it 2 Points, one for Angelina Jolie and a second one for the [[beautiful]] Porsche in the [[beginning]]... Other than that the [[story]] just [[plain]] sucked and [[cars]] racing through cities wasn't so new in 1970. The Happyend was [[probably]] what [[annoyed]] me the most, seldomly seen [[anything]] so [[constructed]]! This was a [[abysmal]] [[filmmaking]]! I [[handed]] it 2 Points, one for Angelina Jolie and a second one for the [[sumptuous]] Porsche in the [[initiate]]... Other than that the [[stories]] just [[ganges]] sucked and [[carriages]] racing through cities wasn't so new in 1970. The Happyend was [[undoubtedly]] what [[irritable]] me the most, seldomly seen [[algo]] so [[constructing]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I've been watching a lot of [[cartoon]] or animated movies because I have a [[baby]] girl who likes to watch TV. I began to watch this [[movie]] to see if I would [[like]] my little one to watch it... and no. At the [[beginning]] I thought it was such a [[cute]] [[movie]] like the Bambi movie, but all the [[way]] it was like [[insinuating]] the ducky was a homosexual. The [[info]] said that they were making fun of him because he wasn't good at [[sports]], but that was not the [[case]]. It just seems like a [[movie]] [[made]] for [[kids]] to [[learn]] to be okay being [[gay]]. It was also very [[sad]], as far as the ducky's [[dad]] and all. I don't know, I guess if you're gay you'd [[like]] it, but I don't [[think]] I'm [[going]] to watch it again with my [[little]] one. I've been watching a lot of [[cartoons]] or animated movies because I have a [[babies]] girl who likes to watch TV. I began to watch this [[filmmaking]] to see if I would [[loves]] my little one to watch it... and no. At the [[launches]] I thought it was such a [[purty]] [[filmmaking]] like the Bambi movie, but all the [[ways]] it was like [[suggesting]] the ducky was a homosexual. The [[information]] said that they were making fun of him because he wasn't good at [[athletes]], but that was not the [[instances]]. It just seems like a [[filmmaking]] [[effected]] for [[kid]] to [[learning]] to be okay being [[gays]]. It was also very [[hapless]], as far as the ducky's [[papa]] and all. I don't know, I guess if you're gay you'd [[iike]] it, but I don't [[thinking]] I'm [[go]] to watch it again with my [[scant]] one. --------------------------------------------- Result 264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[If]] the very [[thought]] of Arthur Askey twists your [[guts]], don't [[worry]], you can [[still]] watch and [[love]] The [[Ghost]] Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room [[Boy]], it is a film that is simply too [[damn]] good to be [[sunk]] by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I love Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, [[rather]] than unreasonably [[expecting]] him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The Ghost Train is so [[intensely]] atmospheric that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it [[transports]] you to, it is immersive in a [[way]] that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers [[managed]] to be during the [[desperate]] early '40s and it's a [[film]] that I [[would]] [[imagine]] few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without [[exception]], [[extraordinarily]] good, [[perhaps]] [[Linden]] [[Travers]] [[lays]] it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a [[lonely]] railway station in wartime, she could hardly play a [[nutter]] and not stand out. The [[sad]] passing of the [[lovely]] [[Carole]] Lynne [[earlier]] this [[year]] [[broke]] the last [[link]] we had with this [[incredible]] [[film]] and now it really is in the [[past]], but [[waiting]] [[patiently]] for us to [[press]] play. [[Though]] the very [[idea]] of Arthur Askey twists your [[entrails]], don't [[disturb]], you can [[yet]] watch and [[likes]] The [[Spector]] Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room [[Laddie]], it is a film that is simply too [[goddamn]] good to be [[poured]] by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I love Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, [[fairly]] than unreasonably [[hoping]] him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The Ghost Train is so [[intently]] atmospheric that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it [[transporting]] you to, it is immersive in a [[pathways]] that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers [[administering]] to be during the [[hopeless]] early '40s and it's a [[movie]] that I [[could]] [[suppose]] few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without [[exemption]], [[terribly]] good, [[potentially]] [[Lyndon]] [[Through]] [[laying]] it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a [[single]] railway station in wartime, she could hardly play a [[wacko]] and not stand out. The [[deplorable]] passing of the [[charming]] [[Carol]] Lynne [[formerly]] this [[annum]] [[cracked]] the last [[lier]] we had with this [[unthinkable]] [[kino]] and now it really is in the [[former]], but [[waits]] [[painstakingly]] for us to [[pressing]] play. --------------------------------------------- Result 265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] 1st [[watched]] 12/26/2008 -(Dir-Eugene [[Levy]]): [[Corny]] [[comedy]] murder mystery with very few [[laughs]]. The [[movie]] appears to be [[based]] on an [[earlier]] [[Italian]] [[movie]] [[according]] to the [[credits]] but was re-written by two fairly [[popular]] American romantic [[comedy]] [[writers]]. But this one by [[Charles]] Shyer & [[Nancy]] Meyers does not cut it [[compared]] to their other efforts. The [[story]] is about a [[couple]] of down-and-out traveling [[Americans]], [[played]] by [[Richard]] [[Lewis]] and [[Sean]] [[Young]], who stumble [[upon]] a lost [[dog]] and hope to make a fortune in [[reward]] [[money]] after [[seeing]] an ad in the paper for the dachsund's return. Upon [[trying]] to return it, they [[see]] a hand sticking out of a garage door at the lady's [[residence]] that they believe is attached to the rest of the [[dead]] [[body]] of the [[woman]] who is [[supposed]] to give them the money. They freak out and [[instead]] of contacting the [[police]] and [[telling]] them the truth they make out like runaways from the scene [[expecting]] to be framed for the [[murder]]. The other [[characters]] in the [[film]] are [[met]] on a [[train]] [[prior]] to this and hang [[around]] a Monte [[Carlo]] [[gambling]] resort doing [[various]] things to be [[pulled]] into the [[story]]. The other cast members [[include]] [[character]] [[actors]] [[John]] [[Candy]], James Belushi, Cybill [[Shepherd]], [[George]] Hamilton and others. After the police [[find]] out about the [[death]], they [[start]] [[questioning]] the main [[characters]] and, of course, they have to [[work]] thru their goofy [[lies]] to [[figure]] out what [[really]] [[happened]]. [[None]] of the [[character]] [[actors]] [[mentioned]] [[earlier]] can [[bring]] this [[movie]] out of it's mediocre state [[despite]] some [[funny]] moments mostly [[provided]] by the Belushi/Shepherd [[couple]]. This isn't a horrible [[movie]], it just isn't that good. There are plenty of average [[movies]] out there and this is just another one for the [[pile]]. Try it, [[maybe]] you'll like it, [[probably]] you won't. 1st [[seen]] 12/26/2008 -(Dir-Eugene [[Levi]]): [[Dorky]] [[humor]] murder mystery with very few [[giggling]]. The [[filmmaking]] appears to be [[base]] on an [[ago]] [[Ltalian]] [[cinema]] [[depending]] to the [[credence]] but was re-written by two fairly [[fashionable]] American romantic [[humor]] [[authors]]. But this one by [[Charl]] Shyer & [[Juventus]] Meyers does not cut it [[comparing]] to their other efforts. The [[storytelling]] is about a [[match]] of down-and-out traveling [[America]], [[served]] by [[Richie]] [[Louis]] and [[Shawn]] [[Youths]], who stumble [[after]] a lost [[puppy]] and hope to make a fortune in [[rewards]] [[cash]] after [[see]] an ad in the paper for the dachsund's return. Upon [[tempting]] to return it, they [[behold]] a hand sticking out of a garage door at the lady's [[residential]] that they believe is attached to the rest of the [[died]] [[organ]] of the [[women]] who is [[suspected]] to give them the money. They freak out and [[however]] of contacting the [[policemen]] and [[saying]] them the truth they make out like runaways from the scene [[waiting]] to be framed for the [[murders]]. The other [[traits]] in the [[filmmaking]] are [[fulfilled]] on a [[forming]] [[ago]] to this and hang [[about]] a Monte [[Carla]] [[gaming]] resort doing [[many]] things to be [[pull]] into the [[stories]]. The other cast members [[incorporate]] [[traits]] [[players]] [[Jon]] [[Chocolate]], James Belushi, Cybill [[Pasteur]], [[Jorge]] Hamilton and others. After the police [[unearth]] out about the [[fatalities]], they [[startup]] [[questioned]] the main [[character]] and, of course, they have to [[works]] thru their goofy [[lying]] to [[silhouette]] out what [[truly]] [[arrived]]. [[Nil]] of the [[characters]] [[protagonists]] [[cited]] [[formerly]] can [[bringing]] this [[film]] out of it's mediocre state [[while]] some [[hilarious]] moments mostly [[gave]] by the Belushi/Shepherd [[pair]]. This isn't a horrible [[filmmaking]], it just isn't that good. There are plenty of average [[film]] out there and this is just another one for the [[piles]]. Try it, [[potentially]] you'll like it, [[possibly]] you won't. --------------------------------------------- Result 266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember watching this in the 1970s - then I have just recently borrowed a couple of episodes from our public library.

With a nearly 30 year hiatus, I have come to another conclusion. Most of the principals interviewed in this series - some at the center of power like Traudl Junge (Hitler's Secretary),Karl Doenitz (head of Germany's navy) Anthony Eden (UK) - are long gone but their first hand accounts will live on.From Generals and Admirals to Sergeants, Russian civilians, concentration camp survivors, all are on record here.

I can remember the Lord Mountbatten interview (killed in the 1970s)

This is truly a gem and I believe the producer of this series was knighted by Queen Elizabeth for this work - well deserved.

Seeing these few episodes from the library makes me want to buy the set.

This is the only "10" I have given any review but I have discovered like a fine bottle of wine, it is more appreciated with a little time... --------------------------------------------- Result 267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] WWE has produced some of the [[worst]] pay-per-views in its [[history]] over the [[past]] few [[months]]. Cyber Sunday, Survivor Series and [[December]] to Dismember were [[appalling]] to [[say]] the [[least]] and so it was relying on its B [[brand]] [[show]], Smackdown! to attempt to [[end]] the year on a [[high]] [[note]]. [[Armageddon]] had two [[major]] gimmick matches in the Last Ride and [[Inferno]] matches, three [[Championships]] were on the line and an interesting main [[event]] in the [[shape]] of a tag team [[war]] [[featuring]] [[Batista]] and [[John]] Cena against King [[Booker]] and Finlay. However, it was an [[amendment]] to one of those [[Championship]] [[matches]] that [[brought]] us not only the [[match]] of the [[night]] but [[also]] now a [[match]] of the year [[candidate]] when Teddy [[Long]] gave us [[fans]] an [[early]] [[Christmas]] present. T-Lo [[changed]] the WWE Tag Team [[Championship]] [[match]] from [[Champions]], London and Kendrick against to [[Regal]] and Taylor to a four team [[Ladder]] [[match]] [[including]] MNM and The [[Hardy]] Boyz.

I am not going to dwell on this [[match]] too much as [[nothing]] I can [[say]] would be [[able]] to do it justice. This has to be [[seen]] to be believed. There were [[many]] [[high]] [[spots]] and [[many]] more [[brutal]] bumps and [[awkward]] landings. The one move I have to [[talk]] about [[however]] was the one that [[took]] Joey Mercury straight to the [[emergency]] [[room]] [[midway]] through the [[contest]]. [[Jeff]] [[Hardy]] [[jumped]] [[onto]] a [[ladder]] that was set up in the see [[saw]] [[position]] with Matt [[Hardy]] holding both [[members]] of MNM over the [[opposite]] end of it to [[take]] the full force. [[Unfortunately]] for Mercury he didn't get his hands up to [[protect]] his [[face]] and [[took]] the [[ladder]] full force in the nose and [[left]] [[eye]]. This was [[vicious]]. His [[face]] was instantly a mess for all to [[see]] and not [[surprisingly]] this [[ended]] Mercury's night [[early]]. We [[found]] out [[later]] he [[suffered]] a [[broken]] nose and cuts under his left [[eye]]. [[Be]] warned. This is not for the faint of [[heart]]. The [[ending]] to this roller-coaster of a [[match]] [[came]] after [[Paul]] London [[managed]] to grab both [[Championship]] [[belts]] for the [[victory]]. I have been watching wrestling for [[almost]] 15 years and it doesn't [[get]] any [[better]] than this match. [[Unbelievable]].

The night opened with only the 4th ever Inferno match. Kane took on MVP in a good match but it was all about the visual and not really about the action. There were a few close calls with the flames for both competitors but in the end it was Kane who forced MVP onto the flames after they both ended up outside the ring. MVP ran around the ring whilst his butt was on fire and there was a sick part of me that laughed watching this. May I suggest to Michael Hayes that MVP comes out next week on Smackdown! to Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire.

The other gimmick match of the night, and the second match of a triple main event was an all out war Last Ride match between Mr Kennedy and The Undertaker. This was a stiff match from start to finish and was the best of the series Undertaker and Kennedy have had yet. The used poles, chairs and one scene had The Undertaker thrown 15 feet from the Armageddon set onto what was suppose to be the concrete floor. Unfortunately it was plain to see that this was nothing but a crash mat and crowd didn't pop for this. The ending came after a chokeslam by The Dead Man to Kennedy on top of the hearse followed quickly by a match-winning tombstone.

In other notable happening from the card. Chris Benoit defeated Chavo Guerrero by submission in another stiff match. This was a very good bout with Benoit hitting 8 German suplexes on Chavo at one time. Benoit was also considering whether to put Vikki Guerrero in the sharpshooter or not. Luckily he came to his senses and let her go. This led to Chavo attempting the roll up only for it to be countered into the sharpshooter for the submission.

Another cracking match on the card was the Cruiserweight Championship contest between the longest reigning Champion in WWE, Gregory Helms and Jimmy Wang Yang. Featuring a lot of high flying and dangerous spots, some of which took place outside the ring, this was a match much more deserving of the crowd response than what it got. JBL put it best when he berated the fans in Richmond, Virginia for sitting on their hands during this one and at one point even started a boring chant. Helms picked up the duke after a jawbreaker type manoeuvre with his knees to Smackdowns! resident redneck.

The Boogeyman pinned The Miz in a worthless match. I hate The Boogeyman with a passion. Only worth listening too for JBL's ranting about Miz. JBL is comedy gold.

The last match of the night was main event number 3. World Heavyweight Champion, Batista and WWE Champion, John Cena teamed up to take on Finlay and the Champion of Champions, King Booker. There was no way the match could top the Tag Team Championship match from earlier on but it entertained none the less. The match would have been more memorable had it been given an extra five to ten minutes but how many times have I said that about WWE matches this year already. It was King Booker who was pinned at the end of the match after a big Batistabomb.

So 2006 is over for the WWE in regards to it's pay-per-view schedule. It started the year on a terrible note with New Year's Revolution but ended on a high one with Armageddon. This Ladder match will long be remembered as one of the greatest ladder matches of all time. My hat is off to all eight competitors who but their bodies on the line to give the fans one hell of a match. WWE has produced some of the [[worse]] pay-per-views in its [[historian]] over the [[former]] few [[month]]. Cyber Sunday, Survivor Series and [[Feb]] to Dismember were [[horrifying]] to [[told]] the [[lowest]] and so it was relying on its B [[trademark]] [[exhibition]], Smackdown! to attempt to [[terminate]] the year on a [[alto]] [[remark]]. [[Apocalypse]] had two [[significant]] gimmick matches in the Last Ride and [[Hell]] matches, three [[Championship]] were on the line and an interesting main [[incident]] in the [[form]] of a tag team [[wars]] [[featured]] [[Battista]] and [[Giovanni]] Cena against King [[Poker]] and Finlay. However, it was an [[modify]] to one of those [[Championships]] [[couples]] that [[lodged]] us not only the [[couple]] of the [[overnight]] but [[similarly]] now a [[matching]] of the year [[contestant]] when Teddy [[Lang]] gave us [[followers]] an [[swift]] [[Claus]] present. T-Lo [[modifying]] the WWE Tag Team [[Starring]] [[couple]] from [[Champion]], London and Kendrick against to [[Majestic]] and Taylor to a four team [[Stairway]] [[couple]] [[comprising]] MNM and The [[Robust]] Boyz.

I am not going to dwell on this [[couple]] too much as [[anything]] I can [[tell]] would be [[capable]] to do it justice. This has to be [[watched]] to be believed. There were [[myriad]] [[alto]] [[commercials]] and [[numerous]] more [[brute]] bumps and [[clumsy]] landings. The one move I have to [[conversation]] about [[instead]] was the one that [[picked]] Joey Mercury straight to the [[urgency]] [[chamber]] [[halfway]] through the [[competitions]]. [[Geoffrey]] [[Robust]] [[soared]] [[in]] a [[staircase]] that was set up in the see [[watched]] [[posture]] with Matt [[Resilient]] holding both [[member]] of MNM over the [[inverse]] end of it to [[taking]] the full force. [[Sadly]] for Mercury he didn't get his hands up to [[protections]] his [[confront]] and [[taken]] the [[staircase]] full force in the nose and [[exited]] [[eyes]]. This was [[cruel]]. His [[facing]] was instantly a mess for all to [[seeing]] and not [[terribly]] this [[finished]] Mercury's night [[prematurely]]. We [[find]] out [[afterward]] he [[undergone]] a [[raped]] nose and cuts under his left [[eyes]]. [[Are]] warned. This is not for the faint of [[heartland]]. The [[terminated]] to this roller-coaster of a [[ballgame]] [[arrived]] after [[Paolo]] London [[administering]] to grab both [[Championships]] [[straps]] for the [[triumph]]. I have been watching wrestling for [[hardly]] 15 years and it doesn't [[obtain]] any [[improved]] than this match. [[Inconceivable]].

The night opened with only the 4th ever Inferno match. Kane took on MVP in a good match but it was all about the visual and not really about the action. There were a few close calls with the flames for both competitors but in the end it was Kane who forced MVP onto the flames after they both ended up outside the ring. MVP ran around the ring whilst his butt was on fire and there was a sick part of me that laughed watching this. May I suggest to Michael Hayes that MVP comes out next week on Smackdown! to Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire.

The other gimmick match of the night, and the second match of a triple main event was an all out war Last Ride match between Mr Kennedy and The Undertaker. This was a stiff match from start to finish and was the best of the series Undertaker and Kennedy have had yet. The used poles, chairs and one scene had The Undertaker thrown 15 feet from the Armageddon set onto what was suppose to be the concrete floor. Unfortunately it was plain to see that this was nothing but a crash mat and crowd didn't pop for this. The ending came after a chokeslam by The Dead Man to Kennedy on top of the hearse followed quickly by a match-winning tombstone.

In other notable happening from the card. Chris Benoit defeated Chavo Guerrero by submission in another stiff match. This was a very good bout with Benoit hitting 8 German suplexes on Chavo at one time. Benoit was also considering whether to put Vikki Guerrero in the sharpshooter or not. Luckily he came to his senses and let her go. This led to Chavo attempting the roll up only for it to be countered into the sharpshooter for the submission.

Another cracking match on the card was the Cruiserweight Championship contest between the longest reigning Champion in WWE, Gregory Helms and Jimmy Wang Yang. Featuring a lot of high flying and dangerous spots, some of which took place outside the ring, this was a match much more deserving of the crowd response than what it got. JBL put it best when he berated the fans in Richmond, Virginia for sitting on their hands during this one and at one point even started a boring chant. Helms picked up the duke after a jawbreaker type manoeuvre with his knees to Smackdowns! resident redneck.

The Boogeyman pinned The Miz in a worthless match. I hate The Boogeyman with a passion. Only worth listening too for JBL's ranting about Miz. JBL is comedy gold.

The last match of the night was main event number 3. World Heavyweight Champion, Batista and WWE Champion, John Cena teamed up to take on Finlay and the Champion of Champions, King Booker. There was no way the match could top the Tag Team Championship match from earlier on but it entertained none the less. The match would have been more memorable had it been given an extra five to ten minutes but how many times have I said that about WWE matches this year already. It was King Booker who was pinned at the end of the match after a big Batistabomb.

So 2006 is over for the WWE in regards to it's pay-per-view schedule. It started the year on a terrible note with New Year's Revolution but ended on a high one with Armageddon. This Ladder match will long be remembered as one of the greatest ladder matches of all time. My hat is off to all eight competitors who but their bodies on the line to give the fans one hell of a match. --------------------------------------------- Result 268 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After going for a bike ride that day, lying beside a lake in a nature reserve, spending half an hour feeding and talking to a donkey who lived in a beautiful field with a small wood in it, this film made absolute sense to me.

The imagery of the film was beautiful and that is all you need. Switch off the conscious control knob of the mind and job done.

Reminded me of Baraka (1992) but with the added lesson of my previous paragraph.

This comment requires a minimum of ten lines, ten lines is the minimum not 9 lines but ten. After finishing counting all the lines you realise that there are less than ten even though less than ten lines is all that is needed to make my comment. --------------------------------------------- Result 269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I admit that I am a vampire addict: I have seen so many vampire movies I have lost count and this one is definitely in the top ten. I was very impressed by the original John Carpenter's Vampires and when I descovered there was a sequel I went straight out and bought it. This movie does not obey quite the same rules as the first, and it is not quite so dark, but it is close enough and I felt that it built nicely on the original.

Jon Bon Jovi was very good as Derek Bliss: his performance was likeable and yet hard enough for the viewer to believe that he might actually be able to survive in the world in which he lives. One of my favourite parts was just after he meets Zoey and wanders into the bathroom of the diner to check to see if she is more than she seems. His comments are beautifully irreverant and yet emminently practical which contrast well with the rest of the scene as it unfolds.

The other cast members were also well chosen and they knitted nicely to produce an entertaining and original film. It is not simply a rehash of the first movie and it has grown in a similar way to the way Fright Night II grew out of Fright Night. There are different elements which make it a fresh movie with a similar theme.

If you like vampire movies I would recommend this one. If you prefer your films less bloody then choose something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 270 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] Doctor Mordrid is one of those [[rare]] films that is completely under the radar, but is [[totally]] [[worthwhile]]. It really [[reminds]] me of the [[old]] serials from the 30s and 40s. Which is why I'd have loved to [[see]] follow-up movies... but judging by the rest of Full Moon's output there simply weren't enough tits to satisfy the typical audience. Unfortunately, thanks to a completely [[superfluous]] sacrifice scene there two too many for a [[family]] audience - which is unfortunate, because without em' this could have been a [[Harry]] Potter-style magicfest that [[kids]] would have eaten up. Both Jeffrey Combs and Yvette Nipar are great - I wasn't sure if Ms. Nipar hadn't wandered off an A-list picture onto this film, she was very [[believable]]. No, seriously! Anyway - it's a shame they didn't have the bucks to license Dr. Strange, because I think this could have been a total kiddie phenom. Doctor Mordrid is one of those [[seldom]] films that is completely under the radar, but is [[perfectly]] [[valid]]. It really [[reminded]] me of the [[elderly]] serials from the 30s and 40s. Which is why I'd have loved to [[behold]] follow-up movies... but judging by the rest of Full Moon's output there simply weren't enough tits to satisfy the typical audience. Unfortunately, thanks to a completely [[worthless]] sacrifice scene there two too many for a [[familia]] audience - which is unfortunate, because without em' this could have been a [[Hari]] Potter-style magicfest that [[brats]] would have eaten up. Both Jeffrey Combs and Yvette Nipar are great - I wasn't sure if Ms. Nipar hadn't wandered off an A-list picture onto this film, she was very [[reliable]]. No, seriously! Anyway - it's a shame they didn't have the bucks to license Dr. Strange, because I think this could have been a total kiddie phenom. --------------------------------------------- Result 271 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A Bug's Life is a very good animated feature. This movie is for younger children, but it is also a great movie for people my age. The story is about an ant named Flik. He brought havoc onto his colony when he destroyed the food that were for the superior grasshoppers. He gets banished and he must find bigger bugs to fix the mess. This movie is a classic because it is a good movie and it is a Pixar movie. The animation is brilliant especially for the late 90's. The story is good, but a little more detail would be suffice. The voice acting is good as with most animation movies. The music is nice to listen to. Nothing special, but it earned an nomination for one of the music categories. Overall, this movie struck me as awestruck. This is a good movie for all families. I rate this movie 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think this could've been a decent movie, and some of its parts are OK... but in whole it's a B movie. Same about the plot, parts are OK but it has several holes and oddities that doesn't quite add up. Acting is mostly OK, I've seen worse of this too. :)

The beginning sets the level, with cars driving in the desert, making "cool" but totally unnecessary jumps through some small dunes (In slow motion! Cool!), like the drivers had never seen sand before... It gets slightly better from there, but not much.

If you're gonna rent this, get another one too and use this one as a warm-up. Keep expectations low and it might work for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] i can't believe that NONE of the [[official]] reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as [[though]] our culture [[accepts]] this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My [[biggest]] [[problem]] with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these [[assaults]] - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and [[pressured]] never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with "you cannot force a woman to love you" rather than "you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk"... From a woman's point of view, the [[movie]] is a let down. It sort of "throws a bone" to women in letting them be both [[skilled]] fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more [[defined]] by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality [[must]] involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her [[attackers]]. She never even makes them apologize - [[rather]], SHE [[seems]] [[apologetic]]. Overall, a [[depressing]] and [[upsetting]] movie, with some great cinematography and some cool [[fight]] scenes, but not as good as [[Hero]] by a [[long]] shot. i can't believe that NONE of the [[functionary]] reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as [[albeit]] our culture [[concedes]] this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My [[strongest]] [[issues]] with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these [[aggressions]] - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and [[pressed]] never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with "you cannot force a woman to love you" rather than "you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk"... From a woman's point of view, the [[filmmaking]] is a let down. It sort of "throws a bone" to women in letting them be both [[proficient]] fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more [[defining]] by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality [[needs]] involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her [[assailants]]. She never even makes them apologize - [[somewhat]], SHE [[looks]] [[repentant]]. Overall, a [[demoralizing]] and [[unnerving]] movie, with some great cinematography and some cool [[fights]] scenes, but not as good as [[Superhero]] by a [[longer]] shot. --------------------------------------------- Result 274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this movie quite a lot. I have always been a fan of Whoopi Goldberg and this movie only emphasizes it. She portrays a housewife in an African-American family which is moving up the social chain due to the husband's (Danny Glover) success as an attorney. She moves to an all white neighborhood where the people are friendly, yet a little awkward toward her. The various events that arise during the course of the movie make for SOME laughs but mostly appeal to the other emotions. This movie is not so much a comedy as a drama. I give it a strong 8/10. I highly recommend you catch it on TV or rent it soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Peter [[Sellers]] plays Dick Scratcher (ha,ha), a [[cook]] for a pirate [[ship]] who takes over as [[captain]] after he [[murders]] the previous one. [[Although]] he's [[witnessed]] a treasure being [[buried]], he [[begins]] [[losing]] his [[memory]] and the [[treasure]] map he [[obtains]] becomes blank. [[Thus]], Dick is forced to find [[someone]] who can [[see]] and [[communicate]] with [[ghosts]] (do you place an [[ad]] for that?) and [[help]] lead a [[path]] to the [[treasure]]. It's mind boggling how [[anyone]] [[could]] have bankrolled this [[pointless]] [[film]]. Former [[Goon]] [[Spike]] Milligan replaced Medak as [[director]], and [[given]] Medak's [[talents]] in the film The Ruling [[Class]], you can [[probably]] [[guess]] which of the [[grainy]], poorly lit scenes had Milligan in the director's [[chair]]. Peter Boyle makes a brief appearance in the film's first 10 minutes as the doomed pirate captain. He's probably quite thankful that Young Frankenstein was released the same year this was filmed and canned, so that he can keep this off his resume. Franciosa looks dashing as the handsome power-behind-Scratcher but he and Seller both look pretty desperate, with even Sellers' makeup and hair looking quite terrible. They had to know this movie was [[bombing]] even as they were filming it. With lines like these, I can understand any possible [[unease]]:

PIERRE: (about to be hanged) You'll [[pay]] for this.

SCRATCHER: No, I won't. I'll do it for [[free]].

And that's one of the [[GOOD]] jokes. It's [[amazing]] to me that much of [[Sellers]] prolific material is still in the vaults, but this was [[made]] available on VHS more than 15 years [[ago]]! How about [[someone]] stepping up to the plate and [[releasing]] in the [[US]] the well-received British [[TV]] [[program]] "A Show Called Fred" [[starring]] Sellers, Milligan, and [[directed]] by the [[great]] Richard Lester? Peter [[Retailers]] plays Dick Scratcher (ha,ha), a [[cooke]] for a pirate [[battleship]] who takes over as [[skipper]] after he [[kill]] the previous one. [[While]] he's [[saw]] a treasure being [[interred]], he [[starts]] [[loses]] his [[memories]] and the [[darling]] map he [[attains]] becomes blank. [[So]], Dick is forced to find [[whoever]] who can [[behold]] and [[liaise]] with [[ghostbusters]] (do you place an [[advert]] for that?) and [[helps]] lead a [[road]] to the [[treasury]]. It's mind boggling how [[nobody]] [[did]] have bankrolled this [[fruitless]] [[flick]]. Former [[Enforcer]] [[Fortification]] Milligan replaced Medak as [[headmaster]], and [[gave]] Medak's [[talent]] in the film The Ruling [[Classes]], you can [[arguably]] [[suppose]] which of the [[foggy]], poorly lit scenes had Milligan in the director's [[presidents]]. Peter Boyle makes a brief appearance in the film's first 10 minutes as the doomed pirate captain. He's probably quite thankful that Young Frankenstein was released the same year this was filmed and canned, so that he can keep this off his resume. Franciosa looks dashing as the handsome power-behind-Scratcher but he and Seller both look pretty desperate, with even Sellers' makeup and hair looking quite terrible. They had to know this movie was [[bombed]] even as they were filming it. With lines like these, I can understand any possible [[anxiety]]:

PIERRE: (about to be hanged) You'll [[salary]] for this.

SCRATCHER: No, I won't. I'll do it for [[libre]].

And that's one of the [[ALRIGHT]] jokes. It's [[awesome]] to me that much of [[Salesman]] prolific material is still in the vaults, but this was [[brought]] available on VHS more than 15 years [[earlier]]! How about [[everyone]] stepping up to the plate and [[liberation]] in the [[AMERICANS]] the well-received British [[TELEVISION]] [[programme]] "A Show Called Fred" [[championships]] Sellers, Milligan, and [[aimed]] by the [[whopping]] Richard Lester? --------------------------------------------- Result 276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It is [[obviously]] illegal. Pedophiles pray on stuff like this. How did they get away with [[making]] such a movie? This [[movie]] is all summed up in one word, [[SICK]]. Where do people get off [[making]], and [[watching]] these kinds of films. As I was watching the movie I didn't actually think they would allow this kid that is say maybe 12 if that actually sleep with this [[woman]]. Sorry if this is a spoiler to you but I would have [[rater]] not seen this. Where has the sanity of these people gone? Maybe the makers of this movie are pedophiles? Our society today is filled with all types of sexual predators that pray upon children, [[yet]] film makers make these types of movies that do nothing but [[provoke]] this [[type]] of behavior. I noticed that on a previous comment someone asked if there was a version where it showed them naked. This is a kid here, and someone is [[asking]] something like this? What is wrong with this picture? It is [[definitely]] illegal. Pedophiles pray on stuff like this. How did they get away with [[doing]] such a movie? This [[filmmaking]] is all summed up in one word, [[INDISPOSED]]. Where do people get off [[doing]], and [[staring]] these kinds of films. As I was watching the movie I didn't actually think they would allow this kid that is say maybe 12 if that actually sleep with this [[mujer]]. Sorry if this is a spoiler to you but I would have [[assessor]] not seen this. Where has the sanity of these people gone? Maybe the makers of this movie are pedophiles? Our society today is filled with all types of sexual predators that pray upon children, [[even]] film makers make these types of movies that do nothing but [[induce]] this [[genre]] of behavior. I noticed that on a previous comment someone asked if there was a version where it showed them naked. This is a kid here, and someone is [[wondering]] something like this? What is wrong with this picture? --------------------------------------------- Result 277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching about half of this I was ready to give up and turn it off, but I endured to the end. This is a movie that tries to be a romantic comedy and fails. The acting is poor---much worse than the acting in 80s T&A movies.

There are several attempts at humour that fail miserably and the movie is 100% predictable. Perhaps if you are a teenager this movie will hold some appeal, but for those that have seen many movies, you will know how the film turns out after the first 10 minutes. The rest of your time will be spent in agony waiting for the ending credits to roll.

Don't waste your time watching this. --------------------------------------------- Result 278 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Must confess to having seen a few howlers in my time, but this one is up there with the worst of them. Plot troubling to follow. Sex and violence thrown in to disorient and distract from the really poorly put together film.

I can only imagine that the cast will look back on the end product and wish it to gather dust on a shelf not to be disturbed for a generation or two. Sadly, in my case, I have the DVD. It will sit on the shelf and look at me from time to time. --------------------------------------------- Result 279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] "[[After]] the atomic [[bombs]] carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber [[explode]] in the Arctic, the creature 'Gammera' is [[released]] from his [[hibernation]]. The [[giant]] prehistoric turtle [[proceeds]] on a [[path]] to [[Tokyo]] and destroys [[anything]] in his [[path]]. The military and the scientific community rush to [[find]] a means to [[stop]] this [[monster]] before Tokyo is laid to waste," [[according]] to the [[DVD]] sleeve's [[synopsis]].

The re-produced for American audiences version of this, the first [[film]] in the "Gamera" series, [[adds]] English language [[material]] that is even funnier than the regularly [[dubbed]] Japanese fare. [[Clearly]], the monster is following in the [[footsteps]] of "Godzilla". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish "Batman!" TV [[series]], [[musician]] Wes Farrell's [[ludicrous]] [[theme]] song heightens the US version's [[camp]] appeal.

*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) [[Sandy]] Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ [[Dick]] O'Neill, [[Brian]] Donlevy, Albert Dekker, [[John]] Baragrey "[[Afterwards]] the atomic [[blasts]] carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber [[blasting]] in the Arctic, the creature 'Gammera' is [[freed]] from his [[hibernate]]. The [[gigantic]] prehistoric turtle [[incomes]] on a [[pathways]] to [[Tokio]] and destroys [[nothing]] in his [[pathways]]. The military and the scientific community rush to [[found]] a means to [[cease]] this [[creature]] before Tokyo is laid to waste," [[depending]] to the [[DVDS]] sleeve's [[outline]].

The re-produced for American audiences version of this, the first [[filmmaking]] in the "Gamera" series, [[summing]] English language [[materials]] that is even funnier than the regularly [[nicknamed]] Japanese fare. [[Clara]], the monster is following in the [[traces]] of "Godzilla". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish "Batman!" TV [[serial]], [[musicians]] Wes Farrell's [[stupid]] [[topics]] song heightens the US version's [[campground]] appeal.

*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) [[Sandi]] Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ [[Pecker]] O'Neill, [[Bryan]] Donlevy, Albert Dekker, [[Giovanni]] Baragrey --------------------------------------------- Result 280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Father]] and son communicate very [[little]]. IN [[fact]] they [[speak]] [[different]] languages. BUt when the son drives his father 3000 [[miles]] for his pilgrimage's to Mecca, the conversations finally take place. they are difficult and growth is necessary on both parts.

This movie takes us into the hearts of these two [[travelers]], and it is [[indeed]] a [[grand]] [[voyage]] for the audience as well as the two principals. The [[imagery]] throughout is [[impressive]], especially the [[final]] scenes in Mecca. It underlines for me once again how much [[different]] the world can be, but [[also]] at the same time, how similar. The same was true for the father and son in this film.

See this movie. Tell your friends to see it. You'll be glad you did. [[Fathers]] and son communicate very [[tiny]]. IN [[facto]] they [[talking]] [[disparate]] languages. BUt when the son drives his father 3000 [[mile]] for his pilgrimage's to Mecca, the conversations finally take place. they are difficult and growth is necessary on both parts.

This movie takes us into the hearts of these two [[traveler]], and it is [[actually]] a [[huge]] [[touring]] for the audience as well as the two principals. The [[pictures]] throughout is [[wondrous]], especially the [[ultimate]] scenes in Mecca. It underlines for me once again how much [[several]] the world can be, but [[similarly]] at the same time, how similar. The same was true for the father and son in this film.

See this movie. Tell your friends to see it. You'll be glad you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I felt asleep, watching it!!! (and I had tickets for the midnight- premiere) Any questions? The most disturbing scene, as far as I can remember, was the techno-dance-i-dont-know-what-that-was-scene. By the way what an ending!? --------------------------------------------- Result 282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I know I've already added a comment but I just wanted to clarify something...

I'm not some old fogey from the Baby Boom generation that [[grew]] up glued to a [[flickering]] b/w picture of Phil Silvers, Jackie Gleason etc.

Bilko was already 20 years [[old]] before I was [[born]] but I had the pleasure of discovering Phil Silver's Bilko courtesy of BBC2. I wonder if I [[would]] have [[enjoyed]] Steve Martin's travesty if I hadn't seen or heard of Phil Silvers - I don't know - maybe I would have.

Some of the other reviewers who think this [[movie]] is worthy of a '10' [[admit]] that they haven't seen the [[original]]. I can only [[urge]] you to [[spend]] 21 minutes of your life watching a single episode. If after watching the original Ernie, Colonel Hall, Ritzig & Emma, Duane [[Doberman]], Henshaw, Dino, Flashman, Zimmerman, Mullin et al you still think that [[Steve]] Martin's film is woth anything above a '2' - I'll stand you a pint.... I know I've already added a comment but I just wanted to clarify something...

I'm not some old fogey from the Baby Boom generation that [[grow]] up glued to a [[wink]] b/w picture of Phil Silvers, Jackie Gleason etc.

Bilko was already 20 years [[archaic]] before I was [[ould]] but I had the pleasure of discovering Phil Silver's Bilko courtesy of BBC2. I wonder if I [[could]] have [[adored]] Steve Martin's travesty if I hadn't seen or heard of Phil Silvers - I don't know - maybe I would have.

Some of the other reviewers who think this [[filmmaking]] is worthy of a '10' [[acknowledge]] that they haven't seen the [[preliminary]]. I can only [[invite]] you to [[outlay]] 21 minutes of your life watching a single episode. If after watching the original Ernie, Colonel Hall, Ritzig & Emma, Duane [[Pinscher]], Henshaw, Dino, Flashman, Zimmerman, Mullin et al you still think that [[Stephens]] Martin's film is woth anything above a '2' - I'll stand you a pint.... --------------------------------------------- Result 283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Very]] different topic [[treated]] in this [[film]]. A straightforward and simple description of local [[Chinese]] customs, by [[looking]] at the daily [[operation]] of a public bath, run by the [[old]] [[owner]] and his [[retarded]] son, when older son [[returns]] home, [[wrongly]] [[believing]] his [[father]] has [[died]]. [[How]] [[every]] [[man]] in [[town]] makes his daily [[visit]] to [[chat]], [[play]] games, discuss personal [[matters]] and get honest [[advice]], besides the usual spa-like [[therapies]]. When [[old]] [[man]] [[dies]], [[strong]] and loyal [[family]] [[ties]] make [[older]] [[son]] take [[charge]], so [[public]] [[bath]] [[operation]] is not disrupted. And finally, the [[arrival]] of [[modernization]] to [[end]] this way of [[spending]] relaxed hours and getting along. The public [[bath]] has to be [[demolished]], making place for a commercial [[complex]] to be constructed. [[Quite]] different topic [[processed]] in this [[movies]]. A straightforward and simple description of local [[Chinaman]] customs, by [[researching]] at the daily [[operating]] of a public bath, run by the [[longtime]] [[proprietor]] and his [[moronic]] son, when older son [[returned]] home, [[falsely]] [[think]] his [[fathers]] has [[deaths]]. [[Mode]] [[any]] [[guy]] in [[ciudad]] makes his daily [[visits]] to [[schmooze]], [[playing]] games, discuss personal [[questions]] and get honest [[counsel]], besides the usual spa-like [[curative]]. When [[archaic]] [[guy]] [[dying]], [[forceful]] and loyal [[families]] [[relationship]] make [[elderly]] [[sons]] take [[charges]], so [[populace]] [[wallow]] [[operating]] is not disrupted. And finally, the [[incoming]] of [[update]] to [[termination]] this way of [[expense]] relaxed hours and getting along. The public [[bain]] has to be [[clobbered]], making place for a commercial [[tricky]] to be constructed. --------------------------------------------- Result 284 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Massacre]] is a [[film]] directed by Andrea Bianchi (Burial [[Ground]]) and produced by legendary Italian horror director Lucio Fulci. [[Now]] with this [[mix]] of [[great]] [[talent]] you [[would]] [[think]] this movie [[would]] have been a [[true]] gore fest. This could not be further from that. [[Massacre]] [[falls]] right on its [[face]] as being one of the most [[boring]] slasher films I have [[seen]] come out of Italian [[cinema]]. I was actually [[struggling]] to [[stay]] [[awake]] during the film and I have never had that problem with [[Italian]] horror [[films]].

[[Massacre]] [[starts]] out with a [[hooker]] being slaughtered on the side of the [[road]] with an ax. This scene was [[used]] in Fulci's Nightmare Concert. This isn't a bad scene and it raises your expectations of the [[movie]] as being an [[ax]] wielding slaughter. Unfortuanitly, the [[next]] hour of the [[movie]] is SO [[boring]]. The [[movie]] goes on to a set of a [[horror]] [[film]] being [[filmed]] and there is a lot of [[character]] [[development]] during all these scenes but the [[characters]] in the [[movie]] are so dull and [[badly]] [[acted]] your interest [[starts]] to [[leak]] away. The last 30 minutes of the [[movie]] aren't so [[bad]] but [[still]] [[could]] have been [[much]] better. The [[gore]] in the [[movie]] was [[pathetic]] and [[since]] Fulci [[used]] most of the gore scenes in Nightmare [[Concert]] there was [[nothing]] new here. The end of the movie did [[leave]] a [[nice]] [[twist]] but there was [[still]] to much unanswered and the continuity falls right through the floor.

This wasn't a very good film but for a true Italian horror freak (like myself) this movie is a must have [[since]] it is very rare. 4/10 stars [[Carnage]] is a [[filmmaking]] directed by Andrea Bianchi (Burial [[Terra]]) and produced by legendary Italian horror director Lucio Fulci. [[Presently]] with this [[mixing]] of [[marvellous]] [[talents]] you [[could]] [[believing]] this movie [[could]] have been a [[veritable]] gore fest. This could not be further from that. [[Bloodbath]] [[tumble]] right on its [[encounter]] as being one of the most [[dull]] slasher films I have [[saw]] come out of Italian [[filmmaking]]. I was actually [[fight]] to [[sojourn]] [[woke]] during the film and I have never had that problem with [[Ltalian]] horror [[movies]].

[[Carnage]] [[launched]] out with a [[prostitute]] being slaughtered on the side of the [[chemin]] with an ax. This scene was [[using]] in Fulci's Nightmare Concert. This isn't a bad scene and it raises your expectations of the [[flick]] as being an [[axe]] wielding slaughter. Unfortuanitly, the [[future]] hour of the [[flick]] is SO [[dull]]. The [[filmmaking]] goes on to a set of a [[terror]] [[movie]] being [[shot]] and there is a lot of [[characters]] [[evolution]] during all these scenes but the [[trait]] in the [[filmmaking]] are so dull and [[sorely]] [[served]] your interest [[started]] to [[leaks]] away. The last 30 minutes of the [[filmmaking]] aren't so [[wicked]] but [[however]] [[did]] have been [[very]] better. The [[gora]] in the [[filmmaking]] was [[unhappy]] and [[because]] Fulci [[using]] most of the gore scenes in Nightmare [[Concerto]] there was [[none]] new here. The end of the movie did [[let]] a [[delightful]] [[twisting]] but there was [[again]] to much unanswered and the continuity falls right through the floor.

This wasn't a very good film but for a true Italian horror freak (like myself) this movie is a must have [[because]] it is very rare. 4/10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This is a [[great]] [[film]].

I [[agreed]] to watch a chick [[flick]] and some how [[ended]] up with this. I had never [[heard]] of it or [[anyone]] in it (excpet Mike from Friends).

But it is [[great]]! [[Eva]], [[Lake]] and [[Paul]] give amazing performances. The [[humour]] is [[consistently]] dry and witty.

[[Paul]] Rudd pretty much plays the mike [[character]] from Friends (which [[works]] great). The other [[characters]] are stereotypes and the plot is formulaic (I mean we are not talking 'Apocalypse Now' here) But the [[characters]] are [[likable]], the story is engaging, the soundtrack, production and direction all [[work]] well.

[[In]] all a [[great]] feel-good film that really [[deserves]] a lot more credit than it [[gets]].

[[Everyone]] has their own tastes but I really don't [[understand]] the one star [[reviews]] for this. This is a [[wondrous]] [[flick]].

I [[consented]] to watch a chick [[film]] and some how [[finished]] up with this. I had never [[hear]] of it or [[person]] in it (excpet Mike from Friends).

But it is [[large]]! [[Ewa]], [[Lakes]] and [[Paulus]] give amazing performances. The [[comedy]] is [[constantly]] dry and witty.

[[Paulo]] Rudd pretty much plays the mike [[personage]] from Friends (which [[work]] great). The other [[features]] are stereotypes and the plot is formulaic (I mean we are not talking 'Apocalypse Now' here) But the [[features]] are [[likeable]], the story is engaging, the soundtrack, production and direction all [[cooperates]] well.

[[During]] all a [[wondrous]] feel-good film that really [[deserved]] a lot more credit than it [[got]].

[[Someone]] has their own tastes but I really don't [[understands]] the one star [[inspecting]] for this. --------------------------------------------- Result 286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too [[long]]; some of

the content [[could]] have been [[saved]] for the sequel, Barry McKenzie [[Holds]] His Own, which [[desperately]] [[needed]] some new stuff anyway. Granted, his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes [[annoying]] as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's [[songs]] are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but "hilarious"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10 A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too [[lange]]; some of

the content [[did]] have been [[rescued]] for the sequel, Barry McKenzie [[Hold]] His Own, which [[sorely]] [[requisite]] some new stuff anyway. Granted, his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes [[exasperating]] as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's [[melodies]] are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but "hilarious"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] this is the [[result]]. A [[piece]] of trash movie that doesn't [[deserve]] to [[even]] be classified as a [[movie]], it's just a bunch of [[stuff]] on a film reel, that makes no [[sense]] whatsoever. Well back to the actors, which from the [[get]] [[go]] [[seem]] to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would [[get]] a little [[amount]] of money together and try to make a movie that would be a [[great]] [[horror]] film. Well it's a great horror anyway, nevermind being a film. There's plenty of horrific acting in "Hobgoblins," but the [[worse]] is the [[main]] guy named Richard, who is just way too much of a [[weakling]] to even sorta [[root]] for. Well, when you cast a bunch of friends and try to make the film scary, on a less than shoestring budget, no less, this is what will happen. Oh well at least the MST3K version was hilarious. But this is still a horrid movie, that deserves all the bashing it gets. 9 for the MST [[version]]. this is the [[findings]]. A [[slice]] of trash movie that doesn't [[deserved]] to [[yet]] be classified as a [[movies]], it's just a bunch of [[thing]] on a film reel, that makes no [[feeling]] whatsoever. Well back to the actors, which from the [[got]] [[going]] [[seems]] to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would [[got]] a little [[somme]] of money together and try to make a movie that would be a [[grand]] [[abomination]] film. Well it's a great horror anyway, nevermind being a film. There's plenty of horrific acting in "Hobgoblins," but the [[pire]] is the [[primary]] guy named Richard, who is just way too much of a [[sissy]] to even sorta [[origins]] for. Well, when you cast a bunch of friends and try to make the film scary, on a less than shoestring budget, no less, this is what will happen. Oh well at least the MST3K version was hilarious. But this is still a horrid movie, that deserves all the bashing it gets. 9 for the MST [[stepping]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 288 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have only managed to see this classic for the first time a few weeks ago. Being made almost 30 years ago I thought the scary moments would be rather tame. Boy was I wrong. There are some great moments that sent shivers down my spine. Even the acting was great, Jamie Lee Curtis was fantastic and Donald Pleasance was superb.

On the downside it can be rather slow to start but once it gets going there is no stopping it. It makes all the copycats, e.g. Nightmare on Elm Street, Scream look very tame. I can't really say it is Carpenter's best because I have not seen many of his, the only one I can remember of his is Starman (I think he made it). Halloween is the crowning achievement of the horror genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This is a poor [[film]] by any standard. The story in [[Match]] Point had a certain intrigue, and the [[direction]] and [[writing]] a certain [[fascination]] (Woody Allen [[mixing]] his own [[culture]] with that of the [[classic]] [[English]] [[murder]] and [[exploring]] what can be [[done]] with it).

Scoop, however has [[none]] of this. It is poorly [[written]], the two leads are hopelessly [[wooden]] and the story itself has no interest at all. The genre that it spoofs [[requires]] at least some sort of subplot with witty explanations and tie-ups (why are tarot cards and keys kept under French [[horns]] in locked rooms?).

Allen's delightful and witty versions of various Hollywood genres (Curse of the Jade Scorpion/Purple Rose of Cairo etc) have given us so much pleasure over the years. Even Hollywood Ending had a great central idea. Sadly his inspiration has deserted him this time. This is a poor [[filmmaking]] by any standard. The story in [[Couple]] Point had a certain intrigue, and the [[orientation]] and [[handwriting]] a certain [[passion]] (Woody Allen [[blending]] his own [[cropping]] with that of the [[typical]] [[Anglais]] [[manslaughter]] and [[explores]] what can be [[completed]] with it).

Scoop, however has [[nos]] of this. It is poorly [[handwritten]], the two leads are hopelessly [[lumber]] and the story itself has no interest at all. The genre that it spoofs [[requiring]] at least some sort of subplot with witty explanations and tie-ups (why are tarot cards and keys kept under French [[antlers]] in locked rooms?).

Allen's delightful and witty versions of various Hollywood genres (Curse of the Jade Scorpion/Purple Rose of Cairo etc) have given us so much pleasure over the years. Even Hollywood Ending had a great central idea. Sadly his inspiration has deserted him this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] What a [[load]] of Leftist Hollywood bilge. This movie glorifies mutiny as brave and noble if it be for [[pacifist]] principles. The fairytale [[ends]] with the pacifist character, played by Danzel Washington, actually getting [[promoted]] for his treason. What is it with these Hollywood tools? Is this still [[payback]] for McCarthyism?

If I sound [[cynical]] it's because I am [[fed]] up with [[movies]] hawking a political agenda. The military [[brass]] in this [[movie]] are portrayed as, what else? Gung-ho war [[mongers]]. Sound familiar? Ever see a movie where the CIA or any government agency is not evil? Think about it. Yet again, Crimson [[Tide]] stresses the point. The Hackman character, U-boat captain Ramsey, comes across like a raving lunatic, until the very end when, of course he comes to his senses, does a complete 360, [[renounces]] his blood lust, [[suggests]] a promotion for the treasonous Ron [[Hunter]], and repents by retiring from the service. A [[guy]] [[mutinies]], takes command of your [[boat]], puts the U.S at grave [[risk]] of receiving a [[nuclear]] first-strike, and you [[promote]] him???? What [[hogwash]]! What a [[uploading]] of Leftist Hollywood bilge. This movie glorifies mutiny as brave and noble if it be for [[tranquil]] principles. The fairytale [[end]] with the pacifist character, played by Danzel Washington, actually getting [[encouraged]] for his treason. What is it with these Hollywood tools? Is this still [[vengeance]] for McCarthyism?

If I sound [[cynic]] it's because I am [[fueled]] up with [[kino]] hawking a political agenda. The military [[bronze]] in this [[filmmaking]] are portrayed as, what else? Gung-ho war [[monger]]. Sound familiar? Ever see a movie where the CIA or any government agency is not evil? Think about it. Yet again, Crimson [[Tidal]] stresses the point. The Hackman character, U-boat captain Ramsey, comes across like a raving lunatic, until the very end when, of course he comes to his senses, does a complete 360, [[renounce]] his blood lust, [[propose]] a promotion for the treasonous Ron [[Bellboy]], and repents by retiring from the service. A [[bloke]] [[uprisings]], takes command of your [[sailboat]], puts the U.S at grave [[peril]] of receiving a [[nuke]] first-strike, and you [[encouragement]] him???? What [[claptrap]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is a pure failure. I am a Steve Martin fan, but even he can't save the tired idea and swiss cheese script. Think "Police Academy 7" and apply it to a military parody. Yuck.

I DO NOT feel the other user comments reflected the poor rating this film received (and rightfully deserved!). It is extremely misleading. I have often seen this film marked down to $3.00 in the grocery store and now I certainly know why.

If only I could get my 90 minutes back... --------------------------------------------- Result 292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I waited and waited for this film to come out,the trailers seemed to be on for years, it was worth it. I'm not a big fan of watching films over and over again but i cant wait for this to come out for all to buy! Not a big fan of Jim but this suited him perfectly, there was so much to see and the 'feel good factor' is off the scale, perfect for Christmas. I think Ron did a fab job turning this into a film, If you haven't seen it then do so, if you have, watch it again, i know you want to! --------------------------------------------- Result 293 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Who wrote this? Some [[guy]] named John Cohen. I guess this was the first [[screenplay]] he's ever worked on. Someone should've told him you're [[supposed]] to [[write]] dialog that sounds like something someone actually might [[say]].

And who [[directed]] this? Scott [[Marshal]]? [[Son]] of [[Gerry]] [[Marshall]]. My the [[nut]] has [[fallen]] far from the tree. Someone might have wanted to let him know that you can, in fact, shoot a scene in a cab in [[New]] York, and it will [[look]] real, and you won't have to [[fake]] it with a blue screen for no [[reason]]. Might have also wanted to let him know he should stay away from Jessica Simpson, but hopefully he's learned that lesson now.

And Jessica Simpson... naturally she can't [[act]]. Hell, she makes Jessica Alba look like Audry Hepburn, and yet she's starring in this movie. OH wait, it was produced by her father. Okay, that's why she got the part. That's really the only [[reason]] I can think of.

So should I be surprised it's bad? No. Should I be amazed at how bad it is? I think a lot of people would if they saw as much of it as I did. I mean you expect a movie starring Jessica Simpson to be bad, but this... it's not just bad, it's the complete [[opposite]] of a classic [[film]]. Think of a great Woody Allen movie, this film is as [[bad]] as that film is good. It's the Anti-Annie Hall.

I am so glad I didn't [[pay]] to see it, I stopped watching ten minutes in cus I couldn't [[go]] on. No doubt I would've walked out of the theater [[sooner]]. In fact I wonder how many of the 6 people who saw it per theater actually stayed and watched the whole thing. The [[film]] starts out laughably [[bad]], and then goes to the point of being so bad it [[becomes]] a kind of Chinese water torture. And then, around when the first [[act]] is ending, you realize it'll only get [[worse]], and that's when you either need to leave, or kill yourself.

In conclusion, this film goes under the category of being so bad it should be used in place of water boarding at Guantanamo Bay. Although some prefer the water boarding. Who wrote this? Some [[guys]] named John Cohen. I guess this was the first [[scenarios]] he's ever worked on. Someone should've told him you're [[suspected]] to [[handwriting]] dialog that sounds like something someone actually might [[tell]].

And who [[oriented]] this? Scott [[Marshall]]? [[Sons]] of [[Jerry]] [[Marshal]]. My the [[walnuts]] has [[decrease]] far from the tree. Someone might have wanted to let him know that you can, in fact, shoot a scene in a cab in [[Novel]] York, and it will [[gaze]] real, and you won't have to [[false]] it with a blue screen for no [[cause]]. Might have also wanted to let him know he should stay away from Jessica Simpson, but hopefully he's learned that lesson now.

And Jessica Simpson... naturally she can't [[legislation]]. Hell, she makes Jessica Alba look like Audry Hepburn, and yet she's starring in this movie. OH wait, it was produced by her father. Okay, that's why she got the part. That's really the only [[cause]] I can think of.

So should I be surprised it's bad? No. Should I be amazed at how bad it is? I think a lot of people would if they saw as much of it as I did. I mean you expect a movie starring Jessica Simpson to be bad, but this... it's not just bad, it's the complete [[opus]] of a classic [[filmmaking]]. Think of a great Woody Allen movie, this film is as [[unfavourable]] as that film is good. It's the Anti-Annie Hall.

I am so glad I didn't [[paid]] to see it, I stopped watching ten minutes in cus I couldn't [[going]] on. No doubt I would've walked out of the theater [[beforehand]]. In fact I wonder how many of the 6 people who saw it per theater actually stayed and watched the whole thing. The [[filmmaking]] starts out laughably [[negative]], and then goes to the point of being so bad it [[become]] a kind of Chinese water torture. And then, around when the first [[legislation]] is ending, you realize it'll only get [[worst]], and that's when you either need to leave, or kill yourself.

In conclusion, this film goes under the category of being so bad it should be used in place of water boarding at Guantanamo Bay. Although some prefer the water boarding. --------------------------------------------- Result 294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Films such as Chocolat, [[Beau]] Travail, and others have propelled French director [[Claire]] [[Denis]] into the [[top]] echelon of the world's most [[unique]] and [[accomplished]] filmmakers and her 2004 [[film]] The Intruder (L'Intrus) [[adds]] to the depth of her portfolio. A cinematic poem that conveys a mood of abiding loneliness and loss, the [[film]] [[provides]] a glimpse into the [[psyche]] of a [[man]] who is deteriorating physically and mentally and who travels to [[various]] parts of the [[globe]] [[seeking]] redemption and [[peace]] but [[finds]] it hard to [[come]] by. [[Loosely]] [[based]] on Jean-Luc Nancy's memoir of a heart transplant, The Intruder is a film of such unrelenting opaqueness that even after two viewings it is [[difficult]] to [[describe]] it in other than subjective, impressionistic terms.

[[Louis]] Trebor ([[Michael]] Subor) is a man in his seventies who is likely [[dying]] of a heart condition and who, like the [[professor]] in Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries, [[attempts]] to [[come]] to terms with the [[mistakes]] of his life while he has [[time]]. It is [[clear]] that he is physically rugged and very [[wealthy]] but [[seems]] [[emotionally]] drained and the look on his [[face]] is one of [[quiet]] [[resignation]]. [[Though]] we see only one episode of violence, where he [[gets]] out of bed in the middle of night to [[kill]] an intruder, there is a sinister sense about him. He might be an intelligence [[officer]], a [[foreign]] [[agent]], or a [[hit]] [[man]].

Whatever the [[case]], he [[apparently]] is under some [[kind]] of [[surveillance]] and [[acts]] like a [[man]] that has been involved in criminal wrongdoing and is only now [[able]] to see the [[consequences]]. Facial close-ups [[throughout]] the movie [[create]] a strong [[sense]] of [[isolation]]. He lives with his dogs in a cabin in the Jura Mountains [[near]] the French-Swiss border and has an estranged son [[Sidney]] (Gregoire [[Collin]]) whom he has long [[neglected]]. [[Sidney]] lives nearby with his wife Antoinette (Florence Loiret-Caille) and their two children. [[In]] one [[telling]] scene, he meets up with his [[father]] on the street and [[calls]] him a lunatic, but that does not [[prevent]] him from [[taking]] his money.

[[When]] the [[film]] [[opens]], we [[meet]] Antoinette, a Swiss border [[guard]], who [[boards]] a van with a [[trained]] [[dog]] to sniff out some [[contraband]]. When she [[comes]] [[home]], she is [[greeted]] by her husband who [[asks]] her with tongue-in-cheek if she has "anything to [[declare]]?" Other than these three individuals, the people and circumstances we see during the rest of the film may exist only in Louis' imagination. Louis has three women in his life and we meet them all in the film's first half hour: a pharmacist (Bambou) who prepares his medication, a neighbor (Béatrice Dalle) who is a dog breeder who refuses to care for his dogs when he goes away on a trip telling him that they are as crazy as he is, and a young Russian organ dealer (Katia Golubeva) who he tells he wants a "young man's heart".

Relentlessly, she stalks him throughout the film but it is apparently only in his mind. In the last section of the film, Louis travels to South Korea in search of a heart transplant and to Tahiti to deliver a gift to a different son, one whom he has not seen for many years or perhaps has never seen. His heart transplant, however, appears to be a metaphor for a man without a heart, a man whose life has been fascinating but ultimately directionless, intruding into other people's lives with little real empathy. The Intruder contains a haunting guitar soundtrack by Stuart Staples of the band Tindersticks, reminiscent of the guitar riff in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man, and gorgeous cinematography by Denis regular Agnes Godard.

Godard creates memorable images that convey a mood of longing and regret: a heart beating alone in the snow, an infant in a sling looking up at his father for a good two minutes, the baby's expression gradually turning from morose to a half smile, colored streamers blowing from a newly christened ship, a massage in a dark room by a mysterious Korean masseuse, and the vast expanse of ocean seen from a bobbing ship deck. While The Intruder can be frustrating because of its elliptical nature, Denis forces us to respond out of our own experience, to understand the images on the screen on a very personal level. If there is any theme, a hint might be found in the opening that tells us what is revealed piecemeal in the film - "your worst enemies are hiding, in the shadow, in your heart." Films such as Chocolat, [[Suitor]] Travail, and others have propelled French director [[Clara]] [[Denny]] into the [[topped]] echelon of the world's most [[particular]] and [[played]] filmmakers and her 2004 [[flick]] The Intruder (L'Intrus) [[added]] to the depth of her portfolio. A cinematic poem that conveys a mood of abiding loneliness and loss, the [[movie]] [[prescribes]] a glimpse into the [[psychology]] of a [[males]] who is deteriorating physically and mentally and who travels to [[several]] parts of the [[planet]] [[striving]] redemption and [[nonviolent]] but [[deems]] it hard to [[arrived]] by. [[Vaguely]] [[predicated]] on Jean-Luc Nancy's memoir of a heart transplant, The Intruder is a film of such unrelenting opaqueness that even after two viewings it is [[problematic]] to [[outline]] it in other than subjective, impressionistic terms.

[[Lewis]] Trebor ([[Micheal]] Subor) is a man in his seventies who is likely [[died]] of a heart condition and who, like the [[teachers]] in Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries, [[endeavour]] to [[arrive]] to terms with the [[errors]] of his life while he has [[times]]. It is [[definite]] that he is physically rugged and very [[prosperous]] but [[appears]] [[excitedly]] drained and the look on his [[encounter]] is one of [[silent]] [[quits]]. [[If]] we see only one episode of violence, where he [[get]] out of bed in the middle of night to [[murdered]] an intruder, there is a sinister sense about him. He might be an intelligence [[officials]], a [[overseas]] [[officer]], or a [[knocked]] [[males]].

Whatever the [[lawsuit]], he [[supposedly]] is under some [[sort]] of [[supervising]] and [[act]] like a [[males]] that has been involved in criminal wrongdoing and is only now [[capable]] to see the [[effects]]. Facial close-ups [[across]] the movie [[creating]] a strong [[feeling]] of [[seclusion]]. He lives with his dogs in a cabin in the Jura Mountains [[nearby]] the French-Swiss border and has an estranged son [[Sid]] (Gregoire [[Colin]]) whom he has long [[omitted]]. [[Sid]] lives nearby with his wife Antoinette (Florence Loiret-Caille) and their two children. [[Throughout]] one [[saying]] scene, he meets up with his [[fathers]] on the street and [[requested]] him a lunatic, but that does not [[deter]] him from [[picked]] his money.

[[Whenever]] the [[kino]] [[opened]], we [[cater]] Antoinette, a Swiss border [[guards]], who [[councils]] a van with a [[qualified]] [[lapdog]] to sniff out some [[smuggle]]. When she [[arrives]] [[household]], she is [[saluted]] by her husband who [[petition]] her with tongue-in-cheek if she has "anything to [[declared]]?" Other than these three individuals, the people and circumstances we see during the rest of the film may exist only in Louis' imagination. Louis has three women in his life and we meet them all in the film's first half hour: a pharmacist (Bambou) who prepares his medication, a neighbor (Béatrice Dalle) who is a dog breeder who refuses to care for his dogs when he goes away on a trip telling him that they are as crazy as he is, and a young Russian organ dealer (Katia Golubeva) who he tells he wants a "young man's heart".

Relentlessly, she stalks him throughout the film but it is apparently only in his mind. In the last section of the film, Louis travels to South Korea in search of a heart transplant and to Tahiti to deliver a gift to a different son, one whom he has not seen for many years or perhaps has never seen. His heart transplant, however, appears to be a metaphor for a man without a heart, a man whose life has been fascinating but ultimately directionless, intruding into other people's lives with little real empathy. The Intruder contains a haunting guitar soundtrack by Stuart Staples of the band Tindersticks, reminiscent of the guitar riff in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man, and gorgeous cinematography by Denis regular Agnes Godard.

Godard creates memorable images that convey a mood of longing and regret: a heart beating alone in the snow, an infant in a sling looking up at his father for a good two minutes, the baby's expression gradually turning from morose to a half smile, colored streamers blowing from a newly christened ship, a massage in a dark room by a mysterious Korean masseuse, and the vast expanse of ocean seen from a bobbing ship deck. While The Intruder can be frustrating because of its elliptical nature, Denis forces us to respond out of our own experience, to understand the images on the screen on a very personal level. If there is any theme, a hint might be found in the opening that tells us what is revealed piecemeal in the film - "your worst enemies are hiding, in the shadow, in your heart." --------------------------------------------- Result 295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not exactly my genre, this straight-to-DVD street fight action is one I only encountered due to a friend putting it on whilst we had a few beers. I'm relatively open minded, and quite a fan of Eamonn Walker, so I sat back ready to enjoy myself.

Blood and Bone is the story of Isiah Bone, an ex-con who becomes a street fighter for unclear reasons which eventually unfold as the film progresses. Blah blah blah.

What a tedious film. I understand that films like this don't rely hugely on plot, but do they have to stuff in such a silly, predictable and entirely stupid storyline? It may not be important, but by golly gum does it annoy me. Better no plot and pure action than a clíche-ridden fleabag mongrel of a narrative. Infused with entirely unfounded and unachieving sentimental drivel, it is the cinematic equivalent of a thin-skinned turkey stuffed with rotten innards. I should probably at this point mention what is, of course, the film's drawing point: the fighting. Even in itself, the fighting is rather poor. Bone manages to take out well established tough-man street fighters in single punches (a large oaf or two is the filmmakers' laughworthy attempt to rectify this inconsistency); fighters who never seem to conclude that attacking one by one is a foolish ploy. Even this is repetitive and stupid, arms broken and faces kicked with a steady alacrity that we get to see time and time again.

A run of the mill, film-by-numbers movie which fully deserves its straight to DVD status, doing absolutely nothing new and everything we've seen time and time again. And not even particularly well. --------------------------------------------- Result 296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This movie [[surprised]] me! Not ever having [[heard]] of Hyde of Gackt I was not expecting much! The reason I wanted to watch this movie was because somebody mentioned that the movie contained some serious action scenes in John Woo [[style]]! Normally I am very careful when this is claimed! There is only one [[John]] [[Woo]] and til this day there hasn't been one director that comes close to his brilliance when it comes to action! The fact that "[[Moon]] Child" would feature a vampire convinced me [[even]] more! How can you go wrong with gun blazing vampires! Sounds promising and interesting! The first thing I noticed about this movie that the pace was considerably slow! It [[takes]] it's time to set the mood! This movie contains some nice Hong Kong style action scenes! But "Moon Child" isn't an action movie! It is a drama about friendship and [[loyalty]]! The focus is on the characters and their relation to each other! The pop singers Hyde and Gackt do a good job in acting and are very believable as friends! The only problem I had was with the plot! A couple of times the movie seems to skip a few years without explaining what happened and why they had to skip! Example:When one member of the gang dies (very dramatic moment) Alexander Wang sees Kei (Hyde) drinking blood of one of the attackers! Without warning and explanation the movie skips 9 nine years and most of the friends aren't together anymore! Also without a proper reason given Son (Alexander Wang) and Sho (Gackt) have to kill each other! I know that this is done to add some serious drama! Because of the actors it is very [[effective]] but sometimes it does feel forced! Apart from the flaws in [[plot]] this movie has an [[ambiance]] and slickness that makes it hard not to [[like]] this movie! It is hard to explain why this movie is [[wonderful]]! But it just is! The overall experience you get is heartwarming and sincere! This movie [[horrified]] me! Not ever having [[listened]] of Hyde of Gackt I was not expecting much! The reason I wanted to watch this movie was because somebody mentioned that the movie contained some serious action scenes in John Woo [[elegance]]! Normally I am very careful when this is claimed! There is only one [[Johannes]] [[Wooo]] and til this day there hasn't been one director that comes close to his brilliance when it comes to action! The fact that "[[Lune]] Child" would feature a vampire convinced me [[yet]] more! How can you go wrong with gun blazing vampires! Sounds promising and interesting! The first thing I noticed about this movie that the pace was considerably slow! It [[pick]] it's time to set the mood! This movie contains some nice Hong Kong style action scenes! But "Moon Child" isn't an action movie! It is a drama about friendship and [[fidelity]]! The focus is on the characters and their relation to each other! The pop singers Hyde and Gackt do a good job in acting and are very believable as friends! The only problem I had was with the plot! A couple of times the movie seems to skip a few years without explaining what happened and why they had to skip! Example:When one member of the gang dies (very dramatic moment) Alexander Wang sees Kei (Hyde) drinking blood of one of the attackers! Without warning and explanation the movie skips 9 nine years and most of the friends aren't together anymore! Also without a proper reason given Son (Alexander Wang) and Sho (Gackt) have to kill each other! I know that this is done to add some serious drama! Because of the actors it is very [[efficacious]] but sometimes it does feel forced! Apart from the flaws in [[intrigue]] this movie has an [[mood]] and slickness that makes it hard not to [[iike]] this movie! It is hard to explain why this movie is [[wondrous]]! But it just is! The overall experience you get is heartwarming and sincere! --------------------------------------------- Result 297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Rookie kept me smiling from beginning to end. Dennis Quaid played the role to perfection. The little boy that plays his son was fantastic. He made this a father-son movie to remember. The messages are good ones. Follow your dreams. Failing at the pursuit is alright as long as you try. The excitement is palpable. I believe this movie will be a classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I agree with the last reviewer that this movie had terrible acting. Yes, there was a lot of gore and some nudity. But it was [[overshadowed]] by a slow-moving, meaningless plot and dumb ending. [[Where]] was this supposed to be filmed anyway: a Canadian Chinatown or Hong Kong? Hostel was a much better movie and I would recommend seeing that [[instead]]. A technical annoyance I had with the DVD is that if you shut off the Spanish subtitles, they return after a few scenes and then you have to go back to the main menu and turn them off again. Also, don't waste your time on the deleted scenes because there's no audio and it just looks like tourist footage. I agree with the last reviewer that this movie had terrible acting. Yes, there was a lot of gore and some nudity. But it was [[clouded]] by a slow-moving, meaningless plot and dumb ending. [[Hence]] was this supposed to be filmed anyway: a Canadian Chinatown or Hong Kong? Hostel was a much better movie and I would recommend seeing that [[conversely]]. A technical annoyance I had with the DVD is that if you shut off the Spanish subtitles, they return after a few scenes and then you have to go back to the main menu and turn them off again. Also, don't waste your time on the deleted scenes because there's no audio and it just looks like tourist footage. --------------------------------------------- Result 299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Powers Boothe turns in a stellar performance as 1970's cult figure Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple. Jones physical likeness to Jones is uncanny and the story is acted out chillingly. The movie keeps you riveted and is a must see for anyone. check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a kid I thought this movie was great. It had animals, it had beautiful music, and it had my favorite actor: Michael J. Fox. Now, I still love this movie, for different reasons. It has well trained animals that are put through various stunts and scenes that look excellent on camera. It has beautiful, well-written musical that fits the scenes perfectly, with rousing fast-paced melodies and the heart wrenching main theme, that still makes me cry. Even when people hum it. And it has my favorite actor, Michael J. Fox.

Based on a book, this is the story of three house pets, an intelligent, overly-trusting and considerably paternal lab by the name of Shadow, a witty and vain - but still smart - cat with a fear of water named Sassy and a street-smart ridiculously curious and slightly neurotic bulldog, Chance. The three are taken to a friend's farm when their family goes away. Dismayed and worried, the pets break out and plan a trip across the Sierra mountains for the trip of their lives. A truly incredible journey. So what, maybe home IS just over that mountain. But what if it isn't?

I suggest Homeward Bound for people that like the three amazing actors providing the voices for the lead animal characters, and for anyone else that ... yeah, everyone go watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 301 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Modern]] [[viewers]] know this [[little]] [[film]] [[primarily]] as the model for the remake, "The Money Pit." [[Older]] viewers today watch it with wisps of nostalgia: Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, and Melvyn Douglas were all "superstars" in an easier, less complicated era. Or was it? Time, of course, has a way of [[modifying]] perspectives, and with so [[many]] films [[today]] verily ulcerating with social and political [[commentary]], there is a natural [[curiosity]] to wonder about controversy in older, [[seemingly]] [[less]] provocative films. In "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House," there may, therefore, be more than what audiences were looking for in 1948. There is political commentary, however subtle. Finding a house in the late 40s was a truly exasperating experience, only [[lightly]] [[softened]] by the coming of Levittowns and the like. [[Politics]] in the movie? The Blandings children always seem to be talking about progressive ideas being taught to them in school (which in real life would get teachers accused of communism). In real life, too, Myrna [[Loy]] was a housing activist, a Democrat, and a feminist. Melvyn Douglas was no less a Democratic firebrand: he was married to congresswoman [[Helen]] Gahagan Douglas, whom young Richard Nixon accused of being soft on communism (and which ruined her). Jason Robards, sr., has a [[small]] role in the film, but his political activism was no less noticeable. More importantly, his [[son]], Jason Robards, jr., would be for many years a very active liberal Democrat. Almost the [[odd]] [[fellow]] out was Cary Grant, whose [[strident]] conservatism [[reflected]] a majority [[political]] sentiment in Hollywood that was already slipping. But this was 1948: [[Communism]] was a real perceived [[threat]] and the blacklist was just [[around]] the [[corner]]. It [[would]] be another decade before [[political]] activism would reappear in mainstream films, and then not so subtly. [[Fashionable]] [[listeners]] know this [[petite]] [[cinematography]] [[basically]] as the model for the remake, "The Money Pit." [[Oldest]] viewers today watch it with wisps of nostalgia: Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, and Melvyn Douglas were all "superstars" in an easier, less complicated era. Or was it? Time, of course, has a way of [[changed]] perspectives, and with so [[multiple]] films [[yesterday]] verily ulcerating with social and political [[comments]], there is a natural [[nosey]] to wonder about controversy in older, [[ostensibly]] [[lowest]] provocative films. In "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House," there may, therefore, be more than what audiences were looking for in 1948. There is political commentary, however subtle. Finding a house in the late 40s was a truly exasperating experience, only [[casually]] [[soothed]] by the coming of Levittowns and the like. [[Politician]] in the movie? The Blandings children always seem to be talking about progressive ideas being taught to them in school (which in real life would get teachers accused of communism). In real life, too, Myrna [[Lui]] was a housing activist, a Democrat, and a feminist. Melvyn Douglas was no less a Democratic firebrand: he was married to congresswoman [[Helene]] Gahagan Douglas, whom young Richard Nixon accused of being soft on communism (and which ruined her). Jason Robards, sr., has a [[petite]] role in the film, but his political activism was no less noticeable. More importantly, his [[sons]], Jason Robards, jr., would be for many years a very active liberal Democrat. Almost the [[bizarre]] [[colleagues]] out was Cary Grant, whose [[shrill]] conservatism [[manifested]] a majority [[politician]] sentiment in Hollywood that was already slipping. But this was 1948: [[Communists]] was a real perceived [[hazard]] and the blacklist was just [[roundabout]] the [[nook]]. It [[ought]] be another decade before [[politician]] activism would reappear in mainstream films, and then not so subtly. --------------------------------------------- Result 302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst films i have ever seen. The events in it are completely random and make little or no sense. The fact that there is a sequel is so sickening i may come down with a case of cabin fever (I'M SO SORRY). I describe it as bug being smooshed to a newspaper because it seems to be different parts of things mixed together. e.g Kevin the pancake loving karate kid is just freakishly weird on its own, then there's the cop who is slightly weird and perverted, then the drug addict, then there's the fact that they attack some random guy who clearly needs help. then all of a sudden the main character is having sex with his friends girlfriend just because she says something stupid about a plane going down. then at the end some good old family racism followed by a rabbit operating on Kevin the karate kid. Its actually pretty despicable that they can use racism as a joke in this film. There is no reason for anyone to enjoy this film unless you love Eli Roth, even that did not make me like this film. Hate is a strong word but seeing as it is the only word i am permitted to use it will have to do. BOYCOTT CABIN FEVER 2!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] The full title of this film is 'May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows you're dead', a rewording of the old Irish toast 'May you have food and raiment, a soft pillow for your head; may you be 40 years in heaven, before the devil knows you're dead.' First [[time]] screenwriter Kelly Masterson (with some modifications by director [[Sidney]] Lumet) has concocted a melodrama that [[explores]] just how fragmented a family can become when external forces drive the members to [[unthinkable]] extremes. In this film the viewer is allowed to witness the gradual but nearly complete [[implosion]] of a family by a much used but, here, very [[sensible]] manipulation of the flashback/flash forward technique of storytelling. By repeatedly offering the differing vantages of each of the characters about the central incidents that drive this [[rather]] [[harrowing]] tale, we see all the [[motivations]] of the [[players]] in this [[case]] of a robbery [[gone]] very wrong.

Andy Hanson ([[Philip]] Seymour [[Hoffman]]) is a wealthy [[executive]], married to an [[emotionally]] [[needy]] Gina (Marisa Tomei), and addicted to an [[expensive]] [[drug]] habit. His [[life]] is [[beginning]] to [[crumble]] and he [[needs]] money. Andy's ne're-do well [[younger]] brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is a life in [[ruins]] - he is divorced from his shrewish wife [[Martha]] (Amy Ryan), is behind in alimony and child [[support]], and has [[borrowed]] all he can from his [[friends]], and he [[needs]] money. [[Andy]] [[proposes]] a low-key [[robbery]] of a [[small]] [[Mall]] mom-and-pop [[jewelry]] [[store]] that [[promises]] [[safe]], [[quick]] [[cash]] for both. The glitch is that the [[jewelry]] story belongs to the men's [[parents]] - [[Charles]] ([[Albert]] Finney) and Nanette (Rosemary Harris). Andy [[advances]] Hank some [[cash]] and wrangles an [[agreement]] that Hank will do the actual [[robbery]], but [[though]] Hank agrees to the 'fail-safe' [[plan]], he [[hires]] a [[friend]] to take on the actual [[job]] while Hank plans to be the [[driver]] of the [[getaway]] [[car]]. The [[robbery]] is [[horribly]] [[botched]] when Nanette, filing in for the [[regular]] [[clerk]], [[shoots]] the robber and is herself shot in the mess. The [[disaster]] [[unveils]] [[many]] [[secrets]] about the [[fragile]] [[relationships]] of the [[family]] and when Nanette [[dies]], [[Charles]] and [[Andy]] and Hank (and their respective [[partners]]) are [[driven]] to disastrous [[ends]] with [[surprises]] at [[every]] turn.

Each of the actors in this strong but emotionally acrid film gives superb performances, and while we have come to expect that from Hoffman, Hawke, Tomei, Finney, Ryan, and Harris, it is the wise hand of direction from Sidney Lumet that make this film so unforgettably powerful. It is not an [[easy]] film to watch, but it is a film that allows some bravura performances that demand our respect, a film that reminds us how fragile many families can be. Grady Harp The full title of this film is 'May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows you're dead', a rewording of the old Irish toast 'May you have food and raiment, a soft pillow for your head; may you be 40 years in heaven, before the devil knows you're dead.' First [[period]] screenwriter Kelly Masterson (with some modifications by director [[Sydney]] Lumet) has concocted a melodrama that [[investigate]] just how fragmented a family can become when external forces drive the members to [[incomprehensible]] extremes. In this film the viewer is allowed to witness the gradual but nearly complete [[debacle]] of a family by a much used but, here, very [[judicious]] manipulation of the flashback/flash forward technique of storytelling. By repeatedly offering the differing vantages of each of the characters about the central incidents that drive this [[fairly]] [[horrifying]] tale, we see all the [[motivation]] of the [[actors]] in this [[example]] of a robbery [[faded]] very wrong.

Andy Hanson ([[Felipe]] Seymour [[Hoffmann]]) is a wealthy [[management]], married to an [[excitedly]] [[poverty]] Gina (Marisa Tomei), and addicted to an [[pricey]] [[medication]] habit. His [[living]] is [[commencing]] to [[flop]] and he [[should]] money. Andy's ne're-do well [[youngest]] brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is a life in [[wreck]] - he is divorced from his shrewish wife [[Marta]] (Amy Ryan), is behind in alimony and child [[assistance]], and has [[loaned]] all he can from his [[freund]], and he [[required]] money. [[Andi]] [[proposed]] a low-key [[stealing]] of a [[minimal]] [[Supermarket]] mom-and-pop [[jewellery]] [[stores]] that [[pledged]] [[secure]], [[fast]] [[money]] for both. The glitch is that the [[jewellery]] story belongs to the men's [[parent]] - [[Karel]] ([[Hugh]] Finney) and Nanette (Rosemary Harris). Andy [[advance]] Hank some [[money]] and wrangles an [[contract]] that Hank will do the actual [[stickup]], but [[despite]] Hank agrees to the 'fail-safe' [[programmes]], he [[recruiting]] a [[boyfriend]] to take on the actual [[labour]] while Hank plans to be the [[drivers]] of the [[runoff]] [[vehicle]]. The [[stickup]] is [[awfully]] [[bungled]] when Nanette, filing in for the [[periodic]] [[clerks]], [[twigs]] the robber and is herself shot in the mess. The [[cataclysm]] [[divulge]] [[countless]] [[secrecy]] about the [[flimsy]] [[relationship]] of the [[families]] and when Nanette [[dying]], [[Karel]] and [[Indie]] and Hank (and their respective [[partner]]) are [[stimulated]] to disastrous [[end]] with [[stuns]] at [[any]] turn.

Each of the actors in this strong but emotionally acrid film gives superb performances, and while we have come to expect that from Hoffman, Hawke, Tomei, Finney, Ryan, and Harris, it is the wise hand of direction from Sidney Lumet that make this film so unforgettably powerful. It is not an [[easier]] film to watch, but it is a film that allows some bravura performances that demand our respect, a film that reminds us how fragile many families can be. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 304 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Almost 30 [[years]] [[later]] I recall this original PBS film as [[almost]] unbearably tender. Periodically, I check here at IMDb hoping that someone has had the good sense to purchase the rights and put it on a DVD. It's September of 2004, and I keep hoping -- deep sigh.

One of the two lead actors went on to a small career primarily in a prime-time evening soap; the other, Frances Lee McCain, was seen in small roles here and there for a few years. But nothing they did before or after ever [[matched]] this little movie which was produced, as I recall it, on a short-lived PBS series which showcased original screenplays by new and up-and-coming playwrights.

I watched it every time it was shown on PBS, maybe 2 or 3 times. That was before the era of VCRs, so I have no record of it, except in my mind's eye.

12/31/2006 addition to above: Happy New Year, ladies! This [[wonderful]] [[film]] is finally available on DVD at ladyslipper.org. My understanding is that the DVDs are burned from the writer's own personal copy. Almost 30 [[olds]] [[then]] I recall this original PBS film as [[roughly]] unbearably tender. Periodically, I check here at IMDb hoping that someone has had the good sense to purchase the rights and put it on a DVD. It's September of 2004, and I keep hoping -- deep sigh.

One of the two lead actors went on to a small career primarily in a prime-time evening soap; the other, Frances Lee McCain, was seen in small roles here and there for a few years. But nothing they did before or after ever [[confronted]] this little movie which was produced, as I recall it, on a short-lived PBS series which showcased original screenplays by new and up-and-coming playwrights.

I watched it every time it was shown on PBS, maybe 2 or 3 times. That was before the era of VCRs, so I have no record of it, except in my mind's eye.

12/31/2006 addition to above: Happy New Year, ladies! This [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] is finally available on DVD at ladyslipper.org. My understanding is that the DVDs are burned from the writer's own personal copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I [[saw]] this piece of [[garbage]] on AMC last night, and wonder how it [[could]] be [[considered]] in any [[way]] an American Movie Classic. It was awful in every way. How badly did Jack Lemmon, James Stewart and the rest of the cast need cash that they would even [[consider]] doing this [[movie]]? I [[noticed]] this piece of [[trash]] on AMC last night, and wonder how it [[wo]] be [[deemed]] in any [[camino]] an American Movie Classic. It was awful in every way. How badly did Jack Lemmon, James Stewart and the rest of the cast need cash that they would even [[contemplating]] doing this [[filmmaking]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 306 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] This is [[full]] of major [[spoilers]], so beware.

"[[Prix]] [[de]] Beaute" [[always]] suffers in comparison to the two [[films]] [[Louise]] [[Brooks]] made with G. W. Pabst, "Pandora's Box" and "Diary of a Lost Girl," but in some [[ways]], "Prix" is the quintessential [[Brooks]] [[film]]. Here she has a chance to be [[charming]] without the [[dark]] side of her Pabst [[collaboration]]. What "Prix" has that the Pabst [[films]] don't is music. [[In]] this early French [[film]], the [[whole]] Louise Brooks mystique is fleshed out [[powerfully]] with a [[conjunction]] of [[image]], song and music. The Charleston is what [[seems]] most associated with [[Brooks]] (she was the first to [[dance]] it in [[Europe]]), but the essence of the actress comes across more [[strongly]] in the tango. The tango [[also]] plays a plot point in "[[Prix]]," being the music she danced with on her short [[rise]] to [[stardom]] after becoming Miss Europe. [[Later]], when she has [[forsaken]] her fame in favor of a mundane existence as the wife of [[jealous]] husband Andre, the [[longing]] for her forsaken fame [[becomes]] [[apparent]] when the same tango record is [[seen]] on her [[apartment]] record [[player]]. [[So]] appropriate is the tango to Brooks it is used to [[accompany]] the [[documentary]] about her [[life]], "Looking for Lulu," a [[film]] narrated by [[Shirley]] [[Maclaine]]. The [[brazen]] and [[forceful]] quality of the tango epitomizes [[Louise]] Brooks' strong-headed but [[elegant]] and erotic [[individuality]].

The [[song]], "Je n'ai qu'un amour, c'est toi," [[adds]] an [[immense]] [[amount]] of [[pathos]] to what is not a [[great]] [[film]] (but a very good one). By the way, Brooks' [[voice]] was not [[dubbed]] for the [[film]] by Edith Piaf as some have [[claimed]]. Piaf was born in 1915, and wasn't [[discovered]] until 1935. The song, [[however]], is what Brooks' [[character]], Lucienne, [[sings]] to Andre at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]] to cheer him up and express her deep affection for him. And at the climax it is the song she [[sings]] for her screen [[test]], which she [[views]] with the [[producers]] and [[managers]] who [[intend]] to shape her [[career]]. It [[continues]] on screen after husband [[Andre]], who has followed her to the screening [[room]], [[shoots]] and [[kills]] her. [[In]] a [[single]] shot, with Lucinenne's dead body in repose at the bottom of the screen while her screen test continues above with the song she once sang to Andre, the essence of what movies do that other art forms do not is perfectly characterized. As Andre watches his now dead wife sing to him on screen, the murder weapon still smoking, he subtly smiles. She is now his forever, and by association, ours.

Coincidentally, Louise Brooks real life career crashed and burned after "Prix de Beaute," so it was also the death of her final starring roll as well. This film really seals the Brooks mystique more so than the Pabst films (which are superior films, no doubt). It also points out what it is about the movies that create the whole idea of the "cult" of the movies - where people like Brooks, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe live on more intensely after their death than when they were alive. This is [[fullest]] of major [[troublemakers]], so beware.

"[[Awards]] [[of]] Beaute" [[steadily]] suffers in comparison to the two [[kino]] [[Luiz]] [[Creek]] made with G. W. Pabst, "Pandora's Box" and "Diary of a Lost Girl," but in some [[methods]], "Prix" is the quintessential [[Creek]] [[kino]]. Here she has a chance to be [[enchanting]] without the [[dusky]] side of her Pabst [[collaborate]]. What "Prix" has that the Pabst [[cinematography]] don't is music. [[Onto]] this early French [[movie]], the [[entire]] Louise Brooks mystique is fleshed out [[fervently]] with a [[collaborate]] of [[photo]], song and music. The Charleston is what [[looks]] most associated with [[Creek]] (she was the first to [[choreography]] it in [[Eu]]), but the essence of the actress comes across more [[harshly]] in the tango. The tango [[further]] plays a plot point in "[[Prize]]," being the music she danced with on her short [[surge]] to [[glory]] after becoming Miss Europe. [[Subsequently]], when she has [[forsworn]] her fame in favor of a mundane existence as the wife of [[jealousy]] husband Andre, the [[yearning]] for her forsaken fame [[becoming]] [[obvious]] when the same tango record is [[noticed]] on her [[condo]] record [[protagonist]]. [[Accordingly]] appropriate is the tango to Brooks it is used to [[escort]] the [[literature]] about her [[vie]], "Looking for Lulu," a [[movie]] narrated by [[Sylvie]] [[Mclean]]. The [[cocky]] and [[powerful]] quality of the tango epitomizes [[Louie]] Brooks' strong-headed but [[stylish]] and erotic [[peculiarity]].

The [[chanson]], "Je n'ai qu'un amour, c'est toi," [[adding]] an [[gargantuan]] [[sums]] of [[ducks]] to what is not a [[remarkable]] [[kino]] (but a very good one). By the way, Brooks' [[vocal]] was not [[nicknamed]] for the [[cinematography]] by Edith Piaf as some have [[asserted]]. Piaf was born in 1915, and wasn't [[detected]] until 1935. The song, [[instead]], is what Brooks' [[nature]], Lucienne, [[sing]] to Andre at the [[startup]] of the [[cinematography]] to cheer him up and express her deep affection for him. And at the climax it is the song she [[sung]] for her screen [[tests]], which she [[opinions]] with the [[manufacturer]] and [[directors]] who [[aimed]] to shape her [[quarries]]. It [[continued]] on screen after husband [[Andrej]], who has followed her to the screening [[rooms]], [[canes]] and [[killed]] her. [[Among]] a [[lonely]] shot, with Lucinenne's dead body in repose at the bottom of the screen while her screen test continues above with the song she once sang to Andre, the essence of what movies do that other art forms do not is perfectly characterized. As Andre watches his now dead wife sing to him on screen, the murder weapon still smoking, he subtly smiles. She is now his forever, and by association, ours.

Coincidentally, Louise Brooks real life career crashed and burned after "Prix de Beaute," so it was also the death of her final starring roll as well. This film really seals the Brooks mystique more so than the Pabst films (which are superior films, no doubt). It also points out what it is about the movies that create the whole idea of the "cult" of the movies - where people like Brooks, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe live on more intensely after their death than when they were alive. --------------------------------------------- Result 307 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The year is 1964. Ernesto "Che" Guevara, having been a Cuban citizen for the last five years,disappears from the face of the Earth,leaving a glum Fidel Castro to announce that he is probably dead,when in truth, he has left Cuba to move to Bolivia to live an assumed identity. Whilst living in La Paz,Guevara undertakes an idea to overthrow the corrupt,bourgeois government there. Once again,Steven Soderberg takes up where 'Che:Part One' leaves off (only better this time). The pacing is more on target,the job of acting is ever so fine (including a turn by a sickly looking Benecio Del Toro,as Che Guevara). Suffice it to say,it's probably best if you see both films,to get the true story of Guevara & what kind of a man he was (I had the rare open window of opportunity to see both films at one screening----talk about a long haul!). As with 'Che-Part 1:The Argentine',this film has no MPAA rating, but contains enough salty language & violence to easily snag it an 'R'. --------------------------------------------- Result 308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I think I should [[start]] this in saying that nearly any style of work can be [[entertaining]] in parts. The [[true]] [[test]] is whether it is good from start to finish, which is the reason I [[gave]] the analogical title for this review. Most of us would agree--even those like me, who enjoy reading many blogs--that blogs can't compare with good novel writing for a number of reasons. Likewise, FEM can't compare with [[good]] film making for a number of reasons, and I actually believe it's a poor [[example]] of [[independent]] filmography. From [[start]] to [[finish]], FEM feels like a pieced together vlog. (Heck, [[even]] MySpace [[gets]] some [[pimping]].) [[If]] I [[wanted]] to [[see]] an [[hour]] of lonelygirl15--I don't--I'd go watch it. FEM, while [[certainly]] grittier than the bubble [[gum]] atmosphere of the aforementioned [[media]], is so personal that it is without an interesting [[story]]. It's like watching the mundaneness of [[life]], which I [[think]] most [[would]] agree is very [[naturally]] boring. And yet the creators of FEM [[want]] us to applaud it, their very postmodern [[film]] about making a [[film]]. Cue my [[yawn]].

Ultimately, I [[come]] away not [[caring]] the [[least]] bit about any of it. I'm [[shocked]] that I'm [[actually]] interested in [[taking]] [[time]] out to [[write]] this [[review]], even. It's not that FEM is [[downright]] [[bad]], because it isn't; it has a few [[moments]] where I [[crack]] a [[smile]] or [[think]] that maybe--just maybe--something of interest is about to [[happen]]. It's rather that it's just downright...mediocre. I feel so [[indifferent]] about it that it's [[almost]] [[fitting]] of an oxymoron: passionate indifference.

I [[hope]] the creators/"[[actors]]" in the [[film]] [[get]] out of debt from their [[efforts]]. They'll [[probably]] [[need]] it for when one of them [[moves]] out and moves on with [[life]].

[[See]] this [[movie]] if you've got [[time]] to waste and [[nothing]] much you want to do; otherwise, pass it by, and don't [[worry]] that you've missed some [[great]], [[undiscovered]] talent. You really haven't. I think I should [[lancer]] this in saying that nearly any style of work can be [[entertain]] in parts. The [[veritable]] [[essays]] is whether it is good from start to finish, which is the reason I [[yielded]] the analogical title for this review. Most of us would agree--even those like me, who enjoy reading many blogs--that blogs can't compare with good novel writing for a number of reasons. Likewise, FEM can't compare with [[buena]] film making for a number of reasons, and I actually believe it's a poor [[instances]] of [[autonomous]] filmography. From [[begin]] to [[conclude]], FEM feels like a pieced together vlog. (Heck, [[yet]] MySpace [[got]] some [[pandering]].) [[Unless]] I [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] an [[hora]] of lonelygirl15--I don't--I'd go watch it. FEM, while [[definitely]] grittier than the bubble [[eraser]] atmosphere of the aforementioned [[medium]], is so personal that it is without an interesting [[histories]]. It's like watching the mundaneness of [[iife]], which I [[reckon]] most [[ought]] agree is very [[evidently]] boring. And yet the creators of FEM [[wants]] us to applaud it, their very postmodern [[flick]] about making a [[filmmaking]]. Cue my [[yawns]].

Ultimately, I [[coming]] away not [[care]] the [[less]] bit about any of it. I'm [[surprised]] that I'm [[indeed]] interested in [[adopting]] [[period]] out to [[writing]] this [[examine]], even. It's not that FEM is [[absolutely]] [[unfavourable]], because it isn't; it has a few [[times]] where I [[crevasse]] a [[smiles]] or [[believe]] that maybe--just maybe--something of interest is about to [[occur]]. It's rather that it's just downright...mediocre. I feel so [[impassive]] about it that it's [[roughly]] [[montage]] of an oxymoron: passionate indifference.

I [[hopes]] the creators/"[[protagonists]]" in the [[filmmaking]] [[obtains]] out of debt from their [[initiatives]]. They'll [[certainly]] [[gotta]] it for when one of them [[shift]] out and moves on with [[lives]].

[[Behold]] this [[flick]] if you've got [[moment]] to waste and [[anything]] much you want to do; otherwise, pass it by, and don't [[anxiety]] that you've missed some [[sublime]], [[unfamiliar]] talent. You really haven't. --------------------------------------------- Result 309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Leave it to geniuses like Ventura Pons, the Spanish director, to convince the higher ups in his country to subsidize this misguided attempt of a film. The sad state of the film industry in that country is a product of trying to make a film out of such thin material. Most of the pictures that are made in Spain fall under two categories: those about the Spanish Civil War, that love to present past history as the writers deem fit. The other type of films show the viewer with a lot of gratuitous sex because the 'creators' don't have anything interest to say.

As the film opens we get to watch Pere's penis as he attempts to cut it off and place it in one of the platters at a party. Later on, Sandra will show all she has been given for the audience to admire. The story of Pere's attraction to Sandra, a married woman that seems to be happily married, is false from the start.

Our only interest in watching the film centered on an earlier, better made picture by Mr. Pons, "Amic/Amat", but alas, it has nothing to do with the mess we are punished to watch in this venture. As far as the comments submitted in IMDb, all the negative votes come from Spanish viewers, which speaks volumes coming from them! --------------------------------------------- Result 310 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I was so [[eager]] to see this one of my favorite [[TV]] [[shows]].I [[saw]] Universal [[trademark]] followed with a [[newly]] [[acquainted]] title and [[theme]] song which still impress me.[[Computer]] animation on some [[scenery]] [[like]] a solid title [[name]]"The Jetsons" or a dimension [[view]] of a [[spaceship]] [[approaching]] an [[amusement]] [[park]] and more [[made]] this version [[splendid]] and [[fantastic]].Shortly after that till the [[end]]...I couldn't [[believe]] my eyes!!!!How lucky I was that I could [[forget]] all I had seen.Just [[songs]] by Tiffany and its theme song in new arrangement were in my head.Anyway,I wish to see this space-aged family (also The Flintstones and Yogi Bear) in all graphic computer design as Toy story or Bug's life.The best style for Hanna-Barbera's in my opinion. I was so [[enthusiastic]] to see this one of my favorite [[TVS]] [[show]].I [[watched]] Universal [[trademarks]] followed with a [[recently]] [[abreast]] title and [[themes]] song which still impress me.[[Computers]] animation on some [[panorama]] [[iike]] a solid title [[denomination]]"The Jetsons" or a dimension [[opinions]] of a [[starship]] [[approaches]] an [[entertainment]] [[playpen]] and more [[effected]] this version [[resplendent]] and [[sumptuous]].Shortly after that till the [[ceases]]...I couldn't [[reckon]] my eyes!!!!How lucky I was that I could [[overlook]] all I had seen.Just [[anthems]] by Tiffany and its theme song in new arrangement were in my head.Anyway,I wish to see this space-aged family (also The Flintstones and Yogi Bear) in all graphic computer design as Toy story or Bug's life.The best style for Hanna-Barbera's in my opinion. --------------------------------------------- Result 311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[first]] Cruel [[Intentions]], the [[original]], is my [[favorite]] [[movie]] of all [[time]]. It was an [[absolute]] masterpiece. [[So]] how on [[earth]] [[could]] they [[make]] a sequel so [[downright]] [[bad]]. Sarah Michelle Gellar was perfect in the first movie. In this one, Amy Adams sucks. She is terrible. And couldn't they have found a chick who actually looked like Sarah Michelle Gellar? At least the same hair color!!! i mean come on. Robin Dunn isn't as bad as Adams, but he is absolutely terrible when compared to Ryan [[Phillipe]]. The Sebastian in the first film is devious, deceitful, and much more evil than the Sebastian in the prequel. And what is up with the story line. It basically goes like this...

1- Sebastian has a bad rep at his first school, so the movie says, although it mentions nothing about him and his dating life, and how he has been with girls 2- Sebastian moves to New York, and just suddenly decides he's going to turn himself around. He "falls in love" with Danielle (might i remind you that in the original, Sarah Michelle giller says quote "you broke up with THE FIRST PERSON you ever loved because i said to- so how can he have been in love in the prequel???). And he's all nice and charming, and all "good person", as he turns down sex from the chick his dad was doing.

3- He does a complete 180, and ends up in a threesome at the end of the movie, and then seducing Cherry.

I mean, its terrible. And i loved the [[first]] one so much. I haven't even seen the third one yet. I hope to god its better than this prequel. The [[fiirst]] Cruel [[Intents]], the [[initial]], is my [[preferable]] [[filmmaking]] of all [[times]]. It was an [[unmitigated]] masterpiece. [[Therefore]] how on [[terrestrial]] [[did]] they [[deliver]] a sequel so [[fully]] [[unfavourable]]. Sarah Michelle Gellar was perfect in the first movie. In this one, Amy Adams sucks. She is terrible. And couldn't they have found a chick who actually looked like Sarah Michelle Gellar? At least the same hair color!!! i mean come on. Robin Dunn isn't as bad as Adams, but he is absolutely terrible when compared to Ryan [[Phillippe]]. The Sebastian in the first film is devious, deceitful, and much more evil than the Sebastian in the prequel. And what is up with the story line. It basically goes like this...

1- Sebastian has a bad rep at his first school, so the movie says, although it mentions nothing about him and his dating life, and how he has been with girls 2- Sebastian moves to New York, and just suddenly decides he's going to turn himself around. He "falls in love" with Danielle (might i remind you that in the original, Sarah Michelle giller says quote "you broke up with THE FIRST PERSON you ever loved because i said to- so how can he have been in love in the prequel???). And he's all nice and charming, and all "good person", as he turns down sex from the chick his dad was doing.

3- He does a complete 180, and ends up in a threesome at the end of the movie, and then seducing Cherry.

I mean, its terrible. And i loved the [[fiirst]] one so much. I haven't even seen the third one yet. I hope to god its better than this prequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] American film makers decided to make a film they think is Japanese. The characters all badly represented, the actors are not even Japanese and the set is cheap, unreal and definitely doesn't represent Kyoto in Early 20ties and 30ties. Who ever read the book understand that the script writers didn't add any extra value to differentiate the movie from the script. Worse, they even changed the original plot line with a few goofs. Rob Marshall is using for his two main characters two well known Chinese actors who joined before in crouching tiger hidden dragon. Marshall probably saw one Chinese movie and tho they represent Japanese culture. Seeing those two actors together again even makes the movies more ridiculous. Quentine Tarantino's last scene in Kill Bill #1 is ten times more Japanese made than that of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Joe Don's [[opening]] line [[says]] everything about this [[movie]]. It takes place on the [[island]] of [[Malta]] (the [[island]] of [[pathetic]] [[men]]) and involves [[Joe]] Don Baker [[tracking]] down an Italian mobster. Joe Don's character is named Geronimo (pronounced Heronimo) and all he does in this movie is shoot people and get [[arrested]] over and over agin. Everyone in the movie [[hates]] him, just like [[everyone]] hates Greydon Clark. I [[liked]] an [[earlier]] Greydon picture, "Angel's Revenge" because it was a shirne for thriteen [[year]] old boys. [[Avoid]] this [[movie]] at all [[costs]]!! Joe Don's [[opens]] line [[say]] everything about this [[movies]]. It takes place on the [[isola]] of [[Maltese]] (the [[isola]] of [[unlucky]] [[man]]) and involves [[Evel]] Don Baker [[tracks]] down an Italian mobster. Joe Don's character is named Geronimo (pronounced Heronimo) and all he does in this movie is shoot people and get [[apprehended]] over and over agin. Everyone in the movie [[abhors]] him, just like [[everybody]] hates Greydon Clark. I [[wished]] an [[formerly]] Greydon picture, "Angel's Revenge" because it was a shirne for thriteen [[annum]] old boys. [[Shirk]] this [[filmmaking]] at all [[charges]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the first movie I ever saw Ashley Judd in and the first film of Victor Nunez' that I ever say, and boy am I glad I did. Its' quiet tone, its' relaxed pace, its' realistic depiction of a young woman just starting out in life, its' fine depiction of the struggles she has to go through to make her mark in life, the decisions she makes based on real things, the people she meets - there is nothing wrong with this movie. It is as close to movie magic as I have ever seen outside of the " Star Wars " movies, and, given what those films are like, that means this film deserves a high rating indeed. Ashley Judds' acting, Mr. Nunez'writing, and its' great simple worthwhile story make this a fine coming-of-age story and a wonderful movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I [[saw]] the [[movie]] with two grown [[children]]. [[Although]] it was not as [[clever]] as Shrek, I [[thought]] it was [[rather]] good. [[In]] a [[movie]] [[theatre]] surrounded by [[children]] who were on [[spring]] break, there was not a sound so I know the [[children]] all liked it. There parents also [[seemed]] [[engaged]]. The [[death]] and [[apparent]] [[death]] of characters [[brought]] about the [[appropriate]] gasps and comments. Hopefully people [[realize]] this [[movie]] was [[made]] for [[kids]]. As such, it was successful although I liked it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!! I [[noticed]] the [[kino]] with two grown [[kiddies]]. [[Nonetheless]] it was not as [[skilful]] as Shrek, I [[brainchild]] it was [[somewhat]] good. [[Throughout]] a [[flick]] [[theaters]] surrounded by [[kids]] who were on [[printemps]] break, there was not a sound so I know the [[kids]] all liked it. There parents also [[appeared]] [[incurred]]. The [[mortality]] and [[obvious]] [[decease]] of characters [[lodged]] about the [[proper]] gasps and comments. Hopefully people [[realise]] this [[film]] was [[introduced]] for [[brats]]. As such, it was successful although I liked it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!! --------------------------------------------- Result 316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] After being hugely entertained by [[Mr]]. Brosnan's performance as a cad in "The Tailor of Panama" (which I rate 10/10 across the board: casting, acting, script, story, editing, pace, music, emotional impact, etc.), I enthusiastically [[anticipated]] this film. I was [[hugely]] [[disappointed]]. It is a script reading not a [[film]], [[vulgar]] for the sake of being vulgar, bankrupt in every way that "The Tailor of Panama" is [[rich]] and [[satisfying]]. [[Blame]] it on the screen writing and directing. I sat in the [[theater]] waiting for the "[[good]] part;" it never [[came]]. I [[neither]] [[laughed]] nor cried, although one line of dialog did make me smile. Worth $7? [[Hardly]]. After being hugely entertained by [[Olli]]. Brosnan's performance as a cad in "The Tailor of Panama" (which I rate 10/10 across the board: casting, acting, script, story, editing, pace, music, emotional impact, etc.), I enthusiastically [[anticipate]] this film. I was [[remarkably]] [[disappoint]]. It is a script reading not a [[filmmaking]], [[trashy]] for the sake of being vulgar, bankrupt in every way that "The Tailor of Panama" is [[rika]] and [[agreeable]]. [[Culpability]] it on the screen writing and directing. I sat in the [[theaters]] waiting for the "[[well]] part;" it never [[became]]. I [[or]] [[giggled]] nor cried, although one line of dialog did make me smile. Worth $7? [[Practically]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a pleasant film, even if the premise is silly. It was sort of a guilty pleasure to watch. Meg Ryan seems to be able to pull off roles in this kind of film (another example is Joe vs. the Volcano). That's what makes her a star, in part. Walter Matthau, of course, had that ability, too, and he really puts himself into the role, making an amusing, good-hearted Einstein. I suppose you could say they're both good at portraying loveable characters, though loveable in different ways (loveable young women vs. loveable curmudgeon). --------------------------------------------- Result 318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Panic is a [[sneaky]] [[little]] gem of a film - you think you have it figured out by the first half hour only to realize, with [[great]] [[pleasure]], that Henry Bromell is a much better writer/[[director]] than that.

The film builds slowly, with one [[quietly]] [[devastating]] scene after another, all enacted [[perfectly]] by [[William]] H. Macy, Donald Sutherland, Neve Campbell, [[Tracey]] Ullman, [[John]] [[Ritter]], and the most [[remarkable]] child actor I've [[seen]] in a [[long]] [[time]], David Dorfman, as Macy's [[son]], who delivers his lines as if they're completely unscripted thoughts being created in his mind. [[Rich]] and [[rewarding]], this [[film]] will stay with you long after the credits have rolled. Panic is a [[duplicitous]] [[small]] gem of a film - you think you have it figured out by the first half hour only to realize, with [[excellent]] [[gladness]], that Henry Bromell is a much better writer/[[headmaster]] than that.

The film builds slowly, with one [[stealthily]] [[ravaging]] scene after another, all enacted [[entirely]] by [[Guillaume]] H. Macy, Donald Sutherland, Neve Campbell, [[Tracy]] Ullman, [[Jon]] [[Knight]], and the most [[wondrous]] child actor I've [[saw]] in a [[protracted]] [[moment]], David Dorfman, as Macy's [[yarns]], who delivers his lines as if they're completely unscripted thoughts being created in his mind. [[Rika]] and [[reward]], this [[movies]] will stay with you long after the credits have rolled. --------------------------------------------- Result 319 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] With the advent of the IMDb, this overlooked movie can now find an interested audience. Why? Because users here who do a search on two-time Academy Award winner Glenda Jackson can find 'The Return of The Soldier' among her credits. So can those checking out Oscar winner Julie Christie. Fans of Ann-Margret can give the title a click, as will those looking into the career of the great Alan Bates. Not to mention the added bonus of a movie with supporting heavyweights Ian Holm and Frank Finlay. Any movie with so many notables in it is rewarded by the IMDb, given all the cross-referencing that goes on here. So, why isn't this movie out on DVD? Don't the Producers realize the Internet Movie Database is a marketing gift for such a film? And 'The Return of The Soldier' is definitely a gem waiting to be discovered. Get with it, people. --------------------------------------------- Result 320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I wouldn't [[call]] "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" [[simply]] a kiddie version of "Jurassic Park". I found it more interesting than that. Like the [[former]], it [[calls]] into [[question]] the [[security]] of bringing [[beings]] from one era into ours. But it [[really]] [[opens]] my [[eyes]] when I see who provided the voices: [[John]] Goodman, Rhea Perlman, [[Jay]] Leno, [[Walter]] Cronkite, Julia Child, Kenneth Mars, Yeardley Smith, Martin Short and Larry King. To paraphrase that: a [[given]] actor, the "[[Cheers]]" woman, the "[[Tonight]] Show" host, the Most Trusted Name In News, a famous chef, the "Young Frankenstein" police chief, Lisa Simpson, one of the Three Amigos and the CNN guy.

But I guess that I shouldn't focus only on the cast. I thought that this movie had [[something]] for both children (purely fun) and adults (natural [[history]]). True, it's [[escapism]], but the [[perceptive]] [[kind]]. I would actually [[say]] that [[John]] Goodman doing Rex's [[voice]] here is sort of a [[precursor]] to his [[voice]] [[work]] in "Monsters [[Inc]]". Worth seeing. I wouldn't [[calling]] "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" [[merely]] a kiddie version of "Jurassic Park". I found it more interesting than that. Like the [[old]], it [[requests]] into [[issue]] the [[assurance]] of bringing [[humans]] from one era into ours. But it [[genuinely]] [[opened]] my [[eye]] when I see who provided the voices: [[Giovanni]] Goodman, Rhea Perlman, [[Jae]] Leno, [[Walters]] Cronkite, Julia Child, Kenneth Mars, Yeardley Smith, Martin Short and Larry King. To paraphrase that: a [[gave]] actor, the "[[Cheering]]" woman, the "[[Sunday]] Show" host, the Most Trusted Name In News, a famous chef, the "Young Frankenstein" police chief, Lisa Simpson, one of the Three Amigos and the CNN guy.

But I guess that I shouldn't focus only on the cast. I thought that this movie had [[anything]] for both children (purely fun) and adults (natural [[histories]]). True, it's [[escapist]], but the [[canny]] [[sorting]]. I would actually [[tell]] that [[Johannes]] Goodman doing Rex's [[vowel]] here is sort of a [[harbinger]] to his [[vocals]] [[jobs]] in "Monsters [[Serv]]". Worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 321 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This is the kind of movie that my enemies content I watch all the time, but it's not [[bloody]] [[true]]. I only watch it once in a while to make [[sure]] that it's as [[bad]] as I first thought it was.

Some [[kind]] of mobsters hijack a Boeing 747. (That, at least, is an improvement over having [[Boeing]] hijack a good part of the Pentagon.) The [[airplane]] goes down in the Bermuda [[triangle]] and sinks pressurized to the [[bottoms]], a kind of post-facto [[submarine]].

It has one of those all-star [[casts]], the stars either falling or [[barely]] above the horizon.

"We're on our own!", says pilot Jack [[Lemon]]. He is so right. Except for [[George]] Kennedy. He's in all these disaster movies.

Watch another movie [[instead]]. Oh, not "[[Airport]]" the original. That's no good [[either]]. Instead, watch a decent flick about stuck airplanes like "Flight of the Phoenix." This is the kind of movie that my enemies content I watch all the time, but it's not [[homicidal]] [[real]]. I only watch it once in a while to make [[persuaded]] that it's as [[unfavourable]] as I first thought it was.

Some [[types]] of mobsters hijack a Boeing 747. (That, at least, is an improvement over having [[Lockheed]] hijack a good part of the Pentagon.) The [[aviation]] goes down in the Bermuda [[triangular]] and sinks pressurized to the [[soles]], a kind of post-facto [[undersea]].

It has one of those all-star [[castings]], the stars either falling or [[hardly]] above the horizon.

"We're on our own!", says pilot Jack [[Citrus]]. He is so right. Except for [[Georgi]] Kennedy. He's in all these disaster movies.

Watch another movie [[conversely]]. Oh, not "[[Airfields]]" the original. That's no good [[nor]]. Instead, watch a decent flick about stuck airplanes like "Flight of the Phoenix." --------------------------------------------- Result 322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I saw this [[movie]] again as an [[assignment]] for my [[management]] [[class]]. [[Were]] to [[mainly]] [[comment]] on the [[different]] [[management]] [[styles]] and [[ideas]] on quality(of the [[product]]). I did [[rent]] this one back in the eighties and I [[remember]] it to be good(but not [[great]])[[movie]]. I've [[always]] liked [[Michael]] Keaton's [[style]] and delivery. He was a [[perfect]] fit for the [[movie]].

I am surprised to [[see]] some of the low [[ratings]] for this movie. I grant you [[yes]] it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle [[comedy]] [[rather]] than a all-out [[comedy]] [[farce]]. I also find some of those that [[felt]] this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.

Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.

Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it "it was the [[dealers]](meaning car dealer) problem".

Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called "The machine that changed the world" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a [[study]] of automakers during and before the time [[period]] that this movie [[covers]]. Parts are [[bit]] [[dry]] but I [[think]] you'll find that it backs up [[much]] the [[movie]] also. I saw this [[cinematography]] again as an [[allocation]] for my [[governance]] [[homeroom]]. [[Was]] to [[essentially]] [[observing]] on the [[distinct]] [[governance]] [[style]] and [[brainchild]] on quality(of the [[merchandise]]). I did [[rented]] this one back in the eighties and I [[remembering]] it to be good(but not [[resplendent]])[[kino]]. I've [[unceasingly]] liked [[Michele]] Keaton's [[styles]] and delivery. He was a [[perfected]] fit for the [[flick]].

I am surprised to [[behold]] some of the low [[rating]] for this movie. I grant you [[yep]] it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle [[comedian]] [[somewhat]] than a all-out [[parody]] [[mockery]]. I also find some of those that [[smelled]] this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.

Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.

Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it "it was the [[vendors]](meaning car dealer) problem".

Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called "The machine that changed the world" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a [[examine]] of automakers during and before the time [[deadline]] that this movie [[covering]]. Parts are [[bite]] [[desiccated]] but I [[thinks]] you'll find that it backs up [[very]] the [[cinema]] also. --------------------------------------------- Result 323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most amazing, spiritually uplifting movie about the restoration of the gospel. Far better than any other film, or movie made about the restoration thus far. If you haven't seen it, hop on a plane to Salt Lake and see it now. You won't regret it! You truly get a sense of what the first saints had to struggle through, putting complete and total faith in there prophet Joseph Smith. You finally get some sort of comprehension of the things the prophet had to fight through and the persecutions he and his people faced. If you have any questions about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-days Saints and our humble beginnings just watch this movie, it will make complete and total sense afterward. --------------------------------------------- Result 324 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was disgusting. Their should be a warning that some sadistic nasty writer is attempting to make a name for herself before being held hostage for an hour and a half watching garbage. What is garbage? The misuse of peoples time, the misuse of energy, and the waste of whatever type of educational system that taught her how to read and write. Talia you are a sick demented loser. Your psychiatrist needs to prescribe stronger medications for your problem.

The acting and plot gave me no choice but to fast forward through the middle of the garbage. I ended up at a scene that was uncalled for. If you want to learn how to shock people watch a Larry Clark movie. I lost all respect for the entire cast of this movie "no more support from me." How could actors or actresses sit on a set while such gross depictions of human behavior is manifested from the mind of a psycho? I feel sorry for all actors that took part in that scene. I think the devil now knows who the writer of this movie is; congratulations you won his attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I had known this movie was filmed in the exasperating and quease-inducing Dogme 95 style, I would never have rented it. Nevertheless, I took a dramamine for the seasickness and gave it a shot. I lasted a very, very, very long forty minutes before giving up. It's just boring, pretentious twaddle.

The last French movie I saw was "Romance" and it too was pretty dismal, but at least the camera was steady and not breathing down the necks of the characters all the time. I am baffled at the continuing popularity of Dogme 95 overseas -- it'll catch on in America about the same time as the next big outbreak of leprosy. (It's called Dogme 95 because that's the average number of times the actors are poked in the eye by the camera.)

--------------------------------------------- Result 326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was [[going]] to bed with my gf last night, and while she was brushing her teeth, I flipped [[channels]] until I [[came]] across this Chinese [[movie]] called the King of Masks. [[At]] [[first]] I thought it was [[going]] to be a Kung [[Fu]] [[movie]], so I started [[watching]] it, and then it [[immediately]] [[captured]] me in, and I had to finish it.

The [[little]] girl in the movie was absolutely adorble. She was such a [[great]] [[actor]] for being so [[little]]. Maybe the fact it was in Chinese, so the [[English]] was dubbed made it [[harder]] for me to [[tell]]...but she really seemed to be in [[character]] [[perfectly]]. I [[felt]] so [[bad]] for the [[girl]] as she [[kept]] [[trying]] to please her "[[boss]]" but everything just turned out [[rotten]]. lol. Even when she [[brings]] him another [[grandson]], just so he can pass on his [[art]]...it [[turns]] out that kid was [[kidnapped]], so he [[gets]] arrested and has 5 days to live. [[lol]]...whatever she touches in an [[effort]] to be [[nice]] to her grandpa, just backfires.

[[In]] the end, he [[sees]] how much [[love]] is in her and teaches her the art of masks...which is just so heartwarming after all the mishaps in the movie.

[[Definitely]] a gem, and [[totally]] [[original]].

Scott I was [[gonna]] to bed with my gf last night, and while she was brushing her teeth, I flipped [[canals]] until I [[became]] across this Chinese [[cinematic]] called the King of Masks. [[During]] [[fiirst]] I thought it was [[gonna]] to be a Kung [[Foo]] [[kino]], so I started [[staring]] it, and then it [[rightaway]] [[apprehended]] me in, and I had to finish it.

The [[petite]] girl in the movie was absolutely adorble. She was such a [[wondrous]] [[protagonist]] for being so [[petit]]. Maybe the fact it was in Chinese, so the [[Brits]] was dubbed made it [[tighter]] for me to [[telling]]...but she really seemed to be in [[traits]] [[altogether]]. I [[deemed]] so [[inclement]] for the [[chick]] as she [[retained]] [[tempting]] to please her "[[chef]]" but everything just turned out [[lousy]]. lol. Even when she [[bring]] him another [[granddaughter]], just so he can pass on his [[artistry]]...it [[revolves]] out that kid was [[abducted]], so he [[got]] arrested and has 5 days to live. [[jk]]...whatever she touches in an [[endeavor]] to be [[pleasurable]] to her grandpa, just backfires.

[[At]] the end, he [[believes]] how much [[loves]] is in her and teaches her the art of masks...which is just so heartwarming after all the mishaps in the movie.

[[Obviously]] a gem, and [[perfectly]] [[initial]].

Scott --------------------------------------------- Result 327 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Ulysses]] as a film should in no [[way]] be [[compared]] with the novel, for they are two [[entirely]] [[different]] [[entities]]. However, that being [[said]], the film [[still]] manages to [[maintain]] [[many]] of the [[elements]] that [[made]] the [[book]] [[work]], but [[since]] it is a [[visual]] [[medium]], it is more [[difficult]] to pull of stream-of-consciousness. I [[think]] this is the [[best]] [[film]] they could have made with the [[material]]... and this is from [[someone]] that [[routinely]] [[rants]] about [[films]] not being like their literary counterparts. I [[recommend]] the book, but the movie is [[still]] entertaining. [[Ulises]] as a film should in no [[manner]] be [[comparison]] with the novel, for they are two [[abundantly]] [[assorted]] [[organizations]]. However, that being [[say]], the film [[nonetheless]] manages to [[sustaining]] [[innumerable]] of the [[facets]] that [[accomplished]] the [[workbook]] [[jobs]], but [[because]] it is a [[optic]] [[average]], it is more [[cumbersome]] to pull of stream-of-consciousness. I [[believe]] this is the [[bestest]] [[cinema]] they could have made with the [[materials]]... and this is from [[somebody]] that [[systematically]] [[protesting]] about [[kino]] not being like their literary counterparts. I [[recommended]] the book, but the movie is [[yet]] entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And I absolutely adore Isabelle Blais!!! She was so cute in this movie, and far different from her role in "Quebec-Montreal" where she was more like a man-eater. I think she should have been nominated for a Jutra. I mean, Syvlie Moreau was good, but Isabelle was far superior, IMO. Pelletier has done fine work for his first time out, and I noticed he snuck in a couple of his buddies from Rock et Belles Oreilles, Guy A. LePage & Andre Ducharme. It was fun to see them in this, I didn't know they were going to appear.

I don't think I've seen a romantic comedy from Quebec that I didn't like, and this one is as good as any I've had the pleasure to see. And if you're in the states and wondering how you can get a copy of the DVD, www.archambault.ca delivered it to me in less than a week. --------------------------------------------- Result 329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is a real [[eye]] candy. A [[world]] made of floating [[islands]] and [[flying]] ancient cities. Huge monsters [[whose]] preferred method of attack is hurling cathedrals at their opponents... Who can resist that? An ancient prophecy, a bunch of underdog heroes and a cute princess in [[search]] of her hero... sounds familiar...? Yes we [[heard]] that song before. But You will [[forget]] that while looking at the [[spectacular]] scenery.

This movie is fun to watch while it lasts. But after [[leaving]] the cinema You'll be longing for a [[little]] bit more story.

What is behind the 30-years-circle? What [[drove]] the [[knight]] [[crazy]]? Who built all these [[fabulous]] monuments, castles and [[cities]]... and why are they [[falling]] [[apart]]? And apart from that one bunch of farmers, where are the people? [[Really]], this picture looks so intriguing, but it's no [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]. This is a real [[eyes]] candy. A [[monde]] made of floating [[archipelago]] and [[fly]] ancient cities. Huge monsters [[who]] preferred method of attack is hurling cathedrals at their opponents... Who can resist that? An ancient prophecy, a bunch of underdog heroes and a cute princess in [[browsing]] of her hero... sounds familiar...? Yes we [[audition]] that song before. But You will [[overlook]] that while looking at the [[wondrous]] scenery.

This movie is fun to watch while it lasts. But after [[abandoning]] the cinema You'll be longing for a [[petit]] bit more story.

What is behind the 30-years-circle? What [[steered]] the [[trooper]] [[lunatic]]? Who built all these [[impressive]] monuments, castles and [[towns]]... and why are they [[receding]] [[additionally]]? And apart from that one bunch of farmers, where are the people? [[Truthfully]], this picture looks so intriguing, but it's no [[God]] of the [[Piercings]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd [[growing]] up in school. [[If]] you [[liked]] this movie, then I would [[suggest]] you watch Valentine. I just found out [[today]] that the guy who played Marty(Simon) [[killed]] himself a little after the [[movie]] was [[released]] which is a shame since he did a good [[job]]. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when [[Carol]] [[tricks]] him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was [[changing]] in the showers, Carols popular [[friends]] snuck into the [[bathroom]] and got everything ready, camera, [[electric]] shock, [[pole]]. When [[Marty]] open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab [[Marty]] and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They [[picked]] him up, dunked his [[head]] in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like [[cocaine]] but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time. it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd [[widening]] up in school. [[Unless]] you [[loved]] this movie, then I would [[insinuate]] you watch Valentine. I just found out [[hoy]] that the guy who played Marty(Simon) [[murdering]] himself a little after the [[kino]] was [[publicized]] which is a shame since he did a good [[workplace]]. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when [[Carroll]] [[stratagems]] him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was [[modified]] in the showers, Carols popular [[homies]] snuck into the [[shitter]] and got everything ready, camera, [[electrical]] shock, [[totem]]. When [[Martyn]] open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab [[Martyn]] and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They [[opting]] him up, dunked his [[leiter]] in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like [[coca]] but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time. --------------------------------------------- Result 331 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of [[movie]] v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's [[focus]] on the [[movie]] and the message.

I have rated this [[movie]] 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 [[years]], and for a [[family]] movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.

I like pop/[[rock]] [[music]], i'm 45. I know of [[Britney]] [[Spears]] but never realised she [[actually]] sang [[Stronger]] until i read the [[credits]] and these [[reviews]]. I didn't [[recognise]] her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.

I watch [[movies]] to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the [[movie]] and does it [[entertain]] me.

I watched this movie for the [[message]]. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a [[whole]] other [[story]]) so [[watched]] with the message in mind, as that is an [[area]] of interest. The [[movie]] is light, bright and breezy, [[great]] for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.

This movie is a [[great]] family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal. I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of [[cinema]] v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's [[concentrations]] on the [[cinematographic]] and the message.

I have rated this [[flick]] 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 [[olds]], and for a [[families]] movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.

I like pop/[[boulder]] [[musica]], i'm 45. I know of [[Rihanna]] [[Spurs]] but never realised she [[indeed]] sang [[Bigger]] until i read the [[appropriations]] and these [[assessment]]. I didn't [[confess]] her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.

I watch [[movie]] to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the [[films]] and does it [[distract]] me.

I watched this movie for the [[messages]]. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a [[total]] other [[saga]]) so [[observed]] with the message in mind, as that is an [[zoning]] of interest. The [[cinematography]] is light, bright and breezy, [[huge]] for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.

This movie is a [[wondrous]] family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal. --------------------------------------------- Result 332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henry Fonda brilliantly captures what we have long believed Abraham Lincoln was like. It is a fooler. Through Fonda's performance we are led to believe (on the surface) that Abraham Lincoln was a country bumpkin. But, through his confrontation with the lynch mob and especially during the court proceedings, you can see that beneath the exterior posturings is a brilliant man who has a very good command of what is going on around him and how to influence the people around him.

In this movie Henry Fonda shows that he has a very good grasp of how to present humor. It is an aspect of him that has been lost over the years. When he is telling stories and jokes he has the timing down perfect. There is a sequence in the trial that had me laughing quite hard. He shows this gift again in The Lady Eve in 1940.

The ending by John Ford is absolutely brilliant with Henry Fonda going to the top of a hill and in the distance a tremendous storm symbolic of the Civil War. He goes forward into history. The movie is fiction but the insight into Lincoln is tremendous. Definitely worth seeing again. --------------------------------------------- Result 333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Hollow]] [[Man]] starts as [[brilliant]] but flawed [[scientist]] Dr. [[Sebastian]] Caine ([[Kevin]] [[Bacon]]) [[finally]] [[works]] out how to make [[things]] visible again after having been [[turned]] invisible by his own serum. They [[test]] the serum on an already invisible Gorilla & it [[works]] [[perfectly]], Caine & his team of assistant's [[celebrate]] but while he should report the breakthrough to his military backers Caine [[wants]] to be the first [[invisible]] [[human]]. He [[manages]] to [[persuade]] his team to [[help]] him & the procedure [[works]] well & Caine [[becomes]] invisible, however when they [[try]] to bring him back the [[serum]] fails & he [[remain]] invisible. The team desperately search for an antidote but [[nothing]] works, Caine slowly starts to lose his grip on reality as he realises what power he has but is unable to use it being trapped in a laboratory. But then again he's invisible right, he can do anything he wants...

Directed by Paul Verhoeven I rather [[liked]] Hollow Man. You know it's just after Christmas, I saw this a few hours ago on late night/early morning cable TV & worst of all I feel sick, not because of the film but because of the chocolates & fizzy pop I've had over the past week so I'll keep this one brief. The script by Andrew W. Marlowe has a decent pace about but it does drag a little during the middle & has a good central premise, it takes he basic idea that being invisible will make you insane just like in the original The Invisible Man (1933) film which Hollow Man obviously owes a fair bit. It manages to have a petty successful blend of horror, sci-fi & action & provide good entertainment value for 110 odd minutes. I thought the character's were OK, I thought some of the ideas in the film were good although I think it's generally known that Verhoeven doesn't deal in subtlety, the first thing he has the invisible Caine do is sexually molest one of his team & then when he gets into the outside world he has Caine rape a woman with the justification 'who's going to know' that Caine says to himself. Then of course there's the gore, he shows a rat being torn apart & that's just the opening scene after the credits, to be fair to him the violence is a bit more sparse this time around but still has a quite nasty & sadistic tone about it. Having said that I love horror/gore/exploitation films so Hollow Man [[delivers]] for me, it's just that it might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Director Verhoeven does a great job, or should that be the special effects boys make him look good. The special effects in Hollow Man really are spectacular & more-or-less flawless, their brilliant & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There's some good horror & action set-pieces here as well even if the climatic fight is a little over-the-top. I love the effect where Kevin Bacon disappears one layer at a time complete with veins, organs & bones on full show or when the reverse happens with the Gorilla. There's a few gory moments including a rat being eaten, someone is impaled on a spike & someone has their head busted open with blood splattering results.

With a staggering budget of about $95,000,000 Hollow Man is technically faultless, I can imagine the interviews on the DVD where some special effects boffin says they mapped Bacon's entire body out right down to he last vein which they actually did because you know everyone watching would notice if one of his veins were missing or in the wrong position wouldn't they? The acting was OK, Bacon made for a good mad scientist anti-hero type guy.

Hollow Man is one of hose big budget Hollwood extravaganzas where the effects & action take center stage over any sort of meaningful story or character's but to be brutally honest sometimes we all like that in a film, well I know I do. Good solid big budget entertainment with a slightly nastier & darker streak than the usual Hollywood product, definitely worth a watch. [[Empty]] [[Dawg]] starts as [[sparkly]] but flawed [[researchers]] Dr. [[Sebastien]] Caine ([[Kev]] [[Lard]]) [[ultimately]] [[cooperates]] out how to make [[items]] visible again after having been [[transformed]] invisible by his own serum. They [[testing]] the serum on an already invisible Gorilla & it [[cooperated]] [[absolutely]], Caine & his team of assistant's [[commemorates]] but while he should report the breakthrough to his military backers Caine [[wanting]] to be the first [[unseen]] [[mankind]]. He [[administered]] to [[convincing]] his team to [[assisting]] him & the procedure [[collaborating]] well & Caine [[becoming]] invisible, however when they [[endeavour]] to bring him back the [[sera]] fails & he [[stay]] invisible. The team desperately search for an antidote but [[anything]] works, Caine slowly starts to lose his grip on reality as he realises what power he has but is unable to use it being trapped in a laboratory. But then again he's invisible right, he can do anything he wants...

Directed by Paul Verhoeven I rather [[wished]] Hollow Man. You know it's just after Christmas, I saw this a few hours ago on late night/early morning cable TV & worst of all I feel sick, not because of the film but because of the chocolates & fizzy pop I've had over the past week so I'll keep this one brief. The script by Andrew W. Marlowe has a decent pace about but it does drag a little during the middle & has a good central premise, it takes he basic idea that being invisible will make you insane just like in the original The Invisible Man (1933) film which Hollow Man obviously owes a fair bit. It manages to have a petty successful blend of horror, sci-fi & action & provide good entertainment value for 110 odd minutes. I thought the character's were OK, I thought some of the ideas in the film were good although I think it's generally known that Verhoeven doesn't deal in subtlety, the first thing he has the invisible Caine do is sexually molest one of his team & then when he gets into the outside world he has Caine rape a woman with the justification 'who's going to know' that Caine says to himself. Then of course there's the gore, he shows a rat being torn apart & that's just the opening scene after the credits, to be fair to him the violence is a bit more sparse this time around but still has a quite nasty & sadistic tone about it. Having said that I love horror/gore/exploitation films so Hollow Man [[furnishes]] for me, it's just that it might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Director Verhoeven does a great job, or should that be the special effects boys make him look good. The special effects in Hollow Man really are spectacular & more-or-less flawless, their brilliant & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There's some good horror & action set-pieces here as well even if the climatic fight is a little over-the-top. I love the effect where Kevin Bacon disappears one layer at a time complete with veins, organs & bones on full show or when the reverse happens with the Gorilla. There's a few gory moments including a rat being eaten, someone is impaled on a spike & someone has their head busted open with blood splattering results.

With a staggering budget of about $95,000,000 Hollow Man is technically faultless, I can imagine the interviews on the DVD where some special effects boffin says they mapped Bacon's entire body out right down to he last vein which they actually did because you know everyone watching would notice if one of his veins were missing or in the wrong position wouldn't they? The acting was OK, Bacon made for a good mad scientist anti-hero type guy.

Hollow Man is one of hose big budget Hollwood extravaganzas where the effects & action take center stage over any sort of meaningful story or character's but to be brutally honest sometimes we all like that in a film, well I know I do. Good solid big budget entertainment with a slightly nastier & darker streak than the usual Hollywood product, definitely worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As [[someone]] [[else]] [[mentioned]], it [[begins]] with a [[bizarre]] prologue about a little blond girl [[killing]] a cat. Then the [[main]] [[story]]: a photographer (Gaffari) and a writer ([[Shepard]]) [[meet]] by [[chance]] and [[take]] a [[trip]] into the mountains. First they spend the night at an inn where the slightly deaf landlord gets hollered at, with [[increasing]] [[irritation]] to the audience, by Gaffari. Once in the mountains they seek shelter again and are invited in by a [[kindly]] old lady who seems overly hospitable to strangers (Hansel and Gretel, [[anyone]]?) What [[happens]] [[next]] I will [[leave]] for the [[bold]] viewer to sort out because I most [[assuredly]] couldn't. Now, I like Eurohorror, and this woulda been better if only Artigot (writer AND director) had [[made]] some [[attempt]] at [[logical]] story telling. The backdrop (Pyrenees?) makes an excellent and [[intriguing]] [[location]] for [[mysterious]] and occult [[occurrences]]. The verdant peaks could easily [[obscure]] [[supernatural]] forces and those who command them. The photography is nice. [[Just]] [[wish]] the whole thing [[made]] sense. You can view this film at archive.org. As [[somebody]] [[elsewhere]] [[cited]], it [[starting]] with a [[weird]] prologue about a little blond girl [[assassinate]] a cat. Then the [[primary]] [[conte]]: a photographer (Gaffari) and a writer ([[Shephard]]) [[satisfy]] by [[opportunity]] and [[taking]] a [[journey]] into the mountains. First they spend the night at an inn where the slightly deaf landlord gets hollered at, with [[rose]] [[annoyance]] to the audience, by Gaffari. Once in the mountains they seek shelter again and are invited in by a [[nicely]] old lady who seems overly hospitable to strangers (Hansel and Gretel, [[anybody]]?) What [[occurs]] [[imminent]] I will [[leaving]] for the [[audacious]] viewer to sort out because I most [[admittedly]] couldn't. Now, I like Eurohorror, and this woulda been better if only Artigot (writer AND director) had [[brought]] some [[tries]] at [[sane]] story telling. The backdrop (Pyrenees?) makes an excellent and [[enigmatic]] [[placements]] for [[enigmatic]] and occult [[incidents]]. The verdant peaks could easily [[blurred]] [[uncanny]] forces and those who command them. The photography is nice. [[Merely]] [[want]] the whole thing [[effected]] sense. You can view this film at archive.org. --------------------------------------------- Result 335 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I've long heard that to [[get]] their [[start]] in 'legitimate' [[films]], [[many]] behind-the-camera [[types]] [[work]] on porno [[films]].

The people who produced and [[directed]] this [[monstrosity]] stayed too [[long]].

Poorly paced, [[staged]] and [[written]], it [[uses]] a lot of [[perfectly]] [[good]] [[talent]] (Diehl, Dorn, Eggert) [[badly]].

Much sexual [[activity]] is teasingly [[implied]] here by the brassiere-popping [[host]] to the [[alien]] [[creature]], but it never [[crosses]] the [[line]]...

You'll [[still]] [[want]] to [[shower]] afterwards, though. I've long heard that to [[obtain]] their [[initiates]] in 'legitimate' [[kino]], [[innumerable]] behind-the-camera [[genre]] [[cooperates]] on porno [[movies]].

The people who produced and [[oriented]] this [[horror]] stayed too [[protracted]].

Poorly paced, [[orchestrated]] and [[handwritten]], it [[utilise]] a lot of [[abundantly]] [[buena]] [[talents]] (Diehl, Dorn, Eggert) [[sorely]].

Much sexual [[actions]] is teasingly [[unspoken]] here by the brassiere-popping [[receiving]] to the [[foreign]] [[ogre]], but it never [[intersects]] the [[bloodline]]...

You'll [[however]] [[wanting]] to [[bathroom]] afterwards, though. --------------------------------------------- Result 336 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My family has watched Arthur Bach stumble and stammer since the movie first came out. We have most lines memorized. I watched it two weeks ago and still get tickled at the simple humor and view-at-life that Dudley Moore portrays. Liza Minelli did a wonderful job as the side kick - though I'm not her biggest fan. This movie makes me just enjoy watching movies. My favorite scene is when Arthur is visiting his fiancée's house. His conversation with the butler and Susan's father is side-spitting. The line from the butler, "Would you care to wait in the Library" followed by Arthur's reply, "Yes I would, the bathroom is out of the question", is my NEWMAIL notification on my computer. "Arthur is truly "funny stuff"! --------------------------------------------- Result 337 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I read the reviews before i watched this movie, and i didn't believe them. I love crap movies and i expected this one to be average. It wasn't. This film makes Camp Blood 1 and 2 look like greats. The film contains bad acting, poor sound, poor confusing storyline, bad makeup- and it bored me so much i turned it off. even the nudity was rubbish! Did they even have a budget for this film? I don't think they did. You can tell if your gonna like this film or not in the first 5 minutes. if u want a good cheesy gory film go watch toxic avenger 4 or even camp blood. Avoid this trash - I watched it on TV and felt riped off, so don't spend anything on it. The best part is probably the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I read the [[novel]] some [[years]] ago and I [[liked]] it a [[lot]]. when I [[saw]] the [[movie]] I couldn't [[believe]] it... They [[changed]] everything I liked about the novel, even the plot. I wonder what did [[Isabel]] Allende ([[author]]) [[say]] about the [[movie]], but I [[think]] it [[sucks]]!!! I read the [[newer]] some [[ages]] ago and I [[wished]] it a [[batches]]. when I [[sawthe]] the [[movies]] I couldn't [[reckon]] it... They [[amend]] everything I liked about the novel, even the plot. I wonder what did [[Isabelle]] Allende ([[auteur]]) [[said]] about the [[filmmaking]], but I [[ideas]] it [[stinks]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 339 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I work at a [[Blockbuster]] store and [[every]] [[week]] we have [[movies]] that [[come]] in with just a few copies, these are the [[kind]] of movies that the Sci-Fi [[channel]] [[shows]]. The [[kind]] of movie that [[nobody]] ever [[wants]], and only that [[idiots]] [[rent]], when they [[bring]] it back I ask them "was it any good?", they [[say]] "no we turned it off after 15 minutes!" [[Movies]] with terrible computer [[generated]], [[super]] imposed monsters and such like, very [[unappealing]].

This is the same [[type]] of [[movie]] that [[Grendel]] is, and [[absolute]] [[waste]] of [[time]], if you [[want]] a reasonably (and only reasonably) good Beowulf [[based]] [[movie]] then [[try]] Beowulf & Grendel , [[starring]] Gerard Butler, who is also [[starring]] in the [[eagerly]] [[anticipated]] 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.

Plus, [[later]] this year we have another Beowulf [[movie]], with a [[star]] studded cast [[ranging]] from [[Anthony]] Hopkins and [[Brendan]] Gleeson, to Angelina Jolie and [[John]] Malkovich.

But don't [[let]] that [[get]] your [[hopes]] up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another [[big]] [[disappointment]].

And regarding rentals, here is my [[rule]] of thumb: If there is only one or two copies, don't [[rent]] it because its a [[load]] of [[crap]].( This is [[true]] 99.9% of the time, [[usually]] not [[true]] if the title is [[foreign]], or a documentary.) I work at a [[Blockbusters]] store and [[all]] [[weeks]] we have [[movie]] that [[arrived]] in with just a few copies, these are the [[genre]] of movies that the Sci-Fi [[channels]] [[showing]]. The [[genre]] of movie that [[anyone]] ever [[wanting]], and only that [[idiot]] [[leases]], when they [[brings]] it back I ask them "was it any good?", they [[said]] "no we turned it off after 15 minutes!" [[Films]] with terrible computer [[caused]], [[marvellous]] imposed monsters and such like, very [[unattractive]].

This is the same [[genre]] of [[film]] that [[Carnival]] is, and [[utter]] [[squander]] of [[times]], if you [[wanted]] a reasonably (and only reasonably) good Beowulf [[founded]] [[filmmaking]] then [[tries]] Beowulf & Grendel , [[championships]] Gerard Butler, who is also [[featuring]] in the [[enthusiastically]] [[waited]] 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.

Plus, [[thereafter]] this year we have another Beowulf [[filmmaking]], with a [[superstar]] studded cast [[ranges]] from [[Antoine]] Hopkins and [[Conor]] Gleeson, to Angelina Jolie and [[Giovanni]] Malkovich.

But don't [[letting]] that [[gets]] your [[aspirations]] up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another [[prodigious]] [[displeasure]].

And regarding rentals, here is my [[rules]] of thumb: If there is only one or two copies, don't [[rental]] it because its a [[burden]] of [[shit]].( This is [[veritable]] 99.9% of the time, [[fluently]] not [[veritable]] if the title is [[external]], or a documentary.) --------------------------------------------- Result 340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is one [[movie]] that will take [[time]] to get out of your head once you have [[seen]] it. The dialogs are close to [[perfect]], which was to be [[expected]] as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are [[simply]] giving their best, the story is [[simple]] and attractive. 88 minutes of pure [[bliss]]!

Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is [[still]] the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an [[excellent]] approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb [[friend]] who is always blundering when you expect it least.

[[Thumbs]] up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this [[excellent]] play, and all the [[best]] for future productions!

I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: "Un air de famille", and "Cuisine et dependances". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui. This is one [[films]] that will take [[moment]] to get out of your head once you have [[watched]] it. The dialogs are close to [[faultless]], which was to be [[waited]] as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are [[merely]] giving their best, the story is [[mere]] and attractive. 88 minutes of pure [[rapture]]!

Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is [[however]] the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an [[great]] approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb [[boyfriend]] who is always blundering when you expect it least.

[[Inches]] up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this [[wondrous]] play, and all the [[better]] for future productions!

I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: "Un air de famille", and "Cuisine et dependances". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui. --------------------------------------------- Result 341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] An [[excellent]] [[movie]]. [[Superb]] acting by Mary Alice, Phillip M. Thomas, and a young Irene Cara. Tony King was very realistic in his role of Satin. This movie was one of the last predominately "all black" movies of the 70's and unlike the "blaxploitation" movies of that era, this movie actually had a plot, and was very well done. The movie soundtrack, sung by Aretha Franklin, was popular on the R&B charts at the time. An [[wondrous]] [[film]]. [[Funky]] acting by Mary Alice, Phillip M. Thomas, and a young Irene Cara. Tony King was very realistic in his role of Satin. This movie was one of the last predominately "all black" movies of the 70's and unlike the "blaxploitation" movies of that era, this movie actually had a plot, and was very well done. The movie soundtrack, sung by Aretha Franklin, was popular on the R&B charts at the time. --------------------------------------------- Result 342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MINOR SPOILERS!

Well i just sat up late and watched this film, mainly because i enjoyed and rated some of Singleton's earlier work like "Boyz n the hood". However, i have to say this was a major disappointment and is everything i hate about contrived, clichéd, so-called "message" movies.

The acting is mainly poor,(pop stars and models do NOT necessarily make good actors...take note), the situations hard to swallow, (rape victim becomes overnight lesbian?...please!), but worst of all it reinforces every screwed up stereotype you can think of. By the second half of the film it has become cartoon like in its characterisation, making you lose any shred of empathy you may have had for its one-dimensional players.

Not once is any valid point made about the inherent causes of racism and cultural, sexual and political ignorance. As a result it merely ends up sensationalising the results of these problems. It's message is contradictory, resulting in a sense of confusion and a general lack of plot cohesion. As for the films conclusion i found it predictable, embarrassing, exploitative and mildly offensive. For a film called "Higher Learning" i have to say all i learned is to avoid seeing this ever again.

If you want a true comment on some of the themes that this film completely fails to elaborate upon then go hire "American History X"....unless you were just watching it for Tyra Banks then go hire a life. --------------------------------------------- Result 343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An absurdly hilarious and strikingly human tale of the jealousies and infidelities surrounding a beetle marriage, Russian animation pioneer Wladyslaw Starewicz's "Mest kinematograficheskogo operatora" ("The Cameraman's Revenge", or "The Revenge of a Kinematograph Cameraman") is a delight of early animation, brimming with highly-effective stop-motion puppetry and no shortage of imagination.

Mr. and Mrs. Beetle have a completely uneventful marriage, and both yearn for more excitement in their lives. Mr. Beetle's desires can only be satisfied by the beautiful exotic dancer at the "Gay Dragonfly" night club, whom he visits whenever he takes a "business trip" to the city. She is the only one who understands him. A fellow admirer of this dancer, an aggressive grasshopper, is jealous that Mr. Beetle has stolen his lady and, as fate would have it, he is also a movie cameraman. The devious grasshopper follows Mr. Beetle and his acquaintance to a hotel room, where he films their exploits through the keyhole.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Beetle has, likewise, acquired a friend to add excitement to her life. He is an artist, and he brings her a painting for a present, before they both settle down on the couch for some intimacy. At that moment, however, Mr. Beetle returns home and witnesses the entire spectacle. As Mr. Beetle bashes through the front door, the artist friend clambers up the chimney, but he doesn't escape without Mr. Beetle first venting his anger and frustration upon him.

There is a certain irony in the statement that follows: "Mr. Beetle is generous. He forgives his wife and takes her to a movie." He is generous enough to forgive her, and yet he had been equally unfaithful just minutes earlier. At this point in time, however, we still haven't forgotten the jealous movie cameraman who had been plotting his revenge, and it is no surprise when he turns out to be the projectionist for the film Mr. and Mrs. Beetle are attending. Suddenly intercut into the film they are enjoying is the footage of Mr. Beetle's disloyalty, and the angry wife hits him across the head with an umbrella, before the frightened and angry husband dives through the theatre screen in search of the grasshopper.

In the final scene, both Mr. and Mrs. Beetle, now somewhat more appreciative of each other, are serving time in prison for the fire that broke out when Mr. Beetle sought his final revenge. We do, indeed, hope that "the home life of the Beetles will be less exciting in the future…" This film may appear to be a mere story of the comings-and-goings of a miniscule insect species, but Starewicz is communicating so much more than that. This isn't a story about beetles – it is a story about us. And it's startlingly accurate, isn't it?! --------------------------------------------- Result 344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There is a [[story]] ([[possibly]] apocryphal) about an [[exchange]] between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the [[start]] of [[Twelve]] [[Monkeys]]. Gilliam ([[allegedly]]) [[produced]] a long [[list]] (think about the [[aircraft]] one from the Fifth [[Element]]) and [[handed]] it to [[Butch]] Bruce. It was [[entitled]] "[[Things]] Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It [[ended]] with a [[simple]] [[message]] [[saying]]: "please don't do any of the above in my [[movie]]".

There is a [[fact]] about this [[movie]] ([[definitely]] true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.

I [[would]] contend that these two factors [[played]] a [[huge]] role in [[creating]] the [[extraordinary]] (if not [[commercial]]) [[success]] that is The Twelve Monkeys.

Visually, the Twelve [[Monkeys]] is all that we have rightly [[come]] to expect from a Gilliam [[film]]. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and [[general]] (but [[magnificent]]) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his [[audience]]. [[Although]] the [[ending]] of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows [[heavily]] from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless [[movement]] of the [[characters]] towards their fate. It is this [[journey]], and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.

I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all [[tend]] to suffer from the same [[weakness]]. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no [[denying]] that The Twelve Monkey's is a [[breath]] of fresh [[air]] in the tight-plotting department. Style, [[substance]] and form seem to merge in a [[way]] not usually seen from the ex-Python.

[[Whatever]] the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam [[also]] manages to get a [[first]] [[rate]] (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is [[excellent]] in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a [[suitably]] bonkers - and very [[scary]] - Brad Pitt.

It's been over a decade since this [[film]] was [[released]]. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered [[perspectives]] and the [[absurd]] one-way [[journey]] through [[time]] that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10. There is a [[narratives]] ([[potentially]] apocryphal) about an [[exchanged]] between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the [[starter]] of [[Dozen]] [[Chimpanzee]]. Gilliam ([[seemingly]]) [[generated]] a long [[listing]] (think about the [[airplane]] one from the Fifth [[Ingredients]]) and [[delivered]] it to [[Dyke]] Bruce. It was [[titled]] "[[Aspects]] Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It [[terminated]] with a [[mere]] [[messaging]] [[arguing]]: "please don't do any of the above in my [[cinematography]]".

There is a [[facto]] about this [[cinema]] ([[surely]] true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.

I [[ought]] contend that these two factors [[served]] a [[sizable]] role in [[establish]] the [[unbelievable]] (if not [[mercantile]]) [[avail]] that is The Twelve Monkeys.

Visually, the Twelve [[Apes]] is all that we have rightly [[coming]] to expect from a Gilliam [[cinematography]]. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and [[overall]] (but [[wondrous]]) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his [[audiences]]. [[Despite]] the [[terminated]] of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows [[extensively]] from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless [[movements]] of the [[features]] towards their fate. It is this [[voyage]], and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.

I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all [[tending]] to suffer from the same [[ineptitude]]. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no [[refusing]] that The Twelve Monkey's is a [[murmur]] of fresh [[airline]] in the tight-plotting department. Style, [[substances]] and form seem to merge in a [[paths]] not usually seen from the ex-Python.

[[Whichever]] the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam [[apart]] manages to get a [[frst]] [[rates]] (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is [[wondrous]] in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a [[sufficiently]] bonkers - and very [[horrible]] - Brad Pitt.

It's been over a decade since this [[cinema]] was [[emitted]]. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered [[outlook]] and the [[counterintuitive]] one-way [[itinerary]] through [[moment]] that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm sure this is a [[show]] no one is that familiar of and might not think good of it; after all it is [[almost]] [[close]] to Baywatch Hawaii. With the cast, the [[location]], [[style]] of the directing and its [[publicity]] – [[shows]] [[women]] [[walking]] [[around]] on the [[beach]] and all that. [[No]] wonder people have [[misconception]] and [[decide]] not to watch it.

It was [[wrong]] of them to do that. Cause after I decide to watch the show, there are actually more thing going on, [[real]] juicy [[story]] and [[conflict]], [[turn]] out to be really exciting to watch and pretty much – addictive.

The story of the [[hotel]] [[clerks]], the [[manager]], the [[owner]] and their complicated love [[life]]. [[Also]] [[enter]] the troublesome hotel's [[visitor]] and [[powerful]] [[man]] trying to [[steal]] the [[hotel]]. It actually more exciting than it [[sounds]] here.

I won't [[deny]] that the acting [[suck]] but it ain't that [[bad]] that you'll [[look]] away. The story is not so consistence but good enough. The soundtrack is [[fitting]] pretty well with the [[scenario]] and the [[action]] is all the time. I took me couple of episode before there is [[actually]] [[anything]] [[happen]] solidly so be patience.

[[Recommendation]]: I [[Really]] Do [[Enjoy]] Watching This. [[Zillion]] [[Times]] [[Better]] Than [[Expected]].

[[Rating]]: 7.5/10 (Grade: B)

Please Rate My Review After Reading It, Thanks. I'm sure this is a [[exhibitions]] no one is that familiar of and might not think good of it; after all it is [[practically]] [[nearer]] to Baywatch Hawaii. With the cast, the [[locations]], [[styling]] of the directing and its [[propaganda]] – [[showings]] [[femmes]] [[marching]] [[roughly]] on the [[beaches]] and all that. [[None]] wonder people have [[misinterpretation]] and [[decides]] not to watch it.

It was [[amiss]] of them to do that. Cause after I decide to watch the show, there are actually more thing going on, [[actual]] juicy [[stories]] and [[dispute]], [[turning]] out to be really exciting to watch and pretty much – addictive.

The story of the [[guesthouse]] [[clerk]], the [[administrator]], the [[proprietor]] and their complicated love [[vida]]. [[Moreover]] [[entering]] the troublesome hotel's [[visitors]] and [[forceful]] [[guy]] trying to [[fly]] the [[motel]]. It actually more exciting than it [[noises]] here.

I won't [[denying]] that the acting [[sucking]] but it ain't that [[negative]] that you'll [[gaze]] away. The story is not so consistence but good enough. The soundtrack is [[fitted]] pretty well with the [[scenarios]] and the [[activity]] is all the time. I took me couple of episode before there is [[genuinely]] [[nothing]] [[emerge]] solidly so be patience.

[[Suggestions]]: I [[Genuinely]] Do [[Enjoying]] Watching This. [[Mln]] [[Period]] [[Best]] Than [[Waited]].

[[Scoring]]: 7.5/10 (Grade: B)

Please Rate My Review After Reading It, Thanks. --------------------------------------------- Result 346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I [[hate]] how this [[movie]] has [[absolutely]] no creative [[input]]. I know they're going for [[realism]], but to be frank I just don't want [[realism]]. Realism is boring. [[If]] I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can [[deal]] with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at [[least]] [[work]] in some good [[ideas]]. The [[direction]] only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking around a bit, but [[obviously]] I'm supposed to dig that because it makes stuff so [[much]] more [[realistic]]. Hitchcock [[used]] to [[say]] [[drama]] was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to [[see]] Rosetta walking to [[someplace]], Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta [[eating]] a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that [[entertaining]]. There isn't really a deeper [[meaning]] [[either]]. I got so [[bored]] I started looking for some reflections on life in this [[movie]] but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm [[supposed]] to love this, but come on, there's [[nothing]] in there. I [[dislikes]] how this [[filmmaking]] has [[totally]] no creative [[entry]]. I know they're going for [[reality]], but to be frank I just don't want [[reality]]. Realism is boring. [[Unless]] I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can [[treating]] with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at [[lowest]] [[works]] in some good [[thoughts]]. The [[directorate]] only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking around a bit, but [[patently]] I'm supposed to dig that because it makes stuff so [[very]] more [[hardheaded]]. Hitchcock [[utilized]] to [[told]] [[theater]] was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to [[seeing]] Rosetta walking to [[somehow]], Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta [[nourishment]] a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that [[amusing]]. There isn't really a deeper [[mean]] [[neither]]. I got so [[boring]] I started looking for some reflections on life in this [[filmmaking]] but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm [[presumed]] to love this, but come on, there's [[nada]] in there. --------------------------------------------- Result 347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] On October of 1945, the American German descendant Leopold Kessler (Jean-Marc Barr) arrives in a post-war Frankfurt and his bitter Uncle Kessler (Ernst-Hugo Järegård) gets a job for him in the Zentropa train line as a sleeping car conductor. While traveling in the train learning his profession, he sees the destructed occupied Germany and meets Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the daughter of the former powerful entrepreneur of transport business and owner of Zentropa, Max Hartmann (Jørgen Reenberg). Leopold stays neutral between the allied forces and the Germans, and becomes aware that there is a terrorist group called "Werewolves" killing the sympathizers of the allied and conducting subversive actions against the allied forces. He falls in love for Katharina, and sooner she discloses that she was a "Werewolf". When Max commits suicide, Leopold is also pressed by the "Werewolves" and need to take a position and a decision.

"Europa" is an impressive and anguishing Kafkanian story of the great Danish director Lars von Trier. Using an expressionist style that recalls Fritz Lang and alternating a magnificent black & white cinematography with some colored details, this movie discloses a difficult period of Germany and some of the problems this great nation had to face after being defeated in the war. Very impressive the action of the occupation forces destroying resources that could permit a faster reconstruction of a destroyed country, and the corruption with the Jew that should identify Max. Jean-Marc Barr has an stunning performance in the role of man that wants to stay neutral but is manipulated everywhere by everybody. The hypnotic narration of Max Von Sydow is another touch of class in this awarded film. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Europa" --------------------------------------------- Result 348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is the [[manager]] of the [[New]] York's longest- [[established]] floating craps [[game]], and he [[needs]] $1000 to [[secure]] a [[new]] [[location]]. Confident of his odds, he bets the city's highest-roller, Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando), that he can't [[woo]] uptight missionary [[Sarah]] Brown (Jean Simmons). '[[Guys]] and Dolls (1955)' is such a [[great]] musical because it [[deftly]] blends the [[contrasting]] styles of film and [[stage]]. During a [[dazzling]] opening sequence, crowds of pedestrians move in [[rhythm]], stopping and starting as though responding to backstage cues. Even the walking movements themselves are stylised and angular, halfway between a walk and a dance. Mankiewicz's [[New]] York City is a [[glittering]] flurry of art deco [[colour]] and [[movement]], a fantasy [[world]] so [[completely]] [[removed]] from [[reality]] that even the [[business]] of [[underground]] gambling and criminal thuggery seems perfectly genial.

As I [[write]] this review, I've just [[received]] word that Jean Simmons has [[passed]] away, age 80. This, unbelievably, was the [[first]] [[time]] I'd seen her in a film, [[yet]] she [[dazzled]] me from the [[beginning]]. Her idealistic and sexually-repressed [[Sarah]] comes out of her [[shell]] following an alcohol [[binge]] in [[Havana]], [[letting]] loose with an adorably [[playful]] [[rendition]] of "If I [[Were]] A [[Bell]]." Even [[though]] both Simmons and Brando were non-singers, producer Sam Goldwyn [[decided]] not to dub their vocals, contending that "[[maybe]] you don't sound so [[good]], but at least it's you." Despite Goldwyn's backhanded confidence, the pair both do well to carry entire musical numbers themselves. Simmons suggests the same child-like liveliness that Audrey Hepburn might have brought to the role, and Brando exudes such self-assurance and charisma that it doesn't matter that his singing voice isn't quite there. Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is the [[administrator]] of the [[Nouveau]] York's longest- [[developed]] floating craps [[games]], and he [[must]] $1000 to [[ensure]] a [[novel]] [[locations]]. Confident of his odds, he bets the city's highest-roller, Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando), that he can't [[hu]] uptight missionary [[Baroness]] Brown (Jean Simmons). '[[Guy]] and Dolls (1955)' is such a [[wondrous]] musical because it [[cleverly]] blends the [[contradictory]] styles of film and [[stages]]. During a [[amazing]] opening sequence, crowds of pedestrians move in [[pace]], stopping and starting as though responding to backstage cues. Even the walking movements themselves are stylised and angular, halfway between a walk and a dance. Mankiewicz's [[Novel]] York City is a [[glowing]] flurry of art deco [[dye]] and [[movements]], a fantasy [[monde]] so [[utterly]] [[scrapped]] from [[realism]] that even the [[enterprise]] of [[subterranean]] gambling and criminal thuggery seems perfectly genial.

As I [[handwriting]] this review, I've just [[benefited]] word that Jean Simmons has [[adopted]] away, age 80. This, unbelievably, was the [[outset]] [[times]] I'd seen her in a film, [[again]] she [[blind]] me from the [[starting]]. Her idealistic and sexually-repressed [[Sara]] comes out of her [[eggshell]] following an alcohol [[orgy]] in [[Habana]], [[let]] loose with an adorably [[mischievous]] [[extradition]] of "If I [[Was]] A [[Doorbell]]." Even [[if]] both Simmons and Brando were non-singers, producer Sam Goldwyn [[decides]] not to dub their vocals, contending that "[[potentially]] you don't sound so [[alright]], but at least it's you." Despite Goldwyn's backhanded confidence, the pair both do well to carry entire musical numbers themselves. Simmons suggests the same child-like liveliness that Audrey Hepburn might have brought to the role, and Brando exudes such self-assurance and charisma that it doesn't matter that his singing voice isn't quite there. --------------------------------------------- Result 349 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Because 'cruel' would be the only word in existence to describe the intentions of these film makers. Where do you even begin? In a spout of b*tchiness, I'm going to start with the awful acting of nearly everybody in this movie. Scratch that. Nearly does not belong in that sentence. I can't think of even one character who was portrayed well. Although, in all fairness, it would be nearly impossible to portray these zero dimensional characters in a successful way. Still, the girl who played Katherine (whose name I purposefully don't include - I'm pretending she doesn't exist) remains one of the worst actors I've ever seen, only eclipsed by the guy who played Sebastian. The story was God awful. It attempted to mirror the brilliance that was the first one but failed in so many ways. Pretty much every part of it was pointless - though I will admit (grudgingly) that the plot twist was quite good it its surprise. And the ending was at least slightly humorous. But this film is up there with the worst I've seen. Don't watch it. Just don't. There is absolutely no value in watching it. None. It only takes away the enjoyment of the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Well the previews looked funny and I [[usually]] don't [[go]] to movies on opening night [[especially]] with my [[kids]] because ......well you never know. Here is a [[movie]] that doesn't [[appeal]] either to children or adults as the [[jokes]] are too perverse for [[children]] and falls completely flat for entertainment [[purposes]] for [[adults]]. I was actually [[embarrassed]] to be with my 9 and 6 year old and having to explain to my 6 year old what S H * T [[spells]]. Essentially what happens here is a [[total]] [[twisting]] of Dr. Seuss's classic. It adds an evil and lazy neighbor who wants to marry the children's mother for her [[money]]. [[If]] that was a subplot, then [[maybe]] that [[would]] have been fine but it ends up being the major plot around the [[whole]] [[movie]] and "the cat" plays more of a subplot role in exposing the neighbor to the [[mom]] for who he really is. Take my advice and read the [[book]] and pass on the [[movie]]. Well the previews looked funny and I [[often]] don't [[going]] to movies on opening night [[notably]] with my [[youths]] because ......well you never know. Here is a [[filmmaking]] that doesn't [[appeals]] either to children or adults as the [[pranks]] are too perverse for [[kids]] and falls completely flat for entertainment [[intentions]] for [[adult]]. I was actually [[ashamed]] to be with my 9 and 6 year old and having to explain to my 6 year old what S H * T [[episodes]]. Essentially what happens here is a [[unmitigated]] [[twist]] of Dr. Seuss's classic. It adds an evil and lazy neighbor who wants to marry the children's mother for her [[cash]]. [[Though]] that was a subplot, then [[potentially]] that [[could]] have been fine but it ends up being the major plot around the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] and "the cat" plays more of a subplot role in exposing the neighbor to the [[mummy]] for who he really is. Take my advice and read the [[ledger]] and pass on the [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 351 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd like to think myself as a fairly open minded guy and it takes a lot(!) for me to dislike a movie but this one is without a doubt one of the suckiest, crappiest movie I've ever seen!

I have no idea what's wrong with the people who gave it such a good rating here (imdb is usually pretty reliable when it comes to ratings)... the only thing I can imagine is that people must've voted during one or more conditions:

1. While being shitfaced / stoned out of their minds 2. They've received hard cash for the votes 3. Under gunpoint

I can't believe I wasted a good 1 h 45 min of my life for this pathetic excuse for a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] After a day at [[work]], I sat down to [[relax]] and [[turned]] on the [[movie]] [[channels]]. The [[movie]] [[came]] up on the [[guide]] and [[sounded]] interesting so I tuned in just before it [[started]]. The [[first]] 30 [[minutes]] were enough to [[make]] me interested, but the [[lack]] of acting [[ability]] in [[Jamie]] [[Foxx]] and the [[slow]] [[plot]] movement made me [[want]] to [[get]] up and [[find]] [[food]] during the [[movie]]. If there is any [[credit]] to be given for acting in this [[movie]] it should go to David Morse who at [[least]] tries to make the [[movie]] interesting. [[All]] in all, don't [[plan]] on impressing your [[friends]] by [[picking]] this one as a [[renter]] for a [[movie]] [[night]]. After a day at [[cooperation]], I sat down to [[mellow]] and [[revolved]] on the [[filmmaking]] [[channel]]. The [[flick]] [[arrived]] up on the [[guides]] and [[seemed]] interesting so I tuned in just before it [[opened]]. The [[frst]] 30 [[mins]] were enough to [[deliver]] me interested, but the [[shortfall]] of acting [[capacity]] in [[Jaime]] [[Fox]] and the [[slower]] [[intrigue]] movement made me [[wanting]] to [[obtain]] up and [[found]] [[eating]] during the [[filmmaking]]. If there is any [[credits]] to be given for acting in this [[film]] it should go to David Morse who at [[fewer]] tries to make the [[filmmaking]] interesting. [[Everything]] in all, don't [[schemes]] on impressing your [[homeys]] by [[selecting]] this one as a [[tenants]] for a [[filmmaking]] [[overnight]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 353 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terry Gilliam traveled again to the future (he had already done it in "Brazil") to tell this story about a virus that's destroying the human race.

The script is totally crazy with some easy tricks on it but it's quite entertaining and Gilliam proves that he's got imagination (the futuristic scenes are just great). As for the cast, Bruce Willis and the beautiful Madeleine Stowe (whatever happened to her??) are just OK, but Brad Pitt is so annoying, whenever he plays roles that are out of his hand he results so forced and he's not credible at all. He should just play good-looking successful young men.

*My rate: 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This whirling movie looks more like a combination of music-clips at MTV than as a real movie. There is no real story and as the movie goes on you ask yourself: "What is going to happen?"; but nothing happens. The story around Eric Cloeck, the frustrated writer, is the only good thing. The other persons seem to have nothing in common: then why bring them together in a movie. With music you can make watchable the worst movie. When I open the tap and there comes water out with the music of Bach then most people will like to look at it but this is not a movie. The director should learn how to write a script for a movie of 100 minutes or more before starting to direct a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 355 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Oh [[dear]], this movie was [[bad]] for [[various]] reasons. I was expecting to [[see]] a very low [[score]] for this [[film]] and was a bit surprised by the over-all [[score]].Sorry, but to rate this highly as many have, is a joke! Once you get past the one shot/black and white movie gimmick, which was a nice [[idea]], the movie drags on, even at a run time of only 66 [[minutes]]. The credits sequence at the [[start]] was so annoying too![[In]] the van the guys suffer a flat tyre and change the wheel, [[wow]], that was needed in the story! How slow were the guys chasing and actually managing to wound Campbell?? They did not [[seem]] to bother continue chasing him...sigh..I am only too glad I got this free with a special Edition of Evil Dead!! Oh [[beloved]], this movie was [[unfavourable]] for [[sundry]] reasons. I was expecting to [[seeing]] a very low [[punctuation]] for this [[filmmaking]] and was a bit surprised by the over-all [[punctuation]].Sorry, but to rate this highly as many have, is a joke! Once you get past the one shot/black and white movie gimmick, which was a nice [[notions]], the movie drags on, even at a run time of only 66 [[mins]]. The credits sequence at the [[initiation]] was so annoying too![[Among]] the van the guys suffer a flat tyre and change the wheel, [[whoa]], that was needed in the story! How slow were the guys chasing and actually managing to wound Campbell?? They did not [[appears]] to bother continue chasing him...sigh..I am only too glad I got this free with a special Edition of Evil Dead!! --------------------------------------------- Result 356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] NOTHING (3+ [[outta]] 5 [[stars]]) Another [[weird]] premise from the director of the [[movie]] "Cube". This time [[around]] there are two [[main]] [[characters]] who [[find]] themselves and their home [[transported]] to a [[mysterious]] white [[void]]. There is literally [[NOTHING]] outside of their [[small]] two-story house. Intriguing to be sure, but I thought the comedic tone [[established]] for this [[movie]] from the get-go was extremely ill-conceived. There [[needs]] to be some humour, certainly... and I have no [[problem]] with the [[humour]] that was [[eventually]] derived from the plight of our two heroes (their [[final]] "[[showdown]]" was [[definitely]] a hoot)... but I really think the movie would have been a lot better off if it had stayed more rooted in reality in the beginning. After watching the movie I watched the "Making of" feature on the DVD and a short trailer at the end is almost totally devoid of the "sillier" comedic aspects... making it look like a completely different (and slightly better) movie. The last half hour of the movie is where things really start to come together... similar in a way to the recent movie "Primer." The actors are fine when they are not overdoing the comedy shtick. They are really quite [[believable]] in their more "normal" moments. I was probably ready to write this movie off as a failed experiment at the midway point... but it won me over by the end. (And keep watching past the credits for the final scene... just don't ask me to explain it.) NOTHING (3+ [[outa]] 5 [[superstar]]) Another [[bizarre]] premise from the director of the [[cinematography]] "Cube". This time [[throughout]] there are two [[principal]] [[personages]] who [[unearthed]] themselves and their home [[hauled]] to a [[opaque]] white [[null]]. There is literally [[NONE]] outside of their [[petite]] two-story house. Intriguing to be sure, but I thought the comedic tone [[formulated]] for this [[cinematography]] from the get-go was extremely ill-conceived. There [[should]] to be some humour, certainly... and I have no [[trouble]] with the [[humor]] that was [[lastly]] derived from the plight of our two heroes (their [[latter]] "[[confrontation]]" was [[clearly]] a hoot)... but I really think the movie would have been a lot better off if it had stayed more rooted in reality in the beginning. After watching the movie I watched the "Making of" feature on the DVD and a short trailer at the end is almost totally devoid of the "sillier" comedic aspects... making it look like a completely different (and slightly better) movie. The last half hour of the movie is where things really start to come together... similar in a way to the recent movie "Primer." The actors are fine when they are not overdoing the comedy shtick. They are really quite [[reliable]] in their more "normal" moments. I was probably ready to write this movie off as a failed experiment at the midway point... but it won me over by the end. (And keep watching past the credits for the final scene... just don't ask me to explain it.) --------------------------------------------- Result 357 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i [[needed]] a no-brainer in the summer heat, and the [[cover]] [[looked]] [[cool]].

Of course I should've known better. This is a really, really [[bad]] movie. And it gets embarasing when the [[makers]] know it's bad, and [[try]] [[cover]] it up by adding some sexy/beautiful [[women]], and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!

If you [[WOULD]] like a cool movie about a big [[reptile]] that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order) Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i [[requisite]] a no-brainer in the summer heat, and the [[covers]] [[seemed]] [[refrigerate]].

Of course I should've known better. This is a really, really [[unfavourable]] movie. And it gets embarasing when the [[industrialists]] know it's bad, and [[attempting]] [[covers]] it up by adding some sexy/beautiful [[mujer]], and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!

If you [[COULD]] like a cool movie about a big [[amphibians]] that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order) --------------------------------------------- Result 358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Drew Barrymore was [[excellent]] in this film. This role is the [[type]] of role you don't [[normally]] see [[Drew]] [[play]]. Her [[typical]] role is as a [[woman]] looking for [[love]]. The storyline is [[also]] [[great]].

When Holly is [[implicated]] in her mother's murder she moves to L.A. She moves in with a [[guy]] who becomes her lover. But her brother who is in a [[mental]] [[prison]] [[hospital]] for what they [[believe]] is [[murder]] is [[almost]] [[killed]] she is [[wrongfully]] accused. It is then revealed to her lover that she has [[Multiple]] [[Personality]] [[Disorder]]. After that another [[woman]] [[becomes]] paranoid when she's [[around]] her. [[In]] the [[end]] though, they [[find]] out the truth. Drew Barrymore was [[wonderful]] in this film. This role is the [[kind]] of role you don't [[usually]] see [[Called]] [[gaming]]. Her [[classic]] role is as a [[girls]] looking for [[likes]]. The storyline is [[apart]] [[wondrous]].

When Holly is [[engaged]] in her mother's murder she moves to L.A. She moves in with a [[buddy]] who becomes her lover. But her brother who is in a [[spiritual]] [[incarceration]] [[hospitals]] for what they [[think]] is [[murders]] is [[hardly]] [[massacred]] she is [[inappropriately]] accused. It is then revealed to her lover that she has [[Several]] [[Subjectivity]] [[Commotion]]. After that another [[femmes]] [[becoming]] paranoid when she's [[roundabout]] her. [[At]] the [[termination]] though, they [[found]] out the truth. --------------------------------------------- Result 359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Another Aussie masterpiece, this delves into the world of the unknown and the supernatural, and it does very well. It doesn't resort to the big special effects overkill like American flicks, it focuses more on emotional impact. A relatively simple plot that Rebecca Gibney & Co. bring to life. It follows the story of a couple who buy an old house that was supposedly home to a very old woman who never went outside, and whose husband disappeared in mysterious circumstances a century ago. Strange things begin to happen in the house, and John Adam begins to turn into the man who disappeared, who was actually a mass murderer. Highly recommended. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The [[premise]] of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. [[Though]] very little dialog is provided [[throughout]] the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone [[made]] the film [[quite]] engaging. The setting of the gray woods [[conveys]] a feeling of loneliness, which [[complements]] the [[quietness]] of the characters themselves. We can [[also]] sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the [[police]] of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.

True horror lies in feelings of [[hopelessness]], [[helplessness]], and irrationality. This film successfully [[addresses]] these [[elements]] by visuals alone, [[rather]] than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad [[horror]] films use when the narrative is [[weak]].

Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as "The Ring," and "Dark Water," or English horror films, such as "Lady in Black," and "The Innocents," this [[film]] provides viewers the experience of [[true]] atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this [[film]] a try.

By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well. The [[supposition]] of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. [[Nonetheless]] very little dialog is provided [[across]] the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone [[accomplished]] the film [[rather]] engaging. The setting of the gray woods [[airs]] a feeling of loneliness, which [[supplements]] the [[placid]] of the characters themselves. We can [[further]] sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the [[constabulary]] of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.

True horror lies in feelings of [[helplessness]], [[weakness]], and irrationality. This film successfully [[treats]] these [[components]] by visuals alone, [[fairly]] than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad [[monstrosity]] films use when the narrative is [[flimsy]].

Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as "The Ring," and "Dark Water," or English horror films, such as "Lady in Black," and "The Innocents," this [[cinema]] provides viewers the experience of [[real]] atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this [[cinematography]] a try.

By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 361 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I can give you four reasons to [[see]] this [[movie]]:

1. Four of the best filmmakers in the contemporary Mexican cinema.

2. Four good stories, related into a big scheme.

3. A [[surprisingly]] good cast.

4. A bitter reflexion about the biggest trouble in this country (and many others).

(POSSIBLE [[SPOILERS]])

Alejandro Gamboa opens this movie with a good story in a comedic mood about the authority practicing the extortion against regular people and still expecting to be appreciated by its efforts.

Then Antonio Serrano gets more dramatic in the second piece with a story heir to the Italian neorealism with a "Peter and the wolf"-like anecdote.

In the third story, the one that seems more independent from this series even in the context, Carlos Carrera tells us the story of a man being at the wrong place in the wrong moment. But after the recent lynching at Tlahuac and the tradition in this awful matter at the State of Mexico, this story couldn't be more updated.

And at the end, Fernando Sariñana returns to the dark humor in the "grand finale" in which he puts together the most of the characters from the past sequences in one of the better comedy pieces ever filmed. Reprising the center scene from one of his previous films "Todo el poder", Sariñana gives the final lesson of the theme. And by the way, give us the scene that steals the movie with Anna Ciochetti making a brief striptease.

Once the movie has ended, you get a bittersweet feeling about having looked at a good movie (and maybe enjoyed it) with a very painful subject. They say that in Mexico people laugh at their own disgrace and this is the best example. This film is a testimony of how Mexicans have learn to live in the middle of a crime state(and perhaps accepted it), between two fires: The criminals and the so-called authorities full of corruption. Even this movie is a wishful thinking because almost all the good people have been a victim of crime and they don't get this unhurt. If you had an assault without a scratch then you're lucky. Meanwhile, don't lose the chance to see this movie, highly recommended.

And it's a beautiful life in Mexico... I can give you four reasons to [[seeing]] this [[kino]]:

1. Four of the best filmmakers in the contemporary Mexican cinema.

2. Four good stories, related into a big scheme.

3. A [[impossibly]] good cast.

4. A bitter reflexion about the biggest trouble in this country (and many others).

(POSSIBLE [[VANDALS]])

Alejandro Gamboa opens this movie with a good story in a comedic mood about the authority practicing the extortion against regular people and still expecting to be appreciated by its efforts.

Then Antonio Serrano gets more dramatic in the second piece with a story heir to the Italian neorealism with a "Peter and the wolf"-like anecdote.

In the third story, the one that seems more independent from this series even in the context, Carlos Carrera tells us the story of a man being at the wrong place in the wrong moment. But after the recent lynching at Tlahuac and the tradition in this awful matter at the State of Mexico, this story couldn't be more updated.

And at the end, Fernando Sariñana returns to the dark humor in the "grand finale" in which he puts together the most of the characters from the past sequences in one of the better comedy pieces ever filmed. Reprising the center scene from one of his previous films "Todo el poder", Sariñana gives the final lesson of the theme. And by the way, give us the scene that steals the movie with Anna Ciochetti making a brief striptease.

Once the movie has ended, you get a bittersweet feeling about having looked at a good movie (and maybe enjoyed it) with a very painful subject. They say that in Mexico people laugh at their own disgrace and this is the best example. This film is a testimony of how Mexicans have learn to live in the middle of a crime state(and perhaps accepted it), between two fires: The criminals and the so-called authorities full of corruption. Even this movie is a wishful thinking because almost all the good people have been a victim of crime and they don't get this unhurt. If you had an assault without a scratch then you're lucky. Meanwhile, don't lose the chance to see this movie, highly recommended.

And it's a beautiful life in Mexico... --------------------------------------------- Result 362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the second entry in the regular Columbo series, and it holds up well today. As I am able to look at it closely now on DVD and see how it is constructed, I am very impressed with the direction of Bernard L. Kowalski (who directed the fine MACHO CALLAHAN as well as countless TV episodes)--watch how the post-murder actions of the killer are shown on a split-screen effect on his two eyeglasses, watch how the murder itself is shown in montage fashion, watch the point-of-view shot from the perspective of the corpse. Also, the wild but impressive avant-garde musical score from noted jazzman Gil Melle was incredible and helped so much to create atmosphere. And the supporting performance of Brett Halsey as the golf pro was wonderful--such subtlety and complexity in a role that nine out of ten times would be a one-dimensional cutout. The "formula" had not yet been set when this episode was filmed, so there are still some surprises in Columbo's methods. Of course, Falk, Robert Culp, and Ray Milland are the highest-quality actors and it's a pleasure to see them work--all men are familiar from many other roles yet lose themselves in their characters here. In all, this entry in the Columbo series--and MANY of the others--are as well-crafted as a very good feature film. --------------------------------------------- Result 363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] There [[seems]] to be a surprisingly [[high]] number of 8-10 [[star]] reviews here from people who have never written an IMDb review before or since. Given the very low average rating given to the film by other people, I think you may draw your own conclusions.

This is a very [[bad]] film. I'll admit it, I thought the [[concept]] was kind of [[cute]], and I was pleased to see the [[actresses]] who played Eve and [[Harmony]] on Angel getting [[work]], but it didn't [[take]] long for the sheer awfulness of this film to [[make]] itself known.

Acting: The [[leads]] [[seemed]] [[competent]] enough, but everyone [[else]]? [[Terrible]].

Plot: Chock full of holes [[big]] enough to [[drive]] a truck through.

[[Direction]]: Non-existent.

[[Humour]]: [[Did]] they really think people were [[going]] to [[laugh]]? [[Oh]] boy.

[[Eye]] Candy: [[OK]]. there were some [[really]] [[beautiful]] [[women]] in this [[film]]. [[Not]] just the three main female [[characters]], but right [[across]] the board. It was as if the producers [[hoped]] the [[scenery]] [[would]] [[keep]] [[male]] [[viewers]] so [[distracted]] they wouldn't notice how terrible everything [[else]] was. If so, they [[failed]] [[miserably]].

In the right hands this could have been cute but darkly [[funny]] camp classic. It wasn't even close. There [[appears]] to be a surprisingly [[highest]] number of 8-10 [[stars]] reviews here from people who have never written an IMDb review before or since. Given the very low average rating given to the film by other people, I think you may draw your own conclusions.

This is a very [[unfavourable]] film. I'll admit it, I thought the [[concepts]] was kind of [[purty]], and I was pleased to see the [[actors]] who played Eve and [[Concord]] on Angel getting [[cooperation]], but it didn't [[taking]] long for the sheer awfulness of this film to [[deliver]] itself known.

Acting: The [[leeds]] [[looked]] [[proficient]] enough, but everyone [[further]]? [[Frightful]].

Plot: Chock full of holes [[prodigious]] enough to [[driving]] a truck through.

[[Directorate]]: Non-existent.

[[Humor]]: [[Got]] they really think people were [[go]] to [[chuckles]]? [[Ah]] boy.

[[Ojo]] Candy: [[ALRIGHT]]. there were some [[genuinely]] [[sumptuous]] [[females]] in this [[filmmaking]]. [[No]] just the three main female [[hallmarks]], but right [[throughout]] the board. It was as if the producers [[desired]] the [[panorama]] [[could]] [[keeping]] [[men]] [[audiences]] so [[entertained]] they wouldn't notice how terrible everything [[elsewhere]] was. If so, they [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]].

In the right hands this could have been cute but darkly [[comical]] camp classic. It wasn't even close. --------------------------------------------- Result 364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not sure it was the language or the poor acting, but everything about this movie feels and looks cheap and fake.

After seeing Der Untergang this is a huge disappointment. There's no connection between different scenes, and the acting is so incredibly poor I couldn't even believe people could make such a mess of something that had great potential.

And above all, everyone in Germany speaks English. Big mistake. The German language has a certain sound to it, and especially Hitler himself only sounds like Hitler when he's speaking/yelling German.

The way the story is told made me believe it was improvised on the spot, the characters were empty and the movie seems to be a collection of random events that could have happened.

Whether it's the English or the fact that I've already seen Der Untergang, everything about this movie was fake and ridiculous. --------------------------------------------- Result 365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The part where Meg [[visits]] the mechanic and he says - "Is the piston firing short?" ([[implying]] [[poor]] sexual energy on the part of her fiancée) was [[hilarious]]. I love Meg Ryan and she is as sweet as ever in this [[wonderful]] movie. [[Very]] [[lovable]] and very intelligent too. Her innocent [[indignant]] expressions have you wishing she was yours. The hero handles the garage mechanic to physicist transformation well. Einstein had a romantic side to his [[psyche]]? The puzzle [[round]] in [[front]] of the press and [[audience]] was [[done]] well. It's awfully [[underrated]] and [[deserves]] [[accolades]] and [[attempts]] at a [[revival]]. It loses out one vote for [[including]] the [[highly]] improbable far fetched theory being [[bought]] by the [[US]] Govt. I don't [[see]] why it doesn't figure in the top 20 romantic comedies of the century. Great Movie, it has the presidential seal of [[approval]] on it! The part where Meg [[visiting]] the mechanic and he says - "Is the piston firing short?" ([[suggesting]] [[poorest]] sexual energy on the part of her fiancée) was [[humorous]]. I love Meg Ryan and she is as sweet as ever in this [[wondrous]] movie. [[Much]] [[adorable]] and very intelligent too. Her innocent [[annoyed]] expressions have you wishing she was yours. The hero handles the garage mechanic to physicist transformation well. Einstein had a romantic side to his [[psychology]]? The puzzle [[ronda]] in [[newsweek]] of the press and [[spectators]] was [[doing]] well. It's awfully [[underestimated]] and [[merit]] [[laude]] and [[tries]] at a [[rejuvenation]]. It loses out one vote for [[include]] the [[tremendously]] improbable far fetched theory being [[acquired]] by the [[USA]] Govt. I don't [[seeing]] why it doesn't figure in the top 20 romantic comedies of the century. Great Movie, it has the presidential seal of [[ratification]] on it! --------------------------------------------- Result 366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This [[movie]] was messed up. A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't [[add]] up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a [[little]] [[strange]]. [[Stick]] to the [[first]] "[[Vampires]]", it's a good [[movie]]. "[[Vampires]]: Los Muetos" wasn't a good [[attempt]] of a sequel.

4/10 This [[filmmaking]] was messed up. A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't [[summing]] up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a [[scant]] [[freaky]]. [[Wand]] to the [[frst]] "[[Bloodsuckers]]", it's a good [[filmmaking]]. "[[Bloodsuckers]]: Los Muetos" wasn't a good [[tried]] of a sequel.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] So we compromised. This was a fairly [[charming]] [[film]], I liked the art direction (it felt far more "real" than most kids movies), and the costumes weren't too cutesy. The child actors were not bad to watch (the adult performances trended toward cheesy). It was great that they showed how a bullied kid bullies others as well as kids standing up to bullying.

I don't know how many grown ups would want to see this for themselves, but it's a [[great]] film to take a kid to. And since "Barnyard" was apparently attended by 100+ kids at the same time, I'm REALLY glad we picked the sparsely attended showing of "worms" instead. So we compromised. This was a fairly [[lovable]] [[cinematography]], I liked the art direction (it felt far more "real" than most kids movies), and the costumes weren't too cutesy. The child actors were not bad to watch (the adult performances trended toward cheesy). It was great that they showed how a bullied kid bullies others as well as kids standing up to bullying.

I don't know how many grown ups would want to see this for themselves, but it's a [[wondrous]] film to take a kid to. And since "Barnyard" was apparently attended by 100+ kids at the same time, I'm REALLY glad we picked the sparsely attended showing of "worms" instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Phantom of the Mall is a [[film]] that fits best in the "easily forgotten" category. It's a pretty [[lousy]] [[variant]] on the famous story by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera. Not a bad [[idea]] to itself, but the plot and production of this movie are way to weak to bring a decent homage to that story. On the bright side, Gaston Leroux doesn't has to [[turn]] over in his grave just yet. It [[could]] have been a lot worse.

Phantom of the Mall has too many useless flashbacks in it and way too many boring sequences to make it memorable. Also, the scriptwriters wanted to give too much draught to the story than necessary. And even though there's a lot of mystery getting build up about the character of Eric ... the basic plot is ordinary and déjà-vu. ***SPOILERS*** It's about a young couple that brutally gets torn apart because the boy gets killed in a fire. That fire was set to his house because he and his parents refused to sell their home in order to make room for a huge mall to be build. The boy survived the fire and he has hidden himself in the mall to avenge himself. Meanwhile he guards his girl who now works in the mall and tries to forget her loss ****END SPOILERS*** This pretty simple - but rather effective - plot [[gets]] thickened by lots of [[pointless]] elements and [[annoying]] conspiracy theories. [[While]] it should just be an entertaining horror movie, it [[desperately]] [[tries]] to be an intelligent thriller...and that's not what the fans look for. There are a few innovative killings but they're not satisfying enough for people who want to see a relaxing horror movie. And besides, Phantom of the Mall could have used at least a bit of humor!! This entire production - the cast included - takes itself way too [[serious]].

I'll try to finish with a few [[positive]] aspects...Like for example, it stars Ken Foree !! Die-hard horror fans will [[certainly]] [[recognize]] him as [[Peter]] for Dawn of the Dead! That's like the horror milestone that yet has to find an equal. Even though his role in this movie is limited and even completely [[unnecessary]]...it was good to [[see]] him again. TV-movie fans will also recognize Morgan Fairchild as the mayor, she's a fine actress and an elegant lady. Pauly Shore is also in this but I can't stand him...so my opinion about him may be a bit biased. And finally, a bit of praise for the leading actress named Kari Whitman. She's an extremely beautiful girl and she does have a bit of talent...too bad she never made it to the top. Actually, this movie is her biggest achievement and that says enough about her career... Phantom of the Mall is a [[filmmaking]] that fits best in the "easily forgotten" category. It's a pretty [[rotten]] [[variations]] on the famous story by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera. Not a bad [[thoughts]] to itself, but the plot and production of this movie are way to weak to bring a decent homage to that story. On the bright side, Gaston Leroux doesn't has to [[transforming]] over in his grave just yet. It [[wo]] have been a lot worse.

Phantom of the Mall has too many useless flashbacks in it and way too many boring sequences to make it memorable. Also, the scriptwriters wanted to give too much draught to the story than necessary. And even though there's a lot of mystery getting build up about the character of Eric ... the basic plot is ordinary and déjà-vu. ***SPOILERS*** It's about a young couple that brutally gets torn apart because the boy gets killed in a fire. That fire was set to his house because he and his parents refused to sell their home in order to make room for a huge mall to be build. The boy survived the fire and he has hidden himself in the mall to avenge himself. Meanwhile he guards his girl who now works in the mall and tries to forget her loss ****END SPOILERS*** This pretty simple - but rather effective - plot [[got]] thickened by lots of [[unnecessary]] elements and [[irritating]] conspiracy theories. [[Albeit]] it should just be an entertaining horror movie, it [[sorely]] [[strives]] to be an intelligent thriller...and that's not what the fans look for. There are a few innovative killings but they're not satisfying enough for people who want to see a relaxing horror movie. And besides, Phantom of the Mall could have used at least a bit of humor!! This entire production - the cast included - takes itself way too [[severe]].

I'll try to finish with a few [[favorable]] aspects...Like for example, it stars Ken Foree !! Die-hard horror fans will [[definitely]] [[recognizing]] him as [[Pete]] for Dawn of the Dead! That's like the horror milestone that yet has to find an equal. Even though his role in this movie is limited and even completely [[superfluous]]...it was good to [[seeing]] him again. TV-movie fans will also recognize Morgan Fairchild as the mayor, she's a fine actress and an elegant lady. Pauly Shore is also in this but I can't stand him...so my opinion about him may be a bit biased. And finally, a bit of praise for the leading actress named Kari Whitman. She's an extremely beautiful girl and she does have a bit of talent...too bad she never made it to the top. Actually, this movie is her biggest achievement and that says enough about her career... --------------------------------------------- Result 369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Man With the Gun is pretty much forgotten now, but caused a minor storm of media interest back in 1955 when Robert Mitchum turned down both Jett Rink in Giant (which had actually been written for him and which was subsequently substantially reworked) and Charles Laughton's intended version of The Naked and the Dead to make it instead. Despite some obvious production problems and some harsh lighting that occasionally renders both Mitch and Jan Sterling in unflattering tones, it's a terrific dark western that more than stands comparison with his earlier Blood on the Moon as his 'town tamer' sets to work on a town that never had the chance to grow up before getting run down by the local badmen before turning out to – possibly – be almost as bad as the men he dispatches. Certainly his way of dealing with news of a death in the family – burning a saloon to the ground and goading its manager into trying to kill him – doesn't inspire much confidence in his stability. As well as a good script and a surprisingly good supporting turn from the usually irritating but here well cast Henry Hull, it also boasts a strikingly good early Alex North score, which even includes an early workout for one of his tormented emotional cues that would later turn up in Spartacus. --------------------------------------------- Result 370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Documentary [[starts]] in 1986 in NYC where black and hispanic [[drag]] queens [[hold]] "balls". That's where they [[dress]] up [[however]] they like, strut their [[stuff]] in [[front]] of an [[audience]] and are [[voted]] on. We [[get]] to know many of the [[members]] and [[see]] how they all [[hold]] [[together]] and [[support]] each other. As one [[man]] [[says]] to another--"You have three [[strikes]] against you--you're black, [[gay]] and a drag queen". These are people who ([[sadly]]) are not [[accepted]] in society--only at the balls. There they can be whoever and whatever they [[want]] and be [[accepted]]. Then the [[film]] cuts to three years later (1989) and you [[see]] how [[things]] have [[changed]] (tragically for some).

[[Sounds]] depressing but it's not. Most of the people interviewed are [[actually]] very [[funny]] and [[get]] a lot of [[humor]] out of their situations. They're well aware of their position in society and [[accept]] it with humor--just as they should. We [[find]] out they all [[live]] in "[[houses]]" run by [[various]] "mothers" and all help each other out. The [[sense]] of [[community]] in this [[film]] is [[fascinating]].

When this [[film]] [[came]] out in 1990 it was controversial--and a [[big]] [[hit]]. It won [[Best]] Documentary [[Awards]] at [[numerous]] festivals--but was never even [[nominated]] for an Academy [[Award]]. Their reason was "Black and hispanic drag queens are not Academy material". Fascinating isn't it? [[Homophobia]] and racism all together.

[[Seen]] today it's [[still]] a [[great]] film--and a [[period]] piece. It just isn't like that anymore--the NY they [[show]] no longer exists. The balls are [[still]] held but not in the spirit we see here. [[Also]] [[drag]] has [[become]] more "[[accepted]]" in society (for better or [[worse]]). And I've [[heard]] the [[houses]] are gone too. That's [[kind]] of sad. I [[WOULD]] like to know where these [[characters]] are now--I know two died of AIDS but I have no [[idea]] about the others. And what [[DID]] [[happen]] to that 13 [[year]] old and 15 year old [[shown]]?

[[Still]], it a one of a [[kind]] documentary--fascinating, [[funny]] and riveting. A must see all the way! A [[definite]] 10. Where's the DVD??? Documentary [[initiates]] in 1986 in NYC where black and hispanic [[dragging]] queens [[held]] "balls". That's where they [[costume]] up [[instead]] they like, strut their [[thing]] in [[newsweek]] of an [[audiences]] and are [[voting]] on. We [[obtain]] to know many of the [[member]] and [[behold]] how they all [[held]] [[jointly]] and [[supporting]] each other. As one [[dude]] [[tells]] to another--"You have three [[attacks]] against you--you're black, [[homo]] and a drag queen". These are people who ([[unfortunately]]) are not [[recognised]] in society--only at the balls. There they can be whoever and whatever they [[wanna]] and be [[recognised]]. Then the [[cinematography]] cuts to three years later (1989) and you [[behold]] how [[items]] have [[amend]] (tragically for some).

[[Noises]] depressing but it's not. Most of the people interviewed are [[indeed]] very [[fun]] and [[got]] a lot of [[humour]] out of their situations. They're well aware of their position in society and [[accepted]] it with humor--just as they should. We [[found]] out they all [[vivo]] in "[[house]]" run by [[multiple]] "mothers" and all help each other out. The [[feeling]] of [[communities]] in this [[cinema]] is [[exciting]].

When this [[cinematography]] [[arrived]] out in 1990 it was controversial--and a [[massive]] [[strike]]. It won [[Better]] Documentary [[Scholarship]] at [[many]] festivals--but was never even [[nominate]] for an Academy [[Awards]]. Their reason was "Black and hispanic drag queens are not Academy material". Fascinating isn't it? [[Homophobic]] and racism all together.

[[Saw]] today it's [[however]] a [[phenomenal]] film--and a [[times]] piece. It just isn't like that anymore--the NY they [[displays]] no longer exists. The balls are [[again]] held but not in the spirit we see here. [[Similarly]] [[dragging]] has [[gotten]] more "[[recognise]]" in society (for better or [[worst]]). And I've [[overheard]] the [[house]] are gone too. That's [[type]] of sad. I [[COULD]] like to know where these [[attribute]] are now--I know two died of AIDS but I have no [[thought]] about the others. And what [[COULD]] [[emerge]] to that 13 [[annum]] old and 15 year old [[indicated]]?

[[However]], it a one of a [[sorts]] documentary--fascinating, [[amusing]] and riveting. A must see all the way! A [[concrete]] 10. Where's the DVD??? --------------------------------------------- Result 371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Peter Falk is a diverse and accomplished actor. The movie is well written and the acting seems like real life. For all lovers of Columbo this is a superior piece of work. Because it shows what a talent Peter Falk is. He doesn't play a detective he plays a retired carpet salesman. By the time the credits begin to role you already want to watch it again. The interesting part of the movie is that the message will apply to every person that watches it; the depth of its' pertinence will be the only thing that varies. It is a shame that the liberals in Hollywood only promote smut and skin because this is the type of movie that the people in the business should be proud of. This would be a great movie to turn into a live stage play. --------------------------------------------- Result 372 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I thought that for a [[first]] episode of a [[first]] series it did really well. It was really fun and i thought the actors was brilliant. I think it is a crime for [[anyone]] to [[say]] that is was bad because it looked the right time. i find it really annoying when people say that it wasn't historically correct because it is [[supposed]] to be a [[Saturday]] night entertainment show not a boring [[history]] documentary so i think the costumes and settings were just right. A [[brilliant]] start and i am going to love what will [[come]] next!! I have spoken to [[many]] people at my school and they love the [[show]]! we all [[think]] that it is brilliant entertainment and it has [[great]] stories to go with it. I thought that for a [[outset]] episode of a [[firstly]] series it did really well. It was really fun and i thought the actors was brilliant. I think it is a crime for [[someone]] to [[tell]] that is was bad because it looked the right time. i find it really annoying when people say that it wasn't historically correct because it is [[alleged]] to be a [[Monday]] night entertainment show not a boring [[tale]] documentary so i think the costumes and settings were just right. A [[wondrous]] start and i am going to love what will [[arriving]] next!! I have spoken to [[various]] people at my school and they love the [[exhibit]]! we all [[thinking]] that it is brilliant entertainment and it has [[wondrous]] stories to go with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Worst Bob Hope comedy ever(and that includes some heavy competition). Hope, on an island with sailors, dreams aloud of being in a bathtub with a geisha girl "steering his ship". Somebody certainly steered this Hope-hackery over the cliff, as it features Phyllis Diller and Gina Lollobrigida and still can't work up any laughs or excitement. Where's Bing Crosby when you really need him? --------------------------------------------- Result 374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a veteran of many, many pretentious French films I thought I'd taken the worst the industry had to offer and was able to stomach anything. But not this. Pointless, relentless, violent, unpleasant, meaningless ... The film has nothing to offer and is random hatred and aggression dressed up as pretentious art. Avoid at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Let me start out by saying that I used to really like Betty Grable, particularly from "Down Argentine Way", but by the time she got around to this disaster, she had also got "round" and frankly the whole film was an embarrassment. Costarred with Douglas Fairbanks JNr (who must have been fairly desperate) the story was bad, the colours good, and the film far too long. It had some of the old standbys in it like Harry Davenport and Reginald Gardiner to try and stimulate interest but with no success. The music score was woeful, and I have to say not one tune was memorable in any way....as I was such a fan of Miss Grable, I always wish I had never seen this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Extremely thin 'plot' of satanic rituals or some such mumbo-jumbo provides the hokey excuse to thread copious amounts of sex scenes together. Straight vanilla sex, masturbation, lesbianism, S&M, bestiality, incest, and a few other sexual proliferation's all get their time in the spotlight here. The problem is the storyline is so dull that the rampant sexuality gets pretty tedious after awhile. Who knew that a film with an intimate goat/ girl encounter could be so damn boring? Well now I do.

Eye Candy: Venessa Hidalgo shows all; Helga Line provides T&A (both on display quite frequently); women viewers get the occasional penis.

My Grade: D+

Region 1 DVD Extras: Trailers for "Pick Up", "Legend of Eight Samurai", "Don't Answer the Phone", "Prime Evil", & "Sister Street Fighter" (also the same DVD holds a second feature movie "Evil Eye") --------------------------------------------- Result 377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] You have to understand, when Wargames was released in 1983, it [[created]] a generation of wannabe [[computer]] [[hackers]]. The [[idea]] that a teenager could do anything of far reaching proportions, let alone deter a world war was [[novel]] and [[thrilling]]. Real computers were beginning to show up in people's homes, and for the first time, society was becoming interconnected in a way that made the movie's premise excitingly prescient. Granted, a talking computer that balanced it's free time between chess and global thermonuclear war was a bit far fetched, but the brilliant commentary on nuclear proliferation and the cold war made up for it. I've probably even heard of the hackers that this movie was actually based on.

Fast forward 25 years, and we have a horrible mutant of a thing that I loathe to call a "sequel", called Wargames: The Dead Code. I'll just dig right in. First of all, the plot hinges on a government operated gambling site where folks who win the games automatically become terror suspects. You're probably very confused right now. The idea is that eventually the terrorist will click on the sub-game within the web site called "The Dead Code" where they pilot a plane over a city, spraying it with bioweapons. At some point in the game, you have to choose between "sarin gas" and "anthrax", and if you choose "sarin", then you're automatically confirmed as a bioterrorism weapons expert and your family is taken into custody and interrogated. In the movie, this actually happens. However, since the payment for the game was made from a bank account that was suspicious, it obviously all makes sense.

Second, the avatar of the AI in this straight-to-DVD bomb is an [[annoying]] flash animation that keeps repeating the pop-up-ad-esquire sound bite "play with me baby". Because apparently in the future, advanced AI loses interest in intellectual pursuits like chess, and gets into porn.

Third, the motivation for these "hackers" is profit and women, as opposed to pure curiosity as in the original movie. For some reason, recent hacker movies feel the need to portray all young adults as average surfer dude kind of people who are just like everyone else. That may work for your average sitcom, but c'mon, you don't learn how to take over government computers by doing your hair, playing sports, and shopping at the mall, folks. The one novel thing I noticed was that at some point in the dialogue there is a reference to a Matt Damon movie, and then later there is the phrase, "Good Hunting, Will". I swear, they named the main character Will just for that phrase so they could send a high five to Mr. Damon. This Will kid isn't bad, but he was certainly wasn't like any obsessive hacker I've ever met. I can't fully state how annoyed I am that this movie shares the same name as the original, because it has absolutely nothing in common with it except… Professor Falken and Joshua (WOPR) make a reappearance in this movie, as a limp old man who apparently is dying of boredom, and a dilapidated old tic-tac-toe machine with a higher pitched voice. After some prodding, Joshua (the AI) has what appears to be sex with the new AI with the porn voice, a bunch of board games flash on the big screens, and the whole "The only way to win, is not to play" revelation is supposed to be the crowning moment. Except that those of us who saw the original, you know, those who would want to see this in the first place have already been there and done that. A recycled ending for a movie made from last month's compost.

The new movie was directed by a guy who's done 90210, and written by guys who do B movies. The original was directed by a guy who's been keeping himself busy with "Heroes", so you see the quality difference there. There was talk of a real remake, but I hope they don't destroy this classic all over again. I swear, if I have to, I'll visit every gambling web site until I find the one that's run by a psychotic government computer. The saving grace is that I was able to stream this on Netflix, so at least the only energy I expended watching this disaster was for breathing, clicking, and indigestion. You have to understand, when Wargames was released in 1983, it [[engendered]] a generation of wannabe [[computers]] [[trespassers]]. The [[think]] that a teenager could do anything of far reaching proportions, let alone deter a world war was [[new]] and [[enthralling]]. Real computers were beginning to show up in people's homes, and for the first time, society was becoming interconnected in a way that made the movie's premise excitingly prescient. Granted, a talking computer that balanced it's free time between chess and global thermonuclear war was a bit far fetched, but the brilliant commentary on nuclear proliferation and the cold war made up for it. I've probably even heard of the hackers that this movie was actually based on.

Fast forward 25 years, and we have a horrible mutant of a thing that I loathe to call a "sequel", called Wargames: The Dead Code. I'll just dig right in. First of all, the plot hinges on a government operated gambling site where folks who win the games automatically become terror suspects. You're probably very confused right now. The idea is that eventually the terrorist will click on the sub-game within the web site called "The Dead Code" where they pilot a plane over a city, spraying it with bioweapons. At some point in the game, you have to choose between "sarin gas" and "anthrax", and if you choose "sarin", then you're automatically confirmed as a bioterrorism weapons expert and your family is taken into custody and interrogated. In the movie, this actually happens. However, since the payment for the game was made from a bank account that was suspicious, it obviously all makes sense.

Second, the avatar of the AI in this straight-to-DVD bomb is an [[exasperating]] flash animation that keeps repeating the pop-up-ad-esquire sound bite "play with me baby". Because apparently in the future, advanced AI loses interest in intellectual pursuits like chess, and gets into porn.

Third, the motivation for these "hackers" is profit and women, as opposed to pure curiosity as in the original movie. For some reason, recent hacker movies feel the need to portray all young adults as average surfer dude kind of people who are just like everyone else. That may work for your average sitcom, but c'mon, you don't learn how to take over government computers by doing your hair, playing sports, and shopping at the mall, folks. The one novel thing I noticed was that at some point in the dialogue there is a reference to a Matt Damon movie, and then later there is the phrase, "Good Hunting, Will". I swear, they named the main character Will just for that phrase so they could send a high five to Mr. Damon. This Will kid isn't bad, but he was certainly wasn't like any obsessive hacker I've ever met. I can't fully state how annoyed I am that this movie shares the same name as the original, because it has absolutely nothing in common with it except… Professor Falken and Joshua (WOPR) make a reappearance in this movie, as a limp old man who apparently is dying of boredom, and a dilapidated old tic-tac-toe machine with a higher pitched voice. After some prodding, Joshua (the AI) has what appears to be sex with the new AI with the porn voice, a bunch of board games flash on the big screens, and the whole "The only way to win, is not to play" revelation is supposed to be the crowning moment. Except that those of us who saw the original, you know, those who would want to see this in the first place have already been there and done that. A recycled ending for a movie made from last month's compost.

The new movie was directed by a guy who's done 90210, and written by guys who do B movies. The original was directed by a guy who's been keeping himself busy with "Heroes", so you see the quality difference there. There was talk of a real remake, but I hope they don't destroy this classic all over again. I swear, if I have to, I'll visit every gambling web site until I find the one that's run by a psychotic government computer. The saving grace is that I was able to stream this on Netflix, so at least the only energy I expended watching this disaster was for breathing, clicking, and indigestion. --------------------------------------------- Result 378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Here's a real weirdo for you. It [[starts]] out with another take-off on the [[PSYCHO]] shower scene, on [[campus]], then [[gets]] crazier when [[several]] coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The [[trouble]] starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the [[college]] cuties wanders into the [[woods]], witnesses a [[murder]] by the sheriff and has her [[head]] blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, [[traps]] and slaughters the [[witless]] witnesses one by one. Tony [[March]] is on-target as the [[evil]], shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's [[overall]] tone is [[truly]] [[disturbing]]. The [[ending]] is so [[abrupt]] you [[almost]] [[think]] the director ran out of [[film]]; it's [[also]] a [[study]] in [[despair]]. [[SHALLOW]] [[GRAVE]] is a [[must]] for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the [[world]] over. Here's a real weirdo for you. It [[initiates]] out with another take-off on the [[MADMAN]] shower scene, on [[universities]], then [[get]] crazier when [[dissimilar]] coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The [[problem]] starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the [[academia]] cuties wanders into the [[forest]], witnesses a [[assassinations]] by the sheriff and has her [[leader]] blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, [[trap]] and slaughters the [[daft]] witnesses one by one. Tony [[Marci]] is on-target as the [[satanic]], shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's [[entire]] tone is [[honestly]] [[nagging]]. The [[terminated]] is so [[steep]] you [[practically]] [[reckon]] the director ran out of [[kino]]; it's [[apart]] a [[scrutinize]] in [[despondency]]. [[SUPERFICIAL]] [[GRAVEYARD]] is a [[should]] for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the [[monde]] over. --------------------------------------------- Result 379 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There have been several films about Zorro, some even made in Europe, e.g. Alain Delon. This role has also been played by outstanding actors, such as Tyrone Power and Anthony Hopkins, but to me the best of all times has always been Reed Hadley. This serial gives you the opportunity to see an interesting western, where you will only discover the real villain, Don del Oro, at its end. The serial also has good performance of various actors of movies B like Ed Cobb, ex- Tarzan Jim Pierce, C. Montague Shaw, eternal villains like John Merton and Charles King, and a very good performance of Hadley as Zorro. He was quick, smart, used well his whip and sword, and his voice was the best for any Zorro. --------------------------------------------- Result 380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Since [[Educating]] Rita, [[Julie]] Walters has been one of my role [[models]], and her performance in this as a [[woman]] who [[helps]] the [[man]] she loves get in [[synch]] with his feminine side is [[magnificent]]. I [[would]] never have believed her character in the hands of a [[lesser]] actress, but Walters [[pulls]] it off with gusto and [[panache]]. Adrian Pasdar [[gives]] his [[best]] performance to-date in the [[male]] lead. Since [[Educate]] Rita, [[Juli]] Walters has been one of my role [[modeling]], and her performance in this as a [[girls]] who [[helped]] the [[guy]] she loves get in [[sync]] with his feminine side is [[wondrous]]. I [[should]] never have believed her character in the hands of a [[smaller]] actress, but Walters [[pulled]] it off with gusto and [[plume]]. Adrian Pasdar [[delivers]] his [[better]] performance to-date in the [[macho]] lead. --------------------------------------------- Result 381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[Godfather]] [[Part]] I was a [[stunning]] look inside the [[fictional]] Corleone [[family]] and how an innocent [[young]] man was all but forced into [[circumstances]] he never [[wanted]] to have a [[part]] of. The [[Godfather]] [[Part]] II [[shows]] that young man's acceptance of his [[new]] role, his desensitization of [[character]], as well as his [[complete]] loss of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The [[first]] two parts of this saga of this [[transformation]] of [[Michael]] Corleone make for one of the [[greatest]] tragedies in [[cinematic]] history.

Then, along [[came]] The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex [[character]] that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather [[Part]] II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the [[unbelievably]] tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and [[abandoning]] the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the [[meaning]] of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible [[mess]] of a [[film]] that never should have been made. The only [[solution]] to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather [[movies]] is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's [[shockingly]] horrible act of having a member of his own family killed. The [[Nominating]] [[Parties]] I was a [[staggering]] look inside the [[imaginary]] Corleone [[families]] and how an innocent [[youthful]] man was all but forced into [[situations]] he never [[wanting]] to have a [[parte]] of. The [[Nominating]] [[Portion]] II [[showings]] that young man's acceptance of his [[nouveau]] role, his desensitization of [[personage]], as well as his [[finishing]] loss of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The [[fiirst]] two parts of this saga of this [[transform]] of [[Michel]] Corleone make for one of the [[widest]] tragedies in [[cinematographic]] history.

Then, along [[arrived]] The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex [[nature]] that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather [[Parties]] II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the [[unimaginably]] tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and [[abandon]] the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the [[mean]] of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible [[chaos]] of a [[filmmaking]] that never should have been made. The only [[solving]] to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather [[filmmaking]] is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's [[marvellously]] horrible act of having a member of his own family killed. --------------------------------------------- Result 382 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] While movie titles contains the word 'Mother', the first thing that comes to our mind will be a mother's love for her children.

However, The Mother tells a [[different]] [[story]].

The Mother do not discuss the love between a mother and her child, or how she sacrifice herself for the benefit of her child. Here, Notting Hill director Roger Michell tells us how a mother's love for a man about half of her age hurts the people around her.

Before Daniel Craig takes on the role of James Bond, here, he plays Darren, a man who is helping to renovate the house of the son of the mother, and sleeping with her daughter as well. Anne Reid, who was a familiar face on TV series, takes up the challenging role of the leading character, May.

The story begins with May coping with the sudden loss of her husband, Toots, in a family visit to her son, Bobby. While she befriends Darren, a handyman who is doing some renovation in Bobby's house, she was shocked to found out that her daughter, Paula, was sleeping with Darren. At the same time, May was coping with life after the death of Toots. Fearing that Harry and Paula do not wanted her, May starts to find her life going off track, until she spends her afternoon with Darren.

Darren was nice and friendly to May, and May soon finds some affection on Darren. Instead of treating him like a friend, she treated the man who was about half her age with love of a couple. Later, May found sexual pleasure from Darren, where he gave her the pleasure she could never find on anyone else. And this is the beginning of the disaster that could lead to the break down of a family.

The Mother explores the inner world of a widow who wanted to try something she never had in her life, and solace on someone who is there for her to shoulder on. This can be told from May buying tea time snacks for Darren to fulfilling sexual needs from a man younger than her, where it eventually gave her more than she bargained for.

Anne Reid has made a breakthrough for her role of May, as she was previously best well known for her various role on TV series. As she do not have much movies in her career resume, The Mother has put her on the critic's attention. Daniel Craig, on the other hand, had took on a similar role in his movie career, such as Sylvia (2003) and Enduring Love (2004). If his reprising role of James Bond fails, film reviewers should not forget that he has a better performance in small productions in his years of movie career, and The Mother is one of them.

The Mother may not be everyone's favorite, but it is definitely not your usual matinée show to go along with tea and scones, accompanied by butter and jam. While movie titles contains the word 'Mother', the first thing that comes to our mind will be a mother's love for her children.

However, The Mother tells a [[multiple]] [[storytelling]].

The Mother do not discuss the love between a mother and her child, or how she sacrifice herself for the benefit of her child. Here, Notting Hill director Roger Michell tells us how a mother's love for a man about half of her age hurts the people around her.

Before Daniel Craig takes on the role of James Bond, here, he plays Darren, a man who is helping to renovate the house of the son of the mother, and sleeping with her daughter as well. Anne Reid, who was a familiar face on TV series, takes up the challenging role of the leading character, May.

The story begins with May coping with the sudden loss of her husband, Toots, in a family visit to her son, Bobby. While she befriends Darren, a handyman who is doing some renovation in Bobby's house, she was shocked to found out that her daughter, Paula, was sleeping with Darren. At the same time, May was coping with life after the death of Toots. Fearing that Harry and Paula do not wanted her, May starts to find her life going off track, until she spends her afternoon with Darren.

Darren was nice and friendly to May, and May soon finds some affection on Darren. Instead of treating him like a friend, she treated the man who was about half her age with love of a couple. Later, May found sexual pleasure from Darren, where he gave her the pleasure she could never find on anyone else. And this is the beginning of the disaster that could lead to the break down of a family.

The Mother explores the inner world of a widow who wanted to try something she never had in her life, and solace on someone who is there for her to shoulder on. This can be told from May buying tea time snacks for Darren to fulfilling sexual needs from a man younger than her, where it eventually gave her more than she bargained for.

Anne Reid has made a breakthrough for her role of May, as she was previously best well known for her various role on TV series. As she do not have much movies in her career resume, The Mother has put her on the critic's attention. Daniel Craig, on the other hand, had took on a similar role in his movie career, such as Sylvia (2003) and Enduring Love (2004). If his reprising role of James Bond fails, film reviewers should not forget that he has a better performance in small productions in his years of movie career, and The Mother is one of them.

The Mother may not be everyone's favorite, but it is definitely not your usual matinée show to go along with tea and scones, accompanied by butter and jam. --------------------------------------------- Result 383 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] I think the [[biggest]] disappointment in this film was that, right until the end, I [[expected]] the acting [[instructors]] of the cast to break in and apologize for how poor the acting was. When you [[consider]] the [[powerful]] subject, the [[brilliant]] scenery and the effort made in creating a [[wonderful]] set and [[spectacular]] images, it is a shame that little [[attention]] was given to acting.

I think the [[bigger]] disappointment in this film was that, right until the end, I [[prophesied]] the acting [[tutors]] of the cast to break in and apologize for how poor the acting was. When you [[scrutinize]] the [[emphatic]] subject, the [[sumptuous]] scenery and the effort made in creating a [[sumptuous]] set and [[marvellous]] images, it is a shame that little [[beware]] was given to acting.

--------------------------------------------- Result 384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[film]] was absolutely...ugh i can't [[find]] the word oh [[wait]]... [[crap]]! I mean when it [[started]] i was like [[yeah]] this [[looks]] good and then after it was so boring. I [[nearly]] fell asleep and it had nothing to do with the [[fact]] that i [[caught]] a late [[showing]] because it was [[utter]] [[filth]]. Ram Gopal Varma has tried his best but the cast [[could]] never [[live]] up to the cast of the [[original]] Sholay i mean what was he [[thinking]] doing a [[remake]]. What was he [[trying]] to do? [[Be]] like Sanjay Leeli Bhansani and [[win]] all the [[awards]] next year like he did for [[Black]]? Ajay and that other guy were good [[especially]] the other guy who played raj because out of all of them he was the one to look at. What was Amitabh doing? He's [[destroying]] his own dignity by doing all these stupid [[films]]. First Nishabd then Cheeni [[Kum]] then Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and now this i mean hes got to [[gather]] a [[bit]] of his money and [[move]] as far away from Bollywood as [[possible]] before he loses all his [[respect]] and I'm telling you he's already [[past]] half his [[way]]. I mean all this is [[really]] good for the other actors like Shah Rukh Khan who's [[getting]] a really good name now because of the recent downfall of Amitabh. I never really liked him because he [[thinks]] he's [[God]] and i just knew Abhishek was [[going]] to be in that [[movie]].

[[If]] you [[want]] to [[save]] your £17.75 and spend it on [[something]] [[good]] go watch Heyy Babyy because that's just the funniest [[movie]] ever and it's number one in the [[charts]]! This [[filmmaking]] was absolutely...ugh i can't [[finds]] the word oh [[expecting]]... [[shit]]! I mean when it [[launched]] i was like [[yep]] this [[seems]] good and then after it was so boring. I [[approximately]] fell asleep and it had nothing to do with the [[facto]] that i [[grabbed]] a late [[show]] because it was [[total]] [[dirt]]. Ram Gopal Varma has tried his best but the cast [[did]] never [[vivo]] up to the cast of the [[initial]] Sholay i mean what was he [[thought]] doing a [[redo]]. What was he [[try]] to do? [[Are]] like Sanjay Leeli Bhansani and [[winning]] all the [[prize]] next year like he did for [[Negro]]? Ajay and that other guy were good [[mainly]] the other guy who played raj because out of all of them he was the one to look at. What was Amitabh doing? He's [[demolishing]] his own dignity by doing all these stupid [[filmmaking]]. First Nishabd then Cheeni [[Kam]] then Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and now this i mean hes got to [[muster]] a [[bitten]] of his money and [[budge]] as far away from Bollywood as [[probable]] before he loses all his [[respecting]] and I'm telling you he's already [[previous]] half his [[pathways]]. I mean all this is [[truthfully]] good for the other actors like Shah Rukh Khan who's [[obtain]] a really good name now because of the recent downfall of Amitabh. I never really liked him because he [[feels]] he's [[Jeez]] and i just knew Abhishek was [[gonna]] to be in that [[film]].

[[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[saved]] your £17.75 and spend it on [[somethin]] [[alright]] go watch Heyy Babyy because that's just the funniest [[kino]] ever and it's number one in the [[graphics]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much about love & life can be learned from watching the folks at THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER.

Ernst Lubitsch had another quiet triumph added to his credit with this lovely film. With sparkling dialogue (courtesy of his longtime collaborator Samson Raphaelson) and wonderful performances from a cast of abundantly talented performers, he created a truly memorable movie. Always believing in playing up to the intelligence of his viewers, and favoring sophistication over slapstick, the director concocted a scintillating cinematic repast seasoned with that elusive, enigmatic quality known as the ‘Lubitsch touch.'

Although the story is set in Budapest (and there is a jumble of accents among the players) this is of no consequence. The beautiful simplicity of the plot is that any great American city or small town could easily be the locus for the action.

Jimmy Stewart & Margaret Sullavan are wonderful as the clerks in love with romance and then with each other - without knowing it. Their dialogue - so adeptly handled as to seem utterly natural - perfectly conveys their confusion & quiet desperation as they seek for soul mates. Theirs is one of the classic love stories of the cinema.

Cherubic Frank Morgan has a more serious role than usual, that of a man whose transient importance in his little world is shattered when he finds himself to be a cuckold. An accomplished scene stealer, he allows no emotion to escape unvented. Additionally, Morgan provides the film with its most joyous few moments - near the end - when he determines that his store's newest employee, an impoverished youth, enjoys a memorable Christmas Eve.

Joseph Schildkraut adds another vivid depiction to his roster of screen portrayals, this time that of a toadying, sycophantic Lothario who thoroughly deserves the punishment eventually meted out to him. Gentle Felix Bressart has his finest film role as a family man who really can not afford to become involved in shop intrigues, yet remains a steadfast friend to Stewart.

Sara Haden graces the small role of a sales clerk. William Tracy is hilarious as the ambitious errand boy who takes advantage of unforeseen developments to leverage himself onto the sales force.

In tiny roles, Charles Halton plays a no-nonsense detective and Edwin Maxwell appears as a pompous doctor. Movie mavens will recognize Mary Carr & Mabel Colcord - both uncredited - in their single scene as Miss Sullavan's grandmother & aunt. --------------------------------------------- Result 386 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have not read the novel, though I understand that this is somewhat different from it; the fact that I rather enjoyed this, coupled with the fact that this really is not my genre, leads me to the decision of not pursuing reading the book. Having not read a single word of Austen's writing, I really can't compare this to any of her work. What I can say is that almost every line of dialog in this is clever, witty, and well-delivered, as well as the biggest source of comedy in this. This made me laugh out loud a lot, with perfect British and verbal material. Every acting performance is spot-on, and Paltrow completely nails the role of a kind matchmaker. The characters are well-written, credible and consistent. I did find a couple of them extremely irritating, however, and while I think that at least some of that was meant to be funny, it tended to get repeated excessively, and it honestly wasn't amusing the first time they appeared. The editing and cinematography are marvelous, and everything looks utterly gorgeous. Plot and pacing are great, you're never bored. It does end in a *really* obvious manner, but maybe that's what the audience of these prefer. I can't claim that this did not entertain me, it did from start to finish, and I'd watch it again. There is brief language in this. I recommend this to any fan of romance stories. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Guy [[walking]] around without motive... I will never get those two hours of my life back. The guy kept on assuming identities and cheating on his pregnant wife. What was I thinking? How did this win a price anywhere? I understood he loved his father but other than that the [[movie]] was completely [[senseless]] to me. What was the purpose of walking so much and going to the [[funeral]] of a stranger for no apparent reason. How did this enrich his life??? Why did we have to see the dying old lady on her underwear????!!! Why???!!!!

I though it would be deep or about something more interesting. I do not [[recommend]] the [[movie]] [[even]] to leave on while sleeping... Guy [[walks]] around without motive... I will never get those two hours of my life back. The guy kept on assuming identities and cheating on his pregnant wife. What was I thinking? How did this win a price anywhere? I understood he loved his father but other than that the [[filmmaking]] was completely [[mindless]] to me. What was the purpose of walking so much and going to the [[mortuary]] of a stranger for no apparent reason. How did this enrich his life??? Why did we have to see the dying old lady on her underwear????!!! Why???!!!!

I though it would be deep or about something more interesting. I do not [[recommendations]] the [[movies]] [[yet]] to leave on while sleeping... --------------------------------------------- Result 388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jean-Claude Van Damme plays twin brothers Alex and Chad, both whom are martial arts expert who team up to take down the mobsters responsible for the murder of the parents in this empty headed martial arts actioner which doesn't have a plot that would make better use of the gimmick of having two Jean-Claude Van Dammes. Some okay actionscenes, but this is not one of Van Damme's best. --------------------------------------------- Result 389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I [[thought]] this was a [[quiet]] good movie. It was [[fun]] to watch it. What I [[liked]] [[best]] where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were [[GREAT]]. I [[brainchild]] this was a [[hush]] good movie. It was [[amusing]] to watch it. What I [[enjoyed]] [[bestest]] where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were [[WONDROUS]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 390 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The performances in this movie were fantastic. The dialogue was great. Jason Patric delivered a fantastic performance as "Kid" Collins in this wonderful adaptation of the Jim Thompson novel. Far superior to "The Grifters", which was a good movie, this film really stayed true to the pulp fiction/film noir roots from which the story came. I recommend this movie to all film noir fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen my fair share of comedy and standup movies but this one is so original, so fresh, it will make you wonder why you always walked right pass it in the video store. Murphy has some pretty raunchy jokes but this is just too funny to pass. If only every movie could be this funny. it should be called "107 minutes of the most incredible comedy" Murphy is a comic genius in this film and will make you say "this is the guy that did dr. doulittle!" He talkes about the ice cream man, shoe throwing mothers, his aunt with a mustache, racism, and everything else you could possibly think of and the ones you couldnt. Please if you ever see one comedy in your life this is it, if only all movies could be Delirious. --------------------------------------------- Result 392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Joseph L. Mankiewicz is not [[remembered]] by most [[today]] as one of the [[finest]] [[directors]] in Hollywood [[history]], but this [[film]] [[proves]] that he is. Already a success by doing sophisticated American [[dramas]] such as A Letter to Three [[Wives]] and All About Eve as well as successfully [[adapting]] Shakespeare to life in Julius Caesar, Mankiewicz does a [[marvelous]] [[job]] of bringing this hit Broadway play to [[film]] and does it with [[style]]. Marlon Brando is [[perfect]] as [[Sky]] Masterson, [[even]] if he can't sing too well. He is the only [[actor]] who [[could]] pull it off [[perfectly]] wit his [[sheer]] [[coolness]] and [[clarity]]. [[Frank]] Sinatra is a [[wonderful]] singer, as expected, and does a good [[job]] of acting as [[Nathan]] Detroit. Jean Simmons is [[also]] very good as Sarah Brown and her scenes with Brando sizzle with [[great]] [[chemistry]]. All [[supporting]] [[actors]] do their [[part]], [[especially]] Sheldon Leonard as [[Harry]] the Horse in a very [[funny]] bit. [[Still]], Mankiewicz should be [[given]] most of the [[credit]] for [[bringing]] a [[fine]] musical in its own [[right]] to the screen in such a [[way]] that it feels authentic in [[many]] scenes but is [[still]] a [[story]] in its own [[world]]. [[All]] in all, [[Guys]] and Dolls is a [[great]] musical and [[works]] on [[many]] [[levels]] it [[normally]] should not have. Joseph L. Mankiewicz is not [[reminded]] by most [[hoy]] as one of the [[meanest]] [[managers]] in Hollywood [[historic]], but this [[movie]] [[testify]] that he is. Already a success by doing sophisticated American [[theatrical]] such as A Letter to Three [[Handcuffs]] and All About Eve as well as successfully [[adjusted]] Shakespeare to life in Julius Caesar, Mankiewicz does a [[wondrous]] [[labour]] of bringing this hit Broadway play to [[movie]] and does it with [[styles]]. Marlon Brando is [[faultless]] as [[Heavenly]] Masterson, [[yet]] if he can't sing too well. He is the only [[protagonist]] who [[did]] pull it off [[fully]] wit his [[pur]] [[coldness]] and [[lucidity]]. [[Franck]] Sinatra is a [[magnifique]] singer, as expected, and does a good [[employment]] of acting as [[Nate]] Detroit. Jean Simmons is [[furthermore]] very good as Sarah Brown and her scenes with Brando sizzle with [[huge]] [[chemist]]. All [[aiding]] [[actresses]] do their [[parties]], [[notably]] Sheldon Leonard as [[Hari]] the Horse in a very [[amusing]] bit. [[However]], Mankiewicz should be [[afforded]] most of the [[credits]] for [[bring]] a [[fined]] musical in its own [[rights]] to the screen in such a [[ways]] that it feels authentic in [[countless]] scenes but is [[however]] a [[conte]] in its own [[worldwide]]. [[Totality]] in all, [[Buddies]] and Dolls is a [[wondrous]] musical and [[worked]] on [[innumerable]] [[grades]] it [[fluently]] should not have. --------------------------------------------- Result 393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] What [[keeps]] us [[going]] - or at least what I feel the writer wanted us to keep us [[glued]] at an early point is our desire to [[know]] whether Martinaud has done the dirty deed. Without spoiling so much, of course there is a red herring and a twist. But then we discover that this is the [[story]] of Martinaud's [[imperfections]] and his difficulty in [[coping]]. When there is the revelation - we [[begin]] to [[sympathize]] and [[pity]] him because as the story progresses we are made to think he is the sick, perverted pedophiliac that we're predisposed to have in mind. One of those things he has to cope with is the [[distant]] gap he and his wife have even [[though]] they [[live]] on the same [[roof]]. These problems of course are given their denouement in the film's [[shocking]] finale.

This [[movie]] [[demands]] your [[patience]] and it has [[certainly]] tried those of [[restless]] teenagers sitting at the rear. They were heckling obviously because they aren't partial to "central location" films. [[Although]] there is a bit of travelling, when we get to the woods and the beach. And we [[realize]] that Gallien isn't as [[clever]] as we are [[made]] to think he is.

The Inquisitor is 5/5 What [[retains]] us [[gonna]] - or at least what I feel the writer wanted us to keep us [[pasted]] at an early point is our desire to [[savoir]] whether Martinaud has done the dirty deed. Without spoiling so much, of course there is a red herring and a twist. But then we discover that this is the [[conte]] of Martinaud's [[inadequacies]] and his difficulty in [[adapting]]. When there is the revelation - we [[embark]] to [[commiserate]] and [[shame]] him because as the story progresses we are made to think he is the sick, perverted pedophiliac that we're predisposed to have in mind. One of those things he has to cope with is the [[remote]] gap he and his wife have even [[albeit]] they [[vivo]] on the same [[ceiling]]. These problems of course are given their denouement in the film's [[appalling]] finale.

This [[cinematography]] [[demanding]] your [[sabra]] and it has [[probably]] tried those of [[agitated]] teenagers sitting at the rear. They were heckling obviously because they aren't partial to "central location" films. [[Though]] there is a bit of travelling, when we get to the woods and the beach. And we [[realizing]] that Gallien isn't as [[shrewd]] as we are [[accomplished]] to think he is.

The Inquisitor is 5/5 --------------------------------------------- Result 394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Thanks to a dull, dimensionless [[screenplay]] by Neil Simon, and lackluster [[direction]] from [[Robert]] Moore, Chapter Two becomes a [[shrill]] showcase for Marsha Mason who received her third of four Oscar nods for Chapter Two [[giving]] the same performance here that she [[gave]] in Cinnderella [[Liberty]](73), The Goodbye [[Girl]](77), Audrey [[Rose]](78) and Only When I [[Laugh]](81);only this time she doesn't have a [[child]] to [[drag]] around. Chapter Two is the third and [[last]] feature film for Moore having previously [[directed]] [[Neil]] Simon's The [[Cheap]] Detective(78) and [[Murder]] By Death(76). Caan is miscast, the [[characters]] are mono-dimensional, the [[dialog]] is [[overly]] analytical, and there's virtually no [[establishing]] [[detail]]. The first half is a less-than-captivating, [[meet]] [[cute]], coy romance between a blinkered Caan and a chipper Mason, and the [[dreary]] second half makes you long for the first half. The NYC locations as well as Joe Bologna, and a painfully thin Valerie Harper are irrelevant, but at [[least]] they provide some welcome distraction. And [[last]] and least, there's an [[awful]] song played during the credits. Thanks to a dull, dimensionless [[scenario]] by Neil Simon, and lackluster [[orientation]] from [[Roberta]] Moore, Chapter Two becomes a [[strident]] showcase for Marsha Mason who received her third of four Oscar nods for Chapter Two [[conferring]] the same performance here that she [[delivered]] in Cinnderella [[Freedom]](73), The Goodbye [[Giri]](77), Audrey [[Rises]](78) and Only When I [[Laughs]](81);only this time she doesn't have a [[infantile]] to [[dragging]] around. Chapter Two is the third and [[latter]] feature film for Moore having previously [[oriented]] [[Neal]] Simon's The [[Inexpensive]] Detective(78) and [[Assassinations]] By Death(76). Caan is miscast, the [[trait]] are mono-dimensional, the [[dialogue]] is [[exceedingly]] analytical, and there's virtually no [[establish]] [[details]]. The first half is a less-than-captivating, [[satisfy]] [[lovable]], coy romance between a blinkered Caan and a chipper Mason, and the [[depressing]] second half makes you long for the first half. The NYC locations as well as Joe Bologna, and a painfully thin Valerie Harper are irrelevant, but at [[minus]] they provide some welcome distraction. And [[final]] and least, there's an [[shocking]] song played during the credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 395 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] Profanity, stupidity, self-indulgence, and bad acting all join forces for a true tour de force in [[terrible]] movie-making. Pesci's attempt to prove My Cousin Vinny was no fluke, shows the opposite instead. He is generally too lightweight and foulmouthed to handle the lead. A true must-miss! Profanity, stupidity, self-indulgence, and bad acting all join forces for a true tour de force in [[scary]] movie-making. Pesci's attempt to prove My Cousin Vinny was no fluke, shows the opposite instead. He is generally too lightweight and foulmouthed to handle the lead. A true must-miss! --------------------------------------------- Result 396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie, even though is about one of the most favorite topics of Mexican producers producers: the extreme life in our cities, has a funny way to put it on the screen.

Four of the more important Mexican directors, of the last times, approach histories of our city framed in diverse literary sorts as it can be the farce or the satire, which gives us a film with a over exposed topic in our country, but narrated in a very different way which gives a freshness tone him.

With actors little known, but that interprets of excellent way their paper, each one of the directors reflect in the stories the capacity by we have been identified anywhere in the world, that capacity of laugh the pains and to make celebration of the sadness. Perhaps to many people in our country the film not have pleased, but I consider that people of other countries could find attractive and share the surrealism of the Mexican. --------------------------------------------- Result 397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film, in my opinion, is, despite it's flaws (which I maintain are *few*), an utter masterpiece and a great and glorious piece of art.

What Mr. Bakshi has done here is to create an utterly beautiful film and has shown his immense talent and versatility as a director of animated films. He does not receive 1/100th of the credit he deserves for literally saving the art of animation for an adult audience. If it were not for Mr. Bakshi, I don't believe animation would have survived the Disney onslaught. What is more, with The Lord of the Rings, he has not only created a beautiful animated film, but he has created an entirely new art form - unfortunately one that never quite made it off the ground.

Most people will complain about the use of rotoscoping in the film (the use of live action images which are used as background images and often animated over using various techniques from what appears to be small amounts of tinting to full blown animation). But I feel that the people who complain about it simply cannot accept an art form which is out of the norm. No, this is not Disney animation. No it's not live action. No, it's not "cheating" - what it is is a new, fascinating, and absolutely wonderful art form. Something so fresh, and so new that it feels completely at home in such a fantastic tale as "The Lord of the Rings". Bakshi's pioneering use of this technique brings the subtleties of Middle Earth to life is a very dark and mysterious way, in particular, the darker of Tolkien's creatures, particularly the Nazgul, are realized in a way that traditional animation or live action have not been able to accomplish.

Peter S. Beagle's screenplay (based very little, as I understand it, on an early draft by Chris Conkling) is a very loyal adaptation of Tolkien's works. Where possible he uses dialogue directly out of the novel and it feels at home in the world which Bakshi has created. There are many cuts that were made to fit the first book and 3/4 into a single 2 hour 15 minute film, but there are very few changes to the storyline. There are a few holes which it would have been nice to have filled: The reforging of Narsil, the gifts of Galadriel, the Huorns at the battle of the Hornburg, but, again, with the time limitations he had (already the longest animated feature in history), these are certainly understandable (though it makes one wonder how they could have been explained in a sequel).

Also there is the delightful (one of my favorites) score by Leonard Rosenman (who also scored Barry Lyndon and Star Trek IV (the score for which is clearly based on his LotR work)). It is bombastic and audacious and, dare I say, perfect. It stands on it's own as an orchestral triumph, but when coupled with the images of the film, it enters a whole new world of symphonic perfection. So far from the typical Hollywoodland fare that it turns many people off.

The voice actors are wonderful. Of particular note is John Hurt as Aragorn who just oozes the essence of Strider.

The character design is also wonderfully unique, though not often to everyone's taste. But remember that it is the duty of the director of an adaptation to show you what he/she imagines, not what you might have imagined, and so Aragorn is realized with a distinctive Native American feel and Boromir appears in Viking inspired garb. This is perhaps not what you imagined, but I can only applaud Mr. Bakshi for showing us what he "saw". It also might be noted that he spent a significant amount of time with Priscilla Tolkien in developing the character outfits for the film.

One farther word - the Flight to the Ford sequence, in my opinion, is one of the most subtlety beautiful sequences ever to be caught on celluloid. Bakshi is not afraid to slow down the pace for a moment, and his mastery is clearly shown by the incredible tension is able to build. Bakshi's artistic ability and Tolkien's incredible work fuse in this sequence to a glorious peak which has yet to be equaled.

The recent DVD release (2001) by Warner Brothers, is sorely lacking. While we can offer our eternal thanks that the film is finally available in widescreen format, the package is woefully short of extras. How glorious it would have been to have had a director's commentary, been able to see the 20 minutes of extra footage that were removed for the theatrical release. Another delightful addition could have been the assembled the live action footage which was later animated over. Also present in the DVD release is the utterly horrible voiceover at the end of the film which is a departure from the simple voiceover which occurred in the very final frames of the film. This version is plastered and poorly rendered right over the musical climax of the score.

Of course, the greatest tragedy of all is that the sequel was never made. We will never be able to see Bakshi's interpretation of Gondor, of Shelob, of Faramir, of the Cracks of Doom, of Eowyn's battle with the Witch King or Gandalf's confrontation with him. We will never be graced with Bakshi's image of Denethor or the Palatir or the Paths of the Dead. It is a shame beyond all shames that we will, in the end, have to accept Peter Jackson's glitz and glitter Hollywood, action film version of these later events in Tolkien's masterpiece, but, I suppose even that is better than having no cinematic version at all.

David --------------------------------------------- Result 398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Any [[film]] which begins with a cowhand [[shagging]] a female calf can't promise much. As for the stereotyping of the kibbutz as it was 50 [[yrs]] ago, well I was there and it just wasn't like that. OK every kibbutz had just a small piece of something shown in the film (like [[youngsters]] raiding the kitchen at night) but you can't show the whole kibbutz as being full of all those - shall we say - naughty traits. Each kibbutz had its own problems, but hardly any kibbutz had all of them. The views of [[Israel]] were great. I still remember my youth in that Garden of Eden called the Emek (valley). [[Yes]], and the acting was good too, so you see it wasn't all black - just a [[wrong]] portrayal - probably on purpose too. Any [[filmmaking]] which begins with a cowhand [[kissing]] a female calf can't promise much. As for the stereotyping of the kibbutz as it was 50 [[years]] ago, well I was there and it just wasn't like that. OK every kibbutz had just a small piece of something shown in the film (like [[adolescence]] raiding the kitchen at night) but you can't show the whole kibbutz as being full of all those - shall we say - naughty traits. Each kibbutz had its own problems, but hardly any kibbutz had all of them. The views of [[Lsrael]] were great. I still remember my youth in that Garden of Eden called the Emek (valley). [[Oui]], and the acting was good too, so you see it wasn't all black - just a [[misguided]] portrayal - probably on purpose too. --------------------------------------------- Result 399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Honestly, I was disappointed in "Expiration [[Date]]." Super [[clever]] title and interesting premise, but I don't [[think]] it [[delivered]]. What was it about? The main character's desire to reconnect with his Native roots? Or, more [[likely]], it was his need to overcome his fear of death. But, he wasn't set up as someone who has lived his life in fear -- it seems as if his life was going fine, but since doomsday is approaching he should now [[start]] [[worrying]]. I didn't buy it. Meanwhile, the [[supporting]] characters in the [[film]] didn't [[seem]] to have needs that [[blended]] into an overarching story. They were all just doing their thing, running parallel to the main character. Also, what was treated as a "curse" looked more like a coincidence. Who cursed the family? Why? When? Finally, why didn't he just plan on staying in his apartment all day on his birthday? Those are my criticisms, but I did [[love]] the shots of Seattle, [[cinematography]] was beautiful, acting was good in the times it wasn't outstanding. Honestly, I was disappointed in "Expiration [[Dates]]." Super [[malin]] title and interesting premise, but I don't [[believing]] it [[gave]]. What was it about? The main character's desire to reconnect with his Native roots? Or, more [[apt]], it was his need to overcome his fear of death. But, he wasn't set up as someone who has lived his life in fear -- it seems as if his life was going fine, but since doomsday is approaching he should now [[began]] [[disconcerting]]. I didn't buy it. Meanwhile, the [[helping]] characters in the [[filmmaking]] didn't [[looks]] to have needs that [[mixing]] into an overarching story. They were all just doing their thing, running parallel to the main character. Also, what was treated as a "curse" looked more like a coincidence. Who cursed the family? Why? When? Finally, why didn't he just plan on staying in his apartment all day on his birthday? Those are my criticisms, but I did [[iike]] the shots of Seattle, [[film]] was beautiful, acting was good in the times it wasn't outstanding. --------------------------------------------- Result 400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Hollywood [[North]]" is an euphemism from the movie industry as they went to Canada to make movies because of tax breaks and cheaper costs in a [[civilized]] city like Toronto, in this [[case]], [[later]] in Vancouver. Peter O'Brian, the [[director]], probably [[saw]] a [[lot]] of the invaders from California that this movie [[seems]] to be the right way to [[deal]] with the arriving personalities trying to capitalize on the economics that Canada presented.

[[Needless]] to [[say]], "[[Moon]] [[Lantern]]", the successful novel written by a Canadian author is turned into "[[Flight]] to Bogota", which has [[nothing]] to do with the original film. A great egotistical has-been, Michael Baytes, who is obsessed with what is happening in Iran, is offered the lead part, which turns to be a disaster.

The film seems to be saying that too many cooks have spoiled the broth, which seems to be the case with the ultimate product, which is saved by its producer, Bobby Myers. With the help of Sandy Ryan, who has been around making a documentary of the film being shot in Toronto, parts of the film are [[transformed]] into a [[cohesive]] movie at [[last]].

The filming process is [[hilarious]], and the acting, in general, is good. "Hollywood [[Nordic]]" is an euphemism from the movie industry as they went to Canada to make movies because of tax breaks and cheaper costs in a [[civilised]] city like Toronto, in this [[example]], [[then]] in Vancouver. Peter O'Brian, the [[superintendent]], probably [[observed]] a [[batch]] of the invaders from California that this movie [[looks]] to be the right way to [[address]] with the arriving personalities trying to capitalize on the economics that Canada presented.

[[Futile]] to [[tell]], "[[Luna]] [[Flashlight]]", the successful novel written by a Canadian author is turned into "[[Airplane]] to Bogota", which has [[anything]] to do with the original film. A great egotistical has-been, Michael Baytes, who is obsessed with what is happening in Iran, is offered the lead part, which turns to be a disaster.

The film seems to be saying that too many cooks have spoiled the broth, which seems to be the case with the ultimate product, which is saved by its producer, Bobby Myers. With the help of Sandy Ryan, who has been around making a documentary of the film being shot in Toronto, parts of the film are [[convert]] into a [[coherent]] movie at [[final]].

The filming process is [[funny]], and the acting, in general, is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Made]] in 1931, this foreign film should be [[seen]] and [[enjoyed]] more often.

We open on a [[quiet]] [[little]] French village, scanning the [[roofs]] of the [[sleeping]] [[citizens]]. Then we [[hear]] [[something]] that sounds like a [[party]]. [[Upon]] [[investigating]] the uproar, two [[neighboring]] [[men]] are told the story of two [[men]], [[supposedly]] [[friends]], who [[picked]] two numbers for the [[lottery]].

Our star of the picture has his number and his [[friend]] his. When he [[asks]] his [[friend]], [[would]] he [[share]] half of the dough, should his ticket be the winning number, his [[friend]] promptly [[says]] no. In fact, H.[[E]]. double hockey sticks no! is the way he acts about it.

So when our man discovers he has the winning ticket and that it has been lost, through no fault of his own, he is frantic. Everyone is out for themselves, looking for this ticket, in something like a precursor to "The Great Race." Even though this is all a flashback, I was in knots the whole time and got so [[upset]] over every little thing in this all-for-me show-me-the-money cash-in-the-bank film. Watch Le Million today! [[Introduced]] in 1931, this foreign film should be [[noticed]] and [[liked]] more often.

We open on a [[hush]] [[petite]] French village, scanning the [[ceiling]] of the [[sleep]] [[citizen]]. Then we [[heed]] [[somethings]] that sounds like a [[parties]]. [[After]] [[exploring]] the uproar, two [[adjoining]] [[male]] are told the story of two [[male]], [[presumably]] [[buddies]], who [[selects]] two numbers for the [[bingo]].

Our star of the picture has his number and his [[boyfriend]] his. When he [[demands]] his [[boyfriend]], [[should]] he [[shares]] half of the dough, should his ticket be the winning number, his [[boyfriend]] promptly [[tells]] no. In fact, H.[[f]]. double hockey sticks no! is the way he acts about it.

So when our man discovers he has the winning ticket and that it has been lost, through no fault of his own, he is frantic. Everyone is out for themselves, looking for this ticket, in something like a precursor to "The Great Race." Even though this is all a flashback, I was in knots the whole time and got so [[disgusted]] over every little thing in this all-for-me show-me-the-money cash-in-the-bank film. Watch Le Million today! --------------------------------------------- Result 402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] What is it with Americans and their hang-up with [[religious]] gobbledy-gook? To think this was a best-selling novel is [[incredible]], but to pull it off as a [[movie]] you really [[need]] good acting and a script that delivers. In this case, all the good [[actors]] have [[gone]] to [[heaven]] and we're [[left]] with Kirk Cameron as a CNN-type [[journalist]](!) trying to [[discover]] why a lot of people have simply disappeared. [[Oh]] yeah, there's a subplot about an [[evil]] [[world]] conspiracy and famine, or something. The good news is that this is done so [[cheaply]], and with such inane [[dialogue]], that it has [[sheer]] [[entertainment]] [[value]] in all of its [[unintended]] laughs. Not [[recommended]] for [[anyone]] with a 3-digit IQ. What is it with Americans and their hang-up with [[ecclesiastical]] gobbledy-gook? To think this was a best-selling novel is [[unbelievable]], but to pull it off as a [[filmmaking]] you really [[requisite]] good acting and a script that delivers. In this case, all the good [[protagonists]] have [[missing]] to [[sky]] and we're [[exited]] with Kirk Cameron as a CNN-type [[columnist]](!) trying to [[discovering]] why a lot of people have simply disappeared. [[Ohh]] yeah, there's a subplot about an [[malicious]] [[globe]] conspiracy and famine, or something. The good news is that this is done so [[cheap]], and with such inane [[conversations]], that it has [[unadulterated]] [[entertainments]] [[values]] in all of its [[unexpected]] laughs. Not [[suggested]] for [[nobody]] with a 3-digit IQ. --------------------------------------------- Result 403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is SOOOO funny!!! The acting is WONDERFUL, the Ramones are sexy, the jokes are subtle, and the plot is just what every high schooler dreams of doing to his/her school. I absolutely loved the soundtrack as well as the carefully placed cynicism. If you like monty python, You will love this film. This movie is a tad bit "grease"esk (without all the annoying songs). The songs that are sung are likable; you might even find yourself singing these songs once the movie is through. This musical ranks number two in musicals to me (second next to the blues brothers). But please, do not think of it as a musical per say; seeing as how the songs are so likable, it is hard to tell a carefully choreographed scene is taking place. I think of this movie as more of a comedy with undertones of romance. You will be reminded of what it was like to be a rebellious teenager; needless to say, you will be reminiscing of your old high school days after seeing this film. Highly recommended for both the family (since it is a very youthful but also for adults since there are many jokes that are funnier with age and experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[originally]] [[saw]] this [[movie]] as a [[boy]] at the [[old]] Rialto [[Theatre]] as part of a Saturday [[afternoon]] matinée triple [[bill]] which [[also]] [[featured]] Vincent Price's "Last [[Man]] on Earth" and Mario Bava's "Nightmare Castle." I had nightmares about blood lusting ghosts for a week [[afterwards]]! Though I didn't know it then, all three movies [[would]] prove to be classics of the genre. No wonder I was so scared! [[Though]] all three films frightened me, it was Castle of Blood that had the most profound [[impact]].

It was the first on the bill. I didn't even get to see it from the beginning as we were late getting to the cinema and [[missed]] the first 20 minutes of the movie. That's lot to miss since the edited print only ran about 79 minutes (the unedited runs 87minutes). But despite this, the dark creepy atmosphere (complete with ruined castles, fog enshrouded cemeteries, shadows and cobwebs), [[Gothic]] set design, strong acting, and suspense ([[especially]] the last 20 minutes) scared the bejeepers out of me and [[made]] a [[lasting]] impression It took me years to finally get a copy of the film for my collection. Since it was a French - Italian import, it wasn't a [[movie]] that [[showed]] up on the late [[show]] in Winnipeg. I couldn't [[quite]] [[remember]] the title ([[remember]] I didn't [[get]] to [[seen]] the [[beginning]] of the [[film]] and was scared [[witless]]), and to [[make]] [[matters]] worse, the [[film]] had been [[released]] under literally a dozen [[different]] [[movie]] titles (aka Danze Macabre, Coffin of [[Terror]], [[Castle]] of Terror, [[Long]] [[Night]] of Terror, etc...) and the [[USA]]/[[UK]] [[working]] title "Castle of Blood" was very generic, [[similar]] to [[dozens]] of other "b" horror and suspense [[films]], [[making]] it illusive. But thanks to the internet and [[perseverance]], I [[found]] it at [[last]]! What a [[treat]] to [[finally]] watch the [[film]] in its entirety after so [[many]] years! It [[may]] not have had quite the sheer emotional [[impact]] that it did when I was a [[boy]], but as haunted [[house]] [[movies]] go, it's [[stands]] up well and [[compares]] favourably to [[similar]] [[iconic]] [[films]] of the [[period]] such as "The Haunting," "The Innocents" or "Black [[Sunday]]," The [[film]] is a [[fine]] [[early]] effort of Italian director Antonio Margheriti. It [[stars]] 60's [[scream]] queen [[icon]] Barbara Steele and features a well written screenplay by Sergio Corbucci about a sceptical writer (Georges Riviere) who, on a bet, spends the night in haunted house and unsuspectingly becomes part of an annual ongoing ghostly story. The hypnotic Steele is well cast as the ghostly love interest - as is Arturo Dominici as Dr. Carmus, and Margarete Robsahm as Julia.

Many of the tricks Margheriti employs to create the film's eerie atmosphere (cobwebs, creaking doors, fog, etc) are bound to seem cliché to a modern audience, but they work far more effectively in black and white than they ever could in modern day colour. Rather than using body counts and special effects, the film creates scares the old fashion way, relying on a good story, stylish direction, fine set production, interesting camera work, and strong acting performances. Margheriti does a marvellous job taking these elements and building the film's suspense as the horrifying paranormal secret of the house gradually reveals itself to the unwitting writer.

The film is not without faults. The pace drags at the beginning of the film (ironically, the 20 minutes I originally missed). This is probably worsened by Synapse films effort to restore the film to its original length. Though fans will likely appreciate the chance to see the film restored - in terms of the intro - it may have been more of hindrance than a help. The English voice dubs are merely passable and, in the restored scenes, the language shifts from English to French (English subtitles provided) which is sure to be annoying to some viewers.

However, Synapse Films deserves kudos for the quality of the print. Clearly some effort was put into its restoration and deservedly so.

I enjoyed the film immensely and highly recommend it to aficionados of 60's Italian Goth films, or anyone who enjoys a good ghost story.

Rob Rheubottom Winnipeg, MB Canada I [[initially]] [[sawthe]] this [[kino]] as a [[guy]] at the [[former]] Rialto [[Cinema]] as part of a Saturday [[evening]] matinée triple [[billing]] which [[moreover]] [[characteristics]] Vincent Price's "Last [[Guy]] on Earth" and Mario Bava's "Nightmare Castle." I had nightmares about blood lusting ghosts for a week [[upon]]! Though I didn't know it then, all three movies [[ought]] prove to be classics of the genre. No wonder I was so scared! [[If]] all three films frightened me, it was Castle of Blood that had the most profound [[consequences]].

It was the first on the bill. I didn't even get to see it from the beginning as we were late getting to the cinema and [[flunked]] the first 20 minutes of the movie. That's lot to miss since the edited print only ran about 79 minutes (the unedited runs 87minutes). But despite this, the dark creepy atmosphere (complete with ruined castles, fog enshrouded cemeteries, shadows and cobwebs), [[Goth]] set design, strong acting, and suspense ([[specifically]] the last 20 minutes) scared the bejeepers out of me and [[brought]] a [[permanent]] impression It took me years to finally get a copy of the film for my collection. Since it was a French - Italian import, it wasn't a [[cinema]] that [[displays]] up on the late [[displaying]] in Winnipeg. I couldn't [[very]] [[reminisce]] the title ([[remembering]] I didn't [[got]] to [[watched]] the [[initiate]] of the [[cinematography]] and was scared [[dopey]]), and to [[deliver]] [[things]] worse, the [[cinematography]] had been [[liberated]] under literally a dozen [[multiple]] [[cinema]] titles (aka Danze Macabre, Coffin of [[Horror]], [[Castillo]] of Terror, [[Lange]] [[Nocturnal]] of Terror, etc...) and the [[US]]/[[BRITAIN]] [[worked]] title "Castle of Blood" was very generic, [[identical]] to [[tens]] of other "b" horror and suspense [[cinematography]], [[doing]] it illusive. But thanks to the internet and [[stubbornness]], I [[uncovered]] it at [[final]]! What a [[deal]] to [[ultimately]] watch the [[cinema]] in its entirety after so [[several]] years! It [[maggio]] not have had quite the sheer emotional [[impacts]] that it did when I was a [[bloke]], but as haunted [[households]] [[film]] go, it's [[standing]] up well and [[compare]] favourably to [[identical]] [[emblematic]] [[movie]] of the [[deadline]] such as "The Haunting," "The Innocents" or "Black [[Yesterday]]," The [[cinematography]] is a [[fined]] [[precocious]] effort of Italian director Antonio Margheriti. It [[superstar]] 60's [[yells]] queen [[icons]] Barbara Steele and features a well written screenplay by Sergio Corbucci about a sceptical writer (Georges Riviere) who, on a bet, spends the night in haunted house and unsuspectingly becomes part of an annual ongoing ghostly story. The hypnotic Steele is well cast as the ghostly love interest - as is Arturo Dominici as Dr. Carmus, and Margarete Robsahm as Julia.

Many of the tricks Margheriti employs to create the film's eerie atmosphere (cobwebs, creaking doors, fog, etc) are bound to seem cliché to a modern audience, but they work far more effectively in black and white than they ever could in modern day colour. Rather than using body counts and special effects, the film creates scares the old fashion way, relying on a good story, stylish direction, fine set production, interesting camera work, and strong acting performances. Margheriti does a marvellous job taking these elements and building the film's suspense as the horrifying paranormal secret of the house gradually reveals itself to the unwitting writer.

The film is not without faults. The pace drags at the beginning of the film (ironically, the 20 minutes I originally missed). This is probably worsened by Synapse films effort to restore the film to its original length. Though fans will likely appreciate the chance to see the film restored - in terms of the intro - it may have been more of hindrance than a help. The English voice dubs are merely passable and, in the restored scenes, the language shifts from English to French (English subtitles provided) which is sure to be annoying to some viewers.

However, Synapse Films deserves kudos for the quality of the print. Clearly some effort was put into its restoration and deservedly so.

I enjoyed the film immensely and highly recommend it to aficionados of 60's Italian Goth films, or anyone who enjoys a good ghost story.

Rob Rheubottom Winnipeg, MB Canada --------------------------------------------- Result 405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Orson Welles' "The Lady From Shanghai" does not have the brilliant screenplay of "Citizen Kane," e.g., but Charles Lawton, Jr.'s cinematography, the unforgettable set pieces (such as the scene in the aquarium, the seagoing scene featuring a stunning, blonde-tressed Rita Hayworth singing "Please Don't Love Me," and the truly amazing Hall of Mirrors climax), and the wonderful cast (Everett Sloane in his greatest performance, Welles in a beautifully under-played role, the afore-mentioned Miss Hayworth--Welles' wife at the time--at her most gorgeous) make for a very memorable filmgoing experience. The bizarre murder mystery plot is fun and compelling, not inscrutable at all. The viewer is surprised by the twists and turns, and Welles' closing line is an unheralded classic. "The Lady From Shanghai" gets four stars from this impartial arbiter. --------------------------------------------- Result 406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I regret that I've seen this movie. Can't believe that the creator of Best Intentions and Pelle the Conqueror could make such a bleak and boring film. What a waste! --------------------------------------------- Result 407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Antwone Fisher" tells of a young black U.S. Navy enlisted man and product of childhood abuse and neglect (Luke) whose hostility toward others gets him a stint with the base shrink (Washington) leading to introspection, self appraisal, and a return to his roots. Pat, sanitized, and sentimental, "Antwone Fisher" is a solid feel-good flick about the reconciliation of past regrets and closure. Good old Hollywood style entertainment family values entertainment with just a hint of corn. (B) --------------------------------------------- Result 408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow, I loved this film. It may not have had the funding and advertising that the latest hollywood blockbusters get but it packs twice the emotional punch. The tale revolves around this one family from Utah and it's the connections between the people in the family that provide the film with its punch. The main lead (Giovanni Ribisi) plays his part very well, at no time does he leave you to believe that he's acting all his feelings. It's his brother (Elias Koteas) who stole the show for me though. When the two were in scenes together they bounded their lines off of each other, giving fantastic performances. Great cast, great film. --------------------------------------------- Result 409 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was eager to see "Mr. Fix It" because I'm a huge David Boreanaz fan. What I got, though, was a 1-1/2 hour nap. The premise seemed enjoyable: Boreanaz is Lance Valenteen, proprietor of a business called "Mr. Fix It", where dumped men enlist his help to get their girlfriends to take them back.

Among the problems with this movie are the editing, script, and acting. Although I've found Boreanaz delightful in his other film roles (with the exception of that "Crow" movie he did), this was disappointing. At times, his character was interesting and others, flat. The supporting cast reminded me of soap opera day players. I realize it wasn't a big-budget film, but some of the scene cuts and music just didn't seem right.

My advice: watch at your own risk. --------------------------------------------- Result 410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found this film the first time when I was searching for some works in witch Stéphane Rideau had participate, still in an extraordinary ravishment caused by the astonishingly beautiful «Les roseaux sauvages» (in Portuguese, Juncos Silvestres), by André Téchiné. I was searching for similar movies, in the come of age line. I found then «Presque Rien», a movie where the director Sébastien Lifshitz deliciously amazes us, earning a nomination by the Cannes festival in 2000. The story is about two guys, the kind «boy next door», Mathieu (Jérémie Elkaïm) and Cédric (Stéphane Rideau), who meet during the summer vacations. In a land far from where he lives, Mathieu spends is days at the beach with his sister. There he meets Cédric, a local, with whom he starts this estival and revealing relationship, much by means of the sensual and seducer personality that Stéphane Rideau gives his characters, (in «Les roseaux sauvages», 6 years younger, he still preserves the innocence of the sweet seducer, witch matures here in experience). Exemplar in directing, in the amorous sequence, in the intimate and confessing description that is made about a boys first facing his (still ambiguous) sexuality and great love. The first love, in its terrible progression ecstasy-despair. The best of the film is the best of France: the fervent passion, the hot and excited rationalism, the brownish beauty, the simple and natural acceptance made by the families, although not without surprise and first anger. Still, there is the beach, the luminosity, the lightness e simplicity of summer, the freshness of breeze, the surge’s melody, and the expressive eyes of an introverted Elkaïm (hesitant, hurt, puzzled, passionate). The sex is not avoided nor exploited, it is treated as it is, with no exhibitionist intention. In virtue of pure talent, this is a work of drama of uncommon quality, without cheap sentimentalism, showing an inevitably real image of two homosexual in their prime youth as any ordinary person, although with a social fear of rejection and shame. It is well worthy being seen, especially by those who adore French movies (although the DVD front cover is very lame, with the two actors in between tens of stars, greased with brilliantine). A movie witch, in my opinion, deserves an 8-9! --------------------------------------------- Result 411 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1st watched 8/3/2003 - 2 out of 10(Dir-Brad Sykes): Mindless 3-D movie about flesh-eating zombies in a 3 story within a movie chronicle. And yes, we get to see zombies eating human flesh parts in 3D!! Wow, not!! That has been done time and time again in 2D in a zombie movie but what usually makes a zombie movie better is the underlying story not the actual flesh-eating. That's what made the original zombie classics good. The flesh-eating was just thrown in as an extra. We're actually bored throughout most of this 3-part chronicle because of the lame(twilight-zone like) easily understood and slow-pacingly revealed finale's. The last story is actually the story the movie started with(having a reporter investigating a so-called ghost town) and of course we get to see flesh eating zombie's in that one as well. Well, I think I've said enough. Watch the classics, not this 3D bore-feast. --------------------------------------------- Result 412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[William]] Wyler was to have directed this [[adaptation]] of Moss Hart's [[hit]] Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most [[unlikely]] helmsman: [[George]] Cukor. The "women's director" has a sure [[touch]] on the [[many]] documentary-like sequences of [[Air]] Corps training, and he [[invests]] it with more unhackneyed [[humanity]] than the [[genre]] generally [[allowed]], [[particularly]] in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and [[entirely]] white, [[save]] for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of [[newbies]] are nicer and more [[wholesome]] than in [[real]] [[life]], and the speechifying about [[home]] and Mom and the wife and [[kid]] [[gets]] pretty thick, but it's [[efficient]] propaganda and [[undeniably]] [[stirring]]. [[Notable]], too, for the all-military [[male]] cast, [[several]] of whom didn't reemerge for [[years]]: [[Lon]] McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, [[Martin]] Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, Gary Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. [[Also]] for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't show up till an hour and a half into the picture but has some good little sequences as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn [[spouse]]. Too bad its [[rights]] are in a [[tangle]] and the only [[print]] anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox released it (to considerable success), the [[rights]] [[reverted]] to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's [[disingenuous]] and corny in [[spots]], but it [[also]] [[captures]] the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it [[deserves]] to be more widely seen. [[Williams]] Wyler was to have directed this [[adjustments]] of Moss Hart's [[slugged]] Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most [[improbable]] helmsman: [[Giorgi]] Cukor. The "women's director" has a sure [[toque]] on the [[various]] documentary-like sequences of [[Airline]] Corps training, and he [[invested]] it with more unhackneyed [[humanist]] than the [[gender]] generally [[authorizing]], [[especially]] in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and [[altogether]] white, [[savings]] for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of [[beginners]] are nicer and more [[healthy]] than in [[reales]] [[living]], and the speechifying about [[abode]] and Mom and the wife and [[kids]] [[got]] pretty thick, but it's [[effective]] propaganda and [[surely]] [[agitating]]. [[Cannot]], too, for the all-military [[macho]] cast, [[many]] of whom didn't reemerge for [[olds]]: [[Ldn]] McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, [[Martins]] Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, Gary Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. [[Moreover]] for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't show up till an hour and a half into the picture but has some good little sequences as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn [[spousal]]. Too bad its [[right]] are in a [[muddle]] and the only [[fingerprint]] anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox released it (to considerable success), the [[right]] [[reverting]] to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's [[untruthful]] and corny in [[sunspots]], but it [[apart]] [[apprehended]] the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it [[deserved]] to be more widely seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This [[movie]] sucked [[plain]] and [[simple]]. [[Okay]] so it's [[basically]] about a [[girl]] that [[gets]] [[raped]], and to get revenge she [[gets]] another [[guy]] to [[rape]] the [[rapist]]. The [[rapist]] is a [[douche]], but the [[girl]] victim is partly to blame. I mean they both get in the [[mood]] and [[start]] [[kissing]] and stuff, but when the [[rapist]] tries to have sex with her, she doesn't [[allow]] it so the [[rapist]] [[rapes]] her. And the [[thing]] is the rape scene for the [[girl]] is very [[short]] and it doesn't [[really]] [[expose]] or [[show]] anything, but when it comes to the rapist getting [[raped]], it's a pretty long [[rape]] scene. There is [[basically]] [[nothing]] in the [[story]] that is worth [[watching]].

3.2/10 This [[filmmaking]] sucked [[lowlands]] and [[easy]]. [[Verywell]] so it's [[fundamentally]] about a [[chick]] that [[got]] [[broken]], and to get revenge she [[got]] another [[guys]] to [[violating]] the [[violator]]. The [[violator]] is a [[knucklehead]], but the [[chick]] victim is partly to blame. I mean they both get in the [[humour]] and [[started]] [[screwing]] and stuff, but when the [[violator]] tries to have sex with her, she doesn't [[allowed]] it so the [[offender]] [[raping]] her. And the [[stuff]] is the rape scene for the [[chick]] is very [[terse]] and it doesn't [[genuinely]] [[unmask]] or [[illustrates]] anything, but when it comes to the rapist getting [[infringed]], it's a pretty long [[rapes]] scene. There is [[predominantly]] [[anything]] in the [[history]] that is worth [[staring]].

3.2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 414 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Broadway and film actor-turned-director [[John]] Cassavetes (from Rosemary's [[Baby]])[[creates]] a [[masterpiece]] with this 1977 film. It stars Gena Rowlands, John Cassavetes himself, [[Ben]] Gazzara, Joan Blondell, [[Paul]] [[Stewart]], Zohra Lampert, Laura [[Johnson]] and there is a cameo by [[Peter]] Falk. The [[premise]] of the film: An aging [[stage]] and film actress (Gena Rowlands)re-evaluates her life after an obscessed fan [[dies]] in a [[car]] [[accident]] trying to [[get]] her [[autograph]]. The [[movie]] has a slow [[pace]] and a dark, [[moody]], frightening quality. It has a 60's cinematic look and it even reminded me of Polanski's Rosemary's [[Baby]] without the supernatural horror. The fears here are the ones [[every]] successful actress has- she is [[getting]] old and she will become [[useless]] in her [[career]]. [[Furthermore]], she feels she has [[lived]] a [[life]] that [[lacks]] any [[true]] spirituality, [[humanity]] and merit. She has [[lived]] only for her career- she has no [[children]], doesn't do charitable deeds, etc. The [[gradual]] [[disintegration]] of her personality is the meat of this [[film]]. She is [[falling]] apart. She's in a crisis. Gena Rowlands [[really]] [[gets]] into the character's [[tormented]] psyche and acts the [[part]] [[quite]] well. She is a [[terrific]] [[actress]] and this 70's [[film]] is a refreshing [[contrast]] to the [[often]] [[violent]] films of the [[period]] and or the disaster [[movies]] or adventure [[thrillers]]. It's a movie with lots of deep-seated emotion but has a cold, [[cynical]] feeling, as if Cassavetes is criticizing the mainstream [[movies]] and [[actors]] of the 70's [[generation]]. [[Either]] that or this [[movie]] is a product of the 70's which was itself [[cynical]] in [[many]] aspects- Nixon's [[deception]], Watergate, [[Vietnam]], etc. [[Although]] the [[production]] [[values]] are not [[great]], and this film is not well-known, it's a very haunting [[film]] with haunting [[moods]]. Kudos to the underrated and [[late]] director Cassavetes who [[died]] in the late 80's. Broadway and film actor-turned-director [[Johannes]] Cassavetes (from Rosemary's [[Babies]])[[begets]] a [[centerpiece]] with this 1977 film. It stars Gena Rowlands, John Cassavetes himself, [[Bin]] Gazzara, Joan Blondell, [[Paulo]] [[Stuart]], Zohra Lampert, Laura [[Johnston]] and there is a cameo by [[Pieter]] Falk. The [[assumption]] of the film: An aging [[stages]] and film actress (Gena Rowlands)re-evaluates her life after an obscessed fan [[deaths]] in a [[cars]] [[accidents]] trying to [[obtain]] her [[manuscript]]. The [[films]] has a slow [[tempo]] and a dark, [[quirky]], frightening quality. It has a 60's cinematic look and it even reminded me of Polanski's Rosemary's [[Honey]] without the supernatural horror. The fears here are the ones [[each]] successful actress has- she is [[obtain]] old and she will become [[futile]] in her [[quarries]]. [[Besides]], she feels she has [[resided]] a [[lifetime]] that [[lacked]] any [[authentic]] spirituality, [[humanitarian]] and merit. She has [[resided]] only for her career- she has no [[child]], doesn't do charitable deeds, etc. The [[phased]] [[decay]] of her personality is the meat of this [[cinematography]]. She is [[tumbling]] apart. She's in a crisis. Gena Rowlands [[genuinely]] [[get]] into the character's [[disturbed]] psyche and acts the [[portion]] [[rather]] well. She is a [[spectacular]] [[actor]] and this 70's [[movies]] is a refreshing [[contrasts]] to the [[normally]] [[ferocious]] films of the [[deadline]] and or the disaster [[movie]] or adventure [[thriller]]. It's a movie with lots of deep-seated emotion but has a cold, [[cynic]] feeling, as if Cassavetes is criticizing the mainstream [[theater]] and [[actresses]] of the 70's [[jill]]. [[Neither]] that or this [[flick]] is a product of the 70's which was itself [[sarcastic]] in [[multiple]] aspects- Nixon's [[hoax]], Watergate, [[Viet]], etc. [[Though]] the [[productivity]] [[value]] are not [[fantastic]], and this film is not well-known, it's a very haunting [[kino]] with haunting [[feelings]]. Kudos to the underrated and [[tardy]] director Cassavetes who [[dead]] in the late 80's. --------------------------------------------- Result 415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] High heels are tricksy things. They can elevate women (or cross-dressing [[men]]) to newfound [[heights]], put forward a [[sharp]] [[statement]] of [[style]] and [[bring]] a [[touch]] of [[fragile]] [[elegance]]. Alternatively, they can be a [[perilous]] foot pain that will [[inevitably]] lead to [[trips]], falls and [[ultimate]] tragedy. Tacones lejanos is more of a [[disappointment]] [[trip]] than a stylish high [[riser]].

Almodóvar's mother-daughter drama is stylish for sure, but in terms of [[plot]] it's a tongue-tied and [[tedious]] affair full of [[confusing]], complex characters that never fully engage or make [[sense]]. A few [[moments]] of comedy aside, Tacones lejanos just isn't interesting. The [[best]] bit comes at the beginning in a marvellously macabre case of [[manslaughter]] orchestrated by a [[child]]. From this brilliant bit of black comedy things are looking up, but then the film comes to a heel.

There's solid [[enough]] acting performances and there's some stylish, arty direction that you'd expect from Almodóvar, but otherwise Tacones lejanos isn't an impressive piece of Spanish cinema. With a story of murder, showbiz, femininity, [[fractured]] mother-daughter [[relationship]] and a [[character]] who is [[alternately]] a [[judge]], a transvestite and a police [[informer]] this [[could]] have been a melodramatic powerhouse. [[Instead]] it's [[poor]]. [[High]] Heels stumbles for sure. High heels are tricksy things. They can elevate women (or cross-dressing [[mens]]) to newfound [[highlands]], put forward a [[abrupt]] [[declarations]] of [[styles]] and [[brings]] a [[toque]] of [[precarious]] [[style]]. Alternatively, they can be a [[precarious]] foot pain that will [[unavoidably]] lead to [[voyages]], falls and [[final]] tragedy. Tacones lejanos is more of a [[dissatisfaction]] [[travel]] than a stylish high [[escalator]].

Almodóvar's mother-daughter drama is stylish for sure, but in terms of [[intrigue]] it's a tongue-tied and [[monotonous]] affair full of [[disconcerting]], complex characters that never fully engage or make [[feeling]]. A few [[times]] of comedy aside, Tacones lejanos just isn't interesting. The [[better]] bit comes at the beginning in a marvellously macabre case of [[homicidal]] orchestrated by a [[enfants]]. From this brilliant bit of black comedy things are looking up, but then the film comes to a heel.

There's solid [[satisfactorily]] acting performances and there's some stylish, arty direction that you'd expect from Almodóvar, but otherwise Tacones lejanos isn't an impressive piece of Spanish cinema. With a story of murder, showbiz, femininity, [[broken]] mother-daughter [[ties]] and a [[traits]] who is [[otherwise]] a [[magistrate]], a transvestite and a police [[insider]] this [[did]] have been a melodramatic powerhouse. [[However]] it's [[deficient]]. [[Highest]] Heels stumbles for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Anyone who has [[studied]] any physics or cognitive science will walk out disgusted after 40 [[min]]., as my [[wife]] and I did. The ignorant masses might be entertained by the hand-waiving arguments and the absurd "[[conclusions]]" [[drawn]] (without even an [[attempt]] at a [[logical]] [[reason]]) from [[real]] science. I'm offended by such [[nonsense]] [[presented]] under the guise of "science". I can only conclude that the [[writers]] [[picked]] up a quantum physics [[book]], didn't [[understand]] a word of it, then watched The Matrix about a thousand times, and proceeded to [[write]] this [[movie]].

For example, the Washington DC [[crime]] [[experiment]] was [[done]] by The [[Transcendental]] [[Meditation]] Program. A [[brief]] [[search]] will [[reveal]] the science of their [[methods]]. (http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/t/[[tm]]/dissenter.htm)

[[Save]] your money. Anyone who has [[analysed]] any physics or cognitive science will walk out disgusted after 40 [[mn]]., as my [[mujer]] and I did. The ignorant masses might be entertained by the hand-waiving arguments and the absurd "[[finding]]" [[lured]] (without even an [[attempts]] at a [[sane]] [[rationale]]) from [[true]] science. I'm offended by such [[absurdity]] [[tabled]] under the guise of "science". I can only conclude that the [[authors]] [[chosen]] up a quantum physics [[books]], didn't [[realise]] a word of it, then watched The Matrix about a thousand times, and proceeded to [[writing]] this [[filmmaking]].

For example, the Washington DC [[misdemeanors]] [[experiences]] was [[effected]] by The [[Momentous]] [[Meditative]] Program. A [[succinct]] [[quest]] will [[unveil]] the science of their [[modes]]. (http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/t/[[mt]]/dissenter.htm)

[[Savings]] your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 2002's undeservedly popular "I Love the 80's" is an inane, idiotic, offensive and downright disgusting pop-culture mess of a show that was the first in a long-line of horrid television programming that ultimately spelled out the end of VH1, which was at one time the only real music-oriented channel left on TV! I used to practically live on VH1 up until the spring or winter, I forget which one now, of 2002 when garbage like this started to appear for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Out of sheer morbid curiosity (I'd guess that's what you'd call it) I had decided that I would go ahead and give it a look-see anyhow the first night it came on even though the advertisements looked like complete crap. At least I can honestly say that I wasn't a bit disappointed by it because my expectations were obviously bottom basement-level to begin with. The emphasis of this show I found out within the first 5 minutes was less on each year of the 1980's and what was and wasn't culturally significant or popular (which is what I was expecting to see), but instead more of an impromptu platform for a whole slew of really god-awful no-name comedians to display what they more than likely think is their comedic skills *rolls eyes*...more like lack-thereof if you ask me! It's pretty easy now to see why no one had ever heard of any of these idiots before they appeared on this show because they are all so terribly unfunny and pathetic in their attempts at so-called "humor" that I swear I could feel my intestines knot up with each and every rancid one-liner they shot off one after another! Altogether, I have no problem in saying that "I Love the 80's" was/is trash of the lowest denominator, and one of the main reasons why I almost never watch VH1 anymore. --------------------------------------------- Result 418 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A wonderful early musical film from Rene Clair, as fun and witty as his silent "The Italian Straw Hat". Using sound in a expressive way and not just for dialogue and effects, Clair influenced early musicals in America (the opera scene from A Night at the Opera is strongly influenced by Le Million, for example). Should (but won't) be seen by all cinephiles, and the DVD from Criterion is exactly as good as you'd expect. There's not a ton of extras, but most DVD extras I've seen are useless fluff, and the Clair interview on disc is one I hadn't ever seen. Get it while it's still around. --------------------------------------------- Result 419 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of [[Rowan]] Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it [[seems]] that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their work, something that [[allows]] them to [[identify]] with audience members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. [[A]] Bug's [[Life]] has that same charm, it has a connection with [[real]] life that allows us to easily [[suspend]] disbelief and [[accept]] a [[lot]] of talking [[insects]], because [[even]] though they talk, they [[still]] ACT just like [[real]] bugs. It's like the team that [[made]] the [[movie]] [[found]] a [[way]] to bring us into the mind of a [[child]] and [[allow]] us to [[think]] like them, to imagine [[bugs]] the [[way]] a [[young]] mind does.

[[Honey]], I Shrunk The [[Kids]] was one of my [[favorite]] [[films]] when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's [[Life]] is like a more [[realistic]] [[version]] of that [[movie]], if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this [[style]] of story-telling just opens up so [[many]] more [[narrative]] [[possibilities]]. I try not to [[compare]] it to [[something]] like [[Toy]] [[Story]] (which I [[still]] [[maintain]] is the [[best]] computer animated [[film]] ever made), because the [[story]] of A Bug's Life is not [[quite]] as good as [[Toy]] Story's, but then again, [[almost]] nothing is. The [[important]] [[thing]] is that it is [[still]] [[wonderful]] fun.

The [[story]] [[concerns]] a [[colony]] of [[hard]] [[working]] bugs who have an [[impressively]] [[developed]] [[society]], [[mostly]] [[geared]] [[around]] [[building]] a harvest of [[food]], most of which will [[go]] to the [[tyrannical]] [[grasshoppers]], vastly superior in [[strength]] and [[general]] meanness, and hopefully still leave [[enough]] left over for the bugs to [[make]] it through the [[winter]]. We are [[treated]] to some [[visits]] from the grasshoppers, who [[make]] it clear that if the [[bugs]] [[provide]] an unsatisfactory [[quantity]] of [[food]], the [[consequences]] will be [[dire]]. And [[incidentally]], the similarities between this crippling [[level]] of [[food]] [[extraction]] is [[strikingly]] [[similar]] to [[Mao]] Tse-tung's [[vicious]] [[forcing]] of [[food]] from his own people during the "[[Great]] Leap Forward…"

The [[fun]] and [[excitement]] [[begins]] when Flik, the [[main]] character, sets off on a quest to [[find]] a gang of [[appropriate]] warrior [[bugs]] to [[come]] back and [[help]] [[defend]] the colony against the grasshoppers. You see, he spilled all of the amassed food and placed everyone in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan.

The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun! Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of [[Rouen]] Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it [[looks]] that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their work, something that [[allowed]] them to [[detect]] with audience members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. [[una]] Bug's [[Iife]] has that same charm, it has a connection with [[actual]] life that allows us to easily [[suspended]] disbelief and [[accepting]] a [[batch]] of talking [[beetles]], because [[yet]] though they talk, they [[again]] ACT just like [[actual]] bugs. It's like the team that [[accomplished]] the [[film]] [[find]] a [[ways]] to bring us into the mind of a [[kids]] and [[permit]] us to [[believe]] like them, to imagine [[beetles]] the [[pathways]] a [[youthful]] mind does.

[[Dear]], I Shrunk The [[Child]] was one of my [[preferred]] [[cinematography]] when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's [[Vida]] is like a more [[practical]] [[stepping]] of that [[cinematography]], if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this [[styles]] of story-telling just opens up so [[numerous]] more [[narration]] [[chances]]. I try not to [[comparative]] it to [[anything]] like [[Plaything]] [[History]] (which I [[however]] [[maintaining]] is the [[bestest]] computer animated [[movies]] ever made), because the [[tale]] of A Bug's Life is not [[pretty]] as good as [[Pawn]] Story's, but then again, [[practically]] nothing is. The [[principal]] [[stuff]] is that it is [[however]] [[magnifique]] fun.

The [[saga]] [[concerned]] a [[colonies]] of [[stiff]] [[worked]] bugs who have an [[exponentially]] [[devised]] [[societal]], [[basically]] [[aimed]] [[about]] [[constructing]] a harvest of [[meal]], most of which will [[going]] to the [[despotic]] [[locusts]], vastly superior in [[kraft]] and [[overall]] meanness, and hopefully still leave [[adequate]] left over for the bugs to [[deliver]] it through the [[wintertime]]. We are [[processed]] to some [[tours]] from the grasshoppers, who [[deliver]] it clear that if the [[beetles]] [[render]] an unsatisfactory [[quantities]] of [[meals]], the [[impact]] will be [[baleful]]. And [[coincidentally]], the similarities between this crippling [[plano]] of [[meals]] [[extract]] is [[unbelievably]] [[akin]] to [[Maa]] Tse-tung's [[sadistic]] [[prompting]] of [[nutrition]] from his own people during the "[[Awesome]] Leap Forward…"

The [[funny]] and [[restlessness]] [[commences]] when Flik, the [[principal]] character, sets off on a quest to [[found]] a gang of [[suitable]] warrior [[cockroaches]] to [[coming]] back and [[supporting]] [[defender]] the colony against the grasshoppers. You see, he spilled all of the amassed food and placed everyone in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan.

The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun! --------------------------------------------- Result 420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Telemundo should definitely consider making a DVD collection of the novela Xica! I know tons of people including myself who would like to be able to purchase the novela Xica! It is a very entertaining novela which is set in Brazil. The costumes worn by the actors are beautiful and the town in which the novela takes place is beautiful. Xica contains a lot of history of that time period. I wish Telemundo would televise it again even if it was a 2 in the morning. I would highly recommend watching Xica if it is ever shown again on Telemundo. I've e-mailed Telemundo a million times already to show the novela again but my pleas have fallen on deaf ears. The only cautionary statement about Xica is that it occasionally contains some harsh scenes therefore I would recommend that children under 14 do not watch Xica. Overall Xica merits a 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this movie about 6 times now. And each time I view it, I'm more impressed by the story and the acting. Its like watching a train wreck being set in motion. Its subtle in its approach, but very effective in reaching its goal.

Spoilers-> At the center of the story is a very nice dichotomy. On the one hand we have Deputy major, Eddy Calhoun (Cusack) unknowingly tearing at the old boys network that forms the hart of major of New York's Administration and on the other hand we have the mob boss Zappati who's deliberately trying to maintain the status quo through all means necessary. This situation nicely culminates in the end when Zappati orders Alselmo to make it easy on himself by killing himself and Calhoun ordering Pappas to do the same, politically speaking.

The movie also contains some really great one-liners such as (a personal weakness of mine): - You don't sum up a man's life in one moment - The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know

All in all, a great movie that deserves a much higher rating. --------------------------------------------- Result 422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This [[film]] caught me off [[guard]] when it started out in a Cafe located in Arizona and a Richard Grieco,(Rex),"Dead Easy",'04, decides to have something to eat and gets all hot and bothered over a very hot, sexy waitress. While Rex steps out of the Cafe, he sees a State Trooper and asks him,"ARE YOU FAST?" and then all hell breaks loose in more [[ways]] than one. Nancy Allen (Maggie Hewitt),"Dressed to [[Kill]],",'80, is a TV reporter and is always looking for a news scoop to broadcast. Maggie winds up in a hot tub and Rex comes a calling on her to tell her he wants a show down, Western style, with the local top cop in town. This is a [[different]] film, however, Nancy Allen and Richard Grieco are the only two actors who help this picture [[TOGETHER]]! This [[cinematography]] caught me off [[warder]] when it started out in a Cafe located in Arizona and a Richard Grieco,(Rex),"Dead Easy",'04, decides to have something to eat and gets all hot and bothered over a very hot, sexy waitress. While Rex steps out of the Cafe, he sees a State Trooper and asks him,"ARE YOU FAST?" and then all hell breaks loose in more [[method]] than one. Nancy Allen (Maggie Hewitt),"Dressed to [[Killings]],",'80, is a TV reporter and is always looking for a news scoop to broadcast. Maggie winds up in a hot tub and Rex comes a calling on her to tell her he wants a show down, Western style, with the local top cop in town. This is a [[several]] film, however, Nancy Allen and Richard Grieco are the only two actors who help this picture [[TOTALITY]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stefan is an x-con that five years ago got married to Marie. Their marriage has been stable until Stefan past catch up with them and he's offered to do a courier job. Stefan's job is a heroin delivery from Germany to Sweden which should go easily.

In Germany Stefan meet Elli, a girl from Bosnia that has been sold to a stripclub owner. Stefan dislikes what he sees and decide to help Elli out of her misery. Due to the fact that Elli's father during the war fleed to Sweden Elli now goes with Stefan to Sweden. To make up with the past Stefan promises Elli to help her find her father, no matter what it takes. Finally back in Sweden the whole situation seems to be more complicated than Stefan ever thought of..

This movie doesn't seem to fit in the ordinary class of swedish movies due to the fact that it's been americanized alot. Regina Lund and Cecilia Bergqvist makes it all average, the effects makes the movie a little too much though. See it and jugde for yourself.

--------------------------------------------- Result 424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The [[past]] few months I have collected [[Voyager]] seasons 4 to 7 on DVD (I only had 1 to 3 on video before that, because Kes is my [[favourite]] [[character]]) and have just [[reached]] the [[end]]. I [[saw]] them when they were [[originally]] [[shown]] on [[TV]] here in the UK but had [[forgotten]] most of it. Am I [[satisfied]] with the [[ending]]? I think I am. Naturally as I fan I would have liked to have [[seen]] more about what happened to the [[characters]] when they got [[home]] but that's left to our imagination. [[In]] many [[ways]] "[[Endgame]]" is similar to Next Gen's "[[All]] Good [[Things]]…" The [[involvement]] of the crew in the future, but [[mainly]] the [[captain]]. A [[new]] romance [[starting]] in the finale (Troi and Worf in Next Gen and [[Seven]] of [[Nine]] and Chakotay here), which [[results]] in [[death]] in the [[future]]. I [[truly]] [[loved]] "Endgame," fair to all [[characters]], Neelix appears [[although]] he [[left]] the [[ship]] two [[episodes]] earlier. B'elanna [[gives]] birth to her daughter with loving husband [[Tom]]. Tuvok is [[ill]] but [[returning]] [[home]] [[means]] he can be [[cured]]. [[Harry]] has always been the most [[anxious]] and determined but admits the [[journey]] is [[important]]. The [[Doctor]], in the [[future]], is well respected by all and [[finally]] [[chooses]] the [[name]] Joe! But of course the Captain has the [[largest]] role, [[meeting]] her [[future]] self who wants to get the crew [[home]] [[earlier]] to prevent casualties. The Borg are [[involved]], as they have [[played]] a [[massive]] part in this period of [[Voyager]]. Alice Krige plays the Borg Queen again [[fantastically]], just her [[voice]] and acting method are [[magnificent]]. I feel sorry for Susanna Thompson though, the TV Borg queen [[replaced]] by the movie Borg queen. [[Maybe]] she wasn't [[available]] though. The special effects are [[fantastic]], the Borg sub space [[hub]] and the Borg queen falling apart! It's very tense. Especially when they come out of the Borg subspace corridor and say their location is right where they thought they'd be after they'd said they'd have to go in a corridor that leads back to the delta quadrant. And what a [[wonderful]] idea to get inside a Borg [[sphere]] for protection, on the DVD special features they say it was like the Trojan horse. [[Voyager]] could have continued. If it was more popular they would have stuck with their original idea of the crew realising the ship is their home, like in Harry's speech and what Tom said because his wife and child are there. And then they could have got home in a film!

Overall, Voyager was a bit hit and miss. The sixth season seemed to be one good one followed by one less than good one. The two episodes set in the Holographic Irish village are horrible! My perception of Seven of Nine was that she took over, it all revolved around her, which wasn't true. When she first appeared, season 4 was focused on her for too many of the episodes but it evened out after that. And her character is ingenious at times, 20 years as a Borg drone gradually rediscovering her humanity. I like her, especially in "Someone to Watch Over Me," "Imperfection," and "Human Error." When Naomi Wildman was scared of her initially but then became her friend often by her side, that was lovely. Chakotay became my least favourite character. Gone was the chemistry with Janeway (will they/won't they?) and you'd never think he was first officer, he's completely pushed aside most of the time. I loved seeing Tom and B'elanna's relationship blossom against the odds. I always liked Neelix a lot. Tuvok was good at times, especially when he lost his logic, gained emotion and was friends with Neelix. Harry was annoying at times but a okay character at other times. The Doctor is probably my favourite, seeing how far he comes and comedy situations he creates ("Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy" is fantastic!). Janeway is my favourite Captain of any series and you can tell Kate Mulgrew is really enjoying it.

I wish there was more, I love Voyager! The [[elapsed]] few months I have collected [[Travel]] seasons 4 to 7 on DVD (I only had 1 to 3 on video before that, because Kes is my [[preferential]] [[personages]]) and have just [[totaled]] the [[ceases]]. I [[watched]] them when they were [[initially]] [[evidenced]] on [[TELEVISION]] here in the UK but had [[forget]] most of it. Am I [[persuaded]] with the [[terminated]]? I think I am. Naturally as I fan I would have liked to have [[watched]] more about what happened to the [[features]] when they got [[households]] but that's left to our imagination. [[Throughout]] many [[method]] "[[Prom]]" is similar to Next Gen's "[[Entire]] Good [[Items]]…" The [[attendance]] of the crew in the future, but [[basically]] the [[capitan]]. A [[newer]] romance [[induction]] in the finale (Troi and Worf in Next Gen and [[Vii]] of [[Ix]] and Chakotay here), which [[consequences]] in [[killings]] in the [[impending]]. I [[honestly]] [[cared]] "Endgame," fair to all [[hallmarks]], Neelix appears [[while]] he [[exited]] the [[starship]] two [[bouts]] earlier. B'elanna [[provides]] birth to her daughter with loving husband [[Tum]]. Tuvok is [[sick]] but [[returned]] [[households]] [[method]] he can be [[straightened]]. [[Hari]] has always been the most [[worried]] and determined but admits the [[itinerary]] is [[sizable]]. The [[Physician]], in the [[futuristic]], is well respected by all and [[eventually]] [[elected]] the [[names]] Joe! But of course the Captain has the [[bigger]] role, [[meetings]] her [[forthcoming]] self who wants to get the crew [[house]] [[prior]] to prevent casualties. The Borg are [[implicated]], as they have [[served]] a [[considerable]] part in this period of [[Travelling]]. Alice Krige plays the Borg Queen again [[insanely]], just her [[vowel]] and acting method are [[noteworthy]]. I feel sorry for Susanna Thompson though, the TV Borg queen [[substituted]] by the movie Borg queen. [[Potentially]] she wasn't [[accessible]] though. The special effects are [[unbelievable]], the Borg sub space [[concentrator]] and the Borg queen falling apart! It's very tense. Especially when they come out of the Borg subspace corridor and say their location is right where they thought they'd be after they'd said they'd have to go in a corridor that leads back to the delta quadrant. And what a [[super]] idea to get inside a Borg [[scopes]] for protection, on the DVD special features they say it was like the Trojan horse. [[Voyage]] could have continued. If it was more popular they would have stuck with their original idea of the crew realising the ship is their home, like in Harry's speech and what Tom said because his wife and child are there. And then they could have got home in a film!

Overall, Voyager was a bit hit and miss. The sixth season seemed to be one good one followed by one less than good one. The two episodes set in the Holographic Irish village are horrible! My perception of Seven of Nine was that she took over, it all revolved around her, which wasn't true. When she first appeared, season 4 was focused on her for too many of the episodes but it evened out after that. And her character is ingenious at times, 20 years as a Borg drone gradually rediscovering her humanity. I like her, especially in "Someone to Watch Over Me," "Imperfection," and "Human Error." When Naomi Wildman was scared of her initially but then became her friend often by her side, that was lovely. Chakotay became my least favourite character. Gone was the chemistry with Janeway (will they/won't they?) and you'd never think he was first officer, he's completely pushed aside most of the time. I loved seeing Tom and B'elanna's relationship blossom against the odds. I always liked Neelix a lot. Tuvok was good at times, especially when he lost his logic, gained emotion and was friends with Neelix. Harry was annoying at times but a okay character at other times. The Doctor is probably my favourite, seeing how far he comes and comedy situations he creates ("Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy" is fantastic!). Janeway is my favourite Captain of any series and you can tell Kate Mulgrew is really enjoying it.

I wish there was more, I love Voyager! --------------------------------------------- Result 425 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] As I've noticed with a [[lot]] of IMDb [[comments]], certain reviewers [[seem]] to [[demand]] that every film they see have smugly intelligent plots that wallow in there own cleverness. I am not one of those people. [[If]] I watch an action film, I [[want]] to see explosions, gunfire and heroics. [[If]] I watch a comedy, I want to have [[tears]] of [[laughter]] in my eyes. You [[get]] the idea. Therefore watching a [[horror]] film, I [[primarily]] [[want]] to be scared. The [[Grudge]] is a very scary film, in both it's well executed 'jump' scenes, and it's creepy imagery. I've been a horror film fan for many years, and I'm talking about the masters such as Dario Argento, rather than directors of some of the treadmill teen horror flicks that are churned out these days. If you want to be scared, watch this film. Way scarier than the original Japanese 'Ring' (which I [[also]] think is a [[great]] film). As I've noticed with a [[batch]] of IMDb [[feedback]], certain reviewers [[looks]] to [[wondering]] that every film they see have smugly intelligent plots that wallow in there own cleverness. I am not one of those people. [[Though]] I watch an action film, I [[wish]] to see explosions, gunfire and heroics. [[Though]] I watch a comedy, I want to have [[crying]] of [[laughs]] in my eyes. You [[obtain]] the idea. Therefore watching a [[abomination]] film, I [[predominantly]] [[wanted]] to be scared. The [[Dent]] is a very scary film, in both it's well executed 'jump' scenes, and it's creepy imagery. I've been a horror film fan for many years, and I'm talking about the masters such as Dario Argento, rather than directors of some of the treadmill teen horror flicks that are churned out these days. If you want to be scared, watch this film. Way scarier than the original Japanese 'Ring' (which I [[apart]] think is a [[wondrous]] film). --------------------------------------------- Result 426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Although]] Cinderella isn't the [[obvious]] [[choice]] for a sequel I love Jaq and Gus so I didn't hesitate. The format of the [[mice]] [[writing]] a [[book]] for Cinderella was an inspired one. I [[enjoy]] [[writing]] [[stories]] myself and hope children will be [[encouraged]] by this. The three stories are [[cute]] & amusing, [[although]] the songs were forgettable. Jaq and Gus were my favourite characters but I [[also]] enjoyed seeing Lucifer, [[Bruno]], the [[Mice]] Chorus and all the rest. [[Pom]] [[Pom]] [[proved]] the [[perfect]] [[companion]] for [[Lucifer]] and I liked the [[Governess]]. A sequel [[done]] right for a [[change]]. My rating 8/10. [[Though]] Cinderella isn't the [[unmistakable]] [[wahl]] for a sequel I love Jaq and Gus so I didn't hesitate. The format of the [[mouse]] [[writes]] a [[cookbook]] for Cinderella was an inspired one. I [[enjoys]] [[writes]] [[histories]] myself and hope children will be [[encourages]] by this. The three stories are [[purty]] & amusing, [[though]] the songs were forgettable. Jaq and Gus were my favourite characters but I [[apart]] enjoyed seeing Lucifer, [[Bruni]], the [[Mouse]] Chorus and all the rest. [[Boum]] [[Boum]] [[evidenced]] the [[faultless]] [[flanking]] for [[Satan]] and I liked the [[Tutor]]. A sequel [[played]] right for a [[adjustments]]. My rating 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 427 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The only [[way]] this is a family [[drama]] is if parents [[explain]] everything [[wrong]] with its [[message]].

SPOILER: they [[feed]] a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after [[killing]] its [[mother]] and at first pontificating about taking [[responsibility]] for their actions. They [[blame]] bears and deer for "misbehaving" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger. The only [[routing]] this is a family [[opera]] is if parents [[clarify]] everything [[erroneous]] with its [[messages]].

SPOILER: they [[foraging]] a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after [[murdered]] its [[mama]] and at first pontificating about taking [[duty]] for their actions. They [[culpability]] bears and deer for "misbehaving" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger. --------------------------------------------- Result 428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dripping with symbolism and filled with marvelous cinematography, Extase is so much more than the erotic drama we've all come to expect. This is almost a silent film, with what dialogue there is in German, and highly simplified German at that. Perhaps the filmmakers intended the film to reach the widest possible European audience, as anyone with even a little high school level Deutsch can easily dispense with the subtitles. The story is of little importance anyway, with the film succeeding on a cinematic level, not a narrative one. Symbols of fecundity and the power of nature overwhelm the human characters--there are even scenes where flowers obscure the face of supposed star Hedy Lamarr--and there are moments here that will remind viewers of the works of Dreyer, Vertov, and Riefenstahl. If the film has any message to convey, I think it's a political one: bourgeois man is timid and impotent; working class man is a happy, productive creature; and woman is the creator, destined to be unfulfilled until she has borne a child. This blend of Soviet socialist realism and National Socialist dogma doesn't overwhelm the film by any means--it's a beauty to watch from beginning to end--but it does place it in a very distinct artistic era. And, oh yeah, Hedy does get her kit off. --------------------------------------------- Result 429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This Italian [[movie]] is basically a soap [[opera]] with [[skin]].

The VHS box said it was rated "R" but the into on the [[actual]] tape [[inside]] [[said]] it was "X." The [[latter]] makes a lot more sense because there is a [[short]] scene [[near]] the end that was shocking. Even in the dark, you [[could]] see [[Dutch]] actress Marishcka Detmers [[performing]] all [[sex]] on this guy - and, [[yes]], you could [[see]] his [[penis]] in her mouth. I read somewhere that this was the first time where a "mainline [[actress]]" had [[done]] something like this on screen.

Detmers parades around in the nude on several scenes but her face was even better than her body. She looked beautiful. Unfortunately, the movie is ugly....a [[real]] waste of time and certainly not [[recommended]] despite Detmers' looks. This Italian [[filmmaking]] is basically a soap [[drama]] with [[epidermis]].

The VHS box said it was rated "R" but the into on the [[real]] tape [[within]] [[stated]] it was "X." The [[latest]] makes a lot more sense because there is a [[succinct]] scene [[nearby]] the end that was shocking. Even in the dark, you [[would]] see [[Antilles]] actress Marishcka Detmers [[fulfil]] all [[sexuality]] on this guy - and, [[yep]], you could [[behold]] his [[pecker]] in her mouth. I read somewhere that this was the first time where a "mainline [[actor]]" had [[played]] something like this on screen.

Detmers parades around in the nude on several scenes but her face was even better than her body. She looked beautiful. Unfortunately, the movie is ugly....a [[veritable]] waste of time and certainly not [[suggested]] despite Detmers' looks. --------------------------------------------- Result 430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You know a [[movie]] will not go well when [[John]] Carradine [[narrates]] (a.k.a. reads the [[script]] & plot synopsis) over his character's funeral procession, a mere 5 [[minutes]] into the [[movie]]. The [[narration]] is his character's [[last]] will & testament. It stipulates that his estate be divided amongst his 4 children and servants. The children shall split $136 million equally, but if any should die then that share is split amongst the remainders. If all the children should die then it is divided amongst the servants. To be eligible, they must live in the family estate for a week. It sounds like the typical plot of a [[reality]] show.

There is little subtext as to the nature of the Deans. They are a powerful and severely dysfunctional family, but the real trouble starts with the drowning of that dog. From the opening voice-over by John Carradine you expect this [[movie]] will lead to a Machiavellian cat and mouse game with a twist ending.

That journey is painfully slow and [[pointless]]. We trudge through minutes of watching people sitting around, playing pool, throwing darts, the misuse of the "through the fish bowl" shot, dramatic conversations between silk cravat wearing men, constant bickering, misplaced circus [[music]], bizarre flashbacks reminiscent of faux-German expressionism, the horror aesthetic of the 4th grade and [[heaps]] of dramatic overacting. This all inevitably leads to the expected & ungratifying ending. You will be [[happy]] to still be [[alive]], but the pain might be too great to [[bear]] alone. Share children, share.

-Celluloid Rehab You know a [[filmmaking]] will not go well when [[Giovanni]] Carradine [[tells]] (a.k.a. reads the [[hyphen]] & plot synopsis) over his character's funeral procession, a mere 5 [[mins]] into the [[kino]]. The [[storytelling]] is his character's [[final]] will & testament. It stipulates that his estate be divided amongst his 4 children and servants. The children shall split $136 million equally, but if any should die then that share is split amongst the remainders. If all the children should die then it is divided amongst the servants. To be eligible, they must live in the family estate for a week. It sounds like the typical plot of a [[realism]] show.

There is little subtext as to the nature of the Deans. They are a powerful and severely dysfunctional family, but the real trouble starts with the drowning of that dog. From the opening voice-over by John Carradine you expect this [[filmmaking]] will lead to a Machiavellian cat and mouse game with a twist ending.

That journey is painfully slow and [[senseless]]. We trudge through minutes of watching people sitting around, playing pool, throwing darts, the misuse of the "through the fish bowl" shot, dramatic conversations between silk cravat wearing men, constant bickering, misplaced circus [[musicians]], bizarre flashbacks reminiscent of faux-German expressionism, the horror aesthetic of the 4th grade and [[piling]] of dramatic overacting. This all inevitably leads to the expected & ungratifying ending. You will be [[jubilant]] to still be [[vivid]], but the pain might be too great to [[xiong]] alone. Share children, share.

-Celluloid Rehab --------------------------------------------- Result 431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] it's amazing that so many people that i know haven't seen this little gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A [[GREAT]] MOVIE!!

i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 monkeys and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this film as a psycho is unnerving, [[dark]] and right on [[target]].

[[everyone]] else in the film gives [[excellent]] performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing [[greatly]] enhance the [[proceedings]]. the sense of dread for the characters keeps increasing as they come to realize what has been really happening.

the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only [[flaw]] i could find in this cult [[classic]].

if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.

rating:9 it's amazing that so many people that i know haven't seen this little gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A [[WONDROUS]] MOVIE!!

i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 monkeys and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this film as a psycho is unnerving, [[darkness]] and right on [[purposes]].

[[someone]] else in the film gives [[wondrous]] performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing [[radically]] enhance the [[lawsuits]]. the sense of dread for the characters keeps increasing as they come to realize what has been really happening.

the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only [[inadequacy]] i could find in this cult [[typical]].

if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.

rating:9 --------------------------------------------- Result 432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Not knowing what this [[film]] was about, I [[checked]] it out at the video store and after seeing it, I enjoyed it. [[Little]] [[seen]] multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). [[Great]] story and characters. As a fan of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only [[exception]] for this [[film]] was the [[ending]]. However, it is worth the rent. Not knowing what this [[films]] was about, I [[check]] it out at the video store and after seeing it, I enjoyed it. [[Kiddo]] [[watched]] multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). [[Wondrous]] story and characters. As a fan of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only [[immunities]] for this [[movie]] was the [[ended]]. However, it is worth the rent. --------------------------------------------- Result 433 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there was a 0 stars rating i would gladly hand it out to this absolutely horrid pile of waste. The fact that the actual summary is perfectly fine and that if it had been made different it could have been brilliant only makes it worse. The basic task of locking up a group of people in an experiment chamber is fine, but WHERES THE EXPERIMENT? All i see is a bunch of unintelligent surfers and blondes chatting about music and culture i don't know or want to know about... The challenges are pathetic and silly. The whole point of reality TV is to show REALITY. If you set a 'challenge' don't make them play with exaggerated props of food and stereotypical cultural elements in 'friday night games'. make them do an actual challenge. And as for 'earning' prize money, thats fine, if they actually earnt it! These people are nuts. If only they would make the show better, the actual idea would be glorious. But that ain't gonna happen! --------------------------------------------- Result 434 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This [[series]] is set a year after the [[mission]] to Abydos in the [[movie]] [[Stargate]]. It explains a lot of the stuff that the [[movie]] [[neglected]] to [[mention]]. Such as, how was the [[Stargate]] activated without a human [[computer]]? Where did the Goa'uld (Ra's race) come from? [[How]] [[many]] are there?

The first episode has a retired [[Jack]] O'Neill (spelled with 2 Ls) [[recalled]] to active duty by General [[George]] Hammond due to an [[attack]] by the [[shut]] down [[Stargate]] from Apophis, a [[powerful]] Goa'uld who [[killed]] four [[men]] and [[kidnapped]] one [[woman]]. We [[meet]] Samantha Carter, a [[brilliant]] [[scientist]] who [[claims]] that she should have [[gone]] through the [[Stargate]] the first [[time]], and is determined to [[go]] through now. We [[find]] out that [[Daniel]] got married on Abydos, and that there are hundreds of [[Gate]] [[addresses]] that they can [[dial]]. Then Daniel's [[wife]] [[gets]] [[captured]] by Apophis and [[becomes]] his [[new]] queen.

It [[continues]] in the second episode where General Hammond [[announces]] the [[formation]] of the SGC which [[includes]] nine teams, in which Jack's team will be SG-1 which [[consists]] of [[Jack]], Samantha and [[Daniel]]. They go to Chulak, a Goa'uld homeworld to [[rescue]] Daniel's [[wife]] and another one [[captured]] at Abydos named Ska'ra. They get [[captured]], and just as Apophis [[gives]] the [[order]] to [[kill]] them and [[many]] other [[prisoners]], a Jaffa named Teal'c, First Prime of Apophis, [[saves]] them and goes to [[Earth]] with them, where he is made part of SG-1.

That was only the [[beginning]] of the [[adventure]]. [[In]] the course of the [[show]] they have [[gone]] to the past and [[future]], gotten [[transported]] to alternate [[realities]], [[swapped]] [[bodies]], [[grown]] [[old]], met [[alien]] [[races]] which [[include]] a [[rebel]] alliance of Goa'uld [[called]] the Tok'ra, in which Samantha's [[Dad]] [[becomes]] a [[member]], the Asgard, a [[cute]] [[little]] [[race]] in which we see Thor most [[often]] (he's Jack's [[buddy]]),and [[avoid]] [[global]] [[disaster]] by the skin of their teeth countless [[times]].

The [[show]] was [[recently]] [[canceled]], but lasted ten seasons. [[In]] season nine, a [[new]] [[enemy]] called the [[Ori]] [[came]] in flaunting [[brand]] new powers, [[new]] dangers and bringing to light [[new]] [[mysteries]] surrounding the Stargate and its creators, the Ancients. Season nine and ten also saw the introduction to two new characters, Ben Browder as Cameron Mitchell, the new leader of SG-1 and Claudia Black as Vala MalDoran, a female human from another world who brings a new sense of fun to the team.

Very well-produced, interesting characters, fantastic Special effects and a subtle love interest between Samantha and Jack, this one has it all. A different way of travelling the galaxy, and different kinds of adventures, this is one show you don't want to miss. Unlock the gate and step through. You won't regret it! This [[serial]] is set a year after the [[delegations]] to Abydos in the [[cinematography]] [[Door]]. It explains a lot of the stuff that the [[flick]] [[unheeded]] to [[cite]]. Such as, how was the [[Porte]] activated without a human [[computers]]? Where did the Goa'uld (Ra's race) come from? [[Mode]] [[numerous]] are there?

The first episode has a retired [[Jacques]] O'Neill (spelled with 2 Ls) [[recalling]] to active duty by General [[Georges]] Hammond due to an [[attacking]] by the [[closure]] down [[Door]] from Apophis, a [[influential]] Goa'uld who [[murders]] four [[males]] and [[abducted]] one [[wife]]. We [[respond]] Samantha Carter, a [[excellent]] [[scientists]] who [[claim]] that she should have [[disappeared]] through the [[Door]] the first [[period]], and is determined to [[going]] through now. We [[unearthed]] out that [[Daniela]] got married on Abydos, and that there are hundreds of [[Puerta]] [[treats]] that they can [[dialed]]. Then Daniel's [[women]] [[got]] [[catching]] by Apophis and [[become]] his [[novel]] queen.

It [[continued]] in the second episode where General Hammond [[advertisement]] the [[establishment]] of the SGC which [[involves]] nine teams, in which Jack's team will be SG-1 which [[involves]] of [[Jacque]], Samantha and [[Danielle]]. They go to Chulak, a Goa'uld homeworld to [[salvage]] Daniel's [[women]] and another one [[captures]] at Abydos named Ska'ra. They get [[apprehended]], and just as Apophis [[delivers]] the [[decree]] to [[killings]] them and [[several]] other [[detainees]], a Jaffa named Teal'c, First Prime of Apophis, [[savings]] them and goes to [[Earthly]] with them, where he is made part of SG-1.

That was only the [[commences]] of the [[fling]]. [[Onto]] the course of the [[shows]] they have [[faded]] to the past and [[futuristic]], gotten [[hauled]] to alternate [[reality]], [[shuffled]] [[organisations]], [[cultivated]] [[antique]], met [[foreigners]] [[careers]] which [[incorporate]] a [[insurgents]] alliance of Goa'uld [[telephoned]] the Tok'ra, in which Samantha's [[Daddy]] [[become]] a [[lawmakers]], the Asgard, a [[purty]] [[tiny]] [[racing]] in which we see Thor most [[traditionally]] (he's Jack's [[boyfriend]]),and [[evade]] [[worldwide]] [[catastrophe]] by the skin of their teeth countless [[dates]].

The [[exhibitions]] was [[lately]] [[countermanded]], but lasted ten seasons. [[Onto]] season nine, a [[newer]] [[enemies]] called the [[Uri]] [[became]] in flaunting [[brands]] new powers, [[novo]] dangers and bringing to light [[novel]] [[riddles]] surrounding the Stargate and its creators, the Ancients. Season nine and ten also saw the introduction to two new characters, Ben Browder as Cameron Mitchell, the new leader of SG-1 and Claudia Black as Vala MalDoran, a female human from another world who brings a new sense of fun to the team.

Very well-produced, interesting characters, fantastic Special effects and a subtle love interest between Samantha and Jack, this one has it all. A different way of travelling the galaxy, and different kinds of adventures, this is one show you don't want to miss. Unlock the gate and step through. You won't regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Not only is this movie a great film for basic [[cinematography]] ([[screenplay]], acting, setting, etc.) but [[also]] for it's [[realism]]. This movie [[could]] [[take]] place in any [[farm]] or [[rural]] setting. It makes no [[difference]] if the [[movie]] takes place in Louisiana or if it [[would]] [[take]] place in Kansas. The story and the [[messages]] it [[includes]] would remain the same. This [[movie]] [[shows]] family values and connections for an [[older]] audience, while at the same time it [[shows]] [[youthful]] [[behavior]] for the younger [[viewers]]. [[Everyone]] who watches this will walk away with something having [[touched]] them personally, I know I did. The ending hits [[way]] too close to [[home]] for me not to [[burst]] into [[tears]] [[every]] [[time]] I watch it. The [[ending]] [[stresses]] the importance of [[farm]] safety, and [[everyone]] who has ever [[worked]] on a farm [[needs]] to see this [[film]]. Not [[paying]] attention and [[carelessness]] [[gets]] you into [[dangerous]] [[situations]].

Not only is this movie a great film for basic [[films]] ([[script]], acting, setting, etc.) but [[apart]] for it's [[pragmatism]]. This movie [[did]] [[taking]] place in any [[farmhouse]] or [[agrarian]] setting. It makes no [[differences]] if the [[cinematography]] takes place in Louisiana or if it [[should]] [[taking]] place in Kansas. The story and the [[message]] it [[involves]] would remain the same. This [[cinematography]] [[denotes]] family values and connections for an [[aging]] audience, while at the same time it [[displayed]] [[juvenile]] [[attitudes]] for the younger [[listeners]]. [[Someone]] who watches this will walk away with something having [[poked]] them personally, I know I did. The ending hits [[routes]] too close to [[habitation]] for me not to [[blasting]] into [[sobs]] [[all]] [[moment]] I watch it. The [[ceasing]] [[stressing]] the importance of [[farmhouse]] safety, and [[somebody]] who has ever [[acted]] on a farm [[needed]] to see this [[kino]]. Not [[remuneration]] attention and [[negligent]] [[got]] you into [[dicey]] [[instances]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have never commented on IMDb before, but I feel I have to after watching The Batman animation. Its absolute rubbish! Warner Brothers had the perfect animation series in Batman in the early 90s so what the hell are they doing trying to mess with the winning formula? I feel like writing a complaint letter to WB. The original animation was dark and brooding, exactly the way Batman was intended to be. WB had to mess this up with some tripe Batman of the Future. Now they produce this drivel. The Joker doesn't remotely resemble the Joker from DC comics. DC should sue. I urge everyone who agrees with me to email or write to WB and use people power to get back the original formula --------------------------------------------- Result 437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] [[Utterly]] [[tactical]], [[strange]] (watch for the [[kinky]] moment of a drop-dead [[gorgeous]] [[blonde]] acting as pull-string doll for some [[rich]] folks), pointless but [[undoubtedly]] [[compelling]] late-night feature. This unhinged French production is a [[stew]] of perplexedly unfocused [[ideas]] and [[random]] plot illustrations centred on its very charismatic stars (if [[somewhat]] anti-heroes) [[Alain]] Delon and Charles Bronson. Really they don't [[get]] to do all that much, especially during the confined, lengthy mid-section where they hide themselves in a building during the Christmas break to crack a safe with 10,000 possible combinations. Oh fun! But this is when the odd, if intriguing relationship is formed between Delon and Bronson's characters. After a manipulative battle of wills (and childishly sly games against each other), the two come to an understanding that sees them honour each other's involvement and have a mutual respect. This would go on to play a further part in the twisty second half of the story with that undetectable curve-ball. Still their encounters early on suggest there's more, but what we get is vague and this is magnified by that 'What just happen there?' ending that might just make you jump. YEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! Glad to get that out of the system.

The pacing is terribly slow, but placidly measured for it and this seems purposely done to exhaust with its edgy, nervous underlining tension. Watch as the same process is repeated over and over again, and you know something is not quite right and the scheming eventually comes into play. Now everything that does happen feels too spontaneous, but the climax payoff is haunting. The taut, complex script is probably a little too crafty for its own good, but there are some neat novelties (Coins, glass and liquids… try not spilling) and visual symbolisms. Jean Herman's direction is efficiently sophisticated and low-key, but get a tad artificial and infuse an unwelcoming icy atmosphere. The sound FX features more as a potent note, than that of Francois DeRoubaix's funky score that's mainly kept under wrapped after its sizzling opening. Top drawers Delon (who's quite steely) and Bronson (a jovial turn) are solid, and work off each tremendously. Bernard Fresson chalks up the attitude as the Inspector who knows there's more going on than what is being led on. An attractive female cast features able support by Brigitte Fossey and Olga Georges-Picot.

A cryptically directionless, but polished crime drama maintained by its two leads and some bizarre inclusions. [[Acutely]] [[tactic]], [[nosy]] (watch for the [[perv]] moment of a drop-dead [[wondrous]] [[blonds]] acting as pull-string doll for some [[storied]] folks), pointless but [[probably]] [[persuasive]] late-night feature. This unhinged French production is a [[simmer]] of perplexedly unfocused [[conceptions]] and [[haphazard]] plot illustrations centred on its very charismatic stars (if [[rather]] anti-heroes) [[Alan]] Delon and Charles Bronson. Really they don't [[obtain]] to do all that much, especially during the confined, lengthy mid-section where they hide themselves in a building during the Christmas break to crack a safe with 10,000 possible combinations. Oh fun! But this is when the odd, if intriguing relationship is formed between Delon and Bronson's characters. After a manipulative battle of wills (and childishly sly games against each other), the two come to an understanding that sees them honour each other's involvement and have a mutual respect. This would go on to play a further part in the twisty second half of the story with that undetectable curve-ball. Still their encounters early on suggest there's more, but what we get is vague and this is magnified by that 'What just happen there?' ending that might just make you jump. YEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! Glad to get that out of the system.

The pacing is terribly slow, but placidly measured for it and this seems purposely done to exhaust with its edgy, nervous underlining tension. Watch as the same process is repeated over and over again, and you know something is not quite right and the scheming eventually comes into play. Now everything that does happen feels too spontaneous, but the climax payoff is haunting. The taut, complex script is probably a little too crafty for its own good, but there are some neat novelties (Coins, glass and liquids… try not spilling) and visual symbolisms. Jean Herman's direction is efficiently sophisticated and low-key, but get a tad artificial and infuse an unwelcoming icy atmosphere. The sound FX features more as a potent note, than that of Francois DeRoubaix's funky score that's mainly kept under wrapped after its sizzling opening. Top drawers Delon (who's quite steely) and Bronson (a jovial turn) are solid, and work off each tremendously. Bernard Fresson chalks up the attitude as the Inspector who knows there's more going on than what is being led on. An attractive female cast features able support by Brigitte Fossey and Olga Georges-Picot.

A cryptically directionless, but polished crime drama maintained by its two leads and some bizarre inclusions. --------------------------------------------- Result 438 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[film]] is just a [[shame]]. Orlando, Florida seems to becoming a more [[recognized]] filmmaking [[area]] (like Vancouver's rise to prominance). The Brothers was [[shot]] in Central [[Florida]] and this short film is a bit of a setback for the area (which made great strides with the Indie film Walking Across [[Africa]] and the great HBO miniseries From Earth To The Moon).

I will try to be as honest as possible. I think Orlando was the perfect place to film The Brothers. It had the [[potential]] to [[give]] a new spin on the 'Boy Band' craze. [[After]] all, both N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys come from this [[area]]. But, The Brothers [[falls]] short probably because of a weak [[script]]. Both lead [[characters]] are flat with almost no [[development]] (part of this could be the amatuer actors, but some of it is certainly the way the script was written).

Also a problem is the choice of jokes. Many of the jokes are too repetitive (they do come off funny the first time, but it does grow to be a bit [[boring]]). Some of the 'concert' scenes are staged poorly (and many of these scenes also don't seem to move the story along in any way).

I had high hopes for this one, but alas its a disappointing effort. I also [[hope]] the best for the upcoming feature based on this short. But I think the best thing for filmmaker John Figg is to move to different genres (quickly). Comedy isn't his strong suit. But, its indisputable that he definitely is one of the more prominant filmmakers in the Orlando area (its just a shame that right now he's infamous, not famous).

This [[filmmaking]] is just a [[pity]]. Orlando, Florida seems to becoming a more [[acknowledgment]] filmmaking [[zone]] (like Vancouver's rise to prominance). The Brothers was [[offed]] in Central [[Fl]] and this short film is a bit of a setback for the area (which made great strides with the Indie film Walking Across [[Continents]] and the great HBO miniseries From Earth To The Moon).

I will try to be as honest as possible. I think Orlando was the perfect place to film The Brothers. It had the [[prospective]] to [[lend]] a new spin on the 'Boy Band' craze. [[Upon]] all, both N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys come from this [[realms]]. But, The Brothers [[autumn]] short probably because of a weak [[hyphen]]. Both lead [[features]] are flat with almost no [[developments]] (part of this could be the amatuer actors, but some of it is certainly the way the script was written).

Also a problem is the choice of jokes. Many of the jokes are too repetitive (they do come off funny the first time, but it does grow to be a bit [[dull]]). Some of the 'concert' scenes are staged poorly (and many of these scenes also don't seem to move the story along in any way).

I had high hopes for this one, but alas its a disappointing effort. I also [[esperanza]] the best for the upcoming feature based on this short. But I think the best thing for filmmaker John Figg is to move to different genres (quickly). Comedy isn't his strong suit. But, its indisputable that he definitely is one of the more prominant filmmakers in the Orlando area (its just a shame that right now he's infamous, not famous).

--------------------------------------------- Result 439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I [[admit]] I had no idea what to [[expect]] before [[viewing]] this [[highly]] stylized piece. It could have been the cure for a zombie virus or the common [[cold]] for all I [[knew]]. It began with [[great]] visuals, [[little]] snippets to grab your [[attention]] and cause your [[imagination]] to [[run]] [[wild]]. As it [[continued]] I [[learned]] [[quickly]] through voice overs what was taking place. A nice [[little]] neo [[noir]] [[story]] that I felt was not a [[waist]] of a few minutes of my time. The little clues given to the audience through visuals at the [[beginning]] give them a sense of [[accomplishment]] as they piece [[together]] the plot. Along with a nice twist at the end its a cool [[package]] overall. The score, [[though]] not bad, gave the film almost a music video feel. It just [[felt]] a little dated, not adding anything to further the storyline. Some of the performances felt overly dramatic but fit perfectly with the feel of the overall piece. I walk away from this very satisfied. I was given a lot of information in a short period of time but through great editing and voice-over work it didn't feel [[rushed]] or pushed. [[Great]] job! I [[accepted]] I had no idea what to [[hopes]] before [[visualizing]] this [[heavily]] stylized piece. It could have been the cure for a zombie virus or the common [[frigid]] for all I [[knowed]]. It began with [[wondrous]] visuals, [[petite]] snippets to grab your [[beware]] and cause your [[creativity]] to [[running]] [[wilde]]. As it [[uninterrupted]] I [[learning]] [[fast]] through voice overs what was taking place. A nice [[small]] neo [[negro]] [[fairytales]] that I felt was not a [[sizes]] of a few minutes of my time. The little clues given to the audience through visuals at the [[starting]] give them a sense of [[materialization]] as they piece [[jointly]] the plot. Along with a nice twist at the end its a cool [[packaging]] overall. The score, [[if]] not bad, gave the film almost a music video feel. It just [[smelled]] a little dated, not adding anything to further the storyline. Some of the performances felt overly dramatic but fit perfectly with the feel of the overall piece. I walk away from this very satisfied. I was given a lot of information in a short period of time but through great editing and voice-over work it didn't feel [[hastened]] or pushed. [[Grand]] job! --------------------------------------------- Result 440 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I only [[recently]] [[found]] out that [[Madeleine]] L'Engle's [[novel]] had been [[turned]] into a TV [[movie]] by [[Disney]] and [[ordered]] the [[DVD]]. The [[book]] was a [[favorite]] of [[mine]] when I was a [[child]] and I read it [[several]] times.

Despite some of the [[child]] actors not resembling the [[characters]] as described in the novel, the Murry [[family]] is well [[cast]], with a likable (if too [[pretty]]) Meg at the [[center]] and a [[Charles]] Wallace who is [[convincing]] as a child prodigy without becoming irritating.

The [[first]] half hour is promising [[enough]], doing a good job in establishing the relationships between the lead characters and at setting the scene. Unfortunately as soon as the non-human characters appear the adaptation starts to unravel and once the children leave earth the whole thing falls apart. Alfre Woodward is too youthful looking and much too regal as the eccentric Mrs Whatsit (think Miriam Margolis or Joan Plowright instead) and Kate Nelligan [[face]] is so mask like and inexpressive, she must have visited Faye Dunaway's plastic surgeon in recent years. For some reason they make her Mrs Which look like Glinda from The Wizard of Oz when she should have resembled a benign Wicked Witch of the West.

In the end what lets this down most badly are the terrible special [[effects]] and art direction. I understand that this is a TV movie, but the CGI looked like something that could have been done 15 years earlier. Mrs Whatsits' centaur incarnation is a disaster as is the Chewbacca like suit for Aunt Beast, who in the novel is a velvety, elegant creature instead of the ungainly Big Foot like thing shown here. I could go on and on, nearly every artistic choice is a [[disaster]], presumably because there wasn't a large enough budget to do this justice, but [[also]] because the design work [[lacks]] imagination and good [[judgement]].

This really would have needed the sense of wonder Spielberg brought to his early films. What a shame that with the current popularity of adapting children's literary fantasy series nobody thought of adapting A Wrinkle in Time and it's sequels for the big screen, giving it the scope it deserves. I only [[lately]] [[detected]] out that [[Maddalena]] L'Engle's [[newer]] had been [[transformed]] into a TV [[filmmaking]] by [[Disneyland]] and [[decreed]] the [[DVDS]]. The [[ledger]] was a [[prefer]] of [[mines]] when I was a [[kid]] and I read it [[myriad]] times.

Despite some of the [[kid]] actors not resembling the [[trait]] as described in the novel, the Murry [[families]] is well [[casting]], with a likable (if too [[belle]]) Meg at the [[centering]] and a [[Karel]] Wallace who is [[compelling]] as a child prodigy without becoming irritating.

The [[fiirst]] half hour is promising [[adequately]], doing a good job in establishing the relationships between the lead characters and at setting the scene. Unfortunately as soon as the non-human characters appear the adaptation starts to unravel and once the children leave earth the whole thing falls apart. Alfre Woodward is too youthful looking and much too regal as the eccentric Mrs Whatsit (think Miriam Margolis or Joan Plowright instead) and Kate Nelligan [[confront]] is so mask like and inexpressive, she must have visited Faye Dunaway's plastic surgeon in recent years. For some reason they make her Mrs Which look like Glinda from The Wizard of Oz when she should have resembled a benign Wicked Witch of the West.

In the end what lets this down most badly are the terrible special [[influence]] and art direction. I understand that this is a TV movie, but the CGI looked like something that could have been done 15 years earlier. Mrs Whatsits' centaur incarnation is a disaster as is the Chewbacca like suit for Aunt Beast, who in the novel is a velvety, elegant creature instead of the ungainly Big Foot like thing shown here. I could go on and on, nearly every artistic choice is a [[disasters]], presumably because there wasn't a large enough budget to do this justice, but [[similarly]] because the design work [[lacked]] imagination and good [[rulings]].

This really would have needed the sense of wonder Spielberg brought to his early films. What a shame that with the current popularity of adapting children's literary fantasy series nobody thought of adapting A Wrinkle in Time and it's sequels for the big screen, giving it the scope it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Why am I so convinced there's actually another film version of this novel out there somewhere? I saw the [[film]] again this [[year]] as I am teaching the novel and [[find]] the changes in the [[film]] annoying - there is no appearance of the little [[boy]] in the novel and the ending has been [[changed]]. They kill him off in the [[film]] but the [[whole]] point is that he is [[haunted]] by the [[events]] at Eel Marsh House for many years but does remarry and eventually put the [[events]] [[behind]] him. Mr. Bentley is a far more [[sympathetic]] [[character]] in the novel, the scene in the film where Kipps sets fire to the office is plain daft, and the constant appearance of the toy soldier to signify the presence of the child is genuinely creepy but pointless - Kipps is haunted by the woman seeking revenge, not the child. I am sure I've seen a [[film]] which is better and closer to the novel and actually scarier. [[Have]] I just imagined this? Why am I so convinced there's actually another film version of this novel out there somewhere? I saw the [[cinematographic]] again this [[annum]] as I am teaching the novel and [[unearth]] the changes in the [[kino]] annoying - there is no appearance of the little [[bloke]] in the novel and the ending has been [[modified]]. They kill him off in the [[kino]] but the [[entire]] point is that he is [[obsessed]] by the [[event]] at Eel Marsh House for many years but does remarry and eventually put the [[happenings]] [[backside]] him. Mr. Bentley is a far more [[congenial]] [[nature]] in the novel, the scene in the film where Kipps sets fire to the office is plain daft, and the constant appearance of the toy soldier to signify the presence of the child is genuinely creepy but pointless - Kipps is haunted by the woman seeking revenge, not the child. I am sure I've seen a [[filmmaking]] which is better and closer to the novel and actually scarier. [[Ha]] I just imagined this? --------------------------------------------- Result 442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm watching the series again now that it's out on DVD (yay!) It's striking me as fresh, as relevant and as intriguing as when it first aired.

The central performances are gripping, the scripts are layered.

I'll stick my neck out and put it up there with The Prisoner as a show that'll be winning new fans and still be watched come 2035.

I've been asked to write some more line (it seems IMDb is as user unfriendly and anally retentively coded as ever! Pithy and to the point is clearly not the IMDb way.)

Well, unlike IMDb's submissions editors, American Gothic understands that simplicity is everything.

In 22 episodes, the show covers more character development than many shows do in seven seasons. On top of which it questions personal ethics and strength of character in a way which challenges the viewer at every turn to ask themselves what they would choose and what they would think in a given situation.

When the show first aired, I was still grieving for Twin Peaks and thought it would be a cheap knock off. Personally I'm starting to rate it more highly and suspect it will stand up better over the years. Reckon it don't get more controversial than that! --------------------------------------------- Result 443 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your [[life]] watching this [[movie]] - just don't. [[Especially]] if [[someone]] is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I [[waited]] for [[something]] to [[happen]] - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I [[always]] have to see it through to the end. What a [[huge]] [[mistake]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to [[see]] it through to the end. What a [[huge]] [[mistake]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more [[entertaining]]. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your [[lifetime]] watching this [[filmmaking]] - just don't. [[Specifically]] if [[person]] is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I [[anticipated]] for [[anything]] to [[emerge]] - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I [[permanently]] have to see it through to the end. What a [[whopping]] [[mistaken]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to [[behold]] it through to the end. What a [[prodigious]] [[awry]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Allen goes to the country (somewhere he hates going in real life) and has a weekend with his friends - which are the usual successful white middle-class bellyaching types that feature in many of his films.

I usually find something to amuse in Woody Allen comedies, but here he really falls totally flat on his face. Even the one-liners seem to have deserted him. The really is no plot (bar bits and pieces of cod Shakespeare) - but Allen seems to use the location to allow a semi-mystical air, which just makes the thing even more witless and half-baked.

It just doesn't work at any level and is just a giant bore. The best thing about this film (apart from the end credits coming up) is that the bad reviews seem to get him to wake up and realise that simply throwing together a slapdash script and casting your mates in it doesn't make for entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Beat]] a path to this [[important]] [[documentary]] that looks like an attractive feature. [[Forbidden]] [[Lie]]$(2007) is [[simply]] a better ([[cinematic]]) [[version]] of [[Norma]] Khouri's [[book]] [[Forbidden]] [[Love]], and THAT was a best-seller. An onion-peeling of literary fraud and of a pretty [[woman]], [[Lie]]$ is the very best in editorialised reality TV.

[[Cleverly]] edited and [[colourful]], Broinowski's [[storytelling]] is chaptered by moving silhouettes of Norma Khouri meaningfully blowing smoke. I [[disagree]] (with Variety) that it's overlong; instead my one [[slight]] problem was with the episodic nature of its key players commenting on others' just-recorded [[testimonials]]. On a single watching your sense of narrative becomes mired.....so I watched it twice.

This Oscar-worthy effort is at once genuinely funny, upsetting, and [[totally]] engrossing as it documents one lie after another. The [[apparent]] con unfolded in the Australian State of Queensland via very personal swindles of Khouri's friends and fans(!). Clearly these friends are now "turned", the funniest on-camera line belonging to Khouri's QLD neighbour Rachel Richardson who speaks her [[disillusionment]] in flat, no-nonsense colloquialisms: "I think it's a load of sh!t. Personally".

We need to learn from their experience, hence my belief in [[spoilers]]. Any perennial lie-spinner caught out in a lie will just say anything to buy time to tell another lie.

There's some breathtaking footage of Khouri cackling derisively at duping this very documentarian, who instead presses her (con)"Artist" repeatedly for corroboration.

Since being busted by [[Sydney]] Morning Herald journalists Caroline Overington and David Knox a year after publication, Khouri has been on the run, but was [[tempted]] back to the director to supposedly [[clear]] her name. She [[absconded]] supposedly because a) she's either [[terrified]] of her sly, more-Italian-sounding-than-Greek husband, or b) because she needed her passport/visas to clear her name.

Unlikely.

A more plausible reason was that the FBI regained her trail in Queensland before she again skipped overseas (one guess: No, not Jordan). According to a closing card, Khouri is "still under investigation by the FBI" in 2007.

I guessed audiences might just give Khouri the benefit of the doubt once she invoked the need for utmost secrecy and subterfuge. Instead, the audiences I sat with slowly became just as disillusioned as the duped people on the screen. Once they caught on, there was plenty counter-derision and catcalls; earlier, stressed sighs had emanated from audiencemembers who just didn't know how to take Khouri's evolving contradictions.

The filmmaker gets props for so beautifully spanning this convoluted tale from beginning to end, not leaving anything out--not even her own self-sacrifice.

Anna opens her film with a sympathetic book narration by Khouri herself. The putated reason for authoring it is retold very believably at first--key to how a lifelong liar operates: in half-truths. Khouri is nevertheless a very pretty and smart 35yr-old with rather disarming charm, and surprisingly, worked-out biceps.

Gradually we're introduced to less-and-less-adulating Aussie journos, publishers and fans who at first bought the extent of Khouri's honour-killing accusations hook, line and sinker. Later we see their more rueful reactions, quite self-controlled and matter-of-fact, if some perhaps a little bitter.

It was Jordanian (anti-)honour-killing activists who took deepest umbrage at Khouri's fallacies because its pot-stirring forced them to reduce the pace of change. Honour-killings do happen in Jordan; it's just their prevalence that's at odds with Khouri's book--plus 72 other "facts". In 2003 these activists faxed (Australian) Random House with 73 painstakingly-checked objections.

The publishing houses across 4 continents who'd jumped at the chance to publish first-time author Khouri never tried to check any facts. Leaving any corroborration to a disclaimer in their author contract, they too were fair game. So a massive hot-topic fraud was as easy to perpetrate upon the world as typing it up in Internet cafes.

Later still we're shocked to discover that the "factual errors" extend to Khouri's bio as well. For one thing, she's not only not a 35yr-old virgin (her defence is that she merely didn't disabuse people of their assumptions), but she has a slickster husband and 2 teenagers! Sometimes she's just too fast-talking in her American accent. She also seems too-comfortable with cellphone technology and Western clothes. I realise observations like these might sound prejudicial to the very Jordanian women who don't need any Western paternalism from me, but when even cultural cues don't jibe in addition to Khouri's "facts", you've got to start questioning your source.

At some point the filmmaker came to the same conclusion. She makes an admirable effort to hold Khouri to account, in person, in Jordan. The last third is consumed with a fact-finding trip back to Amman, where one "fact" after another falls. Eventually Broinowski forces her (con)"Artist" to admit the decade-discrepancy in her story, and it's after this that Khouri records her derisive secret confession into her own digital camera. Secret, because in it Khouri's "American security guard" Jeremy is heard to have an Australian accent: he's an actor! (We never find out how Anna uncovered it.)

So this becomes the filmmaker's triumph, as she never flags in her tone or commitment. Her on-camera revelations lead her audience to learn from the mistakes of others given such a litany of reasonable doubt, FBI documents--and Khouri's most shocking initial crime.

Anna Broinowski (watch-list her now) is even clever enough to use the one artistic device (key players cross-commenting on footage) to kill two birds--making her audiences want to drink from the same well again.

In fact, despite her deceptively demure approach, she made me re-confirm that Overington and Knox really DID win their 2004 Walkleys in Investigate Journalism for their "Norma Khouri Investigation".

Broinowski MADE ME LOOK.(10/10) [[Beats]] a path to this [[sizeable]] [[documentation]] that looks like an attractive feature. [[Banished]] [[Lying]]$(2007) is [[exclusively]] a better ([[films]]) [[stepping]] of [[Norm]] Khouri's [[books]] [[Prohibiting]] [[Likes]], and THAT was a best-seller. An onion-peeling of literary fraud and of a pretty [[wife]], [[Lying]]$ is the very best in editorialised reality TV.

[[Deftly]] edited and [[scenic]], Broinowski's [[narration]] is chaptered by moving silhouettes of Norma Khouri meaningfully blowing smoke. I [[disagreement]] (with Variety) that it's overlong; instead my one [[lightweight]] problem was with the episodic nature of its key players commenting on others' just-recorded [[testimonial]]. On a single watching your sense of narrative becomes mired.....so I watched it twice.

This Oscar-worthy effort is at once genuinely funny, upsetting, and [[utterly]] engrossing as it documents one lie after another. The [[noticeable]] con unfolded in the Australian State of Queensland via very personal swindles of Khouri's friends and fans(!). Clearly these friends are now "turned", the funniest on-camera line belonging to Khouri's QLD neighbour Rachel Richardson who speaks her [[disappointment]] in flat, no-nonsense colloquialisms: "I think it's a load of sh!t. Personally".

We need to learn from their experience, hence my belief in [[vandals]]. Any perennial lie-spinner caught out in a lie will just say anything to buy time to tell another lie.

There's some breathtaking footage of Khouri cackling derisively at duping this very documentarian, who instead presses her (con)"Artist" repeatedly for corroboration.

Since being busted by [[Sidney]] Morning Herald journalists Caroline Overington and David Knox a year after publication, Khouri has been on the run, but was [[attempted]] back to the director to supposedly [[unmistakable]] her name. She [[fled]] supposedly because a) she's either [[horrified]] of her sly, more-Italian-sounding-than-Greek husband, or b) because she needed her passport/visas to clear her name.

Unlikely.

A more plausible reason was that the FBI regained her trail in Queensland before she again skipped overseas (one guess: No, not Jordan). According to a closing card, Khouri is "still under investigation by the FBI" in 2007.

I guessed audiences might just give Khouri the benefit of the doubt once she invoked the need for utmost secrecy and subterfuge. Instead, the audiences I sat with slowly became just as disillusioned as the duped people on the screen. Once they caught on, there was plenty counter-derision and catcalls; earlier, stressed sighs had emanated from audiencemembers who just didn't know how to take Khouri's evolving contradictions.

The filmmaker gets props for so beautifully spanning this convoluted tale from beginning to end, not leaving anything out--not even her own self-sacrifice.

Anna opens her film with a sympathetic book narration by Khouri herself. The putated reason for authoring it is retold very believably at first--key to how a lifelong liar operates: in half-truths. Khouri is nevertheless a very pretty and smart 35yr-old with rather disarming charm, and surprisingly, worked-out biceps.

Gradually we're introduced to less-and-less-adulating Aussie journos, publishers and fans who at first bought the extent of Khouri's honour-killing accusations hook, line and sinker. Later we see their more rueful reactions, quite self-controlled and matter-of-fact, if some perhaps a little bitter.

It was Jordanian (anti-)honour-killing activists who took deepest umbrage at Khouri's fallacies because its pot-stirring forced them to reduce the pace of change. Honour-killings do happen in Jordan; it's just their prevalence that's at odds with Khouri's book--plus 72 other "facts". In 2003 these activists faxed (Australian) Random House with 73 painstakingly-checked objections.

The publishing houses across 4 continents who'd jumped at the chance to publish first-time author Khouri never tried to check any facts. Leaving any corroborration to a disclaimer in their author contract, they too were fair game. So a massive hot-topic fraud was as easy to perpetrate upon the world as typing it up in Internet cafes.

Later still we're shocked to discover that the "factual errors" extend to Khouri's bio as well. For one thing, she's not only not a 35yr-old virgin (her defence is that she merely didn't disabuse people of their assumptions), but she has a slickster husband and 2 teenagers! Sometimes she's just too fast-talking in her American accent. She also seems too-comfortable with cellphone technology and Western clothes. I realise observations like these might sound prejudicial to the very Jordanian women who don't need any Western paternalism from me, but when even cultural cues don't jibe in addition to Khouri's "facts", you've got to start questioning your source.

At some point the filmmaker came to the same conclusion. She makes an admirable effort to hold Khouri to account, in person, in Jordan. The last third is consumed with a fact-finding trip back to Amman, where one "fact" after another falls. Eventually Broinowski forces her (con)"Artist" to admit the decade-discrepancy in her story, and it's after this that Khouri records her derisive secret confession into her own digital camera. Secret, because in it Khouri's "American security guard" Jeremy is heard to have an Australian accent: he's an actor! (We never find out how Anna uncovered it.)

So this becomes the filmmaker's triumph, as she never flags in her tone or commitment. Her on-camera revelations lead her audience to learn from the mistakes of others given such a litany of reasonable doubt, FBI documents--and Khouri's most shocking initial crime.

Anna Broinowski (watch-list her now) is even clever enough to use the one artistic device (key players cross-commenting on footage) to kill two birds--making her audiences want to drink from the same well again.

In fact, despite her deceptively demure approach, she made me re-confirm that Overington and Knox really DID win their 2004 Walkleys in Investigate Journalism for their "Norma Khouri Investigation".

Broinowski MADE ME LOOK.(10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pathetic... worse than a bad made-for-TV movie. I can't believe that Spacey and Freeman were in this flick. For some reason Morgan Freeman's character is constantly talking about and saying "pussy" when referring to NSync boy's girlfriend. Morgan Freeman calling women "pussy" is just awkward... What the hell were the people behind this film thinking? Too many plot holes to imagine combined with the horrid acting, confusing camera angles, a lame script and cheap background music made this movie absolutely unbearable.

I rented this flop with low expectations.... but... well... it really sucked. --------------------------------------------- Result 447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not even worth watching this tacky spoiler ruins everything about 'Annie'. The characters seem almost cheapened by the poorly written storyline and they low quality feeling to the production. It was very clearly made for TV, yet if I found it on my television, I would flick it straight over. The children in the film do an alright job, yet the adults acting is unbelievable and so the movie fails to really draw you in. This film lacked the music/dance numbers thats made the original brilliant and truly does take the shine of the Annie we all love. Johnson, as Annie is at times annoying and over acted..you cannot convince yourself that she truly is Annie. The differences in character appearance continued to irritate me throughout the duration of the film. Sad to say this sequel was a total flop. --------------------------------------------- Result 448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] John Travolta, the biggest honkeytonk in the world, and a mechanical bull...what more can you ask for! Yeah, you're probably not going to get many surprises or deep meaning in this one. Yet, I have always found it fairly enjoyable to watch this redneck romance. Bud (Travolta) and Sissy (Debra Winger) meet at Gilley's and fall in love. They have all the difficulties you might expect a hardcore redneck couple to have. The honkeytonk scenes are fun with dancing, mechanical bull riding, and -of course- the required brawls. It has a good, 1980 country soundtrack, featuring "Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places", "The Devil Went Down to Georgia", and "Hello Texas" by my favorite Jimmy Buffett. Break out your cowboy boots and have a boot-scootin' boogie!

*** (Out of 4) --------------------------------------------- Result 449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I'm not going to criticize the [[movie]]. There isn't that much to [[talk]] about. It has good animal [[actions]] scenes which were [[probably]] pretty astonishing at the time. Clyde Beatty isn't exactly a matinée idol. He's a little slight and not particularly good looking. But that's [[OK]]. He's the man in that lion cage. We know that when he can't take the time away from his lions to tend to his girlfriend, he will end up on an island with her and have to save the day. Someone said earlier that it is a history lesson. The scenes at the circus are of another day, especially the kids who hang around. I didn't realize that even back in the thirties, they sailed on three masted schooners. It looked like something out of 1860. I guess that's the stock footage they had. No wonder the thing got wrecked. They're always talking about fixing her up. There's even a dirigible. It tells us a little about male female relationships at the time, a kind of giggly silliness. But if you don't take it too seriously, you can have fun watching it. I'm not going to criticize the [[filmmaking]]. There isn't that much to [[talking]] about. It has good animal [[measurements]] scenes which were [[undeniably]] pretty astonishing at the time. Clyde Beatty isn't exactly a matinée idol. He's a little slight and not particularly good looking. But that's [[ALLRIGHT]]. He's the man in that lion cage. We know that when he can't take the time away from his lions to tend to his girlfriend, he will end up on an island with her and have to save the day. Someone said earlier that it is a history lesson. The scenes at the circus are of another day, especially the kids who hang around. I didn't realize that even back in the thirties, they sailed on three masted schooners. It looked like something out of 1860. I guess that's the stock footage they had. No wonder the thing got wrecked. They're always talking about fixing her up. There's even a dirigible. It tells us a little about male female relationships at the time, a kind of giggly silliness. But if you don't take it too seriously, you can have fun watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I thought it was not the [[best]] re-cap episode I've [[every]] seen (though my [[viewing]] partner handed me a [[tissue]] in anticipation of the Brendan [[Fraser]] moment...*sigh*). It was nice to see Cox outside of the incessantly brittle "Coxism State" he is in these days, if only for [[brief]] [[moments]]. I [[also]] enjoyed [[trying]] to place the episodes included by the [[length]] of the character's [[hair]] (or [[height]], in [[case]] of [[JD]]) and the [[youthfulness]] of the [[earliest]] episodes. I can also see how Zach might be well on the way to a very [[Chevy]] [[Chase]]/or is that Matthew Perry? prat-fall induced chemical [[slide]] (already [[acknowledged]] on Conan). A [[little]] side [[note]], the song (now [[stuck]] in my [[head]]) from the janitor-induced [[dance]] [[montage]] was "[[Diner]]" by Martin Sexton. I thought it was not the [[nicest]] re-cap episode I've [[each]] seen (though my [[visualization]] partner handed me a [[kleenex]] in anticipation of the Brendan [[Frazer]] moment...*sigh*). It was nice to see Cox outside of the incessantly brittle "Coxism State" he is in these days, if only for [[succinct]] [[times]]. I [[similarly]] enjoyed [[seeking]] to place the episodes included by the [[duration]] of the character's [[headgear]] (or [[pinnacle]], in [[example]] of [[JOD]]) and the [[youthful]] of the [[tightest]] episodes. I can also see how Zach might be well on the way to a very [[Camaro]] [[Hunting]]/or is that Matthew Perry? prat-fall induced chemical [[slider]] (already [[concede]] on Conan). A [[scant]] side [[remark]], the song (now [[prude]] in my [[chief]]) from the janitor-induced [[dancer]] [[fitting]] was "[[Cafeteria]]" by Martin Sexton. --------------------------------------------- Result 451 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] SPOILERS. [[Strange]] people with generous [[tastes]] have been reviewing this film. Allow me to add balance by pointing out the following:

[[Script]]: [[Dreadful]]. As Tom and [[Dan]] are "getting to know each other," bantering about [[films]], the [[talk]] is [[clearly]] that of one [[person]], and I [[suspect]] it was the [[director]], who [[carefully]] worked his words to [[sound]] intelligent. [[At]] one point, Dan [[asks]], "Have you [[heard]] of the HIV [[virus]]?" and it [[sounds]] about as natural as asking, "Have you [[communicated]] with the nine [[alien]] [[races]]?"

Acting: [[White]] teeth do and a chiseled [[face]] do not a sensitive [[performer]] make. Speedman did well [[enough]] with what he was [[given]], I [[suppose]], but Marsden was [[terrible]] -- [[unsympathetic]], [[unbelievable]], and downright smug and smarmy [[throughout]] his [[captivity]]. There is an [[emptiness]] to his performances ([[also]] see Interstate 60).

[[Plot]]: Spare me! The [[moments]] of half-escape were not thrilling but irritating and [[weak]]. [[Recall]] Marsden [[pretending]] to try keys in the door and then throwing them down: "They don't [[work]], [[man]]!" Tee-hee. And beware the semi black-and-white flashbacks, which are [[initiated]] with some schlocky [[sound]] [[taken]] from CSI and other [[crime]] dramas.

Most [[important]] of all, most dangerous, [[evil]], and offensive, is the [[homophobia]] (external or internal, you decide) in a [[film]] in which HIV is [[considered]] a weapon. Tom [[says]] that [[Dan]] may have [[taken]] off the condom or not [[used]] it at all -- [[excuse]] me, where was [[Tom]] while they were having [[sex]]? There is some villainizing of the [[inserting]] partner which [[comes]] off as a villainizing of the [[gay]] [[man]] in general.

In sum: [[Beware]]! SPOILERS. [[Unusual]] people with generous [[flavors]] have been reviewing this film. Allow me to add balance by pointing out the following:

[[Screenplay]]: [[Abhorrent]]. As Tom and [[Dana]] are "getting to know each other," bantering about [[movie]], the [[chat]] is [[notoriously]] that of one [[persona]], and I [[suspicious]] it was the [[superintendent]], who [[thoroughly]] worked his words to [[sounds]] intelligent. [[During]] one point, Dan [[asked]], "Have you [[hear]] of the HIV [[viruses]]?" and it [[sound]] about as natural as asking, "Have you [[submitted]] with the nine [[strangers]] [[careers]]?"

Acting: [[Blanc]] teeth do and a chiseled [[encounter]] do not a sensitive [[artists]] make. Speedman did well [[satisfactorily]] with what he was [[afforded]], I [[imagining]], but Marsden was [[scary]] -- [[insensitive]], [[fabulous]], and downright smug and smarmy [[during]] his [[imprisonment]]. There is an [[vacuum]] to his performances ([[additionally]] see Interstate 60).

[[Intrigue]]: Spare me! The [[times]] of half-escape were not thrilling but irritating and [[vulnerable]]. [[Remember]] Marsden [[pretend]] to try keys in the door and then throwing them down: "They don't [[working]], [[males]]!" Tee-hee. And beware the semi black-and-white flashbacks, which are [[inaugurated]] with some schlocky [[sounds]] [[picked]] from CSI and other [[misdemeanour]] dramas.

Most [[essential]] of all, most dangerous, [[malign]], and offensive, is the [[homophobic]] (external or internal, you decide) in a [[filmmaking]] in which HIV is [[regarded]] a weapon. Tom [[tells]] that [[Dana]] may have [[picked]] off the condom or not [[utilizing]] it at all -- [[apologies]] me, where was [[Thom]] while they were having [[sexuality]]? There is some villainizing of the [[inserts]] partner which [[occurs]] off as a villainizing of the [[homosexuals]] [[fella]] in general.

In sum: [[Attention]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 452 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen many horror shows over the years, like Nightstalker, that dealt with the Wendigo legend, so I was looking forward to an angry spirit causing mayhem to add flavor to the Halloween season. Man was I mistaken. The whole movie creates this sense of events about to happen that will be scary and creepy, but then delivers a very simplistic tale of revenge and murder over the loss of some property. Ve-ery scary - not! This movie has a lot in common with Cold Creek Manor, another total loser.

It's getting harder and harder to believe anything Hollywood puts forward about scary movies, since they rarely come through with anything original and spooky anymore. What idiots pay for such a bogus movie to be made? Go back to the drawing board fellas, and do something useful with those millions of greenbacks you have to throw around. --------------------------------------------- Result 453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wonder how much this movie actually has got to do with the 1984 movie "Bachelor Party", starring Tom Hanks. Is this movie even an official sequel? This movie is lacking in every department and you're obviously better off not watching it.

For a comedy this movie simply isn't good or funny enough. It relies mostly on the character's their stereotypical assessments, rather then the movie actually features some good, original and funny moments.

Of course there also is very little story present and the movie nude breast than script pages. You just keep waiting for things to finally start off. There is a main plot line in it somewhere but that one is so terribly unoriginal and gets executed so poorly in the movie that it feels more as if it's something non-existent. I guess there even is a message and moral story in it somewhere but this again is so terribly unoriginal and poorly done in the movie that it simply does not work out.

It's basically a typical teenage comedy, with lots of sex jokes and nudity, only without the teenage main characters, which makes the story all the more sad and tasteless. The movie makes some really wrong jokes, that are misplaced for any type of movie.

I regret ever watching this.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Whoa]] nelly! I've [[heard]] a ton of mixed reviews for this...but one of my go to hardcore horror [[reviewers]] really found it to be disappointing. [[Man]] was he right on the nose! This movie was acted by pure [[amateurs]]. They HAD to have [[done]] one take, [[maybe]] two on each scene, the [[movie]] [[seemed]] soooo rushed. The [[script]] was [[also]] poor....they had lines that tried to be unique but failed. [[Miserably]]. "[[Get]] your meathooks off of me!" [[Oh]] [[man]], I hate it when movies try to do that. It [[happens]] all the time with comedies...but, with a [[horror]] movie and with below average actors....the [[results]] are [[incredibly]] [[pathetic]]. The lines and [[scenarios]] were all very predictable. But what [[made]] me feel so [[negative]] towards this [[movie]] was, again, the [[damn]] acting. It was [[awful]]. Besides by the little [[Asian]] [[guy]] who [[worked]] the [[booth]]. I thought he was great.

The [[movie]] is about 5 stupid dumbsh!t [[tourist]] who are on a vacation in Asia. They [[end]] up at the [[wrong]] place and [[fall]] into the hands of a mafia run sex/[[slaughterhouse]]. Sounds like a cool [[story]]. But watching [[someone]] with a bad case of diarrhea is [[probably]] more [[fun]] and intense to watch. The only [[reason]] this is [[considered]] horror is because of the killing. There wasn't a [[trace]] of [[suspense]].

I [[like]] [[many]] other horror fans were dying to get their bloody little [[mitts]] on this. But [[unfortunately]] with a [[HUGE]] capital U, the [[movie]] was [[incredibly]] disappointing. I did enjoy the ankle break and the blood effects. The flabby chicks were [[also]] so so.

Everything about this [[movie]] [[screams]] [[amateur]]. This is Ryan Nicholson's first feature length, and for the most part he failed. There's no denying he has a [[sick]] sense of [[humor]] and taste for horror. I pray his [[next]] [[movie]] doesn't play out like another B [[horror]] flick...unless he tells us that's what it's gonna be. Even after this [[disappointment]] I'm willing to give Ryan another shot. From what I've [[seen]] of him, he's a [[true]], [[dedicated]] man to the [[genre]]. [[Good]] [[luck]] [[next]] time, because this was [[bad]] news. [[Wow]] nelly! I've [[hear]] a ton of mixed reviews for this...but one of my go to hardcore horror [[reviewer]] really found it to be disappointing. [[Guy]] was he right on the nose! This movie was acted by pure [[amateur]]. They HAD to have [[doing]] one take, [[potentially]] two on each scene, the [[filmmaking]] [[sounded]] soooo rushed. The [[scripts]] was [[similarly]] poor....they had lines that tried to be unique but failed. [[Spectacularly]]. "[[Gets]] your meathooks off of me!" [[Ah]] [[guy]], I hate it when movies try to do that. It [[arrives]] all the time with comedies...but, with a [[terror]] movie and with below average actors....the [[findings]] are [[madly]] [[unlucky]]. The lines and [[scenario]] were all very predictable. But what [[introduced]] me feel so [[adverse]] towards this [[filmmaking]] was, again, the [[fucking]] acting. It was [[horrific]]. Besides by the little [[Asiatic]] [[guys]] who [[cooperate]] the [[booths]]. I thought he was great.

The [[filmmaking]] is about 5 stupid dumbsh!t [[tourism]] who are on a vacation in Asia. They [[terminate]] up at the [[flawed]] place and [[declines]] into the hands of a mafia run sex/[[slaughter]]. Sounds like a cool [[saga]]. But watching [[everyone]] with a bad case of diarrhea is [[certainly]] more [[entertaining]] and intense to watch. The only [[motif]] this is [[deemed]] horror is because of the killing. There wasn't a [[traces]] of [[wait]].

I [[likes]] [[numerous]] other horror fans were dying to get their bloody little [[gloves]] on this. But [[sadly]] with a [[MASSIVE]] capital U, the [[filmmaking]] was [[remarkably]] disappointing. I did enjoy the ankle break and the blood effects. The flabby chicks were [[additionally]] so so.

Everything about this [[film]] [[shrieks]] [[enthusiast]]. This is Ryan Nicholson's first feature length, and for the most part he failed. There's no denying he has a [[ill]] sense of [[mood]] and taste for horror. I pray his [[forthcoming]] [[filmmaking]] doesn't play out like another B [[terror]] flick...unless he tells us that's what it's gonna be. Even after this [[displeasure]] I'm willing to give Ryan another shot. From what I've [[watched]] of him, he's a [[veritable]], [[specialised]] man to the [[sort]]. [[Buena]] [[chance]] [[future]] time, because this was [[unfavourable]] news. --------------------------------------------- Result 455 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This may be the only [[film]] that actually comes close to capturing on film the essentially uncapturable [[world]] of the American college experience of the [[late]] 60s-early 70s. Go ahead, name another movie that even approaches this one: "Getting Straight"? "RPM"? These are caricatures. "Return of the Secaucus Seven" has its moments, but that's a [[retrospective]] film about (self-obsessed) individuals more than a film about a time and a place depicted *in* that time and place. "Drive, He Said" portrays-- with [[subtlety]] and [[nuance]] where it should, and a swift kick in the shorts where that's the only appropriate way-- the anti-draft movement, the ambiguity of big-time college sports (especially when there's a war on), the sexual revolution of the period, and the general unreality of the day. Believe me, it was like that.

The whole cast deserves commendation (as does the director, of course) but particular praise should be reserved for Bruce Dern, as the basketball coach, and Karen Black, the hero's very unusual-- except for that time-- love interest. William Tepper, as the lead, also rates a real round of applause both for his perfect capturing of the student-athlete of the period and for actually playing real college basketball in the film (remember Anthony Perkins in "Tall Story"? Yikes!).

[[All]] in all, a [[classic]] of a kind-- and the last film someone currently in 6th grade should be writing comments on ("boring", "repellent"-- um, right, sonny, please go back to your Arnold movies). Why isn't this film available from imdb? This may be the only [[kino]] that actually comes close to capturing on film the essentially uncapturable [[globe]] of the American college experience of the [[tardy]] 60s-early 70s. Go ahead, name another movie that even approaches this one: "Getting Straight"? "RPM"? These are caricatures. "Return of the Secaucus Seven" has its moments, but that's a [[retroactive]] film about (self-obsessed) individuals more than a film about a time and a place depicted *in* that time and place. "Drive, He Said" portrays-- with [[sophistication]] and [[hue]] where it should, and a swift kick in the shorts where that's the only appropriate way-- the anti-draft movement, the ambiguity of big-time college sports (especially when there's a war on), the sexual revolution of the period, and the general unreality of the day. Believe me, it was like that.

The whole cast deserves commendation (as does the director, of course) but particular praise should be reserved for Bruce Dern, as the basketball coach, and Karen Black, the hero's very unusual-- except for that time-- love interest. William Tepper, as the lead, also rates a real round of applause both for his perfect capturing of the student-athlete of the period and for actually playing real college basketball in the film (remember Anthony Perkins in "Tall Story"? Yikes!).

[[Every]] in all, a [[typical]] of a kind-- and the last film someone currently in 6th grade should be writing comments on ("boring", "repellent"-- um, right, sonny, please go back to your Arnold movies). Why isn't this film available from imdb? --------------------------------------------- Result 456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm only rating this [[film]] as a 3 out of [[pity]] because it [[attempts]] to be [[worthwhile]]. I [[love]] to [[praise]] a [[great]] [[movie]] and I'm not biased [[toward]] "[[male]]" [[movies]]. Legally blonde was an excellent [[film]]. Georgia [[Rule]] on the other hand, was a [[disorganized]], [[weak]], poorly [[written]], unrealistic example of [[movie]] making at its [[worst]]. by the [[end]] of the film I didn't care who was [[lying]] or if [[anything]] was [[resolved]].

The most [[important]] thing in a [[film]] is a good STORY. This story is [[weak]] and never develops (just because the subject [[matter]] is [[deep]], doesn't [[mean]] the [[story]] is good). A good story has dynamic characters. A dynamic character is one that experiences a major character change, and is primed for that change over the course of the movie. In Georgia [[Rule]], the character changes were abrupt and undeveloped. Secondly, there were too many ATTEMPTED dynamic characters. Pulling off a really good dynamic character is a tough job and takes time (you've only got a couple [[hours]] in a movie). That means that too many attempted dynamic characters will get too little attention to their personal change. Even if I ignore the poorly [[written]] [[story]], and the [[litter]] of [[weak]] dynamic characters, I can't even say I liked anyone. [[Every]] character was a [[mess]]. That's fine if your're writing American Beauty but not when you're attempting a dramatic comedy. Georgia was a horrible mother, her daughter was a horrible mother and daughter, and Lohan was a horrible excuse for a human being (no I'm not cutting her any slack because she was molested, crap happens to everyone and we're all responsible for our own actions). The "Dudley Do Right" Mormon kid should have had the guts not to compromise his religion and commitments...and Simon, I mean seriously, what kind of guy lets a 17 year old girl who's been molested just stay over occasionally (unless he's an actor or a politician). This movie is worth watching if you [[want]] to [[remind]] yourself what [[good]] [[movie]] making is NOT! I'm only rating this [[filmmaking]] as a 3 out of [[shame]] because it [[endeavor]] to be [[valuable]]. I [[adored]] to [[eulogy]] a [[tremendous]] [[filmmaking]] and I'm not biased [[into]] "[[macho]]" [[films]]. Legally blonde was an excellent [[filmmaking]]. Georgia [[Stipulations]] on the other hand, was a [[chaotic]], [[feeble]], poorly [[handwritten]], unrealistic example of [[movies]] making at its [[meanest]]. by the [[terminate]] of the film I didn't care who was [[lied]] or if [[nothing]] was [[liquidated]].

The most [[substantial]] thing in a [[filmmaking]] is a good STORY. This story is [[breakable]] and never develops (just because the subject [[issue]] is [[deepest]], doesn't [[meaning]] the [[narratives]] is good). A good story has dynamic characters. A dynamic character is one that experiences a major character change, and is primed for that change over the course of the movie. In Georgia [[Stipulations]], the character changes were abrupt and undeveloped. Secondly, there were too many ATTEMPTED dynamic characters. Pulling off a really good dynamic character is a tough job and takes time (you've only got a couple [[hour]] in a movie). That means that too many attempted dynamic characters will get too little attention to their personal change. Even if I ignore the poorly [[wrote]] [[histories]], and the [[rubbish]] of [[vulnerable]] dynamic characters, I can't even say I liked anyone. [[Any]] character was a [[chaos]]. That's fine if your're writing American Beauty but not when you're attempting a dramatic comedy. Georgia was a horrible mother, her daughter was a horrible mother and daughter, and Lohan was a horrible excuse for a human being (no I'm not cutting her any slack because she was molested, crap happens to everyone and we're all responsible for our own actions). The "Dudley Do Right" Mormon kid should have had the guts not to compromise his religion and commitments...and Simon, I mean seriously, what kind of guy lets a 17 year old girl who's been molested just stay over occasionally (unless he's an actor or a politician). This movie is worth watching if you [[wanna]] to [[reminds]] yourself what [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] making is NOT! --------------------------------------------- Result 457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I [[guess]] when "[[Beat]] Street" [[made]] a national appearance, "Flashdance" [[came]] at the same [[time]]. The [[problem]] with "Flashdance" is that there was only one [[break]] dancing scene and the [[rest]] was jazz [[dance]] and [[ballet]]. That was one of the [[reasons]] why "[[Beat]] Street" was [[better]]. The only [[movie]] that could [[rival]] "[[Beat]] Street" seems to be "Footloose", because both movies [[focused]] on how [[dance]] had been used by people to express their [[utmost]] [[feelings]].

The break-dance scenes in "[[Beat]] Street" [[come]] just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I [[loved]] all of them. [[Almost]] all of the [[break]] tricks were [[featured]] in the [[break]] jam scenes: the jackhammer, the [[flares]], the [[head]] spins, the suicide sit, the [[crazy]] [[legs]], the mortal, the [[forward]] flip, the figure four---almost everything.

[[Like]] "The [[Warriors]]", "[[Beat]] Street" does have violence [[related]] to the gang [[life]] in the [[hip]] [[hop]] [[world]]...but in a much less violent [[way]] than the [[former]]. The only [[major]] fight scene in "Beat Street" was when graffiti [[artist]] Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as "Ramo") is chased by a rival gang member on the [[New]] [[York]] [[City]] [[subway]] [[tracks]].....[[fighting]] each other on the third [[rail]] and both dying by electrocution on that rail. [[Well]], [[although]] that chase scene [[ended]] [[tragically]], it was [[better]] that they [[died]] that [[way]] than having blood [[exploding]] from a gang gunshot.

Most of the gang stuff in the [[flick]] was graffiti [[related]] to the hip-hop [[culture]], and [[rap]] [[music]]. A lot of rap music [[appeared]] in the [[flick]], because hip-hop members [[used]] rap [[music]] as a [[diversion]] to the [[negative]] aspects of gang [[life]]. Even the theme song of the [[movie]], which [[closed]] the curtain to the [[flick]], was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the [[death]] of Ramon.

By the way, during the [[dance]] scene [[called]] 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female [[drummer]] in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn [[Chong]] was Sheila E. [[making]] a cameo appearance. I [[guessing]] when "[[Beats]] Street" [[accomplished]] a national appearance, "Flashdance" [[arrived]] at the same [[moment]]. The [[problems]] with "Flashdance" is that there was only one [[breaks]] dancing scene and the [[resting]] was jazz [[choreography]] and [[dances]]. That was one of the [[motif]] why "[[Defeats]] Street" was [[nicer]]. The only [[cinematic]] that could [[contenders]] "[[Defeating]] Street" seems to be "Footloose", because both movies [[centered]] on how [[dancers]] had been used by people to express their [[extreme]] [[affections]].

The break-dance scenes in "[[Overpowering]] Street" [[arriving]] just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I [[cared]] all of them. [[Hardly]] all of the [[blackout]] tricks were [[featuring]] in the [[blackout]] jam scenes: the jackhammer, the [[torches]], the [[leader]] spins, the suicide sit, the [[lunatic]] [[paws]], the mortal, the [[forwards]] flip, the figure four---almost everything.

[[Iike]] "The [[Militants]]", "[[Beats]] Street" does have violence [[tied]] to the gang [[vida]] in the [[hips]] [[jumping]] [[monde]]...but in a much less violent [[pathways]] than the [[previous]]. The only [[important]] fight scene in "Beat Street" was when graffiti [[entertainer]] Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as "Ramo") is chased by a rival gang member on the [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] [[Town]] [[mtr]] [[runways]].....[[combat]] each other on the third [[railing]] and both dying by electrocution on that rail. [[Good]], [[despite]] that chase scene [[finished]] [[regretfully]], it was [[best]] that they [[succumbed]] that [[manner]] than having blood [[blasting]] from a gang gunshot.

Most of the gang stuff in the [[gesture]] was graffiti [[tied]] to the hip-hop [[civilisations]], and [[rapper]] [[musicians]]. A lot of rap music [[seemed]] in the [[film]], because hip-hop members [[uses]] rap [[musician]] as a [[alcatraz]] to the [[detrimental]] aspects of gang [[lifetime]]. Even the theme song of the [[cinematography]], which [[closing]] the curtain to the [[movie]], was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the [[dying]] of Ramon.

By the way, during the [[choreography]] scene [[phoned]] 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female [[drumming]] in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn [[Zhuang]] was Sheila E. [[doing]] a cameo appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 458 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It felt like I watched this movie thousand times before.It was absolutely predictable.Every time the story tried to get a bit twisted,every time I awaited something interesting to happen, I saw nothing but what I expected. Like "The bread factory opened up another facility,because there was not enough bread". In two words:Flat story,that has become a cliché,bad acting,bad special effects...Only the dumb Russian cop,Vlad, was a bit funny while punishing around the bad guys.The pile of muscles was so incredibly STUPID,that it made me laugh at him for a moment. I wonder why i waste my time spitting on that shame-of-a-movie... It won't get worse (because it is not possible) :D --------------------------------------------- Result 459 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like this movie. Bozz is an ultra-cool, not to be intimidated soldier who does not want to go to war. His persona is similar in a way to Yossarian in Catch-22, Joseph Heller's classic novel about men and war. This film, however, is not set in a war zone, but in a pre-war combat prep training. This wonderful film is all about the sickening realization that the Vietnam war was a mistake and those men who were pegged to be sacrificed for a losing cause.

Colin Farrell is brilliant as Bozz, a soldier who showed as much genuine love and compassion for his fellow soldier as he did disdain and irreverence for the establishment that was trying to kill him. Bozz is totally cool and non-plussed, testing and tweaking his military superiors, getting their goat at every opportunity. He is a Jesus Christ figure with a psychology degree, "saving" his fellow soldiers and showing the ones in genuine need, the way out of this man's army.

The acting and action is crisp and believable and as a "Sleeper", Tigerland goes down with Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket as one of the top three Vietnam films in my opinion.

FIVE STARS, a top pick. --------------------------------------------- Result 460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] hello. i just watched this movie earlier today for the 14th time in 3 days. i am a history teacher that has wayyyyy too much time on my hands. i need a life. i found the movie containing a striking resemblance to broke back mountain. i also found that i look a lot like jean Lafitte if he were white. also, my favorite line in the entire movie was from Mr. Petey--"this baby can shoot a chipmunk's eye from 300 yards!!" oh, and my favorite scene in the movie was when the British were coming in, and the one drummer who was so devoted to his work, and he drummed till the death, as if that drum would end the war altogether....but it wouldn't. well, thats all i would like to say about this movie. OH, one more thing..bonnie brown is an insane physco bipolar mood swinging BEEYOTCH. that is all. --------------------------------------------- Result 461 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] OK, the [[portrayal]] of the stereotyped 'indians' in this story is just plain [[WRONG]]. I do agree that Elvis [[looks]] rather [[good]] here, but [[yeah]], his skin color does [[seem]] to [[change]] during the [[movie]]. I was [[thinking]], OK,...he was never THAT [[tan]] in [[real]] [[life]]. It's some of the most [[obvious]] [[brown]] 'indian' [[makeup]] that I have ever [[seen]]. It's as [[bad]] as the 'indians' on 'F-Troop' and the [[old]] Hollywood westerns who were [[played]] by Jewish and Italian American [[actors]] and not real Native Americans!

This movie is o.k., but [[typically]] lame [[story]] and [[mediocre]] [[songs]], like in all of Elvis' later [[films]]. He just did them because Colonel Parker had him [[tied]] down to long term [[movie]] contacts to squeeze as much money out of Elvis as possible! I keep [[thinking]] '[[thank]] God' that Elvis [[stopped]] [[making]] movies forever not long after this movie came out. It is cool to see character [[actors]] Joan Blondell, Katy Jurado, L.Q. Jones, Henry Jones and Burgess Meredith in this [[movie]], though.

Burgess Meredith's 'indian' makeup is [[absolutely]] [[AWFUL]]. It's The [[worst]] of the bunch for sure. What were the filmmakers thinking? Was [[Mr]]. Meredith doing this one just for the [[money]] or what? I do [[love]] certain Elvis [[movies]], [[though]]. For [[example]]: '[[Love]] Me Tender', 'Jailhouse Rock', '[[Viva]] [[Las]] Vegas'. I can even [[stand]] to watch his [[movie]] with [[future]] TV co-stars Mary Tyler Moore and Ed Asner,'[[Change]] Of Habit' in which Elvis plays an inner-city doctor.

[[Oh]] well, at [[least]] [[Elvis]] made a [[FEW]] good [[films]], but the mediocre and [[bad]] ones overwhelm the decent and [[good]] ones.

I'll [[always]] love ELVIS! [[Thank]] you, Thank you very much! OK, the [[depiction]] of the stereotyped 'indians' in this story is just plain [[MISGUIDED]]. I do agree that Elvis [[seem]] rather [[alright]] here, but [[yep]], his skin color does [[seems]] to [[changed]] during the [[filmmaking]]. I was [[thought]], OK,...he was never THAT [[beige]] in [[actual]] [[vida]]. It's some of the most [[noticeable]] [[brownish]] 'indian' [[composition]] that I have ever [[noticed]]. It's as [[unfavourable]] as the 'indians' on 'F-Troop' and the [[archaic]] Hollywood westerns who were [[done]] by Jewish and Italian American [[players]] and not real Native Americans!

This movie is o.k., but [[often]] lame [[history]] and [[lackluster]] [[ballads]], like in all of Elvis' later [[filmmaking]]. He just did them because Colonel Parker had him [[tying]] down to long term [[flick]] contacts to squeeze as much money out of Elvis as possible! I keep [[think]] '[[appreciation]] God' that Elvis [[halted]] [[doing]] movies forever not long after this movie came out. It is cool to see character [[players]] Joan Blondell, Katy Jurado, L.Q. Jones, Henry Jones and Burgess Meredith in this [[filmmaking]], though.

Burgess Meredith's 'indian' makeup is [[totally]] [[SHOCKING]]. It's The [[meanest]] of the bunch for sure. What were the filmmakers thinking? Was [[Mister]]. Meredith doing this one just for the [[cash]] or what? I do [[adored]] certain Elvis [[movie]], [[while]]. For [[case]]: '[[Amour]] Me Tender', 'Jailhouse Rock', '[[Vivo]] [[La]] Vegas'. I can even [[stands]] to watch his [[flick]] with [[futuristic]] TV co-stars Mary Tyler Moore and Ed Asner,'[[Adjustments]] Of Habit' in which Elvis plays an inner-city doctor.

[[Ah]] well, at [[less]] [[Presley]] made a [[SCARCE]] good [[cinematic]], but the mediocre and [[negative]] ones overwhelm the decent and [[alright]] ones.

I'll [[continuously]] love ELVIS! [[Gratitude]] you, Thank you very much! --------------------------------------------- Result 462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Though the story is essentially routine, and the "surprise" ending is nothing but a bad joke on the audience, you can see what attracted these good actors to the project - it offers them the kind of roles in which good actors can shine, and shine they do. The film is impeccably made - for its time. It was remade in 2000 as "Under Suspicion" and if you only want to see one version of the story (that's all it deserves, really), I recommend the latter one, with Hopkins' up-to-date direction and the more explicit references to plot points that the original could only hint at. The ending, however, still blows. (**1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best true-crime movies ever made and very faithful to Truman Capote's book which invented the true-crime novel genre. Haunting Quincy Jones musical score and terrific acting by Scott Wilson and Robert Blake as Dick and Perry, the killers. Why Wilson didn't go on to be a big star after this movie is a mystery to me.

The black and white cinematography and editing in this movie are top notch. The re-creation of the murders is frightening and since it leaves the actual murders to your imagination, even more scary than if they had shown the shotgun going off. The movie was filmed in the actual Clutter house which had been sold to another person after the murders. The movie has a very documentary feel---besides the scenes at the actual Clutter home other scenes were filmed at the gas stations and stores the killers actually went to. Nancy Clutter's beloved horse, Babe, is even in the movie. Will Geer has a great turn as the prosecutor in the short trial scene which is not only filmed in the actual courtroom but has several of the real Clutter murder jurors portraying themselves as the jury for the movie.

This is a solid movie, scary every time you see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] I agree with the above comment, I love the [[realism]] in this, and in [[many]] movies (not just movies on eating disorders) the producers [[seem]] to [[forget]] that. They take an every day [[problem]] and [[create]] a [[hugely]] dramatic scene and then come the end of the movie everything is [[perfect]] again, which I [[dislike]] because its not reality. Not [[meaning]] to say things can't get better, and not meaning to say things don't in this movie, but it doesn't spend most of the movie creating all these problems, and [[come]] the [[end]] of the [[movie]] everything is [[perfect]] again. [[When]] people have [[eating]] [[disorders]] people don't just [[admit]] it and [[want]] to [[get]] [[better]], and then [[life]] is [[peachy]], it takes [[time]], and I like how in this [[movie]] we [[grow]] with the [[characters]], we go through the difficulties with them, [[getting]] better and worse, because it is a very [[important]] [[part]] of the [[movie]]. It gets into the minds of people with eating [[disorders]], and [[shows]] the [[complications]] and [[pain]], in a very [[realistic]] [[way]], and I [[loved]] that. I [[also]] [[love]] how it [[shows]] The secrecy and betrayal people feel when suffering from [[eating]] [[disorders]], it is [[scary]] to [[see]] how people react when they [[find]] out, [[especially]] if they [[approve]] of it. I thought this [[movie]] was very [[touching]] and beautiful and well told, and [[defiantly]] one of my [[favourites]]. I agree with the above comment, I love the [[realist]] in this, and in [[various]] movies (not just movies on eating disorders) the producers [[looks]] to [[forgotten]] that. They take an every day [[difficulty]] and [[creating]] a [[vastly]] dramatic scene and then come the end of the movie everything is [[irreproachable]] again, which I [[disgust]] because its not reality. Not [[sens]] to say things can't get better, and not meaning to say things don't in this movie, but it doesn't spend most of the movie creating all these problems, and [[arrived]] the [[ends]] of the [[kino]] everything is [[irreproachable]] again. [[Whenever]] people have [[dining]] [[troubles]] people don't just [[acknowledged]] it and [[wants]] to [[obtain]] [[best]], and then [[lifetime]] is [[super]], it takes [[period]], and I like how in this [[film]] we [[raising]] with the [[trait]], we go through the difficulties with them, [[obtaining]] better and worse, because it is a very [[sizable]] [[parte]] of the [[cinematography]]. It gets into the minds of people with eating [[disturbances]], and [[showings]] the [[complication]] and [[pains]], in a very [[practical]] [[routing]], and I [[love]] that. I [[further]] [[amour]] how it [[exposition]] The secrecy and betrayal people feel when suffering from [[feeding]] [[disturbances]], it is [[awful]] to [[consults]] how people react when they [[unearth]] out, [[mostly]] if they [[approving]] of it. I thought this [[cinema]] was very [[touch]] and beautiful and well told, and [[fearlessly]] one of my [[favourite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] this movie had a lot of [[blood]] in it when the sabretooth attack it [[also]] i loved it when that [[guy]] and the [[women]] were having some [[good]] time and then the sabretooth [[attacked]] the [[women]] and [[ate]] her [[stomach]] and took the [[liver]] out. that was the [[best]] and the 1ton sabretooth walking on its front [[legs]] [[hilarious]] to make this [[movie]] [[better]] more [[action]] and less talking if you know what i mean and also [[please]] please people who made this movie don't make anothwer [[movie]] like this [[movies]] [[ending]] cause it was [[terrible]] 1 sabretooth alive and killed that [[women]] in the end this movie reminds me of the grudges ending [[always]] there's 1 enemy [[left]]! OK [[damn]] it this movie sucks i can 't believe it i loved it when my lil bro got freaked from the attacks stomach takin out and the blood ya this movie had a lot of [[chrissake]] in it when the sabretooth attack it [[apart]] i loved it when that [[boy]] and the [[mujer]] were having some [[alright]] time and then the sabretooth [[slammed]] the [[woman]] and [[consumed]] her [[belly]] and took the [[livers]] out. that was the [[finest]] and the 1ton sabretooth walking on its front [[paws]] [[comic]] to make this [[filmmaking]] [[nicer]] more [[activities]] and less talking if you know what i mean and also [[invites]] please people who made this movie don't make anothwer [[filmmaking]] like this [[theater]] [[terminated]] cause it was [[frightful]] 1 sabretooth alive and killed that [[woman]] in the end this movie reminds me of the grudges ending [[invariably]] there's 1 enemy [[exited]]! OK [[darn]] it this movie sucks i can 't believe it i loved it when my lil bro got freaked from the attacks stomach takin out and the blood ya --------------------------------------------- Result 466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] I remembered seeing this movie when i was a kid one day on the [[wonderful]] [[world]] of Disney. This [[movie]] has been in my [[memory]] for over 30 [[years]] and I have been [[looking]] for it. I [[would]] have to [[say]] that out of all the [[kids]] [[movies]] I [[saw]] back then,, this one [[stuck]] out more than all of them and after only seeing it once, I really hoped I would get to see it again. The [[story]] and [[images]] of this [[movie]] have been [[burned]] into my memory. To this day, I never did [[see]] it after that day back in the 70s, in fact, I never [[remembered]] the title until an [[internet]] [[search]] [[earlier]] [[today]] [[disclosed]] it to me. I loved it and [[want]] my kids to [[see]] it.Does [[anybody]] [[know]] where I can [[find]] it? I remembered seeing this movie when i was a kid one day on the [[wondrous]] [[monde]] of Disney. This [[cinematography]] has been in my [[memoir]] for over 30 [[yr]] and I have been [[researching]] for it. I [[could]] have to [[tell]] that out of all the [[brats]] [[theater]] I [[watched]] back then,, this one [[jammed]] out more than all of them and after only seeing it once, I really hoped I would get to see it again. The [[storytelling]] and [[photographs]] of this [[cinematography]] have been [[incinerated]] into my memory. To this day, I never did [[seeing]] it after that day back in the 70s, in fact, I never [[recalls]] the title until an [[cyber]] [[quest]] [[formerly]] [[yesterday]] [[reveal]] it to me. I loved it and [[wants]] my kids to [[consults]] it.Does [[somebody]] [[savoir]] where I can [[unearth]] it? --------------------------------------------- Result 467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have never seen anything as awful as this movie for quite some time. The movie was boring, long long and awful plot. The special effects sucks like hell - It's like watching a movie back in 1999. It's a total waste of an hour and a half of my time. Matthew Settle's performance was quite bad. I saw him in Band of Brothers playing Lt.Speirs, he wasn't THAT bad. In fact not bad at all. But in this film, his acting wasn't convincing enough, it was quite bad and there wasn't any chemistry between the rest of the crew either. Plus, his eyes seems empty like he's not feeling it. It surprised me, really, because he was good in Band of Brothers.

Anyway, don't even bother to watch this movie. It's a big big BIG waste of time. Even if you had to kill an hour or two, get something else to do besides watching this movie. Trust me, you'll regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Robin]] [[Williams]] and Kurt [[Russell]] [[play]] [[guys]] in their 30's who put their marraiges in [[jeopardy]] by [[deciding]] ([[Russell]] [[somewhat]] reluctantly) to [[replay]] their heartbreaking [[tie]] with [[rival]] Bakersfield [[years]] after the fact. Williams is [[ok]], but Russell is flat-out [[great]] as [[legendary]] Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could [[live]] without this rematch. [[Film]] is worth [[watching]] just to see the [[famed]] Remo in [[action]]. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. [[Robben]] [[William]] and Kurt [[Russel]] [[playing]] [[lads]] in their 30's who put their marraiges in [[endangerment]] by [[decided]] ([[Russel]] [[rather]] reluctantly) to [[reproducing]] their heartbreaking [[necktie]] with [[challenger]] Bakersfield [[yr]] after the fact. Williams is [[alright]], but Russell is flat-out [[wondrous]] as [[mythical]] Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could [[viva]] without this rematch. [[Flick]] is worth [[staring]] just to see the [[commemorated]] Remo in [[actions]]. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Such great actors such a disappointment. Marlon Brando plays and awful character, the movie is not funny at all, a subconscious message can be seen "IT IS A DAMN CRAP!!!", "IT SUUCKS SO BADLY!!", "THROW YOUR TV THROUGH WINDOW", and so on. It is simply disgusting and irksome. In addition to foolish plot, sense of humor, there is something else. The way the rooms are decorated, the colors. It makes me sick, everything is so colourful that it might cause epilepsy. Usually I do not care about the decoration in movie but this from "Free Money" made me angry. Avoid at all costs! "Free Money" - probably for Charlie Sheen, Sutherland and Brando, but a viewer gets nothing! One watches it at cost of sanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 470 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Late one night on a desolate road, in an [[empty]] saloon [[Martin]] Sheen [[spins]] a yarn for Robert Carradine of Hopalong Cassidy and friends tracking a group of murderous cattle rustlers, who've killed a few men and kidnapped Cassidy's girl.

Writer/director Christopher Coppola [[May]] have [[incurred]] the wrath of William Boyd purists by daring to make a modern low budget film [[featuring]] their beloved Hoppy, but I'm [[glad]] he did it! [[No]] character should be so tied to an an actor that no one else ever be allowed to play him or her again!

I [[thought]] it was good fun and an interesting updating of the classic [[programmers]] of the thirties and forties. [[Though]] guilty of some bad acting, this is earnest enough and unpretentious, making it [[hard]] for me to [[dislike]].

The whole production is a bit [[odd]] though, but I really enjoyed the scenes between Sheen and Carridine. The fact that we're watching a story within a story makes the oddness and exaggerations more [[palatable]]. Late one night on a desolate road, in an [[hollow]] saloon [[Martine]] Sheen [[rotates]] a yarn for Robert Carradine of Hopalong Cassidy and friends tracking a group of murderous cattle rustlers, who've killed a few men and kidnapped Cassidy's girl.

Writer/director Christopher Coppola [[Maggio]] have [[engaged]] the wrath of William Boyd purists by daring to make a modern low budget film [[starring]] their beloved Hoppy, but I'm [[happier]] he did it! [[Nos]] character should be so tied to an an actor that no one else ever be allowed to play him or her again!

I [[thinks]] it was good fun and an interesting updating of the classic [[programmer]] of the thirties and forties. [[Nevertheless]] guilty of some bad acting, this is earnest enough and unpretentious, making it [[arduous]] for me to [[disgust]].

The whole production is a bit [[curious]] though, but I really enjoyed the scenes between Sheen and Carridine. The fact that we're watching a story within a story makes the oddness and exaggerations more [[acceptable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] 1st watched 8/29/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Sidney Franklin): [[Well]] [[told]] [[account]] of farmers in China and their [[rise]] to prominence and [[struggles]] with what [[Mother]] nature throws at them. This movie is [[based]] on an [[award]] [[winning]] novel and chronicles a [[family]] [[starting]] with the son's [[arranged]] marriage to a slave [[girl]]. The movie does a good job of keeping your interest [[despite]] a [[somewhat]] hammy performance by the lead played by [[Paul]] Muni. It chronicles , [[Wong]] Long(the [[character]] played by [[Muni]]) and how he works the land, buys more [[land]], eventually becomes very rich but then [[returns]] to the [[land]] where he [[originally]] [[started]]. The [[relationship]] between him and his wife, [[played]] by [[Luise]] [[Rainer]], is the [[main]] [[thread]] of the story([[besides]] the [[land]] itself) and [[despite]] the [[obvious]] non-Chinese actors it does a pretty good [[job]] of [[displaying]] the country and it's people. It's [[obvious]] that MGM [[used]] it's money to create a really good [[epic]] with this one in an [[era]] where they could [[probably]] afford it. The scene with the [[locusts]] is done [[exceedingly]] well and the rest of th [[movie]] really [[looks]] good warranting the Best [[Cinematography]] [[award]] at the [[Oscars]] in that year. The [[definitive]] [[definition]] of an [[epic]] is what this [[story]] is and it's pulled off pretty well. 1st watched 8/29/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Sidney Franklin): [[Good]] [[said]] [[accounting]] of farmers in China and their [[risen]] to prominence and [[fighting]] with what [[Mommy]] nature throws at them. This movie is [[founded]] on an [[scholarship]] [[earning]] novel and chronicles a [[families]] [[initiating]] with the son's [[organised]] marriage to a slave [[daughter]]. The movie does a good job of keeping your interest [[although]] a [[rather]] hammy performance by the lead played by [[Paulo]] Muni. It chronicles , [[Huang]] Long(the [[characters]] played by [[Mooney]]) and how he works the land, buys more [[lands]], eventually becomes very rich but then [[reverted]] to the [[overland]] where he [[initially]] [[initiating]]. The [[relations]] between him and his wife, [[done]] by [[Luiz]] [[Rainier]], is the [[primary]] [[threading]] of the story([[moreover]] the [[overland]] itself) and [[though]] the [[blatant]] non-Chinese actors it does a pretty good [[labour]] of [[demonstrating]] the country and it's people. It's [[manifest]] that MGM [[using]] it's money to create a really good [[manas]] with this one in an [[epoch]] where they could [[indubitably]] afford it. The scene with the [[grasshoppers]] is done [[overly]] well and the rest of th [[film]] really [[seems]] good warranting the Best [[Film]] [[prix]] at the [[Academy]] in that year. The [[final]] [[definitions]] of an [[manas]] is what this [[history]] is and it's pulled off pretty well. --------------------------------------------- Result 472 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] There's no getting [[around]] it-- this movie is [[terrible]]. I've [[seen]] the old Christopher Lee/Fu Manchu movies, I'm familiar with the characters and it's serial [[origins]], but it's still just godawful. [[However]], Peter Sellers' genius still shines through with his portrayal of Nayland Smith, with echoes of sadness, tragedy, and strength simmering through a stoic facade; it's a performance I place on par with Peter Cushing's portrayal of Van Helsing but done in a tenth of the cumulative screen time of all Cushing's "Dracula" movies. If the movie was done in a more serio-comic vein like BUBBA HO-TEP by way of the 1960's AVENGERS TV show, this could've been something special. If you're a Fu Manchu or Peter Sellers completest, this is something you need to see, but it's a pass for anyone else. There's no getting [[roundabout]] it-- this movie is [[frightful]]. I've [[noticed]] the old Christopher Lee/Fu Manchu movies, I'm familiar with the characters and it's serial [[wellspring]], but it's still just godawful. [[Still]], Peter Sellers' genius still shines through with his portrayal of Nayland Smith, with echoes of sadness, tragedy, and strength simmering through a stoic facade; it's a performance I place on par with Peter Cushing's portrayal of Van Helsing but done in a tenth of the cumulative screen time of all Cushing's "Dracula" movies. If the movie was done in a more serio-comic vein like BUBBA HO-TEP by way of the 1960's AVENGERS TV show, this could've been something special. If you're a Fu Manchu or Peter Sellers completest, this is something you need to see, but it's a pass for anyone else. --------------------------------------------- Result 473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] This is a [[great]] movie! Most of us have seen Jurassic Park, where the Chaos Theory is summarized by telling about a butterfly's wings, causing a tornado on the other side of the planet. Well, Bug is all about that (or at least something, don't worry this is no spoiler) I'm definitely not a religious type and don't believe in pre-destined stuff, fate, etc, but this movie surely makes you wonder if coincidence really exists...

further more, the acting and camera are excellent too, another prove that it's still possible to make a good movie without a zillion bucks This is a [[wondrous]] movie! Most of us have seen Jurassic Park, where the Chaos Theory is summarized by telling about a butterfly's wings, causing a tornado on the other side of the planet. Well, Bug is all about that (or at least something, don't worry this is no spoiler) I'm definitely not a religious type and don't believe in pre-destined stuff, fate, etc, but this movie surely makes you wonder if coincidence really exists...

further more, the acting and camera are excellent too, another prove that it's still possible to make a good movie without a zillion bucks --------------------------------------------- Result 474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The [[world]] of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New [[York]] City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. Overpopulation, air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this particular food stuff really made of? That [[question]] is at the [[heart]] of this admittedly [[somewhat]] dated but still [[intriguing]] [[film]], based on [[Harry]] Harrison's 1966 novel "Make [[Room]]! Make [[Room]]!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly cantankerous but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the world used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that [[part]] has become immortalized into cinematic [[history]].

[[Under]] the very professional [[guiding]] hand of director Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; [[FANTASTIC]] VOYAGE), SOYLENT [[GREEN]] is a fairly [[grim]] but thought-provoking [[look]] at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for filming as far back as 1968, after he had [[struck]] gold in the sci-fi genre with [[PLANET]] OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today. The [[globe]] of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New [[Yorke]] City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. Overpopulation, air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this particular food stuff really made of? That [[issue]] is at the [[nub]] of this admittedly [[rather]] dated but still [[riveting]] [[kino]], based on [[Hari]] Harrison's 1966 novel "Make [[Salle]]! Make [[Chamber]]!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly cantankerous but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the world used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that [[parties]] has become immortalized into cinematic [[histories]].

[[Beneath]] the very professional [[guide]] hand of director Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; [[EXCELLENT]] VOYAGE), SOYLENT [[ARCHER]] is a fairly [[morose]] but thought-provoking [[glance]] at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for filming as far back as 1968, after he had [[pummeled]] gold in the sci-fi genre with [[PLANETARY]] OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today. --------------------------------------------- Result 475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When Ritchie first burst on to movie scene his films were hailed as funny, witty, well directed and original. If one could compare the hype he had generated with his first two attempts and the almost universal loathing his last two outings have created one should consider - has Ritchie been found out? Is he really that talented? Does he really have any genuine original ideas? Or is he simply a pretentious and egotistical director who really wants to be Fincher, Tarantino and Leone all rolled into one colossal and disorganised heap? After watching Revolver one could be excused for thinking were did it all go wrong? What happened to his great sense of humour? Where did he get all these mixed and convoluted ideas from? Revolver tries to be clever, philosophical and succinct, it tries to be an intelligent psychoanalysis, it tries to be an intricate and complicated thriller. Ritchie does make a gargantuan effort to fulfil all these many objectives and invests great chunks of a script into existential musings and numerous plot twists. However, in the end all it serves is to construct a severely disjointed, unstructured and ultimately unfriendly film to the audience. Its plagiarism is so sinful and blatant that although Ritchie does at least attempt to give his own spin he should be punished for even trying to pass it off as his own work. So what the audience gets ultimately is a terrible screenplay intertwined with many pretentious oneliners and clumsy setpieces.

Revolver is ultimately an unoriginal and bland movie that has stolen countless themes from masterpieces like Fight Club, Usual Suspects and Pulp Fiction. It aims high, but inevitably shots blanks aplenty.

Revolver deserves to be lambasted, it is a truly poor film masquerading as a wannabe masterpiece from a wannabe auteur. However, it falls flat on its farcical face and just fails at everything it wants to be and achieve. --------------------------------------------- Result 476 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'How To Lose Friends & Alienate People' is a superb film. A hilarious film from start to end. A lovely entertainer. Enjoyed it. Thumps Up!

Performances: Jason is fantastic. He's a treat to watch him from start to end. Jeff Bridges is excellent as the boss. He's a Legend. Megan Fox looks amazingly hot, and deliver a good performance. but dude, She's so hot man! Anderson is delightful. She doesn't look old at all, still hot indeed. Kristan Dunst looks lovely and does a pretty good job. Others are also pretty good.

'How To Lose Friends & Alienate People' is a excellent entertainer. Don't miss this flick! --------------------------------------------- Result 477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I just [[recently]] [[watched]] this 1954 movie starring [[Vincent]] Price for the first time on Turner Classic Movies. [[Price]] portrays [[Don]] Gallico, a magician/inventor who is [[driven]] to murder when his [[boss]] steals several of his [[magical]] inventions (and [[also]] his [[wife]], [[portrayed]] in a [[brief]] role by the [[lovely]] Eva Gabor). Even though [[Price]] is a [[murderer]], I [[actually]] found myself rooting for him, he is a [[sympathetic]] [[character]] who is [[driven]] [[mad]] by the greedy people [[around]] him who [[keep]] taking advantage of him.

[[Although]] this [[movie]] doesn't have the "[[horror]]" factor of some of his more famous roles (such as my favorite, "[[House]] of Wax") it [[nonetheless]] has [[enough]] going for it to [[keep]] the [[viewers]] interest.

This is a [[must]] for Vincent Price [[fans]]. I just [[freshly]] [[observed]] this 1954 movie starring [[Vicente]] Price for the first time on Turner Classic Movies. [[Prizes]] portrays [[Donate]] Gallico, a magician/inventor who is [[spurred]] to murder when his [[chef]] steals several of his [[quadrant]] inventions (and [[further]] his [[women]], [[depicted]] in a [[writ]] role by the [[nice]] Eva Gabor). Even though [[Prices]] is a [[slayer]], I [[genuinely]] found myself rooting for him, he is a [[empathy]] [[traits]] who is [[stimulated]] [[lunatic]] by the greedy people [[about]] him who [[preserve]] taking advantage of him.

[[Despite]] this [[kino]] doesn't have the "[[terror]]" factor of some of his more famous roles (such as my favorite, "[[Dwellings]] of Wax") it [[yet]] has [[sufficient]] going for it to [[conserve]] the [[listeners]] interest.

This is a [[should]] for Vincent Price [[stalkers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Nintendo!!! YOU #%$@ERS!!! [[How]] [[could]] you do this to me? I can't believe it...this [[movie]] is actually [[worse]] than the first one. I went to [[see]] this at the theatre with my brother because my [[mother]] [[forced]] me to [[tag]] along....oh [[God]]...where do I [[even]] [[begin]]? The plot SUCKED. The voice acting SUCKED. The animation SUCKED. The [[ending]] [[REALLY]] SUCKED. [[If]] you liked this movie, YOU SUCK TOO. And to Futuramafan1987, who [[said]] this was the [[greatest]] [[movie]] ever, you are a TOOL, [[PLAIN]] AND [[SIMPLE]]. This isn't a movie for [[anyone]] but crack-addled ten-year [[olds]] with Game [[Boys]] who [[think]] Pikachu is [[God]]. I'm [[still]] cry to this day [[thinking]] about that [[horrible]] [[turd]] of a [[movie]]....and then there was Pikachu's [[Adventure]]...don't [[even]] [[get]] me [[started]] on that [[horrible]] [[mess]] of a [[film]]. It is, in all truth, one of the most [[boring]] experiences of my entire [[life]]. Don't [[go]] watch this at any [[costs]].

Bottom Line: Go out, [[find]] [[every]] [[copy]] of this [[movie]] that you can, and burn it. [[Burn]] them all, and then proceed to [[rent]] a GOOD [[movie]], like [[Aliens]]...or Bowling For Columbine...or even Back to the [[Future]]! Nintendo!!! YOU #%$@ERS!!! [[Mode]] [[did]] you do this to me? I can't believe it...this [[filmmaking]] is actually [[pire]] than the first one. I went to [[seeing]] this at the theatre with my brother because my [[mommy]] [[obliged]] me to [[labeling]] along....oh [[Seigneur]]...where do I [[yet]] [[lancer]]? The plot SUCKED. The voice acting SUCKED. The animation SUCKED. The [[terminating]] [[TRUTHFULLY]] SUCKED. [[Though]] you liked this movie, YOU SUCK TOO. And to Futuramafan1987, who [[avowed]] this was the [[biggest]] [[filmmaking]] ever, you are a TOOL, [[LOWLANDS]] AND [[UNCOMPLICATED]]. This isn't a movie for [[everyone]] but crack-addled ten-year [[yr]] with Game [[Guy]] who [[thought]] Pikachu is [[Deus]]. I'm [[however]] cry to this day [[thought]] about that [[scary]] [[poo]] of a [[movies]]....and then there was Pikachu's [[Fling]]...don't [[yet]] [[gets]] me [[begins]] on that [[scary]] [[chaos]] of a [[filmmaking]]. It is, in all truth, one of the most [[dull]] experiences of my entire [[living]]. Don't [[going]] watch this at any [[pricing]].

Bottom Line: Go out, [[finds]] [[any]] [[copies]] of this [[filmmaking]] that you can, and burn it. [[Combustion]] them all, and then proceed to [[tenancy]] a GOOD [[films]], like [[Extraterrestrials]]...or Bowling For Columbine...or even Back to the [[Impending]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[If]] I had just [[seen]] the pilot of this [[show]] I would have rated it a 10. I was [[immediately]] [[hooked]] on this [[gorgeous]] [[new]] world. [[Subsequent]] [[episodes]] have not [[completely]] lived up to the [[promise]], but I will keep [[watching]] and hope that it [[keeps]] [[getting]] better. The production [[values]] are incredible and the acting is first-rate. I don't [[mind]] that it doesn't seem to [[align]] [[perfectly]] with BSG because I am so [[intrigued]] by the premise and let's face it, they are two [[different]] [[shows]]. I'm [[thrilled]] that both Esai Morales and one of my all-time faves, Eric Stoltz, are back in my [[life]] (if only weekly) as I've [[missed]] them both. This is a show that requires a bit of [[thought]] from its audience and that is [[always]] a good thing. You kind of have to [[wrap]] your head [[around]] certain [[aspects]] of the [[show]]; [[things]] are not [[always]] as they seem and [[certainly]] there are [[shades]] of [[gray]], both literally and figuratively, in plot lines, characters and, of course, the [[various]] virtual [[worlds]]. We all know how it ends, but the [[journey]] is looking to be [[quite]] a ride. [[Unless]] I had just [[watched]] the pilot of this [[display]] I would have rated it a 10. I was [[rightaway]] [[hook]] on this [[wondrous]] [[newer]] world. [[Resultant]] [[spells]] have not [[downright]] lived up to the [[promising]], but I will keep [[staring]] and hope that it [[retains]] [[obtaining]] better. The production [[value]] are incredible and the acting is first-rate. I don't [[intellect]] that it doesn't seem to [[aligning]] [[fully]] with BSG because I am so [[puzzled]] by the premise and let's face it, they are two [[assorted]] [[exposition]]. I'm [[excited]] that both Esai Morales and one of my all-time faves, Eric Stoltz, are back in my [[vie]] (if only weekly) as I've [[mistook]] them both. This is a show that requires a bit of [[idea]] from its audience and that is [[continuously]] a good thing. You kind of have to [[wrapping]] your head [[about]] certain [[things]] of the [[showing]]; [[items]] are not [[incessantly]] as they seem and [[definitely]] there are [[hues]] of [[grey]], both literally and figuratively, in plot lines, characters and, of course, the [[multiple]] virtual [[universe]]. We all know how it ends, but the [[itinerary]] is looking to be [[rather]] a ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Red [[Eye]] is a good little thriller to watch on a Saturday [[night]]. [[Intense]] acting, [[great]] villain and [[unexpected]] action.

Some might not want to [[see]] this [[movie]] because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the [[movie]] is on a [[plane]] and just talking. Don't [[worry]] they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.

A PG-13 [[movie]] seems to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But [[surely]] [[enough]] he has [[fit]] as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.

This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those [[actors]] the film [[would]] have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 [[days]] [[Later]]. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.

The pacing in this film was [[great]]. Just when your thinking its going to [[get]] [[boring]] they throw a [[twist]] at you. Luckily this isn't a [[long]] [[movie]] and doesn't feel [[like]] it either. Much better then the other [[flight]] [[movie]] [[Flight]] [[Plan]].

Here is my Flight Plan comment: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408790/usercomments-578

I [[recommend]]. Not too [[long]] and not too shabby.

8/10 Red [[Ojo]] is a good little thriller to watch on a Saturday [[soir]]. [[Intensive]] acting, [[huge]] villain and [[unintended]] action.

Some might not want to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]] because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the [[movies]] is on a [[airplanes]] and just talking. Don't [[disturb]] they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.

A PG-13 [[cinematography]] seems to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But [[arguably]] [[sufficiently]] he has [[suited]] as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.

This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those [[protagonists]] the film [[ought]] have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 [[jours]] [[Thereafter]]. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.

The pacing in this film was [[wondrous]]. Just when your thinking its going to [[gets]] [[bored]] they throw a [[twisting]] at you. Luckily this isn't a [[lang]] [[flick]] and doesn't feel [[fond]] it either. Much better then the other [[flights]] [[cinematography]] [[Flights]] [[Plans]].

Here is my Flight Plan comment: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408790/usercomments-578

I [[recommendation]]. Not too [[longer]] and not too shabby.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Sometimes]] laughter in the [[middle]] of a [[horror]] film is a [[signal]] of its greatness. I remember the nervous laughter from the audience in the re-release of The Excorcist… really nervous laughter. It punctuated just how freaked out we all were watching the voice of [[Satan]] coming out of a 12 year old girl. In the case of the 2006 remake of the 1972 [[cult]] classic The Wicker [[Man]] [[however]], it [[made]] me think that this [[new]] Wickerman is about as scary as the [[South]] Park [[character]], Scuzzlebut, the [[friendly]] forest monster with TV's [[Patrick]] Duffy for a leg and a [[celery]] [[stalk]] for an arm who's [[favorite]] [[hobby]] is [[weaving]] wicker baskets.

3 years [[ago]] a [[friend]] of [[mine]] in Hollywood told me that he [[heard]] that [[Nicolas]] Cage was [[going]] to do a remake of the [[film]]. I [[started]] laughing and my friend (Keith) got [[mad]] at me touting [[Nicolas]] Cage as a [[great]] actor. I just didn't [[think]] that he [[could]] [[pull]] it off and [[unfortunately]] for [[moviegoers]] I was right. [[Gone]] is the realness, the outstanding [[original]] music, the originality, the creepiness and the wonderfully powerful dialogue. [[Instead]] we have horror movie [[clichés]], [[affected]] acting and changes to the storyline that [[make]] any believability [[fall]] [[apart]]. Like many of the countless Hollywood remakes we have been [[inundated]] with lately this feels like we are watching 4th graders on a playground "playing Wickerman".

The original film takes place on a remote Scottish Isle where a Scottish police officer is lured there to find a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. In the new spin a California cop (Cage) is lured to an island of the coast of Washington state by his ex-girlfriend to find her missing daughter. She sends a photo and the missing daughter looks exactly like a young girl he tried to save in a fiery crash not long ago. The crash still haunts him in part because the girl's body was never found. Yet even after he gets a letter with her picture in it that connection is completely cast aside as he heads north, alone, to help his ex-girlfriend find her daughter. He arrives to find an island full of actors pretending to be the descendants of Wiccans, many of whom seem like they didn't get call backs for roles in The Village. And like The Village it isn't long before you realize there is nothing to be afraid of here. Not even the cloudy eyed blind sisters who speak in unison.

I think that the opportunity in Hollywood to make great amounts of money on a film often comes at great expense to the artistry. I think someone like Nicolas Cage who is in so many films these days loses touch with the magic that film can be when it gets to the point where he has a personal chef on the set preparing his snacks. We needed a bad re-make of the Wickerman like we needed yet another '9-11' movie. I'm starting to wonder if Nicolas changed his surname from Coppola because he wanted to or because he was pleaded with to do so. [[Occasionally]] laughter in the [[milieu]] of a [[monstrosity]] film is a [[signals]] of its greatness. I remember the nervous laughter from the audience in the re-release of The Excorcist… really nervous laughter. It punctuated just how freaked out we all were watching the voice of [[Lucifer]] coming out of a 12 year old girl. In the case of the 2006 remake of the 1972 [[cults]] classic The Wicker [[Males]] [[still]], it [[introduced]] me think that this [[novel]] Wickerman is about as scary as the [[Southward]] Park [[characteristics]], Scuzzlebut, the [[amiable]] forest monster with TV's [[Patricio]] Duffy for a leg and a [[onion]] [[stem]] for an arm who's [[favourite]] [[leisure]] is [[knitting]] wicker baskets.

3 years [[previously]] a [[buddies]] of [[landmine]] in Hollywood told me that he [[audition]] that [[Nikola]] Cage was [[go]] to do a remake of the [[filmmaking]]. I [[starting]] laughing and my friend (Keith) got [[crazy]] at me touting [[Nicholas]] Cage as a [[large]] actor. I just didn't [[thought]] that he [[wo]] [[pulled]] it off and [[sadly]] for [[spectators]] I was right. [[Disappeared]] is the realness, the outstanding [[preliminary]] music, the originality, the creepiness and the wonderfully powerful dialogue. [[However]] we have horror movie [[cliché]], [[influenced]] acting and changes to the storyline that [[deliver]] any believability [[decrease]] [[moreover]]. Like many of the countless Hollywood remakes we have been [[overwhelmed]] with lately this feels like we are watching 4th graders on a playground "playing Wickerman".

The original film takes place on a remote Scottish Isle where a Scottish police officer is lured there to find a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. In the new spin a California cop (Cage) is lured to an island of the coast of Washington state by his ex-girlfriend to find her missing daughter. She sends a photo and the missing daughter looks exactly like a young girl he tried to save in a fiery crash not long ago. The crash still haunts him in part because the girl's body was never found. Yet even after he gets a letter with her picture in it that connection is completely cast aside as he heads north, alone, to help his ex-girlfriend find her daughter. He arrives to find an island full of actors pretending to be the descendants of Wiccans, many of whom seem like they didn't get call backs for roles in The Village. And like The Village it isn't long before you realize there is nothing to be afraid of here. Not even the cloudy eyed blind sisters who speak in unison.

I think that the opportunity in Hollywood to make great amounts of money on a film often comes at great expense to the artistry. I think someone like Nicolas Cage who is in so many films these days loses touch with the magic that film can be when it gets to the point where he has a personal chef on the set preparing his snacks. We needed a bad re-make of the Wickerman like we needed yet another '9-11' movie. I'm starting to wonder if Nicolas changed his surname from Coppola because he wanted to or because he was pleaded with to do so. --------------------------------------------- Result 482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This should be a [[great]] [[film]]... [[Meryl]] [[Streep]] and Jack Nicholson co-starring as two [[newspaper]] writers. Mike Nichols directing. [[Uh]] [[uh]]. It's dull dull dull! [[Pointless]] and [[predictable]]! [[Slow]] and unfocused!

It's a cookie cutter '[[boy]] meets [[girl]], boy [[marries]] [[girl]], boy has [[affair]], girl leaves boy' [[story]]. Now [[theres]] an original [[concept]]! After [[squirming]] through two [[hours]] (was it only two? It felt like six.)I wasn't sure whether it was a comedy, a romance, a [[tragedy]] or a soap [[opera]]. It was [[done]] in 1986. I'm sure all of us did [[things]] sixteen [[years]] [[ago]] that we [[rather]] would [[forget]]. I hope the [[damage]] to the reputations of Streep et al is [[beginning]] to heal and that the emulsion on the master is [[beginning]] to fade. It's not that it's such a [[bad]] [[picture]]. It's just that it's such an un-good one. This should be a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]]... [[Merrill]] [[Meryl]] and Jack Nicholson co-starring as two [[diaries]] writers. Mike Nichols directing. [[Um]] [[um]]. It's dull dull dull! [[Unhelpful]] and [[foreseeable]]! [[Slower]] and unfocused!

It's a cookie cutter '[[kiddo]] meets [[dame]], boy [[weddings]] [[dame]], boy has [[fling]], girl leaves boy' [[stories]]. Now [[actualy]] an original [[notions]]! After [[wiggling]] through two [[hour]] (was it only two? It felt like six.)I wasn't sure whether it was a comedy, a romance, a [[drama]] or a soap [[drama]]. It was [[completed]] in 1986. I'm sure all of us did [[aspects]] sixteen [[ages]] [[previously]] that we [[somewhat]] would [[forgot]]. I hope the [[harm]] to the reputations of Streep et al is [[initiating]] to heal and that the emulsion on the master is [[onset]] to fade. It's not that it's such a [[wicked]] [[imagery]]. It's just that it's such an un-good one. --------------------------------------------- Result 483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Harold Pinter rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a [[man]] going to [[visit]] the husband of his lover and having it all [[go]] sideways. The [[original]] [[film]] starred [[Laurence]] [[Olivier]] and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this [[version]] and he's [[paired]] with Jude Law. Here the [[film]] is directed by Kenneth Branaugh.

The acting is spectacular. [[Both]] Caine and [[Law]] are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the [[chemistry]] and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and [[enough]] of a [[reason]] to watch when the script's [[direction]] goes haywire.

Harold Pinter's dialog is [[crisp]] and [[sharp]] and [[often]] very witty and I [[understand]] why he was [[chosen]] to [[rewrite]] the [[play]] (which is [[updated]] to make [[use]] of [[surveillance]] cameras and the like).The [[problem]] is that how the script [[moves]] the [[characters]] around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his [[odd]] [[modern]] [[house]] with sliding doors and [[panels]] for no really [[good]] [[reason]]. [[Conversations]] happen [[repeatedly]] in [[different]] [[locations]]. I know Pinter has [[done]] that in his plays, but in this case it becomes [[tedious]]. Why do we [[need]] to have the [[pair]] go over and over and over the [[fact]] that [[Law]] is sleeping with Caine's wife? It [[would]] be okay if at some point [[Law]] [[said]] enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each [[time]] is the first time. The [[script]] also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of [[Law]] all that well. To [[begin]] with he's blindly [[angry]] to [[start]] so he has no [[chance]] to [[turn]] around and [[scare]] us.(Never mind a late in the [[game]] revelation that makes you wonder why he [[bothered]]) [[In]] the [[original]] we never [[suspected]] what was up. here we do and while it [[gives]] an edge it also somehow feels false since its so [[clear]] we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't [[see]] he's being set up. There are a few other [[instances]] but to [[say]] more [[would]] give away too much.

Thinking about the [[film]] in retrospect I [[think]] its a [[film]] of missed opportunities and missteps. The [[opportunities]] [[squandered]] are the [[chance]] to have [[better]] fireworks between Caine and [[Law]]. Missteps in that the [[choice]] of a [[garish]] [[setting]] and [[odd]] [[shifts]] in plot [[take]] away from the [[creation]] of a [[tension]] and a believable thriller. [[Instead]] we [[get]] some [[smart]] [[dialog]] and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.

despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work Harold Pinter rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a [[bloke]] going to [[visiting]] the husband of his lover and having it all [[going]] sideways. The [[preliminary]] [[cinematography]] starred [[Lawrence]] [[Olivia]] and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this [[stepping]] and he's [[coupled]] with Jude Law. Here the [[filmmaking]] is directed by Kenneth Branaugh.

The acting is spectacular. [[Whether]] Caine and [[Act]] are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the [[chemicals]] and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and [[satisfactorily]] of a [[motif]] to watch when the script's [[directions]] goes haywire.

Harold Pinter's dialog is [[sharpness]] and [[abrupt]] and [[generally]] very witty and I [[fathom]] why he was [[selected]] to [[rewriting]] the [[gaming]] (which is [[modernized]] to make [[utilizes]] of [[supervise]] cameras and the like).The [[difficulty]] is that how the script [[shift]] the [[character]] around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his [[weird]] [[trendy]] [[households]] with sliding doors and [[groupings]] for no really [[buena]] [[motif]]. [[Dialogue]] happen [[routinely]] in [[several]] [[places]]. I know Pinter has [[doing]] that in his plays, but in this case it becomes [[monotonous]]. Why do we [[required]] to have the [[torque]] go over and over and over the [[facto]] that [[Lois]] is sleeping with Caine's wife? It [[could]] be okay if at some point [[Ley]] [[says]] enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each [[moment]] is the first time. The [[screenplay]] also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of [[Legislation]] all that well. To [[starting]] with he's blindly [[furious]] to [[initiating]] so he has no [[opportunities]] to [[turning]] around and [[freaked]] us.(Never mind a late in the [[games]] revelation that makes you wonder why he [[disturbed]]) [[At]] the [[preliminary]] we never [[suspect]] what was up. here we do and while it [[delivers]] an edge it also somehow feels false since its so [[clara]] we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't [[seeing]] he's being set up. There are a few other [[situations]] but to [[says]] more [[could]] give away too much.

Thinking about the [[filmmaking]] in retrospect I [[thought]] its a [[movie]] of missed opportunities and missteps. The [[opportunity]] [[wasted]] are the [[luck]] to have [[best]] fireworks between Caine and [[Lois]]. Missteps in that the [[picks]] of a [[coarse]] [[configured]] and [[weird]] [[changes]] in plot [[taking]] away from the [[inception]] of a [[tensions]] and a believable thriller. [[However]] we [[obtain]] some [[ingenious]] [[dialogue]] and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.

despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work --------------------------------------------- Result 484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] First things [[first]]: I'm not a conservative. And [[even]] [[though]] I [[would]] never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was [[opposed]] to the war in [[Iraq]] from day one. I [[think]] it's safe to [[say]] John Cusack and I would [[probably]] see eye-to-eye on [[politics]], in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to talking about how [[great]] Adam Curtis' BBC [[docs]] are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a [[part]] of the [[choir]] Cusack is [[preaching]] to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the [[tailoring]] is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.

As they say "the [[road]] to hell is paved with [[good]] intentions." Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every [[intention]] of [[making]] an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as [[Robert]] Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the [[viewer]], they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as [[Michael]] Moore's [[Canadian]] Bacon.

The current state of US [[politics]], [[foreign]] [[policy]] and the war "effort" is already absurd and, as a [[result]], tragic, [[pathetic]] and, [[regrettably]] comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as [[funny]] as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?

The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a [[hurry]]. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized [[Grosse]] Pointe Blank (one of his best [[films]]), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the [[collected]] [[works]] of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so [[obnoxious]] is none of the [[jokes]] or [[gags]] or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.

Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said "It's funny 'cause it's true" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.

http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/ First things [[firstly]]: I'm not a conservative. And [[yet]] [[albeit]] I [[should]] never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was [[bucked]] to the war in [[Bagdad]] from day one. I [[thoughts]] it's safe to [[tell]] John Cusack and I would [[undeniably]] see eye-to-eye on [[policy]], in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to talking about how [[huge]] Adam Curtis' BBC [[doc]] are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a [[portions]] of the [[chorus]] Cusack is [[soapbox]] to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the [[adapts]] is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.

As they say "the [[routing]] to hell is paved with [[alright]] intentions." Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every [[intents]] of [[doing]] an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as [[Roberto]] Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the [[onlooker]], they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as [[Micheal]] Moore's [[Canadiens]] Bacon.

The current state of US [[policies]], [[alien]] [[policies]] and the war "effort" is already absurd and, as a [[results]], tragic, [[unhappy]] and, [[woefully]] comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as [[hilarious]] as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?

The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a [[faster]]. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized [[Grands]] Pointe Blank (one of his best [[filmmaking]]), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the [[collecting]] [[cooperated]] of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so [[outrageous]] is none of the [[pranks]] or [[jaws]] or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.

Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said "It's funny 'cause it's true" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.

http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------- Result 485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[At]] first [[glance]], this [[film]] looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the [[focus]] on a plot to [[assassinate]] the [[President]] of the [[United]] States, a race against [[time]], and plenty of [[Secret]] Service [[agents]], the agency under the [[spotlight]] in The [[Sentinel]].

But [[wait]], the protagonist turns out to be Michael Douglas' [[character]] Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS [[agents]] are [[specially]] trained to "take the bullet", which is what makes them special - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to [[run]] for his [[life]] while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First [[Lady]] (Kim Basinger). Tsk.

There are shades of Clint Eastwood's [[In]] the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical [[reference]], who [[took]] the bullet in their respective [[tours]] of [[duty]]. [[While]] Eastwood's movie has a more [[enigmatic]] villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its [[lack]] of a central strong villain, preferring to [[share]] the [[assassination]] [[responsibility]] amongst [[many]] forgettable ex-KGB [[villains]], and the mole [[within]] the [[Presidential]] Detail. With Douglas on the run from the [[law]], he becomes [[similar]] to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the [[proverbial]] one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his [[smarts]] to [[outwit]] fellow agents, which turned out to be [[quite]] interesting to watch - despite slick [[processes]], it [[still]] boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.

Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of [[today]] from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).

Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through. [[During]] first [[vista]], this [[cinema]] looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the [[accent]] on a plot to [[murdering]] the [[Chairperson]] of the [[Unified]] States, a race against [[times]], and plenty of [[Secretly]] Service [[officers]], the agency under the [[focusing]] in The [[Sentry]].

But [[suspense]], the protagonist turns out to be Michael Douglas' [[nature]] Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS [[officer]] are [[notably]] trained to "take the bullet", which is what makes them special - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to [[executing]] for his [[vida]] while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First [[Ladies]] (Kim Basinger). Tsk.

There are shades of Clint Eastwood's [[Throughout]] the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical [[references]], who [[picked]] the bullet in their respective [[trip]] of [[accountability]]. [[Despite]] Eastwood's movie has a more [[intriguing]] villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its [[misses]] of a central strong villain, preferring to [[exchanges]] the [[killings]] [[liability]] amongst [[myriad]] forgettable ex-KGB [[thugs]], and the mole [[inside]] the [[Presidency]] Detail. With Douglas on the run from the [[act]], he becomes [[analogue]] to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the [[famed]] one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his [[smarter]] to [[outsmart]] fellow agents, which turned out to be [[rather]] interesting to watch - despite slick [[process]], it [[again]] boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.

Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of [[hoy]] from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).

Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through. --------------------------------------------- Result 486 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is the [[kind]] of [[movie]] which [[shows]] the paucity of French cinema when it comes to [[making]] thrillers.The director's [[desire]] to "[[sound]] [[American]]" is so [[glaring]] that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since "Peeping Tom".

Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),[[horrible]] murders,a [[plot]] more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb "l'inconnu de Strasbourg" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the [[worst]] ever filmed.Add a steamy [[love]] scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to [[attract]] the [[huge]] [[adolescent]] [[audience]].A violent and [[absurd]] [[conclusion]],followed by a silent epilogue who [[could]] [[make]] a [[nice]] commercial for the côte d'azur,it's [[really]] the silence of the lame. This is the [[genre]] of [[cinematographic]] which [[showings]] the paucity of French cinema when it comes to [[doing]] thrillers.The director's [[willingness]] to "[[sounds]] [[Americana]]" is so [[observable]] that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since "Peeping Tom".

Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),[[abhorrent]] murders,a [[intrigue]] more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb "l'inconnu de Strasbourg" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the [[meanest]] ever filmed.Add a steamy [[likes]] scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to [[attraction]] the [[prodigious]] [[adolescence]] [[audiences]].A violent and [[farcical]] [[finding]],followed by a silent epilogue who [[wo]] [[deliver]] a [[handsome]] commercial for the côte d'azur,it's [[truly]] the silence of the lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] 'Midnight Cowboy' was rated X with the original release back in 1969. There are some scenes where you can understand that, just a [[little]]. The movie about Joe Buck ([[Jon]] Voight) [[coming]] from Texas to New York [[City]] to [[become]] a [[hustler]] is sometimes a little disturbing. Dressed up as a cowboy he [[tries]] to [[live]] as a [[hustler]], making [[money]] by the act of [[love]]. It does not [[work]] out as he [[planned]]. After a [[guy]] named [[Rico]] 'Ratso' Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman) [[first]] pulled a [[trick]] on him and [[stole]] some [[money]] they [[become]] friends. They [[live]] in an empty and very [[filthy]] [[apartment]]. Then Ratso gets sick and Joe has to [[try]] to make some money.

The movie was [[probably]] rated X for the main [[subject]] but on the [[way]] we see some [[strange]] things. The [[editing]] in this [[movie]] is [[great]]. We see [[dream]] [[sequences]] from Joe and Ratso [[interrupted]] by the [[real]] world in a nice and [[sometimes]] funny [[way]]. Dustin Hoffman, [[Jon]] Voight and the supporting [[actors]] give [[great]] performances. [[Especially]] Hoffman [[delivers]] some fine [[famous]] lines. The [[score]] is done by John Barry and sounds great. All this makes this a [[great]] movie that won the [[Best]] Picture [[Oscar]] for a good [[reason]]. 'Midnight Cowboy' was rated X with the original release back in 1969. There are some scenes where you can understand that, just a [[tiny]]. The movie about Joe Buck ([[John]] Voight) [[forthcoming]] from Texas to New York [[Town]] to [[becomes]] a [[trickster]] is sometimes a little disturbing. Dressed up as a cowboy he [[attempting]] to [[inhabit]] as a [[trickster]], making [[cash]] by the act of [[loves]]. It does not [[cooperating]] out as he [[envisioned]]. After a [[man]] named [[Rican]] 'Ratso' Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman) [[firstly]] pulled a [[ruse]] on him and [[stolen]] some [[cash]] they [[gotten]] friends. They [[inhabit]] in an empty and very [[disgusting]] [[condo]]. Then Ratso gets sick and Joe has to [[strive]] to make some money.

The movie was [[certainly]] rated X for the main [[topic]] but on the [[path]] we see some [[odd]] things. The [[editorial]] in this [[cinematography]] is [[wondrous]]. We see [[daydream]] [[sequence]] from Joe and Ratso [[discontinued]] by the [[true]] world in a nice and [[occasionally]] funny [[camino]]. Dustin Hoffman, [[John]] Voight and the supporting [[protagonists]] give [[wondrous]] performances. [[Concretely]] Hoffman [[offerings]] some fine [[proverbial]] lines. The [[notation]] is done by John Barry and sounds great. All this makes this a [[wondrous]] movie that won the [[Finest]] Picture [[Oskar]] for a good [[justification]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 488 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] This movie is so [[bad]] it's funny. It stars Scott Backula as some coach, but that's not important, what is important is the large black fellow who plays 1st base. First off he has to be at least 75 years old, yet still plays minor league baseball, second he starts out the movie in the outfield despite not being able to walk, let alone run. Coach Backula brilliantly moves him to first citing the fact that when he attempts to run he stays in the same place for too long a period of time. Backula shows more brilliant coaching strategy in the end of the film, (SPOILER), he tells his star player "downtown" to hit a home run, clearly "downtown" viewed this as a good move. He hit the home run and won the game for his team, a minor league squad playing the Twins who were the class of the majors in the movie. Now if only Tony Muser, manager of the Royals, would be as smart a coach as Backula and tell his players to simply hit a home run in every at bat, the Royals would never end an inning let alone lose a game. This movie is so [[unfavourable]] it's funny. It stars Scott Backula as some coach, but that's not important, what is important is the large black fellow who plays 1st base. First off he has to be at least 75 years old, yet still plays minor league baseball, second he starts out the movie in the outfield despite not being able to walk, let alone run. Coach Backula brilliantly moves him to first citing the fact that when he attempts to run he stays in the same place for too long a period of time. Backula shows more brilliant coaching strategy in the end of the film, (SPOILER), he tells his star player "downtown" to hit a home run, clearly "downtown" viewed this as a good move. He hit the home run and won the game for his team, a minor league squad playing the Twins who were the class of the majors in the movie. Now if only Tony Muser, manager of the Royals, would be as smart a coach as Backula and tell his players to simply hit a home run in every at bat, the Royals would never end an inning let alone lose a game. --------------------------------------------- Result 489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Having lived in Ontario my whole life, in the same town that Marlene Moore [[grew]] up in, I've heard stories of her from my parents, grandparents and family members. So when I found out that they would be filming a movie about her, and that the beginning would be shot on my street, and her house quite close to mine I was excited.

If you read the book Rock a Bye Baby, which is about Marlene Moore you get quite the [[different]] image of her as a person, she was considered awkwardly [[beautiful]] by people who really had the chance to know her with the exception of her own family who frequently abused her as a [[child]], with the exception of one of her [[brothers]]. Also, if you live in my area and are intelligent enough to listen to those around you who knew her from [[school]] you'd find out that she was [[truly]] [[wounded]] before she even set foot in an [[institution]], she was [[always]] [[defensive]] and what [[would]] [[seem]] [[like]] an unwillingness to [[learn]] in a school environment was actually embarrassment over the fact that she was [[unable]] to.

Marlene did not [[deserve]] the [[life]] she was given, with the [[lack]] of [[help]] she [[desperately]] [[needed]] to [[receive]]. It was the government and the people [[around]] her that [[aided]] further in her death by not [[attempting]] to [[understand]] her [[needs]] and why she did what she did. I still [[find]] myself angered that she was put in [[jail]] for self-defense from a [[man]] who [[tried]] to rape her. As her brother once [[said]], "They didn't know what to do with her so they [[locked]] her away and it [[killed]] her." I [[believe]] in that with all my [[heart]].

Rest in [[peace]] Marlene, you [[deserve]] it so much. Having lived in Ontario my whole life, in the same town that Marlene Moore [[raising]] up in, I've heard stories of her from my parents, grandparents and family members. So when I found out that they would be filming a movie about her, and that the beginning would be shot on my street, and her house quite close to mine I was excited.

If you read the book Rock a Bye Baby, which is about Marlene Moore you get quite the [[several]] image of her as a person, she was considered awkwardly [[delightful]] by people who really had the chance to know her with the exception of her own family who frequently abused her as a [[children]], with the exception of one of her [[brethren]]. Also, if you live in my area and are intelligent enough to listen to those around you who knew her from [[tuition]] you'd find out that she was [[genuinely]] [[wounds]] before she even set foot in an [[creation]], she was [[steadily]] [[protective]] and what [[should]] [[appears]] [[iike]] an unwillingness to [[learned]] in a school environment was actually embarrassment over the fact that she was [[incompetent]] to.

Marlene did not [[merits]] the [[vie]] she was given, with the [[inadequacy]] of [[assistance]] she [[sorely]] [[requisite]] to [[recieve]]. It was the government and the people [[throughout]] her that [[aiding]] further in her death by not [[endeavour]] to [[understands]] her [[requirements]] and why she did what she did. I still [[unearthed]] myself angered that she was put in [[imprisonment]] for self-defense from a [[mec]] who [[attempts]] to rape her. As her brother once [[stated]], "They didn't know what to do with her so they [[lock]] her away and it [[murdering]] her." I [[think]] in that with all my [[heartland]].

Rest in [[pacification]] Marlene, you [[deserved]] it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] It's sad to [[view]] this [[film]] now that we know how the [[ANC]] got [[shafted]] by international capitalism. Biko died for nothing much. Woods achieved little. Yes, outright apartheid was abolished, but all the apparatus of power was reserved by the minority whites, leaving the ANC government more or less impotent. As Naomi [[Klein]] [[writes]] in The Shock Doctrine, in the talks between the black and white leaderships "the deKlerk government had a twofold strategy. First drawing on the [[ascendant]] Washington Consensus that there was no only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making --- such as trade policy and the central bank --- as "technical" or "adminsitrative". Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly [[impartial]] experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC." The statistical results are horrifying, with not much [[change]] accomplished, and AIDS flourishing. [[Viewing]] [[Cry]] [[Freedom]] in this [[light]] is [[deeply]] [[ironic]] --- actually [[tragic]]. The ANC has transformed itself from being the solution to being the primary problem. It's sad to [[vista]] this [[cinematography]] now that we know how the [[NAPA]] got [[humped]] by international capitalism. Biko died for nothing much. Woods achieved little. Yes, outright apartheid was abolished, but all the apparatus of power was reserved by the minority whites, leaving the ANC government more or less impotent. As Naomi [[Kline]] [[written]] in The Shock Doctrine, in the talks between the black and white leaderships "the deKlerk government had a twofold strategy. First drawing on the [[upward]] Washington Consensus that there was no only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making --- such as trade policy and the central bank --- as "technical" or "adminsitrative". Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly [[unbiased]] experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC." The statistical results are horrifying, with not much [[shift]] accomplished, and AIDS flourishing. [[Vista]] [[Wept]] [[Freedoms]] in this [[lighting]] is [[seriously]] [[sarcastic]] --- actually [[dire]]. The ANC has transformed itself from being the solution to being the primary problem. --------------------------------------------- Result 491 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Dieter Bohlen, Germany's [[notorious]] [[composer]] and [[producer]] of slightly trashy [[pop]] hits like "You're my [[heart]], you're my soul" [[felt]] the [[need]] to [[tell]] his [[story]] - and gracefully he decided to [[hire]] a [[ghost]] [[writer]]. The [[result]] was a [[funny]] [[book]] about his [[life]]. [[Well]], more or less a [[fuzzy]] [[image]] of it. He didn't [[deny]] that he is a selfish [[asshole]] but the [[whole]] [[story]] was twisted to [[fit]] his [[image]] of himself. [[No]] word that he has [[probably]] beaten up his former [[wife]] and she [[ended]] up in hospital. [[However]] it was written in a [[funny]] [[style]] and a [[huge]] [[success]] after his appearance as jury [[member]] of the German version of "American [[Idol]]" - [[especially]] his unforgettable [[comments]].

This should be the [[end]] of the [[story]] - [[really]]. [[In]] the [[hype]] of the [[mentioned]] "[[Idol]]" TV [[show]] called "Deutschland sucht den [[Superstar]]" ([[abbreviated]] DSDS) somebody [[must]] have [[come]] up with the [[terrible]] [[idea]] to make a [[movie]] out of the [[book]]. The [[result]] is "[[Dieter]] - [[der]] [[Film]]"

I have [[rarely]] [[seen]] a [[movie]] which tries so [[desperately]] to be funny and [[fails]] so [[completely]]. [[None]] of the gags really hits the point. Naddel's voice and style of talking was getting on my nerves right away although Verona's [[voice]] should have [[done]] that more. [[Obvious]], [[childish]], predictable and [[lengthy]] gags [[destroy]] any [[motivation]] to watch this movie to the end within a few minutes. The content of the movie is a sloppy film adaption written sloppily down by a ghost writer based on Bohlen's sloppy idealized memory. They [[could]] have used this freedom to do almost everything. It was supposed to be a [[satire]], but they [[failed]]. The story is totally uninteresting and the [[fact]] that the background voice is Bohlen himself guarantees that the whole film has [[nothing]] satirical at all.

It's no wonder that it was considered to bad for a cinema release. The probability that this thing would have rotten in some archive was quite high until recently when the current season of DSDS turned out to be a mediocre success. With the "friendly" help of Germany's biggest yellow press newspaper "BILD" and the desperate situation for the TV station RTL to have something in the program while the still unbeatable show "Wetten dass... ?" is running on Channel 2 the movie finally arrived in television - unfortunately.

Watching this movie is a waste of time - there are certainly better cartoons with much more fun and a story actually worth looking at.

Therefore: 2/10 Dieter Bohlen, Germany's [[prestigious]] [[composers]] and [[industrialists]] of slightly trashy [[papa]] hits like "You're my [[coeur]], you're my soul" [[deemed]] the [[needs]] to [[say]] his [[storytelling]] - and gracefully he decided to [[recruitment]] a [[ghostbusters]] [[scriptwriter]]. The [[consequence]] was a [[hilarious]] [[workbook]] about his [[vie]]. [[Good]], more or less a [[hazy]] [[picture]] of it. He didn't [[rejecting]] that he is a selfish [[prick]] but the [[ensemble]] [[tales]] was twisted to [[suited]] his [[picture]] of himself. [[Nope]] word that he has [[surely]] beaten up his former [[femme]] and she [[ending]] up in hospital. [[Still]] it was written in a [[hilarious]] [[styles]] and a [[formidable]] [[avail]] after his appearance as jury [[members]] of the German version of "American [[Heroine]]" - [[concretely]] his unforgettable [[observations]].

This should be the [[ends]] of the [[tales]] - [[truly]]. [[Among]] the [[fanfare]] of the [[cited]] "[[Heroine]]" TV [[shows]] called "Deutschland sucht den [[Stars]]" ([[shortened]] DSDS) somebody [[owes]] have [[coming]] up with the [[scary]] [[inkling]] to make a [[cinema]] out of the [[workbook]]. The [[findings]] is "[[Sauer]] - [[monastery]] [[Filmmaking]]"

I have [[seldom]] [[saw]] a [[filmmaking]] which tries so [[frantically]] to be funny and [[fail]] so [[absolutely]]. [[Nos]] of the gags really hits the point. Naddel's voice and style of talking was getting on my nerves right away although Verona's [[vowel]] should have [[played]] that more. [[Flagrant]], [[boyish]], predictable and [[lang]] gags [[raze]] any [[motivates]] to watch this movie to the end within a few minutes. The content of the movie is a sloppy film adaption written sloppily down by a ghost writer based on Bohlen's sloppy idealized memory. They [[did]] have used this freedom to do almost everything. It was supposed to be a [[sarcasm]], but they [[faulted]]. The story is totally uninteresting and the [[facto]] that the background voice is Bohlen himself guarantees that the whole film has [[anything]] satirical at all.

It's no wonder that it was considered to bad for a cinema release. The probability that this thing would have rotten in some archive was quite high until recently when the current season of DSDS turned out to be a mediocre success. With the "friendly" help of Germany's biggest yellow press newspaper "BILD" and the desperate situation for the TV station RTL to have something in the program while the still unbeatable show "Wetten dass... ?" is running on Channel 2 the movie finally arrived in television - unfortunately.

Watching this movie is a waste of time - there are certainly better cartoons with much more fun and a story actually worth looking at.

Therefore: 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 492 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Pretty]] poor Firestarter [[clone]] that seems more like a [[bad]] TV movie than a bad feature [[film]]. [[How]] disappointing for this to [[come]] from Hooper and Dourif!

Government contractors do a human [[experiment]] with a Hydrogen bomb. The [[boy]] [[born]] to the [[couple]] from the experiment [[constantly]] runs a fever of 100 [[degrees]], and when he's an [[adult]], people in his [[life]] [[start]] [[spontaneously]] combusting. He tries to find out why.

The people completely on fire are well [[done]], but when they [[get]] to the point that they are well [[done]] in another sense, they're [[obviously]] [[changed]] to [[dummies]]. When [[jets]] of fire shoot out of characters' arms, it [[looks]] silly [[rather]] than [[alarming]] the [[way]] it should. Also [[ridiculous]] is fire that [[evidently]] [[travels]] through phone lines and [[erupts]] in [[huge]] [[jets]] from the receiver's [[earpiece]]. How is that [[supposed]] to [[happen]], [[exactly]]?

Something else that [[struck]] me as silly about the [[movie]] is when a [[character]] has [[visions]] of his late [[parents]]. We [[later]] [[see]] the [[exact]] same shots from those [[visions]] in [[home]] [[movies]]. [[Belle]] poor Firestarter [[clooney]] that seems more like a [[unfavorable]] TV movie than a bad feature [[movie]]. [[Mode]] disappointing for this to [[coming]] from Hooper and Dourif!

Government contractors do a human [[experiences]] with a Hydrogen bomb. The [[laddie]] [[birthed]] to the [[pair]] from the experiment [[always]] runs a fever of 100 [[degree]], and when he's an [[grownup]], people in his [[lives]] [[outset]] [[voluntarily]] combusting. He tries to find out why.

The people completely on fire are well [[effected]], but when they [[gets]] to the point that they are well [[effected]] in another sense, they're [[patently]] [[altering]] to [[mannequins]]. When [[airplanes]] of fire shoot out of characters' arms, it [[seems]] silly [[somewhat]] than [[scary]] the [[routes]] it should. Also [[nonsense]] is fire that [[naturally]] [[travel]] through phone lines and [[erupt]] in [[prodigious]] [[airplanes]] from the receiver's [[handset]]. How is that [[alleged]] to [[occur]], [[accurately]]?

Something else that [[hitting]] me as silly about the [[flick]] is when a [[characters]] has [[perceptions]] of his late [[relatives]]. We [[subsequently]] [[behold]] the [[correct]] same shots from those [[ideas]] in [[household]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 493 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this film in shire joy.

This is possibly one of the best films of all time. It has a timeless value, you can get so much out of it it's amazing. There are parts that are moving, funny, and just great.

All aspect are spot on, the portrayal of the story is perfect, every detail is 100% genuine, even small Irish subtleties have been covered.

The use of low and high shots gives two great views on Cristy (look out for that).

Daniel Day-Lewis's performance is incredible. I've never seen an actor do that, ever. It really is amazing.

And it's so great to watch, it flows so well, it's probably the closest thing yo can get to real life experience. I love it.

If you haven't seen it, you should see it. Don't have any doubts on it, there is something there for all. --------------------------------------------- Result 494 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This really is the worst film I have ever seen. Ever. Period. I actually paid £3.50 to watch this steaming turd of a movie. Incredibly dull, poorly acted, dire script, often incoherent and too many scenes that don't seem to have any relevance to the overall film (like when Heath Ledger's priest partner get's nailed to a wall by a ghost...what was the point in that scene? answers on a postcard please...)

I should have got a medal for sticking with this film for it's entire running time. I would rather take a strong kick to the groin than sit through this film again.

This should be cast into IMDb's bottom 100. Hopefully my vote of 1/10 will help it on it's way. --------------------------------------------- Result 495 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Only]] the most [[ardent]] DORIS DAY [[fan]] could find this one [[even]] bearable to watch. When one thinks of the [[wealth]] of material available for a [[story]] about [[New]] York City's most famous blackout, a [[film]] that [[could]] have [[dealt]] with [[numerous]] real-life [[stories]] of what people had to [[cope]] with, this [[scrapes]] the bottom of the barrel for [[lack]] of story-telling originality.

Once again Doris is [[indignant]] because she [[suspects]] she may have been [[compromised]] on the [[night]] of the blackout when she returned to her Connecticut [[lodgings]], [[took]] a sleeping potion and woke up in the morning with a [[man]] who had [[done]] the same, [[wandering]] into the house by [[mistake]].

Nobody is able to [[salvage]] this mess--not Doris, not ROBERT MORSE, TERRY-THOMAS, PATRICK O'NEAL or LOLA ALBRIGHT. As [[directed]] by Hy Averback, it's the weakest vehicle Day found herself in, committed to do the film because of her husband's machinations and unable to get out of it. Too bad. [[Purely]] the most [[keen]] DORIS DAY [[admirer]] could find this one [[yet]] bearable to watch. When one thinks of the [[riches]] of material available for a [[saga]] about [[Novo]] York City's most famous blackout, a [[filmmaking]] that [[did]] have [[treated]] with [[various]] real-life [[history]] of what people had to [[coping]] with, this [[scratches]] the bottom of the barrel for [[scarcity]] of story-telling originality.

Once again Doris is [[angry]] because she [[accused]] she may have been [[endangered]] on the [[nocturne]] of the blackout when she returned to her Connecticut [[domicile]], [[taken]] a sleeping potion and woke up in the morning with a [[bloke]] who had [[accomplished]] the same, [[roaming]] into the house by [[blunder]].

Nobody is able to [[rescue]] this mess--not Doris, not ROBERT MORSE, TERRY-THOMAS, PATRICK O'NEAL or LOLA ALBRIGHT. As [[aimed]] by Hy Averback, it's the weakest vehicle Day found herself in, committed to do the film because of her husband's machinations and unable to get out of it. Too bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This entry is certainly interesting for series fans (like myself), but yet it is mostly [[incomprehensible]]. The plot is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking effects, to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.

Try to see the "NC-17" workprint version which contains the gore that was cut to be re-rated "R". This entry is certainly interesting for series fans (like myself), but yet it is mostly [[unimaginable]]. The plot is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking effects, to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.

Try to see the "NC-17" workprint version which contains the gore that was cut to be re-rated "R". --------------------------------------------- Result 497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] I admit that for the first 20 minutes or so of this film I wasn't entirely sure I was going to sit through the whole thing. Like many other people, I found it pretty boring, and I wasn't entirely looking forward to an hour and a half of watching this guy bite icicles and stick them together. [[However]], if you sit through the creation of his first work long enough to see the finished product, you get an idea of how [[impressive]] the rest of the film is. I really think it's sad that so many people found this impossibly boring or a retread of ideas done by other artists.

Rivers and Tides is a quiet study of some of the artwork and methods of Andy Goldsworthy, who makes his art entirely out of things in nature, generally resulting in pieces that will be consumed by nature through the normal process of entropy. It is slow moving and unglamorous, but I think that a lot of the point of the movie is to show that Goldsworthy's art does not need any accompaniment in order for it to be appreciated. I've even heard people complain about how he is always talking throughout the movie, rather than just letting nature and his artwork speak for themselves, which I just think is madness.

On the other hand, lots of people complain about CDs coming with the lyrics written out inside them. A lot of musicians as well think their music should mean whatever the listener wants it to mean without the musician showing the exact lyrics, I guess I'm just the kind of person that believes that I'd like to know what the artist was trying to accomplish with his or her artwork. I can still take it how I want to even if I know what it was meant to do. I can understand not wanting to hear him talk through the movie. He does, after all, lose his train of thought and find himself unable to explain some of his work at more than one occasion, but if you don't want Goldsworthy talk about his art while you're watching the film, feel free to turn the sound off. That's like not reading the lyrics if you don't want to know what a musician is singing and would rather interpret the words yourself.

I think that Andy Goldsworthy's work, which I had no idea existed before I watched this movie, is incredibly impressive, and I'm glad that this film was made in order to showcase it. Indeed, since his work is generally not the kind that can be transported into a studio, photography is the only medium other than film that can express it, and I really appreciated being able to see the work that goes into his art, and the way that only things from nature are used. Whether or not you appreciate certain aspects of how this film is presented, Goldsworthy's work is moving enough to overlook that, because the film is not the star, Goldsworthy's art is. And given the lack of any music or even the smallest special effects and the slow-moving nature of the film, it seems to me that director Thomas Riedelsheimer knows that. I admit that for the first 20 minutes or so of this film I wasn't entirely sure I was going to sit through the whole thing. Like many other people, I found it pretty boring, and I wasn't entirely looking forward to an hour and a half of watching this guy bite icicles and stick them together. [[Instead]], if you sit through the creation of his first work long enough to see the finished product, you get an idea of how [[wondrous]] the rest of the film is. I really think it's sad that so many people found this impossibly boring or a retread of ideas done by other artists.

Rivers and Tides is a quiet study of some of the artwork and methods of Andy Goldsworthy, who makes his art entirely out of things in nature, generally resulting in pieces that will be consumed by nature through the normal process of entropy. It is slow moving and unglamorous, but I think that a lot of the point of the movie is to show that Goldsworthy's art does not need any accompaniment in order for it to be appreciated. I've even heard people complain about how he is always talking throughout the movie, rather than just letting nature and his artwork speak for themselves, which I just think is madness.

On the other hand, lots of people complain about CDs coming with the lyrics written out inside them. A lot of musicians as well think their music should mean whatever the listener wants it to mean without the musician showing the exact lyrics, I guess I'm just the kind of person that believes that I'd like to know what the artist was trying to accomplish with his or her artwork. I can still take it how I want to even if I know what it was meant to do. I can understand not wanting to hear him talk through the movie. He does, after all, lose his train of thought and find himself unable to explain some of his work at more than one occasion, but if you don't want Goldsworthy talk about his art while you're watching the film, feel free to turn the sound off. That's like not reading the lyrics if you don't want to know what a musician is singing and would rather interpret the words yourself.

I think that Andy Goldsworthy's work, which I had no idea existed before I watched this movie, is incredibly impressive, and I'm glad that this film was made in order to showcase it. Indeed, since his work is generally not the kind that can be transported into a studio, photography is the only medium other than film that can express it, and I really appreciated being able to see the work that goes into his art, and the way that only things from nature are used. Whether or not you appreciate certain aspects of how this film is presented, Goldsworthy's work is moving enough to overlook that, because the film is not the star, Goldsworthy's art is. And given the lack of any music or even the smallest special effects and the slow-moving nature of the film, it seems to me that director Thomas Riedelsheimer knows that. --------------------------------------------- Result 498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While the British produced some hilarious and slick sitcoms in the 1990s - Ab Fab, Men Behaving Badly, One Foot in the Grave, etc. - the 70s were the real golden age.

In the 1970s there were whole new territories to explore, including the sexual revolution, feminism, and the slowly evolving awareness of a need for "sensitivity" that would, twenty years later, become Political Correctness. Attempts to grapple with the confusion of this thoroughly modern world were the subtle and not-so-subtle themes in everything from the skits of Monty Python's Flying Circus to sitcoms like Man About the House. (By the late 70s this "grappling" resulted in more meditative and bitter-sweet sitcoms such as the masterpiece Butterflies.)

Man About the House is a perfect example of the good Britcoms of the time - slightly genteel, cheeky, fresh, ingenuous, sometimes outrageous, with some well made observations on contemporary life. Compare it to a cynical 90s show such as Ab Fab, and it is hard to believe the two were created in the same country.

Man About the House is one of the great Britcoms of the 70s, right up there with Good Neighbors (The Good Life), and About the House's spin off George and Mildred. Its quality is attested to by the fact that - as with Good Neighbors - its creators, writers, and many of its cast have had continued success in British television. --------------------------------------------- Result 499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Artemisia Gentileschi, the [[daughter]] of Orazio Gentileschi, showed an early promise as a [[painter]]. [[Taught]] by her father, Artemisia was born in an era that [[denied]] [[talented]] women the [[right]] to have their [[work]] [[seen]] side by side art created by [[men]]. Her [[tragic]] life is chronicled in this biographic film directed and co-written by [[Agnes]] Merlik.

Having read the novel "The [[Passion]] of Artemisia" by Susan Vreeland, [[made]] us investigate more into the [[life]] of this [[woman]], her [[work]], and her [[legacy]]. We [[also]] read Mary Garrard's "Artemisia Gentileschi", which should be a [[must]] read [[book]] by all art lovers.

"Artemisia" [[presents]] the fictionalized facts we have read about [[showing]] the [[early]] [[life]] of the young [[woman]] as she [[starts]] to [[paint]]. She was [[clearly]] influenced by the [[work]] of her [[father]], by Caravaggio, [[Agostino]] Tassi, and other Florentine painters of that period. Her [[relationship]] and [[love]] affair with Tassi is the [[basis]] of the [[film]]. Artemisia, [[unfortunately]] couldn't [[go]] as far as she [[could]] have because of the [[prejudice]] against [[women]] in the arts. It didn't help [[either]] she [[caused]] a scandal where she is [[accused]] of being [[raped]] by Tassi. She had to [[go]] to [[Rome]] in [[order]] to distance herself from that [[unhappy]] [[time]] of her life.

Valentina Cervi makes a [[beautiful]] Artemisia. She is a [[gorgeous]] [[creature]] who awakened passion in men. [[Michel]] Serrault plays Orazio, her father. [[Miki]] Maojlovic is [[seen]] as Tassi, the [[man]] who [[wanted]] Artemisia, but [[ended]] up in [[jail]]. Emmanuelle Devos appears for a moment.

The film has a [[glossy]] [[finish]] that the camera [[work]] of Benoit Delhomme [[captures]] in all its [[splendor]]. The scenic locales of the [[film]] [[offer]] an idea of what inspired that [[school]] of painting to show in their canvases. The [[music]] by Krishna Levy serves well what we see. Agnes Merlik directed with [[sure]] hand [[showing]] a [[visual]] [[style]] of her own. Artemisia Gentileschi, the [[giri]] of Orazio Gentileschi, showed an early promise as a [[painting]]. [[Teach]] by her father, Artemisia was born in an era that [[deny]] [[gifted]] women the [[rights]] to have their [[cooperation]] [[saw]] side by side art created by [[male]]. Her [[disastrous]] life is chronicled in this biographic film directed and co-written by [[Felicity]] Merlik.

Having read the novel "The [[Enthusiasm]] of Artemisia" by Susan Vreeland, [[accomplished]] us investigate more into the [[living]] of this [[wife]], her [[jobs]], and her [[heirloom]]. We [[similarly]] read Mary Garrard's "Artemisia Gentileschi", which should be a [[should]] read [[workbook]] by all art lovers.

"Artemisia" [[presented]] the fictionalized facts we have read about [[demonstrating]] the [[prematurely]] [[vie]] of the young [[women]] as she [[initiating]] to [[painted]]. She was [[apparently]] influenced by the [[works]] of her [[pere]], by Caravaggio, [[Katharine]] Tassi, and other Florentine painters of that period. Her [[nexus]] and [[loves]] affair with Tassi is the [[base]] of the [[movie]]. Artemisia, [[sadly]] couldn't [[going]] as far as she [[would]] have because of the [[harm]] against [[female]] in the arts. It didn't help [[nor]] she [[aroused]] a scandal where she is [[accusing]] of being [[violated]] by Tassi. She had to [[going]] to [[Rom]] in [[edict]] to distance herself from that [[pathetic]] [[moment]] of her life.

Valentina Cervi makes a [[handsome]] Artemisia. She is a [[brilliant]] [[monster]] who awakened passion in men. [[Michelle]] Serrault plays Orazio, her father. [[Micky]] Maojlovic is [[watched]] as Tassi, the [[guy]] who [[wanna]] Artemisia, but [[finished]] up in [[brig]]. Emmanuelle Devos appears for a moment.

The film has a [[bright]] [[conclude]] that the camera [[collaborating]] of Benoit Delhomme [[caught]] in all its [[brilliance]]. The scenic locales of the [[movie]] [[offered]] an idea of what inspired that [[tuition]] of painting to show in their canvases. The [[musician]] by Krishna Levy serves well what we see. Agnes Merlik directed with [[persuaded]] hand [[proving]] a [[optic]] [[styles]] of her own. --------------------------------------------- Result 500 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Bugs life is a [[good]] [[film]]. But to me, it doesn't really [[compare]] to [[movies]] like Toy [[story]] and stuff. Don't get me [[wrong]], I liked this [[movie]], but it wasn't as [[good]] as [[Toy]] story. The [[film]] has the [[visuals]], the [[laughs]], and others that [[Toy]] [[story]] had. But the [[film]] didn't feel [[quite]] as... I don't know, but I [[thought]] it was [[still]] a [[pretty]] good [[film]].

A bugs [[life]]... I don't [[want]] to say this, is a [[film]] that I don't [[remember]]. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen [[Toy]] [[story]] in years, but I [[still]] remember it. I shouldn't have [[reviewed]] this [[film]], but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the [[best]] [[work]] Pixar has [[done]].

A bug's [[life]]:***/**** Bugs life is a [[buena]] [[movie]]. But to me, it doesn't really [[comparison]] to [[films]] like Toy [[tale]] and stuff. Don't get me [[amiss]], I liked this [[movies]], but it wasn't as [[alright]] as [[Pawn]] story. The [[movie]] has the [[photographs]], the [[giggling]], and others that [[Toys]] [[histories]] had. But the [[kino]] didn't feel [[pretty]] as... I don't know, but I [[brainchild]] it was [[however]] a [[quite]] good [[cinematography]].

A bugs [[living]]... I don't [[wish]] to say this, is a [[movie]] that I don't [[recall]]. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen [[Pawn]] [[history]] in years, but I [[yet]] remember it. I shouldn't have [[revisiting]] this [[kino]], but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the [[better]] [[collaborating]] Pixar has [[completed]].

A bug's [[iife]]:***/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can only assume that the other reviewers of this "film" are stockholders in the production company, as this was quite possibly the worst movie I've seen in the last five years. From the opening shot of a Rabbi laughing uncontrollably for no apparent reason, it was clear that the actors in this film would kill to be considered "B-Level." Both my wife and I were in a great mood before starting this film, and we were genuinely looking forward to a funny popcorn movie. We knew we hadn't rented Citizen Kane, and we weren't expecting to see the most amazing movie ever. However, after 40 minutes of enduring the most painfully unfunny bit of garbage I've ever seen, we shut it off instead of wasting another minutes of our lives.

If a "comedy" with no laughs, terrible acting, thin plot and annoying characters are your thing, then this film is for you. Honestly, Troll 2 is better--at least I laughed at the popcorn sex scene.

I cannot justify writing a longer review of this picture because I've already wasted almost an hour trying to find one joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[like]] British [[humor]], I believe it's one of the best in the world. I [[like]] [[almost]] [[every]] British sitcom ([[okay]]... [[maybe]] not Monthy Python, some of the jokes were [[great]], but some of them I didn't understand.), but this League of [[Gentlemen]] is just something good to make you [[sick]]. This [[show]] was good in some [[way]]; it [[helped]] me lost some [[weight]] because watching this [[piece]] of [[garbage]] [[make]] me feel I'm not hungry anymore. This is really just disgusting, sick and not [[even]] [[funny]] TV show and I wonder who is [[actually]] [[laughing]] at this stuff. I [[watched]] it for about 10 minutes and [[turned]] it off. It was so disgusting, [[watching]] [[men]] [[dressed]] in the [[woman]] with yellow teeth and urinating on the [[car]]... I [[mean]]... what's so [[funny]] about that??? It makes me wanna [[puke]]. No [[humor]], just [[disturbing]] [[images]] and [[cheap]], [[toilet]] [[laughs]]... I don't know... if you like this stuff... you [[go]] ahead... watch it... but to be honest, people [[watching]] and [[enjoying]] this must have some [[emotional]] [[problems]]. [[Garbage]]. I [[adores]] British [[mood]], I believe it's one of the best in the world. I [[iike]] [[around]] [[all]] British sitcom ([[ok]]... [[presumably]] not Monthy Python, some of the jokes were [[wondrous]], but some of them I didn't understand.), but this League of [[Gentleman]] is just something good to make you [[indisposed]]. This [[exhibition]] was good in some [[ways]]; it [[help]] me lost some [[weigh]] because watching this [[slice]] of [[trash]] [[deliver]] me feel I'm not hungry anymore. This is really just disgusting, sick and not [[yet]] [[hilarious]] TV show and I wonder who is [[indeed]] [[giggling]] at this stuff. I [[saw]] it for about 10 minutes and [[transformed]] it off. It was so disgusting, [[staring]] [[man]] [[clothed]] in the [[girl]] with yellow teeth and urinating on the [[auto]]... I [[imply]]... what's so [[fun]] about that??? It makes me wanna [[vomiting]]. No [[mood]], just [[disconcerting]] [[picture]] and [[cheaper]], [[toilettes]] [[laughing]]... I don't know... if you like this stuff... you [[going]] ahead... watch it... but to be honest, people [[staring]] and [[enjoy]] this must have some [[affective]] [[difficulty]]. [[Trash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The movie has a [[great]] written [[genre]] story. It [[features]] all of the usual Columbo ingredients; The way Lt. Columbo approaches and bonds to his suspect, the way the mystery unravels for him, Columbo's dog, the cat and mouse play, which is great in this one and luckily as well some good [[relieving]] [[humor]], [[mostly]] involving the Columbo character. It's all written despite the fact that it doesn't even have a truly original [[concept]]. Columbo hunting down a detective/murder novel [[writer]] had been [[done]] more than once before in a Columbo movie.

It's also an [[extremely]] well directed movie from James Frawley, who after this directed 5 more Columbo movies, in the '70's and '80's. He provided the movie with style and some [[truly]] [[great]] and [[memorable]] [[sequences]].

It's one of the slower moving Columbo [[movies]], despite not having a too [[long]] [[running]] [[time]]. This style and approach doesn't always [[work]] out well for a Columbo movie but in this [[movie]] it does, which is [[perhaps]] not in the [[least]] [[thanks]] to the acting performances of the [[movie]].

[[Most]] Columbo movie [[either]] starred a [[big]] well known star or a star from the [[early]] days of film-making, as the [[movie]] its murderer. This [[movie]] [[stars]] the [[rather]] [[unknown]] 81 year old [[Ruth]] Gordon. She didn't starred in an awful lot of movies throughout her career but she is [[still]] well known to some, mostly for her role in "Rosemary's Baby", which also won her an Oscar. She had a [[realistic]] and somewhat unusual style of acting, which some people might not like [[though]]. It earned her 4 more Oscar nominations [[throughout]] her career, [[prior]] to her [[win]] for "Rosemary's [[Baby]]", in 1969. She has some great [[interaction]] as well with Peter Falk in their [[sequences]] [[together]].

The [[movie]] also stars a still young G.D. Spradlin. I say young because I only know him from his latest productions out of his career, despite the fact that he already was 57 at the time of this Columbo production. He is still alive but retired from acting, ever since 1999.

An even [[better]] than usual Columbo movie [[entry]].

8/10 The movie has a [[wondrous]] written [[type]] story. It [[attribute]] all of the usual Columbo ingredients; The way Lt. Columbo approaches and bonds to his suspect, the way the mystery unravels for him, Columbo's dog, the cat and mouse play, which is great in this one and luckily as well some good [[mitigating]] [[comedy]], [[essentially]] involving the Columbo character. It's all written despite the fact that it doesn't even have a truly original [[notions]]. Columbo hunting down a detective/murder novel [[novelist]] had been [[completed]] more than once before in a Columbo movie.

It's also an [[unbelievably]] well directed movie from James Frawley, who after this directed 5 more Columbo movies, in the '70's and '80's. He provided the movie with style and some [[really]] [[huge]] and [[landmark]] [[sequence]].

It's one of the slower moving Columbo [[film]], despite not having a too [[lange]] [[implementing]] [[moment]]. This style and approach doesn't always [[working]] out well for a Columbo movie but in this [[cinematography]] it does, which is [[probably]] not in the [[slightest]] [[appreciation]] to the acting performances of the [[cinematography]].

[[More]] Columbo movie [[neither]] starred a [[grand]] well known star or a star from the [[prematurely]] days of film-making, as the [[cinematography]] its murderer. This [[cinematography]] [[star]] the [[fairly]] [[anonymous]] 81 year old [[Roth]] Gordon. She didn't starred in an awful lot of movies throughout her career but she is [[yet]] well known to some, mostly for her role in "Rosemary's Baby", which also won her an Oscar. She had a [[practical]] and somewhat unusual style of acting, which some people might not like [[albeit]]. It earned her 4 more Oscar nominations [[across]] her career, [[formerly]] to her [[wins]] for "Rosemary's [[Babies]]", in 1969. She has some great [[interact]] as well with Peter Falk in their [[sequencing]] [[jointly]].

The [[cinematographic]] also stars a still young G.D. Spradlin. I say young because I only know him from his latest productions out of his career, despite the fact that he already was 57 at the time of this Columbo production. He is still alive but retired from acting, ever since 1999.

An even [[nicer]] than usual Columbo movie [[inlet]].

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The [[Minion]] is about... well, a minion. A servant of [[Satan]] and whose goal is to get the [[key]] that will unlock the [[door]] where his master is trapped. He is some sort of demon who possess human beings and when the body dies will [[possess]] another. Anyone who happens to be possessed will go on some berserker rage. Dolph Lundgren plays Lukas, a member of a [[secret]] order of Templars, who is tasked to [[keep]] the [[key]] away from the [[minion]]. The movie begins a thousand years [[ago]], in the [[Middle]] [[East]] where a couple of [[knight]] templars [[flee]] from the minion. Then flash forward to 1999, where the [[key]] winds up [[somewhere]] [[underground]] in [[New]] York. An archeologist is [[assigned]] to [[study]]/dig the [[place]] where the [[key]] was found. Needless to say, the minion is after the [[key]], and the [[movie]] [[becomes]] a [[long]] [[winded]] chase scene between the minion and [[Lukas]] and archeologist.

The [[movie]], is just that, a low budget B-movie flick. The movie lacks energy, and just trods along. You'll follow the chase but you won't ever feel involved in the story which willfully [[takes]] [[ideas]] from previous movies ([[especially]] The Terminator [[films]]). The [[fight]] scenes with the minion is troublesome, in that you never [[get]] the [[sense]] of how [[good]] or how [[bad]] a warrior this [[demon]] is. It "[[skillfully]]" becomes a one-man army when [[fighting]] a squad of templars but sucks when it [[comes]] to one-on one. And it's [[supposed]] to be [[around]] for a long time. All this goes to show that any [[sense]] of logic is just thrown down the [[drain]] for convenience. The whole idea of a [[secret]] [[order]] of Templars, a [[door]] to [[hell]], and the key isn't well [[explained]]. We are [[merely]] to accept that they just [[exist]]. The movie seems to have been [[made]] with the [[feeling]] there's not much potential to the story but only enough to make a few [[bucks]]. Dolph Lundgren sure looks like he wish he were [[somewhere]] else.

The verdict: 2 of 5 stars. The [[Servant]] is about... well, a minion. A servant of [[Lucifer]] and whose goal is to get the [[imperative]] that will unlock the [[stargate]] where his master is trapped. He is some sort of demon who possess human beings and when the body dies will [[owning]] another. Anyone who happens to be possessed will go on some berserker rage. Dolph Lundgren plays Lukas, a member of a [[confidential]] order of Templars, who is tasked to [[conserving]] the [[imperative]] away from the [[servant]]. The movie begins a thousand years [[formerly]], in the [[Milieu]] [[Easterly]] where a couple of [[ritter]] templars [[escape]] from the minion. Then flash forward to 1999, where the [[imperative]] winds up [[nowhere]] [[metro]] in [[Novo]] York. An archeologist is [[earmarked]] to [[studied]]/dig the [[placing]] where the [[indispensable]] was found. Needless to say, the minion is after the [[pivotal]], and the [[filmmaking]] [[becoming]] a [[protracted]] [[overtired]] chase scene between the minion and [[Lucas]] and archeologist.

The [[filmmaking]], is just that, a low budget B-movie flick. The movie lacks energy, and just trods along. You'll follow the chase but you won't ever feel involved in the story which willfully [[pick]] [[reflections]] from previous movies ([[mostly]] The Terminator [[filmmaking]]). The [[struggles]] scenes with the minion is troublesome, in that you never [[gets]] the [[sensing]] of how [[alright]] or how [[negative]] a warrior this [[daemon]] is. It "[[skilfully]]" becomes a one-man army when [[struggles]] a squad of templars but sucks when it [[happens]] to one-on one. And it's [[alleged]] to be [[approximately]] for a long time. All this goes to show that any [[feeling]] of logic is just thrown down the [[siphon]] for convenience. The whole idea of a [[secrecy]] [[decree]] of Templars, a [[stargate]] to [[brothel]], and the key isn't well [[explains]]. We are [[only]] to accept that they just [[existent]]. The movie seems to have been [[accomplished]] with the [[sensation]] there's not much potential to the story but only enough to make a few [[dollars]]. Dolph Lundgren sure looks like he wish he were [[somehow]] else.

The verdict: 2 of 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This seemed to be a [[good]] [[movie]], I thought it would be a good [[movie]], and throughout the [[movie]] I was hoping it [[would]] be a meaningful [[use]] of my [[time]], and yes, I have to admit that the acting [[talent]] of Dimple Kapadia and Deepti Naval where [[truly]] [[commendable]], but [[despite]] the [[best]] [[effort]] this movie [[falls]] short of effectively conveying a meaningful message, which it seems is it [[seemed]] was what Somnath Sen is [[trying]] to do. The [[final]] point comes short and the ending seemed kind of unsatisfactory after all that happens; a bit like real life in that respect but [[movies]] unlike real life ends in about 2hrs and the ending should leave the audience satisfied, if indeed that was the director's intention. This falls short in that respect and that is what disappoints me the most.

Another aspect that concerned me was the national stereo-typing of the American [[characters]] - they all seem to be carved out of the same [[block]]. [[Seems]] to me that most American characters in Indian English movies are based upon how common Indians themselves perceive Americans to be like and it is clear that no effort has been made to bring any sense of depth or complexity to any American in the movie.

These two aspects put [[together]] they make for a [[disappointing]] [[story]]. This seemed to be a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], I thought it would be a good [[filmmaking]], and throughout the [[filmmaking]] I was hoping it [[should]] be a meaningful [[utilizing]] of my [[times]], and yes, I have to admit that the acting [[talents]] of Dimple Kapadia and Deepti Naval where [[honestly]] [[creditable]], but [[while]] the [[optimum]] [[endeavor]] this movie [[autumn]] short of effectively conveying a meaningful message, which it seems is it [[appeared]] was what Somnath Sen is [[seeking]] to do. The [[last]] point comes short and the ending seemed kind of unsatisfactory after all that happens; a bit like real life in that respect but [[cinematography]] unlike real life ends in about 2hrs and the ending should leave the audience satisfied, if indeed that was the director's intention. This falls short in that respect and that is what disappoints me the most.

Another aspect that concerned me was the national stereo-typing of the American [[nature]] - they all seem to be carved out of the same [[bloc]]. [[Looks]] to me that most American characters in Indian English movies are based upon how common Indians themselves perceive Americans to be like and it is clear that no effort has been made to bring any sense of depth or complexity to any American in the movie.

These two aspects put [[jointly]] they make for a [[depressing]] [[history]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 506 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] . . . or type on a computer keyboard, they'd probably [[give]] this eponymous [[film]] a rating of "10." After all, no elephants are shown being killed during the movie; it is not even implied that any are hurt. To the contrary, the master of ELEPHANT WALK, John Wiley (Peter Finch), complains that he cannot shoot any of the pachyderms--no matter how menacing--without a permit from the government (and his tone suggests such permits are not within the realm of probability). Furthermore, the [[elements]] conspire--in the form of an unusual drought and a human cholera epidemic--to leave the Wiley plantation house vulnerable to total destruction by the Elephant People (as the natives dub them) to close the story. If you happen to see the current release EARTH, you'll detect the Elephant People are faring less well today. . . . or type on a computer keyboard, they'd probably [[confer]] this eponymous [[kino]] a rating of "10." After all, no elephants are shown being killed during the movie; it is not even implied that any are hurt. To the contrary, the master of ELEPHANT WALK, John Wiley (Peter Finch), complains that he cannot shoot any of the pachyderms--no matter how menacing--without a permit from the government (and his tone suggests such permits are not within the realm of probability). Furthermore, the [[component]] conspire--in the form of an unusual drought and a human cholera epidemic--to leave the Wiley plantation house vulnerable to total destruction by the Elephant People (as the natives dub them) to close the story. If you happen to see the current release EARTH, you'll detect the Elephant People are faring less well today. --------------------------------------------- Result 507 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Taped this late night movie when I was in grade 11, watched it on fast forward. I sugest you do the same. I though it would be and action film, but went to a cort tv type movie. In the end it fits in with the early 70's social activest type films. Glad I missed that era. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Simply]] put, this is a simplistic and one dimensional film. The title, The [[Rise]] to [[Evil]], should tell you that this isn't going to [[attempt]] to be anything [[deep]] or do [[much]] with Hitler's character. [[Rather]], from the first minutes of the movie where we [[see]] [[baby]] [[Hitler]] looking [[evil]] with [[evil]] [[music]] playing the [[background]], we are given a view of Hitler that [[presents]] his as a cartoony supervillian, seemingly ripped right out of a [[Saturday]] morning TV [[show]]. The [[film]] [[REALLY]] [[wants]] to make its [[case]] that Hitler was [[evil]] but does [[anyone]] [[need]] a [[movie]] to convince them that Hitler was [[evil]]? [[Ultimately]], making him such a one-dimensionally [[evil]] character is both [[boring]] and [[confusing]] (one [[must]] [[ask]] how the inept, phsycotic character in the [[film]] cold ever [[persuade]] a [[nation]] to follow him or be named Time's man of the year). This [[film]] had a great [[opportunity]] to [[take]] a figure who has [[committed]] some of the most [[horrible]] [[acts]] in the 20th century, and try to delve into his mind. [[Instead]], it [[basically]] just [[says]], "[[Hey]]! [[Hitler]] was [[evil]]! Just [[thought]] you [[might]] [[like]] to know..." over and over again. The [[great]] [[irony]] is that the [[film]] [[still]] was [[attacked]] for presenting too [[sympathetic]] a [[view]] of the [[character]]. Give me a [[break]]. [[Simple]] put, this is a simplistic and one dimensional film. The title, The [[Hike]] to [[Demonic]], should tell you that this isn't going to [[seek]] to be anything [[deepest]] or do [[very]] with Hitler's character. [[Somewhat]], from the first minutes of the movie where we [[seeing]] [[babe]] [[Nazi]] looking [[malicious]] with [[maleficent]] [[musica]] playing the [[context]], we are given a view of Hitler that [[present]] his as a cartoony supervillian, seemingly ripped right out of a [[Saturdays]] morning TV [[shows]]. The [[filmmaking]] [[TRULY]] [[want]] to make its [[lawsuits]] that Hitler was [[viciousness]] but does [[nobody]] [[needs]] a [[filmmaking]] to convince them that Hitler was [[malicious]]? [[Eventually]], making him such a one-dimensionally [[demonic]] character is both [[dull]] and [[disconcerting]] (one [[needs]] [[requests]] how the inept, phsycotic character in the [[movie]] cold ever [[convincing]] a [[nationals]] to follow him or be named Time's man of the year). This [[flick]] had a great [[opportunities]] to [[taking]] a figure who has [[perpetrate]] some of the most [[excruciating]] [[act]] in the 20th century, and try to delve into his mind. [[Alternatively]], it [[virtually]] just [[say]], "[[Hello]]! [[Nazi]] was [[viciousness]]! Just [[ideology]] you [[conceivably]] [[likes]] to know..." over and over again. The [[marvellous]] [[satire]] is that the [[flick]] [[however]] was [[mugged]] for presenting too [[congenial]] a [[viewing]] of the [[characters]]. Give me a [[breaks]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was but a [[babe]] in arms when George Lucas was wowing the world with his out of this world Saga chronicling the adventures of young Luke Skywalker and the notorious Darth Vadar but even [[today]] 20 years on I can appreciate the [[genius]] that is [[Lucas]] and the [[incredible]] [[imagination]] he's been [[blessed]] with. [[In]] A [[New]] Hope Lucas showed a [[new]] [[way]] to tell stories as he introduced us to such [[memorable]] [[characters]] as the plucky Princess Leia, the Rougish Han Solo and the spirited Luke Skywalker as well as that [[best]] [[loved]] of [[villains]], the sinister Darth Vadar. [[In]] The Empire [[Strikes]] Back he went all out to [[show]] us Special Effects can [[add]] to a [[tale]] and [[managed]] to [[something]] no-one [[thought]] you [[could]] do on screen. He made a [[film]] with no [[specific]] end or beginning and it went down a [[treat]]. [[Return]] of the Jedi is a [[fitting]] [[end]] to a [[Saga]] that will [[stand]] the [[test]] of [[time]].

[[When]] The [[Empire]] Srtikes Back [[ended]] with encasing of the lovable [[Rouge]] Han Solo in Carbonite to be delivered to Jabba the Hut and young Luke reeling from the [[discovery]] of a [[terrible]] truth about his Father we were [[left]] with the [[feeling]] that things were going from [[bad]] to [[worse]]. Vadar it [[seemed]] had won the day. How we [[asked]] [[could]] the [[rebels]] ever [[recover]] from this blow? In Lucas [[stunning]] and captivating [[final]] [[chapter]] we are [[kept]] on the edges of our seats from Han's daring [[rescue]] from Jabba's palace to the the [[final]] climactic [[battle]] on the [[Death]] Star between Luke and Vadar as Luke [[struggles]] between [[fulfilling]] his [[duties]] as a Jedi and rebel fighter and [[attempting]] to reawaken the good he [[believes]] is [[still]] in his Father's soul.

[[Old]] friends like the smooth [[talking]] Lando Calrissian and the ever lovable Chewbacca [[reunite]] for one [[final]] [[battle]] to [[end]] all [[battles]] as a [[new]] darker more [[dangerous]] [[enemy]] [[emerges]] in the [[form]] of the Emperor himself ( [[played]] by the [[brilliant]] Ian McDiarmiud.How he missed out on an Oscar is a mystery.) desperate to [[turn]] Luke to the [[Dark]] Side [[even]] if it means betraying his apprentice Darth Vadar.All in black with his red eyes,ghostly white disfigured face and sinister laugh he [[truly]] is a terrifying [[addition]] to the story and is the undisputed Master of the [[events]] that unfold. His new and improved [[Death]] Star spells [[disaster]] for the [[rebels]] but the brave group launch one last [[desperate]] attack to end the Empire's reign for good.

Lucas managed to incorporate three different stories at once and keep the action going so that the audience is riveted. We watch in excitement as Han and Leia attempt to bring down the shield around the Death Star from the forest Moon of Endor with the help of some adorable Ewoks ( who I really do not believe take from the movie at all. In fact I feel they provide a sort reprieve from the tension of the battles at and in the Death Star) and hindered by legions of Stormtroopers and Imperial Officers. We cheer on Lando and the other pilots as they take on the mighty Imperial Fleet and risk life and limb to fly into the Deatn Star to destroy it once and for all. And we watch with bated breath as Vadar and the Emperor attempt to turn Luke to the Dark Side while he in turn tries to turn his Father back.

But for me the most difficult and yet compelling battles is that going on inside Darth Vadar. For ROTJ is a battle of emotions and feelings. Vadar is caught between his loyalty to the Emporer and the Empire and his Fatherly inclinations to Luke. Never did I think that a mask could show emotion but some-how one can't but see the confusion and pain on Vadar's face during the final scenes as the Emporer turns on Luke. There is more depth and emotion to Vadar than I believed a villain, especially one more machine then man could have and that I think is what makes him so accessible. He is conflicted. The Apprentice as much as the Master. The Victim as much as the Villain. Without ruining the end too much Vadar's final scene is the most poignant and wonderful in the trilogy.

So in conclusion what can I say. George Lucas is the master of the Saga. Star Wars is the most compelling and engaging Sagas I've seen in a long time and I have yet to see another Saga rival it. Return of the Jedi has all the ingredients necessary to provide the ending Lucas masterpiece deserves. It's action, suspense, romance, tragedy, redemption, joy all rolled into one and it's memorable characters, wonderful special effects and catchy music make both a great movie in its own right and an ending that Lucas can be proud of. I was but a [[darling]] in arms when George Lucas was wowing the world with his out of this world Saga chronicling the adventures of young Luke Skywalker and the notorious Darth Vadar but even [[yesterday]] 20 years on I can appreciate the [[prodigy]] that is [[Lukas]] and the [[fantastic]] [[novelty]] he's been [[sanctified]] with. [[For]] A [[Novel]] Hope Lucas showed a [[newer]] [[camino]] to tell stories as he introduced us to such [[landmark]] [[personages]] as the plucky Princess Leia, the Rougish Han Solo and the spirited Luke Skywalker as well as that [[better]] [[worshiped]] of [[thugs]], the sinister Darth Vadar. [[Onto]] The Empire [[Strike]] Back he went all out to [[showing]] us Special Effects can [[added]] to a [[stories]] and [[managing]] to [[anything]] no-one [[thinks]] you [[would]] do on screen. He made a [[movie]] with no [[special]] end or beginning and it went down a [[processed]]. [[Returning]] of the Jedi is a [[fixture]] [[ceases]] to a [[Epic]] that will [[standing]] the [[proof]] of [[period]].

[[Whenever]] The [[Reich]] Srtikes Back [[finished]] with encasing of the lovable [[Khmer]] Han Solo in Carbonite to be delivered to Jabba the Hut and young Luke reeling from the [[discoveries]] of a [[awful]] truth about his Father we were [[exited]] with the [[impression]] that things were going from [[negative]] to [[worst]]. Vadar it [[appeared]] had won the day. How we [[requested]] [[wo]] the [[rebellion]] ever [[retrieve]] from this blow? In Lucas [[striking]] and captivating [[latter]] [[sections]] we are [[preserved]] on the edges of our seats from Han's daring [[salvage]] from Jabba's palace to the the [[last]] climactic [[warfare]] on the [[Dying]] Star between Luke and Vadar as Luke [[battles]] between [[fulfill]] his [[roles]] as a Jedi and rebel fighter and [[tried]] to reawaken the good he [[thinks]] is [[however]] in his Father's soul.

[[Ancient]] friends like the smooth [[spoke]] Lando Calrissian and the ever lovable Chewbacca [[reunification]] for one [[latter]] [[warfare]] to [[terminate]] all [[fighting]] as a [[newer]] darker more [[unsafe]] [[enemies]] [[appears]] in the [[shape]] of the Emperor himself ( [[done]] by the [[excellent]] Ian McDiarmiud.How he missed out on an Oscar is a mystery.) desperate to [[converting]] Luke to the [[Darkness]] Side [[yet]] if it means betraying his apprentice Darth Vadar.All in black with his red eyes,ghostly white disfigured face and sinister laugh he [[honestly]] is a terrifying [[addendum]] to the story and is the undisputed Master of the [[phenomena]] that unfold. His new and improved [[Muerte]] Star spells [[catastrophes]] for the [[mutineers]] but the brave group launch one last [[despondent]] attack to end the Empire's reign for good.

Lucas managed to incorporate three different stories at once and keep the action going so that the audience is riveted. We watch in excitement as Han and Leia attempt to bring down the shield around the Death Star from the forest Moon of Endor with the help of some adorable Ewoks ( who I really do not believe take from the movie at all. In fact I feel they provide a sort reprieve from the tension of the battles at and in the Death Star) and hindered by legions of Stormtroopers and Imperial Officers. We cheer on Lando and the other pilots as they take on the mighty Imperial Fleet and risk life and limb to fly into the Deatn Star to destroy it once and for all. And we watch with bated breath as Vadar and the Emperor attempt to turn Luke to the Dark Side while he in turn tries to turn his Father back.

But for me the most difficult and yet compelling battles is that going on inside Darth Vadar. For ROTJ is a battle of emotions and feelings. Vadar is caught between his loyalty to the Emporer and the Empire and his Fatherly inclinations to Luke. Never did I think that a mask could show emotion but some-how one can't but see the confusion and pain on Vadar's face during the final scenes as the Emporer turns on Luke. There is more depth and emotion to Vadar than I believed a villain, especially one more machine then man could have and that I think is what makes him so accessible. He is conflicted. The Apprentice as much as the Master. The Victim as much as the Villain. Without ruining the end too much Vadar's final scene is the most poignant and wonderful in the trilogy.

So in conclusion what can I say. George Lucas is the master of the Saga. Star Wars is the most compelling and engaging Sagas I've seen in a long time and I have yet to see another Saga rival it. Return of the Jedi has all the ingredients necessary to provide the ending Lucas masterpiece deserves. It's action, suspense, romance, tragedy, redemption, joy all rolled into one and it's memorable characters, wonderful special effects and catchy music make both a great movie in its own right and an ending that Lucas can be proud of. --------------------------------------------- Result 510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Disappearance]] is set in the Mojave [[desert]] as Jim (Harry Hamlin) & Patty Henley ([[Susan]] Dey) plus their two [[kids]] [[Katie]] (Basia A'Hern) & Matt (Jeremey Lelliott) along with Ethan ([[Jamie]] Croft) a [[friend]] of the family are travelling along, they stop at a roadside diner & ask about an old deserted [[mining]] [[town]] on the [[map]] called Weaver. No-one [[claims]] to have heard of it but it's definitely there & the family decide to take a detour in order to check it out & take some [[pictures]]. Once at the [[town]] they take some pictures & have a look around but when it [[comes]] [[time]] to [[leave]] their [[car]] won't start & they have to spend the [[night]] there. [[While]] [[looking]] [[around]] they find a camcorder videotape which they [[play]] only to discover footage of a [[scared]] [[woman]] saying all her [[friends]] have [[disappeared]], the [[next]] morning & their [[car]] has [[disappeared]] as things [[take]] a very [[sinister]] [[turn]]. What is Weaver's [[secret]]? [[Will]] the Henley's ever leave there [[alive]]...

Written, co-executive [[produced]] & [[directed]] by [[Walter]] Klenhard I have to [[say]] that [[Disappearance]] is one of the most [[frustrating]] [[films]] I have ever watched. For the first 85 minutes it was a pretty [[good]] mysterious mix of thriller & horror film but then we are treated to one of the [[single]] [[worst]] endings ever in motion picture history. The [[script]] suggest lots of different things but never elaborates or confirms & I was [[sitting]] there genuinely intrigued about what was going on, from the families [[car]] mysterious disappearing, the four [[recent]] graves, the thing in the abandoned [[mines]], the [[supernatural]] [[sandstorm]], the sudden & [[unexplained]] disappearance of Ethan & his just as [[unexplained]] reappearance, the Sheriff's sinister motives, the compass in the car going crazy, the crashed plane, the townspeople denying Weaver existed & the possible side effects of a neutron [[bomb]] being dropped near Weaver in the 40's but they are all tossed out of the window & for all we know [[could]] have been totally separate random events. Everything was coming along nicely & was set up for a big twist revelation but none was forthcoming & instead I was treated to the most [[ambiguous]], strange, surreal & downright [[frustrating]] ending possible. If nothing else the ending contradicts much of what has gone before & leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. It's almost as if the makers had these [[great]] [[ideas]] but then didn't know what to do with them & just made the ending up on the spot. I just felt I put so much effort into watching the film which can be pretty slow at times without any sort of reward & in fact the ending felt more like a kick in the teeth or a good two finger salute!

Director Klenhard does a reasonable job here, the old ghost town has a certain atmosphere & the large expansive desert locations give a good sense of isolation. It's well made but what were they thinking with that ending? Nothing fits, nothing makes sense & it's just a huge frustrating mess that after sitting through the thing for nearly an hour & a half leaves you confused & wanting to know more. Despite being a horror film there's no blood or gore although there are one or two creepy moments here & there. The film actually reminds of The Hills Have Eyes (2006) remake for large parts as that is what the film is set-up to be before a bizarre ending which does nothing to bring any closure to the film.

Technically the film is good with high production values, good special effects, sets, locations & cinematography. Set in America but filmed in South Australia. The acting is fine from a decent cast.

Disappearance is a really odd film, for a long time it shapes up to be a neat little horror mystery thriller but it never explains anything which happens & the truly surreal ending just throws up more questions than answers. I really can't see anyone making head nor tail of this, I really can't. [[Disappeared]] is set in the Mojave [[deserts]] as Jim (Harry Hamlin) & Patty Henley ([[Suzanne]] Dey) plus their two [[child]] [[Katy]] (Basia A'Hern) & Matt (Jeremey Lelliott) along with Ethan ([[Jaime]] Croft) a [[friends]] of the family are travelling along, they stop at a roadside diner & ask about an old deserted [[mine]] [[city]] on the [[charting]] called Weaver. No-one [[claim]] to have heard of it but it's definitely there & the family decide to take a detour in order to check it out & take some [[images]]. Once at the [[ciudad]] they take some pictures & have a look around but when it [[happens]] [[times]] to [[letting]] their [[cars]] won't start & they have to spend the [[overnight]] there. [[Despite]] [[researching]] [[throughout]] they find a camcorder videotape which they [[playing]] only to discover footage of a [[fear]] [[girl]] saying all her [[friendships]] have [[disappear]], the [[imminent]] morning & their [[auto]] has [[faded]] as things [[taking]] a very [[ominous]] [[transforming]]. What is Weaver's [[secrets]]? [[Willingness]] the Henley's ever leave there [[vivo]]...

Written, co-executive [[generated]] & [[geared]] by [[Walters]] Klenhard I have to [[tell]] that [[Disappeared]] is one of the most [[discouraging]] [[filmmaking]] I have ever watched. For the first 85 minutes it was a pretty [[alright]] mysterious mix of thriller & horror film but then we are treated to one of the [[exclusive]] [[gravest]] endings ever in motion picture history. The [[scripts]] suggest lots of different things but never elaborates or confirms & I was [[seated]] there genuinely intrigued about what was going on, from the families [[cars]] mysterious disappearing, the four [[latest]] graves, the thing in the abandoned [[mine]], the [[uncanny]] [[sand]], the sudden & [[unfathomable]] disappearance of Ethan & his just as [[inexplicable]] reappearance, the Sheriff's sinister motives, the compass in the car going crazy, the crashed plane, the townspeople denying Weaver existed & the possible side effects of a neutron [[bombings]] being dropped near Weaver in the 40's but they are all tossed out of the window & for all we know [[wo]] have been totally separate random events. Everything was coming along nicely & was set up for a big twist revelation but none was forthcoming & instead I was treated to the most [[fuzzy]], strange, surreal & downright [[depressing]] ending possible. If nothing else the ending contradicts much of what has gone before & leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. It's almost as if the makers had these [[marvellous]] [[conceptions]] but then didn't know what to do with them & just made the ending up on the spot. I just felt I put so much effort into watching the film which can be pretty slow at times without any sort of reward & in fact the ending felt more like a kick in the teeth or a good two finger salute!

Director Klenhard does a reasonable job here, the old ghost town has a certain atmosphere & the large expansive desert locations give a good sense of isolation. It's well made but what were they thinking with that ending? Nothing fits, nothing makes sense & it's just a huge frustrating mess that after sitting through the thing for nearly an hour & a half leaves you confused & wanting to know more. Despite being a horror film there's no blood or gore although there are one or two creepy moments here & there. The film actually reminds of The Hills Have Eyes (2006) remake for large parts as that is what the film is set-up to be before a bizarre ending which does nothing to bring any closure to the film.

Technically the film is good with high production values, good special effects, sets, locations & cinematography. Set in America but filmed in South Australia. The acting is fine from a decent cast.

Disappearance is a really odd film, for a long time it shapes up to be a neat little horror mystery thriller but it never explains anything which happens & the truly surreal ending just throws up more questions than answers. I really can't see anyone making head nor tail of this, I really can't. --------------------------------------------- Result 511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As [[someone]] who has read the [[book]], I can say that this is [[vastly]] inferior to the [[big]] American version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. There are [[various]] [[reasons]] for this. [[Firstly]], Emma is too unpleasant. [[Yes]], she has faults, and isn't the easiest person to [[like]] - but the [[viewer]] shouldn't downright [[start]] to despise her. Secondly, [[Mr]] Knightly is miscast. His brooding and melancholy in this [[version]] are better suited to a Bronte or Gaskell adaptation than Austen, and throw the [[mood]] of the [[whole]] [[affair]] "off". Thirdly, Samantha Morton is too strong an actress to be relegated to the role of Harriet; and why was she made to look so sickly? Harriet is [[supposed]] to be blonde and blooming - not to look as if she's going to be carried off by consumption in the next scene. Fourthly, the structure has been mucked up and scenes cut. At the end, when Emma decides she loves Mr Knightly, it comes across as [[utterly]] baffling because this [[narrative]] hasn't been [[adequately]] shown and carried along throughout the film. Fifthly, what was going on, exactly, with Mrs Elton's accent? She went from sounding like an American [[actress]] [[trying]] to suppress her own accent at the [[beginning]], to all out American half-way through, and then back to English at the end. [[Finally]], this dragged at the [[end]]. The [[book]] and the [[big]] film version end with the [[wedding]] of [[Emma]] and Mr Knightly. This version drags on confusingly after the [[announcement]] of the [[wedding]] without actually showing us the [[ceremony]].

[[All]] in all, a rather [[haphazard]] attempt. Read the [[book]] or [[rent]] the Paltrow version [[instead]] As [[everybody]] who has read the [[books]], I can say that this is [[noticeably]] inferior to the [[overwhelming]] American version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. There are [[many]] [[motifs]] for this. [[Initially]], Emma is too unpleasant. [[Yep]], she has faults, and isn't the easiest person to [[fond]] - but the [[onlooker]] shouldn't downright [[embark]] to despise her. Secondly, [[Bernd]] Knightly is miscast. His brooding and melancholy in this [[stepping]] are better suited to a Bronte or Gaskell adaptation than Austen, and throw the [[ambiance]] of the [[overall]] [[fling]] "off". Thirdly, Samantha Morton is too strong an actress to be relegated to the role of Harriet; and why was she made to look so sickly? Harriet is [[suspected]] to be blonde and blooming - not to look as if she's going to be carried off by consumption in the next scene. Fourthly, the structure has been mucked up and scenes cut. At the end, when Emma decides she loves Mr Knightly, it comes across as [[quite]] baffling because this [[descriptive]] hasn't been [[duly]] shown and carried along throughout the film. Fifthly, what was going on, exactly, with Mrs Elton's accent? She went from sounding like an American [[actor]] [[tempting]] to suppress her own accent at the [[commencement]], to all out American half-way through, and then back to English at the end. [[Lastly]], this dragged at the [[terminates]]. The [[ledger]] and the [[prodigious]] film version end with the [[married]] of [[Emmy]] and Mr Knightly. This version drags on confusingly after the [[advertisements]] of the [[marriage]] without actually showing us the [[rite]].

[[Entire]] in all, a rather [[random]] attempt. Read the [[ledger]] or [[rentals]] the Paltrow version [[however]] --------------------------------------------- Result 512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] First off, this really is my [[favorite]] film ever. I don't need to give anyone a description because every a**hole does that. I am literally [[obsessed]] with this practically bloodless, [[cheesy]], lame effects having', boom-stick showing', badly edited, 80's metal horror masterpiece. The [[director]] (I heard) had hoped for a hit at the box office so that he could do sequels and have a [[FREDDY]]/[[JASON]] type of deal for himself. Damn, I wish that could've went down like that! The soundtrack's banging'. The acting's good....[[CHECK]] THIS MOFO OUT. and any die-hard fans out there, feel free to email and chat sometime. Midgetorgy....I can be found at YAHOO. First off, this really is my [[preferred]] film ever. I don't need to give anyone a description because every a**hole does that. I am literally [[fixated]] with this practically bloodless, [[dorky]], lame effects having', boom-stick showing', badly edited, 80's metal horror masterpiece. The [[superintendent]] (I heard) had hoped for a hit at the box office so that he could do sequels and have a [[FREDDIE]]/[[JAS]] type of deal for himself. Damn, I wish that could've went down like that! The soundtrack's banging'. The acting's good....[[AUDITS]] THIS MOFO OUT. and any die-hard fans out there, feel free to email and chat sometime. Midgetorgy....I can be found at YAHOO. --------------------------------------------- Result 513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was made by a bunch of white guys that went to school together. Well there's nothing wrong with that, except it looks like it was made by a bunch of white guys that went to school together. 90 percent of the cast are white males about same age. It's almost like watching a bunch of guys at boys camp who turned the camera on themselves. The movie has no plot. It simply repeats the same action of blood bath after blood bath. There are some funny scenes and comedic bits. But they don't redeem the flat monotony.

The graphic cartoon scenes are used to cover the stuff that was obviously beyond their budget or resources to do, and not done very well at that. Anything that can't be done with white guys running around on the beach covered in blood is done with cheap animation.

I went to see this film after seeing the trailer, which makes it look like a Tarrentino piece. Well, the trailer scenes are as good as they ever get. Ther rest of it just repeats the same kind of mundane, inane comedy. It works at times, but it gets boring after the same stuff comes at you over and over. It's more like a string of Satuday Night Live skits than a movie. It's a hit-you-over-the-head-with-it kind of comedy. I can see where the story idea is intriguing. But, in this film post apocalyptic America is much like Medevil England. In fact Wheatlry says the story ideas came from that era. He plans to make a Part 2. I guess he thinks he's Tarrentino or maybe doing a parody thing.

At the opening in LA, Wheatley mentioned he will bring back pretty much the same cast in part 2. He was asked if he might consider a more diverse cast in the next one, to which he replied, well yea, sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] FORGET CREDIBILITY

You must not [[expect]] credibility with [[action]] [[movies]] where the [[superhero]] has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but [[recovering]] at lightning speed, and transforming [[innocuous]] gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.

"CLIFFHANGER " is no [[exception]]. But the movie has [[numerous]] [[assets]] : [[breathtaking]] scenery gorgeously photographed, [[stunning]] [[special]] and visual effects ( the first five [[minutes]] are gripping and give the tone of the film ), [[excellent]] musical score, welcome [[attempts]] at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a [[solid]] cast : two heroes ( Stallone, [[star]] and cowriter, has the lion's [[share]] of the footage, but the [[excellent]] Michael [[Rooker]] more than [[stands]] his [[ground]] ), a [[charming]] heroin ( Janine [[Turner]] ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless [[John]] Lithgow and deceivingly feminine [[Caroline]] Goodall, but [[also]] Rex Linn - in a longer than [[usual]] [[part]] and who makes the most of it, [[Leon]], Craig Fairbrass ) [[Good]], solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert [[wrote]] ( about another [[film]] )"It's the [[kind]] of [[movie]] you can [[sit]] back and enjoy as long as you don't [[make]] the [[mistake]] of thinking too much."

FORGET CREDIBILITY

You must not [[waits]] credibility with [[activity]] [[theater]] where the [[hero]] has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but [[retrieved]] at lightning speed, and transforming [[harmless]] gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.

"CLIFFHANGER " is no [[immunities]]. But the movie has [[several]] [[possessions]] : [[exciting]] scenery gorgeously photographed, [[breathtaking]] [[specific]] and visual effects ( the first five [[mins]] are gripping and give the tone of the film ), [[wondrous]] musical score, welcome [[strives]] at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a [[solids]] cast : two heroes ( Stallone, [[superstar]] and cowriter, has the lion's [[exchanging]] of the footage, but the [[super]] Michael [[Brooker]] more than [[standing]] his [[overland]] ), a [[ravishing]] heroin ( Janine [[Latour]] ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless [[Giovanni]] Lithgow and deceivingly feminine [[Carolyn]] Goodall, but [[apart]] Rex Linn - in a longer than [[routine]] [[parte]] and who makes the most of it, [[Lyon]], Craig Fairbrass ) [[Well]], solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert [[written]] ( about another [[movie]] )"It's the [[genre]] of [[films]] you can [[assis]] back and enjoy as long as you don't [[deliver]] the [[wrong]] of thinking too much."

--------------------------------------------- Result 515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Whatever his name is (the writer and director) should be locked away in hopes garbage like this is never made again. This one is in a battle with some of the most awful movies of all time. Sometimes movies are bad in a way that they're actually sort of good. Not this one. This was so bad I got angry. Seriously. A drunken 10 year old could have come up with a better script. What a waste. ALL the actors were completely uninspired to work at all, the CGI was barely acceptable, the sequences of scenes were completely retarded and hurt the little bit of story there was, it's like he just decided, "I want this to happen and this to happen, but I don't care how we got there, just shoot it and put it in. Whatever, I'm going back to my trailer to pick my nose, if anyone calls for me, I'm not here." Shame on you whatever your name is. Shame on you. --------------------------------------------- Result 516 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] There was [[something]] here with the female [[lead]] having this perfect life she's [[always]] [[wanted]] after the [[worst]] [[life]] possible, [[beginning]] as a child prostitute and winding up with Eric [[Roberts]]. But her background makes it impossible for her to [[trust]] Dean Cain and this utterly [[destroys]] it in the end. It sounds [[weird]], but I [[like]] the position Dean Cain was in at the end and the choice he [[made]]. He can't hurt her because he loves her and she's the mother of his child (I think the time [[frame]] makes it clear it's his [[child]] and not his brother's), but at the same he can't forgive her for all she's [[done]], sleeping with his brother (which shows the love and obligation he felt was [[pretty]] much one [[way]]) and then being [[part]] of his [[death]]. In better hands this [[would]] have been a better [[movie]], but for something I caught on late [[night]] [[cable]], it's not bad. There was [[somethings]] here with the female [[culminate]] having this perfect life she's [[permanently]] [[wanting]] after the [[hardest]] [[lifetime]] possible, [[initiates]] as a child prostitute and winding up with Eric [[Stevens]]. But her background makes it impossible for her to [[trusting]] Dean Cain and this utterly [[obliterating]] it in the end. It sounds [[bizarre]], but I [[fond]] the position Dean Cain was in at the end and the choice he [[accomplished]]. He can't hurt her because he loves her and she's the mother of his child (I think the time [[framework]] makes it clear it's his [[enfant]] and not his brother's), but at the same he can't forgive her for all she's [[played]], sleeping with his brother (which shows the love and obligation he felt was [[belle]] much one [[pathway]]) and then being [[party]] of his [[deaths]]. In better hands this [[should]] have been a better [[filmmaking]], but for something I caught on late [[overnight]] [[wire]], it's not bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "[[Land]] of Plenty" is not a [[film]]. It is a [[tombstone]] for the directorial career of German [[Director]] Wim Wenders.

Many felt it in "The [[Million]] Dollar Hotel" and now "Land of Plenty" makes it [[perfectly]] [[clear]]; not only has Wenders lost it, he's [[actually]] turned into a BAD director, creating [[horribly]] [[weak]] and superficial [[stories]] and scenes.

One might argue that the "time you lose it" comes for every director, but Wenders' case is extreme. It's as if he completely forget everything he [[knew]] about [[cinema]] and started all over again - only to get sloppish [[results]].

[[In]] a few [[words]], this [[film]] does not [[deserve]] your [[time]]. "[[Overland]] of Plenty" is not a [[filmmaking]]. It is a [[gravestone]] for the directorial career of German [[Superintendent]] Wim Wenders.

Many felt it in "The [[Zillion]] Dollar Hotel" and now "Land of Plenty" makes it [[altogether]] [[unmistakable]]; not only has Wenders lost it, he's [[indeed]] turned into a BAD director, creating [[awfully]] [[tenuous]] and superficial [[history]] and scenes.

One might argue that the "time you lose it" comes for every director, but Wenders' case is extreme. It's as if he completely forget everything he [[overheard]] about [[filmmaking]] and started all over again - only to get sloppish [[result]].

[[During]] a few [[phrase]], this [[filmmaking]] does not [[merited]] your [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 518 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This quasi J-horror film followed a young [[woman]] as she returns to her childhood village on the [[island]] of Shikoku to [[sell]] the [[family]] [[house]] and meet up with [[old]] [[friends]]. She finds that one, the [[daughter]] of the [[village]] [[priestess]], [[drowned]] [[several]] [[years]] [[earlier]]. She and Fumiko (another [[childhood]] friend) then [[learn]] that Sayori's [[mother]] is trying to [[bring]] her back to [[life]] with black magic. Already the bonds between the dead and [[living]] are [[getting]] [[weak]] and the [[friends]] and villagers are seeing [[ghosts]]. [[Nothing]] was exceptional or even very [[good]] about this [[movie]]. Unlike stellar J-horror films, the suspense doesn't really build, the result doesn't seem overly threatening and the ending borders on the absurd.

This movie is like plain white rice cooked a little too long so that it is bordering on mushy. Sometimes you get this at poor Asian restaurants or cook your own white rice a little too long. You end up eating it, because you need it with the meal, because what is Chinese or Japanese food without rice, but it almost ruins the meal because of the gluey, gooey tastelessness of it all. 3/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies This quasi J-horror film followed a young [[girl]] as she returns to her childhood village on the [[isla]] of Shikoku to [[sold]] the [[families]] [[households]] and meet up with [[former]] [[friendships]]. She finds that one, the [[maid]] of the [[villages]] [[shaman]], [[drowning]] [[various]] [[ages]] [[formerly]]. She and Fumiko (another [[children]] friend) then [[learning]] that Sayori's [[mama]] is trying to [[brings]] her back to [[lives]] with black magic. Already the bonds between the dead and [[life]] are [[obtain]] [[vulnerable]] and the [[friendships]] and villagers are seeing [[phantoms]]. [[Nada]] was exceptional or even very [[buena]] about this [[filmmaking]]. Unlike stellar J-horror films, the suspense doesn't really build, the result doesn't seem overly threatening and the ending borders on the absurd.

This movie is like plain white rice cooked a little too long so that it is bordering on mushy. Sometimes you get this at poor Asian restaurants or cook your own white rice a little too long. You end up eating it, because you need it with the meal, because what is Chinese or Japanese food without rice, but it almost ruins the meal because of the gluey, gooey tastelessness of it all. 3/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies --------------------------------------------- Result 519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] And how many [[actors]] can he get to stand in for his own neurotic, compulsive uber-New Yorker [[persona]]? [[In]] this [[film]] Woody is [[played]] by [[Will]] Ferrell in what is mercifully [[less]] a direct [[impersonation]] than the one Kenneth Branagh did in "[[Celebrity]]." It's an annoyingly [[repetitive]] story now: nebbishy, neurotic man with a wife or girlfriend falls madly in love with a shiksa queen upon which he projects all manner of perfection. Everyone lives in perfect gigantic apartments in great Manhattan neighborhoods, everyone constantly patronizes expensive, exclusive restaurants during which all the characters relate fascinating anecdotes and discuss arcane philosophy, there is always a trip to the Hamptons during which the nebbishy main character spazzes out about sand and physical exertion and possible exposure to diseases, and then of course, said main character feels guilty about his lust for the shiksa queen but pursues her anyway, sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing, etc.

This a [[tired]] formula, and [[proof]] that Allen isn't really a [[great]] film [[artist]] at all. He just seems like a dirty old man with the libido and emotions of a 20-year-old who is intent upon [[telling]] the same boring old [[stories]] again and again. And how many [[protagonists]] can he get to stand in for his own neurotic, compulsive uber-New Yorker [[personality]]? [[For]] this [[filmmaking]] Woody is [[effected]] by [[Willingness]] Ferrell in what is mercifully [[minimum]] a direct [[mimicry]] than the one Kenneth Branagh did in "[[Famous]]." It's an annoyingly [[repetitious]] story now: nebbishy, neurotic man with a wife or girlfriend falls madly in love with a shiksa queen upon which he projects all manner of perfection. Everyone lives in perfect gigantic apartments in great Manhattan neighborhoods, everyone constantly patronizes expensive, exclusive restaurants during which all the characters relate fascinating anecdotes and discuss arcane philosophy, there is always a trip to the Hamptons during which the nebbishy main character spazzes out about sand and physical exertion and possible exposure to diseases, and then of course, said main character feels guilty about his lust for the shiksa queen but pursues her anyway, sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing, etc.

This a [[jaded]] formula, and [[test]] that Allen isn't really a [[prodigious]] film [[entertainers]] at all. He just seems like a dirty old man with the libido and emotions of a 20-year-old who is intent upon [[eloquent]] the same boring old [[history]] again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Lion King 1 1/2 is a very fun and addictive sequel. Don't expect the production values of a theatrical release, but do expect the highest quality of direct to video release.

It is set up as Timon & Pumba begin watching the original Lion King in a darkened theater and abruptly switch tracks and begin narrating their own story. This is done with frequent comedic interruptions. For example, during one particular tense moment a home shopping commercial pops on and a chagrined Pumba realizes he has sat on the remote. These little moments pepper the movie, and whether you find them entertaining or not will greatly depend on your sense of humor. If you are particularly bothered by movies that deliberately remind the viewer is watching a movie, than this may not be your cup of tea.

Animation is the best they've invested in the Disney DTV line, and is integrated almost seamlessly with the original material. The newer, independent material uses a lot of the artistic style of the original. The voice talents are all well performed, though I couldn't help thinking of Marge Simpson every time I heard Julie Kavner.

Many of the jokes in the movie will be well recognized by viewers as recycled over the generations, but are presented more with the familiarity of comfortable quirks of old friends than annoyingly repetitive.

The music has made me realize how much I enjoyed and miss a good musical integrated with a Disney feature. The toe-tapping opening feature of 'Dig A Tunnel' is well choreographed and hilarious. Timon and Pumba's take on the Lion King's opening sequence and their introduction to paradise are also amusing. The only problem was the reprise of the 'Dig A Tunnel' at the end of the movie, switching its lyrics and tune from defeatist to uplifting.

Story line is pretty well done, and the integration of new plot elements is done almost perfectly, though the final bit during the hyena chased stretched the storyline credibility a little. The new story doesn't seem to handle saccharine or emotionally charged moments to well, and does better when it is resorting to full comedy.

Overall, worth purchasing. If you like all the bonus features that come with a typical 2-disc set, then go for it. For the penny pincher who still is willing to invest on a good flick, wait until it drops four or more dollars and go rent it right away.

Damion Crowley. --------------------------------------------- Result 521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The word 'classic' is thrown around too loosely nowadays, but this movie well deserves the appelation. The combination of Neil Simon, Walter Matthau (possibly the world's best living comic actor), and the late lamented George Burns make for a comic masterpiece. It is interesting to contemplate what the movie would have been like had not death prevented Jack Benny from playing George Burns' part, as had been planned. As it is, the reunion scene in Matthau's apartment is not likely to be surpassed as a sidesplitter. Definitely one of my desert island films.

"Enter!!!!!!!!!" --------------------------------------------- Result 522 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] A [[man]] and his [[wife]] get in a [[horrible]] [[car]] [[accident]]. [[When]] the wife is left in a [[persistent]] vegetative state, the man [[must]] [[choose]] between pulling the plug and [[letting]] her live. The [[decision]] is made even harder when he [[realizes]] her ghost wants to [[extract]] revenge on him and those [[around]] him.

This [[comes]] to us from [[director]] Rob Schmidt, who [[made]] "[[Wrong]] Turn" (a [[film]] I have not [[seen]]). With only one horror [[film]] under his [[belt]], and not a particularly notorious one at that, I was a bit [[reluctant]] to watch this episode, [[expecting]] Schmidt to be a "[[Master]] of [[Horror]]" in only the most liberal [[sense]]. My [[apologies]] to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the [[best]] one [[yet]].

The issue of the "right to die" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from "decent" to "spectacular". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme [[abundance]]! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of "Hellraiser" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of "Hellraiser 2". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than "Hellraiser 2".

Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a [[second]] [[time]], but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.

While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the "Washingtonians" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3! A [[guy]] and his [[woman]] get in a [[scary]] [[motors]] [[casualty]]. [[Whenever]] the wife is left in a [[ongoing]] vegetative state, the man [[ought]] [[selected]] between pulling the plug and [[allowing]] her live. The [[decisions]] is made even harder when he [[recognizes]] her ghost wants to [[extracts]] revenge on him and those [[about]] him.

This [[occurs]] to us from [[superintendent]] Rob Schmidt, who [[accomplished]] "[[Incorrectly]] Turn" (a [[movies]] I have not [[noticed]]). With only one horror [[cinema]] under his [[strap]], and not a particularly notorious one at that, I was a bit [[loath]] to watch this episode, [[waiting]] Schmidt to be a "[[Maitre]] of [[Terror]]" in only the most liberal [[sensing]]. My [[sorry]] to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the [[nicest]] one [[however]].

The issue of the "right to die" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from "decent" to "spectacular". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme [[profusion]]! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of "Hellraiser" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of "Hellraiser 2". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than "Hellraiser 2".

Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a [[secondly]] [[moment]], but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.

While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the "Washingtonians" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3! --------------------------------------------- Result 523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Steve Carell once again stars in a [[light]] romantic movie about [[choices]], family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the movie I was [[expecting]] a flat-out comedy, [[lots]] of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I [[guess]] I was wrong. [[Sure]] the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a [[light]] Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a [[great]] performance. The movie itself really tackles [[true]] [[observations]] and that was a strong [[element]] I [[found]]. But, the [[ending]] [[felt]] a [[little]] [[bit]] rushed and [[predictable]]. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was great and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very [[important]]. Though, it [[came]] down to [[old]], flat and predictable [[ending]]. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. [[Still]] a fun movie. Steve Carell once again stars in a [[lighting]] romantic movie about [[picks]], family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the movie I was [[expect]] a flat-out comedy, [[batch]] of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I [[imagine]] I was wrong. [[Convinced]] the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a [[lighting]] Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a [[wondrous]] performance. The movie itself really tackles [[real]] [[sightings]] and that was a strong [[ingredients]] I [[unearthed]]. But, the [[ended]] [[smelled]] a [[kiddo]] [[bite]] rushed and [[foreseeable]]. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was great and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very [[sizable]]. Though, it [[arrived]] down to [[former]], flat and predictable [[ended]]. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. [[However]] a fun movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Although]] I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in [[France]] [[lately]] and [[came]] across this bizarre gem of a film.

This [[movie]] was amazing, to say the least. A creative and [[unique]] film, the [[different]] directors each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to [[attempt]] to [[fit]] each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, [[however]], [[renders]] the magic of each individual segment [[obsolete]]. When [[taken]] at [[face]] [[value]], with each of the short segments taken as its own individual film, the love stories [[together]] tell a [[beautiful]] [[message]].

The film is strikingly bizarre at [[times]] -- [[often]] to the point of [[confusion]] -- and each individual segment can be [[hard]] to follow. Still, to a watcher who [[pays]] close attention to each of the segments, the short plot lines [[become]] clear after a short time. The [[confusion]] is [[almost]] [[intriguing]]; it keeps you on the edge of your [[seat]] waiting for what will come next. It leaves the [[viewer]] [[wondering]] "[[Did]] that [[really]] just happen?" [[yet]] [[also]] [[leaves]] them [[satisfied]] that it did, indeed, occur. It's the kind of movie where the viewer, [[upon]] leaving the [[theater]], can't actually [[decide]] whether they [[loved]] it or they [[hated]] it. The initial [[reaction]] is to [[go]] and watch it again and again, just to [[see]] these individual [[lives]] [[blend]] together into a [[cinematic]] masterpiece.

The interesting decision to make the [[movie]] multilingual [[adds]] [[something]] to the [[spectrum]] of people who can [[relate]]. It [[adds]] to the reality of the [[film]] -- here, the American [[tourists]] [[speak]] English, the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the [[film]] encompasses leads to an [[understanding]] of the [[international]] [[language]] of [[love]].

From sickness to the supernatural, the [[love]] of parents to the [[love]] of husbands, this [[film]] [[covers]] all the [[bases]] of romantic [[storytelling]]. [[In]] its [[beautiful]] and [[quirky]] [[way]], each [[unique]] [[event]] somehow [[falls]] into place to [[tell]] a story: that of all [[types]], sizes, nationalities, and [[shapes]] of love. [[Despite]] I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in [[Francia]] [[newly]] and [[became]] across this bizarre gem of a film.

This [[cinematic]] was amazing, to say the least. A creative and [[sole]] film, the [[assorted]] directors each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to [[trying]] to [[fitted]] each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, [[yet]], [[emits]] the magic of each individual segment [[rancid]]. When [[took]] at [[confronts]] [[values]], with each of the short segments taken as its own individual film, the love stories [[jointly]] tell a [[brilliant]] [[messages]].

The film is strikingly bizarre at [[time]] -- [[generally]] to the point of [[muddle]] -- and each individual segment can be [[harsh]] to follow. Still, to a watcher who [[paid]] close attention to each of the segments, the short plot lines [[becoming]] clear after a short time. The [[mess]] is [[hardly]] [[thrilling]]; it keeps you on the edge of your [[seats]] waiting for what will come next. It leaves the [[onlooker]] [[ask]] "[[Got]] that [[genuinely]] just happen?" [[again]] [[furthermore]] [[sheets]] them [[persuaded]] that it did, indeed, occur. It's the kind of movie where the viewer, [[after]] leaving the [[drama]], can't actually [[deciding]] whether they [[enjoyed]] it or they [[hates]] it. The initial [[answered]] is to [[going]] and watch it again and again, just to [[seeing]] these individual [[life]] [[amalgam]] together into a [[films]] masterpiece.

The interesting decision to make the [[cinema]] multilingual [[adding]] [[anything]] to the [[spectral]] of people who can [[pertaining]]. It [[adding]] to the reality of the [[cinematography]] -- here, the American [[passengers]] [[talking]] English, the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the [[kino]] encompasses leads to an [[comprehend]] of the [[globally]] [[linguistic]] of [[loves]].

From sickness to the supernatural, the [[loves]] of parents to the [[loves]] of husbands, this [[cinema]] [[cover]] all the [[basis]] of romantic [[narration]]. [[Across]] its [[belle]] and [[lunatic]] [[pathway]], each [[sole]] [[incident]] somehow [[slumps]] into place to [[say]] a story: that of all [[kinds]], sizes, nationalities, and [[ways]] of love. --------------------------------------------- Result 525 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] ...though for a film that seems to be trying to market itself as a horror, there was a distinct lack of blood.

There was also a distinct [[lack]] of skilled directing, acting, editing, and script-writing.

Jeremy London put in one of most [[appalling]] performances I've ever seen - his "descent into the maelström" of madness is achingly self-aware and [[clumsy]]. Oh look at him twitch! Oh look at him drink strong spirits! Oh look at him raise his brow, and cock his head at a jaunty angle! Oh look at his unwashed, greasy dark hair! Oh listen to his affectedly husky voice! He must be a tortured artist/writer/genius! Oh, yes, out comes the poet-shirt - it's another boy who thinks he's Byron. (Or Poe.) Oh for the love of... did someone give this guy a manual on "How To Act Good" or did they just pull him out of a cardboard box somewhere, the defunct little plastic toy-prize in a discontinued brand of bargain-bin cereal. Okay, that was a stupid line - but that's only because London's performance has melted my brain with its awfulness.

Katherine Heigl is cute, and very briar rose, but has yet to grow into her acting shoes in this film - she delivered her lines like she was being held up, in fact, her whole performance was very [[wooden]], her poses as stiff as her lines - who knows, perhaps she was just reacting to, and trying to neutralise, Jeremy London's flailing excesses, but if that's the case, she takes it too far.

Notable is Arie Verveen as Poe - while his character's role is confused, he delivers the best performance of the piece. He, quite simply, looks right, but it's more than that - he has some sort of depth, I believed that he had a life beyond the dismal two-dimensional quality of the rest of the characters. Huh, maybe it's just because I like Poe, and could thus just let my mind wander and invent while he was on screen - whatever, he had an interest factor otherwise missing.

The rest of the characters are a faceless blur - there are all the usual caricatures: the perky blonde best-friend who's a bit of a floozy; the smitten local cop who's a bit of a dork; the protective older man who perhaps has too much un-fatherly interest in our heroine; the scheming old witch, etc., etc., yawn, yawn.

As with the 'distinct lack of blood for a horror movie' issue, none of the themes that they mention (and that London's character mentions - so scathingly - in his attack on Poe's writing) are followed through on. As another reviewer said - there was potential here: murder, incest, - genuinely shocking stuff, but instead they skirt away from the issues, and cut away from the violence (a raised candlestick swinging through the air - closing in on it's victim - then---cut to black! This is fine in a Noirish traditional horror, indeed, it's expected, and is fondly received when it happens - it's a dear convention, especially when accompanied by fake lightning bolts and intense Siouxie eye makeup - but in 'Descendant' it just comes across as clumsy, or as though the editor got queasy at the last minute and cut it out.) This could have either been a very tense psychological thriller - the horror of palingenesis/delusion/madness - or a simple (and fun) slasher movie: it tries to be both, or neither (something new and exciting!), but either way it fails dismally. The only horror element of this entire movie is it's epic dullness.

I think the editor (if there was one at all) must have been drunk when s/he chopped this thing up - there are awkwardly foreshortened scenes; scenes that appeared to be out of order (but that could have just been the poor script). LIkewise the director & cinematographer - there were some very strange shots and framing that I think were meant to be tributes to Hitchcock or Browning, but just ended up looking silly (again, fine in a noir, but this was trying to be something else.)

The whole thing perhaps may have been funny (in that way that previous reviewers have mentioned - "OMG how did this get made?!?") if I had been in the mood for some trash- bagging, unfortunately for me I had settled on the couch, with the lights down low, with the express intention of scaring myself silly - this is a very poor film, and I'm afraid I can't recommend it to people, not even for laughs.

Please, please, don't waste your time or money on this - either borrow a real horror/thriller film, or find yourself a copy of Poe's fantastical tales, either way, you'll have a far more enjoyable and frightening night than you could ever hope to achieve with this rubbish. ...though for a film that seems to be trying to market itself as a horror, there was a distinct lack of blood.

There was also a distinct [[shortfall]] of skilled directing, acting, editing, and script-writing.

Jeremy London put in one of most [[alarming]] performances I've ever seen - his "descent into the maelström" of madness is achingly self-aware and [[cumbersome]]. Oh look at him twitch! Oh look at him drink strong spirits! Oh look at him raise his brow, and cock his head at a jaunty angle! Oh look at his unwashed, greasy dark hair! Oh listen to his affectedly husky voice! He must be a tortured artist/writer/genius! Oh, yes, out comes the poet-shirt - it's another boy who thinks he's Byron. (Or Poe.) Oh for the love of... did someone give this guy a manual on "How To Act Good" or did they just pull him out of a cardboard box somewhere, the defunct little plastic toy-prize in a discontinued brand of bargain-bin cereal. Okay, that was a stupid line - but that's only because London's performance has melted my brain with its awfulness.

Katherine Heigl is cute, and very briar rose, but has yet to grow into her acting shoes in this film - she delivered her lines like she was being held up, in fact, her whole performance was very [[wood]], her poses as stiff as her lines - who knows, perhaps she was just reacting to, and trying to neutralise, Jeremy London's flailing excesses, but if that's the case, she takes it too far.

Notable is Arie Verveen as Poe - while his character's role is confused, he delivers the best performance of the piece. He, quite simply, looks right, but it's more than that - he has some sort of depth, I believed that he had a life beyond the dismal two-dimensional quality of the rest of the characters. Huh, maybe it's just because I like Poe, and could thus just let my mind wander and invent while he was on screen - whatever, he had an interest factor otherwise missing.

The rest of the characters are a faceless blur - there are all the usual caricatures: the perky blonde best-friend who's a bit of a floozy; the smitten local cop who's a bit of a dork; the protective older man who perhaps has too much un-fatherly interest in our heroine; the scheming old witch, etc., etc., yawn, yawn.

As with the 'distinct lack of blood for a horror movie' issue, none of the themes that they mention (and that London's character mentions - so scathingly - in his attack on Poe's writing) are followed through on. As another reviewer said - there was potential here: murder, incest, - genuinely shocking stuff, but instead they skirt away from the issues, and cut away from the violence (a raised candlestick swinging through the air - closing in on it's victim - then---cut to black! This is fine in a Noirish traditional horror, indeed, it's expected, and is fondly received when it happens - it's a dear convention, especially when accompanied by fake lightning bolts and intense Siouxie eye makeup - but in 'Descendant' it just comes across as clumsy, or as though the editor got queasy at the last minute and cut it out.) This could have either been a very tense psychological thriller - the horror of palingenesis/delusion/madness - or a simple (and fun) slasher movie: it tries to be both, or neither (something new and exciting!), but either way it fails dismally. The only horror element of this entire movie is it's epic dullness.

I think the editor (if there was one at all) must have been drunk when s/he chopped this thing up - there are awkwardly foreshortened scenes; scenes that appeared to be out of order (but that could have just been the poor script). LIkewise the director & cinematographer - there were some very strange shots and framing that I think were meant to be tributes to Hitchcock or Browning, but just ended up looking silly (again, fine in a noir, but this was trying to be something else.)

The whole thing perhaps may have been funny (in that way that previous reviewers have mentioned - "OMG how did this get made?!?") if I had been in the mood for some trash- bagging, unfortunately for me I had settled on the couch, with the lights down low, with the express intention of scaring myself silly - this is a very poor film, and I'm afraid I can't recommend it to people, not even for laughs.

Please, please, don't waste your time or money on this - either borrow a real horror/thriller film, or find yourself a copy of Poe's fantastical tales, either way, you'll have a far more enjoyable and frightening night than you could ever hope to achieve with this rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] The [[Comeback]] starts off looking promising, with a [[brutal]] [[death]] scene by a mask [[wearing]] killer. The mask itself is pretty cool too, and [[looks]] [[almost]] identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher [[film]] "Granny". From then on the film is [[mostly]] boring. We get a few more [[deaths]], which again are good, but there's not enough of them. The [[reason]] the [[deaths]] are so [[good]] is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story behind the [[film]] is [[actually]] [[rather]] interesting and [[would]] have [[worked]] very well had it not been so boring for the most [[part]].

I [[would]] [[avoid]] this [[unless]] you're a die-hard collector - there's not [[enough]] here to [[even]] make it an average slasher flick. The [[Reverted]] starts off looking promising, with a [[cruel]] [[die]] scene by a mask [[wears]] killer. The mask itself is pretty cool too, and [[seems]] [[around]] identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher [[cinema]] "Granny". From then on the film is [[basically]] boring. We get a few more [[dies]], which again are good, but there's not enough of them. The [[reasons]] the [[decease]] are so [[alright]] is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story behind the [[filmmaking]] is [[genuinely]] [[quite]] interesting and [[could]] have [[cooperating]] very well had it not been so boring for the most [[portions]].

I [[should]] [[preventing]] this [[if]] you're a die-hard collector - there's not [[sufficiently]] here to [[yet]] make it an average slasher flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie was exactly what I [[expected]] it to be when i first read the [[casting]]. I probably [[could]] have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a [[pack]] of Howler Monkeys. [[Alberto]] Tomba was [[surely]] a [[good]] skier but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his [[actor]] skills to earn his living. He can't [[play]], he can't [[talk]], he can't [[even]] move very good on mainland without his skis... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty [[blonde]] girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in [[dramatic]] roles but most probably for her nice legs. [[Nevertheless]] I must admit that she [[could]] be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's [[funny]], especially considering that she isn't [[italian]]. I laughed all the time, watching this [[movie]]. I [[found]] it so [[ridiculous]] and [[meaningless]] that it actually made me laugh, [[loud]], very [[loud]]. This movie was exactly what I [[scheduled]] it to be when i first read the [[pouring]]. I probably [[wo]] have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a [[packaging]] of Howler Monkeys. [[Albert]] Tomba was [[definitely]] a [[alright]] skier but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his [[protagonist]] skills to earn his living. He can't [[gaming]], he can't [[discussions]], he can't [[yet]] move very good on mainland without his skis... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty [[lager]] girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in [[phenomenal]] roles but most probably for her nice legs. [[Albeit]] I must admit that she [[wo]] be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's [[comical]], especially considering that she isn't [[ltalian]]. I laughed all the time, watching this [[filmmaking]]. I [[find]] it so [[absurd]] and [[senseless]] that it actually made me laugh, [[rowdy]], very [[vocal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just after I saw the movie, the true magic feeling of the Walt Disney movies came up in me and I realized me that it was a long time ago that I saw the 'real' magic in a movie.

The combination of the right music, speeches and magical effects brings the Disney feeling again into your body. Very special things I saw where the not-knowing effects in the movie, started with the disney logo transforming into the Cinderella castle and ended as an old-story telling fairytale with your grandparents.

The magic has returned in me. I rate this movie 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 529 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] WOW what can i say. I like shity movies and i go out of my way to watch a corny action flick, but Snake Eater i would have rather had a nail driven into my pee hole while my grandma gave me a lap dance .Lorenzo Lamas, [[pfft]] more like Lorenzo Lameass this [[guy]] has as much acting ability as Bill Clinton has self control. It has all the goods to make a [[really]] [[bad]] [[movie]] even [[worse]]. [[Crazed]] Hillbilles YEP! [[needless]] tit shot (with a real weird [[scar]]) YEP! [[crappy]] soundtrack YEP! I wish i [[could]] give the [[movie]] -10 stars but 1 is as low as it goes. [[Seriously]] i [[think]] [[someone]] was [[playing]] a [[joke]] on me when i [[saw]] this it cant be [[real]]...... the [[worse]] thing THERE IS 2MORE SNAKE EATER [[MOVIES]]!...... [[guess]] its in demand. WOW what can i say. I like shity movies and i go out of my way to watch a corny action flick, but Snake Eater i would have rather had a nail driven into my pee hole while my grandma gave me a lap dance .Lorenzo Lamas, [[pffft]] more like Lorenzo Lameass this [[buddy]] has as much acting ability as Bill Clinton has self control. It has all the goods to make a [[truthfully]] [[unfavourable]] [[kino]] even [[worst]]. [[Loca]] Hillbilles YEP! [[superfluous]] tit shot (with a real weird [[scarface]]) YEP! [[shite]] soundtrack YEP! I wish i [[did]] give the [[flick]] -10 stars but 1 is as low as it goes. [[Conscientiously]] i [[reckon]] [[everybody]] was [[play]] a [[jest]] on me when i [[observed]] this it cant be [[veritable]]...... the [[worst]] thing THERE IS 2MORE SNAKE EATER [[FILMMAKING]]!...... [[guessing]] its in demand. --------------------------------------------- Result 530 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first time I saw this movie, I fell in love with it. The atmosphere was what caught my attention first and foremost. I expected a gore fest, but instead got to watch a highly intelligent killer mess with my head to a chilling soundtrack (it's actually my ringer at the moment :P). The fact that I couldn't predict when he'd kill and when he'd disappear was a major plus in my book. Predictable horror movies bore me. Now, I know the storyline had some discrepancies, but, if you're like me, you don't even notice them until long after the movie's over and you're laying in bed mauling over the fact that you just witnessed a masterpiece in motion. Finally, as I mentioned, the soundtrack is timeless. It's one of my all time favorite theatrical scores, so I was very happy to hear that Rob Zombie is leaving it untouched in his remake. Speaking of the remake, I read a very comprehensive article on it and, now that I know that Mr. Zombie reveres John Carpenter, I have high hopes for his take on this classic. This movie is great for any time you have a craving for a spine tingling, but it's the perfect addition, opener, finale, you name it for an All Hallow's Eve movie marathon. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't think this is too bad of a show under the right conditions. I tolerated the [[first]] season.

[[Unfortunately]], this is a [[show]] about lawyers who aren't really lawyers. God [[forbid]] anybody [[actually]] go to law school based on these [[shows]], which I had heard was the [[case]] when I [[watched]] some [[interviews]] of the show. It just made me gag a bit.

That aside, Spader and Shatner, who are [[supposed]] to be the [[stars]] of the [[show]], are the most [[annoying]]. While this might be a [[compliment]] in some situations, it's [[certainly]] not here. Their [[constantly]] harassing the [[women]] on the [[show]] is [[funny]] at first. But since that's what they're doing literally all the time, I've [[realized]] that this is as [[deep]] as the show is [[going]] to [[get]]. [[Trying]] to intersperse some [[serious]], [[dramatic]], and [[even]] tear-jerking [[moments]] in the [[middle]] of this [[mockery]] of a [[real]] show [[fails]] to [[compensate]] for the [[progressive]] loss of interest I've been experiencing trying to [[enjoy]] the [[show]].

[[Alan]] Shore's flamboyant and [[gratuitous]] "public [[service]] announcements" where he spouts off his opinions do not impress. [[Denny]] Crane is just annoying. I was embarrassed for him and for the writers of the show for Crane's [[speech]] [[wearing]] a colonial [[outfit]].

I'm giving two stars because there are moments where I [[thought]] the show's [[attempts]] to [[deal]] with some contemporary issues were [[done]] with [[care]].

I think the show's writers [[became]] [[aware]] that the sexual [[harassment]] [[displayed]] by [[Denny]] and Alan was getting overbearing even to those who were more [[inviting]] of them from the [[start]]. The thing is, I don't [[care]] if the sexual [[harassment]] [[treatment]] in the show is [[done]] well, but I just felt that the writer was insulting me with artificially implanting sexual banters all over the show in the [[hopes]] that my libido will [[keep]] me coming back for more. I'm not a [[teenager]] [[anymore]], and I [[think]] this show is promising if its [[goal]] wasn't to [[cater]] to the [[lowest]] common denominator to [[get]] ratings.

Of course, I'm writing this after I [[realized]] that it's [[really]] not gonna get [[much]] [[better]] than this. It's a [[shame]] because it's one of those shows I'd [[love]] to love. I don't think this is too bad of a show under the right conditions. I tolerated the [[frst]] season.

[[Unluckily]], this is a [[exposition]] about lawyers who aren't really lawyers. God [[barred]] anybody [[genuinely]] go to law school based on these [[denotes]], which I had heard was the [[instances]] when I [[observed]] some [[discussion]] of the show. It just made me gag a bit.

That aside, Spader and Shatner, who are [[suspected]] to be the [[celebrity]] of the [[illustrating]], are the most [[exasperating]]. While this might be a [[commend]] in some situations, it's [[arguably]] not here. Their [[always]] harassing the [[female]] on the [[illustrating]] is [[hilarious]] at first. But since that's what they're doing literally all the time, I've [[performed]] that this is as [[profound]] as the show is [[gonna]] to [[gets]]. [[Attempt]] to intersperse some [[severe]], [[formidable]], and [[yet]] tear-jerking [[times]] in the [[mid]] of this [[parody]] of a [[true]] show [[fail]] to [[offset]] for the [[gradual]] loss of interest I've been experiencing trying to [[enjoying]] the [[illustrating]].

[[Alain]] Shore's flamboyant and [[baseless]] "public [[servicing]] announcements" where he spouts off his opinions do not impress. [[Dennis]] Crane is just annoying. I was embarrassed for him and for the writers of the show for Crane's [[discourse]] [[wears]] a colonial [[attire]].

I'm giving two stars because there are moments where I [[thoughts]] the show's [[try]] to [[treat]] with some contemporary issues were [[performed]] with [[healthcare]].

I think the show's writers [[was]] [[conscious]] that the sexual [[intimidation]] [[shown]] by [[Denis]] and Alan was getting overbearing even to those who were more [[invites]] of them from the [[induction]]. The thing is, I don't [[caring]] if the sexual [[stalking]] [[cure]] in the show is [[doing]] well, but I just felt that the writer was insulting me with artificially implanting sexual banters all over the show in the [[hope]] that my libido will [[maintain]] me coming back for more. I'm not a [[adolescence]] [[most]], and I [[reckon]] this show is promising if its [[objectives]] wasn't to [[satisfy]] to the [[weaker]] common denominator to [[gets]] ratings.

Of course, I'm writing this after I [[performed]] that it's [[truthfully]] not gonna get [[very]] [[optimum]] than this. It's a [[pity]] because it's one of those shows I'd [[adored]] to love. --------------------------------------------- Result 532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not only did they get the characters all wrong, not only do the voices suck, not only do the writers seriously need to get girlfriends, not only are the drawings really crude, but it seems like it was mainly created for ages 1-6. The only episode I've ever seen of this show that kept me watching, was "A Mattter Of Family", because I liked the Robin character. And sometimes I think it's just a general copy of Batman The Animated Series. Example: In BTAS, Bruce is friends with Harvey Dent, yeah? Over a two episode story, he transforms into the unlikely villain, TwoFace. In the "Show" Bruce is Friends with that Ethan guy, and over a two episode story, he Transforms into the unlikely villain ClayFace. That was just a small example (That may not even be true), but in short, this is the WORST attempt on a Batman series. And That's saying something. --------------------------------------------- Result 533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not only was this the most expensive Canadian film ever shot in BC, but easily the worst, never seeing the light of day. The director is not even Canadian, but British, and boy does it show. We are all made out to be a bunch of over-sexed dope fiends and morons. The spirit of what it means to be Canadian is absent, and this is supposed to be the reason we fund this bunk. Of course the British character is normal. The rest are a crop of sitcom stereotype - can you say "Norm!!"? The cinematography ranges from pretty postcard images to murky indoor silhouettes. The actors always seem to be fidgetting. Are they as bored as the viewer, or is this the directors idea of cinema? Avoid this mess and check out some of Bruce Mcdonalds films. A true Canadian boy with something original to say cinematically. You won't be compelled to walk out on HIS films after 10 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[romantic]] [[adventure]] must have seemed [[shockingly]] subversive in its day. A wealthy [[upper]] [[class]] [[English]] [[woman]] [[schemes]], plots and manipulates [[everyone]] [[around]] her for her own [[satisfaction]]. She [[uses]] her privileged position to [[embark]] on [[secret]] [[activities]] of a [[decidedly]] anti-social [[kind]]. There's a [[clever]] sex-role [[reversal]] as her [[activities]] [[prove]] her more [[daring]] and dashing than most of the [[male]] [[characters]]. But [[naturally]] there's a tall, [[dark]] and [[handsome]] [[stranger]] to keep up the [[love]] interest, and this [[wicked]] lady is not backward in [[coming]] forward when she meets the right man.

The wishy-washy [[weakness]] and gullibility of [[every]] other [[character]] make the plot [[unconvincing]] in the extreme, but those who [[thirst]] for [[Romance]] will [[overlook]] that. This [[sentimental]] [[fling]] must have seemed [[curiously]] subversive in its day. A wealthy [[superior]] [[classroom]] [[Frenchman]] [[daughters]] [[plans]], plots and manipulates [[someone]] [[throughout]] her for her own [[gratification]]. She [[utilized]] her privileged position to [[begins]] on [[undercover]] [[efforts]] of a [[strongly]] anti-social [[sorts]]. There's a [[skillful]] sex-role [[inversion]] as her [[action]] [[demonstrate]] her more [[temerity]] and dashing than most of the [[virile]] [[features]]. But [[evidently]] there's a tall, [[gloom]] and [[sumptuous]] [[alien]] to keep up the [[iike]] interest, and this [[evil]] lady is not backward in [[forthcoming]] forward when she meets the right man.

The wishy-washy [[defect]] and gullibility of [[each]] other [[personages]] make the plot [[inconclusive]] in the extreme, but those who [[craving]] for [[Romanticism]] will [[ignore]] that. --------------------------------------------- Result 535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This is by far one of the most [[boring]] and [[horribly]] acted accounts of the early days of [[Adolf]] [[Hitler]] that I have ever watched. Robert [[Carlyle]] is a [[wonderful]] [[actor]], but to cast him as Hitler is just [[plain]] wrong. To cast Liev Schrieber as Hitler's [[longtime]] friend and [[aid]], Haefengstal must have [[emitted]] [[cries]] of despair and anguish from the [[Simon]] Wiesenthal Centre. A J-W playing a Nazi supporter, [[bad]] bad bad [[casting]]. This was not an [[enjoyable]] [[family]] film with a [[good]] historical [[background]]. This was Hollywood rubbish at its finest, cashing in on the strength of a strong (but sorely under utilized) supporting cast of actors whom seemed to have all but disappeared from the acting radar in the past 5 years.

The fake German accents (vee vill vin zis var) is [[insulting]] to German people everywhere. My mother is German and she sat fuming at the sound of the voices which kept switching from American/English/German all in the same sentence. The supporting cast make better cardboard cutouts at the local video store than they do on screen. Jenna Malone as the fated Geli Raubal, was splendid [[though]], she captured the innocence and confusion of this tragic young woman who ultimately ended her own life to escape what her future would have been like in Hitler's shadow.

[[If]] you would like a tremendously [[fantastic]] and historically accurate account of Hitler's early years leading up to and including the war/holocaust, [[rent]] "Inside the Third Reich" 1983 starring Rutger Hauer as Albert Speer and Derek Jacobi as Hitler. It was good and made more sense then this [[baloney]].

As a [[historical]] [[researcher]] of the Third Reich I can [[honestly]] [[tell]] you, this had me [[reaching]] for my books to confirm its myriad of inaccuracies. This is by far one of the most [[dull]] and [[shockingly]] acted accounts of the early days of [[Rudolf]] [[Nazi]] that I have ever watched. Robert [[Carlisle]] is a [[sumptuous]] [[protagonist]], but to cast him as Hitler is just [[lowland]] wrong. To cast Liev Schrieber as Hitler's [[old]] friend and [[aids]], Haefengstal must have [[freed]] [[shouting]] of despair and anguish from the [[Simeon]] Wiesenthal Centre. A J-W playing a Nazi supporter, [[negative]] bad bad [[foundry]]. This was not an [[nice]] [[families]] film with a [[buena]] historical [[backdrop]]. This was Hollywood rubbish at its finest, cashing in on the strength of a strong (but sorely under utilized) supporting cast of actors whom seemed to have all but disappeared from the acting radar in the past 5 years.

The fake German accents (vee vill vin zis var) is [[demeaning]] to German people everywhere. My mother is German and she sat fuming at the sound of the voices which kept switching from American/English/German all in the same sentence. The supporting cast make better cardboard cutouts at the local video store than they do on screen. Jenna Malone as the fated Geli Raubal, was splendid [[despite]], she captured the innocence and confusion of this tragic young woman who ultimately ended her own life to escape what her future would have been like in Hitler's shadow.

[[Though]] you would like a tremendously [[sumptuous]] and historically accurate account of Hitler's early years leading up to and including the war/holocaust, [[lease]] "Inside the Third Reich" 1983 starring Rutger Hauer as Albert Speer and Derek Jacobi as Hitler. It was good and made more sense then this [[crock]].

As a [[historic]] [[searchers]] of the Third Reich I can [[genuinely]] [[say]] you, this had me [[achieve]] for my books to confirm its myriad of inaccuracies. --------------------------------------------- Result 536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] This is a [[baffling]] [[film]].

The beauty in sexual relations between [[men]] and [[women]] is [[shown]] [[degraded]] by a set of [[men]] and [[women]] who can only be [[described]] as a [[collection]] of [[oddballs]] and misfits.

Greenaway [[acknowledges]] his inspiration to Fellini's [[film]] "8 1/2" but [[whereas]] Fellini is a [[titan]] of world [[cinema]], Greenaway is not.

He has [[none]] of the maestro's lightness of touch nor his [[ability]] to [[convey]] [[feelings]] and [[emotions]] with a deftness of [[clarity]].

He is [[pretentious]], the [[film]] being [[divided]] into chapters with a written introduction to each, as if the viewer has to be guided into the film except that the [[written]] notices only [[stay]] on screen for a few seconds, not [[long]] enough to be read by the [[audience]] with the [[result]] that they are [[mostly]] [[ignored]].

As for the [[women]], only two can be [[described]] as lookers, Palmira, played by Polly Walker and Giaconda played by [[Natacha]] [[Amal]]. The rest ooze with ordinariness. Both the women and the [[men]] [[retreat]] from the [[harsh]] light of reality into the dim shades of fantasy.

Greenaway [[obviously]] [[wants]] to [[make]] the point that sexual [[fantasy]] does not lead to [[happiness]]. The women themselves are depressing [[since]] they render their services in exchange for [[money]]. [[Relations]] between [[men]] and [[women]] are debased into a [[commercial]] transaction.

There is no [[sense]] of joy or happiness or love in the film, indeed there are [[several]] scenes that are [[deeply]] [[unpleasant]] :

The [[suggestion]] of an incestuous [[relationship]] between [[father]] and son, [[Philip]] and [[Storey]] Emmental played respectively by [[John]] [[Standing]] and [[Matthew]] Delamere. The [[callous]] [[disregard]] of both [[men]] that Giaconda is [[carrying]] their [[child]], she in fact, [[gets]] [[pregnant]] [[twice]], the first [[foetus]] being [[aborted]] and the second [[time]], she is [[sent]] away to a [[destination]] [[chosen]] by the [[men]] from a flight [[book]]. Both [[men]] having sex with a [[woman]] who has no legs, (the half [[woman]] in the title). The beastiality that [[exists]] between Beryl, [[played]] by [[Amanda]] Plummer, with a [[pig]] named Hortense. [[Father]] and son [[sharing]] [[women]] between them. Women enjoying being beaten sexually. The father sleeping with the corpse of his dead wife.

Mercifully, none of these scenes are shown sexually, only hinted at.

The hinted degradation of women is such that there cannot be any wonder that the film was booed at when it was first premiered at Cannes. What is more extraordinary is that the actresses in the film lined up to defend it, showing yet again that there is no limit to the naivety of women and that women will fool themselves into being exploited by men.

Greenaway's directorial style is pretentious, it is a triumph of style over substance, a depiction of Film as Art accompanied by the abandonment of common sense.

Greenaway tries to attain the sublimity of surrealism but only succeeds in showing the banality of human relationships. This is a [[disconcerting]] [[filmmaking]].

The beauty in sexual relations between [[man]] and [[daughters]] is [[exhibited]] [[decayed]] by a set of [[males]] and [[daughters]] who can only be [[outlining]] as a [[collect]] of [[eccentrics]] and misfits.

Greenaway [[concedes]] his inspiration to Fellini's [[cinema]] "8 1/2" but [[whilst]] Fellini is a [[giant]] of world [[cine]], Greenaway is not.

He has [[nothing]] of the maestro's lightness of touch nor his [[capacity]] to [[transmit]] [[sensations]] and [[passions]] with a deftness of [[lucidity]].

He is [[cocky]], the [[movie]] being [[split]] into chapters with a written introduction to each, as if the viewer has to be guided into the film except that the [[wrote]] notices only [[remain]] on screen for a few seconds, not [[lange]] enough to be read by the [[viewers]] with the [[results]] that they are [[especially]] [[overlooked]].

As for the [[girl]], only two can be [[outlines]] as lookers, Palmira, played by Polly Walker and Giaconda played by [[Natascha]] [[Hope]]. The rest ooze with ordinariness. Both the women and the [[males]] [[retire]] from the [[stiff]] light of reality into the dim shades of fantasy.

Greenaway [[naturally]] [[wanting]] to [[deliver]] the point that sexual [[utopia]] does not lead to [[bonheur]]. The women themselves are depressing [[because]] they render their services in exchange for [[cash]]. [[Ties]] between [[males]] and [[female]] are debased into a [[commerce]] transaction.

There is no [[sensing]] of joy or happiness or love in the film, indeed there are [[many]] scenes that are [[radically]] [[disagreeable]] :

The [[suggestions]] of an incestuous [[relationships]] between [[fathers]] and son, [[Philips]] and [[Flooring]] Emmental played respectively by [[Johannes]] [[Stands]] and [[Mathieu]] Delamere. The [[unforgiving]] [[ignore]] of both [[males]] that Giaconda is [[transporting]] their [[kid]], she in fact, [[got]] [[expectant]] [[doubly]], the first [[fetus]] being [[foiled]] and the second [[period]], she is [[transmitted]] away to a [[fates]] [[elected]] by the [[males]] from a flight [[ledger]]. Both [[males]] having sex with a [[femme]] who has no legs, (the half [[female]] in the title). The beastiality that [[existed]] between Beryl, [[effected]] by [[Remy]] Plummer, with a [[pigs]] named Hortense. [[Pere]] and son [[shared]] [[mujer]] between them. Women enjoying being beaten sexually. The father sleeping with the corpse of his dead wife.

Mercifully, none of these scenes are shown sexually, only hinted at.

The hinted degradation of women is such that there cannot be any wonder that the film was booed at when it was first premiered at Cannes. What is more extraordinary is that the actresses in the film lined up to defend it, showing yet again that there is no limit to the naivety of women and that women will fool themselves into being exploited by men.

Greenaway's directorial style is pretentious, it is a triumph of style over substance, a depiction of Film as Art accompanied by the abandonment of common sense.

Greenaway tries to attain the sublimity of surrealism but only succeeds in showing the banality of human relationships. --------------------------------------------- Result 537 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] When a [[comedy]] movie boasts its [[marvelous]] soundtrack on the back [[cover]] you know your not dealing with a [[top]] notch movie. I rented this movie with [[friends]] expecting to get some [[chuckles]] but overall to get most of our laughs off each other making fun of the movie. We couldn't have [[chosen]] a worse movie.

The movie may have been alright with a few changes. First off, the comedy was [[painful]]. Physical gags were poorly [[performed]] and placed. The [[fat]] kid in the movie made us [[want]] to [[kill]] ourselves, bless him for [[trying]] scene in and scene out but he was like a puppy [[begging]] for [[love]]. [[If]] he had been [[pulled]] from the [[movie]] everything might have been bearable. There were some [[funny]] jokes, I believe one was when the [[group]] of [[boys]] steal one of the parent's porn [[movies]] and it [[turns]] out to be [[gay]] porn. But to [[best]] sum up the [[comedy]] I will [[simply]] tell the opening gag for the [[fat]] kid. He [[wears]] a [[puke]] [[stained]] shirt and [[talks]] about not knowing when [[something]] is [[done]].

To [[finish]] off, the editor of the [[movie]] [[could]] have [[saved]] the [[movie]] by [[removing]] the [[fat]] kid, [[cutting]] out 20 [[minutes]] of the school scenes and [[making]] an ending that is longer than [[thirty]] [[seconds]] of [[random]] [[bickering]].

[[OH]], BTW, there are two [[good]] [[elements]] that the [[movie]] [[possesses]]. Kadeem Hardison plays his role wonderfully and performs his jokes so that none are missed or under-appreciated. The other redeeming [[element]] to the [[movie]] is the [[beautiful]] [[Mrs]]. Ali Landry. Her [[character]] is [[ignored]] most of the [[movie]] which is a shame.

Don't waste your [[time]] [[even]] renting this one. It didn't [[appeal]] to me and I was [[part]] of the [[target]] audience (18 male). When a [[humor]] movie boasts its [[sumptuous]] soundtrack on the back [[covers]] you know your not dealing with a [[supreme]] notch movie. I rented this movie with [[freund]] expecting to get some [[giggles]] but overall to get most of our laughs off each other making fun of the movie. We couldn't have [[pick]] a worse movie.

The movie may have been alright with a few changes. First off, the comedy was [[hurtful]]. Physical gags were poorly [[achieved]] and placed. The [[greasy]] kid in the movie made us [[wanted]] to [[murder]] ourselves, bless him for [[tempting]] scene in and scene out but he was like a puppy [[beg]] for [[loves]]. [[Though]] he had been [[pulling]] from the [[films]] everything might have been bearable. There were some [[hilarious]] jokes, I believe one was when the [[groups]] of [[guys]] steal one of the parent's porn [[cinematography]] and it [[revolves]] out to be [[homosexual]] porn. But to [[finest]] sum up the [[humor]] I will [[exclusively]] tell the opening gag for the [[greasy]] kid. He [[wearing]] a [[barf]] [[coloured]] shirt and [[dialogue]] about not knowing when [[somethin]] is [[played]].

To [[completes]] off, the editor of the [[flick]] [[wo]] have [[rescue]] the [[flick]] by [[eliminate]] the [[fatty]] kid, [[chopped]] out 20 [[mins]] of the school scenes and [[doing]] an ending that is longer than [[thirtieth]] [[second]] of [[indiscriminate]] [[wrangling]].

[[AH]], BTW, there are two [[alright]] [[ingredient]] that the [[filmmaking]] [[owns]]. Kadeem Hardison plays his role wonderfully and performs his jokes so that none are missed or under-appreciated. The other redeeming [[components]] to the [[filmmaking]] is the [[sumptuous]] [[Dagmar]]. Ali Landry. Her [[characters]] is [[overlooked]] most of the [[filmmaking]] which is a shame.

Don't waste your [[period]] [[yet]] renting this one. It didn't [[appellate]] to me and I was [[parte]] of the [[purposes]] audience (18 male). --------------------------------------------- Result 538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After "Beau travail", everybody was waiting for Claire Denis to make a follow-up masterpiece that never arrived. Now it has. Denis makes a quantum leap in this film, an orgy of gorgeous cinematography, elliptical editing and willfully obscure narrative events that feels strange and acts even stranger. There's a nominal plot (derived partly from the Jean-Luc Nancy book of the same name) about a mature man in need of a heart transplant and who seeks a Tahitian son he abandoned long ago; but mostly it's an exploration of the idea of intrusions personal and cultural. It takes a couple of viewings to fully comprehend, and has pacing problems close to the end, but it's still more advanced and gripping than anything else I've seen this year. Miss it at your peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] [[Salvage]] is the [[worst]] so [[called]] horror film I've ever [[seen]]. There is nothing remotely [[horrific]] about it. It doesn't [[deserve]] to be in a genre so fine. [[First]] of all i don't see how so [[many]] people can [[think]] this piece of [[crap]] such a [[great]] [[movie]]. [[If]] I [[wrote]] something as boring and [[utterly]] ridiculous as this i would be [[laughed]] at and too embarrassed to subject others to the [[stupidity]] of it. Second: the acting is [[terrible]] and the lead [[actress]] is [[excruciatingly]] ugly. Third: the [[story]] sucks, its been [[used]] before, and the excuse that its a cheap movie is no [[excuse]]. Read the summery on the back of the [[case]], it [[reveals]] the [[whole]] [[story]]. I do not [[recommend]] that you watch this [[movie]] [[unless]] you have 80 [[minutes]] to waste on something that will [[leave]] you regretting that you [[watched]] it. I feel [[really]] [[bad]] for those [[Crooks]] and the irony of their [[name]]. All hail [[Anthony]] Perkins!!!!!!!!! [[Bailout]] is the [[meanest]] so [[drew]] horror film I've ever [[watched]]. There is nothing remotely [[spooky]] about it. It doesn't [[deserved]] to be in a genre so fine. [[Firstly]] of all i don't see how so [[countless]] people can [[believing]] this piece of [[shitty]] such a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Though]] I [[texted]] something as boring and [[totally]] ridiculous as this i would be [[giggled]] at and too embarrassed to subject others to the [[absurdity]] of it. Second: the acting is [[spooky]] and the lead [[actor]] is [[awfully]] ugly. Third: the [[tales]] sucks, its been [[using]] before, and the excuse that its a cheap movie is no [[apologies]]. Read the summery on the back of the [[example]], it [[unveils]] the [[overall]] [[storytelling]]. I do not [[recommendations]] that you watch this [[filmmaking]] [[if]] you have 80 [[mins]] to waste on something that will [[let]] you regretting that you [[seen]] it. I feel [[truthfully]] [[unfavourable]] for those [[Culprits]] and the irony of their [[names]]. All hail [[Antoni]] Perkins!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or [[absurdly]] loutish. Hysterical if [[viewed]] through the eyes of [[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theatre]] 3000, which I [[rate]] as a 10. I mean, the sight of this [[obese]], corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be [[enough]] to [[send]] you to the vomitory, if you [[make]] it that far into the [[film]]. This [[ugly]], hysterical farce should be placed with the [[likes]] of "Booty [[Call]]", "Pumpkinhead", "[[Swarm]]", and "The Smurfs [[Go]] To [[Bangladesh]]". A -gulp- [[film]] [[like]] this proves that sometimes actors, [[writers]], [[producers]], etc. [[get]] behind on their [[mortgage]], or [[get]] stoned to the point of [[insanity]]. It [[begs]] the [[question]] "who was so stupid to [[finance]] such a [[whale]]?" But then, had good [[judgment]] prevailed and "[[Final]] Justice" never was, then we wouldn't have the [[delightful]] spoof voice-over in "[[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theatre]] 3000"! Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or [[ridiculously]] loutish. Hysterical if [[visualized]] through the eyes of [[Puzzle]] [[Scientifically]] [[Theater]] 3000, which I [[rates]] as a 10. I mean, the sight of this [[feta]], corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be [[satisfactorily]] to [[consignment]] you to the vomitory, if you [[deliver]] it that far into the [[cinematographic]]. This [[ghastly]], hysterical farce should be placed with the [[adores]] of "Booty [[Calling]]", "Pumpkinhead", "[[Hive]]", and "The Smurfs [[Going]] To [[Bengal]]". A -gulp- [[filmmaking]] [[iike]] this proves that sometimes actors, [[authors]], [[growers]], etc. [[gets]] behind on their [[subprime]], or [[gets]] stoned to the point of [[craziness]]. It [[evokes]] the [[issue]] "who was so stupid to [[hacienda]] such a [[pyle]]?" But then, had good [[judgement]] prevailed and "[[Latter]] Justice" never was, then we wouldn't have the [[sumptuous]] spoof voice-over in "[[Conundrum]] [[Veda]] [[Teatro]] 3000"! --------------------------------------------- Result 541 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw his movie in [[Dallas]], Texas when it [[came]] out in 1986. I remember them giving out prizes for showing up to [[see]] the movie. After [[seeing]] the [[movie]] I can see why. The [[movie]] was not [[bad]], nor was it great. The problem with this movie was that it [[tried]] to tell a side story. They created a new story, new characters and tried to [[wrap]] it around the Masters Saga. My biggest [[complaint]] is that the plot is about a second wave of Robotech Masters attacking the Earth. They [[even]] [[used]] the same scenes from the [[Master]] [[Saga]] but with different dialogue. As a [[kid]], I [[loved]] the [[movie]]. But unfortunately I haven't [[seen]] it as an adult and can't give a better review. Looking back I was disappointed but now I would love to see the movie and re-evaluate my stance on it. That being said, will someone please release this movie for the whole world to judge? I [[love]] Robotech and can't [[wait]] for The [[Shadows]] Chronicles. I saw his movie in [[Wallace]], Texas when it [[became]] out in 1986. I remember them giving out prizes for showing up to [[behold]] the movie. After [[see]] the [[kino]] I can see why. The [[cinematographic]] was not [[unfavourable]], nor was it great. The problem with this movie was that it [[attempts]] to tell a side story. They created a new story, new characters and tried to [[adjusting]] it around the Masters Saga. My biggest [[grievance]] is that the plot is about a second wave of Robotech Masters attacking the Earth. They [[yet]] [[utilise]] the same scenes from the [[Maestro]] [[Historian]] but with different dialogue. As a [[petit]], I [[enjoyed]] the [[cinematography]]. But unfortunately I haven't [[watched]] it as an adult and can't give a better review. Looking back I was disappointed but now I would love to see the movie and re-evaluate my stance on it. That being said, will someone please release this movie for the whole world to judge? I [[amour]] Robotech and can't [[suspense]] for The [[Shade]] Chronicles. --------------------------------------------- Result 542 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The wife of a stage [[producer]] in London hopes to fix up the American song-and-dance man starring in her husband's latest show with an acquaintance, an American girl who makes her living modeling [[fashions]] in society circles. Unfortunately, the couple has already [[met]] on their own, with the girl thinking the guy is actually the show producer married to her friend (the fact he's not wearing a [[wedding]] [[ring]] should have discouraged any misunderstandings!). Wafty Fred Astaire-Ginger [[Rogers]] musical is eventually dragged back down to the [[earth]] by Dwight Taylor and Allan Scott's [[idiotic]] [[script]], which is full of [[juvenile]] [[behavior]]. [[Astaire]] and [[Rogers]] don't just '[[meet]] cute'--they meet [[ridiculously]] (he's tap-dancing like a madman in the hotel suite above hers and she [[complains]]). Audiences of 1935 [[probably]] didn't care how these two were going to get together--as long as they did so, and happily. Seen today, the central characters appear to have no motivation to end up in each other's arms: he plies her with [[flowers]] (after [[telling]] his friend he [[wants]] to remain "fancy free" in the [[love]] department) and she gives him the brush-off. Nothing that a [[little]] [[dancing]] couldn't [[cure]]! This glamorous twosome are as deliberately [[unreal]] as are the London and Venice settings, but we watch simply because the leads are Fred and Ginger. It's a fantasy for have-nots...ones who don't mind the dumbed-down plot. The musical moments do break up the monotony of the contrived scenario, yet fail to transcend the surrounding silliness. ** from **** The wife of a stage [[growers]] in London hopes to fix up the American song-and-dance man starring in her husband's latest show with an acquaintance, an American girl who makes her living modeling [[fads]] in society circles. Unfortunately, the couple has already [[fulfilled]] on their own, with the girl thinking the guy is actually the show producer married to her friend (the fact he's not wearing a [[weddings]] [[ringing]] should have discouraged any misunderstandings!). Wafty Fred Astaire-Ginger [[Rutgers]] musical is eventually dragged back down to the [[land]] by Dwight Taylor and Allan Scott's [[stupid]] [[scripts]], which is full of [[youthful]] [[demeanor]]. [[Esther]] and [[Rodgers]] don't just '[[satisfy]] cute'--they meet [[shockingly]] (he's tap-dancing like a madman in the hotel suite above hers and she [[gripes]]). Audiences of 1935 [[potentially]] didn't care how these two were going to get together--as long as they did so, and happily. Seen today, the central characters appear to have no motivation to end up in each other's arms: he plies her with [[flores]] (after [[saying]] his friend he [[want]] to remain "fancy free" in the [[likes]] department) and she gives him the brush-off. Nothing that a [[small]] [[choreography]] couldn't [[therapy]]! This glamorous twosome are as deliberately [[surrealistic]] as are the London and Venice settings, but we watch simply because the leads are Fred and Ginger. It's a fantasy for have-nots...ones who don't mind the dumbed-down plot. The musical moments do break up the monotony of the contrived scenario, yet fail to transcend the surrounding silliness. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I wasn't born until 4 years after this [[wonderful]] show first aired but luckily I managed to catch the reruns of the mid 90's and the rest is history......I was [[hooked]]. The premise was pretty simple; two hardened Nemesis agents, Richard Barrett and Craig Stirling ( William Gaunt and Stuart Damon) are partnered up with an expert (if not young) Doctor and Biologist (Sharron Macready) to head behind the bamboo curtain to retrieve a dangerous biological agent from being used by red china. Whilst making their escape, their plane is hit by machine gun fire and they crash in the heart of the Himalayas where their lives are saved by a mysterious and previously undiscovered civilisation who heal and enhance the senses of the trio, thus setting the scene for many exciting adventures to come...

The series lasted for 30 hour long episodes and I guess it was its relatively short lived, one season run that has set it up for cult status.

Monty Berman, the producer, was notorious for making things as cheaply as possible and sometimes the show suffered for this with incredibly tacky sets - particularly in Episodes such as "Happening" ( a studio deputising for the Australian outback) and the 'snow' sets of "Operation Deep Freeze" and "The Beginning" but if you can get past this, and focus on the characters and the story lines, the show was really a lot of fun. It had a great mix of adventure, and plenty of deadpan humour (mainly from some terrific one liners from William Gaunt).

The chemistry from the three leads was fantastic - you get the sense that they were really having a lot of fun making the show and this is borne out in the 2005 reunion documentary where the three reunite after over 35 years to reminisce about the show (and laugh about Anthony Nicholls awful wig!!). They all shared equal screen time and all had their moments to shine. I have to say, I was always a Richard Barrett fan - I loved his sardonic humour along with that dangerous edge - he was certainly a man you didn't cross, and those eyes........the bluest eyes you would probably see on TV. I have also followed Bill Gaunts career with interest since. However, Craig Stirling certainly would have had his legion of female fans and I am sure Alexandra Bastedo had a whole queue of male fans swooning over her too.

The show also had a plethora of guest stars to entice with, including Donald Sutherland, Jeremy Brett, Peter Wyngarde, Burt Kwouk, Anton Rodgers, Kate O'Mara, Jenny Linden, Paul Eddington and Colin Blakely.

Notable episodes for me were : "Auto Kill", "The Interrogation", "The Fanatics", "The Mission" and "The Gilded Cage" but I am sure every one has their personal favourites.

If you do get a chance to watch this show for the first time, or to re watch it after many years, remember to watch it in the context of the time it was made and just sit back and enjoy - the characters and the chemistry from the three leads is what made this wonderful show for me and I don't think I will ever tire of it.

Enjoy! I wasn't born until 4 years after this [[wondrous]] show first aired but luckily I managed to catch the reruns of the mid 90's and the rest is history......I was [[hook]]. The premise was pretty simple; two hardened Nemesis agents, Richard Barrett and Craig Stirling ( William Gaunt and Stuart Damon) are partnered up with an expert (if not young) Doctor and Biologist (Sharron Macready) to head behind the bamboo curtain to retrieve a dangerous biological agent from being used by red china. Whilst making their escape, their plane is hit by machine gun fire and they crash in the heart of the Himalayas where their lives are saved by a mysterious and previously undiscovered civilisation who heal and enhance the senses of the trio, thus setting the scene for many exciting adventures to come...

The series lasted for 30 hour long episodes and I guess it was its relatively short lived, one season run that has set it up for cult status.

Monty Berman, the producer, was notorious for making things as cheaply as possible and sometimes the show suffered for this with incredibly tacky sets - particularly in Episodes such as "Happening" ( a studio deputising for the Australian outback) and the 'snow' sets of "Operation Deep Freeze" and "The Beginning" but if you can get past this, and focus on the characters and the story lines, the show was really a lot of fun. It had a great mix of adventure, and plenty of deadpan humour (mainly from some terrific one liners from William Gaunt).

The chemistry from the three leads was fantastic - you get the sense that they were really having a lot of fun making the show and this is borne out in the 2005 reunion documentary where the three reunite after over 35 years to reminisce about the show (and laugh about Anthony Nicholls awful wig!!). They all shared equal screen time and all had their moments to shine. I have to say, I was always a Richard Barrett fan - I loved his sardonic humour along with that dangerous edge - he was certainly a man you didn't cross, and those eyes........the bluest eyes you would probably see on TV. I have also followed Bill Gaunts career with interest since. However, Craig Stirling certainly would have had his legion of female fans and I am sure Alexandra Bastedo had a whole queue of male fans swooning over her too.

The show also had a plethora of guest stars to entice with, including Donald Sutherland, Jeremy Brett, Peter Wyngarde, Burt Kwouk, Anton Rodgers, Kate O'Mara, Jenny Linden, Paul Eddington and Colin Blakely.

Notable episodes for me were : "Auto Kill", "The Interrogation", "The Fanatics", "The Mission" and "The Gilded Cage" but I am sure every one has their personal favourites.

If you do get a chance to watch this show for the first time, or to re watch it after many years, remember to watch it in the context of the time it was made and just sit back and enjoy - the characters and the chemistry from the three leads is what made this wonderful show for me and I don't think I will ever tire of it.

Enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 544 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had been [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] this [[film]] for a [[long]] time, after [[seeing]] "Return to [[Paradise]]," which I found to be gritty. I was so [[disappointed]]. The most [[realistic]] [[thing]] about it was the unpredictable [[ending]] which I [[think]] was [[partly]] [[stolen]] from "Return to [[Paradise]]."

[[Maybe]] I was expecting too much.

[[On]] the positive side [[Danes]], Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I [[didnt]] like Danes's [[character]] and first and [[found]] her very [[annoying]].

I couldnt see [[anything]] realistic about the film. It [[could]] of been done so much better, for example there [[could]] of been more [[emphasis]] on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be [[realistic]]. There [[could]] also of been more [[action]] and [[tension]]

The best thing about this film is the "tragic" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.

3/10 I had been [[searching]] forward to [[see]] this [[filmmaking]] for a [[longer]] time, after [[witnessing]] "Return to [[Havens]]," which I found to be gritty. I was so [[disappointing]]. The most [[realism]] [[stuff]] about it was the unpredictable [[terminated]] which I [[thought]] was [[partially]] [[stealing]] from "Return to [[Paradiso]]."

[[Might]] I was expecting too much.

[[Onto]] the positive side [[Danish]], Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I [[couldnt]] like Danes's [[nature]] and first and [[discoveries]] her very [[troublesome]].

I couldnt see [[somethings]] realistic about the film. It [[did]] of been done so much better, for example there [[did]] of been more [[focuses]] on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be [[pragmatic]]. There [[wo]] also of been more [[activities]] and [[tensions]]

The best thing about this film is the "tragic" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It's possible that A Man [[Called]] Sledge might have been [[done]] [[irreparable]] damage on the [[cutting]] room floor. [[Maybe]] [[someone]] will [[demand]] a director's cut one day, but I seriously doubt it.

James Garner decided to [[cash]] in on the [[spaghetti]] western [[market]] and in doing so [[brought]] a [[whole]] lot of [[Americans]] over to [[fill]] the cast out. Folks like Dennis Weaver, Claude Akins, [[John]] Marley. And of course we have Vic Morrow who both [[wrote]] and [[directed]] this [[film]].

Garner [[always]] gets cast as [[likable]] rogues because he's so [[darn]] good at playing them. But he has [[played]] serious and [[done]] it well in [[films]] like The Children's Hour and Hour of the Gun. He can and has [[broken]] away from his usual [[stereotyped]] [[part]] successfully. But A Man Called Sledge can't be counted as one of his successes.

He's got the title role as Luther [[Sledge]] notorious outlaw with a [[big]] price on his head. [[After]] partner Tony [[Young]] gets killed in a saloon and Garner takes appropriate Eastwood style measures, he's followed from the saloon by [[John]] Marley.

Marley's spent time in the [[nearby]] territorial prison and it [[seems]] as though gold shipments are put under [[lock]] and [[key]] there on a rest [[stop]] for the folks [[transporting]] the [[stuff]] on a regular run. Garner gets his gang together for a [[heist]].

Here's where the movie goes totally off the wall. [[Usually]] [[heist]] [[films]] [[show]] the [[protagonists]] [[going]] into a [[lot]] of methodical planning. [[Certainly]] that was the [[case]] in The [[War]] [[Wagon]] which some other reviewer cited. But in this one Garner [[decides]] to [[break]] into the [[prison]] as a [[prisoner]] of [[fake]] [[US]] Marshal [[Dennis]] Weaver and cause a jailbreak at which [[time]] the gold will be robbed.

That was just too much to swallow. If [[taking]] the gold was this easy it should have been done a long time before. But I will say for those who like the blood and guts of Italian [[westerns]], during that prison break there's enough there for three movies.

That's not the whole thing, of course the outlaws fall out and we have another gore fest before the film ends. But by that time the whole film has [[lost]] a [[lot]] of coherency.

The great movie singer of the Thirties Allan Jones is listed in the credits. But for the life of me I can't find him in the film. Maybe a chorus of the Donkey Serenade might have made this better.

Couldn't have hurt any. It's possible that A Man [[Drew]] Sledge might have been [[played]] [[incurable]] damage on the [[cuts]] room floor. [[Might]] [[everybody]] will [[asks]] a director's cut one day, but I seriously doubt it.

James Garner decided to [[money]] in on the [[sandwiches]] western [[markets]] and in doing so [[introduced]] a [[overall]] lot of [[Us]] over to [[filling]] the cast out. Folks like Dennis Weaver, Claude Akins, [[Jon]] Marley. And of course we have Vic Morrow who both [[texted]] and [[oriented]] this [[cinematography]].

Garner [[constantly]] gets cast as [[congenial]] rogues because he's so [[damn]] good at playing them. But he has [[accomplished]] serious and [[completed]] it well in [[film]] like The Children's Hour and Hour of the Gun. He can and has [[fractured]] away from his usual [[stereotypical]] [[party]] successfully. But A Man Called Sledge can't be counted as one of his successes.

He's got the title role as Luther [[Sled]] notorious outlaw with a [[grande]] price on his head. [[Upon]] partner Tony [[Youthful]] gets killed in a saloon and Garner takes appropriate Eastwood style measures, he's followed from the saloon by [[Jon]] Marley.

Marley's spent time in the [[contiguous]] territorial prison and it [[looks]] as though gold shipments are put under [[latch]] and [[essential]] there on a rest [[stopping]] for the folks [[transported]] the [[thing]] on a regular run. Garner gets his gang together for a [[holdup]].

Here's where the movie goes totally off the wall. [[Typically]] [[holdup]] [[film]] [[shows]] the [[players]] [[go]] into a [[batch]] of methodical planning. [[Arguably]] that was the [[example]] in The [[Wars]] [[Trolley]] which some other reviewer cited. But in this one Garner [[decide]] to [[breaks]] into the [[prisons]] as a [[inmates]] of [[forged]] [[USA]] Marshal [[Denis]] Weaver and cause a jailbreak at which [[period]] the gold will be robbed.

That was just too much to swallow. If [[pick]] the gold was this easy it should have been done a long time before. But I will say for those who like the blood and guts of Italian [[westerners]], during that prison break there's enough there for three movies.

That's not the whole thing, of course the outlaws fall out and we have another gore fest before the film ends. But by that time the whole film has [[outof]] a [[lots]] of coherency.

The great movie singer of the Thirties Allan Jones is listed in the credits. But for the life of me I can't find him in the film. Maybe a chorus of the Donkey Serenade might have made this better.

Couldn't have hurt any. --------------------------------------------- Result 546 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of those el cheapo action adventures of the early 1980s that used to fill video rental stores solely to be taken out by adolescent boys in the hope of a cheap thrill.

Woeful down market attempt to cash in on the Death Wish phenomenon by substituting a moderately attractive woman for the visually challenging Bronson. Acting is terrible, sets are cheap, the baddies are, well, bad. Identification with any of the characters is unlikely.

Only redeeming feature is modest amount of gratuitous female nudity, a smattering of which is full frontal. Other than that, you can leave it... --------------------------------------------- Result 547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A tragically wonderful movie... brings us to a Japan that does not exist anymore. Despite Hollywood's technical expertise, I have yet to see a (hollywood) movie that can match the authenticity of the atmosphere in this small town by the river near the sea... Tom Cruise's The Last Samurai looked liked the last installment of the Lord of The Rings in trying to capture rural Old Japan.

If you like serene but intense story lines, this is a must see film. It will be a respite from hollow flashy films much like the last 1000 blockbusters you saw. I think this is one of Kurosawa's better stories.

Even if it's a movie about geishas and brothels and the complicated rules that govern life in such settings, it did not turn into a skin flick. The characters are full of depth and act with much intensity. --------------------------------------------- Result 548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Plainsman is an entertaining western, no doubt a classic, which is actual even today. Gary Cooper is Wild Bill Hickok, ideal for the role, together with John Wayne and James Stewart, they were the best actors that played western heroes in their generation. Jean Arthur is great as Calamity Jane, nobody that I know played it better than her. Even if might not be historically accurate, the film manages to capture the most important about Hickok and about the time it takes place. Sometimes you have to sacrifice History to make your point and that is what DeMille does here. The friendship of Hickok with Buffalo Bill, the selling of rifles to the Indians by a great manufacturer to compensate for the losses he would have because of the end of the civil war, Custer and Little Big Horn, the uneasy relationship between Buffalo Bill's wife, a religious woman, with Hickok a man who had killed plenty, also the unusual love affair between Hickok and Calamity all this makes 'The Plainsman' a non conventional and interesting film. Anthony Quinn has a very short appearance, that already shows what a great actor he was going to become. A lot of care was taken to show the original guns of that time. --------------------------------------------- Result 549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I had pleasure to watch the short [[film]] "The [[Cure]]", by [[first]] [[time]] [[director]] Ryan Jafri. What [[really]] impress me are the camera [[work]] and music.

I think [[many]] [[young]] [[filmmakers]] (as I myself am one of them) [[would]] [[experience]] [[hard]] time with [[cinematography]] when just [[start]] [[making]] of an [[indie]]. We [[see]] the output are not [[exactly]] what we imaged or below our [[ambitions]]. But this film, directorial debut from a young director, handled very well on screen. The camera motion, [[color]], [[lighting]], compositing all [[contribute]] to the [[story]] and emotion of the [[film]].

And [[music]], as a [[key]] [[element]] of [[film]] [[language]], [[helps]] a [[great]] deal too.

It's hard to [[portray]] a woman's heart, her [[desire]], her [[fear]], [[especially]] in a short. But still, I have to [[admit]] I am not a fan of v/o (narration), [[especially]] when the [[film]] is [[advanced]] by narration, instead of shots and cuts. My personal [[feeling]] to some of the [[narrative]] [[part]] is, my [[guess]] was the [[narrator]] [[tried]] a [[bit]] too hard. [[So]] the energy pushes [[audience]] back from the emotion of the [[film]].

[[Overall]], it's a short [[film]] [[nicely]] [[done]], I could see the [[input]] from a director. Way to go, Ryan! [[Greeting]] from [[China]], [[looking]] forward to your [[next]].

tim I had pleasure to watch the short [[films]] "The [[Therapeutic]]", by [[outset]] [[moment]] [[headmaster]] Ryan Jafri. What [[genuinely]] impress me are the camera [[collaborate]] and music.

I think [[innumerable]] [[youthful]] [[cinematographers]] (as I myself am one of them) [[could]] [[enjoying]] [[laborious]] time with [[movie]] when just [[launches]] [[doing]] of an [[andy]]. We [[seeing]] the output are not [[precisely]] what we imaged or below our [[targets]]. But this film, directorial debut from a young director, handled very well on screen. The camera motion, [[dye]], [[lit]], compositing all [[contributes]] to the [[conte]] and emotion of the [[movie]].

And [[musician]], as a [[crucial]] [[component]] of [[films]] [[parlance]], [[helped]] a [[excellent]] deal too.

It's hard to [[depict]] a woman's heart, her [[willingness]], her [[scare]], [[concretely]] in a short. But still, I have to [[recognise]] I am not a fan of v/o (narration), [[principally]] when the [[flick]] is [[advance]] by narration, instead of shots and cuts. My personal [[sense]] to some of the [[descriptive]] [[parties]] is, my [[guessing]] was the [[storyteller]] [[attempting]] a [[bite]] too hard. [[Therefore]] the energy pushes [[spectators]] back from the emotion of the [[cinematography]].

[[Totals]], it's a short [[kino]] [[politely]] [[played]], I could see the [[entrances]] from a director. Way to go, Ryan! [[Saluting]] from [[Wa]], [[searching]] forward to your [[imminent]].

tim --------------------------------------------- Result 550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a true Elvis fan, this movie is a total embarrasment and the script is a disaster. The movie opens with the beautiful son "Stay Away" and the scenery of the Grand Canyon gives the viewer hope of something special. Elvis gets in the picture and his talent is wasted big time, especially on the rest of the featured songs. I sat through this movie twice, just to make sure it is a piece of junk!!! 1 out of 10!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Dear Friends and Family,

I guess if one teen wants to become biblical with another teen, then that's their eternal damnation - just remember kids, "birth control" doesn't mean "oral sex", I don't care what the honor student says. On the other hand, even if the senator's aid quotes himself as a "bit of a romantic guy", he's still only hitting on a high school girl. If she was my sister, I'd eat this guys kneecaps.

Other than that I found out that Mongolians don't kiss the same way the French do and that baseball players named Zoo like delicate undergarments.

I think I'd almost rather watch Richie Rich one more time than suffer the indignity of this slip, slap, slop. Thank you, and good night. --------------------------------------------- Result 552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I like [[films]] that don't [[provide]] the [[typical]] "happy [[ending]]," and that's my main [[reason]] for my [[liking]] of this movie. [[Alice]] Marano ([[Danes]]) and her [[best]] [[friend]] Darlene (Beckinsale) are [[arrested]] in Thailand for narcotics smuggling after a [[tip]] anonymously phoned in to the Thai [[authorities]]. The film does a [[solid]] job of [[keeping]] [[viewers]] guessing as to whether (or which) of the [[girls]] was [[involved]], and Bill Pullman is perfect as their [[sleazy]] lawyer. Jacqueline Kim turns in a [[terrific]] performance as his more [[kind]], [[magnanimous]] wife, [[Yon]], who is [[also]] an [[attorney]]. I wish the [[girls]] had been abused more in the [[prison]], as another commenter has [[suggested]], as I've [[heard]] that Thai [[prisons]] can be [[quite]] [[brutal]]. Where this [[film]] [[grabs]] me, [[however]], is its ending. [[Alice]] [[subjects]] herself to a sentence of 96 [[years]] in total so that [[Darlene]] can be pardoned, and we (the [[viewers]]) [[realize]] that they are both innocent. [[Any]] [[film]] that [[defies]] my expectation of the ending [[wins]] [[extra]] [[points]] with me, and this well-acted [[drama]] is [[certainly]] deserving. I like [[kino]] that don't [[delivering]] the [[characteristic]] "happy [[ended]]," and that's my main [[motives]] for my [[gusto]] of this movie. [[Altar]] Marano ([[Denmark]]) and her [[better]] [[boyfriend]] Darlene (Beckinsale) are [[detained]] in Thailand for narcotics smuggling after a [[tipping]] anonymously phoned in to the Thai [[governments]]. The film does a [[solids]] job of [[preserving]] [[audience]] guessing as to whether (or which) of the [[daughter]] was [[engaged]], and Bill Pullman is perfect as their [[squalid]] lawyer. Jacqueline Kim turns in a [[wondrous]] performance as his more [[genre]], [[generous]] wife, [[Youn]], who is [[additionally]] an [[lawyer]]. I wish the [[dame]] had been abused more in the [[correctional]], as another commenter has [[proposing]], as I've [[listened]] that Thai [[penitentiaries]] can be [[pretty]] [[savage]]. Where this [[movie]] [[grab]] me, [[instead]], is its ending. [[Altar]] [[questions]] herself to a sentence of 96 [[ages]] in total so that [[Dolly]] can be pardoned, and we (the [[audience]]) [[reaching]] that they are both innocent. [[Every]] [[cinematography]] that [[challenge]] my expectation of the ending [[earn]] [[extras]] [[dots]] with me, and this well-acted [[theater]] is [[definitively]] deserving. --------------------------------------------- Result 553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[think]] this [[film]] has been somewhat overrated here. There are some [[things]] to admire in it; for one thing it deserves credit for being a science fiction(ish) film which relies on its story instead of special effects and action sequences to carry the day. The supporting cast is good, the set design and cinematography are good, and the ideas are interesting [[enough]] (though they are beginning to seem a little tired after the many mediocre Dark City / Memento / Fight Club clones of recent years). But the film is undone by poor characterization, [[wooden]] performances from the lead [[actors]], and a laughably bad ending.

The main problem I had was that the protagonist was neither likable nor unlikable. I [[realize]] that part of the [[story]] dictates that he should be a bit of a (wait for it...) [[cipher]], but I was [[utterly]] [[unable]] to [[work]] up any [[empathy]] for a character that just seemed like a [[boring]], [[anonymous]] schlub of a [[man]]. What character [[transformation]] there is for this [[sad]] sack is artificially forced on him by the plot. Lead actor Jeremy Northam succeeds in [[conveying]] that the protagonist is confused and hapless, but [[fails]] at [[inspiring]] any sympathy for him. Opposite him, Lucy Liu does what she can with a character who has no [[real]] [[personality]] of her own, unless being the embodiment of a spy-movie cliché counts as personality.

One of the [[biggest]] disappointments of this [[movie]] is the ending. I won't give any spoilers here, but I will say that a surprise twist at the end was telegraphed pretty clearly at least 45 minutes before it occurred. Further, after being content to be a quirky, idea-oriented movie for the first hour or so, the last few scenes suddenly and terribly devolve into the [[worst]] kind of Hollywood pap, complete with big [[explosions]] and [[special]] [[effects]]. The revealing of the film's McGuffin at the end is poorly [[done]], and at the [[end]] the [[characters]] seem even less [[likable]] than they did before some of the film's main plot [[threads]] were [[resolved]].

The movie's not all bad, [[though]]. It does [[manage]] to [[maintain]] a certain low [[level]] of [[tension]] [[throughout]] most of it, despite the [[slow]] pacing ([[although]] I [[think]] I have a [[higher]] than average tolerance for slow-paced [[movies]]). And there are some moments when the unsettled, paranoiac feeling that director Vincenzo Natali was clearly trying to evoke rises to the surface. But in the end, these elements aren't enough to overcome the flaws in the film's acting and script. There is probably a good movie that covers these same themes and ideas, but this isn't it. I [[ideas]] this [[filmmaking]] has been somewhat overrated here. There are some [[matters]] to admire in it; for one thing it deserves credit for being a science fiction(ish) film which relies on its story instead of special effects and action sequences to carry the day. The supporting cast is good, the set design and cinematography are good, and the ideas are interesting [[satisfactorily]] (though they are beginning to seem a little tired after the many mediocre Dark City / Memento / Fight Club clones of recent years). But the film is undone by poor characterization, [[timber]] performances from the lead [[protagonists]], and a laughably bad ending.

The main problem I had was that the protagonist was neither likable nor unlikable. I [[attain]] that part of the [[conte]] dictates that he should be a bit of a (wait for it...) [[coding]], but I was [[fully]] [[incompetent]] to [[works]] up any [[caring]] for a character that just seemed like a [[dull]], [[unnamed]] schlub of a [[guy]]. What character [[transforms]] there is for this [[unfortunate]] sack is artificially forced on him by the plot. Lead actor Jeremy Northam succeeds in [[transmitted]] that the protagonist is confused and hapless, but [[fail]] at [[stimulating]] any sympathy for him. Opposite him, Lucy Liu does what she can with a character who has no [[true]] [[persona]] of her own, unless being the embodiment of a spy-movie cliché counts as personality.

One of the [[strongest]] disappointments of this [[filmmaking]] is the ending. I won't give any spoilers here, but I will say that a surprise twist at the end was telegraphed pretty clearly at least 45 minutes before it occurred. Further, after being content to be a quirky, idea-oriented movie for the first hour or so, the last few scenes suddenly and terribly devolve into the [[worse]] kind of Hollywood pap, complete with big [[blast]] and [[peculiar]] [[repercussions]]. The revealing of the film's McGuffin at the end is poorly [[performed]], and at the [[ends]] the [[attribute]] seem even less [[congenial]] than they did before some of the film's main plot [[fil]] were [[solved]].

The movie's not all bad, [[nevertheless]]. It does [[managed]] to [[retaining]] a certain low [[levels]] of [[voltage]] [[in]] most of it, despite the [[slower]] pacing ([[albeit]] I [[ideas]] I have a [[superior]] than average tolerance for slow-paced [[filmmaking]]). And there are some moments when the unsettled, paranoiac feeling that director Vincenzo Natali was clearly trying to evoke rises to the surface. But in the end, these elements aren't enough to overcome the flaws in the film's acting and script. There is probably a good movie that covers these same themes and ideas, but this isn't it. --------------------------------------------- Result 554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] [[Sharp]], well-made [[documentary]] [[focusing]] on Mardi Gras beads. I have [[always]] liked this approach to film-making - [[communicate]] [[ideas]] about a [[larger]], more complex, and often inscrutable [[phenomenon]] by [[breaking]] the issue down into something familiar and close to [[home]].

I am sure most people have [[heard]] stories about sweatshops and understand the basic [[motives]] behind [[profit]] and capitalism, and globalism's [[effect]] on poorer nations ([[however]] people feel about it). [[Rather]] than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's [[anything]] [[wrong]] with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.

I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.

Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.

[[Outstanding]] and [[highly]] [[recommended]]. Need to [[see]] more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those [[involved]] in the making of this [[film]]. [[Steep]], well-made [[literature]] [[concentrated]] on Mardi Gras beads. I have [[unceasingly]] liked this approach to film-making - [[submit]] [[conceptions]] about a [[largest]], more complex, and often inscrutable [[phenomena]] by [[violating]] the issue down into something familiar and close to [[house]].

I am sure most people have [[hear]] stories about sweatshops and understand the basic [[reasons]] behind [[gains]] and capitalism, and globalism's [[implications]] on poorer nations ([[conversely]] people feel about it). [[Fairly]] than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's [[something]] [[erroneous]] with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.

I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.

Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.

[[Unresolved]] and [[inordinately]] [[suggested]]. Need to [[behold]] more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those [[implicated]] in the making of this [[cinema]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I always enjoy this movie when it shows up on TV.

The one scene that always stands out, for me that is, is the one with the Myrna Loy and the painters foreman, where she gives him very explicit instructions on the colours and as soon as she goes away he turns the his guys and says "Did you get that, that's yellow, blue, green and white" --------------------------------------------- Result 556 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Justin]] goes [[home]] to live with his strict, hard-nosed police detective father, but it seems daddy has turned the upstairs into three makeshift apartments each with bizarre [[tenants]] [[residing]] in them. Straight-laced idealist Justin is thrust into the world of the occult, murder, under-aged [[drinking]] and other dastardly things. Ho-hum

Wow, have I seen the same film that [[nearly]] all the other [[reviewers]] on here saw??? Clever, compelling, [[original]], intense, [[clever]], genius????!!? I witnessed [[none]] of those things. What I DID see was an uninteresting, bland, [[trite]], extremely clichéd low-budget thriller that was ripe with implausibilities and no [[tension]] in the [[least]] bit as the killer is telegraphed as soon into the film as he gives his monologue/debate/discussion. And where are these humorous laugh-out-loud moments? I never so much as chuckled, perhaps because i was too busy struggling not to be put to sleep by the film.

My Grade: D

DVD [[Extras]]: Audio commentary with director Dave Campfield; Second commentary with various contributers as well as isolated music tracks; 4 featurettes (Making of, on the set, turning 1 room into 4, & Inside the black circle); Interviews with Felissa Rose, Desiree Gould, & Raine Brown; Alternate scenes; bloopers; a music video for 'Addiction'; A trailer for this movie; And trailers for "Shock-o-rama", "Chainsaw Sally", "Skin Crawl", "Sinful", "Bacterium", "Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon", & "Millennium Crises" [[Justine]] goes [[houses]] to live with his strict, hard-nosed police detective father, but it seems daddy has turned the upstairs into three makeshift apartments each with bizarre [[occupiers]] [[staying]] in them. Straight-laced idealist Justin is thrust into the world of the occult, murder, under-aged [[alcohol]] and other dastardly things. Ho-hum

Wow, have I seen the same film that [[nigh]] all the other [[raters]] on here saw??? Clever, compelling, [[upfront]], intense, [[canny]], genius????!!? I witnessed [[nothingness]] of those things. What I DID see was an uninteresting, bland, [[corny]], extremely clichéd low-budget thriller that was ripe with implausibilities and no [[tensions]] in the [[less]] bit as the killer is telegraphed as soon into the film as he gives his monologue/debate/discussion. And where are these humorous laugh-out-loud moments? I never so much as chuckled, perhaps because i was too busy struggling not to be put to sleep by the film.

My Grade: D

DVD [[Goodies]]: Audio commentary with director Dave Campfield; Second commentary with various contributers as well as isolated music tracks; 4 featurettes (Making of, on the set, turning 1 room into 4, & Inside the black circle); Interviews with Felissa Rose, Desiree Gould, & Raine Brown; Alternate scenes; bloopers; a music video for 'Addiction'; A trailer for this movie; And trailers for "Shock-o-rama", "Chainsaw Sally", "Skin Crawl", "Sinful", "Bacterium", "Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon", & "Millennium Crises" --------------------------------------------- Result 557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] tries to be funny and fails miserably. The animation is just terrible, looks like a 2 year old threw it together in his sleep. Plot is dull and cliched. IF you have a young child, maybe rent it. but don't waste hard earned money to pay to see it.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Good [[lord]], whoever [[made]] this turkey needs to be [[buried]] alive. I'm sorry, but the other [[reviewer]] must not have seen this movie, he [[must]] be watching [[something]] [[else]], or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's [[saying]] what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the [[Wind]]? [[Unintentionally]] funny, [[massively]] [[unbelievable]] characters, [[absurd]] situations, looks [[like]] it was shot in [[Griffith]] Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in [[Griffith]] Park), [[crappy]] [[script]], just about everything that could [[possibly]] be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. [[Should]] be [[required]] viewing for all prospective [[film]] [[makers]] as an [[example]] of how a [[movie]] could be horribly wrong. It [[reminds]] me of [[something]] a USC [[student]] may [[make]] for a film [[class]].

Give this one a pass [[unless]] you do [[drugs]] and are into [[high]] camp. Good [[senor]], whoever [[brought]] this turkey needs to be [[interred]] alive. I'm sorry, but the other [[reviewers]] must not have seen this movie, he [[owes]] be watching [[anything]] [[otherwise]], or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's [[telling]] what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the [[Windmill]]? [[Unknowingly]] funny, [[greatly]] [[unimaginable]] characters, [[irrational]] situations, looks [[iike]] it was shot in [[Griffin]] Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in [[Griffiths]] Park), [[shite]] [[hyphen]], just about everything that could [[maybe]] be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. [[Needs]] be [[need]] viewing for all prospective [[flick]] [[maker]] as an [[cases]] of how a [[filmmaking]] could be horribly wrong. It [[remembered]] me of [[anything]] a USC [[learners]] may [[deliver]] for a film [[classroom]].

Give this one a pass [[if]] you do [[medicines]] and are into [[highest]] camp. --------------------------------------------- Result 559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Gender Bender sexes things up a bit for the x-files. This episode has an interesting premise, a good [[story]], but an ending that is [[wanting]]. Gender Bender is [[also]] the x-files debut for actor Nicholas Lea, better known as Alex Krycek. In this episode he plays [[Michael]], a man attacked by one of "The Kindred". You need to see this episode just to [[see]] Nic Lea's less than spectacular beginning. An interesting thing about the Kindred's "power of seduction". When Marty does it to his victims, they [[become]] turned onto him/her. [[However]], when Andrew [[seduces]] Scully, she only because [[disoriented]] and groggy, and does not [[become]] [[attracted]] to Andrew. Maybe it's because Marty has more experience at it than Andrew. This episode [[reminds]] me of why it would [[sometimes]] be [[miserable]] to [[film]] up in [[British]] [[Columbia]]. [[Throughout]] the episode it is so [[wet]], soggy, and muddy, it [[could]] not have been that much fun. [[Despite]] the [[disappointing]] ending, [[Gender]] Bender is [[still]] a decent episode to [[view]]. Gender Bender sexes things up a bit for the x-files. This episode has an interesting premise, a good [[fairytales]], but an ending that is [[desiring]]. Gender Bender is [[apart]] the x-files debut for actor Nicholas Lea, better known as Alex Krycek. In this episode he plays [[Michaela]], a man attacked by one of "The Kindred". You need to see this episode just to [[consults]] Nic Lea's less than spectacular beginning. An interesting thing about the Kindred's "power of seduction". When Marty does it to his victims, they [[becomes]] turned onto him/her. [[Still]], when Andrew [[seducing]] Scully, she only because [[disorientated]] and groggy, and does not [[becomes]] [[lured]] to Andrew. Maybe it's because Marty has more experience at it than Andrew. This episode [[reminded]] me of why it would [[sometime]] be [[deplorable]] to [[movies]] up in [[Britain]] [[Colombia]]. [[Across]] the episode it is so [[crapped]], soggy, and muddy, it [[wo]] not have been that much fun. [[Though]] the [[disappointed]] ending, [[Sexes]] Bender is [[yet]] a decent episode to [[visualise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I was expecting a very [[funny]] movie. [[Instead]], I got a movie with a few funny jokes, and many that just didn't [[work]]. I didn't like the idea of bringing in Sherlock Holmes' and Moriarty's descendants. It was [[confusing]]. It would have been more [[funny]] if they just had someone new, instead of Moriarty resurrected. Some of the things were funny. Burt Kwouk was very [[funny]], as always. McCloud on the horse was funny. The McGarrett from Hawaii 5-0 was not [[even]] McGarrett-like. Connie Booth obviously is very good with accents. She is from Indiana, but played English and a New Yorker pretty well. Unfortunately, she was not presented much into the script. I was expecting a more funny film. Instead, I got a rather [[confusing]] movie with a poor [[script]]. Rather ironic, since both Booth and Cleese were together on this one. Maybe they were about to break up in 77. I was expecting a very [[hilarious]] movie. [[However]], I got a movie with a few funny jokes, and many that just didn't [[cooperates]]. I didn't like the idea of bringing in Sherlock Holmes' and Moriarty's descendants. It was [[disconcerting]]. It would have been more [[comical]] if they just had someone new, instead of Moriarty resurrected. Some of the things were funny. Burt Kwouk was very [[amusing]], as always. McCloud on the horse was funny. The McGarrett from Hawaii 5-0 was not [[yet]] McGarrett-like. Connie Booth obviously is very good with accents. She is from Indiana, but played English and a New Yorker pretty well. Unfortunately, she was not presented much into the script. I was expecting a more funny film. Instead, I got a rather [[puzzling]] movie with a poor [[hyphen]]. Rather ironic, since both Booth and Cleese were together on this one. Maybe they were about to break up in 77. --------------------------------------------- Result 561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you liked the Grinch movie... go watch that again, because this was no where near as good a Seussian movie translation. Mike Myers' Cat is probably the most annoying character to "grace" the screen in recent times. His voice/accent is terrible and he laughs at his own jokes with an awful weasing sound, which is about the only laughing I heard at the theater. Not even the kids liked this one folks, and kids laugh at anything now. Save your money and go see Looney Tunes: Back in Action if you're really looking for a fun holiday family movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As far as horror flicks go, this one is pretty darn good. While it may not be a classic tale of horror and suspense, it does provide many quality chuckles that make this movie a must see if you're into the horror/comedy genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I have no [[idea]] what idiots gave this [[movie]] a Palm D'Or at the 1999 Cannes Film [[Festival]] because it was [[atrocious]]! I [[actually]] [[watched]] the [[entire]] [[thing]] [[simply]] because I couldn't [[believe]] that [[someone]] would make such a [[worthless]] [[film]]. There is [[nothing]] interesting about the plot, the [[characters]] are devoid of [[depth]] and there is no attempt at giving any [[sort]] of [[ambiance]] with [[music]] or sound [[effects]]. [[Also]], if you do decide to waste 2 [[hours]] of your [[life]] by watching this [[film]], be sure to [[bring]] [[something]] to throw up in because the [[cinematography]] is [[simply]] [[someone]] [[running]] [[around]] with a hand-held camcorder and half the [[time]] you can't even see the main [[subjects]]. This [[style]] has been used [[much]] more [[successfully]] in [[movies]] such as "Blair Witch" because it creates suspense. [[In]] [[Rosetta]], there is no plot and no [[suspense]] to which that [[style]] would [[lend]] [[anything]]. I should have known [[better]] when it came on at 2 o'clock in the morning that it was [[going]] to be horrible. I have no [[thinks]] what idiots gave this [[flick]] a Palm D'Or at the 1999 Cannes Film [[Fest]] because it was [[horrible]]! I [[genuinely]] [[observed]] the [[overall]] [[stuff]] [[exclusively]] because I couldn't [[think]] that [[everybody]] would make such a [[meaningless]] [[filmmaking]]. There is [[anything]] interesting about the plot, the [[nature]] are devoid of [[depths]] and there is no attempt at giving any [[genre]] of [[ambience]] with [[musica]] or sound [[consequences]]. [[Further]], if you do decide to waste 2 [[hour]] of your [[vida]] by watching this [[filmmaking]], be sure to [[brings]] [[anything]] to throw up in because the [[filmmaking]] is [[exclusively]] [[anyone]] [[executes]] [[almost]] with a hand-held camcorder and half the [[period]] you can't even see the main [[themes]]. This [[elegance]] has been used [[very]] more [[satisfactorily]] in [[kino]] such as "Blair Witch" because it creates suspense. [[Across]] [[Rachid]], there is no plot and no [[sufferance]] to which that [[styles]] would [[give]] [[somethings]]. I should have known [[nicer]] when it came on at 2 o'clock in the morning that it was [[go]] to be horrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 564 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is one of the most hilariously [[bad]] movies I have ever had the privilege to [[see]].

I [[watched]] this on DVD with a bunch of friends one Friday night and we just couldn't stop laughing from start to finish.

The story is simple enough: terrorists hijack a convoy they think is carrying weapons grade uranium, but it's actually carrying a bunch of man-eating dinosaurs. Easy mistake to make. Cue a startlingly [[incompetent]] team of Army Special Forces to tackle the prehistoric beasts. They are led by Colonel Rance, played by Scott Valentine; a man who seems to have perfected 'Smell the fart' acting, as advocated by Joey in Friends.

There's plenty of gore and an awful lot of shooting, but unfortunately Rance's team seem to have a problem aiming their weapons in the general direction of a horde of giant, lumbering monsters. Also, the lights always seem to flicker and go out whenever a Velociraptor attacks (preumably so we can't see how bad the creature effects are).

Having said all that, we all had a great deal of fun [[betting]] on who was going to get their head bitten off next.

As a Jusassic Park / Aliens style action adventure this movie stinks worse than a dinosaur's crotch, but as ludicrous, tongue-in-cheek [[entertainment]] it's a roaring success. This is one of the most hilariously [[naughty]] movies I have ever had the privilege to [[consults]].

I [[seen]] this on DVD with a bunch of friends one Friday night and we just couldn't stop laughing from start to finish.

The story is simple enough: terrorists hijack a convoy they think is carrying weapons grade uranium, but it's actually carrying a bunch of man-eating dinosaurs. Easy mistake to make. Cue a startlingly [[inept]] team of Army Special Forces to tackle the prehistoric beasts. They are led by Colonel Rance, played by Scott Valentine; a man who seems to have perfected 'Smell the fart' acting, as advocated by Joey in Friends.

There's plenty of gore and an awful lot of shooting, but unfortunately Rance's team seem to have a problem aiming their weapons in the general direction of a horde of giant, lumbering monsters. Also, the lights always seem to flicker and go out whenever a Velociraptor attacks (preumably so we can't see how bad the creature effects are).

Having said all that, we all had a great deal of fun [[gaming]] on who was going to get their head bitten off next.

As a Jusassic Park / Aliens style action adventure this movie stinks worse than a dinosaur's crotch, but as ludicrous, tongue-in-cheek [[amusement]] it's a roaring success. --------------------------------------------- Result 565 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have nothing against religious movies. Religious people need something to watch on a Saturday night, I guess. But what really ticks me off is when the write-up on the DVD box does not indicate this fact to the potential viewer. Passing off religious propaganda as entertainment is NOT cool, bro.

And even if I was a religious person, I would have to agree with most of the other posters here, this movie was a mess. Poorly directed, poorly acted, poorly edited, and the attempt at a soundtrack was hilarious. The fake accents were terrible, the characters were mainly stereotypes, and continuity was out the window. The only reason we sat through this lame waste of time was that it was too late to watch another movie instead. Should have just gone to bed.

Absolutely no redeeming qualities to this movie, unless you are the religious type who will immediately endorse anything that will preach your beliefs to the unbelievers, even if it's a pile of garbage. If you aren't, avoid this at all costs. Do not be deceived by the box write-up. --------------------------------------------- Result 566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a film that makes you say 2 things... 1) I can do much better than this( acting,writing and directing) 2) this is so bad I must leave a review and warn others...

Looks as if it was shot with my flip video. I have too believe my friend who told me to watch this has a vendetta against me. I have noticed that there are some positive posts for this home video; Must have been left by crew members or people with something to do with this film. One of the worst 3 movies I have ever seen. hopefully the writers and director leave the business. not even talented enough to do commercials!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Rather [[nasty]] piece of business featuring Bela Lugosi as a mad scientist (with yes, a Renfield-like assistant and his mother, a dwarf and yes, the scientist's wife (sounds like a Greenaway movie actually lol). Lugosi gives his wife injections from dead brides (why them? Who knows?) so that his wife can keep looking beautiful. He gets the brides after doing a pretty clever trick with some orchids that makes the brides collapse at the altar. After another bride bites the dust, a newspaper reporter just HAPPENS to be around for the scoop, and decides to snoop around for a story. She gets all sorts of clues about the orchids and Lugosi. Heaven knows where the police were. Soon she's off to Bela's lair, when she meets a sort of strange looking doctor who may or may not be eeeevil. It all cumulates in a totally far-fetched plan to have a fake wedding to capture the mad scientist, but it seems that the scientist has x-ray vision, as he foils her plans, Oh no! What will happen? I [[actually]] liked this movie as a bit of a guilty [[pleasure]]. Lugosi is [[great]] here, his hangers-on are all very very strange, the story is actually quite [[nasty]] in some [[places]] which makes it all most watchable. A [[fun]] [[little]] [[view]]. Rather [[soiled]] piece of business featuring Bela Lugosi as a mad scientist (with yes, a Renfield-like assistant and his mother, a dwarf and yes, the scientist's wife (sounds like a Greenaway movie actually lol). Lugosi gives his wife injections from dead brides (why them? Who knows?) so that his wife can keep looking beautiful. He gets the brides after doing a pretty clever trick with some orchids that makes the brides collapse at the altar. After another bride bites the dust, a newspaper reporter just HAPPENS to be around for the scoop, and decides to snoop around for a story. She gets all sorts of clues about the orchids and Lugosi. Heaven knows where the police were. Soon she's off to Bela's lair, when she meets a sort of strange looking doctor who may or may not be eeeevil. It all cumulates in a totally far-fetched plan to have a fake wedding to capture the mad scientist, but it seems that the scientist has x-ray vision, as he foils her plans, Oh no! What will happen? I [[genuinely]] liked this movie as a bit of a guilty [[gladness]]. Lugosi is [[wondrous]] here, his hangers-on are all very very strange, the story is actually quite [[squalid]] in some [[sites]] which makes it all most watchable. A [[funny]] [[petite]] [[opinion]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best movie I've ever seen!

Maybe it's because I live just a few miles from the village were the story take place, and I know how things work out in this area in Sweden. The movie tells the truth, believe me! It both criticizes and honors the lifestyle of Dalarna, and the producer wants people who watch the movie to be more opened minded and care more for your closest friends and relatives.

But if you live in another small village anywhere in Sweden (or another country) you will probably also recognize much from this movie.

Thank you Maria Blom! --------------------------------------------- Result 569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] If you haven't figured out what is going to happen in this film in the first five minutes then give it a couple more minutes. Lilia is a widow. She has been left on the shelf for too long and she wants to burst out. She has a teenage daughter which only highlights that she is not getting any younger. While checking up on her daughter she discovers a world she never dared...the cabaret, where she can belly dance in skimpy sequined outfits while men throw money at her. The [[film]] is very misogamist. It's portrayal of men is [[dismal]]. Which is rather [[odd]] as Lilia stoops to [[jiggle]] around for them, not for money, but just for the hell of it. When she succeeds in arousing them it makes her feel like a woman again. She does not wish to connect with them but she is addicted to the attention. The other dancers all are mostly aging women who look like men in drag and realize their time in the spotlight is short-lived. Not short enough I say. She does find romance, however brief , with you guessed it....No surprises here we didn't see coming. Though the ending is good you realize that it could have ended no other way. Maybe this film just isn't targeting my demographic- 30 Male If you haven't figured out what is going to happen in this film in the first five minutes then give it a couple more minutes. Lilia is a widow. She has been left on the shelf for too long and she wants to burst out. She has a teenage daughter which only highlights that she is not getting any younger. While checking up on her daughter she discovers a world she never dared...the cabaret, where she can belly dance in skimpy sequined outfits while men throw money at her. The [[filmmaking]] is very misogamist. It's portrayal of men is [[sombre]]. Which is rather [[freaky]] as Lilia stoops to [[jiggling]] around for them, not for money, but just for the hell of it. When she succeeds in arousing them it makes her feel like a woman again. She does not wish to connect with them but she is addicted to the attention. The other dancers all are mostly aging women who look like men in drag and realize their time in the spotlight is short-lived. Not short enough I say. She does find romance, however brief , with you guessed it....No surprises here we didn't see coming. Though the ending is good you realize that it could have ended no other way. Maybe this film just isn't targeting my demographic- 30 Male --------------------------------------------- Result 570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I did not like the [[idea]] of the female turtle at all since 1987 we knew the TMNT to be four [[brothers]] with their [[teacher]] [[Splinter]] and their enemies and each one of the four brothers are named after the [[great]] artists name like Leonardo , Michelangleo, Raphel and Donatello so [[Venus]] here doesn't have any [[meaning]] or [[playing]] any [[important]] [[part]] and I believe that the [[old]] TMNT series was [[much]] more [[better]] than that new one which contains [[Venus]] As a [[female]] turtle will not [[add]] any [[action]] to the [[story]] we [[like]] the story of the TMNT we knew in 1987 to have new [[enemies]] in [[every]] part is a [[good]] point to have some [[action]] but to have a [[female]] turtle is a very [[weak]] point to have some [[action]], we [[wish]] to [[see]] more new of TMNT series but just as the same characters we [[knew]] in 1987 without that female turtle. I did not like the [[think]] of the female turtle at all since 1987 we knew the TMNT to be four [[siblings]] with their [[educator]] [[Breakaway]] and their enemies and each one of the four brothers are named after the [[awesome]] artists name like Leonardo , Michelangleo, Raphel and Donatello so [[Zahra]] here doesn't have any [[mean]] or [[replay]] any [[critical]] [[parties]] and I believe that the [[former]] TMNT series was [[very]] more [[improved]] than that new one which contains [[Zahra]] As a [[girls]] turtle will not [[adds]] any [[efforts]] to the [[saga]] we [[adores]] the story of the TMNT we knew in 1987 to have new [[nemesis]] in [[all]] part is a [[buena]] point to have some [[activities]] but to have a [[girl]] turtle is a very [[feeble]] point to have some [[activities]], we [[wants]] to [[consults]] more new of TMNT series but just as the same characters we [[knowed]] in 1987 without that female turtle. --------------------------------------------- Result 571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The penultimate [[collaboration]] between director [[Anthony]] Mann and [[star]] James [[Stewart]] ([[excluding]] the few days Mann [[worked]] on Night [[Passage]] before parting [[company]] with the star under less than amicable [[circumstances]]), The Far Country belies its mainstream [[look]] to offer another [[portrait]] of an embittered man dragged unwillingly to his own [[redemption]], fighting it [[every]] step of the way. This time he's a cattle driver whose response to labour problems - challenging troublesome cowhands to a gunfight at the end of the trail - results in his cattle being confiscated by John McIntire's larcenous judge of the Roy Bean school of law and order. Stealing them back and taking them across the Canadian border, he soon finds himself unwillingly drawn into the growing conflict between prospectors and the judge as he cheats or kills them out of their claims...

While it's no [[great]] [[surprise]] which way [[Stewart]] turns at the [[end]], he's a [[surprisingly]] callous critter along the [[way]], even [[using]] his [[desire]] to just be [[left]] [[alone]] to excuse not warning a [[group]] of prospectors of an impending avalanche when he has the [[chance]] because it's not his problem. [[For]] most of the film there's really only a hair's [[breadth]] between him and McIntire, [[something]] the [[judge]] recognises [[immediately]], revelling in the [[company]] of a kindred [[spirit]] [[even]] as he's genially planning to lynch him. [[In]] many [[ways]] the townspeople who put their [[faith]] in him [[probably]] [[recognise]] it too - [[despite]] their [[appeals]] to his dead-and-buried better [[nature]], there's an [[unspoken]] acknowledgement that the only [[person]] who can [[stand]] up to the [[judge]] is [[someone]] [[almost]] as bad as he is.

As [[usual]] with Mann there's an [[exceptional]] use of high [[country]] locations, [[though]] for once the [[final]] [[showdown]] takes place on level [[ground]], and the [[film]] is [[almost]] [[perfectly]] cast with strong [[support]] from [[Walter]] Brennan, [[Harry]] Morgan and [[Ruth]] Roman ([[though]] Corinne Calvert's young romantic interest veers to the irritating). Sadly the great cinematography of the Canadian Rockies is done few favours by a distinctly average DVD transfer, with only the theatrical trailer as an extra. The penultimate [[cooperates]] between director [[Antony]] Mann and [[superstar]] James [[Steward]] ([[excludes]] the few days Mann [[acted]] on Night [[Crossing]] before parting [[businesses]] with the star under less than amicable [[situations]]), The Far Country belies its mainstream [[glance]] to offer another [[depiction]] of an embittered man dragged unwillingly to his own [[buyout]], fighting it [[any]] step of the way. This time he's a cattle driver whose response to labour problems - challenging troublesome cowhands to a gunfight at the end of the trail - results in his cattle being confiscated by John McIntire's larcenous judge of the Roy Bean school of law and order. Stealing them back and taking them across the Canadian border, he soon finds himself unwillingly drawn into the growing conflict between prospectors and the judge as he cheats or kills them out of their claims...

While it's no [[excellent]] [[surprises]] which way [[Steward]] turns at the [[ends]], he's a [[unbelievably]] callous critter along the [[manner]], even [[usage]] his [[willingness]] to just be [[exited]] [[merely]] to excuse not warning a [[panel]] of prospectors of an impending avalanche when he has the [[probability]] because it's not his problem. [[During]] most of the film there's really only a hair's [[width]] between him and McIntire, [[anything]] the [[magistrate]] recognises [[promptly]], revelling in the [[societies]] of a kindred [[wits]] [[yet]] as he's genially planning to lynch him. [[At]] many [[way]] the townspeople who put their [[fe]] in him [[maybe]] [[acknowledged]] it too - [[though]] their [[appeal]] to his dead-and-buried better [[characters]], there's an [[implied]] acknowledgement that the only [[persons]] who can [[standing]] up to the [[magistrate]] is [[person]] [[virtually]] as bad as he is.

As [[normal]] with Mann there's an [[unusual]] use of high [[nations]] locations, [[if]] for once the [[last]] [[confrontation]] takes place on level [[terra]], and the [[cinematography]] is [[hardly]] [[altogether]] cast with strong [[assistance]] from [[Walther]] Brennan, [[Hare]] Morgan and [[Roth]] Roman ([[while]] Corinne Calvert's young romantic interest veers to the irritating). Sadly the great cinematography of the Canadian Rockies is done few favours by a distinctly average DVD transfer, with only the theatrical trailer as an extra. --------------------------------------------- Result 572 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Your [[mind]] will not be [[satisfied]] by this no—[[budget]] doomsday thriller; but, [[pray]], who's will? [[A]] youngish [[couple]] [[spends]] the actual end of the world in the hidden laboratory of some aliens [[masquerading]] as [[Church]] people.

Small _apocalyptically themed outing, END OF THE WORLD has the [[ingenuity]] and the [[lack]] of both brio and style of the purely '50s similar [[movies]]. And it's not only that, but EOTW plays like a hybrid—not only doomsday but [[convent]] creeps as well. The villain of the movie is a well—known character actor.

This wholly [[shameless]] slapdash seems a piece of convent—[[exploitation]], that significantly '70s genre which looks today so amusingly outdated. Anyway, the convent's secret laboratory is some nasty piece of futuristic deco! Christopher Lee is the pride of End of the World; but the End of the World is not at all his pride! Your [[intellect]] will not be [[pleased]] by this no—[[budgets]] doomsday thriller; but, [[prayed]], who's will? [[una]] youngish [[couples]] [[spend]] the actual end of the world in the hidden laboratory of some aliens [[posing]] as [[Basilica]] people.

Small _apocalyptically themed outing, END OF THE WORLD has the [[resourcefulness]] and the [[lacked]] of both brio and style of the purely '50s similar [[filmmaking]]. And it's not only that, but EOTW plays like a hybrid—not only doomsday but [[abbey]] creeps as well. The villain of the movie is a well—known character actor.

This wholly [[brazen]] slapdash seems a piece of convent—[[operate]], that significantly '70s genre which looks today so amusingly outdated. Anyway, the convent's secret laboratory is some nasty piece of futuristic deco! Christopher Lee is the pride of End of the World; but the End of the World is not at all his pride! --------------------------------------------- Result 573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Penny]] [[Princess]] finds American [[working]] [[girl]] [[Yolande]] Donlon the inheritor of a small kingdom that [[lies]] in that [[triangle]] where France, Italy, and [[Switzerland]] meet called Lampidorra. It [[seems]] as [[though]] the Lampidorrans owe bills all over [[Europe]] and the [[main]] occupation of the [[country]] is smuggling due to its geography. An American multi-millionaire buys the place, but dies before he can take title. His nearest heir is Donlan.

But of course the estate has to go through probate in America and what are the Lampidorrans to do? [[Especially]] [[since]] Donlan who has now become a princess has forbade smuggling.

Enter Dirk Bogarde who is on a trip to Switzerland to learn about the cheese industry. It seems as though the Lampidorrans have a kind of cheese that they playfully refer to as Schmeeze. With a few bumps in the road, Schmeeze solves all the problems both financial, geopolitical, and romantic between Donlan and Bogarde.

How does Schmeeze work, well that's the gimmick to the whole film. But here's a hint. In Lover Come Back Jack Kruschen might just have gotten a hold of the secret of Schmeeze when he was busy inventing VIP for Rock Hudson and his advertising agency.

[[Anyway]] Penny Princess is a [[delightful]] [[blend]] of British farce and romantic comedy. [[Yolande]] Donlon once again plays a role that Marilyn Monroe would have been cast in if the film had been made this side of the pond. Dirk Bogarde was well cast in the part which was at the beginning of his career as a romantic heart throb, way before anyone but him suspected he had the acting chops he had.

This film was sadly shown at three o'clock in the morning on TCM. But at least I [[found]] a reason to be grateful for insomnia. [[Benny]] [[Princesses]] finds American [[worked]] [[chica]] [[Yolanda]] Donlon the inheritor of a small kingdom that [[resides]] in that [[delta]] where France, Italy, and [[Swiss]] meet called Lampidorra. It [[appears]] as [[although]] the Lampidorrans owe bills all over [[Eu]] and the [[primary]] occupation of the [[countries]] is smuggling due to its geography. An American multi-millionaire buys the place, but dies before he can take title. His nearest heir is Donlan.

But of course the estate has to go through probate in America and what are the Lampidorrans to do? [[Namely]] [[because]] Donlan who has now become a princess has forbade smuggling.

Enter Dirk Bogarde who is on a trip to Switzerland to learn about the cheese industry. It seems as though the Lampidorrans have a kind of cheese that they playfully refer to as Schmeeze. With a few bumps in the road, Schmeeze solves all the problems both financial, geopolitical, and romantic between Donlan and Bogarde.

How does Schmeeze work, well that's the gimmick to the whole film. But here's a hint. In Lover Come Back Jack Kruschen might just have gotten a hold of the secret of Schmeeze when he was busy inventing VIP for Rock Hudson and his advertising agency.

[[Writ]] Penny Princess is a [[wondrous]] [[mixes]] of British farce and romantic comedy. [[Yolanda]] Donlon once again plays a role that Marilyn Monroe would have been cast in if the film had been made this side of the pond. Dirk Bogarde was well cast in the part which was at the beginning of his career as a romantic heart throb, way before anyone but him suspected he had the acting chops he had.

This film was sadly shown at three o'clock in the morning on TCM. But at least I [[find]] a reason to be grateful for insomnia. --------------------------------------------- Result 574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Criticism]] of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it [[may]] have discouraged [[many]] viewers from giving the film a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the entire production was over-hyped, etc. For this viewer, seeing the [[film]] on a DVD in the quiet of the home, a very different reaction occurred.

Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are [[woven]] together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 [[years]] later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a [[delicate]] mood piece and the [[script]] by Minot and Cunningham is [[rich]] in atmosphere and subtle [[life]] lessons. [[Yes]], there are [[gaps]] in the [[story]] that could have [[used]] more [[explanation]], but in order to maintain the aura of [[nostalgia]] of a dying lady's [[words]], such 'holes' are [[understandable]]. The film is [[graced]] by the presence of not only Redgrave, [[Richardson]] (Redgrave's [[true]] [[daughter]]), [[Collette]], Gummer (Streep's [[true]] [[daughter]]), [[Meryl]] [[Streep]], Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn [[Close]], Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but [[also]] with an [[ensemble]] [[cast]] of [[brief]] but very [[solid]] performances. The setting is [[gorgeous]] ([[cinematography]] by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan [[A]].P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai ("[[Being]] Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady [[Harp]] [[Critic]] of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it [[maggio]] have discouraged [[innumerable]] viewers from giving the film a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the entire production was over-hyped, etc. For this viewer, seeing the [[cinematography]] on a DVD in the quiet of the home, a very different reaction occurred.

Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are [[tissues]] together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 [[olds]] later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a [[fragile]] mood piece and the [[hyphen]] by Minot and Cunningham is [[wealthy]] in atmosphere and subtle [[living]] lessons. [[Yea]], there are [[inadequacies]] in the [[stories]] that could have [[employs]] more [[explanations]], but in order to maintain the aura of [[longing]] of a dying lady's [[phrase]], such 'holes' are [[comprehensible]]. The film is [[flattered]] by the presence of not only Redgrave, [[Roberts]] (Redgrave's [[authentic]] [[daughters]]), [[Colette]], Gummer (Streep's [[authentic]] [[giri]]), [[Merrill]] [[Meryl]], Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn [[Shutting]], Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but [[apart]] with an [[whole]] [[casting]] of [[writ]] but very [[solids]] performances. The setting is [[wondrous]] ([[movies]] by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan [[una]].P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai ("[[Ongoing]] Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady [[Greenland]] --------------------------------------------- Result 575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I've [[seen]] [[many]] of [[Guy]] Maddin's [[films]], and [[liked]] most of them, but this one literally [[gave]] me a headache. [[John]] Gurdebeke's [[editing]] is [[way]] too [[frenetic]], and, [[apart]] from a tour-de-force [[sequence]] showing a line of heads snapping to [[look]] at one object, does nothing but interfere with the actors' [[ability]] to [[communicate]] with the [[audience]].

Another [[thing]] I [[disliked]] about this film was that it [[seemed]] more [[brutal]] than Maddin's earlier works--though his [[films]] have [[always]] had dark [[elements]], his [[sympathy]] for the characters [[gave]] the [[movies]] an overriding [[feeling]] of humanity. This one [[seemed]] more like [[harshness]] for harshness' sake.

As I'm [[required]] to [[add]] more lines of text before IMDb will [[accept]] my [[review]], I will [[mention]] that the actor playing "[[Guy]] Maddin" does [[manage]] to [[ape]] his facial [[expressions]] [[pretty]] well. I've [[saw]] [[various]] of [[Man]] Maddin's [[filmmaking]], and [[loved]] most of them, but this one literally [[given]] me a headache. [[Giovanni]] Gurdebeke's [[edition]] is [[routes]] too [[furious]], and, [[regardless]] from a tour-de-force [[sequences]] showing a line of heads snapping to [[glance]] at one object, does nothing but interfere with the actors' [[dexterity]] to [[interact]] with the [[viewers]].

Another [[stuff]] I [[proscribed]] about this film was that it [[appeared]] more [[brute]] than Maddin's earlier works--though his [[cinema]] have [[steadily]] had dark [[ingredient]], his [[compassion]] for the characters [[delivered]] the [[films]] an overriding [[sense]] of humanity. This one [[appeared]] more like [[toughness]] for harshness' sake.

As I'm [[require]] to [[summing]] more lines of text before IMDb will [[accepts]] my [[revisions]], I will [[mentioned]] that the actor playing "[[Man]] Maddin" does [[managed]] to [[apes]] his facial [[phrase]] [[quite]] well. --------------------------------------------- Result 576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this with my whole family as a 9 year old in 1964 on our black and white TV. I remember my father remarking that "this is how it could have happened - Adam and Eve." I vividly remember the scene when Adam finds Eve, her eyes were blackened. I asked my father why were her eyes blackened and he told because she was tired and hungry. Having not seen this episode in 45 years, I still remember it vividly - the TV transmissions back and forth with the home planet, scenes of bombs shaking the headquarters, with the final scene of the two walking off, Adam carrying his pack and Eve following. It may not have been a theatrical work of art, but it certainly left an impression on me all these years. --------------------------------------------- Result 577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The acting- [[fantastic]]. The story- amazing. The script- wonderful.

[[Just]] a few ways to [[describe]] this [[movie]]. Yes, it's [[slow]] and it has [[mostly]] talking, but the [[whole]] [[story]] of all of their [[lives]] and how it's told with the flashbacks [[thrown]] in and out makes you want to [[listen]] to [[every]] [[little]] [[thing]] to [[learn]] more about this haunting and [[tragic]] [[story]]. I, myself, am reading the book that the movie is based off of and it has shown me even more [[light]] into this [[story]] and answers some questions that were left unanswered in the [[movie]]. I'm [[also]] to read the Exectioner's [[Song]], which is the 'other' half of the Gilmore [[story]]. This [[movie]] [[made]] me [[think]] so much about the [[phrase]] "piering into the other side of the [[looking]] [[glass]]". You [[hear]] a [[song]] in the movie called Gary Gilmore's Eyes, which is by a [[punk]] band that [[wrote]] a [[song]] about what it'd be like to have Gary Gilmore's eyes(which is one of the [[things]] Gary [[gave]] as a transplant when he [[died]]) and as you [[listen]] to it, which is after the last [[time]] Mikal ever [[sees]] [[Gary]], you [[look]] at the whole situation a little differently if you were to only here the [[song]] itself. This movie opened my [[eyes]] in that [[way]] and in [[many]] [[others]]. I [[recommend]] this movie(and the book) very very much. The acting- [[wonderful]]. The story- amazing. The script- wonderful.

[[Virtuous]] a few ways to [[depict]] this [[film]]. Yes, it's [[slowing]] and it has [[predominantly]] talking, but the [[entire]] [[fairytales]] of all of their [[life]] and how it's told with the flashbacks [[tossed]] in and out makes you want to [[listens]] to [[any]] [[petit]] [[stuff]] to [[learns]] more about this haunting and [[dire]] [[stories]]. I, myself, am reading the book that the movie is based off of and it has shown me even more [[lighting]] into this [[conte]] and answers some questions that were left unanswered in the [[flick]]. I'm [[furthermore]] to read the Exectioner's [[Chanson]], which is the 'other' half of the Gilmore [[saga]]. This [[cinematography]] [[brought]] me [[thinking]] so much about the [[words]] "piering into the other side of the [[searching]] [[glassware]]". You [[heed]] a [[chanson]] in the movie called Gary Gilmore's Eyes, which is by a [[dipshit]] band that [[authored]] a [[chanson]] about what it'd be like to have Gary Gilmore's eyes(which is one of the [[items]] Gary [[supplied]] as a transplant when he [[perished]]) and as you [[listening]] to it, which is after the last [[times]] Mikal ever [[believes]] [[Gari]], you [[gaze]] at the whole situation a little differently if you were to only here the [[chanson]] itself. This movie opened my [[eye]] in that [[route]] and in [[several]] [[alia]]. I [[recommending]] this movie(and the book) very very much. --------------------------------------------- Result 578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Without being one of my [[favorites]], this is [[good]] for being a [[change]] of pace... [[even]] if only for a few minutes.

It all [[starts]] with a [[big]] [[fight]] between [[Tom]], Jerry and Spike (who is renamed "Butch" here). They're all beating each other, but [[suddenly]] [[Spike]] makes a heroic and [[admirable]] [[decision]]: he stops the [[fight]] and [[suggests]] that they all should be [[friends]]. So, all of them sign a [[peace]] treaty and [[become]] [[friends]]... which isn't going to last for long.

Meanwhile, the three [[become]] affectionate, [[patient]] and [[kind]] to each other. They [[even]] [[save]] each other when one of them is in [[danger]] of [[life]]. The [[relationship]] goes [[nothing]] but [[excellent]], until a very [[big]] [[steak]] appears and they all [[become]] greedy. The three are guilty to [[return]] to their usual [[fights]] and rivalries.

But [[still]]... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as [[friends]] is [[truly]] a [[delightful]] and [[grateful]] experience, [[even]] if only for a while.

[[Oh]], by the way, as a [[curious]] fact, two [[songs]] from "The [[Wizard]] of [[Oz]]" are [[played]] here in [[instrumental]] versions: "We're off to [[see]] the [[Wizard]]" and "Somewhere over the [[rainbow]]". Without being one of my [[favourites]], this is [[alright]] for being a [[alterations]] of pace... [[yet]] if only for a few minutes.

It all [[commenced]] with a [[substantial]] [[combats]] between [[Tum]], Jerry and Spike (who is renamed "Butch" here). They're all beating each other, but [[abruptly]] [[Fortification]] makes a heroic and [[wondrous]] [[rulings]]: he stops the [[fought]] and [[proposing]] that they all should be [[homies]]. So, all of them sign a [[pacific]] treaty and [[becomes]] [[freund]]... which isn't going to last for long.

Meanwhile, the three [[becomes]] affectionate, [[ill]] and [[types]] to each other. They [[yet]] [[economize]] each other when one of them is in [[menace]] of [[iife]]. The [[relations]] goes [[anything]] but [[noteworthy]], until a very [[major]] [[steaks]] appears and they all [[gotten]] greedy. The three are guilty to [[homecoming]] to their usual [[battle]] and rivalries.

But [[again]]... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as [[boyfriends]] is [[genuinely]] a [[wondrous]] and [[glad]] experience, [[yet]] if only for a while.

[[Oooh]], by the way, as a [[weird]] fact, two [[hymns]] from "The [[Warlock]] of [[Ounces]]" are [[served]] here in [[helpful]] versions: "We're off to [[consults]] the [[Conjurer]]" and "Somewhere over the [[rayed]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Gung Ho is one of those [[movies]] that you will [[want]] to [[see]] over and over again. [[Michael]] Keaton is put in [[charge]] of [[wooing]] a Japanese [[car]] [[company]] to come to his [[town]] [[thus]] [[creating]] [[jobs]] for the [[residents]] of Hadleyville. What [[happens]] after that is one [[hilarious]] [[moment]] after another. The two [[cultures]] clash and it is up to Keaton to [[hold]] [[things]] [[together]]. Look for [[great]] performances from Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, [[George]] Wendt, [[Mimi]] [[Rogers]], John Turturro, [[Soh]] Yamamura and Sab Shimomo. [[All]] are [[perfectly]] cast. Don't be [[fooled]] by the low number [[rating]]. This is a 7.5 in my [[book]]. It is interesting to note that the [[town]] name of Hadleyville was also used in High Noon. [[Yes]], there is a real Hadleyville but in Oregon. Gung Ho is one of those [[movie]] that you will [[wants]] to [[behold]] over and over again. [[Michele]] Keaton is put in [[charging]] of [[courting]] a Japanese [[vehicles]] [[enterprises]] to come to his [[municipality]] [[accordingly]] [[create]] [[labour]] for the [[locals]] of Hadleyville. What [[comes]] after that is one [[comical]] [[time]] after another. The two [[crop]] clash and it is up to Keaton to [[held]] [[aspects]] [[jointly]]. Look for [[wondrous]] performances from Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, [[Georgi]] Wendt, [[Moaning]] [[Rutgers]], John Turturro, [[Hos]] Yamamura and Sab Shimomo. [[Entire]] are [[altogether]] cast. Don't be [[hoodwinked]] by the low number [[valuation]]. This is a 7.5 in my [[books]]. It is interesting to note that the [[ville]] name of Hadleyville was also used in High Noon. [[Yeah]], there is a real Hadleyville but in Oregon. --------------------------------------------- Result 580 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Unless [[somebody]] enlightens me, I [[really]] have no [[idea]] what this movie is about. It [[looks]] like a [[picture]] with a message but it´s far from it. This [[movie]] tells [[pointless]] [[story]] of a New [[York]] [[press]] [[agent]] and about his [[problems]]. And, that´s [[basically]] all. When that [[agent]] is played by [[Pacino]], one must think that it [[must]] be something [[important]]. But it [[takes]] no [[hard]] [[thinking]] to figure out how meaningless and [[dull]] this [[movie]] is. To one of the best [[actors]] in the world, Al [[Pacino]], this is the second movie of the year (the other is "Simone") that [[deserves]] the title "the most boring and the most [[pointless]] [[motion]] [[picture]] of the year". [[So]], what´s [[going]] on, Al? Unless [[person]] enlightens me, I [[truthfully]] have no [[thinks]] what this movie is about. It [[seems]] like a [[photo]] with a message but it´s far from it. This [[flick]] tells [[futile]] [[history]] of a New [[Yorke]] [[pressing]] [[patrolman]] and about his [[difficulty]]. And, that´s [[mostly]] all. When that [[officer]] is played by [[Deniro]], one must think that it [[gotta]] be something [[major]]. But it [[pick]] no [[harsh]] [[ideas]] to figure out how meaningless and [[boring]] this [[filmmaking]] is. To one of the best [[players]] in the world, Al [[Deniro]], this is the second movie of the year (the other is "Simone") that [[merit]] the title "the most boring and the most [[superfluous]] [[motions]] [[photographing]] of the year". [[Thus]], what´s [[go]] on, Al? --------------------------------------------- Result 581 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] My husband and I went to [[see]] this [[movie]], being the [[horror]] [[movie]] [[buffs]] that we are. Two hours later I found myself [[wanting]] both my [[money]] and time back. I was so [[disappointed]]. The teasers for this [[film]] basically [[contained]] the best points of the film. There was nothing very scary about the film other than good timing on surprise entrances, etc. I found most of the 'scary' parts to be more [[comical]] than [[anything]]. [[After]] viewing other movies [[based]] on the works of Japanese writers, I have to conclude that what is [[deemed]] frightening in Japan is not what is frightening here in the US. My [[advice]]: [[If]] you are a fan of true horror [[movies]], [[save]] yourself the [[pain]] of [[sitting]] through this one. I can't really say that I [[would]] recommend renting it either, [[unless]] you have a free [[rental]] coming to you. My husband and I went to [[behold]] this [[kino]], being the [[monstrosity]] [[flick]] [[stalkers]] that we are. Two hours later I found myself [[wishing]] both my [[cash]] and time back. I was so [[disappointing]]. The teasers for this [[kino]] basically [[contain]] the best points of the film. There was nothing very scary about the film other than good timing on surprise entrances, etc. I found most of the 'scary' parts to be more [[hilarious]] than [[nothing]]. [[Upon]] viewing other movies [[predicated]] on the works of Japanese writers, I have to conclude that what is [[considered]] frightening in Japan is not what is frightening here in the US. My [[counsel]]: [[Though]] you are a fan of true horror [[movie]], [[rescuing]] yourself the [[heartache]] of [[seated]] through this one. I can't really say that I [[ought]] recommend renting it either, [[if]] you have a free [[tenancy]] coming to you. --------------------------------------------- Result 582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is only a [[response]] to the yahoo who [[says]] this [[movie]] is more realistic than the [[classic]], [[genre]] defining MASTERPIECE, [[Jaws]]. [[Yes]], brainiac, [[great]] whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, tiger)have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. [[Humans]] don't [[often]] make it onto that menu, [[granted]], but the shark in the film was [[repeatedly]] pointed out to be [[exhibiting]] abnormal behavior. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer [[whale]] [[destroying]] nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, [[sinking]] [[several]] dozen thick hulled North Atlantic [[fishing]] [[boats]] and knowing when certain people, all [[friends]] of the aforementioned "nemesis", are close enough to the water for it to [[reach]], are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this [[turd]] of a Jaws knock-off. Laughable. Great white [[sharks]] are [[also]] known to [[frequently]] chew on [[boats]], protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the [[size]] of [[Bruce]](if you don't know, look it up)[[would]] be more than [[capable]] of [[sinking]] a boat like The [[Orca]]([[hey]]! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it [[would]] [[weigh]] [[upwards]] of 6,000 [[lbs]]. I [[could]] go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing([[better]] acting, better [[effects]], better music, better [[writing]]), Orca is [[crap]]([[BLATANT]] rip-off of Jaws, lousy writing, [[abominable]] effects, most [[ridiculous]] [[plot]] this side of an [[Olson]] Twins flick). It doesn't take a [[masters]] from Columbia [[University]] to [[see]] that. Watch better movies. This is only a [[reaction]] to the yahoo who [[tells]] this [[filmmaking]] is more realistic than the [[traditional]], [[genres]] defining MASTERPIECE, [[Gags]]. [[Yup]], brainiac, [[super]] whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, tiger)have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. [[Human]] don't [[frequently]] make it onto that menu, [[attributed]], but the shark in the film was [[always]] pointed out to be [[proving]] abnormal behavior. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer [[pyle]] [[destroys]] nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, [[sink]] [[many]] dozen thick hulled North Atlantic [[peach]] [[boat]] and knowing when certain people, all [[friendships]] of the aforementioned "nemesis", are close enough to the water for it to [[achieving]], are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this [[poo]] of a Jaws knock-off. Laughable. Great white [[shark]] are [[additionally]] known to [[often]] chew on [[ship]], protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the [[sizes]] of [[Bros]](if you don't know, look it up)[[should]] be more than [[able]] of [[drowning]] a boat like The [[Orc]]([[yo]]! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it [[could]] [[weighted]] [[upside]] of 6,000 [[pound]]. I [[would]] go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing([[best]] acting, better [[impact]], better music, better [[handwriting]]), Orca is [[shit]]([[SEEMING]] rip-off of Jaws, lousy writing, [[infamous]] effects, most [[absurd]] [[intrigue]] this side of an [[Olsen]] Twins flick). It doesn't take a [[master]] from Columbia [[Campuses]] to [[seeing]] that. Watch better movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[In]] this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, [[Scooter]], Camillia, Dr. Teeth, [[Floyd]], Animal, [[Janice]], and Zoot are college graduates who decide to [[bring]] their successful college musical, Manhattan [[Melodies]], to Broadway. [[Unfortunately]], no [[producer]] will even [[meet]] with the [[Muppets]]. [[After]] being denied by too many producers, [[Scooter]] suggests that the [[Muppets]] [[decide]] to [[move]] on on their own. [[However]], Kermit [[still]] believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he [[finally]] does and let's everybody know that he sold the [[show]], Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.

This features many [[great]] scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding [[sequence]] [[filled]] with Muppets, including the Sesame [[Street]] cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.

My only [[complaint]] is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The [[Electric]] Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys [[dog]] Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this [[movie]], and he wasn't very well-known at the [[time]]). [[Among]] this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, [[Motorbike]], Camillia, Dr. Teeth, [[Freud]], Animal, [[Janis]], and Zoot are college graduates who decide to [[bringing]] their successful college musical, Manhattan [[Hymns]], to Broadway. [[Alack]], no [[manufacturer]] will even [[cater]] with the [[Marionettes]]. [[Upon]] being denied by too many producers, [[Sidecar]] suggests that the [[Puppets]] [[deciding]] to [[budge]] on on their own. [[Instead]], Kermit [[nonetheless]] believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he [[lastly]] does and let's everybody know that he sold the [[spectacle]], Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.

This features many [[wondrous]] scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding [[sequencing]] [[filling]] with Muppets, including the Sesame [[Thoroughfare]] cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.

My only [[grievance]] is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The [[Electricity]] Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys [[lapdog]] Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this [[kino]], and he wasn't very well-known at the [[moment]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 584 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This is the third parody of the [[scary]] [[movies]] and [[hopefully]] the [[last]]. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, [[Signs]] and 8 Mile for some weird [[reason]]. [[In]] my [[opinion]] this movie was very [[pointless]] and [[unnecessary]] and not even funny. I [[laughed]] [[maybe]] three [[times]] and that is not enough for a [[comedy]]. I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] the [[first]] two but this one was just plain [[dumb]]. [[If]] your [[jokes]] consist of [[corpses]] [[getting]] [[beat]] up and people [[constantly]] [[throwing]] [[stuff]] at each other then this [[movie]] is for you. In my [[opinion]], if your smart [[enough]] [[stay]] at [[home]] and [[save]] your [[money]] and [[please]] stop [[making]] these [[kind]] of movies, they just [[keep]] getting [[worse]] 3/10. This is the third parody of the [[fearful]] [[filmmaking]] and [[luckily]] the [[final]]. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, [[Signalling]] and 8 Mile for some weird [[grounds]]. [[At]] my [[visualizing]] this movie was very [[superfluous]] and [[superfluous]] and not even funny. I [[laughs]] [[probably]] three [[dates]] and that is not enough for a [[farce]]. I [[genuinely]] [[adored]] the [[frst]] two but this one was just plain [[witless]]. [[Though]] your [[gags]] consist of [[cadavers]] [[obtain]] [[defeats]] up and people [[always]] [[pelting]] [[thing]] at each other then this [[filmmaking]] is for you. In my [[views]], if your smart [[adequate]] [[stays]] at [[house]] and [[economize]] your [[cash]] and [[invites]] stop [[doing]] these [[kinds]] of movies, they just [[preserving]] getting [[lousiest]] 3/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Reviewed]] at the [[World]] [[Premiere]] screening [[Sept]]. 9, 2006 at the [[Isabel]] Bader Theatre during the Toronto [[International]] Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting premise but [[seemed]] to go on too long with too many [[shots]] of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The [[bits]] of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were [[especially]] [[striking]]. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was [[quite]] something as well. Scenes of the [[activity]] at the Three Gorges Dam project were [[also]] a [[complement]] to the Jia Khang-je [[films]] at TIFF (the [[feature]] [[Still]] Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were [[also]] built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, [[Producer]] Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on [[stage]] for a Q&[[A]] after the [[world]] [[premiere]]. Producer Noah Weinzweig was [[introduced]] from the [[audience]] and was [[thanked]] as the most [[key]] [[person]] that [[assisted]] in the on the ground access in [[China]] itself. [[Reconsidered]] at the [[Worldwide]] [[Debut]] screening [[Sep]]. 9, 2006 at the [[Isabelle]] Bader Theatre during the Toronto [[Globally]] Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting premise but [[sounded]] to go on too long with too many [[punches]] of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The [[tib]] of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were [[concretely]] [[breathtaking]]. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was [[rather]] something as well. Scenes of the [[operations]] at the Three Gorges Dam project were [[apart]] a [[addendum]] to the Jia Khang-je [[movies]] at TIFF (the [[features]] [[However]] Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were [[apart]] built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, [[Producers]] Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on [[phases]] for a Q&[[una]] after the [[worldwide]] [[debut]]. Producer Noah Weinzweig was [[tabled]] from the [[audiences]] and was [[gratitude]] as the most [[principal]] [[someone]] that [[assisting]] in the on the ground access in [[Hua]] itself. --------------------------------------------- Result 586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Ascension is actually a [[step]] up in terms of what the [[original]] movie was in [[story]] and in special [[effects]]. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire [[hunter]] looking for the [[count]] himself (if you [[remember]] him, he was from the [[movie]] Dragon, The [[Bruce]] Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the [[kid]] who [[helps]] the [[woman]] he [[loves]] from a far steal Dracula's body from the [[slab]]. [[Diane]] [[Neal]] Is good as the [[woman]] who steals Dracula's body in order to [[finds]] a [[cure]] for her dying [[boyfriend]], And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. [[Giving]] a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the [[rest]] of the cast in this [[movie]], and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note. Ascension is actually a [[stride]] up in terms of what the [[upfront]] movie was in [[tales]] and in special [[impact]]. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire [[hunting]] looking for the [[counts]] himself (if you [[recalling]] him, he was from the [[movies]] Dragon, The [[Bros]] Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the [[petit]] who [[contribute]] the [[dame]] he [[likes]] from a far steal Dracula's body from the [[plaque]]. [[Dejan]] [[Neil]] Is good as the [[dame]] who steals Dracula's body in order to [[find]] a [[healing]] for her dying [[buddy]], And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. [[Confer]] a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the [[stays]] of the cast in this [[filmmaking]], and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note. --------------------------------------------- Result 587 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[great]] film this, and a shame that it will receive [[little]] attention outside of arthouse circles and students who stay up until two in the morning to watch it on [[Channel]] Four.

The plot is a [[simple]] one but [[works]] very effectively, the blurring between child-like [[fantasy]] and hard-hitting [[nightmare]] is very well [[blurred]]. The budget looks pretty low, but to the [[credit]] of those involved it doesn't show too [[often]]. It also hasn't dated that much either.

I was [[lucky]] [[enough]] to [[tape]] this off the telly when it was on a few years [[ago]], and it has withstood half-a-dozen viewings. It's one of those films that won't appeal to all; [[though]] as usual, those with a more thoughtful approach to [[cinema]] would get a lot out of this.

Charlotte Buerke puts in a good performance as Anna, the spoilt brat and it is a shame she seems to have gone from the acting scene. Cross is [[also]] very good, carrying the stature of his character very well within the [[context]] of the picture.

There are some genuinely (and I don't say that [[lightly]]) [[disturbing]] moments in this film, both half-second shockers and more drawn-out [[tensions]]. Watch it with the lights out!

Highly [[recommended]].

9/10

A [[wondrous]] film this, and a shame that it will receive [[petit]] attention outside of arthouse circles and students who stay up until two in the morning to watch it on [[Canals]] Four.

The plot is a [[uncomplicated]] one but [[cooperate]] very effectively, the blurring between child-like [[chimera]] and hard-hitting [[cabos]] is very well [[grainy]]. The budget looks pretty low, but to the [[credits]] of those involved it doesn't show too [[generally]]. It also hasn't dated that much either.

I was [[fortunate]] [[adequately]] to [[cassettes]] this off the telly when it was on a few years [[prior]], and it has withstood half-a-dozen viewings. It's one of those films that won't appeal to all; [[if]] as usual, those with a more thoughtful approach to [[kino]] would get a lot out of this.

Charlotte Buerke puts in a good performance as Anna, the spoilt brat and it is a shame she seems to have gone from the acting scene. Cross is [[apart]] very good, carrying the stature of his character very well within the [[backdrop]] of the picture.

There are some genuinely (and I don't say that [[casually]]) [[disquieting]] moments in this film, both half-second shockers and more drawn-out [[strain]]. Watch it with the lights out!

Highly [[suggested]].

9/10

--------------------------------------------- Result 588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] From the Star of "[[MITCHELL]]", From the director of "Joysticks" and "Angel's Revenge"!!! These are taglines that would [[normally]] keep me from seeing this movie. And the worst part is that all the above [[mentioned]] statements are [[true]]!!! Ugghhh... Joe [[Don]] Baker eats every other five [[minutes]] in this film. It's like a [[bad]] [[remake]] of "Coogan's Bluff" From the Star of "[[MICHEL]]", From the director of "Joysticks" and "Angel's Revenge"!!! These are taglines that would [[traditionally]] keep me from seeing this movie. And the worst part is that all the above [[alluded]] statements are [[veritable]]!!! Ugghhh... Joe [[Donated]] Baker eats every other five [[mins]] in this film. It's like a [[unfavorable]] [[redo]] of "Coogan's Bluff" --------------------------------------------- Result 589 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WOW!

I just was given this film from a friend of mine, who bought it for 1.98 at Walmart, and he felt that he got taken! It is beyond boring, most of the scenes are filmed in front of a green screen, the acting is somewhat improvised, almost as if they didn't have a script. The Martians are CGI, which look like they were done by a novice, or a Fan produced movie. I cannot stress just how bad this DVD really is!

Example: In one of the scenes, the martians are torturing a local female captive. She goes from a woman in front of a green screen, to a CGI copy of that woman. The change is totally noticeable, and when she is killed, you can see that it is a computer figure, looking like something from a game back in 1990!

If at all possible, avoid this movie like the plague! You can download two trailers from their site, and see how god-awful it really is! --------------------------------------------- Result 590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Spectacular]] Horror [[movie]] that will give you the chills once you get settled with it. The atmosphere is very creepy and stylish, the [[score]] is chilling, but the best about the movie is it's performances. It's [[rare]] to get scared by performances and this movie's solid acting plays an [[important]] part in the [[scare]] factor.

The [[story]] is very interesting and gets your attention [[since]] the first minutes. [[Though]] the [[woman]] in black does not have much screen [[time]], she makes the [[necessary]] appearances to chill the audience in some [[brilliant]] scenes. The dialogs are very [[descriptive]] and make your imagination [[work]] and that's when it [[becomes]] really scary.

[[If]] you have the chance, watch this on theater it's a totally [[different]] experience but as [[scary]] as this [[movie]].

This is one of the [[best]] [[Ghost]] [[movies]] ever and it's directed for people that want to get scared. [[Wondrous]] Horror [[movies]] that will give you the chills once you get settled with it. The atmosphere is very creepy and stylish, the [[scoring]] is chilling, but the best about the movie is it's performances. It's [[uncommon]] to get scared by performances and this movie's solid acting plays an [[principal]] part in the [[shitless]] factor.

The [[tale]] is very interesting and gets your attention [[because]] the first minutes. [[If]] the [[female]] in black does not have much screen [[moment]], she makes the [[needed]] appearances to chill the audience in some [[sparkly]] scenes. The dialogs are very [[narrative]] and make your imagination [[jobs]] and that's when it [[become]] really scary.

[[Unless]] you have the chance, watch this on theater it's a totally [[several]] experience but as [[terrible]] as this [[cinematography]].

This is one of the [[nicest]] [[Phantoms]] [[theater]] ever and it's directed for people that want to get scared. --------------------------------------------- Result 591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Heather Graham couldn't play a convincing lesbian if her life depended on it. Who do the producers of the movie think they are? the ABSOLUTE WORST, most UNREALISTIC movie i've seen in as long as i can remember. This movie is so bad that i felt compelled to sign-up on IMDb and make sure the rating of this "film" drops.

omg i'm Heather Graham, i just kissed a drunk chick, so while she's passed out i'm REALLY going to pace around my room for HOURS asking myself frantically "WHAT HAVE I DONE?!".. Jesus heather, get over it and grow up... and i'd like to forward that same sentiment to the idiot producers... and while i'm at it, instead of this movie being all about an pathetic excuse for a coming out story, perhaps it would have been more suitable to focus the plot onto a character who's mentally unstable... like your so-called "lesbian" character... after all, i know the first time i had gay sex, when i left the next morning i jumped to the sky in excitement in the middle of the street... honestly b*tch, get a grip...

WHAT A JOKE! and please note there are many many many more flaws and appallingly stupid aspects to this lame flick, but i'm so sick of even thinking about it anymore. bottom line, if you're a smart person you'll hate this movie, and if you're not a smart person, then you'll love it... it's as simple as that. --------------------------------------------- Result 592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have not [[yet]] decided whether this will replace Anaconda as "The [[Worst]] [[Film]] I [[Have]] Ever [[Seen]]".

Even if you [[ignore]] the [[dodgy]] accents, low production [[values]] and [[appalling]] camera [[work]] this film has [[absolutely]] nothing [[going]] for it. I only went to [[see]] it as I had read the [[book]] and wanted to see how they [[would]] [[work]] the [[complicated]] plot into a 2 hour film.

The simple answer is - they didn't. Characters [[appear]] with [[little]] to no [[explanation]] as to who they are and then [[proceed]] to [[play]] no [[valuable]] [[part]] in the narrative. Even the main characters act without [[reason]] so that by the time the [[film]] reaches it's climax you don't [[care]] what [[happens]] to any of them.

I can [[accept]] that [[books]] [[occasionally]] need to be rewritten to [[fit]] into [[films]] and that it is [[perhaps]] unfair to [[judge]] this [[film]] against the book it was [[adapted]] from. But after my [[friends]] and I [[came]] out of the [[cinema]] I had to spend most of the [[journey]] [[home]] [[explaining]] what was [[supposed]] to have happened.

They even change the true [[meaning]] of the books title "[[Rancid]] [[Aluminium]]" by squeezing it into [[yet]] another piece of [[pointless]] [[voice]] over just so they can [[allow]] the film to have a cool title.

A real [[mess]] of a film from [[start]] to [[finish]]. I have not [[however]] decided whether this will replace Anaconda as "The [[Pire]] [[Filmmaking]] I [[Has]] Ever [[Saw]]".

Even if you [[omit]] the [[untrustworthy]] accents, low production [[valuing]] and [[spooky]] camera [[jobs]] this film has [[abundantly]] nothing [[go]] for it. I only went to [[consults]] it as I had read the [[ledger]] and wanted to see how they [[could]] [[cooperated]] the [[tortuous]] plot into a 2 hour film.

The simple answer is - they didn't. Characters [[arise]] with [[small]] to no [[explanations]] as to who they are and then [[proceeding]] to [[playing]] no [[precious]] [[parties]] in the narrative. Even the main characters act without [[cause]] so that by the time the [[filmmaking]] reaches it's climax you don't [[healthcare]] what [[occurs]] to any of them.

I can [[admit]] that [[ledgers]] [[sometimes]] need to be rewritten to [[fitted]] into [[filmmaking]] and that it is [[probably]] unfair to [[richter]] this [[filmmaking]] against the book it was [[adjusted]] from. But after my [[friend]] and I [[arrived]] out of the [[theaters]] I had to spend most of the [[trips]] [[habitation]] [[explains]] what was [[suspected]] to have happened.

They even change the true [[mean]] of the books title "[[Antiquated]] [[Aluminum]]" by squeezing it into [[even]] another piece of [[dispensable]] [[vowel]] over just so they can [[enables]] the film to have a cool title.

A real [[jumble]] of a film from [[embark]] to [[finalize]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] When someone remakes a [[classic]] [[movie]], the remake is always unfavorably [[compared]] to the [[original]]. [[Also]], there's a [[chance]] that the remake is so [[radically]] different that it is just too [[unfamiliar]] to [[audiences]].

Well, the 1973 [[TV]] version of "[[Double]] Indemnity" has almost identical scenes and dialogue as the 1944 original. The main [[difference]] is that the [[remake]] just seems to have no [[energy]] at all. Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering insurance agent Walter Neff in the original; Richard Crenna just seems world-weary and [[tired]]. [[Edward]] G. Robinson brought [[great]] manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton Keys; Lee J. Cobb, a fine [[actor]], [[appears]] almost [[bored]] with the [[proceedings]]. Samantha Eggar is all [[wrong]] as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while Barbara Stanwyck was just superb in this [[wicked]] role, Eggar is [[overly]] polite and mannered and just [[seems]] [[way]] out of place.

[[Robert]] [[Webber]], in the [[old]] [[Richard]] [[Gaines]] role as Robinson's boss Norton, and John Fiedler taking the Porter Hall role as the [[crucial]] [[witness]], bring some life to the movie. In particular, Webber recreates the Norton role well in a 1970s context.

However, after the [[movie]] [[starts]], the [[whole]] [[thing]] just [[sort]] of [[lies]] there, without any [[life]] or electricity. This is one [[film]] that never should have been remade. When someone remakes a [[typical]] [[movies]], the remake is always unfavorably [[compare]] to the [[initial]]. [[Moreover]], there's a [[luck]] that the remake is so [[profoundly]] different that it is just too [[anonymous]] to [[viewers]].

Well, the 1973 [[TELEVISION]] version of "[[Twice]] Indemnity" has almost identical scenes and dialogue as the 1944 original. The main [[dispute]] is that the [[redo]] just seems to have no [[energies]] at all. Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering insurance agent Walter Neff in the original; Richard Crenna just seems world-weary and [[weary]]. [[Edwards]] G. Robinson brought [[super]] manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton Keys; Lee J. Cobb, a fine [[protagonist]], [[appearing]] almost [[drilled]] with the [[trials]]. Samantha Eggar is all [[inaccurate]] as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while Barbara Stanwyck was just superb in this [[maleficent]] role, Eggar is [[exceedingly]] polite and mannered and just [[looks]] [[ways]] out of place.

[[Roberta]] [[Weber]], in the [[former]] [[Ritchie]] [[Holsters]] role as Robinson's boss Norton, and John Fiedler taking the Porter Hall role as the [[indispensable]] [[testimonial]], bring some life to the movie. In particular, Webber recreates the Norton role well in a 1970s context.

However, after the [[filmmaking]] [[initiated]], the [[together]] [[stuff]] just [[genre]] of [[resides]] there, without any [[living]] or electricity. This is one [[filmmaking]] that never should have been remade. --------------------------------------------- Result 594 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was good for it's time. If you like Eddie Murpy this is a must have to add to your collection. Eddie was young and funny with his 80's haircut. Charlotte Lewis, Eddie's costar is hot. This was one of her first movies and she was not bad. The graphics were good for the 80's. A lot of the actors went on to do other good movies you should check them out through IMDb. Other must have from Eddie is "Coming to America" and "48 hours". Another actor "Victor Wong" has a small part in this movie. Check out some of his older movies like "Big trouble in little china". If you liked the action movies from the 80's this is your movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 595 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I, like many other Bachchan fans, having been eagerly awaiting the remake of Sholay. This movie was not it. Thank god they didn't let them use the name "Sholay" in the movie title. Ram Gopal's remake is not worthy of the title. The camera work, the locations, the costumes, the totally out-of-place dancing, the dialogue all combined to make the worst movie I have ever seen. You wonder if the cast of actors agreed to make this movie because they needed money and Ram Gopal was paying a lot of money for the cast. The only non-paid actor, the ant, was the only resemblance to the first movie. Abishek's role was totally ridiculous, did he need money to pay for the wedding to Ash? Save your money, your mind and your time, don't bother with this movie or the DVD when that comes out. --------------------------------------------- Result 596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ... and yet, we were told, there was another hour and 20 minutes left to go.

Why, oh, why wasn't there an editor to tell the writer/director to snip, snip, snip? Apparently that writer/director has previously done shorts; as a short, this would have been okay. But the lack of dialogue starts to grate after twenty minutes. The lack of much music glares. The background noises (talking, traffic, and especially a ubiquitous helicopter) get old really fast. But the worst failure is in story. There is precious little beyond a short.

After an hour we saw variations of the same scene over and over again. I nearly screamed at the screen, "We get it, we get it!!!!!" It's amazing that after that left the theatre, we could drive home, watch the Daily Show and parts of the Colbert Report, get ready for bed,and know that the audience was STILL trapped in the theatre.

It's not enough to indulge your vision. You have to give the audience enough to share your vision. --------------------------------------------- Result 597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And thats about all that is. This thing is slow. The actors have ability, they just don't seem motivated to put forth the effort. The plot isn't that great and is hampered further by the aforementioned slowness of it all. The accents, when there are any, are British. Uh, lots of these folks are supposed to be Danes. OK, OK, accents aren't that important. But language is. I don't think they used words like "yeah" and "OK" in Beowulf's day. And that supposedly way cool weapon his king gave him? Did he ever reload that thing? Did he ever sight it in? Or was Beowulf just that bad an aim? Well, his aim did at least match the computer graphics used in generating the monsters. Those were rather off too. Bad special effects. Bright spot? Just one that I can think of. Marina Sirtis has held up well over the years. --------------------------------------------- Result 598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the most recent addition to a new wave of educational documentaries like "The Corporation" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." Its commentary is clear and unwavering as is the breathtaking cinematic style of this well crafted feature. The film manages to impose a powerful sense of how unsteady our world is as we rush toward an environmentally unsustainable future at lightning speed - while showing us the terrifying beauty in our pursuit of progress.

Truly a remarkable accomplishment which must be seen by all who care about the world we leave to our children. Bravo!

NB - this is also the only film (of 8) at Varsity theaters (Toronto) boasting a stick-on tag which reads... "To arrange group viewings please contact...." ... a further testament to the popularity and importance of this gem.

My bet... an academy award nomination for best documentary.

OB101 --------------------------------------------- Result 599 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "The [[Grudge]]" is a [[remake]] of Shimizu's own [[series]] of popular Japanese horror films. Shimizu knows he is not dealing with anything new, so he does what any [[intelligent]] person would have done in his place: he forgets logic and concentrates in giving viewers a fun ride. He uses commonly known [[clichés]] associated with ghost [[stories]] but Shimizu plays with these [[elements]] in an [[imaginative]] [[manner]]. The nonlinear [[narrative]] is not a [[mere]] [[gimmick]] but an interesting way to present sequences from [[different]] perspectives. At the [[end]], all I can [[say]] is that if the only purpose of a horror film is to scare the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a theater with an audience and it was fun to see viewers go wild over this one. It [[probably]] doesn't play as well in your [[living]] [[room]]. "The [[Dent]]" is a [[redo]] of Shimizu's own [[serials]] of popular Japanese horror films. Shimizu knows he is not dealing with anything new, so he does what any [[smarter]] person would have done in his place: he forgets logic and concentrates in giving viewers a fun ride. He uses commonly known [[cliché]] associated with ghost [[history]] but Shimizu plays with these [[ingredients]] in an [[creative]] [[method]]. The nonlinear [[narration]] is not a [[simple]] [[ruse]] but an interesting way to present sequences from [[dissimilar]] perspectives. At the [[termination]], all I can [[said]] is that if the only purpose of a horror film is to scare the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a theater with an audience and it was fun to see viewers go wild over this one. It [[indubitably]] doesn't play as well in your [[life]] [[chambre]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] I was lucky enough to get a DVD copy of this movie recently and have now seen it for the 2nd time. The 1st time was on late night TV in Australia more than 20 years ago but I could never [[forget]] this strange and [[bleak]] film..

Not many people like this film at all because it is so unconventional - the fact that there is hardly any spoken dialogue in this move - we just hear the thoughts of characters - is only one [[unconventional]] aspect of it.

Searching for a copy of this film I found out that the producer was dead, the main actor was dead, it was not kept in any British TV or film archives, that it was never released on video or DVD, that television networks around the world trashed it after their copyright ran out in the 80's. When it was first shown on TV in Australia there were no recordable devices for consumers.

On the second viewing recently, I could see why it was [[unforgettable]]. At times it is very tense and unbearably claustrophobic very like a Harold Pinter stage play.

Again, if anyone wants a DVD copy of this please email me and I'm sure we can work something out Regards Adam (whiteflokati@hotmail.com) I was lucky enough to get a DVD copy of this movie recently and have now seen it for the 2nd time. The 1st time was on late night TV in Australia more than 20 years ago but I could never [[forgets]] this strange and [[morose]] film..

Not many people like this film at all because it is so unconventional - the fact that there is hardly any spoken dialogue in this move - we just hear the thoughts of characters - is only one [[unorthodox]] aspect of it.

Searching for a copy of this film I found out that the producer was dead, the main actor was dead, it was not kept in any British TV or film archives, that it was never released on video or DVD, that television networks around the world trashed it after their copyright ran out in the 80's. When it was first shown on TV in Australia there were no recordable devices for consumers.

On the second viewing recently, I could see why it was [[eventful]]. At times it is very tense and unbearably claustrophobic very like a Harold Pinter stage play.

Again, if anyone wants a DVD copy of this please email me and I'm sure we can work something out Regards Adam (whiteflokati@hotmail.com) --------------------------------------------- Result 601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has lost her [[mother]] and [[finds]] it [[hard]] to communicate with her [[father]], until one day in the [[basement]] of her [[apartment]] she [[finds]] a [[secret]] [[magic]] [[elevator]] which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she meets two other [[children]] who have lost their father and [[face]] [[poverty]]...

I was clicking through the channels and [[found]] this..I read the synopsis and [[suddenly]] [[saw]] Elisha Cuthbert...I [[thought]] okay....and watched the [[movie]].. i didn't [[realise]] Elisha had [[done]] [[films]] before....'The [[Girl]] Next Door and 24' Elisha provides a satisfactory performance, the plot is a little cheesy but the film [[works]]...Its amazing how this young girl went on to become the Hottest babe in Hollywood! Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has lost her [[mummy]] and [[found]] it [[laborious]] to communicate with her [[pere]], until one day in the [[cellar]] of her [[apartments]] she [[deems]] a [[clandestine]] [[hallucinogenic]] [[shiloh]] which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she meets two other [[kiddies]] who have lost their father and [[encounter]] [[squalor]]...

I was clicking through the channels and [[uncovered]] this..I read the synopsis and [[abruptly]] [[watched]] Elisha Cuthbert...I [[ideas]] okay....and watched the [[kino]].. i didn't [[understand]] Elisha had [[accomplished]] [[cinematography]] before....'The [[Female]] Next Door and 24' Elisha provides a satisfactory performance, the plot is a little cheesy but the film [[collaborated]]...Its amazing how this young girl went on to become the Hottest babe in Hollywood! --------------------------------------------- Result 602 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very close and sharp discription of the bubbling and dynamic emotional world of specialy one 18year old guy, that makes his first experiences in his gay love to an other boy, during an vacation with a part of his family.

I liked this film because of his extremly clear and surrogated storytelling , with all this "Sound-close-ups" and quiet moments wich had been full of intensive moods.

--------------------------------------------- Result 603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This is a [[terrible]] [[movie]], [[terrible]] [[script]], bad [[direction]] and [[nonsensical]] ending. [[Also]], [[bad]] performances, except from Clancy Brown who is criminally underused here, and Michael Pollard. Watching this [[movie]] was purgatory--you do it to unload enough bad movie [[karma]] to [[actually]] [[see]] a [[good]] one further down the line.

The [[movie]] [[presents]] a father and son who look like they couldn't [[every]] possibly have been [[related]]. The [[part]] of the male lead is not well [[written]] and [[seems]] uncharismatic in this role. You can [[see]] the plot [[points]] a [[mile]] away. The [[actions]] of the [[female]] lead and that of her brother, the cop, [[also]] [[make]] no [[sense]]. [[So]], a [[major]] action on her part at the [[end]] of the [[movie]] makes no sense script-wise. This is a [[shocking]] [[filmmaking]], [[scary]] [[scripts]], bad [[directions]] and [[laughable]] ending. [[Moreover]], [[unfavourable]] performances, except from Clancy Brown who is criminally underused here, and Michael Pollard. Watching this [[filmmaking]] was purgatory--you do it to unload enough bad movie [[mojo]] to [[indeed]] [[behold]] a [[alright]] one further down the line.

The [[film]] [[exposes]] a father and son who look like they couldn't [[all]] possibly have been [[pertaining]]. The [[portion]] of the male lead is not well [[wrote]] and [[appears]] uncharismatic in this role. You can [[behold]] the plot [[dots]] a [[miles]] away. The [[action]] of the [[girl]] lead and that of her brother, the cop, [[additionally]] [[deliver]] no [[feeling]]. [[Thus]], a [[grandes]] action on her part at the [[ends]] of the [[filmmaking]] makes no sense script-wise. --------------------------------------------- Result 604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All the world said that the film Tashan would be a good movie with great pleasure, but this is not the case. Vijay Krishna Acharya made a serious mistake to take as an actress Kareena Kapoor. She was unbearable throughout the film. Her tom-boy look does not really goes well. Even the film the story of the film is not making sense at all. Everyone said that the Quetin Taratino of India is Vijay but its not at all Quetin. The talent Anil Kapoor was involved in this stupid movie. Anil is an actor of large caliber and this film is not. Akshay Kumar has also been a victim of this film as all is Saif. The Style and the Phoormola is not really good in this film i was disappointed --------------------------------------------- Result 605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] ANTWONE FISHER is the [[story]] of a young [[emotionally]] [[troubled]] U.S. [[Navy]] [[seaman]]. [[His]] [[problems]] lead him to [[Jerome]] Davenport, a [[psychiatrist]] who [[helps]] him [[realize]] that his [[troubles]] stem from his [[childhood]] upbringing.

[[Get]] ready to shed a [[tear]] or two. The [[movie]] [[could]] [[thaw]] the [[coldest]] [[heart]]. I [[loved]] the story, which turns from [[something]] so very awful to [[happen]] to [[anyone]] into a [[positive]] [[ending]]. ANTWONE FISHER is a [[powerful]] movie, most importantly about [[forgiveness]]. Other [[important]] issues that [[get]] you [[thinking]] are child abuse, adoption, and [[foster]] care.

Oscar [[winner]], Denzel Washington does an [[impressive]] [[job]] in his directorial debut. There were [[many]] scenes which I enjoyed watching. They [[included]] the [[beginning]] ([[dreams]] of a [[little]] [[boy]] – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending ([[dreams]] turned into reality), which [[beautifully]] [[tied]] the story together.

Another [[wonderful]] scene [[occurred]] when the [[doctor]] [[encouraged]] Antwone to search for his family to [[find]] [[answers]] to his questions about his [[family]] that [[abandoned]] him.

My [[favorite]] scene [[happened]] when the young [[man]] finally [[confronted]] his [[mother]] and her [[reaction]] [[towards]] him. [[Priceless]].

All the [[actors]] [[represented]] their parts well.

[[In]] addition to directorial [[responsibilities]], [[Mr]]. Washington [[continues]] to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting [[roles]]. He had a strong [[presence]] in this movie.

Actor, Derek Luke [[demonstrated]] why he was so right for the [[part]] of Antwone [[Fisher]]. He portrayed very [[real]] and heart-tugging [[work]].

[[Joy]] Bryant who played the [[part]] of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The [[chemistry]] [[flowed]] well between the romantic [[characters]].

Novella Nelson who [[played]] the [[part]] of [[Mrs]]. Tate, a [[despicable]] [[character]], deserves [[special]] mention.

[[Although]] we only [[see]] her for a few minutes, the actress who [[played]] Fisher's [[mother]] [[gave]] an [[outstanding]] performance.

[[Everyone]] should see ANTWONE [[FISHER]]. ANTWONE FISHER is the [[storytelling]] of a young [[excitedly]] [[tumultuous]] U.S. [[Marina]] [[marine]]. [[Her]] [[hassles]] lead him to [[Dominguez]] Davenport, a [[psychologist]] who [[assists]] him [[realizing]] that his [[disorders]] stem from his [[infantile]] upbringing.

[[Got]] ready to shed a [[tears]] or two. The [[cinematic]] [[wo]] [[thawing]] the [[coolest]] [[nub]]. I [[enjoyed]] the story, which turns from [[anything]] so very awful to [[arise]] to [[nobody]] into a [[supportive]] [[terminated]]. ANTWONE FISHER is a [[influential]] movie, most importantly about [[amnesty]]. Other [[sizeable]] issues that [[got]] you [[thought]] are child abuse, adoption, and [[promote]] care.

Oscar [[winners]], Denzel Washington does an [[awesome]] [[jobs]] in his directorial debut. There were [[innumerable]] scenes which I enjoyed watching. They [[inscribed]] the [[launching]] ([[dreaming]] of a [[tiny]] [[guy]] – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending ([[dreaming]] turned into reality), which [[amazingly]] [[associated]] the story together.

Another [[wondrous]] scene [[occured]] when the [[doctors]] [[encourages]] Antwone to search for his family to [[found]] [[reactions]] to his questions about his [[families]] that [[waived]] him.

My [[favored]] scene [[sweated]] when the young [[males]] finally [[matched]] his [[ammi]] and her [[responses]] [[into]] him. [[Inestimable]].

All the [[actresses]] [[constituted]] their parts well.

[[During]] addition to directorial [[liability]], [[Mister]]. Washington [[continual]] to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting [[duties]]. He had a strong [[involvements]] in this movie.

Actor, Derek Luke [[protested]] why he was so right for the [[portion]] of Antwone [[Fishermen]]. He portrayed very [[genuine]] and heart-tugging [[collaborate]].

[[Jubilation]] Bryant who played the [[parte]] of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The [[chemist]] [[rushed]] well between the romantic [[character]].

Novella Nelson who [[accomplished]] the [[parte]] of [[Margot]]. Tate, a [[loathsome]] [[characters]], deserves [[particular]] mention.

[[Though]] we only [[consults]] her for a few minutes, the actress who [[done]] Fisher's [[mummy]] [[given]] an [[unresolved]] performance.

[[Someone]] should see ANTWONE [[FISHERMEN]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I know no one cares, but I do. This film is historic for one reason. It is the [[unity]] of two heroes from two [[great]] seventies sci-fi films. Well, one is great, and one is quite [[bad]]. The [[great]] one is truly great, in fact it's the best. The [[bad]] one is [[truly]] [[bad]], in fact it's the [[worst]]. Of course of the great I refer to "Star Wars" and it's star Mark [[Hamill]], [[aka]] "Luke Skywalker", who is the hero of this film about a [[kid]] who gets his Vette swiped and then goes to Vegas (on a lead) and after a [[whole]] [[lot]] of adventures, [[eventually]] [[recovers]] it. (Since he's into fixing cars I [[guess]] you can [[call]] him "Lube [[Skywalker]]"). Along the [[way]] he [[meets]] a [[hooker]] with a heart of gold, and ends up [[facing]] off with a [[character]] [[played]] by Kim Milford, the hero from the seventies sci-fi cult [[film]] "Laserblast", which is, as I've hinted at [[earlier]], the worst sci-fi [[film]] ever [[made]]. Milford plays the lead baddie whom Hamill must steal his car back from. I realize that no one cares about this meeting of two great sci-fi heroes, but I do. And I also [[must]] say that this is one of the best/[[worst]] movies of all time. Mark Hamill's acting needs the force, the plot needs extensive Jedi training, and the character of the hooker played by Annie Potts just might be the most annoying character of all time, ever, in any film I've ever seen. But it's a fun movie to watch on a weekend day, or a weekday night, late at night, very late. It's one of those films that meanders, looking for something but without quite finding it and yet, at the same time, it's entire purpose is, like free-form jazz, to simply exist as is. And it does. And what is, isn't that great, but you can't say it isn't entertaining, because for an hour and a half you might feel ripped off, but you won't feel cheated. So turn off your mind, relax, and enjoy this [[muddled]] gem without any expectations, and may the force be with you, always. I know no one cares, but I do. This film is historic for one reason. It is the [[cohesion]] of two heroes from two [[super]] seventies sci-fi films. Well, one is great, and one is quite [[negative]]. The [[prodigious]] one is truly great, in fact it's the best. The [[unfavorable]] one is [[really]] [[unfavourable]], in fact it's the [[meanest]]. Of course of the great I refer to "Star Wars" and it's star Mark [[Hummel]], [[alias]] "Luke Skywalker", who is the hero of this film about a [[child]] who gets his Vette swiped and then goes to Vegas (on a lead) and after a [[ensemble]] [[batch]] of adventures, [[lastly]] [[regains]] it. (Since he's into fixing cars I [[guessing]] you can [[calling]] him "Lube [[Anakin]]"). Along the [[routes]] he [[conforms]] a [[prostitute]] with a heart of gold, and ends up [[confronting]] off with a [[trait]] [[accomplished]] by Kim Milford, the hero from the seventies sci-fi cult [[cinematography]] "Laserblast", which is, as I've hinted at [[prior]], the worst sci-fi [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. Milford plays the lead baddie whom Hamill must steal his car back from. I realize that no one cares about this meeting of two great sci-fi heroes, but I do. And I also [[should]] say that this is one of the best/[[meanest]] movies of all time. Mark Hamill's acting needs the force, the plot needs extensive Jedi training, and the character of the hooker played by Annie Potts just might be the most annoying character of all time, ever, in any film I've ever seen. But it's a fun movie to watch on a weekend day, or a weekday night, late at night, very late. It's one of those films that meanders, looking for something but without quite finding it and yet, at the same time, it's entire purpose is, like free-form jazz, to simply exist as is. And it does. And what is, isn't that great, but you can't say it isn't entertaining, because for an hour and a half you might feel ripped off, but you won't feel cheated. So turn off your mind, relax, and enjoy this [[disconcerted]] gem without any expectations, and may the force be with you, always. --------------------------------------------- Result 607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] I saw this movie in 1976, my [[first]] year of living in New [[York]]. I went on to [[live]] there for the next 26 [[years]],but never saw anything as [[delicate]] and beautiful again as this small [[TV]] movie. It was part of a PBS series as I recall, and I've never [[forgotten]] it.

There are no [[sex]] scenes to speak of, just delicate, [[moving]], [[extraordinarily]] [[touching]] [[moments]] [[full]] of [[tension]] and excitement, all set [[within]] a conservative, Boston (I [[think]]), [[World]] War 1 [[environment]] where [[women]] played the role of [[devoted]] [[wife]] [[awaiting]] the [[return]] of husband from the war, and did not [[seek]] out a [[career]] and financial [[independence]]. [[Frances]] Lee McCain is [[superb]] in the role of [[career]] photographer and I have [[spent]] the next 30 [[odd]] years searching for her in equally challenging roles to no [[avail]].

There has to be a [[video]] of this [[movie]]? [[Sure]] it should be on DVD but [[surely]] at [[least]] a [[video]]? I saw this movie in 1976, my [[fiirst]] year of living in New [[Yorke]]. I went on to [[vive]] there for the next 26 [[yrs]],but never saw anything as [[fragile]] and beautiful again as this small [[TELEVISION]] movie. It was part of a PBS series as I recall, and I've never [[omitted]] it.

There are no [[sexuality]] scenes to speak of, just delicate, [[shifting]], [[impossibly]] [[affects]] [[times]] [[fullest]] of [[tensions]] and excitement, all set [[inside]] a conservative, Boston (I [[thoughts]]), [[Monde]] War 1 [[surroundings]] where [[female]] played the role of [[dedicated]] [[women]] [[awaited]] the [[returnee]] of husband from the war, and did not [[seeks]] out a [[quarries]] and financial [[autonomy]]. [[Francis]] Lee McCain is [[stunning]] in the role of [[quarry]] photographer and I have [[expenditures]] the next 30 [[freaky]] years searching for her in equally challenging roles to no [[success]].

There has to be a [[videotaping]] of this [[cinematography]]? [[Persuaded]] it should be on DVD but [[unquestionably]] at [[fewer]] a [[videotaped]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 608 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Antitrust falls right into that category of films that aspire to make some great point while being uplifting [[yet]] [[falls]] completely flat. I don't hate the film, but it is missing key elements, such as [[suspense]]. There have been other attempts to [[make]] an [[engaging]] [[film]] about [[computers]], such as [[Hackers]] and The Net. They all [[fall]] short. The improbable ending of both The Net and Antirust [[seem]] to be nearly [[identical]]. These [[movie]] endings suffer from one [[huge]] [[error]] in perception: People in the [[PC]] [[business]] having this over-indulgent self ego that [[assumes]] the [[general]] population lives it's [[life]] [[waiting]] to [[hear]] the [[latest]] news about PC's and software. I have [[worked]] for [[many]] [[companies]] and [[industries]], and they all [[seem]] to [[suffer]] from an expanded [[view]] of their own self-importance, as does this [[film]].

The way they introduced plot lines was [[pathetic]]. [[Showing]] Milo, who is deathly [[allergic]] to Sesame [[Seeds]], [[almost]] ingest one from a [[restaurant]] breadbasket [[crossed]] the line of [[stupidity]]. Only his 'girlfriend' prevented him from sure [[death]]. This makes one wonder how Milo could have survived as [[long]] as he did, [[braving]] the [[perils]] of [[Big]] Mac buns and Sesame Seed breadsticks, as they cloak themselves as, well.... Sesame Seed breadsticks and [[Big]] Mac buns.

Antitrust [[also]] doesn't provide much [[suspense]]. The patterned and predictable plot twists are [[easily]] [[figured]] out long before they are [[revealed]] (come on, was [[anyone]] REALLY [[stunned]] when Yee Jee Tso was killed?), [[thereby]] destroying any real [[shock]] [[value]]. And here again we have [[yet]] another [[film]]/[[story]] where at the [[end]], the bad guys are chasing the [[good]] [[guys]] to 'get the disk'. We need to have a moratorium on this Simple [[Simon]] plot line for about 20 [[years]]. [[Still]], I [[pressed]] on. [[Maybe]] the [[ending]] would be the payoff, but no. The completely [[ridiculous]] ending where we have the [[head]] of [[company]] [[security]], another [[supposed]] evil guy, turn around and be the [[good]] [[guy]] that enables Milo to bring down N.U.R.V CEO Gary Winston was [[laughable]]. And of course, the news [[coverage]] of the arrest of Gary Winston is more [[fevered]] than when Hinckley or Oswald was brought into custody. Gary Winston, played by Tim [[Robbins]], is a cardboard [[cutout]] of the same character [[Robbins]] [[played]] in Arlington [[Road]]. But that [[fits]] perfectly here in Antitrust, which should be called 'Anticlimactic' or 'Anti-Original'.

In the [[years]] to come, this film will likely be banished, to be shown only on your local third rate UHF [[channel]]. Antitrust falls right into that category of films that aspire to make some great point while being uplifting [[nonetheless]] [[autumn]] completely flat. I don't hate the film, but it is missing key elements, such as [[sufferance]]. There have been other attempts to [[deliver]] an [[participate]] [[movie]] about [[machines]], such as [[Infiltrators]] and The Net. They all [[decrease]] short. The improbable ending of both The Net and Antirust [[seems]] to be nearly [[same]]. These [[movies]] endings suffer from one [[prodigious]] [[mistaken]] in perception: People in the [[PCS]] [[corporations]] having this over-indulgent self ego that [[implies]] the [[overall]] population lives it's [[vida]] [[expecting]] to [[overheard]] the [[latter]] news about PC's and software. I have [[working]] for [[various]] [[business]] and [[industry]], and they all [[appears]] to [[suffering]] from an expanded [[viewing]] of their own self-importance, as does this [[films]].

The way they introduced plot lines was [[regrettable]]. [[Shows]] Milo, who is deathly [[allergy]] to Sesame [[Seed]], [[approximately]] ingest one from a [[diner]] breadbasket [[cross]] the line of [[craziness]]. Only his 'girlfriend' prevented him from sure [[killings]]. This makes one wonder how Milo could have survived as [[longer]] as he did, [[defying]] the [[menaces]] of [[Overwhelming]] Mac buns and Sesame Seed breadsticks, as they cloak themselves as, well.... Sesame Seed breadsticks and [[Grand]] Mac buns.

Antitrust [[apart]] doesn't provide much [[sufferance]]. The patterned and predictable plot twists are [[comfortably]] [[imagined]] out long before they are [[proved]] (come on, was [[everyone]] REALLY [[amazed]] when Yee Jee Tso was killed?), [[so]] destroying any real [[shocks]] [[values]]. And here again we have [[still]] another [[filmmaking]]/[[history]] where at the [[terminate]], the bad guys are chasing the [[alright]] [[guy]] to 'get the disk'. We need to have a moratorium on this Simple [[Simeon]] plot line for about 20 [[ages]]. [[However]], I [[pressured]] on. [[Potentially]] the [[ended]] would be the payoff, but no. The completely [[farcical]] ending where we have the [[leader]] of [[firms]] [[insurance]], another [[suspected]] evil guy, turn around and be the [[alright]] [[buddy]] that enables Milo to bring down N.U.R.V CEO Gary Winston was [[ridiculous]]. And of course, the news [[hedging]] of the arrest of Gary Winston is more [[frenetic]] than when Hinckley or Oswald was brought into custody. Gary Winston, played by Tim [[Robins]], is a cardboard [[cutback]] of the same character [[Robins]] [[accomplished]] in Arlington [[Chemin]]. But that [[adjusts]] perfectly here in Antitrust, which should be called 'Anticlimactic' or 'Anti-Original'.

In the [[ages]] to come, this film will likely be banished, to be shown only on your local third rate UHF [[canal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 609 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I guess you have to give some points for the sheer courage of writing a musical around a history lesson but how about some decent music?

Is the cartoonish acting of Howard DeSilva meant to pique the interest of otherwise jaded children?

Is William Daniels' campy contemporary (for the time) acting style meant to appeal to a 1960s/70s demographic?

Do we need all the "in-jokes" about NY & NJ? (I can hear the blue-haired Broadway audience guffawing on cue.)

Sorry, I find the whole piece dated, boring & the acting far too strident for the screen --------------------------------------------- Result 610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is the [[best]] series of its [[type]] I've [[seen]] all [[year]]. I can't [[help]] thinking it's just my [[luck]] - a series I [[love]] [[gets]] 6 [[episodes]] (and more [[next]] [[year]]) and the [[constant]] [[stream]] of cookie-cutter cop [[shows]] get never [[ending]] [[episodes]].

I [[think]] the reasons New [[Tricks]] [[succeeds]] are [[many]]. The [[scripts]] are good, and the [[mix]] of characters [[superb]], The acting is top [[flight]], and the [[blend]] of comedy and [[drama]] [[works]] a [[treat]]. The stories aren't all that memorable, but that's not the [[reason]] I watch [[shows]] like this one.

The theme song is a [[favourite]], and we were [[disappointed]] to find it isn't [[available]] in any [[published]] [[edition]]. [[Great]] stuff, BBC- a [[triumph]] of [[sense]] over sex-appeal ([[aside]] from the young [[constable]] nobody's there as eye-lolly, and [[even]] if he IS, he can [[still]] act!). This is the [[bestest]] series of its [[genera]] I've [[watched]] all [[annum]]. I can't [[support]] thinking it's just my [[chances]] - a series I [[amour]] [[receives]] 6 [[bouts]] (and more [[impending]] [[annum]]) and the [[continual]] [[streams]] of cookie-cutter cop [[exhibited]] get never [[end]] [[bouts]].

I [[thoughts]] the reasons New [[Gimmicks]] [[succeeding]] are [[various]]. The [[script]] are good, and the [[mixing]] of characters [[wondrous]], The acting is top [[flights]], and the [[mixing]] of comedy and [[theater]] [[worked]] a [[deal]]. The stories aren't all that memorable, but that's not the [[motive]] I watch [[demonstrate]] like this one.

The theme song is a [[favorite]], and we were [[disillusioned]] to find it isn't [[approachable]] in any [[publicized]] [[editing]]. [[Huge]] stuff, BBC- a [[clockwork]] of [[feeling]] over sex-appeal ([[sideways]] from the young [[constabulary]] nobody's there as eye-lolly, and [[yet]] if he IS, he can [[yet]] act!). --------------------------------------------- Result 611 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Some of the [[best]] [[movies]] that are [[categorized]] as "comedies" actually blur between comedy and [[drama]]. "The [[Graduate]]" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", which were made also in the late 1960's are [[perfect]] examples. Are they comedies with dramatic undertones, or [[dramas]] with a lot of humor? [[In]] many respects, "The [[Odd]] [[Couple]]" falls into this same [[category]] of being both comedy [[yet]] [[highly]] dramatic with deep underpinnings about human [[nature]]. Much of what [[happens]] may be funny to the [[audience]] but the characters are not laughing.

Despite the rather light-hearted TV [[show]] of the 1970's, the original "[[Odd]] [[Couple]]" is not [[merely]] about a neat [[guy]] and [[messy]] [[guy]] who are [[forced]] to [[live]] [[together]] because of their [[marital]] situation. It's [[really]] about two opposites who [[must]] [[face]] why their [[marriages]] [[fell]] apart and how their [[detrimental]] idiosyncrasies [[reveal]] themselves outside of their [[marriage]]. Neatness, the [[characteristic]] of [[Felix]] Ungar ([[Jack]] [[Lemon]] [[perfectly]] [[cast]]) and messiness, the [[characteristic]] of Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau), are only the beginning and somewhat superficial. As the story unfolds, we find there is a lot more to these men than [[simply]] neatness versus messiness.

Briefly, the story is really about Felix Ungar, who has to face an impending divorce from his wife Francis, who we never meet but is an important character throughout the story. On the verge of suicide, Ungar goes to the only place he knows: the apartment of Oscar Madison where a group of poker buddies hang out every so often. We learn that Ungar is not only a member of this "poker club" but the group knows what's happening to him and try, in their inept way, to help out. Madison figures the best way to help Ungar is to let him move in with him until his suicidal tendencies wear off.

Unfortunately for Madison, he doesn't know what he's getting himself into. Madison is a carefree happy-go-lucky if rather irresponsible slob who's refrigerator was last cleaned [[probably]] when Herbert Hoover was still in the White House. Madison's idea of serving snacks is grabbing moldy cheese and sticking them in between two pieces of bread, and then throwing the contents of a bag of chips on the table. On the other hand, he enjoys booze and women, in short having a good time.

Ungar is not only altogether different, he is diametrically opposite. He is not only an obsessive neatness nut that finds more joy in disinfecting the apartment than meeting women but he knows more than most women do about cooking and fine eating. At one point, he calls his ex-wife, not to talk about reconciling, but to get her recipe for meatloaf. At another moment, Ungar was going to spend the rest of the evening cutting cabbage for coleslaw. When Madison seems unimpressed, Ungar finally confesses he was only doing it for his roommate because he can't stand coleslaw. Who is this guy? But he has another endearing trait: Felix is also a hypochondriac. He obsesses about his health to the point where he makes strange noises in public places claiming he's helping his sinuses. He seems to have every health condition in the book. And if they made up more, Felix would probably have them. Ultimately, he is overly self-absorbed.

Running throughout the movie are references to marriage. At one point when Madison is trying to convince Ungar to move in, he says, "What do you want, a wedding ring?" But little does he know that it is not the neat guy who can't deal with the messy guy, but the other way around. Their friendship becomes an inadvertent hellish relationship. And the climax occurs when Oscar invites two lonely British sisters for a get-together with both comedic and tragic results. This is one of the best comedies of its type ever written and not to be missed, with superlative performances by Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon in roles that are hard to imagine better played by anyone else. It is unfortunate that writing of this caliber is sadly lacking from most comedies being produced today. Some of the [[better]] [[kino]] that are [[sorted]] as "comedies" actually blur between comedy and [[dramas]]. "The [[Graduating]]" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", which were made also in the late 1960's are [[faultless]] examples. Are they comedies with dramatic undertones, or [[opera]] with a lot of humor? [[For]] many respects, "The [[Nosy]] [[Couples]]" falls into this same [[classes]] of being both comedy [[again]] [[heavily]] dramatic with deep underpinnings about human [[trait]]. Much of what [[occurs]] may be funny to the [[viewers]] but the characters are not laughing.

Despite the rather light-hearted TV [[showing]] of the 1970's, the original "[[Weird]] [[Matches]]" is not [[only]] about a neat [[buddy]] and [[chaotic]] [[buddy]] who are [[coerced]] to [[inhabit]] [[jointly]] because of their [[matrimonial]] situation. It's [[genuinely]] about two opposites who [[needs]] [[facing]] why their [[wedding]] [[drop]] apart and how their [[adverse]] idiosyncrasies [[uncover]] themselves outside of their [[wedding]]. Neatness, the [[features]] of [[Rodriguez]] Ungar ([[Jacques]] [[Citrus]] [[abundantly]] [[casting]]) and messiness, the [[traits]] of Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau), are only the beginning and somewhat superficial. As the story unfolds, we find there is a lot more to these men than [[exclusively]] neatness versus messiness.

Briefly, the story is really about Felix Ungar, who has to face an impending divorce from his wife Francis, who we never meet but is an important character throughout the story. On the verge of suicide, Ungar goes to the only place he knows: the apartment of Oscar Madison where a group of poker buddies hang out every so often. We learn that Ungar is not only a member of this "poker club" but the group knows what's happening to him and try, in their inept way, to help out. Madison figures the best way to help Ungar is to let him move in with him until his suicidal tendencies wear off.

Unfortunately for Madison, he doesn't know what he's getting himself into. Madison is a carefree happy-go-lucky if rather irresponsible slob who's refrigerator was last cleaned [[undeniably]] when Herbert Hoover was still in the White House. Madison's idea of serving snacks is grabbing moldy cheese and sticking them in between two pieces of bread, and then throwing the contents of a bag of chips on the table. On the other hand, he enjoys booze and women, in short having a good time.

Ungar is not only altogether different, he is diametrically opposite. He is not only an obsessive neatness nut that finds more joy in disinfecting the apartment than meeting women but he knows more than most women do about cooking and fine eating. At one point, he calls his ex-wife, not to talk about reconciling, but to get her recipe for meatloaf. At another moment, Ungar was going to spend the rest of the evening cutting cabbage for coleslaw. When Madison seems unimpressed, Ungar finally confesses he was only doing it for his roommate because he can't stand coleslaw. Who is this guy? But he has another endearing trait: Felix is also a hypochondriac. He obsesses about his health to the point where he makes strange noises in public places claiming he's helping his sinuses. He seems to have every health condition in the book. And if they made up more, Felix would probably have them. Ultimately, he is overly self-absorbed.

Running throughout the movie are references to marriage. At one point when Madison is trying to convince Ungar to move in, he says, "What do you want, a wedding ring?" But little does he know that it is not the neat guy who can't deal with the messy guy, but the other way around. Their friendship becomes an inadvertent hellish relationship. And the climax occurs when Oscar invites two lonely British sisters for a get-together with both comedic and tragic results. This is one of the best comedies of its type ever written and not to be missed, with superlative performances by Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon in roles that are hard to imagine better played by anyone else. It is unfortunate that writing of this caliber is sadly lacking from most comedies being produced today. --------------------------------------------- Result 612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It should come as no shock to you when I say that Alone in the Dark is a [[crappy]] movie. To put it [[bluntly]], it's as if a [[dung]] monster defecated, ate the [[result]], and then [[vomited]]. The [[final]] product [[would]] still outshine this [[movie]].

[[Seemingly]] based on an [[ancient]] (!) Atari video [[game]], the [[movie]] has something or other to do with a [[portal]] to the [[bowels]] of the [[earth]], the unleashing of [[demons]], and [[ancient]] civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. (Guess which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization [[opened]] the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, conveniently enough.

Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.

But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.

That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty convoluted and [[incomprehensible]]. [[In]] similar [[movies]], one might [[see]] the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are [[mentally]] with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much [[fun]].

The acting is [[dreadful]], save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing "Newfoundland" as "New Fownd Land," Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.

Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.

Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.

Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.

Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit. It should come as no shock to you when I say that Alone in the Dark is a [[shit]] movie. To put it [[openly]], it's as if a [[manure]] monster defecated, ate the [[resulting]], and then [[puked]]. The [[latter]] product [[could]] still outshine this [[filmmaking]].

[[Ostensibly]] based on an [[antigua]] (!) Atari video [[games]], the [[filmmaking]] has something or other to do with a [[portals]] to the [[entrails]] of the [[tierra]], the unleashing of [[minions]], and [[immemorial]] civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. (Guess which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization [[open]] the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, conveniently enough.

Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.

But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.

That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty convoluted and [[unimaginable]]. [[Among]] similar [[movie]], one might [[behold]] the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are [[psychologically]] with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much [[droll]].

The acting is [[scary]], save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing "Newfoundland" as "New Fownd Land," Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.

Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.

Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.

Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.

Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit. --------------------------------------------- Result 613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[CRY]] FREEDOM is an [[excellent]] primer for those wanting an overview of apartheid's [[cruelty]] in just a [[couple]] of hours. [[Famed]] director Richard Attenborough (GANDHI) is [[certainly]] no stranger to the genre, and the [[collaboration]] of the real-life Mr. and [[Mrs]]. [[Woods]], the [[main]] white [[characters]] in their [[book]] and in this [[film]], lends further authenticity to [[CRY]] FREEDOM. The video now in release actually runs a [[little]] over 2 and a half hours since 23 minutes of extra footage was inserted to make it a two [[part]] TV miniseries after the film's [[initial]] theatrical release. [[While]] the added [[length]] serves to [[heighten]] the film's forgivable flaws: uneven character development and blanket stereotyping in particular, another possible [[flaw]] (the insistence on the white characters' fate over that of the [[African]] ones) may [[work]] out as a [[strength]]. Viewing [[CRYING]] [[FREEDOM]] as a politically and historically educational film (as I think it should, over its artistic merits), the story is one which black Africans know only too well, though the younger [[generation]] may now need to see it on film for full impact. It is the whites who have always been the film's and the book's target audience, hopefully driving them to change. Now twelve [[years]] after the movie's production, [[CRY]] FREEDOM is in [[many]] [[ways]] a more interesting film to watch. [[Almost]] ten [[years]] after [[black]] majority [[rule]] has been at least theorically in place, 1987's CRY FREEDOM's ideals remain by and large unrealized. It [[therefore]] remains as [[imperative]] as ever for white South Africans, particularly the younger ones who have only [[heard]] of these actions to see it, and absorb the film's messages. In [[total]] contrast to American slavery and the Jewish Holocaust's exposure, South Africans' struggles have been told by a mere two or three stories: CRY FREEDOM, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY (OK, Count it twice if you include the remake), and SARAFINA (did I miss one?). All three dramas also clumsily feature American and British actors in both the white and black roles. Not one South African actor has played a major role, white, coloured, Indian or Black!). And yes I did miss another international South African drama, MANDELA and DEKLERK. Though this (also highly [[recommended]]) biopic was released after black majority rule was instituted, MANDELA was played by a Black American (Sidney Poitier, who also starred in the original S.A.-themed CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY), while the Afrikaner DeKlerk was played by a (bald) very British Michael Caine, a good performance if you can dismiss that the very essence of Afrikanerdom is vehement anti-British feelings. Until local SABC TV and African films start dealing with their own legacy, CRY FREEDOM is about as authentic as you'll get. As villified as the whites (particularly the Afrikaners) are portrayed in the film, any observant (non-casual) visitor to South Africa even now in 1999, not to mention 1977 when CRY FREEDOM takes place, will generally find white's attitudes towards blacks restrained, even understated. Looking at CRY FREEDOM in hindsight, it is amazing that reconciliation can take place at all, and it is. But CRY FREEDOM at time shows not much has really changed in many people's minds yet, and that the Black Africans' goal to FREEDOM and reconciliation is still ongoing. This is why if you're a novice to the situation, CRY FREEDOM, is your best introduction. [[WEPT]] FREEDOM is an [[wondrous]] primer for those wanting an overview of apartheid's [[savagery]] in just a [[pair]] of hours. [[Commemorated]] director Richard Attenborough (GANDHI) is [[obviously]] no stranger to the genre, and the [[works]] of the real-life Mr. and [[Dagmar]]. [[Lumber]], the [[principal]] white [[characteristic]] in their [[cookbook]] and in this [[kino]], lends further authenticity to [[WEEP]] FREEDOM. The video now in release actually runs a [[small]] over 2 and a half hours since 23 minutes of extra footage was inserted to make it a two [[parties]] TV miniseries after the film's [[original]] theatrical release. [[Despite]] the added [[duration]] serves to [[intensify]] the film's forgivable flaws: uneven character development and blanket stereotyping in particular, another possible [[failure]] (the insistence on the white characters' fate over that of the [[Africans]] ones) may [[working]] out as a [[kraft]]. Viewing [[MOURNING]] [[LIBERTY]] as a politically and historically educational film (as I think it should, over its artistic merits), the story is one which black Africans know only too well, though the younger [[jill]] may now need to see it on film for full impact. It is the whites who have always been the film's and the book's target audience, hopefully driving them to change. Now twelve [[olds]] after the movie's production, [[WEEPING]] FREEDOM is in [[countless]] [[shapes]] a more interesting film to watch. [[Near]] ten [[olds]] after [[negro]] majority [[regulations]] has been at least theorically in place, 1987's CRY FREEDOM's ideals remain by and large unrealized. It [[consequently]] remains as [[necessary]] as ever for white South Africans, particularly the younger ones who have only [[listened]] of these actions to see it, and absorb the film's messages. In [[entire]] contrast to American slavery and the Jewish Holocaust's exposure, South Africans' struggles have been told by a mere two or three stories: CRY FREEDOM, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY (OK, Count it twice if you include the remake), and SARAFINA (did I miss one?). All three dramas also clumsily feature American and British actors in both the white and black roles. Not one South African actor has played a major role, white, coloured, Indian or Black!). And yes I did miss another international South African drama, MANDELA and DEKLERK. Though this (also highly [[recommend]]) biopic was released after black majority rule was instituted, MANDELA was played by a Black American (Sidney Poitier, who also starred in the original S.A.-themed CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY), while the Afrikaner DeKlerk was played by a (bald) very British Michael Caine, a good performance if you can dismiss that the very essence of Afrikanerdom is vehement anti-British feelings. Until local SABC TV and African films start dealing with their own legacy, CRY FREEDOM is about as authentic as you'll get. As villified as the whites (particularly the Afrikaners) are portrayed in the film, any observant (non-casual) visitor to South Africa even now in 1999, not to mention 1977 when CRY FREEDOM takes place, will generally find white's attitudes towards blacks restrained, even understated. Looking at CRY FREEDOM in hindsight, it is amazing that reconciliation can take place at all, and it is. But CRY FREEDOM at time shows not much has really changed in many people's minds yet, and that the Black Africans' goal to FREEDOM and reconciliation is still ongoing. This is why if you're a novice to the situation, CRY FREEDOM, is your best introduction. --------------------------------------------- Result 614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I saw this [[movie]] as a [[child]] and it broke my heart! [[No]] other story had such a unfinished ending... I grew up on [[many]] [[great]] anime movies and this was one of my favourites, because it was so unusual - a [[story]] about unfairness, and cruelty, and loneliness, and life, and choices that can't be undone, and the need for others. Chirin is [[made]] [[alone]] when the [[Wolf]] [[kills]] his [[mother]], but the [[Wolf]] is alone, too, when Chirin follows him into the [[mountain]]. The [[Wolf]] doesn't [[kill]] the [[lamb]], even though each [[night]] he [[says]] "[[maybe]] I'll eat you tomorrow." The [[tape]] of it I have is [[broken]] and degraded from age and [[use]]. I will [[repair]] it and watch the [[movie]] again [[someday]] and [[cry]] just as [[hard]] as I did as a [[child]]. [[Stories]] like this, with this depth and [[feeling]], and this intricacy of meaning, are very [[rare]]. It is a [[sad]] [[story]], but I've never [[encountered]] any catharsis more [[beautifully]] [[made]]. I am [[glad]] I have [[seen]] this [[movie]], and I'm glad I [[saw]] it as a [[child]]. I saw this [[movies]] as a [[kiddies]] and it broke my heart! [[Nos]] other story had such a unfinished ending... I grew up on [[several]] [[terrific]] anime movies and this was one of my favourites, because it was so unusual - a [[stories]] about unfairness, and cruelty, and loneliness, and life, and choices that can't be undone, and the need for others. Chirin is [[accomplished]] [[exclusively]] when the [[Wulf]] [[assassinate]] his [[mom]], but the [[Wolves]] is alone, too, when Chirin follows him into the [[mountainside]]. The [[Wulf]] doesn't [[assassinate]] the [[mouton]], even though each [[overnight]] he [[said]] "[[probably]] I'll eat you tomorrow." The [[taping]] of it I have is [[broke]] and degraded from age and [[utilizing]]. I will [[remedy]] it and watch the [[kino]] again [[sometime]] and [[crying]] just as [[stiff]] as I did as a [[kid]]. [[Storytelling]] like this, with this depth and [[impression]], and this intricacy of meaning, are very [[scarce]]. It is a [[unlucky]] [[tale]], but I've never [[confronted]] any catharsis more [[wonderfully]] [[introduced]]. I am [[happy]] I have [[noticed]] this [[kino]], and I'm glad I [[noticed]] it as a [[kiddies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have loved this movie since I first saw it in 1979. I'm still amazed at how accurately Kurt Russell portrays Elvis, right down to how he moves and the expressions on his face. Sometimes its scary how much he looks, acts, and talks like the real Elvis. Thankfully this is being released on DVD, so all of us that have been waiting can finally have an excellent quality version of the full length film. I have heard the detractors, who say that there are some inaccuracies, or some things left out, but I think that keeping in mind that John Carpenter only had about 2 1/2 hours to work with, and that this was being shown on television (just two years after Elvis's death!) that he did a fine job with this. In fact I haven't seen another Elvis movie that even comes close to this one. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There were good performances by Robin Williams and others but the movie was dull overall and very disappointing compared to the positive reviews.

I thought Sy might become a serial killer who bores people to death: a forlorn guy in ugly clothes trails his victims around food courts, quoting Oprah and reciting his medical history until they beg him to shoot them.

I think the movie mostly appeals to egomaniacs who think strangers are interested in their photos. I expect most retail workers want a break from the customers. --------------------------------------------- Result 617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Film]] [[starts]] in 1840 Japan in which a [[man]] slashes his wife and her lover to death and the commits suicide. It's a very gory, bloody [[sequence]]. Then it jumps to present day...well 1982 to be precise. Ted ([[Edward]] Albert), wife Laura ([[Susan]] [[George]]) and their annoying little kid move to Japan for hubby's work. They rent a house and--surprise! surprise--it just happens to be the [[house]] where the murders took place! The three dead people are around as ghosts (the makeup is hysterically bad) and make life [[hell]] for the family.

Sounds OK--but it's really [[hopeless]]. There's a bloody [[opening]] and ending and [[NOTHING]] happens in between. There is an [[attack]] by [[giant]] [[crabs]] which is just uproarious! They look so fake--I swear I [[saw]] the [[strings]] [[pulling]] one along--and they're muttering!!!!! There's a pointless sex [[sequence]] in the first 20 minutes ([[probably]] just to show off George's [[body]]), another one about 40 minutes [[later]] (but that was [[necessary]] to the plot) and a [[really]] [[silly]] exorcism towards the end. The fight scene between [[Albert]] and Doug McClure must be [[seen]] to be [[believed]].

As for acting--Albert was OK as the husband and McClure was [[pretty]] good as a family [[friend]]. But George--as always--is terrific in a [[lousy]] film. She [[gives]] this film a [[much]] [[needed]] lift--but can't [[save]] it. I'm giving this a 2 just for her and the gory [[opening]] and [[closing]]. That [[aside]], this is a very [[boring]] [[film]]. [[Flick]] [[startup]] in 1840 Japan in which a [[bloke]] slashes his wife and her lover to death and the commits suicide. It's a very gory, bloody [[sequences]]. Then it jumps to present day...well 1982 to be precise. Ted ([[Edouard]] Albert), wife Laura ([[Suzanne]] [[Georges]]) and their annoying little kid move to Japan for hubby's work. They rent a house and--surprise! surprise--it just happens to be the [[maison]] where the murders took place! The three dead people are around as ghosts (the makeup is hysterically bad) and make life [[inferno]] for the family.

Sounds OK--but it's really [[incorrigible]]. There's a bloody [[introductory]] and ending and [[NONE]] happens in between. There is an [[attacks]] by [[colossal]] [[shrimp]] which is just uproarious! They look so fake--I swear I [[witnessed]] the [[ropes]] [[pulls]] one along--and they're muttering!!!!! There's a pointless sex [[sequences]] in the first 20 minutes ([[certainly]] just to show off George's [[agency]]), another one about 40 minutes [[afterward]] (but that was [[imperative]] to the plot) and a [[genuinely]] [[beast]] exorcism towards the end. The fight scene between [[Alberto]] and Doug McClure must be [[noticed]] to be [[felt]].

As for acting--Albert was OK as the husband and McClure was [[belle]] good as a family [[boyfriend]]. But George--as always--is terrific in a [[pathetic]] film. She [[delivers]] this film a [[very]] [[needs]] lift--but can't [[economize]] it. I'm giving this a 2 just for her and the gory [[introductory]] and [[closure]]. That [[sideways]], this is a very [[dull]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 618 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the last great musicals of the 60s. I was 7 years old the first time I saw this movie, and it's always been a favorite since then. The musical numbers are all memorable. In the 60s the people who were cast in musicals actually had musical talent (unlike a CERTAIN Academy Award nominated current musical based in a large midwestern city). All of the main roles were beautifully cast...Ron Moody shines as Fagin, as does Shani Wallis as Nancy. Oliver Reed was a menacing Bill Sikes (who thankfully has no musical numbers, lol), and Mark Lester as Oliver and Jack Wild as the Dodger were great too. Mark Lester comes across as an innocent waif, which was what Dickens intended when he wrote the book! Then, of course there are the dozens of dancers who perform in "consider yourself," "I'd Do Anything" "Who Will Buy" and "be Back Soon," many who were children! This is a great show for the whole family. --------------------------------------------- Result 619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] the [[writing]] of the [[journalists]] and the [[required]] over [[eager]] reckless press officer and [[sobbing]] [[grandma]] was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.

I [[cant]] blame the [[actors]], but [[surely]] [[someone]] must have [[said]] "are you [[joking]] I [[cant]] [[say]] this!"

This episode had a [[press]] [[perspective]] and [[police]] perspective, while the [[police]] perspective was standard enough, the press perspective and characterization was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly [[unbelievable]].

I [[notice]] that this was an HBO co production, if so then [[perhaps]] the [[sledgehammer]] stereotypes can be explained in that light,

I was [[completely]] [[cringing]] during the [[press]] [[conference]] scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely [[ring]] [[true]]. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am [[still]] [[waiting]] for the [[suspense]].

Skip [[Five]] Daysthis. the 2008/9 [[production]] with these characters is far [[better]] and more suspenseful even if the [[crime]] is over the [[top]].

This [[story]] had unforgivable moments which can only be described as [[staggeringly]] [[unbelievable]].

[[For]] a press [[officer]] to [[start]] a press conference without an investigating officer present to [[take]] press [[questions]].

so unbelievable it [[felt]] like amateur [[hour]].

I then [[began]] [[looking]] for Journalists [[called]] "[[Scoop]]" and for Perry [[White]] to make an appearance.

I [[saw]] the 2009 [[Hunter]] before "five days"[[made]] it to [[Australia]], not realizing it was a prequel and was [[looking]] forward to Bonneville and McTeer going [[around]] again.

Head shakingly [[awful]]. the [[writes]] of the [[correspondents]] and the [[obliged]] over [[avid]] reckless press officer and [[crying]] [[gran]] was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.

I [[thats]] blame the [[players]], but [[arguably]] [[everybody]] must have [[told]] "are you [[giggle]] I [[didnt]] [[told]] this!"

This episode had a [[pressing]] [[viewpoint]] and [[cops]] perspective, while the [[cops]] perspective was standard enough, the press perspective and characterization was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly [[fabulous]].

I [[notices]] that this was an HBO co production, if so then [[maybe]] the [[harness]] stereotypes can be explained in that light,

I was [[absolutely]] [[wincing]] during the [[journalism]] [[conferences]] scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely [[ringing]] [[real]]. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am [[nevertheless]] [[suspense]] for the [[wait]].

Skip [[Fifth]] Daysthis. the 2008/9 [[productivity]] with these characters is far [[optimum]] and more suspenseful even if the [[felony]] is over the [[topped]].

This [[storytelling]] had unforgivable moments which can only be described as [[splendidly]] [[awesome]].

[[At]] a press [[officers]] to [[started]] a press conference without an investigating officer present to [[taking]] press [[issues]].

so unbelievable it [[believed]] like amateur [[hours]].

I then [[launching]] [[researching]] for Journalists [[termed]] "[[Spoon]]" and for Perry [[Blanca]] to make an appearance.

I [[sawthe]] the 2009 [[Hunting]] before "five days"[[introduced]] it to [[Australian]], not realizing it was a prequel and was [[researching]] forward to Bonneville and McTeer going [[almost]] again.

Head shakingly [[frightful]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie the other day in a film school class, and I hadn't seen an Almodovar movie before but went in expecting it to be good. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a pointless film with only a couple of laughs mixed in with two hours of sheer boredom. High Heels is just a collection of random scenes that might have worked in their own separate movies but together don't add up to any kind of meaningful whole at all.

Or so I thought. Then, the next day, my film professor spent the entire class period explaining all of the movie's hidden little details, like how the mural depicting stereotypical flamenco dancers in the background of the drag queen scene is some kind of commentary on the lack of identity that Spain as a nation has developed under fascist rule. Apparently, the whole movie is chock full of clever little visual tricks and references like this.

Great, but you know what? It's still a bad movie. It takes more than depth and complexity to make a good film--you still need to give the audience a reason to keep paying attention, something to interest the viewer enough to actually care about all the subtle tricks. High Heels gives us strange, off-beat characters but keeps them in mostly mundane situations recycled from other movies, and Almodovar doesn't seem to be using them to make any kind of point. What is the significance, for example, of the Hitchcockian surprise character revelation that occurs towards the end of the film? Why is that even in there? Just to surprise us?

There is one funny scene that has to do with a news broadcast. And that's it, that's the only entertaining moment. The rest of the movie is just nonsensical filmic references and visual cues that apparently exist only for the sake of showing us how smart Pedro Almodovar is. But no matter what my film professor says, it takes more than self-indulgent trickery for a movie to be good. --------------------------------------------- Result 621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I gotta [[say]], Clive Barker's Undying is by far the [[best]] [[horror]] [[game]] to have ever been made. I've [[played]] Resident Evil, Silent Hill and the Evil Dead and Castlevania [[games]] but none of them have [[captured]] the [[pure]] glee with which this [[game]] tackles its [[horrific]] [[elements]]. Barker is good at what he does, which is attach the horror to our [[world]], and it shows as his hand is clearly everywhere in this game. Heck, even his voice is in the game as one of the main characters. Full of lush visuals and enough atmosphere to [[shake]] a stick at, Undying is the game to [[beat]] in my books as the [[best]] [[horror]] title. I just wish that this had [[made]] it to a [[console]] system but alas [[poor]] [[PC]] [[sales]] nipped that one in the bud. I gotta [[said]], Clive Barker's Undying is by far the [[better]] [[abomination]] [[jeu]] to have ever been made. I've [[served]] Resident Evil, Silent Hill and the Evil Dead and Castlevania [[jeux]] but none of them have [[catch]] the [[pur]] glee with which this [[gaming]] tackles its [[odious]] [[ingredients]]. Barker is good at what he does, which is attach the horror to our [[monde]], and it shows as his hand is clearly everywhere in this game. Heck, even his voice is in the game as one of the main characters. Full of lush visuals and enough atmosphere to [[shaking]] a stick at, Undying is the game to [[defeat]] in my books as the [[better]] [[abomination]] title. I just wish that this had [[effected]] it to a [[consoles]] system but alas [[pauper]] [[PCS]] [[sale]] nipped that one in the bud. --------------------------------------------- Result 622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I would never have thought I would almost cry viewing one minute excerpted from a 1920 black and white movie without sound. Thanks to Martin Scorsese I did (the movie was from F. Borzage). You will start to understand (if it's not already the case), what makes a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I knew about this as a [[similar]] programme as [[Jackass]], and I [[saw]] one or two [[episodes]] on Freeview, and it is the same, only more extreme. Basically three Welsh guys, and one mad British [[bloke]] were [[brought]] [[together]] by [[love]] of skateboarding, and a [[complete]] [[disregard]]/masochistic [[pleasure]] to [[harm]] themselves and their [[health]] and safety. They have had puking, [[eating]] pubes-covered pizza, [[jumping]] in [[stinging]] nettles, naked [[paint]] balling, jokes on the smaller [[guy]] while heavily sleeping/snoring, stunts in a work place, e.[[g]]. army, [[cowboys]], and [[many]] more [[insane]] stunts that cause bruises, bumps, blood and vomit, maybe not just for themselves. [[Starring]] Matthew Pritchard who does pretty much anything, Lee Dainton also up for just about anything, Dan Joyce (the British one) who hardly does much physical [[stuff]] and has a OTT laugh, and Pancho ([[Mike]] [[Locke]]) who does a [[lot]], but is more popular for being [[short]], [[fat]] and lazy. It was number something on The 100 [[Greatest]] [[Funny]] [[Moments]]. [[Very]] good! I knew about this as a [[identical]] programme as [[Asshole]], and I [[noticed]] one or two [[bouts]] on Freeview, and it is the same, only more extreme. Basically three Welsh guys, and one mad British [[guys]] were [[tabled]] [[jointly]] by [[loves]] of skateboarding, and a [[finish]] [[defiance]]/masochistic [[gladness]] to [[damage]] themselves and their [[gesundheit]] and safety. They have had puking, [[feeding]] pubes-covered pizza, [[hopping]] in [[damning]] nettles, naked [[paintings]] balling, jokes on the smaller [[guys]] while heavily sleeping/snoring, stunts in a work place, e.[[grams]]. army, [[buccaneers]], and [[various]] more [[demented]] stunts that cause bruises, bumps, blood and vomit, maybe not just for themselves. [[Featuring]] Matthew Pritchard who does pretty much anything, Lee Dainton also up for just about anything, Dan Joyce (the British one) who hardly does much physical [[thing]] and has a OTT laugh, and Pancho ([[Mich]] [[Luc]]) who does a [[batches]], but is more popular for being [[succinct]], [[blubber]] and lazy. It was number something on The 100 [[Larger]] [[Amusing]] [[Times]]. [[Quite]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a disappointment! Piper Perabo is adorable, Tyra Banks is beautiful but pitiful as an actor and the talented and beautiful Maria Bello is wasted! Bello must have been embarrassed by some of the lines! The plot, script and premise is a joke!

I'm not against silly movies, I think that Something About Mary is a masterpiece, but Coyote Ugly is a waste of 90 minutes........ --------------------------------------------- Result 625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Why oh why don't blockbuster movies simply [[stick]] to their selling point? Everyone in the cinema, young and old, was there to see talking animals make jokes, and whilst they did that we were all happy... And then, as with Lost In Space, [[came]] the two killer blows - plot and sentiment. Who really [[cared]] what happened to the [[tiger]] or whether Eddie [[Murphy]] made up with his [[daughter]]? Not me, that's for [[sure]]. Why oh why don't blockbuster movies simply [[wand]] to their selling point? Everyone in the cinema, young and old, was there to see talking animals make jokes, and whilst they did that we were all happy... And then, as with Lost In Space, [[became]] the two killer blows - plot and sentiment. Who really [[adored]] what happened to the [[tigre]] or whether Eddie [[Murph]] made up with his [[girlie]]? Not me, that's for [[persuaded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 626 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was [[going]] to [[give]] it an 8, but [[since]] you people [[made]] 6.5 out of a [[lot]] better [[votes]], I had to up my [[contribution]]. The river Styx was [[pure]] [[genius]]. Sure, Woody was his [[perennial]] stuff, but at least his role was [[appropriate]]. The first half hour was [[really]] [[hilarious]], and then the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] was [[easy]] to watch. The [[dialog]] was [[clever]] enough, and Woody's card [[tricks]] at the [[parties]], along with the [[reaction]] from the [[upper]] [[crust]], were [[fun]] to watch. This was much better than the [[newspaper]] [[critics]] [[made]] it sound out to be. And a plus, a [[little]] Sorcerer's [[Apprentice]] to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that [[Johansen]] is getting a bit frumpy? Charles [[Dance]] is [[always]] entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman. I was [[go]] to [[lend]] it an 8, but [[because]] you people [[brought]] 6.5 out of a [[batches]] better [[voting]], I had to up my [[contributions]]. The river Styx was [[pur]] [[prodigy]]. Sure, Woody was his [[permanent]] stuff, but at least his role was [[suitable]]. The first half hour was [[truthfully]] [[amusing]], and then the [[repose]] of the [[film]] was [[effortless]] to watch. The [[dialogues]] was [[smarter]] enough, and Woody's card [[gimmicks]] at the [[party]], along with the [[answers]] from the [[superior]] [[rind]], were [[funny]] to watch. This was much better than the [[newsprint]] [[detractors]] [[brought]] it sound out to be. And a plus, a [[tiny]] Sorcerer's [[Intern]] to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that [[Johanson]] is getting a bit frumpy? Charles [[Dancing]] is [[repeatedly]] entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman. --------------------------------------------- Result 627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] for 2 reasons--I like Gerard Butler and Christopher Plummer. Unfortunately, these [[poor]] [[men]] were forced to [[carry]] a pretty [[dumb]] movie. I [[liked]] the [[idea]] that Dracula is [[actually]] a [[reincarnation]] of [[Judas]] Iscariot, because it does explain his disdain for all things [[Christian]], but there was so much camp that this [[idea]] was not realized as much as it could have been. I see this movie more as a way for the talented Gerard Butler to [[pay]] his dues before being truly recognized and a way for the legendary Christopher Plummer to [[remind]] the public (me and the 5 other people who saw this film) that he still exists. I actually enjoyed the special [[features]] on the DVD more than the movie itself. I [[noticed]] this [[filmmaking]] for 2 reasons--I like Gerard Butler and Christopher Plummer. Unfortunately, these [[poorest]] [[mens]] were forced to [[bears]] a pretty [[witless]] movie. I [[loved]] the [[thought]] that Dracula is [[genuinely]] a [[redemption]] of [[Yehuda]] Iscariot, because it does explain his disdain for all things [[Kristen]], but there was so much camp that this [[ideals]] was not realized as much as it could have been. I see this movie more as a way for the talented Gerard Butler to [[paying]] his dues before being truly recognized and a way for the legendary Christopher Plummer to [[remember]] the public (me and the 5 other people who saw this film) that he still exists. I actually enjoyed the special [[featuring]] on the DVD more than the movie itself. --------------------------------------------- Result 628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Man the ending of this film is so terribly unwatchable and dated that my entire film aesthetics class laughed like crazy. Now most of the rest of the film was okay. It had a few unintentionally funny scenes but had a few real good camera shots and editing. Yes Alderich is a great director who made FLight Of The Phoenix and Whatever Happened TO Baby Jane among others. The problem isn't with direction, acting or anything technical. The movie is just destroyed in the third act. Why? The murders, twists, turns and characters have all been revolving around NUCLEAR MATERIAL? What the heck was the writer smoking when he came up with that? The way it just comes out of nowhere may have been the biggest Deus Ex Machina in history. For all the complaints about Burton's Planet of the Apes, THe life of David Gale or Notorious I think THIS is the worst ending ever. What a let down. --------------------------------------------- Result 629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ah, Bait. How do I hate thee? Let me count the ways. 1. You try to be funny, but are corny and unenjoyable; every joke is predictable and expected, and when it comes, does not inspire laughter. Instead, I want to hurl. 2. You try to be dramatic, but are unbelievable; the woman overacts to a terrible degree, and the "bad guy" looks like Bill Gates, and is about as scary as...well, Bill Gates. (Just try to imagine Bill Gates trying to intimidate somebody with a gun. Doesn't work, does it? A lawyer, maybe, but not a gun. Doesn't fit.) As for Jamie Foxx, well, just watching him try to deliver a dramatic and heartfelt dialogue is ludicrous, and makes me want to hurl. 3. You try to be action-packed, but instead are dull and dragging too many times. And when the action heats up, the tripod for the camera must have been lost, for the scenes wobble more than those in The Blair Witch Project, and I find myself nauseated, and once again I want to hurl. 4. You try to be a good movie, but you failed, you FAILED, YOU FAILED! I would rather walk barefoot across the Sahara with a pack full of beef jerky and no water, no sunscreen, and only Meryl Streep for company. This hell would be lovelier than a single minute more spent watching everyone in Bait overact their way through an idiotically written story with Bill Gates for a bad guy, and let's not even talk about the massive bomb that goes off in a car that Jamie Foxx's character has just driven OFF A CLIFF, but somehow manages to escape...just kill me now, or do the right thing and promise me that somehow I'll never have to watch a movie that is this bad, ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I went into this movie perhaps a bit jaded by the hack-and-slash films rampant on the screen these days. Boy, was I [[surprised]]. This little [[treasure]] was [[pleasantly]] paced with a [[somber]], dark atmosphere. More surprising yet was the very [[limited]] amount of blood actually shown. As with most good [[movies]], this one leaves [[something]] to the imagination, and Bill Paxton did a superb job at directing. Scenes shot inside the car as are well done and, after watching the "Anatomy of a Scene" episode at the end of the video tape, It was good to see that some of the subtle, yet [[wonderful]] [[things]] I had noticed were intentional and not just an "Oh, that looks good, keep it" type of direction. This is a moody [[movie]], [[filled]] with grimness. Still, for the [[dark]] subject, a [[considerable]] [[portion]] of it is filmed in daylight, [[even]] some of the more disturbing scenes. The acting is [[exceptional]] (Okay, I've [[always]] been a fan of Powers [[Booth]]), and never goes over the top. Au Contraire, it is very subdued which [[works]] [[extremely]] well for this [[type]] of [[film]]. If there is any one [[area]] where this film lacks, it is in the [[ending]], which seems just a [[bit]] too contrived, but still [[works]] on a simpler [[level]] without [[destroying]] the [[mood]] or the message of the [[movie]]. What is the [[message]]? It's [[something]] that each [[individual]] [[decides]] for themself. [[Overall]], on the 1-10 scale, this movie scores an 8 for those who like the [[southern]] gothic [[genre]] (ie: "Body [[Heat]]" or "Midnight in the Garden of [[Good]] and Evil"), and about a 5 for those who don't. I went into this movie perhaps a bit jaded by the hack-and-slash films rampant on the screen these days. Boy, was I [[horrified]]. This little [[hoard]] was [[cheerfully]] paced with a [[depressing]], dark atmosphere. More surprising yet was the very [[constrained]] amount of blood actually shown. As with most good [[movie]], this one leaves [[anything]] to the imagination, and Bill Paxton did a superb job at directing. Scenes shot inside the car as are well done and, after watching the "Anatomy of a Scene" episode at the end of the video tape, It was good to see that some of the subtle, yet [[excellent]] [[aspects]] I had noticed were intentional and not just an "Oh, that looks good, keep it" type of direction. This is a moody [[cinema]], [[filling]] with grimness. Still, for the [[gloom]] subject, a [[sizable]] [[fraction]] of it is filmed in daylight, [[yet]] some of the more disturbing scenes. The acting is [[wondrous]] (Okay, I've [[continually]] been a fan of Powers [[Booths]]), and never goes over the top. Au Contraire, it is very subdued which [[worked]] [[critically]] well for this [[typing]] of [[films]]. If there is any one [[zoning]] where this film lacks, it is in the [[terminated]], which seems just a [[bite]] too contrived, but still [[collaborate]] on a simpler [[grades]] without [[demolishing]] the [[humour]] or the message of the [[films]]. What is the [[messages]]? It's [[anything]] that each [[person]] [[decided]] for themself. [[General]], on the 1-10 scale, this movie scores an 8 for those who like the [[southerly]] gothic [[kinds]] (ie: "Body [[Heating]]" or "Midnight in the Garden of [[Well]] and Evil"), and about a 5 for those who don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 631 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] An MGM MINIATURE [[Short]] [[Subject]].

The [[editor]] of the [[Cole]] County [[Clarion]] [[must]] decide what is the [[real]] [[IMPORTANT]] NEWS for his readers: an impending [[frost]] which may spell [[disaster]] to their [[crops]], or the sensational shooting-down of a notorious [[gangster]] on their small [[town]] [[main]] street.

This is an [[enjoyable]] [[little]] one-reeler, [[featuring]] a good performance by [[comic]] Charles `Chic' [[Sale]]. Today's [[viewers]] will [[perhaps]] be more interested in the appearance of uncredited James Stewart, as Sale's nephew/assistant. Slow talking & [[somewhat]] goofy, [[Stewart]] [[shows]] many of the attributes which would make him a [[huge]] star in a very short [[time]].

[[Often]] overlooked or [[neglected]] [[today]], the one and two-reel short [[subjects]] were [[useful]] to the Studios as [[important]] training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for [[creating]] a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something like writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. [[Economical]] to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the [[perfect]] complement to the Studios' feature films. An MGM MINIATURE [[Concise]] [[Subjected]].

The [[editorial]] of the [[Kohl]] County [[Bugler]] [[should]] decide what is the [[actual]] [[NOTABLE]] NEWS for his readers: an impending [[gel]] which may spell [[catastrophe]] to their [[cultivation]], or the sensational shooting-down of a notorious [[thug]] on their small [[towns]] [[principal]] street.

This is an [[nice]] [[petite]] one-reeler, [[featured]] a good performance by [[comedian]] Charles `Chic' [[Selling]]. Today's [[bystanders]] will [[conceivably]] be more interested in the appearance of uncredited James Stewart, as Sale's nephew/assistant. Slow talking & [[rather]] goofy, [[Steward]] [[showing]] many of the attributes which would make him a [[big]] star in a very short [[moment]].

[[Usually]] overlooked or [[ignored]] [[yesterday]], the one and two-reel short [[item]] were [[handy]] to the Studios as [[substantial]] training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for [[establish]] a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something like writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. [[Thrifty]] to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the [[faultless]] complement to the Studios' feature films. --------------------------------------------- Result 632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a [[character]], was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and [[ended]] up nearly [[sacrificing]] her [[humanity]] in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant [[reminders]] of this struggle of the [[old]] and [[new]], and the [[carnage]] (so to speak) along the way.

[[While]] the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it [[missed]] the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more "traditionally", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.

Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.

There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice. Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a [[personages]], was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and [[finalised]] up nearly [[compromising]] her [[mankind]] in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant [[reminder]] of this struggle of the [[former]] and [[novo]], and the [[butchery]] (so to speak) along the way.

[[Though]] the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it [[miss]] the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more "traditionally", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.

Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.

There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] Ain't it hilarious when an average schmo leading a [[pathetic]] [[life]] suddenly has something [[outrageously]] [[magical]] happen to him, turning his life upside down and causing him to [[learn]] a few [[valuable]] lessons along the way? That formula never gets [[old]], does it? It's such a [[sure]] fire [[way]] to make a [[classic]] [[film]]! [[Just]] [[look]] at major hits like Liar Liar and [[Big]]!... This must have been Rob Schneider's line of [[thinking]] when he [[made]] semi-successful Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo and followed it with The [[Animal]]. [[Since]] I've already traced the plot through [[sarcasm]], allow me to [[color]] it in more: Schneider plays a loser [[cop]] who's [[suddenly]] [[involved]] in a [[tragic]] [[accident]] but is saved through surgery... by a [[loopy]] [[veterinarian]] who [[loads]] him up with animal parts, causing him to whinny like a horse at [[inappropriate]] [[times]], run like a cheetah, etc. This movie is [[slightly]] more [[likable]] than other Schneider-starring [[flicks]] (such as another lame same-plot follow-up The Hot Chick), but it almost feels like they [[want]] [[audiences]] to hate it by [[casting]] a [[reality]] TV [[star]] as the [[romantic]] lead (Colleen Haskell from "Survivor") and [[inserting]] a cameo by Norm MacDonald. My favorite scene... just does not exist. Sorry - [[nothing]] memorably good except the production value. I just want to end this review by [[saying]] that slight references to other [[movies]] in a movie can be [[okay]], but when it comes to lines being delivered the exact same way ("You can DO it!"), there's a word for that - "milking." Actually, here's another word - "[[cheap]]." Ain't it hilarious when an average schmo leading a [[hapless]] [[vida]] suddenly has something [[appallingly]] [[quadrant]] happen to him, turning his life upside down and causing him to [[learned]] a few [[precious]] lessons along the way? That formula never gets [[archaic]], does it? It's such a [[persuaded]] fire [[manner]] to make a [[classical]] [[filmmaking]]! [[Mere]] [[peek]] at major hits like Liar Liar and [[Sizeable]]!... This must have been Rob Schneider's line of [[ideas]] when he [[brought]] semi-successful Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo and followed it with The [[Zoo]]. [[Because]] I've already traced the plot through [[satire]], allow me to [[coloring]] it in more: Schneider plays a loser [[cops]] who's [[unexpectedly]] [[engaged]] in a [[disastrous]] [[incident]] but is saved through surgery... by a [[potty]] [[vets]] who [[burden]] him up with animal parts, causing him to whinny like a horse at [[unsuitable]] [[period]], run like a cheetah, etc. This movie is [[moderately]] more [[congenial]] than other Schneider-starring [[gestures]] (such as another lame same-plot follow-up The Hot Chick), but it almost feels like they [[wanna]] [[viewers]] to hate it by [[cast]] a [[realism]] TV [[superstar]] as the [[sentimental]] lead (Colleen Haskell from "Survivor") and [[added]] a cameo by Norm MacDonald. My favorite scene... just does not exist. Sorry - [[none]] memorably good except the production value. I just want to end this review by [[arguing]] that slight references to other [[filmmaking]] in a movie can be [[allright]], but when it comes to lines being delivered the exact same way ("You can DO it!"), there's a word for that - "milking." Actually, here's another word - "[[cheaply]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Like many people on this site, I saw this [[movie]] only once, when it was first televised in 1971. Certain scenes linger in my memory and an [[overall]] feeling of [[disquiet]] is how I remember being [[affected]] by it. I would be fascinated to see it again, if it was ever made available for home video.

Possible spoiler: I wonder if anyone else would agree that the basic plot setup and characters might have been derived from a 1960 British movie, originally titled City of the Dead, retitled Horror Hotel for the American release? There are some similarities also to a later British film The Wicker Man.

One detail remains with me years after seeing the film. It's a small but significant moment near the beginning of the film. As I recall, a minister and his wife have stopped to aid some people by the side of the road, circa 1870, somewhere out West. The friendly seeming Ray Milland introduces himself and his ( daughter?), Yvette Mimieux, a beautiful young mute woman. While the preacher is helping Ray Milland with the wagon, a [[rattlesnake]] slithers into view and coils menacingly, unobserved by any of the characters except Yvette Mimieux. She doesn't look scared at all, but stares at the snake with silent concentration, until it goes away. With this strange little moment, we already realize there's something highly unusual about these seemingly normal folks, though the possible danger to the minister and his wife remains vague and uncertain for a long time.

That one little scene stays with me vividly after all these years, along with many others. The film has a haunting quality about it that won't [[let]] go, and it's not surprising that people remember it so vividly. Someone ought to make this available for home video! Like many people on this site, I saw this [[kino]] only once, when it was first televised in 1971. Certain scenes linger in my memory and an [[comprehensive]] feeling of [[malaise]] is how I remember being [[stricken]] by it. I would be fascinated to see it again, if it was ever made available for home video.

Possible spoiler: I wonder if anyone else would agree that the basic plot setup and characters might have been derived from a 1960 British movie, originally titled City of the Dead, retitled Horror Hotel for the American release? There are some similarities also to a later British film The Wicker Man.

One detail remains with me years after seeing the film. It's a small but significant moment near the beginning of the film. As I recall, a minister and his wife have stopped to aid some people by the side of the road, circa 1870, somewhere out West. The friendly seeming Ray Milland introduces himself and his ( daughter?), Yvette Mimieux, a beautiful young mute woman. While the preacher is helping Ray Milland with the wagon, a [[snake]] slithers into view and coils menacingly, unobserved by any of the characters except Yvette Mimieux. She doesn't look scared at all, but stares at the snake with silent concentration, until it goes away. With this strange little moment, we already realize there's something highly unusual about these seemingly normal folks, though the possible danger to the minister and his wife remains vague and uncertain for a long time.

That one little scene stays with me vividly after all these years, along with many others. The film has a haunting quality about it that won't [[allowing]] go, and it's not surprising that people remember it so vividly. Someone ought to make this available for home video! --------------------------------------------- Result 635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This [[kind]] of "inspirational" saccharine is [[enough]] to make you [[sick]]. It telegraphs its sentiments [[like]] the biggest semaphore on earth. It [[removes]] from the [[audience]] its own interpretation and [[feeling]] by [[making]] the [[choices]] for it. The [[big]] finish is [[swimming]] in [[weeping]] orchestration that must [[supposed]] to [[work]] like jumper cables on a [[dead]] car; I guess you'd need such prompting to feel if you're stupid [[enough]] to watch a [[film]] as simple-minded and sappy as this. [[Streep]] [[glows]] and you wonder if she really has the depth of feeling on [[display]] or if it's just that---a [[display]], [[switched]] on and off like a light. Because I can't for the life of me see how she [[could]] [[possibly]] find [[life]] in such a dud of [[film]]. Even [[though]] it's [[based]] on a true story, and an inspirational one at that I'm sure, the set-up, execution and performances [[play]] like a third-rate TV movie or half-witted high school drama. This [[genre]] of "inspirational" saccharine is [[adequate]] to make you [[indisposed]]. It telegraphs its sentiments [[iike]] the biggest semaphore on earth. It [[clears]] from the [[viewers]] its own interpretation and [[sensation]] by [[doing]] the [[pick]] for it. The [[prodigious]] finish is [[swim]] in [[sobbing]] orchestration that must [[suspected]] to [[worked]] like jumper cables on a [[dies]] car; I guess you'd need such prompting to feel if you're stupid [[suitably]] to watch a [[filmmaking]] as simple-minded and sappy as this. [[Meryl]] [[shines]] and you wonder if she really has the depth of feeling on [[shows]] or if it's just that---a [[shows]], [[swapped]] on and off like a light. Because I can't for the life of me see how she [[did]] [[arguably]] find [[iife]] in such a dud of [[kino]]. Even [[despite]] it's [[predicated]] on a true story, and an inspirational one at that I'm sure, the set-up, execution and performances [[gaming]] like a third-rate TV movie or half-witted high school drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is a [[cute]] and sad [[little]] [[story]] of cultural difference. Kyoko is a [[beautiful]] Japanese [[woman]] who has [[run]] to California to [[escape]] from a failed [[relationship]] in [[Japan]]. [[Ken]] is a Japanese American manual [[laborer]] with aspirations of [[rock]] and roll stardom but little concrete to [[offer]] a potential [[partner]]. Kyoko "[[marries]]" [[Ken]] in [[order]] to be [[able]] to [[stay]] [[permanently]] in the U.S., with the [[understanding]] that [[although]] they will [[live]] together until she [[gets]] a "green card" the [[marriage]] will be in [[name]] only. It soon develops that the [[parties]] are not on the same [[wavelength]] - or [[perhaps]] in the same "time zone", hence the title of the movie. As an immigration [[attorney]] I have [[seen]] such "[[arrangements]]" [[take]] on a [[life]] of their own, so I was [[pleased]] to see how well the filmmaker [[developed]] the [[dramatic]] [[possibilities]] of this situation. This is a [[mignon]] and sad [[tiny]] [[histories]] of cultural difference. Kyoko is a [[wondrous]] Japanese [[female]] who has [[executing]] to California to [[fleeing]] from a failed [[relationships]] in [[Japans]]. [[Keane]] is a Japanese American manual [[worker]] with aspirations of [[rocks]] and roll stardom but little concrete to [[offering]] a potential [[partners]]. Kyoko "[[wedding]]" [[Keane]] in [[decree]] to be [[capable]] to [[remain]] [[invariably]] in the U.S., with the [[understood]] that [[albeit]] they will [[vive]] together until she [[get]] a "green card" the [[marries]] will be in [[names]] only. It soon develops that the [[part]] are not on the same [[wave]] - or [[potentially]] in the same "time zone", hence the title of the movie. As an immigration [[prosecutors]] I have [[watched]] such "[[accords]]" [[taking]] on a [[iife]] of their own, so I was [[glad]] to see how well the filmmaker [[worded]] the [[impressive]] [[chances]] of this situation. --------------------------------------------- Result 637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[While]] [[visiting]] [[Romania]] with his CIA dad, [[Tony]]([[Adam]] Arkin), [[quite]] a talented [[high]] school quarterback seen as the savior to lead his team [[finally]] to a victory over rival [[Simpson]], is told by a would-be palm-reader(..in Romania, the people are not [[allowed]] many books, so she took up [[palm]] reading)that he [[would]] be [[bitten]] by a werewolf("When the moon is full, don't make any appointments..you will be busy."). Well, who [[would]] have thunk it..[[Tony]] is in fact bitten and his [[life]] would be [[forever]] [[changed]]. After his father unfortunately dies in a mishap within his [[bomb]] [[shelter]](!)under odd [[circumstances]](firing at his werewolf son inside a metallic bomb shelter isn't a very good idea, especially if the bullet doesn't leave the [[room]] and bounces around like a pinball [[gone]] berserk), Tony travels the land through [[endless]] [[years]], until he's tired of packing, and [[returns]] decades(..and [[many]] US Presidents)[[later]] to hopefully lead his [[football]] team to a win over [[Simpson]]..a task he abandoned long ago. What was once a very white, clean-cut high school has indeed changed into a ghetto of drug use, violence, and perversion. To get an idea of what the early 80's Full Moon High school's prom party resembles, [[think]] Studio 54 with teenagers..

Larry Cohen's parody of werewolf flicks, among others things, is crammed full of gags, homages, and in-jokes. My [[favorite]] sequences contain one in the sex-ed classroom where Tony reveals to the 80's class his werewolf transformation and the introductory scene to Dr. Brand(Alan Arkin, who steals the film when Kenneth Mars isn't on screen), quite possibly the worst [[psychiatrist]] on Earth. His task to talk down a jumper leads to two men falling off a balcony..the jumper and a fireman (trying, at first, to talk him out of it), both fuming mad at Brand! Brand even tries to get Tony to sign a waver for his body's being donated to science so he can get his wife a fur coat! Kenneth Mars had me rolling in the floor as a homosexual football coach(..and later in the 80's as the Principal)who likes to pat his players on the behind..his scene where Tony's unloading the truth to the sex-ed class is classic. The film is loaded with inspired casting choices..just littered with funny characters and the cast interpretations..such as Ed McMahon as a very conservative military blowhard who actually looks identical to Joseph McCathy standing next to his photo in the bomb shelter(..always talking about commies), Joanne Nail as bulging eyed Ricky in present day who falls for the werewolf, Elizabeth Hartman(A Patch of Blue)as a mousy, nerdy sexually molested(..and molester)teacher who finds an attraction towards Tony, James Dixon as a deputy(..his great scene has him stealing a line from his police chief reciting it to Dr. Brand who begins mouthing the words to himself for memorization), Roz Kelly as Jane, an undyingly devoted female desiring Tony for only herself constantly demanding he ravish her, and Bill Kirchenbauer as Flynn, Tony's long-time pal and now the police chief who only got Jane after his friend left town. Can not forget JM J Bullock as Flynn's closeted gay son trying to fit in at the school hoping to find a dame with hilarious results.

I like how the film pays homage to the werewolf genre such as when he's on the prowl..he's often referred to in the papers as Jack the Nipper because he likes to bite his victims on the cheek..and I'm not talking face. He's seen more as an annoyance than danger. The homages to Carrie and Psycho are nice, and the violin shtick is also amusing. Cohen tosses so many zingers at the viewer, eventually one has to stick. Obviously in a comedy such as this, not every joke hits it's mark, but many do. The cast makes this worthwhile. The film looks cheap on the typical Larry Cohen budget. Notice the 50's scenes where the obvious old cast members that would show up down the road wear glaring wigs. Loved Adam in the lead..he is the perfect foil for the gags that follow him and the zingers he lets fly from Cohen's script. The film moves quickly, rarely catching a breath. I liked this horror comedy more than most it seems. [[Whereas]] [[visited]] [[Romanians]] with his CIA dad, [[Tonny]]([[Adem]] Arkin), [[perfectly]] a talented [[supreme]] school quarterback seen as the savior to lead his team [[lastly]] to a victory over rival [[Simpsons]], is told by a would-be palm-reader(..in Romania, the people are not [[permitted]] many books, so she took up [[palma]] reading)that he [[could]] be [[hunk]] by a werewolf("When the moon is full, don't make any appointments..you will be busy."). Well, who [[ought]] have thunk it..[[Toni]] is in fact bitten and his [[iife]] would be [[indefinitely]] [[amended]]. After his father unfortunately dies in a mishap within his [[bombings]] [[shelters]](!)under odd [[situations]](firing at his werewolf son inside a metallic bomb shelter isn't a very good idea, especially if the bullet doesn't leave the [[bedroom]] and bounces around like a pinball [[faded]] berserk), Tony travels the land through [[countless]] [[ages]], until he's tired of packing, and [[comeback]] decades(..and [[various]] US Presidents)[[then]] to hopefully lead his [[soccer]] team to a win over [[Simpsons]]..a task he abandoned long ago. What was once a very white, clean-cut high school has indeed changed into a ghetto of drug use, violence, and perversion. To get an idea of what the early 80's Full Moon High school's prom party resembles, [[ideas]] Studio 54 with teenagers..

Larry Cohen's parody of werewolf flicks, among others things, is crammed full of gags, homages, and in-jokes. My [[prefers]] sequences contain one in the sex-ed classroom where Tony reveals to the 80's class his werewolf transformation and the introductory scene to Dr. Brand(Alan Arkin, who steals the film when Kenneth Mars isn't on screen), quite possibly the worst [[psych]] on Earth. His task to talk down a jumper leads to two men falling off a balcony..the jumper and a fireman (trying, at first, to talk him out of it), both fuming mad at Brand! Brand even tries to get Tony to sign a waver for his body's being donated to science so he can get his wife a fur coat! Kenneth Mars had me rolling in the floor as a homosexual football coach(..and later in the 80's as the Principal)who likes to pat his players on the behind..his scene where Tony's unloading the truth to the sex-ed class is classic. The film is loaded with inspired casting choices..just littered with funny characters and the cast interpretations..such as Ed McMahon as a very conservative military blowhard who actually looks identical to Joseph McCathy standing next to his photo in the bomb shelter(..always talking about commies), Joanne Nail as bulging eyed Ricky in present day who falls for the werewolf, Elizabeth Hartman(A Patch of Blue)as a mousy, nerdy sexually molested(..and molester)teacher who finds an attraction towards Tony, James Dixon as a deputy(..his great scene has him stealing a line from his police chief reciting it to Dr. Brand who begins mouthing the words to himself for memorization), Roz Kelly as Jane, an undyingly devoted female desiring Tony for only herself constantly demanding he ravish her, and Bill Kirchenbauer as Flynn, Tony's long-time pal and now the police chief who only got Jane after his friend left town. Can not forget JM J Bullock as Flynn's closeted gay son trying to fit in at the school hoping to find a dame with hilarious results.

I like how the film pays homage to the werewolf genre such as when he's on the prowl..he's often referred to in the papers as Jack the Nipper because he likes to bite his victims on the cheek..and I'm not talking face. He's seen more as an annoyance than danger. The homages to Carrie and Psycho are nice, and the violin shtick is also amusing. Cohen tosses so many zingers at the viewer, eventually one has to stick. Obviously in a comedy such as this, not every joke hits it's mark, but many do. The cast makes this worthwhile. The film looks cheap on the typical Larry Cohen budget. Notice the 50's scenes where the obvious old cast members that would show up down the road wear glaring wigs. Loved Adam in the lead..he is the perfect foil for the gags that follow him and the zingers he lets fly from Cohen's script. The film moves quickly, rarely catching a breath. I liked this horror comedy more than most it seems. --------------------------------------------- Result 638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I have no idea why they [[made]] this version of "Persuasion" when they already had that fine mini-series with [[Amanda]] [[Root]] and Ciaran Hinds. I [[suppose]] that they wanted to make a feature-length version, but of course a lot had to be deleted; [[alas]], what ended up on the cutting-room [[floor]] was all the lovely wit and humour, [[leaving]] a [[film]] that was mere melodrama rather than an [[amusing]] exposition of English country manners and mores.

Also, the [[characters]] were shallow and uninteresting. They had [[poor]] Anne chasing up and down the streets after Captain Wentworth like a silly modern adolescent (and if you happen to be a silly modern adolescent reading this, let me tell you: running after a male like a female in heat is [[NOT]] cool). That is something a well-bred woman of the Napoleonic era would never have done, and certainly not this level-headed heroine.

Some have [[said]] they found this antic laughable; my reaction was not laughter, but outrage. The very [[idea]] of such a [[corruption]] of an Austen work is beneath contempt.

It was ghastly. I have no idea why they [[brought]] this version of "Persuasion" when they already had that fine mini-series with [[Remy]] [[Origin]] and Ciaran Hinds. I [[presuming]] that they wanted to make a feature-length version, but of course a lot had to be deleted; [[alack]], what ended up on the cutting-room [[flooring]] was all the lovely wit and humour, [[abandoning]] a [[filmmaking]] that was mere melodrama rather than an [[hilarious]] exposition of English country manners and mores.

Also, the [[trait]] were shallow and uninteresting. They had [[poorest]] Anne chasing up and down the streets after Captain Wentworth like a silly modern adolescent (and if you happen to be a silly modern adolescent reading this, let me tell you: running after a male like a female in heat is [[NOPE]] cool). That is something a well-bred woman of the Napoleonic era would never have done, and certainly not this level-headed heroine.

Some have [[stated]] they found this antic laughable; my reaction was not laughter, but outrage. The very [[ideals]] of such a [[graft]] of an Austen work is beneath contempt.

It was ghastly. --------------------------------------------- Result 639 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I saw this movie last month at a free sneak preview and I walked out. It was pretty [[horrible]]. In the [[process]] of trying too [[hard]], they over acted and made a horrible movie. I was disappointed since I felt all the actors had made [[respectable]] [[choices]] in the [[past]] so this one couldn't be that far off the mark--but, I was wrong. I was [[hoping]] they would give out a [[survey]] at the end of the [[movie]] so I [[could]] [[tell]] them not to release this [[movie]]. I was [[lured]] in by the free aspect of the preview, but it turned out to be a [[waste]] of my time--and, [[usually]], I'm very [[easily]] amused. It tried to be [[innovative]] and [[creative]] with the [[shots]], [[ideas]] and [[filming]], but because they threw together so [[many]] [[ideas]] at once, it [[failed]]. I'm not [[usually]] [[picky]] about [[movies]] and I [[usually]] don't feel the [[need]] to [[display]] my [[opinions]] about [[movies]], but I had to [[warn]] everyone not to watch it. I [[registered]] on IMDb just to [[tell]] all of you [[guys]] I saw this movie last month at a free sneak preview and I walked out. It was pretty [[scary]]. In the [[treated]] of trying too [[harsh]], they over acted and made a horrible movie. I was disappointed since I felt all the actors had made [[reputable]] [[opt]] in the [[yesteryear]] so this one couldn't be that far off the mark--but, I was wrong. I was [[expecting]] they would give out a [[probes]] at the end of the [[filmmaking]] so I [[did]] [[told]] them not to release this [[filmmaking]]. I was [[drawn]] in by the free aspect of the preview, but it turned out to be a [[wastes]] of my time--and, [[fluently]], I'm very [[comfortably]] amused. It tried to be [[imaginative]] and [[inventive]] with the [[beatings]], [[thoughts]] and [[photographing]], but because they threw together so [[various]] [[insights]] at once, it [[faulted]]. I'm not [[habitually]] [[choosy]] about [[movie]] and I [[habitually]] don't feel the [[gotta]] to [[shows]] my [[view]] about [[theater]], but I had to [[cautionary]] everyone not to watch it. I [[inscription]] on IMDb just to [[say]] all of you [[guy]] --------------------------------------------- Result 640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Man, I [[really]] find it [[hard]] to [[believe]] that the [[wonderful]] Alan [[Ball]] had anything to do with this [[mess]]. Having seen the first two episodes [[thus]] far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must [[see]] list. It's just got so many things [[working]] against it.

[[None]] of the [[actors]] cast are [[particularly]] good. Anna Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just [[awful]]. I remember her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much [[fun]] to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is [[marginally]] better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and [[aloof]]. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are [[given]] it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like [[nails]] on a [[chalkboard]] bad. [[Almost]] as [[awful]] is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of [[genius]] casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.

The story [[seems]] to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. [[Out]] of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO [[shows]] but here at least they [[prolonged]] rough sex scenes [[involving]] Jason Stackhouse seem a [[bit]] over the [[top]] and [[pointless]].

About the only nice thing I can [[really]] think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air. Man, I [[truly]] find it [[laborious]] to [[believing]] that the [[sumptuous]] Alan [[Ballon]] had anything to do with this [[chaos]]. Having seen the first two episodes [[then]] far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must [[behold]] list. It's just got so many things [[cooperating]] against it.

[[Nil]] of the [[protagonists]] cast are [[peculiarly]] good. Anna Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just [[frightful]]. I remember her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much [[droll]] to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is [[slightly]] better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and [[faraway]]. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are [[awarded]] it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like [[fingernails]] on a [[blackboard]] bad. [[Around]] as [[scary]] is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of [[engineers]] casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.

The story [[appears]] to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. [[Outward]] of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO [[showings]] but here at least they [[lengthened]] rough sex scenes [[encompassing]] Jason Stackhouse seem a [[bite]] over the [[superior]] and [[superfluous]].

About the only nice thing I can [[genuinely]] think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air. --------------------------------------------- Result 641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] "Freddy's Dead" did the smartest thing it could've done after the disappointment of the fifth film. It started from scratch. Sure, this "final" film in the saga is silly but at least it's original. Some of the visuals are even a bit breath-taking. And the story of Freddy's kid (Lisa Zane) returning to town to face her evil father is unique.

[[Overall]], the movie is [[nothing]] but another cartoon made to get kids in the theater. It has a bunch of good actors (Zane, Yaphet Kotto, and Lezlie Deane) who basically look dumb and wander around like sheep ready for slaughter. It's one-sided, it's a magic-trick, and, in the end, it's nothing but goofy, childish entertainment.

"Freddy's Dead" did the smartest thing it could've done after the disappointment of the fifth film. It started from scratch. Sure, this "final" film in the saga is silly but at least it's original. Some of the visuals are even a bit breath-taking. And the story of Freddy's kid (Lisa Zane) returning to town to face her evil father is unique.

[[Holistic]], the movie is [[anything]] but another cartoon made to get kids in the theater. It has a bunch of good actors (Zane, Yaphet Kotto, and Lezlie Deane) who basically look dumb and wander around like sheep ready for slaughter. It's one-sided, it's a magic-trick, and, in the end, it's nothing but goofy, childish entertainment.

--------------------------------------------- Result 642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's such a shame that because of it's title this film will be avoided by people who hate football. Bend it Like Beckham is much more than a cheesy sports flick. The story line is touching and intelligent without being soppy, the jokes were laugh out loud funny, and the characters are well acted. Parminder Nagra and Keira Knightley are brilliant as teenagers Jess and Jules, putting in great performances both on and off the pitch. Anupam Kher is wonderful as Jess' worried father, and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, who was so amazingly evil in 'Ride with the Devil,' comes across so well as the nice guy for once, making full use of his gorgeous Irish accent! Even if you don't like football, go see this film. If anything it'll make you smile. --------------------------------------------- Result 643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Reign Over Me is a [[success]] due to the [[powerful]] [[work]] by Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. [[While]] comedic [[actors]] [[going]] dramatic has been [[seen]] as somewhat of a distraction, Sandler is no stranger to playing more serious roles. Most of the characters he portrays have an unstable temperament and a [[vulnerability]] that can burst at any [[moment]]. He [[might]] even be typecast for [[characters]] with such [[hidden]] [[anger]] [[problems]]. However, this performance has some [[considerable]] dramatic weight, unlike his [[roles]] in [[less]] [[comedic]] [[fare]] [[like]] Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish.

[[In]] the film, [[Alan]] Johnson (Cheadle) runs into his [[old]] college roommate, Charlie Finerman (Sandler), whom he hasn't [[seen]] in several years. Five [[years]] before, Charlie suffered the [[overwhelming]] loss of his wife and three daughters in a [[plane]] [[crash]]. Charlie barely [[even]] [[recognizes]] Cheadle's [[character]] due to the [[repression]] of his [[memories]] and consequent reclusive childish lifestyle since the accident. It isn't until [[Alan]] persists in engaging him in conversation that Charlie remembers who he is. Their renewed relationship that follows will allow Finerman to have a friend who doesn't speak about his loss, eventually [[enabling]] him to confront the thoughts and feelings he has [[suppressed]] on his own terms.

[[Though]] writer-director [[Mike]] Binder doesn't [[show]] much sense of an [[individual]] [[style]] and some of his shots and [[transitions]] are a bit [[awkward]], he does have a knack of getting decent to [[great]] performances from his [[actors]] while being a talented and funny writer. He [[shot]] this [[film]] with a digital camera, as more and more filmmakers are doing [[today]], [[enabling]] the crew to shoot the [[night]] scenes with [[limited]] lighting. This kept the [[colorful]] [[backgrounds]] of New York [[City]] in [[focus]], but resulted in [[creating]] frequent digital [[grain]], which resembles blue specks [[scattered]] and [[moving]] on the screen.

[[Almost]] every main character in Reign Over Me gives a [[great]] performance. Jada-Pinkett Smith and [[especially]] Liv [[Tyler]] are [[memorable]] in their respective roles as a [[frustrated]] [[wife]] to Cheadle's [[character]] and a [[psychiatrist]]. However, it is Sandler and Cheadle that give some of their [[finest]] work to date. They completely [[owned]] this [[movie]]. Sandler actually plays a [[character]] that doesn't [[outwardly]] [[resemble]] or act like himself at all, partially credited to his [[Bob]] Dylan-esquire wig. [[Though]] Cheadle's character has more screen time than Sandler, they both should be considered to be leading roles, as they equally support and help each other throughout the film.

Music also plays a great part in this film, especially the title song "Reign Over Me," or "Love, Reign O'er Me" by The Who, and later covered by Pearl Jam. In one of the most powerful moments of the film, Binder shows Sandler using music to shut out his feelings and memories, but this particular song provokes such intense emotion that rather than diminishing his anger, it incites his emotions. All an all, Reign Over Me is an enjoyable, sad, yet many times funny film, driven by its amazing leading performances. Reign Over Me is a [[accomplishments]] due to the [[influential]] [[works]] by Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. [[Despite]] comedic [[actresses]] [[gonna]] dramatic has been [[noticed]] as somewhat of a distraction, Sandler is no stranger to playing more serious roles. Most of the characters he portrays have an unstable temperament and a [[frailty]] that can burst at any [[time]]. He [[probability]] even be typecast for [[features]] with such [[covert]] [[fury]] [[disorders]]. However, this performance has some [[significant]] dramatic weight, unlike his [[functions]] in [[lowest]] [[slapstick]] [[tariffs]] [[iike]] Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish.

[[For]] the film, [[Alana]] Johnson (Cheadle) runs into his [[elderly]] college roommate, Charlie Finerman (Sandler), whom he hasn't [[watched]] in several years. Five [[olds]] before, Charlie suffered the [[sizable]] loss of his wife and three daughters in a [[aircraft]] [[crashes]]. Charlie barely [[yet]] [[recognize]] Cheadle's [[characters]] due to the [[suppression]] of his [[memorials]] and consequent reclusive childish lifestyle since the accident. It isn't until [[Alain]] persists in engaging him in conversation that Charlie remembers who he is. Their renewed relationship that follows will allow Finerman to have a friend who doesn't speak about his loss, eventually [[allow]] him to confront the thoughts and feelings he has [[stifled]] on his own terms.

[[If]] writer-director [[Mick]] Binder doesn't [[display]] much sense of an [[personally]] [[styles]] and some of his shots and [[transition]] are a bit [[clumsy]], he does have a knack of getting decent to [[excellent]] performances from his [[players]] while being a talented and funny writer. He [[offed]] this [[cinematography]] with a digital camera, as more and more filmmakers are doing [[hoy]], [[permitting]] the crew to shoot the [[nuit]] scenes with [[constrained]] lighting. This kept the [[colourful]] [[provenance]] of New York [[Ville]] in [[spotlight]], but resulted in [[establishing]] frequent digital [[grains]], which resembles blue specks [[littered]] and [[shifting]] on the screen.

[[Circa]] every main character in Reign Over Me gives a [[wondrous]] performance. Jada-Pinkett Smith and [[concretely]] Liv [[Ty]] are [[eventful]] in their respective roles as a [[disillusioned]] [[woman]] to Cheadle's [[personages]] and a [[psychoanalyst]]. However, it is Sandler and Cheadle that give some of their [[meanest]] work to date. They completely [[belonged]] this [[kino]]. Sandler actually plays a [[trait]] that doesn't [[externally]] [[resembling]] or act like himself at all, partially credited to his [[Spongebob]] Dylan-esquire wig. [[Whilst]] Cheadle's character has more screen time than Sandler, they both should be considered to be leading roles, as they equally support and help each other throughout the film.

Music also plays a great part in this film, especially the title song "Reign Over Me," or "Love, Reign O'er Me" by The Who, and later covered by Pearl Jam. In one of the most powerful moments of the film, Binder shows Sandler using music to shut out his feelings and memories, but this particular song provokes such intense emotion that rather than diminishing his anger, it incites his emotions. All an all, Reign Over Me is an enjoyable, sad, yet many times funny film, driven by its amazing leading performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Those [[individuals]] familiar with Asian [[cinema]], as a [[whole]], are [[aware]] that Japan is renowned, or [[notorious]], for it's hyper-violent [[films]] and [[Korea]] is now garnering a reputation for viciously [[brutal]] films. [[Dog]] Bites [[Dog]], while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike [[film]], nor is it as unapologetically [[brutal]] as some Koreas more ambitious [[efforts]], it is a [[perfect]] in between with its own [[brand]] of [[brutality]] all it's own. The greatest [[strength]] this [[film]] has though, like the [[greatest]] of the [[Japanese]] or Korean [[efforts]], is that the [[brutality]], [[rather]] than detracting from the [[film]], [[actually]] [[develops]] the [[characters]], if not, [[pushing]] the [[story]] forward. The two [[main]] characters are both [[incredibly]] vicious [[individuals]] with their own motivations and [[emotional]] underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's [[character]], for [[instance]], is on the edge from the very [[start]] and slowly and [[surely]], amidst [[various]] [[encounters]] with Chang's [[character]], it is [[revealed]] why he is. Without spoiling this [[part]] of the [[story]] too much, it involves the morally [[ambiguous]] [[nature]] of his [[father]]. Chang's [[character]], on the other hand, has his most [[primal]] instincts honed to, if not perfection, [[brutal]] efficiency. [[Surprisingly]], Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more [[human]] side, actually [[reveals]] a side to our animal [[nature]] which [[many]] forget about which is the natural [[ability]] to [[recognize]] a [[fellow]] [[broken]] animal (and no I am not [[talking]] about Sam [[Lee]], rather Pei Pei's [[garbage]] [[dump]] [[girl]] [[character]]). Ultimately [[however]], for the first 80 minutes or so, it is a, more or [[less]], straight forward cat and [[mouse]], or Dog [[chase]] Dog, [[film]] in which every [[encounter]] ends in at [[least]] one [[death]] ([[seriously]], once Sam Lee and [[Chang]] Square off, some one will [[die]]) and the [[fun]] part of movie is you never know who hands will commit the act. [[Which]] brings us to the film's one weakness. Unforunatley to [[delve]] into it would be [[yet]] another [[spoiler]] but, to put it simply, it is guilty of pushing one of the main points of the [[film]] [[since]], [[rather]] then [[letting]] the point be [[made]] as is 80 minutes into the [[film]], the [[film]] goes on for another 20 minutes or so to further [[emphasize]] it. Don't get me [[wrong]], if transitioned better from the 80 minute [[mark]] to the climax and if the final [[act]] wasn't filled with [[sweet]] [[music]] (in fact if it, like the majority of the film, kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh air from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact. Those [[persons]] familiar with Asian [[movies]], as a [[together]], are [[conscious]] that Japan is renowned, or [[prestigious]], for it's hyper-violent [[cinematography]] and [[Korean]] is now garnering a reputation for viciously [[ferocious]] films. [[Hound]] Bites [[Canine]], while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike [[cinematography]], nor is it as unapologetically [[ferocious]] as some Koreas more ambitious [[activities]], it is a [[impeccable]] in between with its own [[mark]] of [[cruelty]] all it's own. The greatest [[kraft]] this [[movies]] has though, like the [[biggest]] of the [[Japs]] or Korean [[effort]], is that the [[barbarian]], [[quite]] than detracting from the [[cinema]], [[genuinely]] [[develop]] the [[features]], if not, [[prompting]] the [[narratives]] forward. The two [[leading]] characters are both [[terribly]] vicious [[person]] with their own motivations and [[sentimental]] underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's [[nature]], for [[lawsuit]], is on the edge from the very [[launches]] and slowly and [[obviously]], amidst [[multiple]] [[clashes]] with Chang's [[nature]], it is [[shown]] why he is. Without spoiling this [[parties]] of the [[tale]] too much, it involves the morally [[obscure]] [[character]] of his [[fathers]]. Chang's [[nature]], on the other hand, has his most [[primitive]] instincts honed to, if not perfection, [[cruel]] efficiency. [[Terribly]], Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more [[humanity]] side, actually [[reveal]] a side to our animal [[characters]] which [[numerous]] forget about which is the natural [[competence]] to [[acknowledging]] a [[colleagues]] [[raped]] animal (and no I am not [[talk]] about Sam [[Rhee]], rather Pei Pei's [[junk]] [[shithole]] [[daughters]] [[characteristics]]). Ultimately [[instead]], for the first 80 minutes or so, it is a, more or [[lesser]], straight forward cat and [[smile]], or Dog [[chases]] Dog, [[cinema]] in which every [[confrontation]] ends in at [[less]] one [[muerte]] ([[severely]], once Sam Lee and [[Jang]] Square off, some one will [[killed]]) and the [[funny]] part of movie is you never know who hands will commit the act. [[Whom]] brings us to the film's one weakness. Unforunatley to [[diving]] into it would be [[even]] another [[deflector]] but, to put it simply, it is guilty of pushing one of the main points of the [[kino]] [[because]], [[comparatively]] then [[allowing]] the point be [[introduced]] as is 80 minutes into the [[movie]], the [[movie]] goes on for another 20 minutes or so to further [[stressing]] it. Don't get me [[amiss]], if transitioned better from the 80 minute [[brands]] to the climax and if the final [[ley]] wasn't filled with [[sugary]] [[musicians]] (in fact if it, like the majority of the film, kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh air from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact. --------------------------------------------- Result 645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has beautiful scenery. Unfortunately it has no plot. In order to have a plot there must be a conflict. This movie had none. It spent two hours painting a beautifule scene and failed to ever place any activity in it. The picture trys to be artistic but fails to pay attentions to the fundamentals of story telling.

If you love Montana scenery and fly fishing you will find some value in this film just don't expect a story. There isn't one. --------------------------------------------- Result 646 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Before the [[regular]] [[comments]], my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A [[LOVE]] SONG is that while there's a running [[time]] listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring [[Media]] in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any [[input]] on this is [[appreciated]]!

Two friends with very rough [[lives]] [[take]] on the road for an adventure. What they [[wind]] up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two escaping by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the film is [[complicated]] by the the daft and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may [[dislike]] the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as "big man" in contrast to Spike's "kid out of control" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.

Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and [[continue]] a [[friendship]], due to Glenaan's [[great]] performance. After all, there are [[many]] [[many]] reasons during their [[run]] that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to [[save]] himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a [[protective]] older brother to [[Spike]], and the [[loyalty]] between the two is [[hard]] to [[break]] -- until things get too [[desperate]].

[[While]] some of the cinematography is [[indeed]] artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful [[landscapes]], rain, and vast gray skies offer a [[somber]] tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song "This Is Not A Love Song" and as the title of the film is quite smart.

Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.

I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand.

Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.

Before the [[routine]] [[remarks]], my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A [[LOVED]] SONG is that while there's a running [[moment]] listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring [[Medium]] in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any [[inlet]] on this is [[enjoyed]]!

Two friends with very rough [[vie]] [[taking]] on the road for an adventure. What they [[windmill]] up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two escaping by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the film is [[complicate]] by the the daft and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may [[aversion]] the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as "big man" in contrast to Spike's "kid out of control" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.

Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and [[uninterrupted]] a [[goodwill]], due to Glenaan's [[huge]] performance. After all, there are [[innumerable]] [[innumerable]] reasons during their [[execute]] that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to [[economize]] himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a [[defensive]] older brother to [[Fortification]], and the [[allegiance]] between the two is [[laborious]] to [[outage]] -- until things get too [[despondent]].

[[Although]] some of the cinematography is [[admittedly]] artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful [[scenery]], rain, and vast gray skies offer a [[dark]] tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song "This Is Not A Love Song" and as the title of the film is quite smart.

Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.

I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand.

Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.

--------------------------------------------- Result 647 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] I'm kinda torn on DARK ANGEL. The film appears to be a "loving" tribute to the greatest pin-up to ever live - but there is so little actual "content" that the film itself is virtually [[pointless]]. I can't really see what the [[motivation]] or "point" of this [[film]] is - as there is very little biographical information provided in the narrative - so those who don't know much about Bettie aren't gonna know much more after watching DARK ANGEL either...

The film [[basically]] chronicles the last few [[years]] of Bettie's [[career]] in bondage modeling. [[Almost]] the entire [[film]] is [[comprised]] of "re-enactments" of some of Bettie's more "[[famous]]" photo-shoots and loops. These re-enactments take up literally 75% of the [[films]] run-time, and give virtually no [[insight]] into Bettie as a [[person]]. The [[film]] touches briefly on her short-lived [[legitimate]] acting pursuits, and her [[subsequent]] decision to [[leave]] the "[[business]]" and [[become]] religious - but all of this is pretty much glossed-over in favor of [[showing]] [[long]] and drawn-out re-enactment scenes...

DARK ANGEL isn't a [[horrible]] [[film]] - there's just no [[substance]] to it. The other problem is that the [[actress]] that plays Bettie only really [[resembles]] her in farther away shots - up-close it's a no-go. The other [[thing]] that [[irritated]] me, is that [[although]] Bettie did [[several]] [[topless]] modeling shoots - the only nudity in the [[film]] was a short segment shot in a [[zoo]] during the [[end]] credits. The film itself is [[obviously]] [[extremely]] low-budget, but does what it can set and costume-wise within it's [[limitations]] - so no [[gripes]] from me there. The acting is pretty wooden and unmemorable from [[everyone]] involved. In fact - the most [[memorable]] [[thing]] about the [[whole]] [[film]] for me, was noticing during the [[end]] credits that the [[actor]] who [[played]] Irving Klaw's [[real]] [[name]] is Dukey Flyswatter. No joke - [[check]] the cast [[list]]. Can't [[say]] that I recommend this one too highly unless you are a true Bettiefile completist and [[must]] own [[anything]] [[relating]] to her. And if you are that [[bad]] off - then you need to [[seek]] [[treatment]] [[anyway]]...4/10 I'm kinda torn on DARK ANGEL. The film appears to be a "loving" tribute to the greatest pin-up to ever live - but there is so little actual "content" that the film itself is virtually [[meaningless]]. I can't really see what the [[motif]] or "point" of this [[filmmaking]] is - as there is very little biographical information provided in the narrative - so those who don't know much about Bettie aren't gonna know much more after watching DARK ANGEL either...

The film [[mainly]] chronicles the last few [[aged]] of Bettie's [[professions]] in bondage modeling. [[Virtually]] the entire [[filmmaking]] is [[composed]] of "re-enactments" of some of Bettie's more "[[notorious]]" photo-shoots and loops. These re-enactments take up literally 75% of the [[film]] run-time, and give virtually no [[eyesight]] into Bettie as a [[persons]]. The [[filmmaking]] touches briefly on her short-lived [[lawful]] acting pursuits, and her [[later]] decision to [[letting]] the "[[businesses]]" and [[gotten]] religious - but all of this is pretty much glossed-over in favor of [[demonstrating]] [[longer]] and drawn-out re-enactment scenes...

DARK ANGEL isn't a [[scary]] [[filmmaking]] - there's just no [[substances]] to it. The other problem is that the [[actor]] that plays Bettie only really [[reminds]] her in farther away shots - up-close it's a no-go. The other [[stuff]] that [[outraged]] me, is that [[while]] Bettie did [[various]] [[bikini]] modeling shoots - the only nudity in the [[filmmaking]] was a short segment shot in a [[animals]] during the [[ends]] credits. The film itself is [[definitely]] [[terribly]] low-budget, but does what it can set and costume-wise within it's [[limits]] - so no [[complains]] from me there. The acting is pretty wooden and unmemorable from [[someone]] involved. In fact - the most [[unforgettable]] [[stuff]] about the [[ensemble]] [[filmmaking]] for me, was noticing during the [[terminate]] credits that the [[protagonist]] who [[served]] Irving Klaw's [[true]] [[designation]] is Dukey Flyswatter. No joke - [[inspections]] the cast [[listing]]. Can't [[tell]] that I recommend this one too highly unless you are a true Bettiefile completist and [[owes]] own [[something]] [[pertaining]] to her. And if you are that [[unfavorable]] off - then you need to [[striving]] [[cure]] [[anyhow]]...4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] It [[could]] have been a better film. It does drag at points, and the central story shifts from Boyer completing his mission to [[Boyer]] avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham [[Greene]] is an author who is really [[hard]] to spoil. His [[stories]] are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, [[guilt]] and innocence (very relative terms in his [[world]] [[view]]), and the human condition.

Boyer is [[Luis]] Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has [[sided]] with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts [[turns]] out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house keeper, and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an "esperanto" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.

The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. [[Blimp]] type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in showing his dislike for foreigners in general.

The one ray of hope is Lauren Bacall (Rose [[Cullen]]), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an [[aristocrat]] - the [[daughter]] of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to [[say]]) [[almost]] sank her [[long]] career. She does act well, but the [[spark]] she [[showed]] in her [[first]] [[film]] was due to the [[dual]] [[effect]] of [[starring]] with [[Humphrey]] Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.

It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden [[foes]] all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.

With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction. It [[would]] have been a better film. It does drag at points, and the central story shifts from Boyer completing his mission to [[Boer]] avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham [[Archer]] is an author who is really [[dur]] to spoil. His [[fairytales]] are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, [[culpa]] and innocence (very relative terms in his [[globe]] [[avis]]), and the human condition.

Boyer is [[Louise]] Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has [[cara]] with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts [[revolves]] out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house keeper, and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an "esperanto" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.

The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. [[Dirigible]] type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in showing his dislike for foreigners in general.

The one ray of hope is Lauren Bacall (Rose [[Keren]]), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an [[nobleman]] - the [[maid]] of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to [[tell]]) [[practically]] sank her [[longer]] career. She does act well, but the [[ignites]] she [[indicated]] in her [[frst]] [[cinematographic]] was due to the [[twofold]] [[implications]] of [[featuring]] with [[Humphreys]] Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.

It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden [[adversaries]] all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.

With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction. --------------------------------------------- Result 649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Well when watching this film late one night I was simple [[amazed]] by it's [[greatness]]. [[Fantastic]] [[script]], [[great]] acting, [[costumes]] and special effects, and the plot twists, [[wow]]!! In [[fact]] if you can [[see]] the [[ending]] [[coming]] you should become a writer yourself.

Great, I [[would]] recommend this [[film]] to [[anyone]], [[especially]] if I don;t like them much.

[[Terrific]] Well when watching this film late one night I was simple [[flabbergasted]] by it's [[size]]. [[Excellent]] [[hyphen]], [[wondrous]] acting, [[clothes]] and special effects, and the plot twists, [[whoa]]!! In [[facto]] if you can [[consults]] the [[ceasing]] [[arriving]] you should become a writer yourself.

Great, I [[should]] recommend this [[kino]] to [[somebody]], [[mainly]] if I don;t like them much.

[[Funky]] --------------------------------------------- Result 650 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Sunday [[would]] not be Sunday without an [[action]] [[movie]], and when you [[want]] [[intense]] [[combat]], you turn to [[Tom]] Berenger (Platoon).

Here he plays a [[sniper]] in the jungle going after rebels and [[drug]] lords. Life's a [[bitch]], so he [[gets]] a green office [[type]] (Billy Zane) to [[help]] on the [[mission]].

The [[film]] is in the hands of [[Luis]] Llosa, who stunk up Anaconda. he doesn't do much better here, but Berenger makes the [[movie]] worthwhile.

Sure, it [[may]] be a [[little]] [[long]] - who [[wants]] to [[see]] a [[lot]] of walking through the jungle, but is is [[good]], tense [[action]] when the time is right. Sunday [[could]] not be Sunday without an [[efforts]] [[film]], and when you [[wantto]] [[vehement]] [[counter]], you turn to [[Tum]] Berenger (Platoon).

Here he plays a [[shooter]] in the jungle going after rebels and [[pharmaceuticals]] lords. Life's a [[motherfucker]], so he [[got]] a green office [[genre]] (Billy Zane) to [[succour]] on the [[delegations]].

The [[films]] is in the hands of [[Lewis]] Llosa, who stunk up Anaconda. he doesn't do much better here, but Berenger makes the [[films]] worthwhile.

Sure, it [[maggio]] be a [[tiny]] [[protracted]] - who [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] a [[batch]] of walking through the jungle, but is is [[alright]], tense [[efforts]] when the time is right. --------------------------------------------- Result 651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Something very [[strange]] [[happens]] when you [[talk]] about [[Global]] [[Warming]]: science goes out the [[window]] and "[[belief]]" and "[[consensus]]" [[becomes]] the [[topic]] of [[discussion]].

It's because of that fact that I [[give]] a [[failing]] [[mark]] to Al Gore's documentary.

Instead of promoting [[intelligent]] discussion, he kept the debate at the level of "belief" and "consensus".

Of [[course]], when you're trying to [[sell]] the world into spending trillions of dollars to "stop [[Global]] [[Warming]]" you may thing it's a [[problem]] to tell the scientific truth: we don't know how much of the [[current]] warming was caused by [[humans]]. [[Maybe]] [[none]] of it, [[maybe]] some of it, or maybe it has over-ceded the [[next]] Ice Age and we got really lucky not to have [[boiled]] the [[planet]].

But the fact remains that we don't know.

so we're [[asked]] to "believe" in the "consensus". Never mind that any scientist that strays from the "[[consensus]]" is [[ostracized]]. Never mind that scientific [[inquiry]] is about [[straying]] from the [[consensus]]. Einstein didn't "[[believe]]" in the [[consensus]], neither did Copernicus or Galileo.

So why so much [[scorn]] placed on those very [[researchers]] who [[would]] [[advance]] the [[field]] by asking the tough questions? If Global [[Warming]] is so [[incontrovertible]], [[surely]] a few people [[testing]] that theory can't be so [[threatening]].

What is going on here? That's the [[movie]] I was [[hoping]] Al [[Gore]] [[would]] have [[made]]. Istead, he [[chose]] to shore up his [[support]] with the [[true]] "[[believers]]" of the "consensus".

Sad, really. Something very [[odd]] [[arises]] when you [[talking]] about [[International]] [[Heat]]: science goes out the [[luna]] and "[[creed]]" and "[[unanimity]]" [[become]] the [[themes]] of [[debates]].

It's because of that fact that I [[confer]] a [[omitting]] [[brands]] to Al Gore's documentary.

Instead of promoting [[smarter]] discussion, he kept the debate at the level of "belief" and "consensus".

Of [[cours]], when you're trying to [[sold]] the world into spending trillions of dollars to "stop [[International]] [[Warm]]" you may thing it's a [[issues]] to tell the scientific truth: we don't know how much of the [[contemporary]] warming was caused by [[beings]]. [[Possibly]] [[nos]] of it, [[potentially]] some of it, or maybe it has over-ceded the [[upcoming]] Ice Age and we got really lucky not to have [[cooked]] the [[globe]].

But the fact remains that we don't know.

so we're [[requested]] to "believe" in the "consensus". Never mind that any scientist that strays from the "[[unanimity]]" is [[marginalized]]. Never mind that scientific [[survey]] is about [[strayed]] from the [[unanimity]]. Einstein didn't "[[think]]" in the [[unanimity]], neither did Copernicus or Galileo.

So why so much [[derision]] placed on those very [[investigators]] who [[should]] [[headway]] the [[campo]] by asking the tough questions? If Global [[Warm]] is so [[unquestionable]], [[undoubtedly]] a few people [[test]] that theory can't be so [[threaten]].

What is going on here? That's the [[filmmaking]] I was [[awaiting]] Al [[Gora]] [[could]] have [[effected]]. Istead, he [[picks]] to shore up his [[helps]] with the [[veritable]] "[[followers]]" of the "consensus".

Sad, really. --------------------------------------------- Result 652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] for its two [[hours]] and have [[absolutely]] no [[idea]] what it's about. [[Somebody]] got [[murdered]] or [[maybe]] they didn't and maybe [[somebody]] did it or maybe they didn't. This [[brought]] back [[memories]] of the [[good]] [[old]] days ([[bad]] [[old]] days?) when all CBC Canadian movies were stinkers. [[Lately]] stinkers have been the exception but this [[confused]] hodge podge of trendy feminism, mind reeling flash backs and [[mumbled]] [[dialogue]] makes up for lost [[time]]. I've never [[found]] [[Margaret]] Atwood's books [[easy]] to read. This [[movie]] continues that [[fine]] Canadian [[tradition]]. It isn't easy to watch. [[Maybe]] the [[trendy]] folks at the chi chi Toronto cocktail [[parties]] will [[pretend]] they [[liked]] it. Us folks in the boonies are a [[little]] less [[pretentious]]. I [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]] for its two [[hour]] and have [[totally]] no [[thoughts]] what it's about. [[Everyone]] got [[kiiled]] or [[probably]] they didn't and maybe [[everyone]] did it or maybe they didn't. This [[introduced]] back [[reminiscences]] of the [[alright]] [[former]] days ([[negative]] [[longtime]] days?) when all CBC Canadian movies were stinkers. [[Recently]] stinkers have been the exception but this [[perplexed]] hodge podge of trendy feminism, mind reeling flash backs and [[sighed]] [[talks]] makes up for lost [[times]]. I've never [[uncovered]] [[Margarita]] Atwood's books [[easier]] to read. This [[filmmaking]] continues that [[alright]] Canadian [[traditions]]. It isn't easy to watch. [[Possibly]] the [[modern]] folks at the chi chi Toronto cocktail [[party]] will [[faking]] they [[loved]] it. Us folks in the boonies are a [[small]] less [[cocky]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines.

But then in the third episode he says that when the Europeans in South Africa got too far north they ran into Zulu people and other tribes that *herded cattle and planted crops*. So what explains their lack of technological, economic, and artistic achievement if they had the key things the author claims are needed for success?

Diamond also claims germs in the form of smallpox (brought to North America by black slaves) were our biggest weapon. Well, if 150 Europeans can defeat 20,000 native warriors and 400 non-military South Africans can defeat 10,000 Zulus *without a single casualty* in either case, then I think you have to conclude that germs are irrelevant. With or without germs, we were going to succeed.

He says Malaria stopped Europeans from colonizing further North, killing "thousands" of Europeans while not affecting Africans. (I'd like to know real numbers but he doesn't say.) Then at the end he says today Malaria is killing thousands of Africans and that is why they can't catch up with us. So which is it, Jared? Did Malaria help the Africans by halting Eurpeans or hurt them? And how come Europe did okay despite massive plagues throughout our history?

He also seems far too eager to say that the reasons Europeans succeeded was because of dumb luck. At times when the evidence threatens to overwhelm his rickety theories he's reluctant to admit that maybe Europeans were successful because they worked for it. It's sad watch this obvious neo-Marxist contort reality to try to prove his point. --------------------------------------------- Result 654 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the very worst films Clark Gable made. Only PARNELL was obviously worse. It is just so painfully clichéd and the dialog is so lousy that it is something neither Gable nor Jean Harlow should have been proud of making.

Gable is a heel whose illegal activities result in his girl going' to the slammer (like the gangster talk?). She holds out hope that he'll do the right thing but he just leaves her there--unknown to either of them, gosh, that she's "in the family way". Eventually, the rogue returns to do the right thing and somehow they tie this all together into a happy ending! They seemed to have forgotten about Gable's needing to take the rap and spend several years in the hoosegow. Leonard Maltin says "the stars are at their best here". By what standard? Best at producing unintended chuckles? Gimme a break!

PS--after saying this, my wife thinks Leonard Maltin is going to find me and kick my butt. Hmmm. However, despite my comment, I think Mr. Maltin is the finest reviewer and human being on the planet (I hope that appeased him).

UPDATE--2/2/08. Because I disliked this film so much the first time (especially the ridiculous ending), I decided to watch it once again. After all, sometimes when I watch a film again I like it much more and realize that I was a bit too harsh. While that has been the case with several films in recent months, I still disliked this film--even the second time. Most of it was not because of the first half of the film. In the first half, Harlow's character was amazingly stupid but at least it was believable. But when she was sent to prison, it was all clichés until the final ridiculous marriage scene occurred. The bottom line is that this sequence is embarrassingly dumb--it just makes no sense at all and is akin to turning the movie into some wacky fairy tale instead of a love story about two cons. I stand by my original review (despite all the "NOT HELPFULS") and think that aside from PARNELL and possibly POLLY AT THE CIRCUS, it might just be the worst Gable film. --------------------------------------------- Result 655 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Zentropa has much in common with The Third Man, another noir-like film set among the rubble of postwar Europe. Like TTM, there is much inventive camera work. There is an innocent American who gets emotionally involved with a woman he doesn't really understand, and whose naivety is all the more striking in contrast with the natives.

But I'd have to say that The Third Man has a more well-crafted storyline. Zentropa is a bit disjointed in this respect. Perhaps this is intentional: it is presented as a dream/nightmare, and making it too coherent would spoil the effect.

This movie is unrelentingly grim--"noir" in more than one sense; one never sees the sun shine. Grim, but intriguing, and frightening. --------------------------------------------- Result 656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I think this movie was supposed to be [[shocking]]. But the only [[way]] in which it is [[indeed]] [[shocking]] is how shocking [[badly]] it's been [[made]] ...and [[simply]] is. It's one-and-a-half [[hour]] of [[torment]]. Even more so for the viewer than for the characters in the [[movie]] (the five girls).

Sure the main characters get their [[bloody]] [[piece]] in a bad way, which is basically fine, since it's a horror-movie. And I (usually) like horror-movies. I've no problem with violence in these type of movies per se. [[However]] all the violence in this [[film]] serves no end whatsoever. It's no [[spectacle]] other than that it's [[simply]] [[grotesque]]. It's so lame it even gets [[boring]], and really quick too.

The [[worst]] thing (if the above wasn't bad enough for ya) about this movie is that they've tried to copy the Blair Whitch Project, by filming with cheap hand-held-cameras. But (again, this too) serves no end whatsoever. In the "Blair Which", sure enough, there's an explanation, namely they are their with a camera looking for the blair witch. In this film, there's no other explanation than: "Hey ya'll we wanted this to LOOK LIKE the Blair Whitch!!" The sound in the movie is also something to get depressed about. The girls are screaming so hysterically that many a time you can't make out what they're saying. Also, no effort has been made to make anything any better, sound-wise or other wise.

Than finally, there's the soundtrack, which is just as bad as the rest, and varies from [[cheap]] euro-house to the [[worst]] grungy hard-rock...

My [[advise]]: Don't watch this under ANY circumstances. I think this movie was supposed to be [[frightening]]. But the only [[routing]] in which it is [[actually]] [[terrifying]] is how shocking [[desperately]] it's been [[introduced]] ...and [[purely]] is. It's one-and-a-half [[hours]] of [[haunt]]. Even more so for the viewer than for the characters in the [[movies]] (the five girls).

Sure the main characters get their [[murderous]] [[slice]] in a bad way, which is basically fine, since it's a horror-movie. And I (usually) like horror-movies. I've no problem with violence in these type of movies per se. [[Conversely]] all the violence in this [[filmmaking]] serves no end whatsoever. It's no [[show]] other than that it's [[exclusively]] [[farcical]]. It's so lame it even gets [[bore]], and really quick too.

The [[meanest]] thing (if the above wasn't bad enough for ya) about this movie is that they've tried to copy the Blair Whitch Project, by filming with cheap hand-held-cameras. But (again, this too) serves no end whatsoever. In the "Blair Which", sure enough, there's an explanation, namely they are their with a camera looking for the blair witch. In this film, there's no other explanation than: "Hey ya'll we wanted this to LOOK LIKE the Blair Whitch!!" The sound in the movie is also something to get depressed about. The girls are screaming so hysterically that many a time you can't make out what they're saying. Also, no effort has been made to make anything any better, sound-wise or other wise.

Than finally, there's the soundtrack, which is just as bad as the rest, and varies from [[cheaper]] euro-house to the [[worse]] grungy hard-rock...

My [[counselor]]: Don't watch this under ANY circumstances. --------------------------------------------- Result 657 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I guess every time I see one of these old movies from the 80's it puts me back at a simpler time, no matter how corny they may seem today. This movie is a good one. I remember seeing it as a small kid and thinking it was the greatest movie ever. It has all the heroistic characters that a young cowboy wants to be. Now as an adult, I can look back and laugh and still feel sad, but this time I actually know what's going on. I did find one thing weird. How many people can move to Houston and hook up with Sissy,get married,move into a trailer,have a falling out,cheat, have an uncle die,then get back together, all in the course of a month? Only in America. --------------------------------------------- Result 658 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A killer, cannibal rapist is killed by a crazed cop on the scene of his latest murder. At his grave a cult have gathered with plans to resurrect him by peeing onto the grave. This of course works and he awakes ripping the guys penis off and he is back into his old killing ways with an all new zombie look. The two cops one of who is going a little crazy about the scum of the city and has a drug problem, are back on the case. Two of the original cult member also tries to stop the killer by resurrecting some other kind of dead thing. Thinking they have filed they leave but out from the grave comes a plastic baby doll that was used in the original resurrection. Sounds a bit confusing really but no its just rubbish.

The acting is terrible and one of the cops is the same guy that plays Dr Vincent van Gore in the faces of gore series and he is just as terrible as the annoying cop in this film. The other cop just about struggles to get his terrible lines out. Now I'm all for low budget cinema but this film is just terrible. If it wasn't for the very easy on the eye ladies and their nakedness I would probably have fallen asleep. There is a bit of gore but it's never more than some animal guts placed on the stomach of the victims. The zombie makeup on the other hand looks great and his foot long penis that he uses to rape his victims with is kind of funny at times. There is also a half decent scene where the killer falls in love with a sex doll. The doll with the chipmunks voice is the stupidest thing I have ever seen in a film. It is just a plastic toy on a fishing line.

The ending is extremely bad. You would expect the killer to put up much more of a fight than he does. God knows how they made enough money to make a sequel.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This isn't the [[best]] Bigfoot ever [[made]], but by the [[recent]] standards of [[Nature]] [[gone]] [[awry]] [[movies]], mostly [[showing]] on the Sci-Fi channel, this is quality stuff. It has some [[action]], some [[humor]], decent F/X and Bigfoot. CG is used, but so are some [[practical]] F/X, which I [[like]].

[[Overall]] this [[movie]] is worth a watch if you are a fan of B horror/sci-fi and [[need]] a fix. It's better than the [[movie]] [[Sasquatch]] and not a sequel to it, so don't be fooled.

The acting is better than you may expect to find in a [[movie]] like this and the directing is more than adequate. [[Expect]] a [[bit]] of a lul as the [[characters]] are "[[developed]]", but know that [[things]] will [[pick]] up. If you are watching a DVD you may [[want]] to skip a [[chapter]] or two. This isn't the [[nicest]] Bigfoot ever [[accomplished]], but by the [[latest]] standards of [[Character]] [[faded]] [[amiss]] [[film]], mostly [[proving]] on the Sci-Fi channel, this is quality stuff. It has some [[efforts]], some [[comedy]], decent F/X and Bigfoot. CG is used, but so are some [[concrete]] F/X, which I [[fond]].

[[Whole]] this [[films]] is worth a watch if you are a fan of B horror/sci-fi and [[required]] a fix. It's better than the [[film]] [[Bigfoot]] and not a sequel to it, so don't be fooled.

The acting is better than you may expect to find in a [[films]] like this and the directing is more than adequate. [[Waits]] a [[bite]] of a lul as the [[features]] are "[[devised]]", but know that [[items]] will [[selects]] up. If you are watching a DVD you may [[desiring]] to skip a [[sections]] or two. --------------------------------------------- Result 660 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is lame and not funny at all. The plot doesn't even make sense. Some scientist who works on the fringes of science opens a doorway to another dimension (maybe hell???) and his daughter gets sucked through it or something, then one day for no apparent reason she comes back and now she has big breasts and wears a skimpy outfit (I guess the demons in the other dimension made it for her?) The main character is a guy who wants to marry his girlfriend but she is gay so obviously she's more interested in her new girlfriend, and they stumble upon this witch spell book (they want to be witches or something???) and the evil spell ends up getting read again which is how the evil demon comes to earth which only the bikini top girl and the spurned guy in love can stop apparently. There is topless scenes for no reason and a guy in it who my boyfriend says is a well known wrestler but his part is completely unnecessary, obviously they made something up just to put him in it because then maybe wrestling fans will actually watch this pointless movie. I'm sure the topless girls doesn't hurt there either. The extra features on the DVD were even more confusing than the rest of the movie, I thought it might help explain what was going on but it actually just made things more confusing. Who are these people and what are they doing? Basically this is a go-camping-to-make-out-then-fight-a-monster movie but there are a bunch of things (like the other dimension and book seller) than make it confusing. I didn't like the movie but it was only like five bucks so big deal. I don't recommend watching it though it was just too stupid, I can't think of any part of the movie that was good. --------------------------------------------- Result 661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] [[In]] the colonies we're not all that familiar with [[Arthur]] Askey, so I [[nearly]] skipped this [[film]] (which had its TCM preview [[recently]]) on [[account]] of the [[negative]] [[comments]] here on his appearance in "[[Ghost]] [[Train]]" -- which I [[expected]] to be [[thoroughly]] annoying. Instead I was [[pleasantly]] surprised to [[find]] myself [[laughing]] audibly. The physical aspects of Askey's [[comedy]] and his [[timing]] when [[delivering]] a line suggest what you'd [[get]] if [[Charlie]] [[Chaplin]] and Woody Allen had a [[baby]]. There is no [[comparing]] him to Bud [[Abbott]] or any of the other [[usual]] purveyors of comic relief who [[turn]] up in [[films]] of this [[genre]]. One can feel, [[moreover]], the thread [[connecting]] Askey to British [[comedy]] 30 years [[later]]; at [[least]] it is [[clear]] from an American point of [[view]] that he has more in common with the [[Monty]] Python troupe than with any of his [[counterparts]] over here. As for the [[rest]] of the [[film]] -- the more [[movies]] you've [[seen]], the more [[likely]] you'll [[guess]] at the ending, but it is [[still]] [[quite]] entertaining and [[atmospheric]] and worth [[waiting]] for its [[next]] appearance. [[For]] the colonies we're not all that familiar with [[Artur]] Askey, so I [[practically]] skipped this [[kino]] (which had its TCM preview [[freshly]]) on [[accountancy]] of the [[injurious]] [[observations]] here on his appearance in "[[Spector]] [[Forming]]" -- which I [[waited]] to be [[carefully]] annoying. Instead I was [[cheerfully]] surprised to [[found]] myself [[kidding]] audibly. The physical aspects of Askey's [[charade]] and his [[timeframe]] when [[offering]] a line suggest what you'd [[got]] if [[Vietcong]] [[Chapin]] and Woody Allen had a [[bebe]]. There is no [[compared]] him to Bud [[Abbot]] or any of the other [[habitual]] purveyors of comic relief who [[converting]] up in [[cinematography]] of this [[gender]]. One can feel, [[apart]], the thread [[linking]] Askey to British [[parody]] 30 years [[then]]; at [[lowest]] it is [[definite]] from an American point of [[opinion]] that he has more in common with the [[Python]] Python troupe than with any of his [[counterpart]] over here. As for the [[roosting]] of the [[movie]] -- the more [[theater]] you've [[saw]], the more [[probable]] you'll [[reckon]] at the ending, but it is [[however]] [[rather]] entertaining and [[atmosphere]] and worth [[hoping]] for its [[forthcoming]] appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I knew this [[movie]] wasn't [[going]] to be [[amazing]], but I [[thought]] I would [[give]] it a [[chance]]. I am a [[fan]] of [[Luke]] Wilson so I [[thought]] it had [[potential]]. [[Unfortunately]], a lot of the movie's [[dialog]] was very [[fake]] sounding and [[cheesy]]. I [[think]] that Aquafresh [[gave]] some [[money]] towards the production of the [[film]] because they were seriously [[dropping]] some hints [[throughout]]. There is a [[shot]] where the Aquafresh sign [[sticks]] out at you that you can't [[help]] but [[notice]] it. Maybe they should have [[focused]] on writing and acting more than how [[many]] [[times]] can we drop Aquafresh [[products]] in the [[movie]] without people getting [[annoyed]]. The [[movie]] had its moments, but I'm [[glad]] I didn't [[spend]] $9.50 to see it in the [[theater]]. I knew this [[filmmaking]] wasn't [[gonna]] to be [[surprising]], but I [[figured]] I would [[confer]] it a [[luck]]. I am a [[breather]] of [[Matty]] Wilson so I [[thoughts]] it had [[prospective]]. [[Sadly]], a lot of the movie's [[dialogues]] was very [[faked]] sounding and [[dorky]]. I [[thought]] that Aquafresh [[handed]] some [[moneys]] towards the production of the [[filmmaking]] because they were seriously [[falling]] some hints [[in]]. There is a [[offed]] where the Aquafresh sign [[baguettes]] out at you that you can't [[assisting]] but [[advices]] it. Maybe they should have [[concentrated]] on writing and acting more than how [[various]] [[moments]] can we drop Aquafresh [[merchandise]] in the [[filmmaking]] without people getting [[enraged]]. The [[film]] had its moments, but I'm [[thrilled]] I didn't [[outlay]] $9.50 to see it in the [[theatres]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Robert Taylor [[definitely]] showed himself to be a [[fine]] dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. [[Nonetheless]], this picture was far from [[great]] as [[shortly]] after this, Taylor [[fled]] to television with the successful series The Detectives.

[[Stuart]] Granger [[hid]] his British accent and [[turned]] in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner.

Taylor is a [[bigot]] here and his [[hatred]] for the [[Indians]] really [[shows]].

Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre [[Madre]] in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.

The [[writing]] in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here? Robert Taylor [[unquestionably]] showed himself to be a [[fined]] dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. [[However]], this picture was far from [[marvellous]] as [[soon]] after this, Taylor [[absconded]] to television with the successful series The Detectives.

[[Sylvain]] Granger [[disguising]] his British accent and [[revolved]] in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner.

Taylor is a [[bigots]] here and his [[animus]] for the [[Indian]] really [[demonstrates]].

Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre [[Moms]] in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.

The [[literary]] in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here? --------------------------------------------- Result 664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I go out to the video store to rent a flick I usually trust IMDb's views on a film and, until this one, had never seen a flick rated 7.0 or above on the site I did not enjoy.

Sidney Lumet, a legendary director of some of the best films of the 20th century, really misstepped here by making one of the biggest mistakes a filmmaker can: filling a film's cast with thoroughly unlikeable characters with no real redeeming qualities whatsoever.

I like films with flawed characters, but no matter how dark someone's personality is we all have a bit of light in there too, we're all shades of gray with some darker or brighter than others. Mr. Lumet crossed this line by filling this movie with totally unsympathetic and almost masochistic pitch-black characters.

Ethan Hawke's Hank is a 30-something whining, immature, irresponsible man-child divorced from a marriage with a wife that hates him and a daughter who thinks he's a loser, which he very much is. His indecisiveness and willingness to let others do the dirty work for him because he's too cowardly to do it himself leads directly to their bank robbery plan falling apart and mother getting killed. By the time he stands up to his older brother at the end of the film, it's more pathetic than uplifting. Ethan Hawke plays his character well, but isn't given much to work with as he is portrayed as someone with a boot perpetually stamped on their face and he doesn't' particularly care that it's there.

Speaking of which his character's wife is equally as bad. Just about every single shot of the film she's in is her verbally berating him for rent and child support money and further grinding in his already non-existent self-esteem with insults. Seriously, that's just about all the character does. Her harpy-like behavior borders on malevolent.

Albert Finney plays their father Charles, and while Mr. Finney has been a great actor for many decades, he spends about 90% of this film with the same mouth open half-grimace on his face like he's suffering from the world's worst bout of constipation. For someone who's been an actor as long as Mr. Finney, you think he'd be more apt at emoting. Even though he doesn't show it much, his character is supposedly grief stricken and anger-filled. And when he smothers Andy at the film's conclusion it's akin to Dr. Frankenstein putting the monster he helped create out of it's own misery.

Marisa Tomei isn't given much to do with her character. Stuck in an unhappy marriage with Andy and having an affair with his brother for some unfathomable reason. When Andy's world begins to spiral out of control she logically jumps ship, but it really doesn't make her any less selfish or self-serving than any other character in the film, but probably the one with the most common sense at least.

And finally we come to Andy, played by the always good Philip Seymour Hoffman, is the only reason I rated this film a 3 instead of a 1. His performance of the heroin-addicted, embezzling financial executive who's "perfect crime" of robbing his parent's insured jewelry store goes awry is mesmerizing. His descent from calm master planner of a flawed scheme to unstable, deranged homicidal maniac is believable and tragic. Hoffman's character ends up being the film's chief villain, but it's hard to root against him given the alternatives are an emotionally castrated little brother and a father who's self-admitted poor early parenting led to his son's eventual psychosis and indirect, unintentional murder of his mother.

Ultimately this film is really only worth watching for PSH's great performance and it's family train wreck nature. Just don't expect there to be any characters worth cheering for, because there really aren't. --------------------------------------------- Result 665 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A question for you : A [[family]] [[go]] to a [[new]] house and [[get]] stalked by demonic forces . [[Which]] [[film]] am I talking about ? [[Every]] horror [[film]] you`ve [[seen]] ? Yes that`s [[true]] but that`s not the [[answer]] I`m looking for . I`ll narrow it down by [[saying]] there`s a lot of [[teen]] angst scenes . Doesn`t [[help]] ? [[Well]] there`s [[lots]] of [[bits]] where the [[characters]] are stalked by a [[creature]] and you see the [[characters]] through the creature`s POV . No futher forward ? Okay there`s a dream sequence involving [[lots]] of blood ? [[Could]] still be any [[horror]] [[film]] you [[say]] . Oh gawd this [[could]] take [[weeks]] so I`ll say the film I`m [[talking]] about [[features]] [[loads]] of Aussies [[many]] of whom have [[appeared]] in [[NEIGHBOURS]] and [[HOME]] AND AWAY . Yes that`s right the film is THE THIRD CIRCLE ( [[aka]] CUBBYHOUSE ) and do you [[understand]] what the above [[exercise]] is about ? It`s about me pointing out how THE [[THIRD]] CIRCLE is [[absolutely]] no [[different]] from any horror [[film]] that`s been [[made]] A question for you : A [[families]] [[going]] to a [[newest]] house and [[gets]] stalked by demonic forces . [[Whom]] [[movies]] am I talking about ? [[Everything]] horror [[films]] you`ve [[noticed]] ? Yes that`s [[veritable]] but that`s not the [[respond]] I`m looking for . I`ll narrow it down by [[telling]] there`s a lot of [[adolescent]] angst scenes . Doesn`t [[aids]] ? [[Good]] there`s [[batch]] of [[tib]] where the [[personages]] are stalked by a [[monster]] and you see the [[nature]] through the creature`s POV . No futher forward ? Okay there`s a dream sequence involving [[batches]] of blood ? [[Wo]] still be any [[terror]] [[filmmaking]] you [[says]] . Oh gawd this [[did]] take [[chow]] so I`ll say the film I`m [[chitchat]] about [[characters]] [[burden]] of Aussies [[various]] of whom have [[seemed]] in [[NEIGHBORING]] and [[ABODE]] AND AWAY . Yes that`s right the film is THE THIRD CIRCLE ( [[nickname]] CUBBYHOUSE ) and do you [[understands]] what the above [[wield]] is about ? It`s about me pointing out how THE [[THIRDS]] CIRCLE is [[wholly]] no [[diversified]] from any horror [[filmmaking]] that`s been [[effected]] --------------------------------------------- Result 666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] How do you spell washed up fat Italian who can barely pull off a martial arts move without needing some heart medication? In this movie we see Steven Seagal at his [[lowest]] level of accomplishment- since his [[career]] [[started]] it has been a [[steady]] [[decline]] into [[pathetic]] over [[indulgent]] [[behavior]] that has scuttled his [[career]]. [[In]] this [[movie]] it [[looks]] like most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his [[restaurant]] every day.

He is fat, [[slow]] and very [[old]] looking in this [[movie]], hardly a martial arts action [[hero]], more like a [[laughing]] [[stock]] clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of [[reasons]] why.

Plot: fat Italian [[guy]] with a big [[reputation]] on the force gets [[wind]] that a [[crime]] [[group]] may be playing around with a drug [[designed]] by the military to create the ultimate warrior [[response]]. This pretense, although pathetic and [[laughable]], gives [[opportunity]] for some over the top [[fight]] scenes that include blasting through walls like a [[comic]] book.

Did I [[mention]] this [[movie]] totally [[sucks]] and Steven Seagal is a complete [[joke]]? yeah. I did. How do you spell washed up fat Italian who can barely pull off a martial arts move without needing some heart medication? In this movie we see Steven Seagal at his [[less]] level of accomplishment- since his [[professions]] [[launched]] it has been a [[ongoing]] [[decrease]] into [[unhappy]] over [[permissive]] [[behaviours]] that has scuttled his [[occupations]]. [[Across]] this [[film]] it [[seem]] like most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his [[diner]] every day.

He is fat, [[slower]] and very [[antique]] looking in this [[filmmaking]], hardly a martial arts action [[heroin]], more like a [[giggling]] [[stocks]] clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of [[motifs]] why.

Plot: fat Italian [[guys]] with a big [[notoriety]] on the force gets [[windmill]] that a [[criminality]] [[groupings]] may be playing around with a drug [[styled]] by the military to create the ultimate warrior [[reaction]]. This pretense, although pathetic and [[ridicule]], gives [[likelihood]] for some over the top [[struggles]] scenes that include blasting through walls like a [[hilarious]] book.

Did I [[mentioning]] this [[filmmaking]] totally [[stinks]] and Steven Seagal is a complete [[farce]]? yeah. I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Cillian [[Murphy]] and Rachel McAdams star in this [[action]]/thriller [[written]] and [[directed]] by the master of [[suspense]], Wes Craven, himself. The [[whole]] movie [[starts]] with some trouble at The Lux Atlantic, a hotel in Miami. The problem is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the manager of the [[hotel]]. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the [[trouble]] begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be [[called]] Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the plane, and [[crazy]] enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her [[house]] to see if her [[father]] is [[okay]], and [[crazily]] enough, Rippner is already there. There is [[nearly]] twelve minutes of violence and [[strong]] intensity throughout that entire scene. In [[total]], about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.

Not only was the movie intense but it had a [[great]] plot to it. Like I [[said]], I will not [[give]] [[anything]] away because it's so [[shocking]] and [[thrilling]] and somewhat [[disturbing]]/frightening. And the acting from [[every]] [[single]] [[character]] in the movie, [[even]] the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch perfect. It was [[incredible]]. [[Everything]] was [[awesome]] in this [[movie]]! The acting, the music, the [[effects]], the make-up, the directing, the [[editing]], the writing, everything was [[wonderful]]! Wes Craven is [[definitely]] The Master of [[Suspense]]. Red [[Eye]] is [[definitely]] a must-see and is [[definitely]] worth [[spending]] your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it [[would]] never ever [[get]] [[boring]].

Red [[Eye]] I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 [[stars]].

Original MPAA [[rating]]: PG-13: Some [[Intense]] [[Sequences]] of Violence, and [[Language]]

My MPAA [[rating]]: PG-13: Some [[Very]] Intense [[Sequences]] of Violence, and [[Language]]

My Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, [[Disturbing]] Content Cillian [[Murph]] and Rachel McAdams star in this [[efforts]]/thriller [[typed]] and [[aimed]] by the master of [[wait]], Wes Craven, himself. The [[ensemble]] movie [[initiated]] with some trouble at The Lux Atlantic, a hotel in Miami. The problem is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the manager of the [[motel]]. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the [[problems]] begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be [[termed]] Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the plane, and [[lunatic]] enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her [[dwelling]] to see if her [[pere]] is [[ok]], and [[deliriously]] enough, Rippner is already there. There is [[practically]] twelve minutes of violence and [[forceful]] intensity throughout that entire scene. In [[utter]], about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.

Not only was the movie intense but it had a [[huge]] plot to it. Like I [[say]], I will not [[lend]] [[something]] away because it's so [[awful]] and [[exciting]] and somewhat [[worrying]]/frightening. And the acting from [[any]] [[sole]] [[trait]] in the movie, [[yet]] the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch perfect. It was [[unthinkable]]. [[Any]] was [[magnifique]] in this [[kino]]! The acting, the music, the [[repercussions]], the make-up, the directing, the [[edited]], the writing, everything was [[wondrous]]! Wes Craven is [[unmistakably]] The Master of [[Sufferance]]. Red [[Eyeball]] is [[obviously]] a must-see and is [[categorically]] worth [[expenditure]] your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it [[ought]] never ever [[got]] [[bored]].

Red [[Ojo]] I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 [[celebrity]].

Original MPAA [[evaluation]]: PG-13: Some [[Intensive]] [[Sequence]] of Violence, and [[Linguistic]]

My MPAA [[evaluation]]: PG-13: Some [[Much]] Intense [[Sequencing]] of Violence, and [[Parlance]]

My Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, [[Unnerving]] Content --------------------------------------------- Result 668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am not a very good writer, so I'll keep this short. World at War is the best WWII documentary that I've seen. I've seen different WWII documentaries (not only English/North American) and this documentary seems to be the most complete WWII documentary that I've seen. I think it could talk a bit more about the Great Depression and why/how Hitler got to power, but it does a very good job at covering the war. It seems to be complete and objective/fair to everyone. It does not exaggerate or diminish roles of different nations. It has a lot of original footage, including color footage and many eye witnesses (it was made in 70's when a lot more were alive). It has great music and narrator. All-in-All I gave this one 10/10, because it's that good. (I haven't seen specials in DVD version so I cannot comment on those) --------------------------------------------- Result 669 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't remember many films where a bumbling idiot of a hero was so funny throughout. Leslie Cheung is such the antithesis of a hero that he's too dense to be seduced by a gorgeous vampire... I had the good luck to see it on a big screen, and to find a video to watch again and again. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was glad to watch this [[movie]] free of charge as I am [[working]] in the [[hotel]] [[industry]] and this [[movie]] [[came]] [[lately]] to our movie library. [[Nothing]] against low [[budget]] [[movies]], but this movie has [[horrible]] acting and directing. How can a [[movie]] as this one ever be [[made]]. The director should be blacklisted, and for all the poor [[actors]], it is for sure not a jumping board into a career. Please make sure that you'll not watch this movie, the acting is lame, the camera and directing [[awful]]. There are just a few more movies out there which [[deserve]] to be [[called]] the "LOW 10". Another example would be "Dracula 3000". People who [[make]] [[money]] with this movie should give it to [[charity]], so at [[least]] it [[serves]] for a [[good]] [[reason]].

[[In]] this [[case]] I [[would]] watch it even another 10 (or at least one more time). I was glad to watch this [[movies]] free of charge as I am [[worked]] in the [[guesthouse]] [[industries]] and this [[filmmaking]] [[became]] [[recently]] to our movie library. [[None]] against low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]], but this movie has [[frightful]] acting and directing. How can a [[flick]] as this one ever be [[introduced]]. The director should be blacklisted, and for all the poor [[actresses]], it is for sure not a jumping board into a career. Please make sure that you'll not watch this movie, the acting is lame, the camera and directing [[scary]]. There are just a few more movies out there which [[merit]] to be [[drew]] the "LOW 10". Another example would be "Dracula 3000". People who [[deliver]] [[moneys]] with this movie should give it to [[philanthropy]], so at [[fewer]] it [[serve]] for a [[alright]] [[raison]].

[[Onto]] this [[instances]] I [[could]] watch it even another 10 (or at least one more time). --------------------------------------------- Result 671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't remember many details about the show, but i remember how passionate i was about it and how i was determined not to miss any episodes. Unfortunately at the time we had no VCR, so i haven't ever seen the series again. However i can remember strongly how i felt while watching it and how thrilled i was every time it came on. Sam Waterstone was my favorite actor these days (i think i was almost in love) and he remains one of my favorite actors to the day, mostly due to his appearance in the series. I would gladly buy/steal/download this series, i think i would go to great lengths in order to see it again and revisit a childhood long gone... Any ideas? Does anybody knows of a site devoted to the series or has the episodes on tape from their first airing? --------------------------------------------- Result 672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] They're not jawing [[journalists]] Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from "His Girl Friday" or [[witty]] detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett [[Johansson]] are [[surprisingly]] charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post [[Depression]], Allen's writing filled with [[ironic]] self deprecation and plain old [[New]] York [[angst]]. [[Shades]] of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: "I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism." [[Johansson]], fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the "American Tragedy"/Place in the Sun boating "accident." As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.

Allen as director and actor can't [[hide]] his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not [[great]] but amusing, at [[times]] brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, "I'd be very surprised if he killed one person." This is vintage Allen [[humor]]. [[While]] there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not [[lost]] his touch of class. They're not jawing [[reporters]] Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from "His Girl Friday" or [[spiritual]] detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett [[Johansen]] are [[terribly]] charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post [[Doldrums]], Allen's writing filled with [[ironical]] self deprecation and plain old [[Novo]] York [[anguish]]. [[Hues]] of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: "I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism." [[Johanson]], fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the "American Tragedy"/Place in the Sun boating "accident." As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.

Allen as director and actor can't [[disguised]] his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not [[remarkable]] but amusing, at [[moments]] brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, "I'd be very surprised if he killed one person." This is vintage Allen [[mood]]. [[Though]] there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not [[outof]] his touch of class. --------------------------------------------- Result 673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This wasn't what i wanted to [[see]]. I bought this on DVD and under the movie i [[found]] myself [[irritated]] and [[turned]] off the [[movie]] for a moment.

Heres what i didn't like:

1 They were [[shooting]] at the father

2 The [[tribes]] was really annoying

3 the dinosaurs (mostly)[[looked]] to [[faked]]

4 The bad scientist well he was annoying

5 The [[picture]] quality on the [[DVD]] was really [[bad]]

What i DID like:

1 The [[music]] by Jerry Goldsmith. This music is [[really]] great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this [[movie]]. Sadly the [[sound]] quality is not good, but its [[OK]] for its time.

2 The first [[time]] we [[see]] the [[dinosaurs]] they inspire a [[sort]] of [[awe]].

3 [[Baby]] is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing

4 That funny scene with the tent.

5 The [[children]] who [[sees]] this [[film]] would [[hopefully]] [[learn]] that [[evil]] [[always]] loses. This wasn't what i wanted to [[consults]]. I bought this on DVD and under the movie i [[discovered]] myself [[irritable]] and [[revolved]] off the [[filmmaking]] for a moment.

Heres what i didn't like:

1 They were [[gunshot]] at the father

2 The [[tribesmen]] was really annoying

3 the dinosaurs (mostly)[[seemed]] to [[false]]

4 The bad scientist well he was annoying

5 The [[image]] quality on the [[DVDS]] was really [[negative]]

What i DID like:

1 The [[musicians]] by Jerry Goldsmith. This music is [[genuinely]] great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this [[film]]. Sadly the [[sounds]] quality is not good, but its [[ALLRIGHT]] for its time.

2 The first [[times]] we [[seeing]] the [[dinosaur]] they inspire a [[kind]] of [[admiration]].

3 [[Bebe]] is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing

4 That funny scene with the tent.

5 The [[childhood]] who [[believes]] this [[filmmaking]] would [[luckily]] [[learns]] that [[nefarious]] [[constantly]] loses. --------------------------------------------- Result 674 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Boy]] what a dud this [[mess]] was.But it only lasts an [[hour]] and I only [[paid]] a buck for it so I'll live....unlike the entire cast of this 1933 clunker who are all dust by now.

So anyway a small village [[starts]] having [[bodies]] turning up that have been [[drained]] of all their blood.The local yokels [[start]] [[talking]] about vampires ,of course,and a [[little]] more loudly after each [[body]] is [[found]].The [[town]] sheriff or constable or [[whatever]] he is,played by [[awesome]] [[actor]] Melvyn Douglas,[[tries]] to [[tell]] them otherwise.[[When]] he mentions the fact that the dead have one [[large]] [[hole]] on each side of the neck,instead of two holes close together, the [[locals]] simply then [[say]] it's a [[giant]] vampire bat.The constable insists that vampires do not [[exist]] and it must be a human culprit doing the killings.

But Melvyn doesn't [[seem]] too bothered either [[way]].He [[spends]] most of his time trying to [[get]] into the pantaloons of his [[sweetie]],[[played]] by Faye Wray.Also in this [[mix]] is the town simpleton,played by Dwight Frye,who [[always]] [[seemed]] to have played the same role in every [[movie]] he did.He further freaks out the townspeople by catching [[bats]] and [[drinking]] his own blood.Lionel Atwill plays the town doctor who seemingly is [[trying]] to [[help]] the constable [[solve]] the [[crimes]].And boy does he ever [[stink]] as an [[actor]].Atwill is as [[close]] to cardboard in this role as he [[could]] [[get]].And Lionel Barrymore is [[also]] in this thing....lots of [[big]] [[names]] to be such a [[pile]] of guano.

Other than the [[terrible]] mis-title this [[movie]] has,the [[alternate]] [[name]],"The Blood Sucker" is [[much]] better,this [[movie]] is also [[dull]] and plodding and just silly.

For me the [[high]] point of the [[movie]] is watching Frye,he nails the [[freaky]] [[town]] weirdo but other than him this [[movie]] didn't [[offer]] [[much]].And then when you [[find]] out the [[reason]] for the [[strange]] [[deaths]] and [[see]] the special [[effect]] thing that [[required]] all this blood you'll really be [[let]] down.

Bela Lugosi did a lot of [[awful]] [[pictures]] but at [[least]] he was fun and interesting to watch.[[Think]] of this [[movie]] as a [[really]] [[bad]] Lugosi clunker WITHOUT Lugosi and you'll get a feel for how miserably bad this mess was.

If you can't make a good 1930's horror film at least put Lugosi in it. [[Laddie]] what a dud this [[chaos]] was.But it only lasts an [[hours]] and I only [[pays]] a buck for it so I'll live....unlike the entire cast of this 1933 clunker who are all dust by now.

So anyway a small village [[begins]] having [[agencies]] turning up that have been [[emptied]] of all their blood.The local yokels [[launching]] [[schmooze]] about vampires ,of course,and a [[petite]] more loudly after each [[agency]] is [[finds]].The [[ville]] sheriff or constable or [[whichever]] he is,played by [[sumptuous]] [[protagonist]] Melvyn Douglas,[[attempting]] to [[say]] them otherwise.[[Whenever]] he mentions the fact that the dead have one [[immense]] [[hellhole]] on each side of the neck,instead of two holes close together, the [[residents]] simply then [[tell]] it's a [[monumental]] vampire bat.The constable insists that vampires do not [[existent]] and it must be a human culprit doing the killings.

But Melvyn doesn't [[appears]] too bothered either [[paths]].He [[spent]] most of his time trying to [[gets]] into the pantaloons of his [[pumpkin]],[[accomplished]] by Faye Wray.Also in this [[mixes]] is the town simpleton,played by Dwight Frye,who [[incessantly]] [[appeared]] to have played the same role in every [[film]] he did.He further freaks out the townspeople by catching [[bates]] and [[drinkable]] his own blood.Lionel Atwill plays the town doctor who seemingly is [[attempting]] to [[aids]] the constable [[address]] the [[offense]].And boy does he ever [[smelling]] as an [[actress]].Atwill is as [[nearer]] to cardboard in this role as he [[did]] [[gets]].And Lionel Barrymore is [[further]] in this thing....lots of [[large]] [[naming]] to be such a [[battery]] of guano.

Other than the [[horrendous]] mis-title this [[filmmaking]] has,the [[alternating]] [[designation]],"The Blood Sucker" is [[very]] better,this [[filmmaking]] is also [[boring]] and plodding and just silly.

For me the [[supreme]] point of the [[filmmaking]] is watching Frye,he nails the [[loopy]] [[city]] weirdo but other than him this [[film]] didn't [[delivering]] [[very]].And then when you [[found]] out the [[motives]] for the [[weird]] [[fatalities]] and [[seeing]] the special [[consequences]] thing that [[requirement]] all this blood you'll really be [[allowing]] down.

Bela Lugosi did a lot of [[horrific]] [[photographing]] but at [[lowest]] he was fun and interesting to watch.[[Thinking]] of this [[filmmaking]] as a [[truthfully]] [[wicked]] Lugosi clunker WITHOUT Lugosi and you'll get a feel for how miserably bad this mess was.

If you can't make a good 1930's horror film at least put Lugosi in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought Hedy Burress (who managed to escape from the watery grave of part one) was going to be in part 2 Guess not. I just think they should of killed her off like in Friday The 13th Part 2 (you know what I mean).

This movie like Scream 3, and Urban Legend 2 followed movies within a movie.

This was PURE CRAP! The whole Movie within a Movie crap.

BAD STAY AWAY! --------------------------------------------- Result 676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far one of the worst movies i have ever seen, the poor special effects along with the poor acting are just a few of the things wrong with this film. I am fan of the first two major leagues but this one is lame! --------------------------------------------- Result 677 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a VERY entertaining movie. A few of the reviews that I have read on this forum have been written by people who, apparently, think that the film was an effort at serious drama. IT WAS NOT MADE THAT WAY....It is an extremely enjoyable film, performed in a tongue in cheek manner. All of the actors are obviously having fun while entertaining us. The fight sequences are lively, brisk and, above all, not gratuitous. The so-called "Green Death", utilized on a couple of occasions, is not, as I read in one review, "gruesome". A couple of reviewers were very critical of the martial arts fight between Doc and Seas near the end of the film. Hey, lighten up... Again, I remind one and all that this is a fun film. Each phase of this "fight" was captioned, which added to the fun aspect. The actors were not trying to emulate Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan. This is NOT one of those martial arts films. Ron Ely looks great in this film and is the perfect choice to play Doc. Another nice touch is the unique manner in which the ultimate fate of the "bad guy" (Seas) is dealt with. I promise you that if you don't try to take this film very seriously and simply watch it for the entertainment value, you will spend 100 minutes in a most enjoyable manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Only reason I have [[seen]] 101 Dalmatians was its [[nominations]] for [[original]] song and [[costume]] [[design]] for the Oscars. I [[must]] admit that I was [[less]] than impressed with this film. In this sequel, Cruella [[DeVil]](by the [[way]] [[Glen]] Close pulls off this role very well) is released from the hospital due to her good behaviour. She likes all sort of animals and locks all her furs away. From that point, we only [[wait]] until she starts having crises. Soon enough, she does and [[tries]] to make the best coat of fashion world, of course for herself and from fine Dalmatian fur. Apart from Glen Close, I [[found]] all cast quite [[silly]] but from a child's eye funny. That is fair enough as its target market is, I assume, children under 12. Quite a good entertainment for children and families, but didn't do much for me. * out of ***** Only reason I have [[noticed]] 101 Dalmatians was its [[nominating]] for [[preliminary]] song and [[attire]] [[conceive]] for the Oscars. I [[should]] admit that I was [[lowest]] than impressed with this film. In this sequel, Cruella [[devils]](by the [[camino]] [[Glyn]] Close pulls off this role very well) is released from the hospital due to her good behaviour. She likes all sort of animals and locks all her furs away. From that point, we only [[hoping]] until she starts having crises. Soon enough, she does and [[strives]] to make the best coat of fashion world, of course for herself and from fine Dalmatian fur. Apart from Glen Close, I [[unearthed]] all cast quite [[beast]] but from a child's eye funny. That is fair enough as its target market is, I assume, children under 12. Quite a good entertainment for children and families, but didn't do much for me. * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have just recently purchased [[collection]] one of this [[awesome]] series and even after just watching three episodes, I still am [[mesmerized]] by sleek styling of the animation and the slow, [[yet]] [[thoughtful]] [[actions]] of the story-telling. I am still a fan.....with some [[minor]] pains.

Though this installment into the Gundam saga is very cool and has what the [[previous]] series had-a stylish satiric way of telling about the [[wrongs]] of war and not [[letting]] [[go]] of the [[need]] to have [[control]] or power over everything([[sound]] familiar?), I have to [[say]] that this one gets a [[bit]] too mellow-dramatic on continuing to explain the [[lives]] of the [[main]] [[characters]] and their [[incessant]] [[need]] to belly-ache about [[every]] [[thing]] that [[happens]] and what they [[need]] to do to [[stop]] the OZ [[group]] from succeeding in their [[plans]]([[especially]] the character [[called]] Wufei...I mean he whines more than an [[American]] [[character]] on a soap opera. Get a [[counselor]],will ya?)

Besides for the over-exaggerated drama(I [[think]] that [[mostly]] comes from the dubbing of the English [[voice]] actors), this [[series]] is [[still]] very [[exciting]] and will [[still]] [[captivate]] me once again. I [[mean]] it can [[always]] be worse. It [[could]] be like the [[recent]] [[installment]], [[SEED]]......eeeewwww, talk about mellow-dramatic....I'll [[chat]] about that one [[later]]. I have just recently purchased [[collate]] one of this [[wondrous]] series and even after just watching three episodes, I still am [[hypnotised]] by sleek styling of the animation and the slow, [[again]] [[pensive]] [[activities]] of the story-telling. I am still a fan.....with some [[smaller]] pains.

Though this installment into the Gundam saga is very cool and has what the [[anterior]] series had-a stylish satiric way of telling about the [[evils]] of war and not [[leave]] [[going]] of the [[gotta]] to have [[monitors]] or power over everything([[sounds]] familiar?), I have to [[told]] that this one gets a [[bite]] too mellow-dramatic on continuing to explain the [[life]] of the [[principal]] [[character]] and their [[unceasing]] [[needs]] to belly-ache about [[each]] [[stuff]] that [[comes]] and what they [[needed]] to do to [[discontinue]] the OZ [[panels]] from succeeding in their [[scheme]]([[namely]] the character [[termed]] Wufei...I mean he whines more than an [[Americas]] [[characters]] on a soap opera. Get a [[counsellors]],will ya?)

Besides for the over-exaggerated drama(I [[ideas]] that [[basically]] comes from the dubbing of the English [[vocals]] actors), this [[serial]] is [[again]] very [[excite]] and will [[again]] [[fascinate]] me once again. I [[signify]] it can [[constantly]] be worse. It [[wo]] be like the [[latest]] [[installments]], [[SEEDS]]......eeeewwww, talk about mellow-dramatic....I'll [[talk]] about that one [[trailing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] i love horror films, low budget, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's.. but how can anyone [[think]] this is a very good horror film? let's compare it to titles in a similar vein- haunted house films. the haunting, the changeling, the shining. or for a similar technology based horror film that was FAAAR better, (though still FAR from great) Demon Seed. OK, i'll be [[fair]].. let's compare it to made-for-TV horror films! don't go to sleep.. waaay creepier and better done. salem's lot, the night stalker, night gallery, even don't go in the basement or crowhaven farm were far better. *SPOILERS* first of all, for as good a scene as the bloody shower scene was, you have a scene like the opening scene.. oh boy! the garden hose comes alive to hose down some frisky [[teenagers]]! [[TERRIBLE]]. also, just what we understand about the house.. it [[apparently]] needs to [[use]] its video cameras to see what is going on, and it's a very emotional house. not a spirit, or demon, or entity, it's a house thats "possessed", but by what? we are led to believe an inanimate object learned to love suzie/margaret, our protagonist? now that I'm on the topic of suzie.. another scene that totally [[bothered]] me, this poor old crazy lady comes, tells you she was your nurse, pours her heart out, falls in the boiling pool, struggling in agony for 45 seconds, and what does margaret do? does she risk her hands being burnt to save this poor elderly woman that came there to warn her's life? no, she stands there and watches! the acting for the most part was [[better]] than average for a horror film, but that's where the positives end. for at least a more interesting, and fun horror film about an inanimate object that kills people watch death bed: the bed that eats. i have a feeling the people who rated this so highly either haven't watched it since it originally aired, or remembered it scaring them as children. this film was pretty much merit less. i love horror films, low budget, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's.. but how can anyone [[believe]] this is a very good horror film? let's compare it to titles in a similar vein- haunted house films. the haunting, the changeling, the shining. or for a similar technology based horror film that was FAAAR better, (though still FAR from great) Demon Seed. OK, i'll be [[impartiality]].. let's compare it to made-for-TV horror films! don't go to sleep.. waaay creepier and better done. salem's lot, the night stalker, night gallery, even don't go in the basement or crowhaven farm were far better. *SPOILERS* first of all, for as good a scene as the bloody shower scene was, you have a scene like the opening scene.. oh boy! the garden hose comes alive to hose down some frisky [[teen]]! [[TERRIFYING]]. also, just what we understand about the house.. it [[visibly]] needs to [[usage]] its video cameras to see what is going on, and it's a very emotional house. not a spirit, or demon, or entity, it's a house thats "possessed", but by what? we are led to believe an inanimate object learned to love suzie/margaret, our protagonist? now that I'm on the topic of suzie.. another scene that totally [[disturbed]] me, this poor old crazy lady comes, tells you she was your nurse, pours her heart out, falls in the boiling pool, struggling in agony for 45 seconds, and what does margaret do? does she risk her hands being burnt to save this poor elderly woman that came there to warn her's life? no, she stands there and watches! the acting for the most part was [[optimum]] than average for a horror film, but that's where the positives end. for at least a more interesting, and fun horror film about an inanimate object that kills people watch death bed: the bed that eats. i have a feeling the people who rated this so highly either haven't watched it since it originally aired, or remembered it scaring them as children. this film was pretty much merit less. --------------------------------------------- Result 681 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Actor Paxton made his directorial debut with this chilling, dark, and competently made thriller about a widowed mechanic (Paxton himself) who ropes his two sons into participating in savage ax murders, claiming that the victims are not human beings at all but "demons", and that they have been selected by God to destroy these "demons". This is all told in flashback by one of the sons, now grown up (Matthew McConaughey) to skeptical FBI agent (Powers Boothe).

Hard to automatically forget this film; better than most serial killer features, it's a twisty and unsettling tale told in straightforward fashion with a bare minimum of cinema gimmicks. Paxton, commendably, barely shows any blood at all until near the end. Well acted by all, especially the two child actors (Jeremy Sumpter of the recent "Peter Pan" and Matt O'Leary of "Spy Kids 2" and "Domestic Disturbance"). The only reason I deducted any points at all is because I can understand that some people may find all of this hard to stomach. In any event, it's an atypical thriller with a decent script.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[really]] enjoyed the performances of the main [[cast]]. Emma Lung is [[courageous]] and interesting. The director has [[developed]] performances where the [[characters]] are not one [[dimensional]]. A [[complex]] [[story]] with the [[changing]] between eras. Also appreciated the underlying story of the unions [[losing]] power and the [[effect]] of a [[large]] employer [[closing]] on a [[small]] [[town]]. I do not agree with the [[comment]] that the [[older]] [[man]] has to be attractive. There have be [[many]] relationships with [[older]] [[men]] and younger [[women]] - without the [[male]] being [[good]] [[looking]]. Depth of [[character]] can be [[appealing]] to the not so shallow. The [[film]] has a good look and the [[cinematography]] is [[also]] good. I [[genuinely]] enjoyed the performances of the main [[casting]]. Emma Lung is [[brave]] and interesting. The director has [[devised]] performances where the [[features]] are not one [[dimensions]]. A [[complicate]] [[storytelling]] with the [[shifting]] between eras. Also appreciated the underlying story of the unions [[loses]] power and the [[consequences]] of a [[substantial]] employer [[closes]] on a [[minor]] [[towns]]. I do not agree with the [[commentary]] that the [[elderly]] [[men]] has to be attractive. There have be [[multiple]] relationships with [[elderly]] [[male]] and younger [[girl]] - without the [[macho]] being [[alright]] [[researching]]. Depth of [[personage]] can be [[tempting]] to the not so shallow. The [[kino]] has a good look and the [[film]] is [[apart]] good. --------------------------------------------- Result 683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] the 60's, having as the background the rehearsal and recording of "Sympathy for the Devil" in the [[classic]] album "Beggar's Banquet" by the revolutionary bad boy Rolling Stones – [[Mick]] Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman and Brian Jones – plus Marianne Faithful, Godard [[discloses]] other [[contemporary]] [[revolutionary]] and ideological movements – the Black Power through the [[Black]] [[Panthers]], the feminism, the communism, the fascism - [[entwined]] with the reading of a [[cheap]] pulp political novel divided in the chapters: "The Stones Rolling; "Outside Black Novel"; "Sight and Sound"; "All About Eve"; "The Heart of Occident"; "Inside Black Syntax"; and, "Under the Stones the Beach".

"Sympathy for the Devil" is another [[pretentious]] and boring [[mess]] of the uneven director Jean-Luc Godard. The narrative and the footages are awful, but fortunately I love the [[Stones]] and "Sympathy for the [[Devil]]" and it is [[nice]] to [[see]] them in the [[beginning]] of their [[careers]]; [[otherwise]] this documentary would be unbearable. My [[vote]] is three.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "[[Sympathy]] for the [[Devil]]" [[Into]] the 60's, having as the background the rehearsal and recording of "Sympathy for the Devil" in the [[conventional]] album "Beggar's Banquet" by the revolutionary bad boy Rolling Stones – [[Mikey]] Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman and Brian Jones – plus Marianne Faithful, Godard [[uncovers]] other [[current]] [[groundbreaking]] and ideological movements – the Black Power through the [[Negro]] [[Cougars]], the feminism, the communism, the fascism - [[interconnected]] with the reading of a [[inexpensive]] pulp political novel divided in the chapters: "The Stones Rolling; "Outside Black Novel"; "Sight and Sound"; "All About Eve"; "The Heart of Occident"; "Inside Black Syntax"; and, "Under the Stones the Beach".

"Sympathy for the Devil" is another [[presumptuous]] and boring [[chaos]] of the uneven director Jean-Luc Godard. The narrative and the footages are awful, but fortunately I love the [[Cobbles]] and "Sympathy for the [[Heck]]" and it is [[pleasurable]] to [[seeing]] them in the [[initiate]] of their [[career]]; [[alternately]] this documentary would be unbearable. My [[voting]] is three.

Title ([[Brasil]]): "[[Empathy]] for the [[Demons]]" --------------------------------------------- Result 684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For me,this is one of the best movies i ever saw.Overcoming racism,struggling through life and proving himself he isn't just an ordinary "cookie" ,Carl Brashear is an amazing character to play ,who puts Cuba in his best light,best performance in his life.De Niro,who is a living legend gives THAT SOMETHING to the movie.Hated his character in movie,but he gives so much good acting to this film,great performance.And appearance of beautiful Charlize was and as always is a big plus for every movie. So if you haven't seen this movie i highly recommended for those who love bravery,greatness who seek inspiration.You must look this great drama. My Vote 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the guy who wrote, directed and stared in this shocking piece of trash should really consider a carer change. Yes Rob Stefaniuk, i mean you! Seriously, who funded this crap? there are so many talented writers out there whom money could be better spent on. I think the idea is great but the acting, script and directing is just plain awful! The jokes are so not funny, I understand that they are supposed to be taking the mickey. BUT do it with style, this movie is screaming 1995 Saturday night live skits. Why, I say again why do studios give money to hacks like Rob Stefaniuk - NEVER GIVE A COMEDIAN THE Opportunity TO WRITE DIRECT AND STAR IN HIS OWN MOVIE. DUH! --------------------------------------------- Result 686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If The Man in the White Suit had been done in America, can't you see either Danny Kaye or Jerry Lewis trying on Alec Guinness's Sidney Stratton on for size?

This is one of the best of Alec Guinness's films and certainly one of the best that Ealing Studios in the United Kingdom ever turned out. It's so perfectly fits within the time frame of the new Labour government and the society it was trying to build. It's amazing how in times of crisis capital and labor can agree.

Alec Guinness this meek little schnook of a man is obsessed with the idea that he can invent clothing that will never need cleaning, that in fact repels all kinds of foreign matter the minute it touches the garment.

He's a persistent cuss and he does succeed. Of course the implications haven't really been thought through about the kind of impact clothing like that will have on society. In the end everyone is chasing him down like they would a fugitive, almost like Peter Lorre from M or Orson Welles in The Stranger or even Robert Newton in Oliver Twist.

It's the mark of a great comedy film that a potentially serious situation like that chase as described in some of the serious films I've mentioned can be played for laughs. Poor Guinness's suit is not only white and stain repellent, but it glows like a neon sign.

Other than Guinness the best performances are from Cecil Parker as yet another pompous oaf, Joan Greenwood as his siren daughter and Ernest Thesiger the biggest clothing manufacturer in the UK>

Come to think of it, did Paramount borrow that suit from Ealing and give it to John Travolta for Saturday Night Fever? --------------------------------------------- Result 687 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is a scene in Dan in Real Life where the family is competing to see which sex can finish the crossword puzzle first. The answer to one of the clues is Murphy's Law: anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. This is exactly the case for Dan Burns (Steve Carell, the Office) a columnist for the local newspaper. Dan is an expert at giving advice for everyday life, yet he comes to realize that things aren't so picture perfect in his own. Dan in Real Life is amazing at capturing these ironies of everyday life and is successful at embracing the comedy, tragedy, and beauty of them all. Besides that this movie is pretty damn hilarious.

The death of his wife forces Dan to raise his three daughters all on his own... each daughter in their own pivotal stages in life: the first one anxious to try out her drivers license, the middle one well into her teenage angst phase, and the youngest one drifting away from early childhood. Things take a turn for Dan when he goes to Rhode Island for a family reunion and stumbles across an intriguing woman in a bookstore.

Her name is Marie (Juliette Binoche, Chocolat) and she is looking for a book to help her avoid awkward situations... which is precisely whats in store when they get thrown into the Burns Family household.

If you've seen Steve Carell in The Office or Little Miss Sunshine, you'd know that he is incomparable with comedic timing and a tremendously dynamic actor as well. Steve Carell is awesome at capturing all the emotions that come with family life: the frustration and sincere compassion. The family as well as the house itself provides a warm environment for the movie that contrasts the inner turmoil that builds throughout the movie and finally bursts out in a pretty suspenseful climax. The movie only falls short in some of the predictable outcomes, yet at the same time life is made up of both irony and predictability: which is an irony within itself.

Dan in Real Life is definitely worth seeing, for the sole enjoyment of watching all the funny subtleties we often miss in everyday life, and I'll most likely enjoy it a second time, or even a third. Just "put it on my tab." --------------------------------------------- Result 688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] No, this wasn't one of the ten [[worst]] [[films]] of the 1980's, but it [[certainly]] skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks like it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else [[would]] you explain special [[effects]] pre-dating "An American [[Werewolf]] in London," disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? [[While]] we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in "Happy Days" & "Laverne & Shirley" combined.

The one [[woman]] who elevates this movie to the "so bad, it's good" category was the late, [[great]] Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to [[death]] and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a "hot chick" she [[retains]] her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also [[looks]] much better as Miss Wimp. "Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell." She wasn't kidding.

This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I [[like]] Hartman. Incidentally, "Teen [[Wolf]]" was better than this. "[[Teen]] [[Wolf]] Too" was [[better]] than this, and that wasn't even so good.

No, this wasn't one of the ten [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] of the 1980's, but it [[definitively]] skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks like it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else [[could]] you explain special [[implications]] pre-dating "An American [[Werewolves]] in London," disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? [[Although]] we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in "Happy Days" & "Laverne & Shirley" combined.

The one [[femme]] who elevates this movie to the "so bad, it's good" category was the late, [[fabulous]] Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to [[fatalities]] and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a "hot chick" she [[retaining]] her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also [[seem]] much better as Miss Wimp. "Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell." She wasn't kidding.

This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I [[adores]] Hartman. Incidentally, "Teen [[Woolf]]" was better than this. "[[Youths]] [[Lupo]] Too" was [[optimum]] than this, and that wasn't even so good.

--------------------------------------------- Result 689 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] My [[kids]] recently started watching the [[reruns]] of this [[show]] - both the early episodes on the N, and the [[later]] ones on ABC Family - and they [[love]] it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what [[prompted]] all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as "[[highly]] publicized," and yet a half hours searching efforts on the [[web]] have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early [[episodes]] were so much better than the [[later]] [[episodes]]. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and [[themes]] remain largely the same throughout - but they do [[lose]] some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some [[light]] on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen ([[Mr]]. turner being another character who left) Oh well - [[maybe]] there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just [[glad]] to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't [[cut]] it for me) My [[brats]] recently started watching the [[repetitions]] of this [[display]] - both the early episodes on the N, and the [[afterward]] ones on ABC Family - and they [[loved]] it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what [[drove]] all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as "[[eminently]] publicized," and yet a half hours searching efforts on the [[internet]] have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early [[spells]] were so much better than the [[afterward]] [[bouts]]. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and [[topic]] remain largely the same throughout - but they do [[wasting]] some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some [[lighting]] on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen ([[Monsieur]]. turner being another character who left) Oh well - [[conceivably]] there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just [[happy]] to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't [[chopping]] it for me) --------------------------------------------- Result 690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Ever [[wanted]] to know just how much Hollywood could get away with before the [[Hayes]] Code was officially put into [[effect]]? [[Well]], [[unfortunately]] "Convention City" is lost, so well just have to watch "Tarzan and His [[Mate]]" to find out. [[For]] 1934, there is a [[remarkable]] [[amount]] of sexual [[innuendo]] and [[even]] exposed flesh. [[Just]] [[look]] at Jane's nude [[swim]]. [[While]] Tarzan is [[often]] [[thought]] of as b-adventure [[films]] [[made]] for [[young]] boys and no one else, this [[picture]] [[proves]] that the [[series]] was originally very adult. Over [[seventy]] [[years]] later, it is [[still]] as sexy as it was when it came out.

[[In]] addition to the envelope [[pushing]] taboo [[nature]], it is a superb and exciting [[adventure]] [[story]]. I've always [[enjoyed]] the jungle [[films]] that Hollywood churned out in the 30s and the 40s, but there are few from the [[genre]] I'd [[call]] [[great]] [[films]]. "Tarzan and His Mate" is by far the [[best]] [[film]] from this [[long]] [[gone]] subgenre. The [[sequences]] of the [[attacks]] on the safari by either [[apes]] or natives [[still]] manage to [[create]] [[tension]] today. Also, the [[animals]] are all too cool (espescially the [[apes]] throwing [[boulders]]). The acting won't [[win]] any [[major]] [[awards]] [[soon]], but is [[certainly]] more than [[adequate]] for this [[type]] of picture. The film is once again stolen by Cheetah, the [[smartest]] [[monkey]] in the jungle. One of the most [[entertaining]] [[examples]] of pre-code Hollywood out there. Ever [[wanting]] to know just how much Hollywood could get away with before the [[Hays]] Code was officially put into [[consequences]]? [[Good]], [[sadly]] "Convention City" is lost, so well just have to watch "Tarzan and His [[Comrade]]" to find out. [[Onto]] 1934, there is a [[tremendous]] [[sums]] of sexual [[insinuation]] and [[yet]] exposed flesh. [[Jen]] [[glance]] at Jane's nude [[bath]]. [[Although]] Tarzan is [[habitually]] [[figured]] of as b-adventure [[movie]] [[introduced]] for [[youthful]] boys and no one else, this [[photos]] [[demonstrating]] that the [[serials]] was originally very adult. Over [[seventies]] [[olds]] later, it is [[however]] as sexy as it was when it came out.

[[During]] addition to the envelope [[prompting]] taboo [[trait]], it is a superb and exciting [[adventurer]] [[tale]]. I've always [[appreciated]] the jungle [[cinema]] that Hollywood churned out in the 30s and the 40s, but there are few from the [[sort]] I'd [[invitation]] [[wonderful]] [[kino]]. "Tarzan and His Mate" is by far the [[better]] [[cinematographic]] from this [[lengthy]] [[faded]] subgenre. The [[sequence]] of the [[attack]] on the safari by either [[monkeys]] or natives [[yet]] manage to [[creating]] [[tensions]] today. Also, the [[animal]] are all too cool (espescially the [[chimpanzees]] throwing [[cobbles]]). The acting won't [[earning]] any [[important]] [[prize]] [[promptly]], but is [[obviously]] more than [[appropriate]] for this [[typing]] of picture. The film is once again stolen by Cheetah, the [[cleverest]] [[monkeys]] in the jungle. One of the most [[amusing]] [[instances]] of pre-code Hollywood out there. --------------------------------------------- Result 691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anyone who doesn't like this film is one who is afraid to explore his or her own demons. This film does make the viewer a little uncomfortable at times, but that is its intention. It asks you to look at your own life and confront the obstacles head on like Lou eventually does. It asks you to overcome the fear of perception and become who you are meant to be. Bret Carr holds up a mirror unlike any filmmaker has. The intention and the message is clear and profound. People's apprehension about this film stems only from their own insecurities. An open-minded viewer takes this inspirational message and runs with it. Sometimes a life- changing realization DOES come in a flash -- a light bulb going on. This story is real and changes the lives if its viewers in a real way. --------------------------------------------- Result 692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There aren't many overcoming-the-odds stories quite like that of Christy Brown. Born with cerebral palsy in 1930s Dublin, his parents thought his handicap was mental as well as physical. Though eventually properly diagnosed, Brown, in a lower working-class family with nearly 20 children, had to push himself just to be appreciated by his family. Through the use of his only fully-functioning limb, his left leg, he taught himself to write and paint, both skills he developed expertly.

But what makes the film version of Brown's autobiography "My Left Foot" such a great retelling is its humility. Both director/writer Jim Sheridan and star Daniel Day-Lewis have managed to tell this story in a way that doesn't scream for attention and resort to melodrama. Cheesy struggles and scenes of frustration as well as glorious moments of minute victory are easy pitfalls of a story so miraculous, yet "My Left Foot" stays real and intrinsically inspired.

Day-Lewis is the easiest to highlight. Playing anyone with such serious physical impairments has to be a demanding task. Not only does Day-Lewis give us a very complete picture of Christy, but he also manages to chronicle the growth, improvement and inner change of the character in different stages of his life. He plays Christy at 17 when he had limited language capability and was emotionally volatile just as crisply as he does the intellectually learned Christy who struggles to cope with why he can't find non-platonic love. The latter theme is the film's strongest and it would've been nice for Sheridan and co-adapter Shane Connaughton to really flesh that out. Regardless, Day-Lewis gets us to understand and sympathize with all those elements, giving a performance that's so believable you often don't have time to think "wow, he's such a great actor." Those are the most commendable performances.

Equally important but through more subtle means is Sheridan's work on the film. This story is about day-to-day life and struggles. Although Christy has such a unique set of circumstances hampering his life, his struggles are not unlike our own and Sheridan grasps that concept completely. Christy struggles with love, parental attention, questions of self- worth and capability. His struggles are just more physically manifested (literally and figuratively) than ours.

Sheridan gives us moments that capture the spirit of the large Brown family and Christy's unique place in it. The drama evolves naturally when tensions are highest and the humor comes in much the same way. The dinner scene when Christy learns that his doctor/teacher -- the woman he loves -- is going to marry his brother Peter is the film's finest example of both Day-Lewis and Sheridan's efforts. It's built up to so well by Sheridan that it comes out when we're ready and Day-Lewis takes us from there with his stunning work.

The other strong component of the film is Brenda Fricker as Mrs. Brown. I did not know she'd won the Oscar, but there was something about her performances as Christy's loving and wise mother that just screamed Oscar-worthy. Her love for Christy and constant fighting for him just seems so convincing and heartfelt and she earns a lot of sympathy given her situation.

The emotional punch of the film given the story is surprisingly minimal. Perhaps that was part of the sacrifice of trying to create a film that feels organically human. The two should be reconcilable, but I imagine it's challenging to tell a story that feels true-to-life and one that provides enough dramatic moments to take our emotions on a roller coaster. The choice to downplay the latter was definitely the wise one for "My Left Foot." Brown's circumstances speak for themselves -- they don't need to be squeezed for weightier dramatic impact.

~Steven C

Visit my site moviemusereviews.com for more --------------------------------------------- Result 693 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] [[Live]]! Yes, but not [[kicking]].

[[True]] story: Some time ago, a Dutch [[TV]] station made an [[announcement]] that they were [[going]] to [[air]] a [[new]] [[reality]] [[show]]. A contest [[rather]]. The main [[participant]] in this show would be a [[woman]] who was [[dying]] of something terrible and she would be [[donating]] her [[kidneys]] to one lucky person with [[progressive]] kidney failure. [[For]] real.

The country and the international media were all over this story like flies on a [[turd]], saying it was [[appalling]], [[immoral]], what-is-this-world-coming-to, and the like. In a way, I had to agree.

As the months passed, the tension built up to a degree that the government was mostly occupied by the issue of whether they should let this show go ahead or not, instead of running the country.

The show did air and right up to the last moment they were pushing ahead. And up to the last moment the country was up in arms, the Prime Minister making speeches, every newspaper writing about it, everyone in the country holding their breaths. And the network pushed on. Towards a new frontier in television. And they definitely succeeded in doing just that. They pushed the envelope.

The show aired and we all watched a terminally ill woman selecting the right candidate to receive her kidneys so he or she would live, whilst she would die shortly after.

And then, in the last moments of the show it was revealed that it was a partial hoax. The woman was not ill, but all the candidates were. There was no kidney auction. The whole show, that, with the publicity and the commercials and all the discussions, built up for months to a fantastic climax, was a publicity stunt to focus attention on the problem of major shortages in organ donors. The man who founded this particular network himself died of kidney disease.

Now THIS is television. [[Leaving]] everybody far behind in amazement.

Don't give me a poorly acted, poorly directed flick about some woman trying to get a Russian Roulette show on American TV.

As if.

*Spoiler* As if I'm going to believe they would get this through the FCC. As if I'm going to believe this would get through the US Supreme Court on the basis of free expression. As if I'm gonna believe the ridiculous ending where this woman pulled it off and has conscience issues because some guy shot himself on air.

It's all been done before. Watch Running Man with Arnold instead. At least it had a semi good ending.

*Spoiler* This is an appallingly bad piece of film, together with a ridiculous ending. So she gets shot in the end, is that supposed to make us movie going public feel better after we leave the theater because there was some kind of justice? Don't take my word for it, but I would say this: leave this one alone and watch a test pattern instead, you'll get more quality. [[Viva]]! Yes, but not [[kick]].

[[Veritable]] story: Some time ago, a Dutch [[TELEVISION]] station made an [[ad]] that they were [[go]] to [[airplane]] a [[nuevo]] [[realism]] [[exhibitions]]. A contest [[quite]]. The main [[attendees]] in this show would be a [[girl]] who was [[died]] of something terrible and she would be [[gift]] her [[kidney]] to one lucky person with [[progressively]] kidney failure. [[During]] real.

The country and the international media were all over this story like flies on a [[crap]], saying it was [[frightening]], [[amoral]], what-is-this-world-coming-to, and the like. In a way, I had to agree.

As the months passed, the tension built up to a degree that the government was mostly occupied by the issue of whether they should let this show go ahead or not, instead of running the country.

The show did air and right up to the last moment they were pushing ahead. And up to the last moment the country was up in arms, the Prime Minister making speeches, every newspaper writing about it, everyone in the country holding their breaths. And the network pushed on. Towards a new frontier in television. And they definitely succeeded in doing just that. They pushed the envelope.

The show aired and we all watched a terminally ill woman selecting the right candidate to receive her kidneys so he or she would live, whilst she would die shortly after.

And then, in the last moments of the show it was revealed that it was a partial hoax. The woman was not ill, but all the candidates were. There was no kidney auction. The whole show, that, with the publicity and the commercials and all the discussions, built up for months to a fantastic climax, was a publicity stunt to focus attention on the problem of major shortages in organ donors. The man who founded this particular network himself died of kidney disease.

Now THIS is television. [[Exiting]] everybody far behind in amazement.

Don't give me a poorly acted, poorly directed flick about some woman trying to get a Russian Roulette show on American TV.

As if.

*Spoiler* As if I'm going to believe they would get this through the FCC. As if I'm going to believe this would get through the US Supreme Court on the basis of free expression. As if I'm gonna believe the ridiculous ending where this woman pulled it off and has conscience issues because some guy shot himself on air.

It's all been done before. Watch Running Man with Arnold instead. At least it had a semi good ending.

*Spoiler* This is an appallingly bad piece of film, together with a ridiculous ending. So she gets shot in the end, is that supposed to make us movie going public feel better after we leave the theater because there was some kind of justice? Don't take my word for it, but I would say this: leave this one alone and watch a test pattern instead, you'll get more quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 694 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I'm a big [[fan]] of B5, having [[caught]] on only at the [[end]] of season three. I faithfully [[watched]] all the previous seasons when it was syndicated, [[concluding]] that it was one of the most well-thought out [[story]] arcs to ever [[hit]] [[television]]. Even the filler episodes were interesting. The movies, also, were well [[produced]] and as entertaining as anything to hit the [[theaters]].

[[Which]] brings us to '[[River]] of Souls'. Naturally, after [[seeing]] everything else, I had high [[expectations]]. Martin Sheen appears to be acting in an Ed Wood movie rather than a serious Sci-Fi story. The story itself, might have looked good in outline form, even made it to the story board. However, it [[suffers]] obviously when it came time to filling this notion out into a two hour movie. There are no special effects to keep us entertained in the [[total]] [[absence]] of a compelling story. There are places where they were obviously short of time and just improvised the dialog to fill the story out. Had this made the regular season, it would have rated among the [[worst]] of the episodes. I'm a big [[breather]] of B5, having [[grabbed]] on only at the [[ends]] of season three. I faithfully [[seen]] all the previous seasons when it was syndicated, [[concluded]] that it was one of the most well-thought out [[narratives]] arcs to ever [[strike]] [[tv]]. Even the filler episodes were interesting. The movies, also, were well [[generated]] and as entertaining as anything to hit the [[cinema]].

[[Whose]] brings us to '[[Rivers]] of Souls'. Naturally, after [[see]] everything else, I had high [[forecasting]]. Martin Sheen appears to be acting in an Ed Wood movie rather than a serious Sci-Fi story. The story itself, might have looked good in outline form, even made it to the story board. However, it [[undergoes]] obviously when it came time to filling this notion out into a two hour movie. There are no special effects to keep us entertained in the [[unmitigated]] [[lacking]] of a compelling story. There are places where they were obviously short of time and just improvised the dialog to fill the story out. Had this made the regular season, it would have rated among the [[meanest]] of the episodes. --------------------------------------------- Result 695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[love]] this movie [[like]] no other. Another [[time]] I will [[try]] to [[explain]] its virtues to the uninitiated, but for the moment let me quote a few of pieces the [[remarkable]] dialogue, which, please remember, is all tongue in cheek. Aussies and Poms will understand, everyone else-well?

(title song lyric)"he can sink a beer, he can pick a queer, in his latest double-breasted Bondi gear."

(another song lyric) "All pommies are bastards, [[bastards]], or worse, and [[England]] is the a**e-hole of the universe."

(during a television [[interview]] on an "arty [[program]]"): Mr [[Mackenzie]] what artists have [[impressed]] you most [[since]] you've been in [[England]]? (Barry's [[response]])Flamin' bull-artists!

(while [[chatting]] up a [[naive]] young [[pom]] [[girl]]): Mr [[Mackenzie]], I [[suppose]] you have hordes of [[Aboriginal]] [[servants]] back in Australia? (Barry's [[response]]) Abos? I've never [[seen]] an [[Abo]] in me life. [[Mum]] does most of the solid yacca (ie [[hard]] [[work]]) [[round]] our place.

This is just a [[taste]] of the [[hilarious]] [[farce]] of this bonser Aussie flick. [[If]] you can [[get]] a copy of it, watch and enjoy. I [[iove]] this movie [[iike]] no other. Another [[times]] I will [[endeavour]] to [[clarifying]] its virtues to the uninitiated, but for the moment let me quote a few of pieces the [[wondrous]] dialogue, which, please remember, is all tongue in cheek. Aussies and Poms will understand, everyone else-well?

(title song lyric)"he can sink a beer, he can pick a queer, in his latest double-breasted Bondi gear."

(another song lyric) "All pommies are bastards, [[motherfuckers]], or worse, and [[Brits]] is the a**e-hole of the universe."

(during a television [[interrogation]] on an "arty [[programmes]]"): Mr [[Mckenzie]] what artists have [[surprising]] you most [[because]] you've been in [[Uk]]? (Barry's [[answers]])Flamin' bull-artists!

(while [[drooling]] up a [[unsuspecting]] young [[baum]] [[girls]]): Mr [[Mckenzie]], I [[guess]] you have hordes of [[Natives]] [[employees]] back in Australia? (Barry's [[answers]]) Abos? I've never [[watched]] an [[Abou]] in me life. [[Mommy]] does most of the solid yacca (ie [[stiff]] [[jobs]]) [[rounded]] our place.

This is just a [[aftertaste]] of the [[funny]] [[joke]] of this bonser Aussie flick. [[Unless]] you can [[got]] a copy of it, watch and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Any child old enough to sit up in front of a screen will be absolutely captivated by the beautifully drawn images and wonderful music in this heartfelt and humorous re-write of the Grimms' fairytale. They'll be singing 'Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo' before they can even formulate a complete sentence and will continue singing it till their dying days. It is a classic for all children, especially those adults who are young at heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] ***SPOILERS*** Seething with hatred and revenge half breed Zach Provo, [[James]] Coburn, had spent the last 11 [[years]] on a [[chain]] gang planing his escape. What Provo want's more then [[freedom]] is to [[even]] the [[score]] with the [[man]] who [[captured]] him and in the [[process]], during a wild [[shootout]], killed his Navajo wife: The former Pima [[County]] sheriff Sam Burgade, Charlton Heston.

Making his [[escape]] after [[killing]] two [[prison]] [[guards]] Provo makes his [[way]] [[towards]] Yuma [[knowing]] that that's not just where Burgade lives but where his his young [[daughter]] Susan, [[Barbara]] Hershey,[[resides]] as well. [[Using]] his [[fellow]] escaped convicts to [[lure]] Burgade into the [[vast]] [[Arizona]] Desert, by promising them $30,000.00 in gold [[coins]] that he [[buried]] there, Provo plans to [[exact]] his bloody [[vengeance]] on Burgade. But only after having him witness his daughter being [[brutally]] [[raped]] by his fellow [[convicts]] or are, in not being with a [[woman]] for years, as horny as a rabbit during mating season!

Brutal and very [[effective]] western that [[updates]] the John Wayne 1956 [[classic]] "The Searchers" in a father [[searching]] through [[dangerous]] Indian territory for his [[kidnapped]] daughter. Charlton Heston as the guilt-ridden Sam Burgade in his felling somehow [[responsible]] for [[killing]] Provo's wife and then having to [[face]] the fact that the same thing can very well [[happen]] to his [[daughter]] Susan is [[perfect]] in the role of the [[aging]] and retired sheriff. Charles Coburn as the vengeful half breed [[Zach]] Provo is [[also]] at his best as the obsessed with hatred and [[murder]] [[escaped]] convict.

The [[man]] who escaped with Provo are really not interest in his personal affairs but have no choice, in that he knows the [[territory]] like the back of his hand, but to go along with him. It's only the [[thought]] of them having their [[way]] with [[Susan]], when Provo gives them the green light, as well as the buried $30,000.00 in gold [[coins]] that [[keeps]] them from [[breaking]] up and [[going]] their own [[way]].

[[Also]] [[going]] along with Burgade is Susan's boyfriend Hal Brickman, Chris Mitchum, who [[proves]] in the [[end]] that he's as good as Burgade is, who [[felt]] that he just didn't have it in him, in both tracking down the escaped criminals as well as using common sense, which in this case Burgade lacks, in doing it.

***SPOILERS**** The unbelievably brutal and blood splattered showdown between Burgade and Provo is almost too much to sit through. Provo who's hatred of Burgade bordered on out right insanity wanted him to suffer a slow and excruciating death. it was that hatred that Bugrade took advantage of and, after taking some half dozen bullets, thus ended up putting the crazed and blood thirsty, as well as mindless, lunatic away for good! ***SPOILERS*** Seething with hatred and revenge half breed Zach Provo, [[Jacques]] Coburn, had spent the last 11 [[olds]] on a [[strings]] gang planing his escape. What Provo want's more then [[freedoms]] is to [[yet]] the [[notation]] with the [[guy]] who [[caught]] him and in the [[processes]], during a wild [[shooting]], killed his Navajo wife: The former Pima [[Prefecture]] sheriff Sam Burgade, Charlton Heston.

Making his [[fleeing]] after [[murdering]] two [[prisons]] [[warders]] Provo makes his [[camino]] [[vers]] Yuma [[conscious]] that that's not just where Burgade lives but where his his young [[girls]] Susan, [[Barbarian]] Hershey,[[lies]] as well. [[Utilizing]] his [[colleagues]] escaped convicts to [[bait]] Burgade into the [[sizable]] [[Az]] Desert, by promising them $30,000.00 in gold [[coinage]] that he [[bury]] there, Provo plans to [[precise]] his bloody [[revenge]] on Burgade. But only after having him witness his daughter being [[savagely]] [[infringed]] by his fellow [[convict]] or are, in not being with a [[female]] for years, as horny as a rabbit during mating season!

Brutal and very [[efficacious]] western that [[modernization]] the John Wayne 1956 [[classical]] "The Searchers" in a father [[searches]] through [[unsafe]] Indian territory for his [[abducted]] daughter. Charlton Heston as the guilt-ridden Sam Burgade in his felling somehow [[liable]] for [[slaying]] Provo's wife and then having to [[confront]] the fact that the same thing can very well [[occur]] to his [[daughters]] Susan is [[faultless]] in the role of the [[age]] and retired sheriff. Charles Coburn as the vengeful half breed [[Zac]] Provo is [[apart]] at his best as the obsessed with hatred and [[killings]] [[fled]] convict.

The [[guy]] who escaped with Provo are really not interest in his personal affairs but have no choice, in that he knows the [[land]] like the back of his hand, but to go along with him. It's only the [[ideas]] of them having their [[routing]] with [[Suzan]], when Provo gives them the green light, as well as the buried $30,000.00 in gold [[coin]] that [[retains]] them from [[violating]] up and [[go]] their own [[camino]].

[[Moreover]] [[gonna]] along with Burgade is Susan's boyfriend Hal Brickman, Chris Mitchum, who [[proving]] in the [[termination]] that he's as good as Burgade is, who [[smelled]] that he just didn't have it in him, in both tracking down the escaped criminals as well as using common sense, which in this case Burgade lacks, in doing it.

***SPOILERS**** The unbelievably brutal and blood splattered showdown between Burgade and Provo is almost too much to sit through. Provo who's hatred of Burgade bordered on out right insanity wanted him to suffer a slow and excruciating death. it was that hatred that Bugrade took advantage of and, after taking some half dozen bullets, thus ended up putting the crazed and blood thirsty, as well as mindless, lunatic away for good! --------------------------------------------- Result 698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] From the pen of [[Richard]] Condon (The Manchurian [[Candidate]] 1962) [[comes]] this [[muddled]] [[tale]] of [[political]] [[intrigue]] and assassination. The [[story]], [[told]] in almost comic [[book]] fashion is [[difficult]] to swallow. All-star [[cast]] [[considered]], this poor effort is not [[entirely]] the fault of the [[cast]] and crew: the [[novel]] was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as [[though]] at times the [[story]] is [[actually]] mocking the more [[sincere]] [[effort]] put forth in "Manchurian Candidate." A [[disappointment]] on all [[counts]]. From the pen of [[Richie]] Condon (The Manchurian [[Nominee]] 1962) [[arrives]] this [[disconcerted]] [[storytelling]] of [[politician]] [[plot]] and assassination. The [[saga]], [[said]] in almost comic [[ledger]] fashion is [[laborious]] to swallow. All-star [[casting]] [[judged]], this poor effort is not [[downright]] the fault of the [[casting]] and crew: the [[newer]] was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as [[whilst]] at times the [[saga]] is [[genuinely]] mocking the more [[earnest]] [[endeavour]] put forth in "Manchurian Candidate." A [[displeasure]] on all [[count]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this show!

Every time i watch an episode i repeat that line and remind myself how good of a show this is. I am a huge sci-fi fan and this show has grounds to be the most important science (fiction?) show in the history of film/TV. There are so many theories in this show about the universe i could start a religion. Its amazing, season after season the show gets better and better.

I've been a fan of MacGyver since i was 5 (19 now) and i find it so ironic that my 2 favorite TV shows of all time star Richard Dean Anderson. Its also interesting how each character is practically the opposite of the other.

Back when i first saw Stargate the movie, i instantly liked it and considered it one of my favorite sci-fi flicks, then hearing a TV show would spin from it i got really excited, but didn't get showtime till the fifth season was almost over.

Though, I'm disappointed to hear that Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin wanted to do a trilogy of movies but the studio optioned the series instead.

Id say though that it turned out just fine. Maybe even better.

This show is amazing, and i hope it never dies. Atlantis here we come! --------------------------------------------- Result 700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Veteran [[sleazeball]] [[Bruno]] Mattei is at it again with this erotic thriller that [[clearly]] echoes Joel Schumacher's 8MM. But, as expected, Mattei does his [[movie]] on a minuscule budget - so that it already looks obscure when it's [[newly]] released.

After her daughter [[gets]] [[abducted]], a [[mother]] enters the [[dark]] world of underground [[pornography]], because the kidnappers belong to an international organization that direct snuff films as long as the exclusive [[clients]] pay well. The search for her [[daughter]] does not only lead the mother [[across]] [[Europe]], but also into [[prostitution]]. She goes to bed with some guys to [[get]] her clues. When she finally reaches contact with the snuff organization [[lead]] by the mysterious Doctor Hades, she's [[getting]] into great [[danger]] herself.

There is not [[much]] good to say about this one, even though it [[starts]] promising. Problem is that the movie is by far not as sleazy or explicit as one might [[expect]] from the [[director]] who [[made]] films like BLADE [[VIOLENT]]. SNUFF [[TRAP]] (which was [[first]] [[released]] in [[Russia]]!) is neither gory [[enough]] nor does it [[contain]] the [[amount]] of nudity and [[sex]] to really [[keep]] the viewer's attention. The [[plot]] isn't that special [[either]], except maybe for the [[surprisingly]] many [[different]] [[locations]] [[throughout]] Europe. The ending is [[hugely]] [[disappointing]]. The acting isn't [[really]] [[remarkable]] [[either]], except for Anita Auer who plays Doctor Hades: She [[looks]] and acts extremely creepy. You don't want to meet her like this in a dark alley (or Your bedroom, for that matter).

All in all, SNUFF TRAP only appeals to collectors of [[Bruno]] Mattei's films. But it's good to [[see]] the man back on the [[helm]] again: It was his first thriller since 1994's giallo GLI OCCHI DENTRO. Veteran [[slimeball]] [[Bruni]] Mattei is at it again with this erotic thriller that [[definitely]] echoes Joel Schumacher's 8MM. But, as expected, Mattei does his [[filmmaking]] on a minuscule budget - so that it already looks obscure when it's [[lately]] released.

After her daughter [[got]] [[kidnapped]], a [[madre]] enters the [[somber]] world of underground [[porn]], because the kidnappers belong to an international organization that direct snuff films as long as the exclusive [[consumers]] pay well. The search for her [[fille]] does not only lead the mother [[throughout]] [[Europa]], but also into [[prostitute]]. She goes to bed with some guys to [[obtains]] her clues. When she finally reaches contact with the snuff organization [[culminate]] by the mysterious Doctor Hades, she's [[obtain]] into great [[hazard]] herself.

There is not [[very]] good to say about this one, even though it [[initiate]] promising. Problem is that the movie is by far not as sleazy or explicit as one might [[waits]] from the [[superintendent]] who [[accomplished]] films like BLADE [[FIERCE]]. SNUFF [[TRAPS]] (which was [[firstly]] [[emitted]] in [[Russian]]!) is neither gory [[sufficiently]] nor does it [[containing]] the [[somme]] of nudity and [[sexuality]] to really [[retaining]] the viewer's attention. The [[intrigue]] isn't that special [[neither]], except maybe for the [[unbelievably]] many [[diverse]] [[sites]] [[during]] Europe. The ending is [[remarkably]] [[depressing]]. The acting isn't [[truthfully]] [[sumptuous]] [[nor]], except for Anita Auer who plays Doctor Hades: She [[seems]] and acts extremely creepy. You don't want to meet her like this in a dark alley (or Your bedroom, for that matter).

All in all, SNUFF TRAP only appeals to collectors of [[Bruni]] Mattei's films. But it's good to [[seeing]] the man back on the [[rudder]] again: It was his first thriller since 1994's giallo GLI OCCHI DENTRO. --------------------------------------------- Result 701 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Okay. Who was it? Who gave Revolver 10 out of 10? [[Are]] you tripping of your [[head]] on [[Ecstasy]] [[pipes]]? There were so many of you. [[Did]] you do it for a dare? Is this some [[kind]] of cult? [[Or]] did [[Guy]] [[Richie]] himself sign up 788 [[times]] under different [[names]]?

Before I say [[anything]] else, I'll say this. Just because you don't [[understand]] a [[film]] doesn't mean that it's not great. Maybe you've had a bad day at work, or you sat down to watch a [[film]] after you had a row with your [[wife]] and then weren't in the mood. [[Maybe]] there's a more fundamental [[stumbling]] block- like you just don't have the mental [[capacity]] or a [[highly]] [[enough]] developed philosophical sense to engage with it. BUT. And this is a very, very big but. The XXL elephant-sized mega-but to [[end]] all buts.

PLEASE don't confuse incoherence for complexity, and please don't confuse this two hour non-squirter for an interesting film. Really. You may [[think]] you are pretty smart. You may even think of yourself as somewhat of a [[romantic]] figure: an independent [[thinker]] championing a masterpiece against a [[chorus]] of sheep-like naysayers. Please don't. You're [[embarrassing]] yourself.

Revolver's a waste of everyone's [[time]]. If you thought about if for a few minutes, you'd [[recognise]] it too. It was a waste of the cast, a waste of the [[crew]], a waste of the caterers, and [[definitely]] a waste of the precious minutes (you can't [[get]] them back you know) of anyone [[unlucky]] [[enough]] to [[sit]] through this unutterable, [[wretched]] [[mess]].

"No - [[wait]]," [[comes]] a [[voice]] in the darkness. "You just don't [[understand]]. Its NON-LINEAR. That [[means]] the story doesn't go in a STRAIGHT LINE. This is actually the COMPLEX and SUBTLE work of an [[AUTEUR]]. It addresses difficult EXISTENTIAL questions. And anyway - they slated FIGHT CLUB when it first came out - didn't you hear? -Because they couldn't deal with the COMPLEXITY. They're eating humble pie now. Bet you hate Lynch films too, doncha?"

Hate to disappoint you, but I am quite a big Lynch fan. I rather like Memento, so a narrative told in an unconventional fashion doesn't necessarily fill me with fear. And although I've only studied it briefly a few years ago, philosophy interests me greatly. I don't dislike Revolver for these reasons. I dislike it because it purports to be about weighty, big-brained topics but deals with them in such an insultingly superficial way as to be laughable. I'm not much of a chess player, but Richie's idea of how chess works seems to be that of a precocious four year old. I dislike it because the characters, without exception, totally alienated me. "Aha!" cries the Richie apologist. "Guy is cleverly tipping his hat to Brecht!" Just maybe you're right. I think its more likely that he just can't write a decent script for toffee.

Comparing Revolver with Fight Club is actually really instructive. Fight Club has acid-tongued, nihilistic dialogue that makes you laugh. Revolver has stale fortune cookie reject one-liners that make your ears bleed. Fight Club has a great twist that makes you reassess everything that has happened. Revolver has, as far as I can tell, several incomprehensible twists that offer no satisfaction because... well, they don't make sense. If you keep pulling the rug out from under people, they eventually kick you out of their house. And then they lock all the doors and windows. And they never let you back in. Ever.

Guy Richie seems to assume that being philosophical entails repeating a mantra of little buzz-phrases. Mostly they are spoken, but often they flash up on the screen with attributions. It's almost pathological.

But what makes this film particularly notable is the way in which something so incomprehensible can be married so neatly with all tired gangster clichés in the world. Ultimately its so inconsequential. You don't care about anything. You don't understand anything. You go home.

Actually, there was a bit I really liked: the uptight assassin who has a crisis of confidence. He's great. But I can't recommend you see the film just to see him. He's only in it for a few minutes.

Please believe me. It's horrible. Okay. Who was it? Who gave Revolver 10 out of 10? [[Be]] you tripping of your [[leader]] on [[Bliss]] [[tubes]]? There were so many of you. [[Got]] you do it for a dare? Is this some [[genre]] of cult? [[Nor]] did [[Buddy]] [[Ritchie]] himself sign up 788 [[moments]] under different [[name]]?

Before I say [[nothing]] else, I'll say this. Just because you don't [[understanding]] a [[filmmaking]] doesn't mean that it's not great. Maybe you've had a bad day at work, or you sat down to watch a [[filmmaking]] after you had a row with your [[woman]] and then weren't in the mood. [[Likely]] there's a more fundamental [[stumble]] block- like you just don't have the mental [[abilities]] or a [[heavily]] [[adequate]] developed philosophical sense to engage with it. BUT. And this is a very, very big but. The XXL elephant-sized mega-but to [[ending]] all buts.

PLEASE don't confuse incoherence for complexity, and please don't confuse this two hour non-squirter for an interesting film. Really. You may [[believe]] you are pretty smart. You may even think of yourself as somewhat of a [[sentimental]] figure: an independent [[philosopher]] championing a masterpiece against a [[verse]] of sheep-like naysayers. Please don't. You're [[ashamed]] yourself.

Revolver's a waste of everyone's [[times]]. If you thought about if for a few minutes, you'd [[recognizing]] it too. It was a waste of the cast, a waste of the [[crewman]], a waste of the caterers, and [[obviously]] a waste of the precious minutes (you can't [[got]] them back you know) of anyone [[unhappy]] [[sufficiently]] to [[seated]] through this unutterable, [[unfortunate]] [[chaos]].

"No - [[sufferance]]," [[arises]] a [[vocals]] in the darkness. "You just don't [[understanding]]. Its NON-LINEAR. That [[methods]] the story doesn't go in a STRAIGHT LINE. This is actually the COMPLEX and SUBTLE work of an [[AUTHOR]]. It addresses difficult EXISTENTIAL questions. And anyway - they slated FIGHT CLUB when it first came out - didn't you hear? -Because they couldn't deal with the COMPLEXITY. They're eating humble pie now. Bet you hate Lynch films too, doncha?"

Hate to disappoint you, but I am quite a big Lynch fan. I rather like Memento, so a narrative told in an unconventional fashion doesn't necessarily fill me with fear. And although I've only studied it briefly a few years ago, philosophy interests me greatly. I don't dislike Revolver for these reasons. I dislike it because it purports to be about weighty, big-brained topics but deals with them in such an insultingly superficial way as to be laughable. I'm not much of a chess player, but Richie's idea of how chess works seems to be that of a precocious four year old. I dislike it because the characters, without exception, totally alienated me. "Aha!" cries the Richie apologist. "Guy is cleverly tipping his hat to Brecht!" Just maybe you're right. I think its more likely that he just can't write a decent script for toffee.

Comparing Revolver with Fight Club is actually really instructive. Fight Club has acid-tongued, nihilistic dialogue that makes you laugh. Revolver has stale fortune cookie reject one-liners that make your ears bleed. Fight Club has a great twist that makes you reassess everything that has happened. Revolver has, as far as I can tell, several incomprehensible twists that offer no satisfaction because... well, they don't make sense. If you keep pulling the rug out from under people, they eventually kick you out of their house. And then they lock all the doors and windows. And they never let you back in. Ever.

Guy Richie seems to assume that being philosophical entails repeating a mantra of little buzz-phrases. Mostly they are spoken, but often they flash up on the screen with attributions. It's almost pathological.

But what makes this film particularly notable is the way in which something so incomprehensible can be married so neatly with all tired gangster clichés in the world. Ultimately its so inconsequential. You don't care about anything. You don't understand anything. You go home.

Actually, there was a bit I really liked: the uptight assassin who has a crisis of confidence. He's great. But I can't recommend you see the film just to see him. He's only in it for a few minutes.

Please believe me. It's horrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Passing stones definitely one of the best comedy independent films ever. You must have a sense of humor to fully enjoy this one. This film for some reason hasn't received its credit due. First, lets start with the story line everyone loves a good treasure hunt. When a dead father leaves letters behind advising of a hidden treasure it not only brings two families together but starts a whirlwind adventure. Mix in a polish translator, a comatose mother, a crack-head with turrets syndrome, a twisted homosexual hypnotist, and one drag queen, money not only makes the world go round but can turn family into enemies. My favorite character in this film would have to be the sister/crack addict with turret's syndrome,her sudden out burst will have you crying and mimicking for weeks. --------------------------------------------- Result 703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The 63 year reign of [[Queen]] Victoria is [[perhaps]] one of the most [[documented]] and popularly [[known]] historical [[reigns]] in British [[history]]. On the one hand, her [[story]] lacks the theatrics of [[earlier]] royals [[thanks]] to a [[change]] in [[social]] [[climate]] and [[attitudes]], and on the other her [[story]] is one that perpetuates because it is [[notably]] [[human]]. Taking on the [[earlier]] years of her [[life]] where the budding romance between herself and the German Prince Albert was [[taking]] forefront, director Jean-Marc Vallée who has only until [[recently]] [[remained]] in the [[unbeknownst]] shadows of the [[industry]] here takes Victoria's [[story]] and [[captures]] that human [[element]] so vital to her [[legacy]]. It's a story that feels [[extremely]] [[humble]] considering its exuberant [[background]], and [[yet]] that's [[partly]] what [[gives]] it a [[distinct]] edge here that separates it from the [[usual]] fare.

[[Taking]] a very direct and [[focused]] [[approach]] that centres in on a brief five or so year [[period]] between her ascension and [[marriage]] to Albert, The Young Victoria does what so [[little]] period pieces of this [[nature]] [[offer]]. Instead of [[attempting]] a [[sprawling]] encapsulation of such a figure's [[entire]] [[life]], Vallée [[instead]] opts to [[show]] one of the [[lesser]] known [[intricacies]] of Victoria's early years which are [[easily]] [[overlooked]] in favour of the more publicly known accolades. The [[result]] is a [[feature]] that [[may]] disgruntle historians [[thanks]] to its relatively [[flippant]] regards to facts and the like, [[yet]] never to let document [[get]] in the [[way]] of [[extracting]] a [[compelling]] [[story]], [[writer]] Julian Fellowes sticks to his [[guns]] and [[delivers]] a [[slightly]] romanticised [[yet]] [[convincing]] [[portrayal]]. Vallée takes this and runs, making sure to [[fully]] capitalise on those [[elements]] with enough [[restraint]] to [[maintain]] integrity in regards to both the [[history]] [[involved]] and the viewer watching.

A major [[part]] in the joy of [[watching]] The Young Victoria [[play]] out [[however]] [[simply]] [[lies]] in the production values [[granted]] here that [[bring]] early 1800's [[Regal]] [[Britain]] to [[life]] with a [[vigorous]] [[realism]] so rarely achieved [[quite]] so [[strikingly]] by genre films. [[Everything]] from the costume [[designs]], sets, hair [[styles]], lighting and photography accentuates the [[grandiose]] background inherent to Victoria's [[story]] without ever over-encumbering it. Indeed, while [[watching]] Vallée's [[interpretation]] [[come]] to life here it is very hard not to be sucked in solely through the aesthetics that [[permeates]] the visual [[element]]; and then there's the film's [[score]] [[also]] which [[works]] tremendously to further the very elegant yet personal tones that dominate Fellowes' script. Entwining the works of Schubert and Strauss into Victoria and Albert's story not only works as a point of reference for the characters to play with, but also melds to the work with an elegance and refrain that echoes composer Ilan Eshkeri's original work just as well.

Yet for all the poignant compositions, lush backdrops and immaculate costumes that punctuate every scene, the single most important factor here—and indeed to most period dramas—are the performances of the cast and how they help bring the world they exist in to life. Thankfully The Young Victoria is blessed with an equally immaculate ensemble of thespians both young and old that do a fantastic job of doing just that. Between the sweet, budding romance of Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) and the somewhat antagonistic struggles of her advisors and the like (spearheaded by a terrific Mark Strong and Paul Bettany), the conflicts and warmth so prevalent to Fellowe's screenplay are conveyed perfectly here by all [[involved]] which helps keep the movie from being a plastic "nice to look at but dim underneath" affair so common with these outings.

In the end, it's hard to fault a work such as The Young Victoria. It's got a perfectly touching and human sense of [[affection]] within its perfectly paced romance, plus some historical significance that plays as an intriguing source of interest for those in the audience keen on such details. Of course, it may not take the cinematic world by storm and there lacks a certain significance to its overall presence that stops it from ever becoming more than just a poignantly restrained romantic period drama; yet in a sense this is what makes it enjoyable. Vallée never seems to be striving for grandeur, nor does he seem content at making a run-of-the-mill escapist piece for aficionados. Somewhere within this gray middle-ground lies The Young Victoria, sure to cater to genre fans and those a little more disillusioned by the usual productions; beautiful, memorable but most of all, human.

- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net) The 63 year reign of [[Reine]] Victoria is [[potentially]] one of the most [[researched]] and popularly [[renowned]] historical [[kingdoms]] in British [[stories]]. On the one hand, her [[storytelling]] lacks the theatrics of [[formerly]] royals [[appreciation]] to a [[amendments]] in [[societal]] [[climates]] and [[behaviours]], and on the other her [[stories]] is one that perpetuates because it is [[primarily]] [[mankind]]. Taking on the [[prior]] years of her [[lifetime]] where the budding romance between herself and the German Prince Albert was [[adopting]] forefront, director Jean-Marc Vallée who has only until [[lately]] [[persisted]] in the [[unexplored]] shadows of the [[industries]] here takes Victoria's [[saga]] and [[catching]] that human [[ingredient]] so vital to her [[inheritance]]. It's a story that feels [[terribly]] [[lowly]] considering its exuberant [[backdrop]], and [[even]] that's [[partially]] what [[offers]] it a [[separate]] edge here that separates it from the [[ordinary]] fare.

[[Adopting]] a very direct and [[focus]] [[approaches]] that centres in on a brief five or so year [[timetable]] between her ascension and [[wedding]] to Albert, The Young Victoria does what so [[petit]] period pieces of this [[characters]] [[supplying]]. Instead of [[trying]] a [[complicated]] encapsulation of such a figure's [[whole]] [[living]], Vallée [[however]] opts to [[demonstrate]] one of the [[minimum]] known [[complexities]] of Victoria's early years which are [[comfortably]] [[ignored]] in favour of the more publicly known accolades. The [[conclusions]] is a [[features]] that [[maggio]] disgruntle historians [[appreciation]] to its relatively [[breezy]] regards to facts and the like, [[even]] never to let document [[got]] in the [[path]] of [[removing]] a [[persuasive]] [[stories]], [[scriptwriter]] Julian Fellowes sticks to his [[handguns]] and [[offerings]] a [[marginally]] romanticised [[even]] [[persuade]] [[depiction]]. Vallée takes this and runs, making sure to [[altogether]] capitalise on those [[ingredients]] with enough [[restrictions]] to [[conserve]] integrity in regards to both the [[story]] [[implicated]] and the viewer watching.

A major [[parties]] in the joy of [[staring]] The Young Victoria [[playing]] out [[instead]] [[merely]] [[lurks]] in the production values [[accorded]] here that [[bringing]] early 1800's [[Royal]] [[Briton]] to [[lives]] with a [[strong]] [[pragmatism]] so rarely achieved [[utterly]] so [[interestingly]] by genre films. [[Any]] from the costume [[design]], sets, hair [[style]], lighting and photography accentuates the [[presumptuous]] background inherent to Victoria's [[saga]] without ever over-encumbering it. Indeed, while [[staring]] Vallée's [[explanations]] [[arrive]] to life here it is very hard not to be sucked in solely through the aesthetics that [[pervades]] the visual [[ingredients]]; and then there's the film's [[punctuation]] [[additionally]] which [[collaborate]] tremendously to further the very elegant yet personal tones that dominate Fellowes' script. Entwining the works of Schubert and Strauss into Victoria and Albert's story not only works as a point of reference for the characters to play with, but also melds to the work with an elegance and refrain that echoes composer Ilan Eshkeri's original work just as well.

Yet for all the poignant compositions, lush backdrops and immaculate costumes that punctuate every scene, the single most important factor here—and indeed to most period dramas—are the performances of the cast and how they help bring the world they exist in to life. Thankfully The Young Victoria is blessed with an equally immaculate ensemble of thespians both young and old that do a fantastic job of doing just that. Between the sweet, budding romance of Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) and the somewhat antagonistic struggles of her advisors and the like (spearheaded by a terrific Mark Strong and Paul Bettany), the conflicts and warmth so prevalent to Fellowe's screenplay are conveyed perfectly here by all [[embroiled]] which helps keep the movie from being a plastic "nice to look at but dim underneath" affair so common with these outings.

In the end, it's hard to fault a work such as The Young Victoria. It's got a perfectly touching and human sense of [[ailment]] within its perfectly paced romance, plus some historical significance that plays as an intriguing source of interest for those in the audience keen on such details. Of course, it may not take the cinematic world by storm and there lacks a certain significance to its overall presence that stops it from ever becoming more than just a poignantly restrained romantic period drama; yet in a sense this is what makes it enjoyable. Vallée never seems to be striving for grandeur, nor does he seem content at making a run-of-the-mill escapist piece for aficionados. Somewhere within this gray middle-ground lies The Young Victoria, sure to cater to genre fans and those a little more disillusioned by the usual productions; beautiful, memorable but most of all, human.

- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net) --------------------------------------------- Result 704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Have you ever in your [[life]], gone out for a sport's [[activity]], tried your best, and then [[found]] yourself in an [[important]] segment of it, where for a [[brief]] [[moment]], you were [[given]] a [[chance]] to be a [[hero]] and a champion and . . . [[failed]]? I believe many of us have had that [[moment]] in our [[lives]]. This is the premise of the [[movie]], "The [[Best]] of Times." In this story a [[middle]] age banker, named Jack Dundee ([[Robin]] Williams) [[suffers]] from the [[deep]] [[melancholy]] of a football [[mistake]], which happened [[years]] [[ago]], is inspired to re-play the [[game]] . . again. [[In]] [[order]] to accomplish this he must convince the once [[great]] football quarterback, Reno Hightower ([[Kurt]] [[Russell]]) to [[make]] a [[comeback]]. [[For]] Reno, who is satisfied with his present [[lot]] in [[life]], see's no [[need]] to [[change]] the [[past]] [[record]], which get's better as he ages. Added to both their problem is the fact years have passed and in addition, both their [[marriages]] are floundering and in [[need]] of re-vamping. Not easy when his Father-in-law (Donald Moffat) [[habitually]] [[reminds]] him of the [[biggest]] [[drop]]. Nevertheless, Dundee is persistent and will do anything to [[try]] and correct the [[greatest]] [[blunder]] of his [[life]]. [[Great]] [[fun]] for [[anyone]] [[wishing]] to [[enjoy]] their youth again. *** Have you ever in your [[iife]], gone out for a sport's [[activities]], tried your best, and then [[unearthed]] yourself in an [[sizable]] segment of it, where for a [[writ]] [[time]], you were [[bestowed]] a [[probability]] to be a [[heroin]] and a champion and . . . [[faulted]]? I believe many of us have had that [[time]] in our [[life]]. This is the premise of the [[kino]], "The [[Better]] of Times." In this story a [[mid]] age banker, named Jack Dundee ([[Robyn]] Williams) [[undergoes]] from the [[deepest]] [[wistful]] of a football [[error]], which happened [[ages]] [[prior]], is inspired to re-play the [[gaming]] . . again. [[During]] [[decree]] to accomplish this he must convince the once [[awesome]] football quarterback, Reno Hightower ([[Curt]] [[Russel]]) to [[deliver]] a [[returning]]. [[During]] Reno, who is satisfied with his present [[lots]] in [[vida]], see's no [[requisite]] to [[modified]] the [[preceding]] [[records]], which get's better as he ages. Added to both their problem is the fact years have passed and in addition, both their [[married]] are floundering and in [[require]] of re-vamping. Not easy when his Father-in-law (Donald Moffat) [[fluently]] [[remembered]] him of the [[largest]] [[autumn]]. Nevertheless, Dundee is persistent and will do anything to [[trying]] and correct the [[widest]] [[miscalculation]] of his [[lives]]. [[Wondrous]] [[funny]] for [[nobody]] [[desire]] to [[enjoying]] their youth again. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 705 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A [[lot]] has already been said on this movie and I' d like to [[join]] those who praised it. It's a highly [[unique]] film which [[uses]] elements of different [[genres]]: [[drama]], comedy, [[gangster]] [[film]] without making a mess of it. At [[points]] you just laugh out loud, at other [[points]] you feel for the characters [[whose]] [[mistakes]] and failures you watch. Sabu's [[genius]] can be [[shown]] with regard to some [[sequences]] of the [[movie]]. One is that where all three men [[chasing]] one another have an erotic day dream about a [[young]] [[woman]] that they just [[passed]] by on the street. This sequence is beautifully done and [[illustrates]] the [[characters]] of all three runners very well. It is erotic and funny at the same [[time]]. Another example of Sabu's genius is the [[part]] of the film where the runners [[get]] tired. First one of them, the [[typical]] loser [[among]] the three guys, hallucinates that the [[woman]] that [[left]] him for someone else is back again and you [[see]] them [[dancing]] with one another and in the [[next]] shot him dancing with himself which is [[deeply]] [[moving]]. All of the runners get to this point where they [[think]] that have something back they lost or are on [[track]] again. And at one [[part]] of the movie they [[stop]] [[chasing]] each other, running in [[line]], just laughing.So here is it all the [[beauty]] and the ludicrousness of what we [[call]] life which Sabu [[manages]] to [[show]] [[throughout]] the [[film]]. His [[characters]] fail (do they at the [[end]]?) but he doesn't [[rob]] them of their dignity. "Monday" and "Postman Blues" that do justice to Sabu's claim that he is a genius. Go watch them!

A [[batches]] has already been said on this movie and I' d like to [[joining]] those who praised it. It's a highly [[unequalled]] film which [[using]] elements of different [[genera]]: [[teatro]], comedy, [[mobster]] [[cinematographic]] without making a mess of it. At [[dot]] you just laugh out loud, at other [[dot]] you feel for the characters [[who]] [[malfunctions]] and failures you watch. Sabu's [[engineers]] can be [[indicated]] with regard to some [[sequence]] of the [[kino]]. One is that where all three men [[hunts]] one another have an erotic day dream about a [[youths]] [[wife]] that they just [[adopted]] by on the street. This sequence is beautifully done and [[proves]] the [[characteristic]] of all three runners very well. It is erotic and funny at the same [[period]]. Another example of Sabu's genius is the [[party]] of the film where the runners [[gets]] tired. First one of them, the [[characteristic]] loser [[between]] the three guys, hallucinates that the [[women]] that [[exited]] him for someone else is back again and you [[behold]] them [[danced]] with one another and in the [[impending]] shot him dancing with himself which is [[crucially]] [[shifting]]. All of the runners get to this point where they [[believing]] that have something back they lost or are on [[trajectory]] again. And at one [[portion]] of the movie they [[stops]] [[hunting]] each other, running in [[bloodline]], just laughing.So here is it all the [[beaut]] and the ludicrousness of what we [[calling]] life which Sabu [[administering]] to [[displaying]] [[during]] the [[movie]]. His [[features]] fail (do they at the [[ceases]]?) but he doesn't [[stealing]] them of their dignity. "Monday" and "Postman Blues" that do justice to Sabu's claim that he is a genius. Go watch them!

--------------------------------------------- Result 706 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I actually liked this [[movie]] until the end. Sure, it was cheesy and [[pretty]] [[unlikely]] but [[still]] it kept my [[attention]] on a [[rainy]] afternoon. Until the end, that is. [[For]] her final performance at the [[prestigious]] [[classical]] conservatory where she has [[struggled]] to catch-up to the other classically [[trained]] [[students]], what does the main character do? [[Wow]] them with her grasp and [[execution]] of this time [[honored]] musical tradition? [[No]]. She [[tortures]] and [[butchers]] the [[great]] [[sensuous]] Habanera from Carmen and [[turns]] it into an utterly forgettable Brittany Spears-wannabe [[pop]] song. My ears [[bled]]! And, in the [[supreme]] [[moment]] of [[horror]], her [[teachers]] [[gave]] her a standing ovation! Any [[teacher]] not in a Spears-induced [[fantasy]] [[would]] have [[failed]] her on the spot. [[Save]] your time, [[save]] your [[ears]] - [[skip]] this [[movie]]! I actually liked this [[film]] until the end. Sure, it was cheesy and [[quite]] [[implausible]] but [[yet]] it kept my [[beware]] on a [[wettest]] afternoon. Until the end, that is. [[During]] her final performance at the [[notorious]] [[classic]] conservatory where she has [[fought]] to catch-up to the other classically [[qualified]] [[student]], what does the main character do? [[Ruff]] them with her grasp and [[executes]] of this time [[flattered]] musical tradition? [[Nos]]. She [[torturing]] and [[tormentors]] the [[gorgeous]] [[sensual]] Habanera from Carmen and [[revolves]] it into an utterly forgettable Brittany Spears-wannabe [[pops]] song. My ears [[persecuted]]! And, in the [[highest]] [[time]] of [[terror]], her [[prof]] [[provided]] her a standing ovation! Any [[educator]] not in a Spears-induced [[fantasia]] [[should]] have [[faulted]] her on the spot. [[Rescues]] your time, [[saved]] your [[eardrums]] - [[jumping]] this [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Luchino Visconti was light years ahead of his contemporaries. The [[great]] directors of [[Italy]] of the 40s and 50s were [[men]] who understood the [[medium]], but it was Luchino Visconti, a [[man]] of [[vision]], who dared to bring a film like to [[show]] what he was capable of doing. He [[clearly]] [[shows]] his genius early on in his [[distinguished]] [[career]] with "Ossessione", a [[film]] based on [[James]] Cain's "The Postman [[Always]] [[Ring]] [[Twice]]", which was [[later]] [[made]] by Hollywood, but that version pales in [[comparison]] with what Visconti [[achieved]] in the [[movie]]. Luchino Visconti and his [[collaborators]] on the screen [[included]] an uncredited [[Alberto]] Moravia, a [[man]] who knew about the [[effect]] of [[passion]] on [[human]] [[beings]].

The [[film]] has been well [[preserved]] in the DVD format we [[watched]] [[recently]]. The [[film]] is a [[must]] for all serious [[movie]] [[fans]] because we can [[see]] how Visconti's [[vision]] translated the text into a [[movie]] that [[rings]] true in a plausible [[way]], something the American [[version]] [[lacked]].

What comes across [[watching]] the [[movie]], is the intensity which the [[director]] [[got]] from his [[key]] players. The [[magnificent]] [[Clara]] Calamai does an [[amazing]] [[job]] as Giovanna, the [[woman]] who has [[married]] an [[older]] [[man]], but when Gino [[appears]] in her [[life]], all she [[wants]] to do is rid herself of the [[kind]] [[man]] who [[gave]] her an [[opportunity]] in [[life]]. Giovanna is one of the [[best]] [[creations]] in [[Ms]]. Calamai's [[achievements]] in the Italian [[cinema]]. The last sequence of the [[film]] [[shows]] [[Ms]]. Calamai at her [[best]] in the ironic twist that [[serves]] as the moral [[redemption]] for the [[monstrous]] [[crime]] that was [[committed]].

[[Equally]] [[excellent]] is Massimo Girotti, one of the [[best]] [[actors]] of his [[generation]] who [[appears]] as Gino, the hunky [[man]] that [[awakens]] the [[obsessive]] [[passion]] in [[Giovanna]]. Gino is the [[perfect]] [[man]] for Giovanna, [[something]] that Mr. Girotti [[projects]] with such ease and sophistication not equaled before in the screen. Mr. Girotti makes the [[man]] [[come]] alive in a performance that seems so [[easy]], [[yet]] with another [[actor]] it [[might]] not have been so [[apparent]]. Juan DeLanda is [[seen]] as Giuseppe, the [[older]] [[man]] who [[fell]] in [[love]] with Giovanna. [[In]] [[fact]], his [[character]] [[rings]] truer than his [[counterpart]] in the [[American]] [[film]], where he is seen more as a buffoon.

The film is beautifully photographed by Domenic Scala and Aldo Tonti. They gave the film a naturalistic look that was the way Italian directors of the era favored. The original musical score of Giuseppe Rosati is perfect. Visconti, a man who loved opera and was one of the best directors, also includes arias by Bizet and Verdi that fit well in the context of the movie.

"Ossessione" is a film to treasure because we see a great Luchino Visconti at the top of his form. Luchino Visconti was light years ahead of his contemporaries. The [[awesome]] directors of [[Italia]] of the 40s and 50s were [[man]] who understood the [[midst]], but it was Luchino Visconti, a [[men]] of [[conception]], who dared to bring a film like to [[display]] what he was capable of doing. He [[apparently]] [[displayed]] his genius early on in his [[illustrious]] [[quarry]] with "Ossessione", a [[cinematography]] based on [[Jacques]] Cain's "The Postman [[Continually]] [[Rings]] [[Double]]", which was [[then]] [[brought]] by Hollywood, but that version pales in [[compare]] with what Visconti [[obtained]] in the [[cinema]]. Luchino Visconti and his [[collaborator]] on the screen [[inscribed]] an uncredited [[Albert]] Moravia, a [[guy]] who knew about the [[effects]] of [[enthusiasm]] on [[mankind]] [[humans]].

The [[cinema]] has been well [[stored]] in the DVD format we [[observed]] [[freshly]]. The [[cinematography]] is a [[should]] for all serious [[cinema]] [[amateurs]] because we can [[behold]] how Visconti's [[conception]] translated the text into a [[film]] that [[ring]] true in a plausible [[routing]], something the American [[stepping]] [[lacks]].

What comes across [[staring]] the [[film]], is the intensity which the [[superintendent]] [[gets]] from his [[keys]] players. The [[great]] [[Clearly]] Calamai does an [[striking]] [[labour]] as Giovanna, the [[girls]] who has [[wedding]] an [[elderly]] [[men]], but when Gino [[emerges]] in her [[vida]], all she [[desires]] to do is rid herself of the [[sorts]] [[guy]] who [[supplied]] her an [[luck]] in [[living]]. Giovanna is one of the [[nicest]] [[establishment]] in [[Mrs]]. Calamai's [[accomplishments]] in the Italian [[cinemas]]. The last sequence of the [[cinematography]] [[showing]] [[Mrs]]. Calamai at her [[nicest]] in the ironic twist that [[serve]] as the moral [[buyout]] for the [[hideous]] [[offense]] that was [[commit]].

[[Alike]] [[magnifique]] is Massimo Girotti, one of the [[better]] [[actresses]] of his [[jill]] who [[emerges]] as Gino, the hunky [[dude]] that [[provokes]] the [[obsessed]] [[enthusiasm]] in [[Astrid]]. Gino is the [[faultless]] [[dude]] for Giovanna, [[anything]] that Mr. Girotti [[project]] with such ease and sophistication not equaled before in the screen. Mr. Girotti makes the [[males]] [[arrived]] alive in a performance that seems so [[simpler]], [[however]] with another [[actress]] it [[probability]] not have been so [[flagrant]]. Juan DeLanda is [[saw]] as Giuseppe, the [[elderly]] [[fella]] who [[fallen]] in [[loves]] with Giovanna. [[Among]] [[facto]], his [[nature]] [[piercings]] truer than his [[contra]] in the [[Americans]] [[kino]], where he is seen more as a buffoon.

The film is beautifully photographed by Domenic Scala and Aldo Tonti. They gave the film a naturalistic look that was the way Italian directors of the era favored. The original musical score of Giuseppe Rosati is perfect. Visconti, a man who loved opera and was one of the best directors, also includes arias by Bizet and Verdi that fit well in the context of the movie.

"Ossessione" is a film to treasure because we see a great Luchino Visconti at the top of his form. --------------------------------------------- Result 708 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] As someone who has never condescended Adam Sandler in terms of talent, as is done to him and many comic actors like him, I walked in to Reign Over Me expecting a [[great]] film, not simply because of his presence in the movie but because I [[thought]] that it looked very good overall. Even someone who already thought that Sandler could deliver an effective dramatic performance is writing here that I was [[surprised]] at how fantastic he is in it. He will make you weep, especially in his [[purposefully]] sudden and [[unexpected]] monologue. What's [[amazing]] about his role is that it's a [[character]] it's hard to say we've seen before. We've [[seen]] many [[emotionally]] scarred characters, many mentally retarded people, many loners, many passionate self-centered artists, but Sandler's Charlie Fineman is none of these. He may have a taste of each of them in some ways, but his [[character]] is [[truly]] [[unpredictable]] and [[completely]] individual. It's a [[joy]] for the audience to be [[drawn]] in [[emotionally]] by him and be [[tugged]] [[every]] which [[way]] by someone whose [[problems]], [[mindset]], and provocations are [[completely]] [[different]] from most [[characters]] like him.

Don Cheadle delivers an interesting performance on a [[completely]] different [[level]]. He is [[every]] man. He is the most [[normal]] [[possible]] [[person]] in the [[world]], so [[much]] so that you will hardly find many [[characters]] like his either, or at least any that are played the way he plays Alan Johnson, whose name is even found on the assembly line. Cheadle is [[brilliant]] in that he is funny, jolting, [[smart]], and stupid the way so many normal people are.

The rest of the cast is populated by actors and actresses who've hardly done anything in awhile in smaller but quite colorful roles. Jada Pinkett-Smith is the overly refined upper middle class wife, Donald Sutherland is the impatient but surprising judge, Robert Klein is Sandler's desensitized father-in-law.

Mike Binder's script is quite [[brilliant]] because it says something quite profound about the wonders of communication in all of its guises. It's much more subtle than, say, Babel, and has a much more close-to-home ideal.

The camera is only interested in the reality of its images as opposed to the [[mere]] style. This film struck me as sort of a sendback to the kitchen-sink style of the 1970s. Cinematography was grainy and unfastened, but that was its charm. It wasn't about attracting us to the camera itself and the gloss that would've diluted its stories with such.

The music, which plays a major role in the film, and its title, is very powerful. Near the beginning, you feel like you're in for another About Schmidt or Little Miss Sunshine sort of soundtrack, but you soon realize you're in for more than that. In fact, the film is packed with lots of music that stimulates a lot of the most emotional scenes.

Reign Over Me is a major statement not only for society but also for film itself. It goes to show that even the director of Blankman is capable of wonders. As someone who has never condescended Adam Sandler in terms of talent, as is done to him and many comic actors like him, I walked in to Reign Over Me expecting a [[wondrous]] film, not simply because of his presence in the movie but because I [[ideas]] that it looked very good overall. Even someone who already thought that Sandler could deliver an effective dramatic performance is writing here that I was [[dumbfounded]] at how fantastic he is in it. He will make you weep, especially in his [[intentionally]] sudden and [[unintended]] monologue. What's [[striking]] about his role is that it's a [[personages]] it's hard to say we've seen before. We've [[watched]] many [[excitedly]] scarred characters, many mentally retarded people, many loners, many passionate self-centered artists, but Sandler's Charlie Fineman is none of these. He may have a taste of each of them in some ways, but his [[trait]] is [[honestly]] [[erratic]] and [[altogether]] individual. It's a [[glee]] for the audience to be [[lured]] in [[excitedly]] by him and be [[tugging]] [[all]] which [[route]] by someone whose [[disorders]], [[psyche]], and provocations are [[entirely]] [[several]] from most [[features]] like him.

Don Cheadle delivers an interesting performance on a [[perfectly]] different [[grades]]. He is [[any]] man. He is the most [[ordinary]] [[feasible]] [[somebody]] in the [[monde]], so [[very]] so that you will hardly find many [[traits]] like his either, or at least any that are played the way he plays Alan Johnson, whose name is even found on the assembly line. Cheadle is [[wonderful]] in that he is funny, jolting, [[artful]], and stupid the way so many normal people are.

The rest of the cast is populated by actors and actresses who've hardly done anything in awhile in smaller but quite colorful roles. Jada Pinkett-Smith is the overly refined upper middle class wife, Donald Sutherland is the impatient but surprising judge, Robert Klein is Sandler's desensitized father-in-law.

Mike Binder's script is quite [[wondrous]] because it says something quite profound about the wonders of communication in all of its guises. It's much more subtle than, say, Babel, and has a much more close-to-home ideal.

The camera is only interested in the reality of its images as opposed to the [[only]] style. This film struck me as sort of a sendback to the kitchen-sink style of the 1970s. Cinematography was grainy and unfastened, but that was its charm. It wasn't about attracting us to the camera itself and the gloss that would've diluted its stories with such.

The music, which plays a major role in the film, and its title, is very powerful. Near the beginning, you feel like you're in for another About Schmidt or Little Miss Sunshine sort of soundtrack, but you soon realize you're in for more than that. In fact, the film is packed with lots of music that stimulates a lot of the most emotional scenes.

Reign Over Me is a major statement not only for society but also for film itself. It goes to show that even the director of Blankman is capable of wonders. --------------------------------------------- Result 709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is one of my very favorites. It's hard to explain why. Maybe it's the innocence of Corin Nemec and his awkwardness paired with the boldness of Cheryl Pollak, but it definitely has something to do with the soundtrack. Also, some of the characters have little lines or movements or moments that are amusing in and of themselves. Finally, the story is one that always tugs at my heartstrings, and the last scene is so bittersweet. All in all, I love this movie; it's perfect for a gooey, sentimental girls' night. --------------------------------------------- Result 710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I'm a pretty old dude, old enough to remember the taste of [[Oreos]] and Coke as they were 50-55 years ago, when every taste for a kid was fresh. I wish I have [[somehow]] set some aside then is some magical [[suspended]] locker, so that I could [[taste]] those things [[today]]. This [[magical]] locker might [[even]] have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've [[drifted]], physically and [[otherwise]], a [[sort]] of dynamic [[chemistry]] of expectations. Over the half century, they [[would]] have had to adjust [[quite]] a bit, because you see I would have [[known]] that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a [[celebration]] of self and past, and story, and [[sense]] that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.

I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something [[almost]] as good. In the seventies, I [[really]] tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic [[pleasure]] — you know, [[movies]] smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the [[last]] to get it.

Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I [[deferred]] until I [[thought]] I [[would]] be [[big]] [[enough]] to [[deserve]] it. Over the years, I would [[test]] myself, my [[ability]] to [[surround]] [[beauty]] and delineate it without occupying it. There [[probably]] are few [[Poles]] who have [[worked]] at this, [[practicing]] to deserve Chopin. [[Working]] to deserve womanness when I [[see]] it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.

[[Recently]], I [[achieved]] [[something]] like [[assurance]] that it was [[time]] to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the [[time]] when this would [[work]] optimally, because I had already [[seen]] and [[understood]] "9th [[Gate]]."

If you do not know this, it is about a [[man]] who [[innocently]] [[rents]] a room in which the [[previous]] tenant (about whom the [[story]] is named) [[jumped]] out the window, to [[die]] [[later]] after this [[man]] ([[played]] by Polanski) [[visits]]. What happens is that [[time]] folds and he [[becomes]] this [[woman]]. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.

The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the [[body]] that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.

I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.

To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; "Rear Window." The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this. I'm a pretty old dude, old enough to remember the taste of [[Oreo]] and Coke as they were 50-55 years ago, when every taste for a kid was fresh. I wish I have [[someplace]] set some aside then is some magical [[ceased]] locker, so that I could [[liking]] those things [[yesterday]]. This [[quadrant]] locker might [[yet]] have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've [[derivatives]], physically and [[alternatively]], a [[genre]] of dynamic [[chemist]] of expectations. Over the half century, they [[ought]] have had to adjust [[pretty]] a bit, because you see I would have [[renowned]] that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a [[commemorating]] of self and past, and story, and [[feeling]] that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.

I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something [[hardly]] as good. In the seventies, I [[genuinely]] tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic [[gladness]] — you know, [[movie]] smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the [[final]] to get it.

Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I [[delayed]] until I [[figured]] I [[ought]] be [[major]] [[adequately]] to [[merit]] it. Over the years, I would [[testing]] myself, my [[capabilities]] to [[surrounds]] [[beaut]] and delineate it without occupying it. There [[surely]] are few [[Columns]] who have [[acted]] at this, [[practising]] to deserve Chopin. [[Collaborated]] to deserve womanness when I [[seeing]] it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.

[[Lately]], I [[performed]] [[anything]] like [[security]] that it was [[period]] to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the [[moment]] when this would [[worked]] optimally, because I had already [[watched]] and [[understand]] "9th [[Wears]]."

If you do not know this, it is about a [[dude]] who [[nonchalantly]] [[leases]] a room in which the [[former]] tenant (about whom the [[saga]] is named) [[bumped]] out the window, to [[killed]] [[then]] after this [[guy]] ([[served]] by Polanski) [[tours]]. What happens is that [[period]] folds and he [[become]] this [[wife]]. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.

The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the [[agencies]] that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.

I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.

To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; "Rear Window." The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this. --------------------------------------------- Result 711 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This [[scary]] and [[rather]] [[gory]] [[adaptation]] of Stephen King's great novel features [[outstanding]] central performances by Dale Midkiff,Fred Gwynne(who sadly died few years ago)and Denise Crosby and some really gruesome gore effects.Director Mary Lambert has a wonderful sense of visual style,and manages to make this one of the few versions of King's work that is not only worth seeing,but genuinely unnerving.The depiction of the zombie child Gage(Miko Hughes-later in "New Nightmare")is equally [[noteworthy]],as what could easily have been a laughable character is made [[menacing]] and spooky.As for the people,who think that this one isn't scary-watch it alone in the dark(eventually with your squeamish girlfriend)and I guarantee you that "Pet Sematary" will creep you out.Some horror movies like this one or "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" shouldn't be watched in group.Recommended for horror fans! This [[awful]] and [[comparatively]] [[gori]] [[adapting]] of Stephen King's great novel features [[unresolved]] central performances by Dale Midkiff,Fred Gwynne(who sadly died few years ago)and Denise Crosby and some really gruesome gore effects.Director Mary Lambert has a wonderful sense of visual style,and manages to make this one of the few versions of King's work that is not only worth seeing,but genuinely unnerving.The depiction of the zombie child Gage(Miko Hughes-later in "New Nightmare")is equally [[wondrous]],as what could easily have been a laughable character is made [[endangering]] and spooky.As for the people,who think that this one isn't scary-watch it alone in the dark(eventually with your squeamish girlfriend)and I guarantee you that "Pet Sematary" will creep you out.Some horror movies like this one or "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" shouldn't be watched in group.Recommended for horror fans! --------------------------------------------- Result 712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I'll be [[honest]],I [[finally]] [[checked]] this [[movie]] not because of the stars--though they were reasonably watchable and compelling,particularly the three leads--or [[even]] the compelling [[story]] of a [[breach]] in the [[Presidential]] [[Secret]] Service(something,I've been informed through the [[DVD]] [[extras]] of this [[show]],has [[yet]] to ever [[happen]].Assuming that's true,that's [[remarkable]]!). I [[got]] it because it was directed and has a [[choice]] cameo by [[none]] other than [[Detective]] Meldrick [[Lewis]]!! Well,okay,Clark Johnson,one of my faves from "Homicide:Life on the [[Street]]" and a veteran (mostly) TV director. I'd say that he does about as good as he can with a project that is watchable but pretty average,despite the possibilities.

Veteran and ace Secret agent Pete Garrison(Michael Douglass)has to find out both who is blackmailing him AND who killed his friend,targeted and blew up an Air Force One chopper and is gunning for the Prez.(David Rasche. Anyone [[remember]] "Sledgehammer"?). His affair with the first lady(Kim Basinger,clearly one of the HOTTER first ladies we've ever had,fictional or real)is certainly not helping his standing. He's got to both ferret out the real mole in the service and avoid the hound dog like hunting of his former best friend and fellow agent and chief(Kiefer Sutherland,[[almost]] still completely in "24" mode). Throw in some other pivotal Service agents([[Martin]] Donovan and the foxy,[[somewhat]] [[hard]] to [[buy]] as the gig Eva Longorria) and shady foreign [[characters]] and you have a [[fairly]] [[standard]] political thriller that doesn't aim as high as it purports and reaches the desired,if underwhelming,results.

The summary [[line]] is about the [[best]] way to describe how this [[show]] plays out without [[giving]] spoilers. The DVD extras to me seemed more insightful and interesting than the movie,though the [[film]] itself was [[entertaining]] [[enough]] to keep most (myself included) interested. I'll be [[truthful]],I [[eventually]] [[ticked]] this [[movies]] not because of the stars--though they were reasonably watchable and compelling,particularly the three leads--or [[yet]] the compelling [[tale]] of a [[violate]] in the [[Presidency]] [[Clandestine]] Service(something,I've been informed through the [[DVDS]] [[supplemental]] of this [[exposition]],has [[even]] to ever [[emerge]].Assuming that's true,that's [[dramatic]]!). I [[get]] it because it was directed and has a [[elects]] cameo by [[nothingness]] other than [[Pinkerton]] Meldrick [[Louie]]!! Well,okay,Clark Johnson,one of my faves from "Homicide:Life on the [[Thoroughfare]]" and a veteran (mostly) TV director. I'd say that he does about as good as he can with a project that is watchable but pretty average,despite the possibilities.

Veteran and ace Secret agent Pete Garrison(Michael Douglass)has to find out both who is blackmailing him AND who killed his friend,targeted and blew up an Air Force One chopper and is gunning for the Prez.(David Rasche. Anyone [[remembering]] "Sledgehammer"?). His affair with the first lady(Kim Basinger,clearly one of the HOTTER first ladies we've ever had,fictional or real)is certainly not helping his standing. He's got to both ferret out the real mole in the service and avoid the hound dog like hunting of his former best friend and fellow agent and chief(Kiefer Sutherland,[[hardly]] still completely in "24" mode). Throw in some other pivotal Service agents([[Martins]] Donovan and the foxy,[[slightly]] [[arduous]] to [[acquire]] as the gig Eva Longorria) and shady foreign [[nature]] and you have a [[comparatively]] [[norms]] political thriller that doesn't aim as high as it purports and reaches the desired,if underwhelming,results.

The summary [[bloodline]] is about the [[bestest]] way to describe how this [[showing]] plays out without [[conferring]] spoilers. The DVD extras to me seemed more insightful and interesting than the movie,though the [[kino]] itself was [[amusing]] [[adequately]] to keep most (myself included) interested. --------------------------------------------- Result 713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I am [[currently]] doing film studies at A.S level and "this is not a love song" is a film we [[watched]] and in my [[opinion]] it is a film with a very [[simple]] storyline but a [[complex]] back-story. If you scratch the surface you will find a thriller-chase film of two men running through the countryside from farmers, after committing a murder:-"[[sounds]] [[quite]] [[exiting]]".

[[However]] you need to dig deeper to [[uncover]] the [[true]] [[feeling]] of the [[true]] genre. As it is suggested, it is a love story between two homosexual lovers, filled with [[trust]], deceit and betrayal. We are not told about this "love" directly through the film but the events that happen through out, for [[example]] the [[way]] Heaton acts towards Spike almost screams this [[untouched]] [[love]] affair in our faces.

[[Overall]] this film is a good example of why British [[films]] should not be dismissed as "rubbish" just because they are done on a low [[budget]].

A Good [[film]] with an [[intricate]] story line, however it is [[definitely]] an [[acquired]] [[taste]] and is [[possibly]] not suitable for the average fan of Hollywood blockbusters. I am [[now]] doing film studies at A.S level and "this is not a love song" is a film we [[observed]] and in my [[visualise]] it is a film with a very [[uncomplicated]] storyline but a [[thorny]] back-story. If you scratch the surface you will find a thriller-chase film of two men running through the countryside from farmers, after committing a murder:-"[[noises]] [[perfectly]] [[leaving]]".

[[Instead]] you need to dig deeper to [[unmask]] the [[genuine]] [[impression]] of the [[real]] genre. As it is suggested, it is a love story between two homosexual lovers, filled with [[trusts]], deceit and betrayal. We are not told about this "love" directly through the film but the events that happen through out, for [[case]] the [[pathways]] Heaton acts towards Spike almost screams this [[uninjured]] [[iove]] affair in our faces.

[[Entire]] this film is a good example of why British [[kino]] should not be dismissed as "rubbish" just because they are done on a low [[budgets]].

A Good [[cinematography]] with an [[complicated]] story line, however it is [[surely]] an [[acquiring]] [[aftertaste]] and is [[potentially]] not suitable for the average fan of Hollywood blockbusters. --------------------------------------------- Result 714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As an animated film from 1978, this is pretty good--generally well above the standard of the days when Disney hadn't done anything good in years (and Tolkien cared little for Disney anyway). It gets major points for innovative and careful camera work, applying cinematic techniques with relative success. The much-maligned rotoscoping actually works pretty well, especially with the Ringwraiths, and the opening narration. However, it is so drastically overused--possibly as a money-saving technique--that it detracts from the overall effect. The same technique that makes wraiths spooky and otherworldly doesn't fare so well in the Prancing Pony.

As for the adaptation of the story, it's actually quite good. We lose little bits here and there, minor details such as the Old Forest and Tom Bombadil, the Gaffer and the Sackville-Bagginses. We compress a few characters, such as revising Legolas as one of Elrond's household and an old friend of Aragorn's, but that's a rather wise decision for film. In books you have room to include the references to the larger world of the Elves and Middle-Earth's vast history. In film, you trade that for visuals and sound that convey the same elements in a different way. Nothing critical is truly lost here, and although I have minor quibbles about some of the changes, I'm generally pretty happy with it.

If only the dratted writers had managed to remember Saruman's name--he's frequently referred to as Aruman, a decision probably made to make him more distinct from similarly-named Sauron; it took me a second viewing before I was certain I hadn't misheard it. It's also annoying that Boromir is a bloody stage viking, and irritable from the start. However, Gandalf is excellent, and most of the rest of the voicework is excellent. If only John Hurt weren't too old to play Aragorn; I love his voice.

Of course, with the film ending at the midpoint of the story, there's a vast disappointment built in. What makes it far, far worse is the altogether miserable job done by the Rankin & Bass crew on the sequel. That they were permitted to do Return of the King after butchering The Hobbit remains a huge mystery; they seem more interested in bad songs than in proper storytelling. For all its faults, this film's heart is solidly in place and it tries very hard to accomplish a nearly impossible task. I can only hope that the upcoming series of films keeps as true to its vision... --------------------------------------------- Result 715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Okay, that was a pretty [[damn]] [[good]] episode. [[Much]] better than the [[credit]] it [[receives]].

The camera work is splendid. Best yet. I love that final shot. The [[atmosphere]] is fantastic, the costumes are great and the guest cast (minus the helpless victims) is strong.

What I don't like about this episode is that [[many]] [[things]] that are left [[unexplained]]. why does it [[change]] sex? what's the [[purpose]]? and they're aliens? what kind? why were they never shown again in the [[later]] mythology?

I'm giving this episode a high THREE stars. One of my [[favorites]] yet, but the plot holes bother me. Still... not gonna let it ruin my entertainment. Okay, that was a pretty [[frakking]] [[buena]] episode. [[Very]] better than the [[credence]] it [[gets]].

The camera work is splendid. Best yet. I love that final shot. The [[atmospheric]] is fantastic, the costumes are great and the guest cast (minus the helpless victims) is strong.

What I don't like about this episode is that [[multiple]] [[items]] that are left [[incomprehensible]]. why does it [[amend]] sex? what's the [[targeting]]? and they're aliens? what kind? why were they never shown again in the [[subsequent]] mythology?

I'm giving this episode a high THREE stars. One of my [[favourites]] yet, but the plot holes bother me. Still... not gonna let it ruin my entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 10 out of 10, this brilliant, super documentary is a must see, with film clips from the war which people did not seen for years, untill this was screened in 1974. The film clips in this documentary from the war doesn't miss out anything, some of the clips left me dumbstuck. The whole series is over 20 episodes long, and Sir Lawrence Olivier is the narrator and tells a stunning story of war. Simply this is still probably the best documentary of war still, and now over 25 years old still is able to pack a tremendous punch. You must watch this at some time, even if it's a few episodes, even at that you will still be blown away at the impact this documentary means to those who have been there suffered and died in the name of WAR, in a WORLD AT WAR.. --------------------------------------------- Result 717 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1st watched 2/28/2006 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Sydney Pollack):-DVD version I watched titled "3 Days of the Condor"- So so CIA drama full of laid-back performances making for a very laid-back movie. The premise of the story revolves around 7 out of 8 members of a CIA research group being killed with Robert Redford's character, codename = Condor, being the one that was left. Who killed them and why? That's what Redford tries to find out while trying to not be the 8th victim at the same time. Along the way, he gets Faye Dunaway's character involved involved, originally because he needs a place to hide, and then she eventually helps him out after a little lovey-dovey time. This is one of a handful of innocent guy on the run stories but this one doesn't have a lot of suspense. The flat performances don't help and the finish doesn't seal the deal for the audience enough either. Despite having a good director in Sydney Pollack and a group of classic performers, the story and the performances are not what they should be and therefore the movie is not what it should be. --------------------------------------------- Result 718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to [[see]] this [[movie]] for a very long [[time]] only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and [[charming]] [[smiling]] that [[way]]? I'm in [[love]] with that woman! I [[got]] what I [[expected]]...but only half. This [[film]] should deliver expectations for those who enjoy all [[kinds]] of romantic comedies or [[stories]] involving [[intelligent]] [[humor]] and light [[dramatic]] situations.

[[While]] I don't agree with another fellow IMDb user who states that the [[movie]] is overrated; I [[must]] [[admit]] that "Préte-moi ta main" has plenty of [[flaws]].

My main problem with the [[film]] is the lack of on screen chemistry between the [[main]] characters. There isn't a [[single]] scene [[previous]] to the [[climax]] that [[shows]] the main [[characters]] [[sharing]] a [[moment]] "of romance" or even a clue to [[suggest]] that they're interested in each other.

In fact, the only scene were both share a [[moment]] is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the [[audience]] [[understand]] about a [[possible]] love interest. I didn't [[buy]] the [[dinner]] sequence.

[[Still]], the [[movie]] [[delivers]] very funny [[moments]] and has a strong dialogs that [[support]] such an ingenuous premise. I [[mean]] with [[ingenuous]] that it would be very [[difficult]] to [[execute]] such a farse by a 43 year old [[man]] in these days.

I understand it's a [[movie]] and that's why I [[accept]] it as a [[funny]] situation. Plus, the [[humor]] is versatile. There are [[moments]] [[involving]] S&M, funny lines with Chabat's best [[friend]], some lesbian [[references]], funny [[situations]] [[involving]] the [[family]] [[women]], and more.

Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is [[top]] notch and she's by far the [[reason]] to watch the [[movie]]. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and fine, and [[demonstrates]] she's a versatile and [[talented]] [[actress]] who can pull out a comedic and dramatic performance in sheer brilliance.

[[Alain]] Chabat is a [[fine]] actor and gives a very decent performance. I [[think]] the [[supporting]] cast do what they can.

The score, art [[direction]], and other technical [[aspects]] are [[really]] good and give a dynamic look to the film.

Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema. I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]] for a very long [[moment]] only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and [[enchanting]] [[grinning]] that [[paths]]? I'm in [[amour]] with that woman! I [[ai]] what I [[hoped]]...but only half. This [[kino]] should deliver expectations for those who enjoy all [[sorts]] of romantic comedies or [[fairytales]] involving [[termite]] [[comedy]] and light [[noteworthy]] situations.

[[Though]] I don't agree with another fellow IMDb user who states that the [[cinematography]] is overrated; I [[gotta]] [[accepted]] that "Préte-moi ta main" has plenty of [[gaps]].

My main problem with the [[movie]] is the lack of on screen chemistry between the [[principal]] characters. There isn't a [[sole]] scene [[former]] to the [[pinnacle]] that [[demonstrating]] the main [[attribute]] [[exchange]] a [[time]] "of romance" or even a clue to [[proposing]] that they're interested in each other.

In fact, the only scene were both share a [[time]] is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the [[viewers]] [[comprehend]] about a [[feasible]] love interest. I didn't [[buying]] the [[luncheon]] sequence.

[[However]], the [[cinematography]] [[offering]] very funny [[times]] and has a strong dialogs that [[help]] such an ingenuous premise. I [[meaning]] with [[gullible]] that it would be very [[problematic]] to [[implement]] such a farse by a 43 year old [[dude]] in these days.

I understand it's a [[film]] and that's why I [[countenance]] it as a [[amusing]] situation. Plus, the [[mood]] is versatile. There are [[times]] [[involve]] S&M, funny lines with Chabat's best [[buddies]], some lesbian [[referencing]], funny [[instances]] [[involve]] the [[families]] [[girl]], and more.

Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is [[superior]] notch and she's by far the [[justification]] to watch the [[kino]]. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and fine, and [[demonstrating]] she's a versatile and [[gifted]] [[actor]] who can pull out a comedic and dramatic performance in sheer brilliance.

[[Alan]] Chabat is a [[fined]] actor and gives a very decent performance. I [[thought]] the [[helping]] cast do what they can.

The score, art [[directorate]], and other technical [[facets]] are [[genuinely]] good and give a dynamic look to the film.

Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Others have already commented on the "decline" of director Tobe Hooper, but what about Brad Dourif? He was perfectly capable of selecting good projects (as he proved by starring in the same year's "Exorcist III"), so why did he agree to appear in this? Sure, he gives a suitably demented performance, and the film is not outright bad; it's just uninvolving, uninteresting and unappealing. That's three "un-"s too many. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I sincerely consider this movie as another poor effort of Dominican Movie Industry. The first 30 minutes of the movie are a little funny but then when they switch their role in the society (men doing what women usually do and women doing what men usually do) the movie falls. Becoming boring and not funny at all. They let many things without explanation and the end of the movie is predictable. I didn't like the way as a Roberto Angel played his character and his little either. I went to the movies theater hoping to see a good work but I went out really disappointed.

I don't recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as "[[Death]] [[Wish]]" and "Chato's Land", but he is [[equally]] [[gifted]] as a director of occult [[Horror]] [[cinema]], as "The Sentinel" of 1977 [[proves]]. "The Sentinel", which is [[based]] on a novel by John Konvitz, who also [[wrote]] the [[screenplay]], is a [[clever]] and [[immensely]] creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult [[Horror]] should [[consider]] [[missing]]. The [[film]] is [[obviously]] inspired by successful occult classics such as "Rosemary's [[Baby]]", "The Exorcist" or "The Omen", but, as far as I am [[concerned]], it is [[also]] [[easily]] as [[unsettling]] as these more [[widely]] [[acclaimed]] [[films]], and [[probably]] even creepier.

[[Allison]] [[Parker]] ([[Christina]] Raines) is a [[beautiful]] young [[New]] York model. Traumatized by [[events]] in her her [[past]] and not [[yet]] willing to [[marry]] her [[lawyer]] boyfriend ([[Chris]] Sarandon), [[Allison]] is in search for an [[apartment]], and [[finds]] a [[big]], [[incredibly]] nice one, which is [[also]] [[affordable]], in an [[old]] [[mansion]] in Brooklyn. The [[new]] apartment, [[however]], [[comes]] along with a bunch of very [[strange]] other tenants. And the sinister [[new]] [[neighbors]] [[soon]] [[become]] more than a [[little]] [[bothersome]] to Alice... This may not be an [[adequate]] plot [[synopsis]], but I [[would]] [[hate]] to [[spoil]] any of this film's [[great]] moments, so I will not [[give]] any further plot [[description]]. What I will [[say]], however, is that "The Sentinel" is a very [[creepy]] and [[effective]] [[film]] that [[profits]] from a [[great]] [[cast]] as well as an [[often]] [[bizarre]] and [[constantly]] [[uncanny]] atmosphere. The fact that director [[Michael]] [[Winner]] and [[writer]] [[John]] Konnvitz [[also]] [[acted]] as [[producers]] here [[certainly]] had its [[influence]] on the [[outcome]]. The [[film]] is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn [[mansion]] is a [[fantastic]] [[setting]] for this [[kind]] of [[film]]. As [[mentioned]] above, the [[atmosphere]] is obscure and [[creepy]], and the [[film]] [[also]] [[includes]] several shock-moments and [[genuine]] scares. The [[film]] features [[many]] sinister and eccentric [[characters]], and the cast is [[superb]]. [[Beautiful]] Christina Raines is [[great]] in her role of [[Allison]] [[Parker]], [[lovable]] and [[yet]] on the cusp to [[losing]] her [[mind]]. [[Chris]] Sarandon is [[also]] very good as her boyfriend, a successful [[lawyer]], and the [[supporting]] cast [[includes]] [[many]] big names, such as Christopher Walken, [[Jeff]] Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also [[includes]] stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director [[Michael]] Winner for a [[long]] time, mostly for films like "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land". "The Sentinel" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, "The Sentinel" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans! Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as "[[Deaths]] [[Wanna]]" and "Chato's Land", but he is [[alike]] [[talented]] as a director of occult [[Terror]] [[cinemas]], as "The Sentinel" of 1977 [[demonstrating]]. "The Sentinel", which is [[founded]] on a novel by John Konvitz, who also [[authored]] the [[scenarios]], is a [[smarter]] and [[terribly]] creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult [[Terror]] should [[examine]] [[gone]]. The [[films]] is [[apparently]] inspired by successful occult classics such as "Rosemary's [[Babies]]", "The Exorcist" or "The Omen", but, as far as I am [[worried]], it is [[similarly]] [[readily]] as [[worrisome]] as these more [[heavily]] [[hailed]] [[cinema]], and [[maybe]] even creepier.

[[Ellison]] [[Barker]] ([[Kristina]] Raines) is a [[awesome]] young [[Nuevo]] York model. Traumatized by [[phenomena]] in her her [[preceding]] and not [[however]] willing to [[marriages]] her [[lawyers]] boyfriend ([[Kris]] Sarandon), [[Ellison]] is in search for an [[condo]], and [[find]] a [[grand]], [[terribly]] nice one, which is [[similarly]] [[inexpensive]], in an [[former]] [[manor]] in Brooklyn. The [[nuevo]] apartment, [[yet]], [[arrives]] along with a bunch of very [[odd]] other tenants. And the sinister [[nuevo]] [[neighbourhood]] [[rapidly]] [[becomes]] more than a [[petit]] [[annoying]] to Alice... This may not be an [[suitable]] plot [[summary]], but I [[ought]] [[hatred]] to [[ruin]] any of this film's [[excellent]] moments, so I will not [[lend]] any further plot [[descriptions]]. What I will [[said]], however, is that "The Sentinel" is a very [[spooky]] and [[effectiveness]] [[films]] that [[profit]] from a [[huge]] [[casting]] as well as an [[usually]] [[outlandish]] and [[repeatedly]] [[supernatural]] atmosphere. The fact that director [[Micheal]] [[Winning]] and [[screenwriter]] [[Johannes]] Konnvitz [[apart]] [[behaved]] as [[manufacturers]] here [[probably]] had its [[implications]] on the [[findings]]. The [[films]] is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn [[castel]] is a [[brilliant]] [[settings]] for this [[sorting]] of [[films]]. As [[referenced]] above, the [[atmospheric]] is obscure and [[frightening]], and the [[films]] [[apart]] [[involves]] several shock-moments and [[true]] scares. The [[cinema]] features [[several]] sinister and eccentric [[attribute]], and the cast is [[excellent]]. [[Belle]] Christina Raines is [[grand]] in her role of [[Ellison]] [[Barker]], [[loveable]] and [[however]] on the cusp to [[wasting]] her [[esprit]]. [[Chrissy]] Sarandon is [[apart]] very good as her boyfriend, a successful [[lawyers]], and the [[assisting]] cast [[involves]] [[several]] big names, such as Christopher Walken, [[Geoffrey]] Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also [[comprises]] stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director [[Michaela]] Winner for a [[lang]] time, mostly for films like "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land". "The Sentinel" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, "The Sentinel" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans! --------------------------------------------- Result 722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Poor Whoopi Goldberg. Imagine her at a friend's dinner party, and she adds a [[comment]] to the in-depth political [[discussion]] going on. People just look at her and say, "Oh what would YOU [[know]], you were the star of 'Theodore Rex'". How [[could]] anyone take her seriously after she lowered herself to be the star of this [[appalling]] piece of [[crap]]? Even [[little]] kids would be cringing in horror at this Thing. It [[reminded]] me of a [[particularly]] [[bad]] episode of 'Sigmund And The [[Sea]] Monsters'. Actually, come to think of it, 'Sigmund' was vastly superior to this.

And however did it get made? By plying the producer with an illegal substance before telling him about it? Watch this [[hideous]] [[abomination]] at your own [[peril]]. Poor Whoopi Goldberg. Imagine her at a friend's dinner party, and she adds a [[observation]] to the in-depth political [[deliberation]] going on. People just look at her and say, "Oh what would YOU [[savoir]], you were the star of 'Theodore Rex'". How [[wo]] anyone take her seriously after she lowered herself to be the star of this [[frightening]] piece of [[baloney]]? Even [[small]] kids would be cringing in horror at this Thing. It [[recalls]] me of a [[especially]] [[rotten]] episode of 'Sigmund And The [[Seas]] Monsters'. Actually, come to think of it, 'Sigmund' was vastly superior to this.

And however did it get made? By plying the producer with an illegal substance before telling him about it? Watch this [[despicable]] [[monstrosity]] at your own [[endangerment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was one of the most ridiculous and badly directed movies I've seen in a very long time. I've never liked Spike Lee, but thought I'd give this one a try: bad mistake. The movie is supposed to show how the Son of Sam real life murders affected a neighborhood in the summer of 1977; what it really did was center around the most boring characters that I doubt anyone cared for as far as their drug problems, marriage problems, and so on, etc. The scenes that depict the murders are just that, and nothing more; a shooting and then it's back to Saturday Night Fever! What's even more ridiculous is Spike Lee's choice to show up as a reporter in the movie: Spike, trust me, you're no Hitchcock, stay out of the movies, it makes them even worse off. The most silly scene had to be the dog speaking in a goofy voice, which was depicted in a scene before it where it was supposed to have been shot??? Spike, what were you thinking when you made this film? Not thinking at all is my guess. People who think they'll see a crime drama, take my advice and do not waste your time or money on this loser. You're better off watching Jerry Springer in this case! Waste of film, I gave it a 1 out of 10: awful dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] It is very [[hard]] to [[rate]] this [[film]]. As entertainment value for 21st century [[viewers]], it fails [[miserably]]. However, for the [[student]] of early sound [[films]] and [[history]], it is a [[jewel]]. "Show of [[Shows]]" was a revue filmed to [[compete]] with MGM's successful "Hollywood [[Revue]] of 1929", which still survives [[intact]] [[complete]] with its Technicolor scenes.

The [[purpose]] of the all-star revue was to showcase a particular studio's silent stars in speaking roles, and [[show]] that they could make the transition. [[However]], Warner Bros. seems to have forgotten this and employs many acts and stars that they didn't even have under long-term contract such as Ben Turpin, Lloyd Hamilton, Beatrice [[Lillie]], and even a marching band. Meanwhile, their [[biggest]] talent - Al Jolson - is noticeably absent. Even at a high salary he could not be compelled to join in. Almost every act is overly long and the film plays like a dozen or so Vitaphone [[shorts]] strung together with no continuity. The finale is also overly long, but it is [[really]] [[enjoyable]] with all of its dance numbers.

The highlights of the film are two numbers from Winnie Lightner - "Pingo Pongo" and "[[Singin]] in the [[Bathtub]]", a couple of numbers with Nick Lucas, John Barrymore performing Shakespeare, and the Chinese Fantasy "Li Po Li" with Nick Lucas and Myrna [[Loy]]. This last number is the only part of the film that survives in Technicolor, and it [[really]] is quite [[attractive]]. Reasonably enough, the players in these good acts were long-term Warner Bros. stars so perhaps the director knew how to play to their strengths since he was familiar with them.

This film acts as a snapshot at an odd point in film history - the year 1929, which was the bridge year between two eras - the silent and sound eras, and the roaring 20's and the Great Depression. Just two years later this same film would have had an entirely different cast, as Warner Bros. would abandon its silent era stars and the stars they hired just to produce the early musicals in favor of those stars that gave Warner Bros. its distinctive urban look and feel - James Cagney, Joan Blondell, Edward G. Robinson, and others. It is very [[difficult]] to [[rates]] this [[cinematography]]. As entertainment value for 21st century [[spectators]], it fails [[spectacularly]]. However, for the [[learners]] of early sound [[cinematography]] and [[stories]], it is a [[jewelry]]. "Show of [[Showings]]" was a revue filmed to [[rival]] with MGM's successful "Hollywood [[Magazine]] of 1929", which still survives [[uninjured]] [[finish]] with its Technicolor scenes.

The [[targeting]] of the all-star revue was to showcase a particular studio's silent stars in speaking roles, and [[displayed]] that they could make the transition. [[Still]], Warner Bros. seems to have forgotten this and employs many acts and stars that they didn't even have under long-term contract such as Ben Turpin, Lloyd Hamilton, Beatrice [[Mildred]], and even a marching band. Meanwhile, their [[strongest]] talent - Al Jolson - is noticeably absent. Even at a high salary he could not be compelled to join in. Almost every act is overly long and the film plays like a dozen or so Vitaphone [[underclothes]] strung together with no continuity. The finale is also overly long, but it is [[genuinely]] [[nice]] with all of its dance numbers.

The highlights of the film are two numbers from Winnie Lightner - "Pingo Pongo" and "[[Playin]] in the [[Bathhouse]]", a couple of numbers with Nick Lucas, John Barrymore performing Shakespeare, and the Chinese Fantasy "Li Po Li" with Nick Lucas and Myrna [[Lui]]. This last number is the only part of the film that survives in Technicolor, and it [[genuinely]] is quite [[tempting]]. Reasonably enough, the players in these good acts were long-term Warner Bros. stars so perhaps the director knew how to play to their strengths since he was familiar with them.

This film acts as a snapshot at an odd point in film history - the year 1929, which was the bridge year between two eras - the silent and sound eras, and the roaring 20's and the Great Depression. Just two years later this same film would have had an entirely different cast, as Warner Bros. would abandon its silent era stars and the stars they hired just to produce the early musicals in favor of those stars that gave Warner Bros. its distinctive urban look and feel - James Cagney, Joan Blondell, Edward G. Robinson, and others. --------------------------------------------- Result 725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sundown - featuring the weakest, dorkiest vampires ever seen, accompanied by one of the most unfitting, pretentious scores ever written - and with Shane the vampire, who's every move and spoken word was so ridiculous that I burst out laughing half the times and rolled my eyes the rest.

The vampires don't seem to have any special powers at all - except for strength (sometimes), being able to switch off a lamp with their mind (one time) and... that's it, really. Ever imagine count Dracula worriedly recoiling from a fight 'cause he ran out of bullets? Neither did I. Practically any other movie-Dracula would eat this one for breakfast, skin his followers and use their bones as toothpicks.

The main plot of the movie is that a human family of four gets caught up in a vampire gang fight - Dracula's vs. some old geezer's. It could have been some good old B-flick fun, but the overly dramatic music was clearly written by someone who took this movie a bit too seriously, and ends up ruining the remaining part of the movie not already ruined by clay bats, mediocre acting and the laughable screenplay.

In the end it's just too silly to be funny. Sure, it has some amusing moments, but they're few, and far apart. --------------------------------------------- Result 726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Basically]], a dentist husband-wife team and their 3 [[daughters]] deal with [[infidelity]]. The [[premise]] is interesting, the acting is [[good]], and the music, although [[sometimes]] abrupt and without direction, is pretty cool.

The [[problem]] is the plot. The [[husband]] dentist [[drops]] his [[wife]] off backstage at an opera before the show (she has a [[minor]] role) and then [[walks]] back in to [[give]] her [[something]], but sees her with another man. The rest of the movie deals with his angst about this episode, his visual [[hallucinations]] and a macho alter-ego (Denis Leary, a former [[patient]] of his) and his [[fear]] in confronting his [[wife]] lest he will have to "do [[something]] about it." I won't tell you the ending, but let me say that the film goes [[nowhere]] and the ending is like a sputtering whimper. The motivations of the characters are [[missing]]: Why is she cheating on him? He's a dentist, decent looking, good father. The film doesn't [[say]]. Who's she doing it with? Don't [[expect]] any answers on that either. Why does he [[want]] to keep the [[marriage]] going in [[spite]] of all this? [[Who]] knows. What purpose does all the kids [[vomiting]] serve? [[Where]] is this film [[going]]? Good performances by Campbell Scott and [[Hope]] Davis (and Denis Leary as [[comic]] relief)are [[completely]] wasted by this stilted [[nonsense]] which doesn't know if it [[wants]] to be American [[Beauty]] or a [[family]] film. A [[root]] [[canal]] is more interesting. [[Avoid]] it. [[Fundamentally]], a dentist husband-wife team and their 3 [[girl]] deal with [[disloyalty]]. The [[hypothesis]] is interesting, the acting is [[buena]], and the music, although [[intermittently]] abrupt and without direction, is pretty cool.

The [[troubles]] is the plot. The [[hubby]] dentist [[descartes]] his [[femme]] off backstage at an opera before the show (she has a [[small]] role) and then [[walking]] back in to [[confer]] her [[somethin]], but sees her with another man. The rest of the movie deals with his angst about this episode, his visual [[daydreams]] and a macho alter-ego (Denis Leary, a former [[ailing]] of his) and his [[fright]] in confronting his [[woman]] lest he will have to "do [[anything]] about it." I won't tell you the ending, but let me say that the film goes [[somewhere]] and the ending is like a sputtering whimper. The motivations of the characters are [[faded]]: Why is she cheating on him? He's a dentist, decent looking, good father. The film doesn't [[tell]]. Who's she doing it with? Don't [[waits]] any answers on that either. Why does he [[wish]] to keep the [[marry]] going in [[sadness]] of all this? [[Whose]] knows. What purpose does all the kids [[barf]] serve? [[Whenever]] is this film [[go]]? Good performances by Campbell Scott and [[Hopes]] Davis (and Denis Leary as [[humorous]] relief)are [[absolutely]] wasted by this stilted [[claptrap]] which doesn't know if it [[wanting]] to be American [[Beaut]] or a [[families]] film. A [[racine]] [[channels]] is more interesting. [[Forestall]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Steve Carell has [[made]] a career out of portraying the [[slightly]] [[odd]] straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various [[supporting]] roles. In Virgin, Carell has [[found]] a [[clever]] and [[hilarious]] script that [[perfectly]] capitalizes on his [[strengths]]. Carell plays Andy Stitzer, a middle aged [[man]] [[living]] a [[quiet]], [[lonely]] life. Andy is a [[little]] [[odd]], but in an awkward [[nice]] guy [[sort]] of [[way]]. One [[night]], while socializing with his co-workers for the first time, Andy [[accidentally]] [[reveals]] that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David ([[Paul]] [[Rudd]]), [[Jay]] ([[Romany]] Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease Andy about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent [[human]] being that [[Andy]] is, and they [[resolve]] to [[help]] him out by [[assisting]] him in ending his virginity. And so [[begins]] Andy's quest into [[adulthood]]. [[Andy]] is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the [[humor]] derives from his naiveté to the [[situations]] he [[finds]] himself in [[throughout]] the film. Some of the [[humor]] is [[crude]] gross out stuff, but most of it is just well [[done]] [[intelligent]] [[comedy]]. [[In]] [[addition]], I [[found]] some parts of the [[film]] actually pretty [[touching]] as [[Andy]] finds himself [[developing]] both romantic [[relationships]] and [[friendships]] [[perhaps]] for the first time in his [[life]]. I'm not [[trying]] to portray the movie as a love story or a [[drama]]; it's a [[rolling]] in your seats [[comedy]]. [[Still]], [[every]] good [[comedy]] I have ever seen contains enough [[heart]] for you to [[care]] about the [[characters]]. A good comparison would be 'The [[Wedding]] Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a [[similar]] [[humor]], but is [[perhaps]] a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I [[particularly]] [[loved]] the [[ending]] of the [[film]], which I [[thought]] was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of '[[Something]] About Mary'. [[Very]] light and fun; it [[leaves]] you [[laughing]] and [[smiling]], which is [[exactly]] how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I [[would]] [[highly]] [[recommend]]. Steve Carell has [[brought]] a career out of portraying the [[moderately]] [[unusual]] straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various [[aiding]] roles. In Virgin, Carell has [[find]] a [[smarter]] and [[funny]] script that [[entirely]] capitalizes on his [[fortresses]]. Carell plays Andy Stitzer, a middle aged [[dude]] [[residing]] a [[silent]], [[alone]] life. Andy is a [[petit]] [[unusual]], but in an awkward [[enjoyable]] guy [[genre]] of [[pathway]]. One [[nocturne]], while socializing with his co-workers for the first time, Andy [[inadvertently]] [[illustrates]] that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David ([[Paulo]] [[Rode]]), [[Jae]] ([[Pikey]] Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease Andy about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent [[mankind]] being that [[Indie]] is, and they [[solve]] to [[helps]] him out by [[helps]] him in ending his virginity. And so [[beginning]] Andy's quest into [[mature]]. [[Indie]] is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the [[comedy]] derives from his naiveté to the [[instances]] he [[discoveries]] himself in [[in]] the film. Some of the [[humour]] is [[rough]] gross out stuff, but most of it is just well [[doing]] [[smart]] [[comedian]]. [[During]] [[supplement]], I [[find]] some parts of the [[films]] actually pretty [[affects]] as [[Indie]] finds himself [[drafting]] both romantic [[ties]] and [[friends]] [[presumably]] for the first time in his [[lifetime]]. I'm not [[attempting]] to portray the movie as a love story or a [[theater]]; it's a [[roll]] in your seats [[comedian]]. [[However]], [[any]] good [[parody]] I have ever seen contains enough [[heartland]] for you to [[healthcare]] about the [[features]]. A good comparison would be 'The [[Wed]] Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a [[analogous]] [[comedy]], but is [[presumably]] a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I [[principally]] [[cared]] the [[ended]] of the [[cinematography]], which I [[ideology]] was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of '[[Anything]] About Mary'. [[Quite]] light and fun; it [[departs]] you [[kidding]] and [[grinning]], which is [[accurately]] how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I [[could]] [[hugely]] [[recommends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I give it a 2 is that filmography is so stylized these days such that it has at least something to comment on.

This film is asinine. It's like so many other 21st century grind house fodder. The gore is gratuitous and simply revolting. I didn't care about any of the characters, but I did care that some cretin bothered to pen this crap: I'd complain about the money I spent, but my date and I wisely left after 40 minutes and went to an adjoining theater to watch the adventurous and entertaining "Live Free or Die Hard," which probably got a much higher rating from me simply because I endured the utter poop of "Captivity" for 40 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 729 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Have you seen The Graduate? It was hailed as the movie of its generation. But A River Runs Through It is the story about all generations. Long before Dustin Hoffman's character got all wrapped up in the traps of modern suburbia, Norman Maclean and his brother Paul were facing the same crushing pressures of growing up as they tried to find their place in the world. But how could a place like post WW1 Montana be a showcase for the American family, at a time when the Wild West still was not completely gone? Just what has Maclean tapped into that strikes so deeply at who we all are and what we have to go through to find ourselves? As the movie opens, Norman is an old man, flyfishing beside a rushing river, trying to understand the course his own life has taken. The movie is literally a journey up through his own stream of consciousness, against time's current and back to when he was a boy. He and his younger brother Paul were the sons of a Presbyterian minister and devoted mother. The parents fit snugly into their roles. Mom takes care of house and home. Dad does the work of the Lord. The boys ponder what they will be when they grow up. Norm has it narrowed down to a boxer or a minister like his dad. Given the choice, little Paul would be the boxer, since he's told his first choice of pro flyfisherman doesn't even exist. The boys grow up and get into trouble with their pranks, fight to see who is tougher and do the things brothers do, all the while attending church and taking part in all other spiritual matters like flyfishing. They are at similar points in their lives before college. But when Norm returns from his six years at Dartmouth, things are very different. Paul is at the top of his game. Master flyfisherman. Grad of a nearby college and newspaper reporter who knows every cop on the beat and every judge on the bench. Norman is stunningly well educated for his day but has little idea what to do with his life, even as his father grills him about what he intends to do. You're left feeling that at least to Pops, God will call you to your life's work. But you have to stay open and ready to receive it -- all your life. Father has always taken his boys to reflect by the side of the river and contemplate God's eternal words. "Listen," their father urges. It's both Zen and Quakerly. Pretty radical for a stoic clergyman. But with all the beauty and contemplation, and even though the Macleans are truly a God-fearing, scripture-heeding household, how is it that Rev. Maclean's family is unraveling? Paul is true perfection as he fishes the river, but he's feeling the pull of gambling and boozing, while his family doesn't know how to keep him from winding up where he seems to be headed. Mom, Dad and Brother all seem to have the same quiet desperation of not knowing what they should be doing and why they can't seem to help. Pauly just waves it all off with a grin and his irresistible charm. But the junior brother is losing his grip. Norman starts getting his life on track, finding love and career, but Paul continues to slide. The family that loves him watches helplessly. Mother, Father, Brother flounder in their own ways trying to help, but none very effectively. How can a family that loves each other so much be so ill-equipped to handle this? How can someone be so artful and full of grace when out in God's nature, yet be somehow unfit or unwilling to fit into the constructs of society that God's peoples have made for themselves? These are all questions Norman will ponder his entire life. The eternal words beneath the smooth stones of the river forever haunt him, yet keep their secrets. The movie is beautiful to watch. This is certainly God's country, and filming it won an Oscar. Director Robert Redford plays with the story from the book and teases the narration a bit to follow the emotional pattern he's presenting, and it works well. But do go back and read the book, too. You'll see Norman made connections with his old man even deeper than the movie can suggest -- and you'll see the places where the storyteller's very words gurgle and sing right off the page with an exuberance of a river running through it, leading into the unknown. --------------------------------------------- Result 730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'The Omen 4: The Awakening' is a made-for-television sequel to the original 'The Omen' film. Instead of Satan possessing the body of a little boy, he possesses the body of a little girl adopted by rich parents, who is bullied at school and who ends up getting revenge against those who do her wrong. The film seems to struggle with any horror factor, and a lot of the events that happen are simply silly rather than particularly frightening, and it is difficult to believe that this little girl is Satan, even with all of the events that surround it. I just did not find this film very suspenseful or frightening, particularly when compared to the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[City]] Hall takes on the politics of a city rather than country, state or any sort of major political table. Granted it [[shines]] on New York City which is a huge political arena, especially nowadays, but it [[still]] goes for a smaller scale and [[puts]] the microscope on a few key players in a [[city]] [[wide]] scandal stumbled on by the mayor's right hand. Director Harold Becker is a director very familiar with [[elements]] of the thriller having done Mercury [[Rising]], [[Malice]], and [[Domestic]] [[Disturbance]] and I [[think]] in [[many]] [[ways]] he incorporates so many of the formulaic thriller [[genre]] that its [[almost]] to a fault. I [[mean]] [[City]] Hall is [[meant]] to be a [[political]] [[drama]], not a thriller but [[instead]] when all is [[said]] and [[done]] and once you get to the meat and potatoes of the [[film]] it [[feels]] and [[looks]] like a thriller but a decent one at that with very [[important]] [[part]] of the [[recipe]] that [[immediately]] makes it [[stand]] out...what else...or rather who else...Al Pacino. The [[film]] begins by giving you a really good [[look]] at [[life]] in the mayoral office and the [[inner]] workings of the [[city]]. As the [[film]] [[continues]] it broadens its [[political]] [[spectrum]] to [[include]] a [[democratic]] [[boss]], and his [[connections]] and then we are [[introduced]] to some of the goings on [[within]] the [[city]]. As [[events]] unfold a mystery begins and the political aspect is [[kind]] of left in the [[background]] but it [[still]] has a brilliant set up.

I [[absolutely]] hate talking about Al Pacino. I [[mean]] [[even]] if ONCE he didn't give a good performance how [[could]] I ever [[say]] it? The [[man]] is acting [[royalty]]. There is just [[something]] [[brilliant]] about his entire [[demeanor]]. [[In]] [[City]] [[Hall]] Pacino plays the [[New]] York [[City]] mayor. He has a sense of [[duty]] and honor and immediately appears to be a very upstanding politician. He also delivers one of the most [[powerful]] and outright engaging speeches I've ever [[seen]] at the 'James Bone' [[Funeral]]. I re-watched that [[speech]] four [[times]] and the [[first]] [[time]] I watched Pacino give it, my mouth gaped open and I [[almost]] wanted to stand up and [[applaud]]. Its [[brilliantly]] [[written]] and brilliantly delivered by [[Pacino]]. [[John]] Cusack, who I really do enjoy as an actor, turns in a mediocre and overdone performance as the deputy Mayor Kevin Calhoun. He is kind of the focus of the film and him and Pacino have good chemistry together when they are on screen but there is just something in this performance...he seems like he's trying too hard. His accent is just bizarre, and although he is supposed to be cutthroat and intimidating he doesn't get seem to pull it off. Maybe he was having an off film. Bridget Fonda, on her way out of her high point stardom does an okay job as attorney for police widows Marybeth Cogan. Her performance is very similar to Cusack's in that she just doesn't seem to find her groove with this character. Danny Aiello is terrific although his character is a little under explored as democratic boss with ties to the mafia Frank Anselmo. Martin Landau makes a decent cameo as Judge under scrutiny Walter Stern.

The problem with City Hall is evident in my review of the characters and actors. Everyone is...okay. There is a lot of back story that they try to bring out without actually showing it and it unfortunately leaves you just a little bit confused about the whole conspiracy. And of course you have Al Pacino in a rather small supporting role but he's absolutely brilliant at it and outshines and overshadows every other actor in the film. It almost feels like maybe they are intimidated by him being on screen with them. So City Hall could have been this huge political epic drama/thriller but it felt cut and toned down to an average run of the mill one BUT it still has to be seen for Pacino and a different spin on the inner working of politics. If you just won't see this movie than find Pacino's speech at James Bone funeral because the word electrifying doesn't seem to give it justice but you can see what makes Al Pacino so incredible because in a mediocre film he pulls out this wallop of a speech and makes you feel it. If you're a John Cusack fan which I am...he's definitely done better but he is the main character and all in all he does get his justice. A decent movie but unfortunately potential loss. 7.5/10 [[Ville]] Hall takes on the politics of a city rather than country, state or any sort of major political table. Granted it [[glows]] on New York City which is a huge political arena, especially nowadays, but it [[nevertheless]] goes for a smaller scale and [[begs]] the microscope on a few key players in a [[town]] [[broad]] scandal stumbled on by the mayor's right hand. Director Harold Becker is a director very familiar with [[components]] of the thriller having done Mercury [[Rises]], [[Mischief]], and [[Internally]] [[Unrest]] and I [[reckon]] in [[various]] [[modes]] he incorporates so many of the formulaic thriller [[type]] that its [[nearly]] to a fault. I [[meaning]] [[Ville]] Hall is [[intended]] to be a [[politician]] [[theatrical]], not a thriller but [[however]] when all is [[told]] and [[performed]] and once you get to the meat and potatoes of the [[cinematography]] it [[believes]] and [[seem]] like a thriller but a decent one at that with very [[momentous]] [[parties]] of the [[recipes]] that [[promptly]] makes it [[standing]] out...what else...or rather who else...Al Pacino. The [[cinematography]] begins by giving you a really good [[glance]] at [[lifetime]] in the mayoral office and the [[internally]] workings of the [[ville]]. As the [[movie]] [[persisted]] it broadens its [[politician]] [[spectral]] to [[containing]] a [[congo]] [[chef]], and his [[connector]] and then we are [[lodged]] to some of the goings on [[inside]] the [[town]]. As [[event]] unfold a mystery begins and the political aspect is [[genera]] of left in the [[backdrop]] but it [[yet]] has a brilliant set up.

I [[fully]] hate talking about Al Pacino. I [[meaning]] [[yet]] if ONCE he didn't give a good performance how [[would]] I ever [[told]] it? The [[men]] is acting [[royalties]]. There is just [[anything]] [[wondrous]] about his entire [[behaviour]]. [[At]] [[Town]] [[Salle]] Pacino plays the [[Nuevo]] York [[Ville]] mayor. He has a sense of [[duties]] and honor and immediately appears to be a very upstanding politician. He also delivers one of the most [[forceful]] and outright engaging speeches I've ever [[noticed]] at the 'James Bone' [[Burials]]. I re-watched that [[sermons]] four [[moments]] and the [[outset]] [[period]] I watched Pacino give it, my mouth gaped open and I [[hardly]] wanted to stand up and [[praising]]. Its [[brightly]] [[wrote]] and brilliantly delivered by [[Deniro]]. [[Johannes]] Cusack, who I really do enjoy as an actor, turns in a mediocre and overdone performance as the deputy Mayor Kevin Calhoun. He is kind of the focus of the film and him and Pacino have good chemistry together when they are on screen but there is just something in this performance...he seems like he's trying too hard. His accent is just bizarre, and although he is supposed to be cutthroat and intimidating he doesn't get seem to pull it off. Maybe he was having an off film. Bridget Fonda, on her way out of her high point stardom does an okay job as attorney for police widows Marybeth Cogan. Her performance is very similar to Cusack's in that she just doesn't seem to find her groove with this character. Danny Aiello is terrific although his character is a little under explored as democratic boss with ties to the mafia Frank Anselmo. Martin Landau makes a decent cameo as Judge under scrutiny Walter Stern.

The problem with City Hall is evident in my review of the characters and actors. Everyone is...okay. There is a lot of back story that they try to bring out without actually showing it and it unfortunately leaves you just a little bit confused about the whole conspiracy. And of course you have Al Pacino in a rather small supporting role but he's absolutely brilliant at it and outshines and overshadows every other actor in the film. It almost feels like maybe they are intimidated by him being on screen with them. So City Hall could have been this huge political epic drama/thriller but it felt cut and toned down to an average run of the mill one BUT it still has to be seen for Pacino and a different spin on the inner working of politics. If you just won't see this movie than find Pacino's speech at James Bone funeral because the word electrifying doesn't seem to give it justice but you can see what makes Al Pacino so incredible because in a mediocre film he pulls out this wallop of a speech and makes you feel it. If you're a John Cusack fan which I am...he's definitely done better but he is the main character and all in all he does get his justice. A decent movie but unfortunately potential loss. 7.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The emotional powers and characters of Dominick and Eugene are the things that Hollywood doesn't make anymore. This is one of the most emotional, sensitive, and heart-felt movies that I have ever seen! Roy Liotta, Tom Hulce, and supporting actress Jamie Lee Curtis, deliver Oscar Winning caliber performances! There are not enough words to express how great this movie is. Sure, people who are not into sentimental movies may not care as much as the rest of us about Dominick and Eugene, but for the rest of us, this movie goes right to the heart and sole of compassion and humanity. You will never forget this film, EVER!

*****SPOILERS BELOW*****

The simple yet eloquent story is masterfully told. Eugene is a med-school intern who faces long hours and a demanding work load at the hospital. His fraternal twin brother Dominick (born 12 minutes earlier) is a little slow and awkward because of brain damage due to a victim of abuse by their father. (A heartbreaking moment when this is found out in the film that will leave you in tears!) Eugene (a.k.a "Geno") faces a painful dilemma. He must decide whether to finish medical school, which would mean accepting his residency in another city and leave Dominick (a.k.a "Nicky") behind, or forfeit the rest of his education to take care of him. Nicky helps pay his brother's med-school tuition by working as a trash collector.

The questions of ethics, morals, and responsibilities are masterfully blended in this landmark movie. Just when Gino thinks Nicky might be making progress toward independence, Dominick turns around and winds up doing things like helping out a drug dealer, or tying to use a faulty cord that he finds at the dump on an electrical appliance.

Larry, is "The Character" and Nicky's partner on his garbage route who fills gullible Dominick's head with all kinds of stories like Geno and Jennifer (his girlfriend, whom he is tutoring in Clinical Pharmacology) going to Atlantic City and gambling away all their money. But deep down, you can see that Larry cares for him. On their rounds, Nicky also befriends a little boy, whom we find out has also been beaten by his father. An end result is also tragic and the pain that you see on Nicky's face when it happens, speaks volumes.

The sensitivity that the two brothers share for each other can not be overstated enough. All Nicky wants to do is be loved and look for acceptance in anyway he can. (i.e he goes to church, loves Hulk Hogan) Geno loves Nicky more than anything in the world. But can his brother become independent enough so that Geno can pursue his dream of becoming a doctor? A brilliant film that should have gotten tons more recognition than it deserved, but unfortunately came out around the same time as Rain Man, which dealt with a similar issue. However, I like Dominick and Eugene better because it has a far stronger emotional component. Be forewarned that this movie is aimed right at the tear-ducts, so have Kleenex handy! What a film!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] SPOILER [[WARNING]]: There are some [[minor]] spoilers in this review. Don't read it beyond the first paragraph if you [[plan]] on seeing the [[film]].

The [[Disney]] [[Channel]] currently has a [[policy]] to make [[loads]] of [[movies]] and [[show]] one a [[month]] on the [[cable]] [[channel]]. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few good [[elements]] but [[still]] being a [[disappointment]] (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From [[Planet]] Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make [[something]] really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a [[real]] [[stinker]]. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and [[worse]] acting. [[Apparently]], `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the [[holiday]], because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV [[Guide]], so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.

The [[plot]] was more far-fetched than [[normal]]. I [[usually]] [[let]] that slide, but here it just goes too far. [[Matthew]] Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his [[dad]] is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where [[kids]] all [[around]] the world can find and send him a [[dollar]] to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole [[concept]] is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, [[Matthew]] opens his own company's [[bank]] [[account]] and buys up most of his dad's business's [[stock]]. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his [[dad]], but instead [[presents]] himself at board [[meetings]] as a cartoon [[image]] through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.

There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10. SPOILER [[ALERT]]: There are some [[smaller]] spoilers in this review. Don't read it beyond the first paragraph if you [[plans]] on seeing the [[filmmaking]].

The [[Disneyland]] [[Canals]] currently has a [[policies]] to make [[burden]] of [[movie]] and [[illustrating]] one a [[months]] on the [[cables]] [[channels]]. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few good [[facets]] but [[however]] being a [[displeasure]] (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From [[Planetary]] Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make [[somethings]] really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a [[veritable]] [[tosser]]. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and [[lousiest]] acting. [[Visibly]], `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the [[vacations]], because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV [[Guides]], so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.

The [[intrigue]] was more far-fetched than [[ordinary]]. I [[fluently]] [[leave]] that slide, but here it just goes too far. [[Mathew]] Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his [[daddy]] is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where [[children]] all [[throughout]] the world can find and send him a [[usd]] to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole [[conception]] is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, [[Mathieu]] opens his own company's [[banque]] [[accounting]] and buys up most of his dad's business's [[stocks]]. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his [[poppa]], but instead [[exposes]] himself at board [[meeting]] as a cartoon [[photo]] through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.

There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the last of four swashbucklers from France I've scheduled for viewing during this Christmas season: the others (in order of viewing) were the uninspired THE BLACK TULIP (1964; from the same director as this one but not nearly as good), the surprisingly effective LADY Oscar (1979; which had originated as a Japanese manga!) and the splendid CARTOUCHE (1962). Actually, I had watched this one not too long ago on late-night Italian TV and recall not being especially bowled over by it, so that I was genuinely surprised by how much I enjoyed it this time around (also bearing in mind the baffling lack of enthusiasm shown towards the film here and elsewhere when it was first announced as an upcoming DVD release from Criterion).

Incidentally, FANFAN LA TULIPE has quite a bit in common with the afore-mentioned CARTOUCHE: not just cast and crew members (producers Georges Dancigers and Alexandre Mnouchkine, cinematographer Christian Matras, actor Noel Roquevert) but plot-wise as well – in fact, the hero is a womanizing soldier (Jean-Paul Belmondo's Cartouche had also had a brief military spell) who's loved by a fiery girl (in this case, gypsy Gina Lollobrigida) while he's himself obsessed by an impossible love (here, it's none other than the king's daughter)! As in the later film, too, Fanfan (an ideally cast Gerard Philipe who, ironically, is so full of life here that one finds it hard to believe that he would be stricken down by cancer within 7 years' time) is flanked by two fun-loving yet cowardly men (one of them is actually his superior officer and the heroine's own father) and opposed by an unscrupulous figure within his own ranks (the ageing Roquevert, with whom the hero eventually engages in a rooftop duel since he too has amorous designs on the gypsy girl)!; for the record, Lollobrigida will rejoin Philippe in her next film, Rene Clair's delightful romantic fantasy LES BELLES DE NUIT (1952).

FANFAN proved to be a big box-office hit on its home-ground and even copped a surprising (but well-deserved) Best Direction award at Cannes over more renowned films like AN American IN Paris (1951), DETECTIVE STORY (1951), OTHELLO, UMBERTO D. and VIVA ZAPATA! In fact, its popularity ensured its re-release in a computer-colored version (presumably for the benefit of viewers who wouldn't touch a black-and-white product with a ten-foot pole) and the Criterion DVD itself contains a sample from this variant; being obviously a foreign-language title, there's also the dubious choice of an English-dubbed soundtrack but, even if these proved not especially painful to sit through considering, when all is said and done, there's simply no substitute for the original!

FANFAN LA TULIPE (a nickname given the hero by a young Genevieve Page as the celebrated Madame De Pompadour) contains about as much comedy as (the expected) action and romance; while some may find this overwhelming, I don't agree myself as I enjoyed the sharply satirical narration and, on the whole, this combination is comparable with Jerzy Skolimowski's equally droll THE ADVENTURES OF GERARD (1970). That said, the swordfights here are remarkably forceful for an essentially lighthearted enterprise (particularly a scuffle in the woods and the ambush at a convent) and the film itself rather adult at times (with numerous allusions to sexuality as well as coarse language adopted throughout) when viewed back-to-back with vintage Hollywood fare as I did now; the climax, then is quite ingenious: the enemy forces (who, amusingly, are made to speak in speeded-up gibberish!) are depleted by our heroic trio alone, much to the king's amazement who, as portrayed by Marcel Herrand – best-known for his role of leader of the Parisian underworld in Marcel Carne''s CHILDREN OF PARADISE (1945) – is himself something of a lecher.

P.S. An Italian TV channel has been threatening to screen Christian-Jaque's promising CHAMPAGNE FOR SAVAGES (1964) for months now but, despite programming it three times already (with a tentative fourth one slated for next week), they have yet to show it; even so, I do have three more films of his in my unwatched VHS pile (equally culled from late-night Italian TV screenings): the three-hour epic LA CHARTREUSE DE PARME (1948; also starring Gerard Philippe), THE SECOND TWIN (1967) and THE LEGEND OF FRENCHIE KING (1971; with Brigitte Bardot and Claudia Cardinale). --------------------------------------------- Result 735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Even]] in the 21st century, child-bearing is [[dangerous]]: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five years ago, it was not uncommon for [[women]] to die during [[childbirth]]. That is the [[theme]] of "[[Life]] [[Begins]]": a [[look]] at the "[[difficult]] cases" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta [[Young]] plays the lead, a [[woman]] [[brought]] here from [[prison]] (what [[crime]] she committed is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's [[conflicted]] about the fact she's going to have to [[give]] her [[baby]] up after birth. She's in a ward with [[several]] other women, who [[share]] their [[joys]] and [[pain]] with each other.

[[Although]] Loretta Young is the lead, the [[outstanding]] performance, as [[usual]], is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's "B" [[women]] in the 1930s, [[showing]] up [[quite]] a bit in [[supporting]] roles, and [[sometimes]] [[getting]] the lead in B [[movies]] (Farrell played Torchy Blane in [[several]] installments of the "Torchy" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant [[mother]] who doesn't want her [[children]], [[since]] they'll only [[get]] in the [[way]]. She does everything she can to get in the [[way]] of the [[nurses]], [[including]] [[smuggling]] [[liquor]] into the ward (this of course during the [[Prohibition]] [[days]]), and [[drinking]] like a fish -- [[apparently]] they'd never [[heard]] of fetal [[alcohol]] syndrome back in the 30s.

Interestingly, unlike most [[movie]] of the [[early]] 1930s, it's not the [[women]] being bumbling idiots [[getting]] in the [[way]] of the [[heroic]] men -- that situation is [[reversed]], with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran [[character]] [[actor]] Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) "[[Life]] [[Begins]]", being an early talkie, [[treats]] the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's [[quite]] a [[charming]] [[little]] [[movie]]. Turner [[Classic]] [[show]] it, [[albeit]] infrequently; I've only seen it show up on a few days [[honoring]] Loretta [[Young]]. But it's [[highly]] [[recommended]] viewing when it does show up. [[Yet]] in the 21st century, child-bearing is [[risky]]: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five years ago, it was not uncommon for [[femmes]] to die during [[pregnancy]]. That is the [[topic]] of "[[Vie]] [[Launch]]": a [[gaze]] at the "[[laborious]] cases" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta [[Jeune]] plays the lead, a [[women]] [[lodged]] here from [[incarceration]] (what [[offence]] she committed is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's [[contested]] about the fact she's going to have to [[lend]] her [[babies]] up after birth. She's in a ward with [[multiple]] other women, who [[exchanges]] their [[pleasures]] and [[pains]] with each other.

[[Despite]] Loretta Young is the lead, the [[unresolved]] performance, as [[ordinary]], is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's "B" [[daughters]] in the 1930s, [[shows]] up [[utterly]] a bit in [[assisting]] roles, and [[occasionally]] [[obtain]] the lead in B [[films]] (Farrell played Torchy Blane in [[numerous]] installments of the "Torchy" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant [[mothers]] who doesn't want her [[infant]], [[because]] they'll only [[obtain]] in the [[routes]]. She does everything she can to get in the [[route]] of the [[nursing]], [[comprising]] [[trafficking]] [[spirits]] into the ward (this of course during the [[Prohibit]] [[jours]]), and [[beverage]] like a fish -- [[clearly]] they'd never [[listened]] of fetal [[ethanol]] syndrome back in the 30s.

Interestingly, unlike most [[films]] of the [[swift]] 1930s, it's not the [[females]] being bumbling idiots [[obtain]] in the [[manner]] of the [[heroes]] men -- that situation is [[reversal]], with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran [[nature]] [[actress]] Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) "[[Vida]] [[Outset]]", being an early talkie, [[discusses]] the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's [[rather]] a [[cute]] [[tiny]] [[movies]]. Turner [[Conventional]] [[showing]] it, [[whereas]] infrequently; I've only seen it show up on a few days [[honoured]] Loretta [[Youth]]. But it's [[heavily]] [[suggested]] viewing when it does show up. --------------------------------------------- Result 736 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this movie. It's wacky, funny, violent, surreal, played out in a madman's head, and definitely not your usual comedy.

If you don't find the film amusing then I guess it's just not for your tastes, so this is a tough one to write a review for.

For reference, some other comedies I love are The Big Lebowski, The Princess Bride, and Zoolander (that one only got me the second time around). There are others, but my taste is definitely for the unusual, and I am willing to accept that most people just don't tend to like that kind of thing. I make no apologies for having an unusual sense of humour - at least I have one.

The scenes and characters of this particular movie are well put together, the verbal humour is hilarious, the situations are intriguing, the acting is very good (as you would expect of the cast), though the acting demands made of the cast by the script are not particularly high. The overall package makes for fun, funny, watchable yet violent entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have been a Hindi movie buff since the age of 4 but never in my life have a watched such a moving and impacting movie, especially as a Hindi film. In the past several years, I had stopped watching contemporary Hindi movies and reverted to watching the classics (Teesri Kasam, Mere Huzoor, Madhumati, Mother India, Sholay, etc.) But this movie changed everything. It is one of the best movies I have ever seen. I found it not only to be moving but also found it to be very educational for someone who is a first generation Indian woman growing up in America. It helped me to understand my own family history, which was always something very abstract to me. But, to "see" it, feel it and understand it helped me to sympathize with the generations before me and the struggle that Indian people endured. The film helped to put many things into perspective for me, especially considering the current world events. I never thought that a movie could change the way I think like this before... it did. The plot is fantastic, the acting superb and the direction is flawless. Two thumbs up! --------------------------------------------- Result 738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Mitchell Leisen's fifth [[feature]] as director, and he [[shows]] his versatility by directing a musical, after his [[previous]] movies were heavy [[dramas]]. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.

You can [[tell]] it is a pre [[code]] [[movie]], and [[nothing]] like it was [[made]] in the US for [[quite]] a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would [[see]] - no widescreen [[shots]] or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.

As others have [[mentioned]] the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however [[provides]] a bit of [[spark]].

The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and [[faked]] - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better. Mitchell Leisen's fifth [[characteristics]] as director, and he [[exposition]] his versatility by directing a musical, after his [[anterior]] movies were heavy [[drama]]. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.

You can [[telling]] it is a pre [[cipher]] [[cinematography]], and [[anything]] like it was [[introduced]] in the US for [[altogether]] a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would [[seeing]] - no widescreen [[punches]] or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.

As others have [[talked]] the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however [[gives]] a bit of [[ignites]].

The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and [[falsified]] - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better. --------------------------------------------- Result 739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just a few words.... This movie really sucks. It's like those TV Movies with bad cast and plot. It's amazing how they could make this sequel worse than the III. Don't waste your time watching this crap, even if you like the tremors movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[saw]] it at the [[Legacy]] [[Theater]] in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in [[Salt]] Lake City this morning. I'm going to assume that one's level of enjoyment during this movie will [[largely]] be [[based]] on one's level of acceptance of Joseph's story.

However, that [[aside]] it was very well made, well acted, and had a nice [[score]]. If you get to Salt Lake City, it is a [[must]] to see it in the [[Legacy]] Theater. I have never been in a nicer theater as far as [[picture]] quality, sound quality and [[ambiance]] in my entire life...I wonder if the Church would [[let]] me watch Batman [[Begins]] there! Being that I'm LDS and regard [[Joseph]] as a prophet, I was [[touched]] in several [[places]] and was brought to tears quite a few times...which I presume is expected since they handed out tissues BEFORE the movie [[started]]! [[Anyway]], I'm told that this [[film]] is available in [[several]] LDS Visitor Centers around the [[globe]], if you have 70 minutes [[check]] it out because whether you believe [[Joseph]] Smith or not, he [[tells]] a [[fascinating]] [[story]]. I [[noticed]] it at the [[Inherit]] [[Theatrical]] in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in [[Saline]] Lake City this morning. I'm going to assume that one's level of enjoyment during this movie will [[substantially]] be [[predicated]] on one's level of acceptance of Joseph's story.

However, that [[sideways]] it was very well made, well acted, and had a nice [[scoring]]. If you get to Salt Lake City, it is a [[should]] to see it in the [[Inheritance]] Theater. I have never been in a nicer theater as far as [[image]] quality, sound quality and [[ambience]] in my entire life...I wonder if the Church would [[letting]] me watch Batman [[Beginning]] there! Being that I'm LDS and regard [[Jozef]] as a prophet, I was [[poked]] in several [[spaces]] and was brought to tears quite a few times...which I presume is expected since they handed out tissues BEFORE the movie [[starts]]! [[Writ]], I'm told that this [[cinematography]] is available in [[myriad]] LDS Visitor Centers around the [[orb]], if you have 70 minutes [[verify]] it out because whether you believe [[Jozef]] Smith or not, he [[narrates]] a [[riveting]] [[histories]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This could be [[looked]] at in [[many]] [[different]] ways. This movie sucks, its good or its just [[plain]] weird. The third one [[probably]] explains this [[movie]] best. It has [[strange]] [[themes]] and just has a [[strange]] [[plot]]. So who else but [[Christopher]] Walken would [[play]] in this no [[matter]] how [[bad]], average or even how good it might be.

The acting was what you would [[expect]] especially out of [[Ben]] Stiller. Jack Black I have always [[liked]] so you know what you will get out of him but this is not bad. Christopher Walken is always off the wall. He is always enjoyable to watch no matter how bad the movie is. Comedy wise it is [[somewhat]] funny. This of course meaning that it does have its moments (though very few) but can get a little over top here and there which makes me feel like the movie is just desperate for laughs but of course not in a good way.

The directing was average as well. Barry Levinson is a slightly overrated director and really did not do a good job here. This movie seemed that it had a lot more potential and he did not do much to reach it. Just very average and did not seem like a lot of effort was put into making this film.

The writing is the key to a good comedy. Obviously that means the writing here failed. At best it is below average. Considering it does have its moments it was not too horrible. That is never a good thing to say about a movie though.

If not for Christopher Walken and it stupid ridiculous ending I would have given it a lower rating. He is always quite a character in his movies. Stil this is just a whacked out strange movie with strange characters that really don't go anywhere. Not completely horrible but I would not really recommend it though because it is a very forgettable movie. This could be [[seemed]] at in [[various]] [[various]] ways. This movie sucks, its good or its just [[lowlands]] weird. The third one [[assuredly]] explains this [[filmmaking]] best. It has [[unusual]] [[matters]] and just has a [[weird]] [[intrigue]]. So who else but [[Cristobal]] Walken would [[gaming]] in this no [[issue]] how [[unfavorable]], average or even how good it might be.

The acting was what you would [[awaited]] especially out of [[Bin]] Stiller. Jack Black I have always [[enjoyed]] so you know what you will get out of him but this is not bad. Christopher Walken is always off the wall. He is always enjoyable to watch no matter how bad the movie is. Comedy wise it is [[rather]] funny. This of course meaning that it does have its moments (though very few) but can get a little over top here and there which makes me feel like the movie is just desperate for laughs but of course not in a good way.

The directing was average as well. Barry Levinson is a slightly overrated director and really did not do a good job here. This movie seemed that it had a lot more potential and he did not do much to reach it. Just very average and did not seem like a lot of effort was put into making this film.

The writing is the key to a good comedy. Obviously that means the writing here failed. At best it is below average. Considering it does have its moments it was not too horrible. That is never a good thing to say about a movie though.

If not for Christopher Walken and it stupid ridiculous ending I would have given it a lower rating. He is always quite a character in his movies. Stil this is just a whacked out strange movie with strange characters that really don't go anywhere. Not completely horrible but I would not really recommend it though because it is a very forgettable movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] There's something [[compelling]] and [[strangely]] [[believable]] about this episode. From the very [[beginning]], an [[atmosphere]] of tension is [[created]] by the [[knowledge]] that a certain [[planet]] is going to [[explode]] [[within]] a few [[hours]]. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have beamed down to [[evacuate]] the [[inhabitants]], all of whom [[seem]] to have left already for parts [[unknown]], except for an [[elderly]] librarian.

The librarian's polite but cryptic [[advice]] about where all the citizens have gone to is interrupted by a [[crisis]] in which all three [[Enterprise]] crew members [[find]] themselves [[unexpectedly]] hurled into [[different]] eras of the planet's past. [[Kirk]] [[finds]] himself in a [[time]] [[period]] [[resembling]] 17th Century [[England]], while Spock and McCoy are stranded in a desolate, frozen waste.

The intercutting between the two [[stories]], and the [[different]] [[hazardous]] situations the [[men]] [[find]] themselves in is [[superbly]] [[handled]], with return to the present an [[unknown]] [[chance]], while the minutes are [[counting]] down to the planet's [[explosion]].

[[Imaginative]] [[writing]] and fine acting [[characterize]] this episode, with a [[touching]] performance by Mariette Hartley as a [[woman]] [[exiled]] to the Ice Age, and Ian [[Wolfe]] as the urbane Librarian. Somewhat [[reminiscent]] of the classic episode [[City]] On The Edge of [[Forever]], this time [[travel]] [[story]] is a [[rich]] and [[compelling]] finale to the [[series]], which [[concluded]] one episode [[later]]. This has to be one of the [[best]] of the whole [[series]], [[especially]] [[remarkable]] [[given]] the [[generally]] [[lesser]] quality of the [[third]] season overall. There's something [[convincing]] and [[suspiciously]] [[credible]] about this episode. From the very [[starts]], an [[atmospheric]] of tension is [[established]] by the [[acquaintance]] that a certain [[planetary]] is going to [[explosion]] [[inside]] a few [[hour]]. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have beamed down to [[evicted]] the [[villagers]], all of whom [[appears]] to have left already for parts [[unidentified]], except for an [[ancient]] librarian.

The librarian's polite but cryptic [[councils]] about where all the citizens have gone to is interrupted by a [[crises]] in which all three [[Company]] crew members [[finds]] themselves [[suddenly]] hurled into [[assorted]] eras of the planet's past. [[Kirky]] [[deems]] himself in a [[period]] [[timeline]] [[resembled]] 17th Century [[Britain]], while Spock and McCoy are stranded in a desolate, frozen waste.

The intercutting between the two [[narratives]], and the [[several]] [[unsafe]] situations the [[males]] [[unearthed]] themselves in is [[remarkably]] [[manipulated]], with return to the present an [[unrecognized]] [[possibilities]], while the minutes are [[count]] down to the planet's [[explosions]].

[[Creativity]] [[writes]] and fine acting [[characterization]] this episode, with a [[touch]] performance by Mariette Hartley as a [[wife]] [[exiles]] to the Ice Age, and Ian [[Wolves]] as the urbane Librarian. Somewhat [[evocative]] of the classic episode [[Ville]] On The Edge of [[Indefinitely]], this time [[voyager]] [[conte]] is a [[wealthy]] and [[conclusive]] finale to the [[serial]], which [[concludes]] one episode [[then]]. This has to be one of the [[better]] of the whole [[serials]], [[specially]] [[dramatic]] [[yielded]] the [[routinely]] [[lowest]] quality of the [[thirdly]] season overall. --------------------------------------------- Result 743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] By 1976 the [[western]] was an exhausted [[genre]] and the makers of this film clearly knew it. Still, instead of shelving the project and [[saving]] us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it [[anyway]]. Apparently in need of an interesting [[thread]] to get the [[audiences]] to come and see the film, they decided to make it as [[blatantly]] violent and [[unpleasant]] as [[possible]]. Hell, it worked for The [[Wild]] Bunch so why shouldn't it [[work]] here? Of course, The Wild Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish.

It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired [[lawman]] who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation.

This is a [[bloodthirsty]] [[film]] [[indeed]] in which [[every]] [[time]] someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's [[tremendously]] [[disappointing]] really, because the [[star]] [[pairing]] [[sounds]] like a mouth-watering [[prospect]]. There's no [[sense]] of [[pace]] or [[urgency]] in the [[film]] either. It takes an [[eternity]] to get going, but when the [[action]] finally does come it is [[marred]] by the emphasis on nastiness. [[All]] in all, this might be the very [[worst]] film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his [[illustrious]] CV. By 1976 the [[ouest]] was an exhausted [[kind]] and the makers of this film clearly knew it. Still, instead of shelving the project and [[saved]] us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it [[anyhow]]. Apparently in need of an interesting [[threading]] to get the [[viewers]] to come and see the film, they decided to make it as [[notoriously]] violent and [[nasty]] as [[doable]]. Hell, it worked for The [[Sauvage]] Bunch so why shouldn't it [[cooperating]] here? Of course, The Wild Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish.

It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired [[sheriff]] who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation.

This is a [[murderous]] [[filmmaking]] [[admittedly]] in which [[any]] [[period]] someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's [[extraordinarily]] [[depressing]] really, because the [[superstar]] [[matches]] [[sound]] like a mouth-watering [[prospecting]]. There's no [[feeling]] of [[tempo]] or [[emergency]] in the [[filmmaking]] either. It takes an [[virginity]] to get going, but when the [[actions]] finally does come it is [[tainted]] by the emphasis on nastiness. [[Entire]] in all, this might be the very [[meanest]] film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his [[glamorous]] CV. --------------------------------------------- Result 744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The memory of the "The Last Hunt" has stuck with me since I saw it in 1956 when I was 13. It is a movie that was far ahead of others at the time in that it addressed the treatment of the natives, the environment, and the ever present contrast between the short and long term effects of greed. It is as relevant today as in 1956, a cinemagraphic discussion of utmost depth and relevance. To top it off the setting is beautiful and the cinematography excellent. The memory of this movie will be with me to the end of my days. --------------------------------------------- Result 745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the dumbest films, I've ever seen. It rips off nearly ever type of thriller and manages to make a mess of them all.

There's not a single good line or character in the whole mess. If there was a plot, it was an afterthought and as far as acting goes, there's nothing good to say so Ill say nothing. I honestly cant understand how this type of nonsense gets produced and actually released, does somebody somewhere not at some stage think, 'Oh my god this really is a load of shite' and call it a day. Its crap like this that has people downloading illegally, the trailer looks like a completely different film, at least if you have download it, you haven't wasted your time or money Don't waste your time, this is painful. --------------------------------------------- Result 746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having never seen the original Dirty Harry, I judged this movie on a clean slate. And I must say, I quite enjoyed it. Sure, some of the acting by Sondre Locke made me a little squeemish - but hey, it was the 80's. But even if you can't get past her (and I almost couldn't) or her revenge killings (which seemed a little.. overdone ;P), it's worth it just for Dirty Harry. Or at the very least, the bull dog he affectionately names 'MeatHead' :P

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 747 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a [[winning]] film in the [[spirit]] of cutting, dark [[comedy]]. [[Shot]] on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the [[early]] Coen brother's film Blood [[Simple]] ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to [[boot]]! Needs to [[seen]] more than once to [[appreciate]] all the [[elements]] that [[carry]] one scene to the [[next]]. [[Expect]] more good things to come from this writer-director-actor. First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a [[earn]] film in the [[wits]] of cutting, dark [[charade]]. [[Offed]] on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the [[precocious]] Coen brother's film Blood [[Simpler]] ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to [[startup]]! Needs to [[saw]] more than once to [[thankful]] all the [[ingredients]] that [[bears]] one scene to the [[imminent]]. [[Waits]] more good things to come from this writer-director-actor. --------------------------------------------- Result 748 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Was]] there a [[single]] positive to this film? Critics who knew nothing of [[video]] games [[could]] spot the gaming errors [[made]]. No damage taken with damage [[clearly]] [[visible]] towards the [[beginning]] being a primary [[example]].

And I may have missed [[something]], but wasn't Super Mario Bros. 3 [[suppose]] to be a [[game]] that had never [[played]] before? Well if that IS the case, and I did not miss anything... how did Fred Savage's character, and [[even]] the [[girl]], [[know]] so much about the game already? We're [[talking]] [[things]] that some people don't know about by their second or third play-through.

Beyond the factual and gaming errors there is the general low quality of the film itself. [[Nothing]] here is honestly very memorable. The kid wasn't even that good at playing video games in the footage they showed. A lot of kids I knew way back in those days were significantly more [[experienced]]. On top of all this the acting and storyline are just mediocre at their [[strongest]] points. The [[characters]] are bland and completely uninteresting, the 'Wizard' (the [[youngest]] [[child]]) is a very [[silent]], completely dry child cliché of a little [[kid]] who [[almost]] never [[talks]] because of a trauma. It isn't that this is unrealistic, it's the fact that it had to be thrown into the movie to actually even [[begin]] to form a plot that would exceed even 30 minutes.

Honestly, the only [[value]] that is to be found here is that of a nostalgic nature. [[If]] you grew up with this movie you're going to like it whether it was good or not. It was about kids playing video games, and at the time you saw it you likely had an obsession with the NES as well. But [[unless]] you loved it as a [[kid]] there just isn't anything that's going to keep you interested, and very [[little]] that will [[prevent]] you from turning it off.

No [[sir]], I didn't like it. [[Became]] there a [[exclusive]] positive to this film? Critics who knew nothing of [[videos]] games [[wo]] spot the gaming errors [[introduced]]. No damage taken with damage [[plainly]] [[apparent]] towards the [[startup]] being a primary [[examples]].

And I may have missed [[somethin]], but wasn't Super Mario Bros. 3 [[imagine]] to be a [[gaming]] that had never [[done]] before? Well if that IS the case, and I did not miss anything... how did Fred Savage's character, and [[yet]] the [[girls]], [[savoir]] so much about the game already? We're [[debates]] [[items]] that some people don't know about by their second or third play-through.

Beyond the factual and gaming errors there is the general low quality of the film itself. [[Anything]] here is honestly very memorable. The kid wasn't even that good at playing video games in the footage they showed. A lot of kids I knew way back in those days were significantly more [[undergone]]. On top of all this the acting and storyline are just mediocre at their [[stronger]] points. The [[trait]] are bland and completely uninteresting, the 'Wizard' (the [[younger]] [[kid]]) is a very [[quiet]], completely dry child cliché of a little [[child]] who [[practically]] never [[negotiations]] because of a trauma. It isn't that this is unrealistic, it's the fact that it had to be thrown into the movie to actually even [[embark]] to form a plot that would exceed even 30 minutes.

Honestly, the only [[valued]] that is to be found here is that of a nostalgic nature. [[Though]] you grew up with this movie you're going to like it whether it was good or not. It was about kids playing video games, and at the time you saw it you likely had an obsession with the NES as well. But [[if]] you loved it as a [[child]] there just isn't anything that's going to keep you interested, and very [[petit]] that will [[avoiding]] you from turning it off.

No [[monsieur]], I didn't like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Yes, the [[first]] "[[Howling]]" was a classic. A [[rather]] good werewolf [[movie]] that I [[admit]] started slowly, but gained momentum along the [[way]] to have a rather good finish then the [[anchorwoman]] [[changed]] into a cute werewolf only to be gunned down on camera. [[Yes]] that made for an [[entertaining]] [[horror]] [[movie]] to be sure...well [[forget]] all of that as this movie has nothing to do with that [[film]]. Oh sure, they kind of make it out that the [[anchor]] woman is the same and that her brother or something is wanting to find out what and why things went down as they did, but they go from the little cozy [[retreat]] from the first [[movie]] to Transylvania or somewhere here where they must battle evil magician werewolves or something. I often wonder what in the [[world]] Christopher Lee was doing in this movie, however I read the [[trivia]] here where it says he had never been in a werewolf movie before, but still read the script before you [[take]] a role. Maybe you could have gotten into "An American Werewolf in London" hell that could have been [[possible]]. It was set in London after all. Heck, werewolves do not seem to figure much into this movie except for a rather bizarre and [[prolonged]] sex scene. [[In]] fact, the most [[memorable]] [[death]] in this movie for me was when the one gal started talking loudly and this one dude's ear's started bleeding. Yes, the [[fiirst]] "[[Yelling]]" was a classic. A [[quite]] good werewolf [[movies]] that I [[recognise]] started slowly, but gained momentum along the [[manner]] to have a rather good finish then the [[newscaster]] [[amended]] into a cute werewolf only to be gunned down on camera. [[Yep]] that made for an [[entertain]] [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]] to be sure...well [[forgotten]] all of that as this movie has nothing to do with that [[films]]. Oh sure, they kind of make it out that the [[anchorage]] woman is the same and that her brother or something is wanting to find out what and why things went down as they did, but they go from the little cozy [[backtrack]] from the first [[filmmaking]] to Transylvania or somewhere here where they must battle evil magician werewolves or something. I often wonder what in the [[globe]] Christopher Lee was doing in this movie, however I read the [[anecdotes]] here where it says he had never been in a werewolf movie before, but still read the script before you [[taking]] a role. Maybe you could have gotten into "An American Werewolf in London" hell that could have been [[reachable]]. It was set in London after all. Heck, werewolves do not seem to figure much into this movie except for a rather bizarre and [[lengthy]] sex scene. [[Among]] fact, the most [[unforgettable]] [[muerte]] in this movie for me was when the one gal started talking loudly and this one dude's ear's started bleeding. --------------------------------------------- Result 750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] We showed this movie at the local Film Society, and the art-house [[crowd]] had the time of their [[cinematic]] [[lives]]. It's tasteless, [[groovy]] and very [[funny]] in a sixties kind of way. The [[Kraft]] [[Kitchen]] recipe [[sketch]] had them laughing like maniacs. The rest is a mixed [[bag]], but the highs [[definitely]] beat the lows. By the [[way]], [[whatever]] happened to Ken Shapiro?? We showed this movie at the local Film Society, and the art-house [[multitude]] had the time of their [[cinematographic]] [[iife]]. It's tasteless, [[peachy]] and very [[comical]] in a sixties kind of way. The [[Vigour]] [[Cooks]] recipe [[sketching]] had them laughing like maniacs. The rest is a mixed [[knapsack]], but the highs [[doubtless]] beat the lows. By the [[routes]], [[whichever]] happened to Ken Shapiro?? --------------------------------------------- Result 751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] As you may know, the subject here was to ask eleven directors from all over the world to make each a short movie of 11 minutes, 9 seconds and one frame. We have here : - Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) : what afghan refugee kids can understand to the towers collapsing ? Well, nothing. A great lesson. - Claude Lelouch (France) : a weak plot with a [[great]] cinematography... Just imagine a deaf woman living by the WTC who sees without understanding it that her dog barks... Well just see it. - Youssef Chahine (Egypt) : the greatest oriental movie maker has compassion... For everyone : for an us soldier who died ten years ago, for the people in the Wtc but also for a palestinian suicide-terrorist. Maybe the less tender movie towards the us. - Danis Tanovic (bosnia hrzgovia) : good images, makes us travel, for sure... Not a very good plot. Idrissa Oudraogo (Burkina Faso) : from one of the poorest country in the world, a tender and funny story about five boys who want to capture Osama Bin Laden... And they could have done it but nobody believes them when they tell they know where he is. Ken Loach (uk) : September 11, 1973, The Chile entered in a twenty-years long bloody dictature. Thousands of death, tortures : all that was offered to Chile by Henry Kissinger and the CIA, and knowing this changes very much your point of view ! I guess that is because of that particular short that no american movie distribution company accepted to release the movie in us theaters ! Loach forgot to point that 1973 is also the year when the WTC was built ! - Alejandro Gonzalez inarritu (Mexico) : impressing images that we all know too well, and a lot of black screens. I didn't get this one very much, it is more an artist video (to show in an exhibition) than a movie. - Amos Gitaï (Israël) : an absurd ballet of policemen, journalists, etc., around a burning car in Jerusalem. Very well done. - Mira Nair (India) : about the anti-islamic feeling that followed september the 11th. Very good actualy. - Sean Penn (us) : a funny little story that reminds us a fact usualy forgotten, the WTC did have a huge shadow, and some places now have a daylight they never had. - Shohei Imamura (Japan) : a different one. Here there is not even one word about the WTC, and the action takes place at the end of WWII. It has only one message : no war is holy. This short movie gives very deep feelings, but the director aparently would have done better with more than 11 minutes. --- so --- A great movie, a great attempt to take the world's temperature. I love it. As you may know, the subject here was to ask eleven directors from all over the world to make each a short movie of 11 minutes, 9 seconds and one frame. We have here : - Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) : what afghan refugee kids can understand to the towers collapsing ? Well, nothing. A great lesson. - Claude Lelouch (France) : a weak plot with a [[wondrous]] cinematography... Just imagine a deaf woman living by the WTC who sees without understanding it that her dog barks... Well just see it. - Youssef Chahine (Egypt) : the greatest oriental movie maker has compassion... For everyone : for an us soldier who died ten years ago, for the people in the Wtc but also for a palestinian suicide-terrorist. Maybe the less tender movie towards the us. - Danis Tanovic (bosnia hrzgovia) : good images, makes us travel, for sure... Not a very good plot. Idrissa Oudraogo (Burkina Faso) : from one of the poorest country in the world, a tender and funny story about five boys who want to capture Osama Bin Laden... And they could have done it but nobody believes them when they tell they know where he is. Ken Loach (uk) : September 11, 1973, The Chile entered in a twenty-years long bloody dictature. Thousands of death, tortures : all that was offered to Chile by Henry Kissinger and the CIA, and knowing this changes very much your point of view ! I guess that is because of that particular short that no american movie distribution company accepted to release the movie in us theaters ! Loach forgot to point that 1973 is also the year when the WTC was built ! - Alejandro Gonzalez inarritu (Mexico) : impressing images that we all know too well, and a lot of black screens. I didn't get this one very much, it is more an artist video (to show in an exhibition) than a movie. - Amos Gitaï (Israël) : an absurd ballet of policemen, journalists, etc., around a burning car in Jerusalem. Very well done. - Mira Nair (India) : about the anti-islamic feeling that followed september the 11th. Very good actualy. - Sean Penn (us) : a funny little story that reminds us a fact usualy forgotten, the WTC did have a huge shadow, and some places now have a daylight they never had. - Shohei Imamura (Japan) : a different one. Here there is not even one word about the WTC, and the action takes place at the end of WWII. It has only one message : no war is holy. This short movie gives very deep feelings, but the director aparently would have done better with more than 11 minutes. --- so --- A great movie, a great attempt to take the world's temperature. I love it. --------------------------------------------- Result 752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the single worst movie I have ever seen. Let me say that again: THIS IS THE SINGLE WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN.

It had all of the ear-marks of a bad movie: continuity errors, bad writing, bad acting, bad production value, bad music. I thought that there were a couple points to horror movies. The first is that it is supposed to be suspenseful enough to scare you. This movie gets and F in this category. The second point is that when a character dies, or something bad happens to them, we are supposed to care. This movie gets an F in this regard as well.

The first story, a woman gets mauled by wolves after being afraid that this would happen to her. The next story, an OCD guy dies from not being careful and talks to a dead friend of his. Oh, and then there is the horrific, nail-biting story of a bad roommate. Come on, could you pick topics a little more interesting and a little less common than being alone in a house, being anal-retentive, and having a roommate? Turns out all of these stories where hallucinations, virtual reality induced by a Doctor who in turn uses it himself. Wow, stupid.

Let me explain something, I enjoy watching bad horror movies and laughing at how bad they are. I couldn't do that with this one. It was utter pain to sit and watch. Do not under any circumstance watch this movie. You WILL regret it. --------------------------------------------- Result 753 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching the trailer I was surprised this movie never made it into theaters, so I ordered the BluRay. I had a great time watching it and have to say that this movie is better than some major animation movies out there. Of course, it has its flaws but I can still really recommend it. The animation is well done, very entertaining and unique and the story kept me watching it all the way to the end. Some of the backdrops are just drop-dead gorgeous and you can see the French talent behind it. I thought that Forest Whitaker's performance feels a bit lifeless but that is how the character Lian-Chu is depicted in this movie. So overall, thumbs up, I liked it a lot and I hope it is successful enough for all the studios involved to continue making great movies like this. I would recommend to give it a chance and be surprised how great a movie can be with such a small budget. Hektor alone is worth watching the movie since some of his moments are Stitch-like hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 754 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A story of amazing disinterest kills "The Psychic" over and over again. The characters and plot are completely uninteresting (as is Fulci's mad camera work, which is usually a redeeming factor in his films), and any grasp of suspense is nowhere to be found. It's padded out to an insufferable degree--by the end, you won't be clamoring with excitement but stricken with boredom (and, like me, maybe an uncontrollable urge to fall asleep). Jennifer O'Neill's performance deserves occupancy in a better movie. Fulci gorehounds beware--there's just not much going on in "The Psychic."

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched Grendel the other night and am compelled to put together a Public Service Announcement.

Grendel is another version of Beowulf, the thousand-year-old Anglo-Saxon epic poem. The SciFi channel has a growing catalog of inoffensive and uninteresting movies, and the previews promised an inauthentic low-budget mini-epic, but this one refused to let me switch channels. It was staggeringly, overwhelmingly, bad. I watched in fascination and horror at the train wreck you couldn't tear your eyes away from. I reached for a notepad and managed to capture part of what I was seeing. The following may contain spoilers or might just save your sanity. You've been warned.

- Just to get it over with, Beowulf's warriors wore horned helmets. Trivial issue compared to what came after. It also appears that the helmets were in a bin and handed to whichever actor wandered by next. Fit, appearance and function were apparently irrelevant.

- Marina Sirtis had obviously been blackmailed into doing the movie by the Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey circus. She managed to avoid a red rubber nose, but the clowns had already done the rest of her makeup.

- Ben Cross pretended not to be embarrassed as the king. His character, Hrothgar, must have become king of the Danes only minutes before the film opened and hadn't had a chance to get the crown resized to fit him yet.

- To facilitate the actors' return to their day jobs waiting tables, none were required to change their hairstyles at all. The variety of hair included cornrows, sideburns, buzz cuts and a mullet and at least served to distract from the dialog. To prove it was a multi-national cast, all were encouraged to retain whatever accent they chose.

- As is typical with this type of movie (at least since Mad Max), leather armor was a requirement. In this case it was odd-shaped, ill-fitting and brand-new.

- The female love interest, Ingrid, played by Alexis Peters, followed a long-standing tradition of hotties who should be watched with the volume turned completely down.

- The unintended focus of the movie was a repeating, compound crossbow with exploding bolts. It never needed to be loaded and even had a recoil when fired. It managed to shred the laws of physics, the integrity of the original legend, historical fact and plot suspense all by itself.

- Hrothgar's palace, Heorot, rather than being a Norse long hall, apparently was designed and constructed by artisans who sank with Atlantis.

- Beowulf arrived at the Danes' homeland in a two-masted stern-castled ship that originally was part of a set, the other two being the Santa Maria and the Pinta.

- Prince Unferth observed Beowulf's ship's approach using a telescope. Before you could recover from that astounding innovation, you got to see the ship from his point of view. Judging from the angle, the prince was in an aircraft of some sort.

- Fun fact 1: In Bulgaria, fire (as from a fireplace) creates light without heat. This explains why you could see the actors' breath whether indoors or out.

- Fun fact 2: Dark Age dancing in Denmark looks like slow dances I went to in the 8th grade.

- Fun fact 3: You, too, can make a catapult with a timed-release air-burst explosive. But, don't expect it to actually harm anything. Incidentally, Beowulf was apparently a veteran of World War II, yelling "Incoming!" to shred any remaining suspension of disbelief.

- Grendel was so upset and always in a snit because as a completely CGI creation he couldn't leave footprints. Even in snow.

- Grendel's mom ("Hag") was in a foul mood because she was a single mother and junior hadn't inherited her wings. Recessive gene, I suppose. By the way, we can now make an educated guess that Grendel's pop was probably Swamp Thing.

- Grendel and mom chose to randomly kill, fly away with or drag away their prey based only on a close reading of the next few pages of the script.

- Fun medical fact: Being slammed by a mythical beast hard enough to be thrown fifty feet against stone causes slight facial scratches that don't bleed much.

- The sword of legend Beowulf used to dispatch the Hag was as long as he was tall and would have contained enough steel to put a second deck on the Golden Gate Bridge. Luckily the wobbling dispelled any concerns over its weight.

- Best line of the movie: Prince Unferth had just been impaled by Hag and spit a quart of blood roughly six feet. Princess Ingrid cradled him gently and said, "You're going to be okay, my prince." So much for that job at the triage clinic.

I feel better now. --------------------------------------------- Result 756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This [[movie]] is [[supposed]] to be a "lighthearted" [[tale]] about Santa [[Claus]] and his "magical and [[mystical]]" [[wonders]]. But [[instead]] it comes off as being downright [[creepy]]. Two [[things]] in this [[movie]] that stand out in my [[mind]] as [[horrifying]] are 1) the way Santa [[looks]].- Have you ever [[seen]] a more [[horrible]] looking Santa [[Claus]]? and 2) the "evil rep. of [[Satan]]" Pitch's just plain [[odd]] [[dances]] are just [[sickening]] to watch. [[Only]] watch this [[movie]] if it [[happens]] to be the MSTed version or if you [[like]] a very [[good]] [[laugh]]. I can't [[believe]] this is a children's [[movie]]. This [[filmmaking]] is [[presumed]] to be a "lighthearted" [[saga]] about Santa [[Xmas]] and his "magical and [[mystique]]" [[honeys]]. But [[alternatively]] it comes off as being downright [[freaky]]. Two [[aspects]] in this [[film]] that stand out in my [[intellect]] as [[appalling]] are 1) the way Santa [[seems]].- Have you ever [[saw]] a more [[horrifying]] looking Santa [[Christmas]]? and 2) the "evil rep. of [[Lucifer]]" Pitch's just plain [[peculiar]] [[ballet]] are just [[disgusting]] to watch. [[Exclusively]] watch this [[filmmaking]] if it [[occurs]] to be the MSTed version or if you [[iike]] a very [[alright]] [[chuckles]]. I can't [[believing]] this is a children's [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Here we are: two travelers from a distant futuristic world arrive on earth... one is on a desperate mission to preserve a life, another is an inhuman killing machine determined to eliminate the woman who will give birth to the saviour of an entire race.

So what could we call this killing machine? It's almost like he's some kind of destroyer, or eradicator... sort of like an exterminator or something. What's the word I'm looking for... something that -terminates- things? Hmmmm....

Anyway, the protector (who swiftly doffs the white tunic he stole from Luke Skywalker in favour of local clothing) finds the young woman first and impregnates her with a future-born hero-to-be. The evil uhhhh... "exterminator" kills some rednecks and steals their guns and clothes, then attempts to locate the woman by visiting her workplace and asking around by looking menacingly into people's eyes and repeating her name threateningly.

Then begins a desperate race for survival as the seemingly deathless and unstoppable "exterminator" pursues the couple across the countryside. At some point he may acquire boots and a motorcycle, but I'm not sure.

Perhaps, in an exciting finale, he will attempt to crush them under the wheels of an enormous tanker truck full of... acid. Then the truck will crash. They will be saved... but no! He will then re-emerge, as strong as ever. He will kill the protector and pursue the girl into a meat packing plant, where in a terrifying finish, he is pushed into a large piece of industrial chopping machinery, and destroyed once and for all.

But maybe I'm extrapolating too much... after all, I did stop watching this movie after Mr. Protector magically impregnates Sean Young by kissing her at a bar, then tells her the child will be born in 3 days.

The costumes and effects are great in this movie... I loved them the first time I saw them on Star Trek: Next Generation too! Sean Young does another great turn as an unemotive Replicant, and career sweat-hog Stephen Baldwin is also on board as Young's Fat Cop Boyfriend. Not sure where he fits into the plot though... maybe he's an import from a different James Cameron movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A hilarious Neil Simon comedy that evokes laughs from beginning to end. The late Walter Matthau is the grouchy ex-comedian who is persuaded to join together with his ex-partner (the late Oscar-winner George Burns) for a final reunion show on stage.

Benjamin Martin is Matthau's agent and nephew, and the two have just as much chemistry as Matthau and Burns. I love Matthau's grumpy character--he's just the same as he always is, and yet also very different.

Burns, as the absent-minded old man, is just as funny as Matthau.

Matthau: Want some crackers? I've got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: How about a plain cracker?

Matthau: I don't got plain. I got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: Okay

Matthau: They're in the cupboard in the kitchen.

Burns: Maybe later.

Or how about this:

Matthau: When I did black, the whites knew what I was saying!

You've got to see it in the movie to understand it!

All in all, a refreshingly hilarious, sweet, heartfelt, warm, belivable character comedy with a heart and some of the most memorable quotes of all time.

They just don't make them like this anymore! In a time when all the newest comedies are crude, juvenile and stupid, this leans back towards the tender core of what comedy really is--funny characters, smart and funny dialogue, and grand entertainment.

One of the best buddy comedies of all time, right up there with "Planes, Trains and Automobiles," "Lethal Weapon," and "The Hard Way."

You may have a hard time finding this for rent or on TV, but trust me, it will be worth your time!

4.5/5 stars.

- John Ulmer --------------------------------------------- Result 759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[would]] firstly [[say]] that [[somehow]] I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this [[movie]] in my [[early]] childhood, I couldn't read the [[subtitles]] and I [[thought]] Sonny Chiba was Sean Connery. But I did really like the concept. If you are not able to at least [[partially]] [[suspend]] your adult scepticism and [[embrace]] your [[inner]] seven your old you may [[want]] to [[avoid]] this [[movie]]. That said, having just [[watched]] the restored 137 minute version on DVD I have to say I [[enjoyed]] it, [[though]] not as much as when I was seven ( I [[remembered]] the ending ).

There are aspects of the movie that are worthy of [[criticism]] , the first 15 minutes and [[final]] 15 minutes both have some [[really]] comic moments, my [[favourite]] being the contrast between scenes acted out in the final 10 minutes and the [[curious]] [[choice]] of backing music ( listen to the lyrics ).

[[For]] an action [[film]] there is a [[great]] [[deal]] of [[focus]] on the [[personal]] [[stories]] of certain [[soldiers]] and the social dynamics of the squad as the strain of their [[time]] [[travel]] [[takes]] its toll. By the [[ending]] of the [[movie]] I had [[decided]] that this was a good thing, when seven I [[though]] the 'relationship' [[guff]] was a [[bad]] [[thing]].

[[For]] an [[action]] [[film]] there is [[also]] plenty of [[gratifying]] [[gory]] [[action]], [[especially]] a [[couple]] of epic [[battle]] scenes between the platoon and [[hordes]] of [[Shogun]] era warriors. The [[makers]] of the [[movie]] have [[ensured]] that as [[many]] [[deaths]] as [[possible]] are bloody and, lets face it, [[humorous]]. I [[thought]] this was a [[splendid]] [[aspect]] of the [[movie]] when I was a [[kid]], and I am not ashamed to [[say]] that I [[still]] do.

I [[also]] like the fact that the modern day [[soldiers]] in general don't spend the [[movie]] walking on [[egg]] [[shells]] [[trying]] to avoid [[altering]] the space [[time]] continuum, they've [[got]] heavy calibre machine [[guns]], mortars, rocket [[launchers]], a tank and a [[helicopter]] and they're [[hell]] bent on making feudal Japan theirs. [[Which]] is what I'd like to [[think]] any [[vigorous]] IMDb user would do in their boots.

[[In]] short the [[movies]] worth [[watching]], it makes the viewer [[regret]] that there are not more [[movies]] [[made]] with a [[similar]] premise, and at the same [[time]] [[offers]] some [[hefty]] [[hints]] as to why a [[movie]] like G.I. Samurai is so [[unique]]. I [[ought]] firstly [[tell]] that [[someplace]] I [[remembering]] [[witnessing]] this [[kino]] in my [[precocious]] childhood, I couldn't read the [[caption]] and I [[ideology]] Sonny Chiba was Sean Connery. But I did really like the concept. If you are not able to at least [[partly]] [[halt]] your adult scepticism and [[embracing]] your [[inside]] seven your old you may [[wanna]] to [[avoidance]] this [[films]]. That said, having just [[observed]] the restored 137 minute version on DVD I have to say I [[liked]] it, [[however]] not as much as when I was seven ( I [[recalls]] the ending ).

There are aspects of the movie that are worthy of [[critique]] , the first 15 minutes and [[ultimate]] 15 minutes both have some [[genuinely]] comic moments, my [[preferred]] being the contrast between scenes acted out in the final 10 minutes and the [[bizarre]] [[chose]] of backing music ( listen to the lyrics ).

[[At]] an action [[films]] there is a [[fantastic]] [[deals]] of [[focuses]] on the [[personally]] [[history]] of certain [[troops]] and the social dynamics of the squad as the strain of their [[times]] [[voyage]] [[pick]] its toll. By the [[terminated]] of the [[films]] I had [[deciding]] that this was a good thing, when seven I [[despite]] the 'relationship' [[twaddle]] was a [[rotten]] [[stuff]].

[[In]] an [[efforts]] [[cinema]] there is [[additionally]] plenty of [[pleasing]] [[gori]] [[measures]], [[mostly]] a [[pair]] of epic [[struggle]] scenes between the platoon and [[flocks]] of [[Shogunate]] era warriors. The [[manufacturer]] of the [[film]] have [[insured]] that as [[various]] [[killings]] as [[probable]] are bloody and, lets face it, [[funny]]. I [[figured]] this was a [[wondrous]] [[element]] of the [[film]] when I was a [[kiddo]], and I am not ashamed to [[tell]] that I [[yet]] do.

I [[apart]] like the fact that the modern day [[servicemen]] in general don't spend the [[cinema]] walking on [[eggs]] [[missiles]] [[attempt]] to avoid [[modify]] the space [[period]] continuum, they've [[did]] heavy calibre machine [[handguns]], mortars, rocket [[bowlers]], a tank and a [[helo]] and they're [[dammit]] bent on making feudal Japan theirs. [[Whom]] is what I'd like to [[thought]] any [[forceful]] IMDb user would do in their boots.

[[For]] short the [[kino]] worth [[staring]], it makes the viewer [[sorrow]] that there are not more [[kino]] [[accomplished]] with a [[identical]] premise, and at the same [[period]] [[tender]] some [[gargantuan]] [[suggestions]] as to why a [[flick]] like G.I. Samurai is so [[unequalled]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 760 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] This film is [[beautiful]] to look at, but is like [[watching]] [[really]] [[bad]] experimental theater. The [[plot]] (if there was one) doesn't make any [[sense]]. But it is very "artistic". Lots of shots of half-dressed [[actors]] [[wrestling]] and [[looking]] [[deep]] into each other's eyes. [[Lots]] of arty shots through windows and with people out of frame. [[Mumbling]] and people [[wandering]] wistfully. Lingering close-ups of faces and [[bodies]]. By the time you get to the threesome on the [[roof]] with the cat, you'll be ready to throw a [[bottle]] of KY at the screen.

It is supposed to be about a father and son's relationship, but you will just be wishing the two of them would just f*$& each other and get it over with. If you have always wanted to see bad Russian gay porn without any money shots, your wish has been granted. This film is [[sumptuous]] to look at, but is like [[staring]] [[truthfully]] [[unfavourable]] experimental theater. The [[intrigue]] (if there was one) doesn't make any [[feeling]]. But it is very "artistic". Lots of shots of half-dressed [[players]] [[grappling]] and [[researching]] [[deepest]] into each other's eyes. [[Lot]] of arty shots through windows and with people out of frame. [[Muttering]] and people [[roaming]] wistfully. Lingering close-ups of faces and [[institutions]]. By the time you get to the threesome on the [[roofs]] with the cat, you'll be ready to throw a [[pints]] of KY at the screen.

It is supposed to be about a father and son's relationship, but you will just be wishing the two of them would just f*$& each other and get it over with. If you have always wanted to see bad Russian gay porn without any money shots, your wish has been granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I was the [[Production]] [[Accountant]] on this movie, and I [[also]] [[got]] to do some voice-over [[work]] on it, so I'm not [[entirely]] unbiased, but if it were [[awful]], I [[would]] say so. I [[thought]] it was a fun film, not a critically acclaimed masterpiece, by any [[means]], but there were plenty of [[laughs]] along the [[way]]. The Bible states that laughter does good like a medicine, so watching this movie could be good for your health.

So many of the actors in this picture hadn't [[yet]] [[reached]] their [[peak]] at the [[time]] we [[made]] this film. Susan Sarandon, of [[course]], is one who has since [[gone]] on to much [[greater]] [[fame]]. [[Melanie]] Mayron was [[seen]] on TV on a weekly [[basis]] as a [[photographer]] in the "Thirty-Something" TV [[drama]] series. Robert Englund [[later]] [[became]] known as [[Freddie]] [[Krueger]], [[still]] haunting people's dreams. One of my personal [[favorite]] actors on this [[show]] was Dub Taylor, who [[played]] the sheriff. He was an [[excellent]] comedic actor, and a truly nice, sincere [[person]]. We all had [[fun]] [[working]] on this [[show]], and I [[think]] that [[fun]] [[comes]] through. I was the [[Productivity]] [[Accounting]] on this movie, and I [[moreover]] [[ai]] to do some voice-over [[cooperation]] on it, so I'm not [[downright]] unbiased, but if it were [[odious]], I [[should]] say so. I [[brainchild]] it was a fun film, not a critically acclaimed masterpiece, by any [[methods]], but there were plenty of [[giggles]] along the [[route]]. The Bible states that laughter does good like a medicine, so watching this movie could be good for your health.

So many of the actors in this picture hadn't [[even]] [[achieved]] their [[pinnacle]] at the [[times]] we [[effected]] this film. Susan Sarandon, of [[cours]], is one who has since [[vanished]] on to much [[larger]] [[reputation]]. [[Jackie]] Mayron was [[noticed]] on TV on a weekly [[foundation]] as a [[cinematographer]] in the "Thirty-Something" TV [[tragedy]] series. Robert Englund [[then]] [[was]] known as [[Frederic]] [[Kruger]], [[again]] haunting people's dreams. One of my personal [[preferred]] actors on this [[demonstrating]] was Dub Taylor, who [[accomplished]] the sheriff. He was an [[awesome]] comedic actor, and a truly nice, sincere [[anyone]]. We all had [[amusing]] [[worked]] on this [[demonstrating]], and I [[believing]] that [[funny]] [[happens]] through. --------------------------------------------- Result 762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I have to admit that I stuck this one out thinking something [[would]] have to [[happen]], besides the [[dead]] [[body]] in the first scenes... and her [[disposal]] of him. I was [[wrong]]. It was a [[cinema]] verite of [[Betty]] hits the [[Beach]] [[encased]] for the first part by Mordant Morven. I really don't [[care]] what young lassies from [[Scotland]] do these days, who thy screw, what [[drugs]] they take. Visually, the [[stroll]] through the Cabo de Gata in Andalucia was [[pleasant]] and [[surely]] the [[high]] point for me. The nadir was the [[chop]] [[shop]] for her [[dead]] [[boyfriend]]. As the [[movie]] [[came]] to a close I had two [[thoughts]]... 1. That's all there is? 2. [[Now]] I [[see]] why her [[boyfriend]] [[killed]] himself. Rename it. "[[Bare]] Bitch Boredom, or What I did on my [[trip]] to Spain." I'm such a sucker for sticking these [[things]] out. I have to admit that I stuck this one out thinking something [[should]] have to [[occur]], besides the [[died]] [[bodies]] in the first scenes... and her [[disposition]] of him. I was [[incorrect]]. It was a [[filmmaking]] verite of [[Beatty]] hits the [[Beaches]] [[enveloped]] for the first part by Mordant Morven. I really don't [[healthcare]] what young lassies from [[Scots]] do these days, who thy screw, what [[medicine]] they take. Visually, the [[ballad]] through the Cabo de Gata in Andalucia was [[congenial]] and [[undeniably]] the [[highest]] point for me. The nadir was the [[severing]] [[shopping]] for her [[deceased]] [[buddy]]. As the [[filmmaking]] [[became]] to a close I had two [[reflections]]... 1. That's all there is? 2. [[Presently]] I [[seeing]] why her [[buddy]] [[kiiled]] himself. Rename it. "[[Nus]] Bitch Boredom, or What I did on my [[touring]] to Spain." I'm such a sucker for sticking these [[matters]] out. --------------------------------------------- Result 763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was never so bored in my life. Hours of pretentious, self-obsessed heroin-addicted basket cases lounging around whining about their problems. It's like watching lizards molt. Even the sex scenes will induce a serious case of narcolepsy. If you have insomnia, rent this. --------------------------------------------- Result 764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] One [[reason]] Pixar has [[endured]] so well, and been so successful, is that while their [[films]] [[remain]] technical marvels and [[visual]] mosaics, they have a story to [[match]] their [[style]]. And [[often]] very moving [[style]] at that: [[affecting]], charming and cross-generational. That a lot Anime (speaking in [[broad]] terms) and a [[great]] [[many]] other animations fail to [[match]] their technical virtuosity with real substance is, I [[think]] (and I might be wrong) partly because either the makers aren't bothered with [[character]] and plot and [[focus]] far too much on sound and image, or the sheer effort that goes into making some animations is so enormous, so enervating that they don't have the energy to create a [[really]] engaging story.

That same cannot be said of Renaissance. There are flaws in its plot, but I'll get to that later. Those same flaws, however, are not reflected in the visuals - Renaissance is nowt short of stunning. The ultra-high contrast [[images]] (sometimes so high-contrast that is nothing but one face or one beam of light visible) and [[incredible]] detail are always [[impressive]], always a [[joy]] to [[behold]]. The futuristic Paris on display is the grim offspring of Blade Runner and [[Brave]] [[New]] World; dark, murky, [[quite]] affluent and even clean, but shrouded in intrigue, corporate malfeasance, obsessed with beauty (capital of the catwalk, after all) and disguising the squalor and neglect of its labyrinthine passages with a veneer of monumental, sophisticated architecture.

It's a [[compelling]] environment, not [[entirely]] [[original]], but [[great]] all the same. The film's much-touted 'motion-capture' technology and [[incredible]] attention to human and design minutiae [[result]] in [[images]] a black-and-white [[photographer]] [[would]] [[die]] for. Not that the [[detail]] [[prevents]] [[entertainment]], because Christian Volckman [[crafts]] some [[superb]] action [[sequences]]: a hell-for-leather care chase, a [[couple]] of [[gruesome]](ly imaginative) [[murders]], [[several]] tussles in the dark and a [[nasty]] dust-up in a [[gloomy]] apartment. The [[locations]] are [[great]], too (I want to visit the nightclub). While the central character of [[Karas]] is your [[regular]] off-the-shelf maverick cop, the other two female [[characters]] (who are [[sisters]]) are the [[real]] [[motors]] of the movie. Coming from war-torn Eastern Europe, products of a war, diaspora and a family spat, they're a compelling metaphor for Europe as a whole.

The film is tremendously atmospheric, its dizzying, swooping faux-camera moves and adult tone making for a very engaging experience. However, the plot... It never becomes more interesting than the initial hook, in which indefatigable plod Karas must find Ilona Tasuiev, a drop-dead gorgeous and pioneering scientist, after she's snatched from the street. The sinister corporation Avalon (is ANY corporation ever not sinister?), which she was working for on 'classified', projects are hell-bent on her retrieval, and soon Karas is up to his neck in official reprimands, dead bodies, cigarette-smoke and narrowly-missed bullets, and falling in love with Ilona's sister Bislane (very sympathetically voiced by Catherine McCormack), as he plumbs the depths of the city's sordid underbelly (and his own [[past]]).

Text-book noir, in other words, but while I enjoyed the film a lot more than Sin City (to which it bears a passing visual resemblance), the plot and resolution are dull, the theme of immortality being raised but never examined, and the shenanigans of high-rolling Avalon CEO Paul Dellenbach are also dull , undercutting a lot of the dramatic tension. The basic ideas are familiar sci-fi genre materials, and there's a nagging sense that the visuals and atmosphere are disguising the mundane material.

However, the film as a whole is lucid and perfectly coherent, even if some of the scenarios the characters get into occasionally feel like excuses for displays of technical wizardry. But it's the projection of life in Paris circa 2054, the vision of community and creation of another city from the ground up that makes this film something to behold. I may be taking it too seriously, and if that's the case I can at least say that it's superbly made, extremely entertaining (and pretty mature, too), and with an ambiance like no other. One [[justification]] Pixar has [[suffered]] so well, and been so successful, is that while their [[movies]] [[stay]] technical marvels and [[optic]] mosaics, they have a story to [[couple]] their [[elegance]]. And [[normally]] very moving [[stylistic]] at that: [[influenced]], charming and cross-generational. That a lot Anime (speaking in [[wide]] terms) and a [[marvellous]] [[several]] other animations fail to [[equalize]] their technical virtuosity with real substance is, I [[thought]] (and I might be wrong) partly because either the makers aren't bothered with [[trait]] and plot and [[focuses]] far too much on sound and image, or the sheer effort that goes into making some animations is so enormous, so enervating that they don't have the energy to create a [[genuinely]] engaging story.

That same cannot be said of Renaissance. There are flaws in its plot, but I'll get to that later. Those same flaws, however, are not reflected in the visuals - Renaissance is nowt short of stunning. The ultra-high contrast [[photo]] (sometimes so high-contrast that is nothing but one face or one beam of light visible) and [[stunning]] detail are always [[wondrous]], always a [[gladness]] to [[see]]. The futuristic Paris on display is the grim offspring of Blade Runner and [[Adventurous]] [[Newer]] World; dark, murky, [[rather]] affluent and even clean, but shrouded in intrigue, corporate malfeasance, obsessed with beauty (capital of the catwalk, after all) and disguising the squalor and neglect of its labyrinthine passages with a veneer of monumental, sophisticated architecture.

It's a [[cogent]] environment, not [[fully]] [[initial]], but [[huge]] all the same. The film's much-touted 'motion-capture' technology and [[phenomenal]] attention to human and design minutiae [[findings]] in [[photograph]] a black-and-white [[photograph]] [[should]] [[dying]] for. Not that the [[details]] [[precludes]] [[amusement]], because Christian Volckman [[artisans]] some [[wondrous]] action [[sequence]]: a hell-for-leather care chase, a [[pair]] of [[horrendous]](ly imaginative) [[assassinations]], [[many]] tussles in the dark and a [[nauseating]] dust-up in a [[morose]] apartment. The [[placements]] are [[wondrous]], too (I want to visit the nightclub). While the central character of [[Karras]] is your [[routine]] off-the-shelf maverick cop, the other two female [[personages]] (who are [[sister]]) are the [[actual]] [[automobiles]] of the movie. Coming from war-torn Eastern Europe, products of a war, diaspora and a family spat, they're a compelling metaphor for Europe as a whole.

The film is tremendously atmospheric, its dizzying, swooping faux-camera moves and adult tone making for a very engaging experience. However, the plot... It never becomes more interesting than the initial hook, in which indefatigable plod Karas must find Ilona Tasuiev, a drop-dead gorgeous and pioneering scientist, after she's snatched from the street. The sinister corporation Avalon (is ANY corporation ever not sinister?), which she was working for on 'classified', projects are hell-bent on her retrieval, and soon Karas is up to his neck in official reprimands, dead bodies, cigarette-smoke and narrowly-missed bullets, and falling in love with Ilona's sister Bislane (very sympathetically voiced by Catherine McCormack), as he plumbs the depths of the city's sordid underbelly (and his own [[bygone]]).

Text-book noir, in other words, but while I enjoyed the film a lot more than Sin City (to which it bears a passing visual resemblance), the plot and resolution are dull, the theme of immortality being raised but never examined, and the shenanigans of high-rolling Avalon CEO Paul Dellenbach are also dull , undercutting a lot of the dramatic tension. The basic ideas are familiar sci-fi genre materials, and there's a nagging sense that the visuals and atmosphere are disguising the mundane material.

However, the film as a whole is lucid and perfectly coherent, even if some of the scenarios the characters get into occasionally feel like excuses for displays of technical wizardry. But it's the projection of life in Paris circa 2054, the vision of community and creation of another city from the ground up that makes this film something to behold. I may be taking it too seriously, and if that's the case I can at least say that it's superbly made, extremely entertaining (and pretty mature, too), and with an ambiance like no other. --------------------------------------------- Result 765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Chris Rock, apparently desperate for a cozy star-vehicle which would cross his appeal over to white and mainstream black audiences, [[updates]] the hit 1978 comedy "Heaven Can Wait" with an urban agenda. He plays a struggling comedian involved in a car accident who has his soul removed too soon from his body--consequently, his angels must find another body to place him in, and can only come up with that of a white businessman. [[Rewriting]] a [[movie]] as bland and sentimental as "Heaven Can [[Wait]]" only [[shows]] that Rock's [[eye]] was on the box-office (this was [[strictly]] a corporate move organized by the most mercenary of Hollywood players). Why not [[strive]] for [[something]] loftier or more memorable than a [[silly]] reincarnation comedy that culminates with an Evening at the Apollo? Terrific [[supporting]] cast ([[including]] the usually-reliable Regina King, the [[wonderful]] [[Mark]] Addy, Wanda Sykes, [[Eugene]] [[Levy]], and terrific Frankie Faison) do what they can, but [[Rock]] seems [[awkward]] and [[unsure]] of himself [[throughout]]. *1/2 from **** Chris Rock, apparently desperate for a cozy star-vehicle which would cross his appeal over to white and mainstream black audiences, [[refreshed]] the hit 1978 comedy "Heaven Can Wait" with an urban agenda. He plays a struggling comedian involved in a car accident who has his soul removed too soon from his body--consequently, his angels must find another body to place him in, and can only come up with that of a white businessman. [[Rewrite]] a [[filmmaking]] as bland and sentimental as "Heaven Can [[Awaits]]" only [[exhibitions]] that Rock's [[ojo]] was on the box-office (this was [[tightly]] a corporate move organized by the most mercenary of Hollywood players). Why not [[try]] for [[anything]] loftier or more memorable than a [[asinine]] reincarnation comedy that culminates with an Evening at the Apollo? Terrific [[assists]] cast ([[encompassing]] the usually-reliable Regina King, the [[sumptuous]] [[Marks]] Addy, Wanda Sykes, [[Nunez]] [[Levi]], and terrific Frankie Faison) do what they can, but [[Boulder]] seems [[tricky]] and [[insecure]] of himself [[during]]. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 766 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] My title above says it all. Let me make it [[clearer]]. If you have seen the BBC's "Planet Earth" , which I am sure most of you have , then you are not gonna like this [[movie]] too much. And I own all the [[discs]] of "Planet Earth" I had [[seen]] the rating for this movie very high , and read good [[reviews]] about it. I was excited to check it out.

[[Alas]], I went to the theater and the movie [[started]] , I saw it was a Disney movie with production companies listing BBC and [[Discovery]]. And when they started the first scenes about the polar bear, I recognized them from my DVDs at home of "Planet Earth".

The [[movie]] [[continued]] and went on and on and on , me and my friends kept on recognizing the scenes were all from "Planet [[Earth]]".

We were very very [[disappointed]] , as I think 90% of the footage is from "Planet Earth" . I am saying 90% , because some of the scenes I didn't [[recognize]]. I have a feeling that I simply didn't [[remember]] them.

So finally what this [[movie]] really is , is a [[compilation]] of [[different]] footages from the [[different]] [[discs]] of "Planet [[Earth]]" , with a [[narration]] [[aimed]] at kids. Yes, the [[narration]] is [[quite]] kiddish. Let me give you an example. When they show the polar cubs walking away from the mother cub , the narrator says "The polar cubs are not like human kids. They don't always listen to their mothers" ( I don't remember the exact words , but this is how it is ) So in a nutshell. This is condensed "Planet Earth" for kids ! My title above says it all. Let me make it [[clearest]]. If you have seen the BBC's "Planet Earth" , which I am sure most of you have , then you are not gonna like this [[flick]] too much. And I own all the [[disc]] of "Planet Earth" I had [[noticed]] the rating for this movie very high , and read good [[scrutinize]] about it. I was excited to check it out.

[[Alack]], I went to the theater and the movie [[commences]] , I saw it was a Disney movie with production companies listing BBC and [[Discover]]. And when they started the first scenes about the polar bear, I recognized them from my DVDs at home of "Planet Earth".

The [[filmmaking]] [[continues]] and went on and on and on , me and my friends kept on recognizing the scenes were all from "Planet [[Land]]".

We were very very [[frustrating]] , as I think 90% of the footage is from "Planet Earth" . I am saying 90% , because some of the scenes I didn't [[accepted]]. I have a feeling that I simply didn't [[remind]] them.

So finally what this [[filmmaking]] really is , is a [[collecting]] of [[divergent]] footages from the [[diverse]] [[disc]] of "Planet [[Land]]" , with a [[storytelling]] [[geared]] at kids. Yes, the [[narrative]] is [[rather]] kiddish. Let me give you an example. When they show the polar cubs walking away from the mother cub , the narrator says "The polar cubs are not like human kids. They don't always listen to their mothers" ( I don't remember the exact words , but this is how it is ) So in a nutshell. This is condensed "Planet Earth" for kids ! --------------------------------------------- Result 767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Actually my vote is a 7.5. Anyway, the movie was good, it has those funny parts that make it deserve to see it, don't misunderstand me, is not the funniest movie of the world, and its not even original because its a idea that we have seen before in other movies, but this one has its own taste, a friend of mine told me that this was a film for boyfriends... I think that not exactly but who cares? Also there is another movie that show us almost the same topic, Chris Rock appears in it, the name is Down to Earth, men, that one its a very funny movie, see both if you want and I know that you will agree that Mr. Rock won with his movie. I would liked that the protagonist male character were given to Ashton Kutcher, however, the film is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie is entertaining [[enough]] due to an excellent performance by [[Virginia]] Madsen and the fact that Lindsey Haun is [[lovely]]. [[However]] the reason the movie is so [[predictable]] is that we've seen it all before. I've haven't read the book A Mother's Gift but I hope for Britney and Lynne Spears sake it is completely different than this movie. [[Unless]] you consider ending a movie with what is essentially a music video an original [[idea]], the entire [[movie]] [[brings]] to mind the word plagiarized. This movie is entertaining [[satisfactorily]] due to an excellent performance by [[Virginie]] Madsen and the fact that Lindsey Haun is [[loverly]]. [[Yet]] the reason the movie is so [[foreseeable]] is that we've seen it all before. I've haven't read the book A Mother's Gift but I hope for Britney and Lynne Spears sake it is completely different than this movie. [[If]] you consider ending a movie with what is essentially a music video an original [[concept]], the entire [[filmmaking]] [[puts]] to mind the word plagiarized. --------------------------------------------- Result 769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] as a habit i always like to read through the '[[hated]] it' [[reviews]] of any [[given]] movie. especially one that i'd [[want]] to comment on. and it's not so much a point-counterpoint [[sorta]] deal; i just like to [[see]] what people [[say]] on the flipside.

however, i do want to address one [[thing]]. many people that [[hated]] it called it, to paraphrase, '[[beautiful]], but shallow,' some even going so far as to say that norm's desire yet inability to help his brother was a mundane plot, at best.

i'd like to disagree.

as a brother of a sibling who has a similar dysfunction, i can relate. daily, you see them abuse themselves, knowing only that their current path will inevitably lead them to self-destruction. and it's not about the specifics of what they did when; how or why paul decided to take up gambling and associating with questionable folks; it's really more how they are wired. on one hand, they are veritable geniuses, and on the other, painfully self-destructive (it's a lot like people like howard hughes — the same forces which drive them are the same forces which tear them apart) and all the while you see this, you know this, and what's worse, you realize you can't do a damn thing about it.

for norman [[maclean]], a river runs through it was probably a way to find an answer to why the tragedy had to occur, and who was to blame. in the end, no one is, and often, there is no why. but it takes a great deal of personal anguish to truly come to this realization. sometimes it takes a lifetime. and sometimes it never comes at all. as a habit i always like to read through the '[[loathed]] it' [[inspecting]] of any [[gave]] movie. especially one that i'd [[desiring]] to comment on. and it's not so much a point-counterpoint [[kinda]] deal; i just like to [[consults]] what people [[tell]] on the flipside.

however, i do want to address one [[stuff]]. many people that [[hates]] it called it, to paraphrase, '[[wondrous]], but shallow,' some even going so far as to say that norm's desire yet inability to help his brother was a mundane plot, at best.

i'd like to disagree.

as a brother of a sibling who has a similar dysfunction, i can relate. daily, you see them abuse themselves, knowing only that their current path will inevitably lead them to self-destruction. and it's not about the specifics of what they did when; how or why paul decided to take up gambling and associating with questionable folks; it's really more how they are wired. on one hand, they are veritable geniuses, and on the other, painfully self-destructive (it's a lot like people like howard hughes — the same forces which drive them are the same forces which tear them apart) and all the while you see this, you know this, and what's worse, you realize you can't do a damn thing about it.

for norman [[mcclain]], a river runs through it was probably a way to find an answer to why the tragedy had to occur, and who was to blame. in the end, no one is, and often, there is no why. but it takes a great deal of personal anguish to truly come to this realization. sometimes it takes a lifetime. and sometimes it never comes at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After becoming completely addicted to Six Feet Under, I didn't think there would ever be another show that would come close to being as good as this show. Well, I was wrong! Lost is spellbinding!! I absolutely love this show and cannot turn it off. The richness of the characters, the intricacies of the plot, the beautiful setting are all amazing. I am totally and completely hooked. I don't know how the creators do it, but each character touches me very deeply. I feel their joy, their pain, everything, right down to my core!!! I don't have cable so I've been renting the series on Netflix. When I put it on I watch all the episodes at once and feel sad when it is over. I can't wait for the next disc to arrive at my house. This is probably the best TV show I have ever seen!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has great style, fantastic visuals and hot sex scenes with a beautiful woman. It falters at the end as the story twists get a little bit extreme.. but all in all, I would recommend this movie just because it has that good old Russian feel to it.. big, impressive, powerful, bleak and brutal and at the same time beautiful in the old tradition of tragic beauty.

PLOT: A guy who can make a blade shoot out of his hand at will (not a spoiler since they show it in the trailer) when he is REALLY mad at you tries to have a girlfriend.. he discovers that after you kill one person with your sword hand, it's kind of hard to keep a stable relationship....

Sword boy is on the planet for a reason.. he just doesn't know what it is.. YET.

Lots of dark street fights with guys unexpectedly getting filleted creatively.

RUSSAIN w ENG subtitles.. slick worth a watch.. --------------------------------------------- Result 772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Murders are occurring in a Texas desert town. Who is responsible? Slight novelties of mystery and racial tensions (the latter really doesn't fit), but otherwise strictly for slasher fans, who will appreciate the gore and nudity, which are two conventional elements for these films.

Dana Kimmell (of FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 3 infamy) stars as the bratty quasi-detective teen.

*1/2 out of ****

MPAA: Rated R for violence and gore, nudity, and some language. --------------------------------------------- Result 773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh dear god. This was horrible. There is bad, then there was this. This movie makes no sense at all. It runs all over the map and isn't clear about what its saying at all. The music seemed like it was trying to be like Batman. The fact that 'Edison' isn't a real city, takes away. Since I live in Vancouver, watching this movie and recognizing all these places made it unbearable. Why didn't they make it a real city? The only writing that was decent was'Tilman' in which John Heard did a fantastic job. He was the only actor who played his role realistically and not over the top and campy. It was actually a shame to see John Heard play such a great bad guy with a lot of screen time, and the movie be a washout. Too bad. Hopefully someone important will see it, and at least give John Heard credit where credit is due, and hire him as lead bad guy again, which is where he should be. on the A List. --------------------------------------------- Result 774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Have you ever wished that you could escape your [[dull]] and stressful [[life]] at [[school]] or [[work]] and [[go]] on a [[magical]] adventure of your own, with one of your [[closest]] [[friends]] at your side, [[facing]] all [[sorts]] of [[dangers]] and [[villains]], and unraveling the [[mystery]] of a lost [[civilization]] that's just [[waiting]] for [[someone]] to [[discover]] all its secrets? [[Even]] if you're not [[quite]] that much of a fantasy-lover, have you ever wished you could [[simply]] experience what it's like to be a [[kid]] again, and not have a care in the world, for just a [[couple]] of [[hours]]?

This is [[exactly]] what Miyazaki's "Castle in the [[Sky]]" is all about. Pazu, a [[young]] but very [[brave]] and ambitious [[engineer]], lives a rustic life in a mining [[town]] until one day, a [[girl]] named Sheeta falls down from the [[sky]] like an [[angel]] and takes him on a [[journey]] to a place far beyond the clouds, while all the while they have [[pirates]] and military units [[hot]] on their trail. [[Simply]] put, it is just the [[incredible]] adventure that [[every]] [[kid]] dreams of at one point or another, and I can't [[help]] but feel my [[worries]] [[melt]] away [[every]] [[time]] I [[see]] it.

As it is one of Miyazaki's older [[works]] and takes much place in the [[everyday]] world, the [[film]] is not as visually [[spectacular]] or deep in its storyline as [[Spirited]] Away, Howl's [[Moving]] Castle, or [[even]] Princess Mononoke. Still, I [[find]] it [[difficult]] to [[say]] that any of these [[films]] are [[superior]] over the other, because all three of those [[films]] are, at some point or another, mystical to the point of being [[enigmatic]], if not perplexing, [[especially]] for the [[youngest]] of [[viewers]].

"[[Castle]] in the [[Sky]]", on the other hand, doesn't [[try]] so much to be an allegory of any [[kind]], and it's not a coming-of-age [[story]] [[either]]; it is [[instead]] [[quite]] possibly one of the [[best]] [[depictions]] of the [[inside]] of a child's mind I've ever [[seen]]. Not only is the artwork [[beautiful]], but the [[use]] of [[perspective]] from the kids' [[eyes]] is just [[amazing]]; whether it's the panning up of the "camera" to [[see]] the [[enormous]] [[trees]] or clouds overhead, or the [[incredible]] sense of [[height]] from [[looking]] down at the [[ground]] or [[ocean]] while hundreds of feet in the air, I just can't [[help]] but FEEL like I'm there with Pazu and Sheeta, just a [[kid]] in another world, far far away from reality.

Even the kids themselves don't have a complex relationship that suggests a need for hope like Ashitaka/San or Chihiro/Haku; Sheeta is Pazu's angel, having literally fallen into his life from the sky one day, the absolutely perfect person for him right from the very start. As the film progresses, more and more of their true adventurous childhood spirit comes out through their kind words and beautifully realistic facial expressions. Not only are they an adorable reminder of who I used to be, but their endearing friendship never lets up throughout the whole film, only growing stronger all the way to the last frame. For that reason, I've fallen in love with the two of them more than I have with any other Miyazaki couple.

At the same time, "Castle in the Sky" is such an easily accessible film because no matter what kind of casual moviegoer you may be, you'll be sure to find your fix here. Mystery, action, drama, comedy, suspense, sci-fi, romance, even some western...it's all here, just about everything people go to the movies for (except maybe horror). This why I can easily recommend it as a first Miyazaki film; it's perfect for those who have no expectations from having already seen the incredible otherworldliness of some of his more recent works.

Even the ending song of the [[film]], when translated into English, conveys the sense of longing for the discovery of some kind of lost civilization, and some kind of soul-mate, that could not be found in our mundane lives. "The reason I long for the many lights is that you are there in one of them...The earth spins, carrying you, carrying us both who'll surely meet." Miyazaki has always provided poetic lyrics to make ending songs out of Joe Hiasashi's gorgeous scores, but this is the only one I've seen that's both a touching love song and an inspirational dream. I have found myself near tears just listening to it.

"Castle in the Sky" may not be Miyazaki's most developed, spectacular, or meaningful work, but it's absolutely perfect for what it really was meant to be: a true vision of childhood fantasy, and a wonderful escape from reality for any adults who wish they could have the same wonderful sense of imagination they had when they were just carefree little kids. Sit back, relax, and love it for what it is. Have you ever wished that you could escape your [[uninspiring]] and stressful [[lifetime]] at [[tuition]] or [[collaborate]] and [[going]] on a [[quadrant]] adventure of your own, with one of your [[near]] [[mates]] at your side, [[encountering]] all [[genre]] of [[menace]] and [[punks]], and unraveling the [[riddle]] of a lost [[civilizations]] that's just [[hoping]] for [[everybody]] to [[detected]] all its secrets? [[Yet]] if you're not [[rather]] that much of a fantasy-lover, have you ever wished you could [[merely]] experience what it's like to be a [[petit]] again, and not have a care in the world, for just a [[matching]] of [[hour]]?

This is [[accurately]] what Miyazaki's "Castle in the [[Heavens]]" is all about. Pazu, a [[youthful]] but very [[heroic]] and ambitious [[engineering]], lives a rustic life in a mining [[towns]] until one day, a [[girls]] named Sheeta falls down from the [[heavens]] like an [[angels]] and takes him on a [[voyager]] to a place far beyond the clouds, while all the while they have [[pirate]] and military units [[sexy]] on their trail. [[Simple]] put, it is just the [[unthinkable]] adventure that [[all]] [[petit]] dreams of at one point or another, and I can't [[supporting]] but feel my [[disturbs]] [[molten]] away [[each]] [[period]] I [[seeing]] it.

As it is one of Miyazaki's older [[work]] and takes much place in the [[ordinary]] world, the [[movie]] is not as visually [[noteworthy]] or deep in its storyline as [[Lively]] Away, Howl's [[Relocating]] Castle, or [[yet]] Princess Mononoke. Still, I [[found]] it [[cumbersome]] to [[told]] that any of these [[movie]] are [[higher]] over the other, because all three of those [[movie]] are, at some point or another, mystical to the point of being [[mysterious]], if not perplexing, [[mostly]] for the [[younger]] of [[moviegoers]].

"[[Castillo]] in the [[Heaven]]", on the other hand, doesn't [[trying]] so much to be an allegory of any [[sorts]], and it's not a coming-of-age [[history]] [[nor]]; it is [[alternatively]] [[rather]] possibly one of the [[nicest]] [[representations]] of the [[interiors]] of a child's mind I've ever [[noticed]]. Not only is the artwork [[excellent]], but the [[usage]] of [[views]] from the kids' [[eye]] is just [[astonishing]]; whether it's the panning up of the "camera" to [[behold]] the [[considerable]] [[tree]] or clouds overhead, or the [[unthinkable]] sense of [[pinnacle]] from [[researching]] down at the [[terra]] or [[marine]] while hundreds of feet in the air, I just can't [[aid]] but FEEL like I'm there with Pazu and Sheeta, just a [[child]] in another world, far far away from reality.

Even the kids themselves don't have a complex relationship that suggests a need for hope like Ashitaka/San or Chihiro/Haku; Sheeta is Pazu's angel, having literally fallen into his life from the sky one day, the absolutely perfect person for him right from the very start. As the film progresses, more and more of their true adventurous childhood spirit comes out through their kind words and beautifully realistic facial expressions. Not only are they an adorable reminder of who I used to be, but their endearing friendship never lets up throughout the whole film, only growing stronger all the way to the last frame. For that reason, I've fallen in love with the two of them more than I have with any other Miyazaki couple.

At the same time, "Castle in the Sky" is such an easily accessible film because no matter what kind of casual moviegoer you may be, you'll be sure to find your fix here. Mystery, action, drama, comedy, suspense, sci-fi, romance, even some western...it's all here, just about everything people go to the movies for (except maybe horror). This why I can easily recommend it as a first Miyazaki film; it's perfect for those who have no expectations from having already seen the incredible otherworldliness of some of his more recent works.

Even the ending song of the [[cinema]], when translated into English, conveys the sense of longing for the discovery of some kind of lost civilization, and some kind of soul-mate, that could not be found in our mundane lives. "The reason I long for the many lights is that you are there in one of them...The earth spins, carrying you, carrying us both who'll surely meet." Miyazaki has always provided poetic lyrics to make ending songs out of Joe Hiasashi's gorgeous scores, but this is the only one I've seen that's both a touching love song and an inspirational dream. I have found myself near tears just listening to it.

"Castle in the Sky" may not be Miyazaki's most developed, spectacular, or meaningful work, but it's absolutely perfect for what it really was meant to be: a true vision of childhood fantasy, and a wonderful escape from reality for any adults who wish they could have the same wonderful sense of imagination they had when they were just carefree little kids. Sit back, relax, and love it for what it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie was so [[terrible]] it was [[almost]] [[good]]... [[almost]]. We [[love]] musicals, but not this one. Even with the [[terrible]] sound quality, poor [[cinematography]], and [[many]] actors who can't sing or dance, Anthony Rapp actually managed to give a good performance (especially [[toward]] the [[end]]). The character Marjorie, a drunk lady, was enjoyable to watch, too.

The plot is very [[unexpected]] and [[could]] have been [[funny]] without [[terrible]] [[singing]] and cheezy piano [[music]]. Admittadly, some of the [[songs]] (fantabulous) are pretty catchy (but not in a [[good]] way).

[[Open]] House is a funny movie to watch simply because it is awful! We think it might be a good stage musical (with excellent actors). This movie was so [[frightful]] it was [[nigh]] [[alright]]... [[hardly]]. We [[likes]] musicals, but not this one. Even with the [[dreaded]] sound quality, poor [[movies]], and [[various]] actors who can't sing or dance, Anthony Rapp actually managed to give a good performance (especially [[into]] the [[terminates]]). The character Marjorie, a drunk lady, was enjoyable to watch, too.

The plot is very [[unforeseeable]] and [[did]] have been [[fun]] without [[abysmal]] [[singer]] and cheezy piano [[musician]]. Admittadly, some of the [[anthems]] (fantabulous) are pretty catchy (but not in a [[alright]] way).

[[Openings]] House is a funny movie to watch simply because it is awful! We think it might be a good stage musical (with excellent actors). --------------------------------------------- Result 776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] Netflix should [[mention]] this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. [[Superior]] in [[every]] [[way]] to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk [[Stockings]] turned out to be a [[big]] disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are [[lovely]]. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? [[Very]] glad that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple "song and dance man' is pure joy. Netflix should [[referenced]] this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. [[Superiors]] in [[any]] [[pathways]] to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk [[Tights]] turned out to be a [[hefty]] disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are [[wondrous]]. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? [[Much]] glad that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple "song and dance man' is pure joy. --------------------------------------------- Result 777 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched [[Lion]] king more [[times]] that all my [[friends]] put togther. Having a baby [[sister]].. you know how it is. By now i memorized both the plot and the lines. After Lion king 2 came out i was like [[ok]] well [[let]] me [[see]]... the second one was significantly [[weaker]]... then i [[saw]] an [[ad]] for lion king 1 and 1/2... I was like [[ok]] there we go again. [[After]] watching the 1 1/2 i was like wow. All my expectations (for repetitevness) were [[broken]]. A [[truly]] [[lovely]] and original [[plot]] keeps you glued to your seat for the entire time. I have noticed that the cartoon was filled with so many comical moments that ROFlmao will apply here 100%.

I definetly recommend seeing the cartoon. I watched [[Iion]] king more [[moments]] that all my [[boyfriends]] put togther. Having a baby [[sisters]].. you know how it is. By now i memorized both the plot and the lines. After Lion king 2 came out i was like [[allright]] well [[leave]] me [[consults]]... the second one was significantly [[lowest]]... then i [[watched]] an [[advertisement]] for lion king 1 and 1/2... I was like [[okay]] there we go again. [[Upon]] watching the 1 1/2 i was like wow. All my expectations (for repetitevness) were [[broke]]. A [[genuinely]] [[loverly]] and original [[intrigue]] keeps you glued to your seat for the entire time. I have noticed that the cartoon was filled with so many comical moments that ROFlmao will apply here 100%.

I definetly recommend seeing the cartoon. --------------------------------------------- Result 778 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I vaguely remember Ben from my Sci-Fi fandom days of the '60s, I was doing several interviews & bios of obscure actors/actresses, most notably Ben, actress Fay Spain, and Jody Fair, who played Angela in 1961's The Young Savages. Ben was one of the people at a low-key Sci-Fi con in Chicago, about 1970, when I had a nice chat with him and his "career" and life. All these were published in some now-long-forgotten fanzine of the day. Wish I still had copies of those interviews, but time marches on, and any of those people surely wouldn't' remember me at all so many years later. Ben was a really nice fellow, ekeing out a living (The cons of those days didn't even pay their guest, unless, of course they were big-name stars, and even then the pay was a couple hundred dollars, at most! Good to know Ben's still alive & kicking! How 'bout a remake of Creature, but 50 years older! Ugly then, uglier now! --------------------------------------------- Result 779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A long [[time]] ago, in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the original "[[Star]] Wars" film was released. He doesn't [[remember]] first [[seeing]] the movie, but he [[also]] doesn't [[remember]] life before it. He does [[remember]] the first "Star Wars" themed gift he [[got]]...a shoebox full of action figures from the [[original]] set. He was too [[young]] to [[fully]] [[appreciate]] how special that [[gift]] [[would]] be. But [[years]] later, he would [[get]] what to this day goes down as one of the [[best]] gifts he's ever received: another box full of [[action]] figures, ten of the [[final]] twelve he [[needed]] to [[complete]] his [[collection]]. It's now [[legendary]] in this boy's [[family]] how the last [[action]] figure he [[needed]], [[Anakin]] Skywalker, [[stopped]] being [[produced]] and carried in [[stores]], and how this [[boy]] went for about ten [[years]] (until he [[got]] into [[college]]) [[trying]] to [[track]] one down and [[finally]] [[bought]] it from [[someone]] on his [[dorm]] floor for a [[bag]] of beer nuggets (don't [[ask]]...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).

I can't [[review]] "Star Wars" as a [[movie]]. It represents [[absolutely]] everything good, [[fun]] and magical about my [[childhood]]. There's no separating it in my mind from [[Christmases]], birthdays, summers and [[winters]] growing up. [[In]] the winter, my [[friends]] and I would [[build]] [[snow]] forts and [[pretend]] we were on Hoth (I was [[always]] [[Han]] [[Solo]]). My friends' [[dad]] built them a kick-ass tree [[house]], and that served as the Ewok village. They [[also]] had a huge [[pine]] tree whose bottom branches were [[high]] enough to [[create]] a [[sort]] of cave [[underneath]] it, and this made a [[great]] [[spot]] to pretend we were in Yoda's [[home]]. I am unabashedly dorky when it [[comes]] to "Star [[Wars]]" and I [[think]] people either just understand that or they don't. I don't [[get]] the appeal of "Lord of the [[Rings]]" or "Star Trek" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.

I feel no [[need]] to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.

Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+ A long [[times]] ago, in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the original "[[Superstar]] Wars" film was released. He doesn't [[remind]] first [[witnessing]] the movie, but he [[further]] doesn't [[recalling]] life before it. He does [[remembers]] the first "Star Wars" themed gift he [[ai]]...a shoebox full of action figures from the [[preliminary]] set. He was too [[youth]] to [[totally]] [[grateful]] how special that [[donation]] [[should]] be. But [[olds]] later, he would [[got]] what to this day goes down as one of the [[bestest]] gifts he's ever received: another box full of [[activities]] figures, ten of the [[ultimate]] twelve he [[requirement]] to [[completes]] his [[collections]]. It's now [[mythical]] in this boy's [[families]] how the last [[actions]] figure he [[needs]], [[Skywalker]] Skywalker, [[stop]] being [[generated]] and carried in [[shop]], and how this [[guy]] went for about ten [[olds]] (until he [[gets]] into [[academics]]) [[tempting]] to [[rails]] one down and [[ultimately]] [[acquire]] it from [[somebody]] on his [[roost]] floor for a [[backpack]] of beer nuggets (don't [[requesting]]...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).

I can't [[reviewed]] "Star Wars" as a [[films]]. It represents [[entirely]] everything good, [[funny]] and magical about my [[preschool]]. There's no separating it in my mind from [[Xmas]], birthdays, summers and [[winter]] growing up. [[Onto]] the winter, my [[friend]] and I would [[constructing]] [[snowy]] forts and [[pretending]] we were on Hoth (I was [[continuously]] [[Ambrose]] [[Alone]]). My friends' [[pope]] built them a kick-ass tree [[maison]], and that served as the Ewok village. They [[similarly]] had a huge [[pines]] tree whose bottom branches were [[highest]] enough to [[creating]] a [[sorting]] of cave [[beneath]] it, and this made a [[wondrous]] [[blemish]] to pretend we were in Yoda's [[house]]. I am unabashedly dorky when it [[arrives]] to "Star [[War]]" and I [[ideas]] people either just understand that or they don't. I don't [[got]] the appeal of "Lord of the [[Piercings]]" or "Star Trek" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.

I feel no [[requisite]] to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.

Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 780 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] This [[movie]] is pretty cheesy, but I do give it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's principles. There are some [[great]] moments in the film and the [[dialogue]] has some [[great]] moments as well.

The aerial assault sequence is [[perhaps]] the [[best]] part of the movie.

I guess I really like the idea of what lengths a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. Sure it's not all that well done, but the [[premise]] is not at all [[bad]].

Tom This [[kino]] is pretty cheesy, but I do give it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's principles. There are some [[huge]] moments in the film and the [[talks]] has some [[wondrous]] moments as well.

The aerial assault sequence is [[presumably]] the [[better]] part of the movie.

I guess I really like the idea of what lengths a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. Sure it's not all that well done, but the [[prerequisite]] is not at all [[horrid]].

Tom --------------------------------------------- Result 781 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is just horrible, really horrible trash. Yes, we've got beautiful naked women dancing and having sex. But while this may work in the mechanism of a porn movie – may have even been a hit as a porn movie – this tries to mask itself as a "film" with actual things to say, with real emotion and struggle. It isn't. It's an excuse to get some girls naked and have a fun time. I'm sure all of these women (and men) in this particular movie could have faired decently in the porn movie business of the 1970s . . . but not in the actual movie business.

The acting was hackneyed, so bad, I mean real terrible. The writing was even worse. I can't lay all blame on these actors – they had nothing to work with. The very broad structure or plot of the movie could possibly be done and done well with good writers and competent actors. The very broad structure or plot is that of a psychotic man who spends his time shooting people from afar, as a sniper. These shootings were motivated from men not respecting their women enough. If there was more writing - better writing, much better writing - and less gratuitous sexual imagery we might have something to work with.

This movie should have been shot, made and marketed a hardcore porn movie all along; it would have made more money. It practically is a hardcore porn film already, and it remains the only non-porn movie I've seen that shows a male erect penis. --------------------------------------------- Result 782 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A good cast and they do their best with what they're given, but the story makes no sense, the characters' actions are inexplicable, and there are too many moments of unintentional humor, as when a man is killed by being pierced with pieces of a phonograph record or when they get the witch drunk to a hip hop beat and then hit her over the head with a bottle and she grabs her hostage and pouts off. The scene when the two witch and her victim (played by the same actress) are in the house together sets up like a 3 Stooges routine, and the plot begs the question: if the witch wants to possess this other woman's soul, why doesn't she just do it instead of leading these people on this elaborate chase? Not to be missed is Christopher Walkin's eyeglasses and his automotive explanation of the afterlife (paraphrased): "The ancient Egyptianas - they wee materialists. They expected the body to last through eternity, like a used car that you souped up. But the Druids, they knew you couldn't drive in the afterlife. You had to get out and walk." Huh? The ending is absolutely indecipherable. Seems like they just ran out of film. --------------------------------------------- Result 783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw this movie today at the Seattle International Film Festival, and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Great writing and direction, excellent and believable interaction among the cast, and great comic timing as well.

This movie touches on themes that are universal-family and separation. As a result, I can see European, Asian, and American audiences all finding points of similarity between this film and their own lives.

If all that wasn't enough, this has the potential to be the best underground date movie of the year...somebody distribute this in the USA, please!

Finally: thank you Maria Flom! It really is a great film. --------------------------------------------- Result 784 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[film]] actually works from a fairly original [[idea]] - I've never [[seen]] nymphs that were thrown out of [[heaven]] in a horror [[movie]] before anyway. [[However]], the [[way]] that it [[executes]] this [[idea]] isn't [[original]] in the [[slightest]]; we follow a bunch of [[kids]] that, for some reason decide to [[go]] on a trip into the forest. The [[fact]] that the forest is [[inhabited]] by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/[[nutcases]]/[[zombies]] etc; but [[really]], the [[monsters]] are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real [[asset]] that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.

It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror [[setting]]. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct [[lack]] of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only [[real]] [[highlight]] the [[film]] has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's [[nothing]] to [[recommend]] this [[film]] for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties [[woodland]] flicks, you [[might]] find some enjoyment here. This [[cinema]] actually works from a fairly original [[thoughts]] - I've never [[noticed]] nymphs that were thrown out of [[sky]] in a horror [[films]] before anyway. [[Instead]], the [[ways]] that it [[run]] this [[ideals]] isn't [[upfront]] in the [[teeniest]]; we follow a bunch of [[infantile]] that, for some reason decide to [[going]] on a trip into the forest. The [[facto]] that the forest is [[resided]] by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/[[nitwits]]/[[walkers]] etc; but [[genuinely]], the [[freaks]] are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real [[assets]] that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.

It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror [[configured]]. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct [[scarcity]] of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only [[actual]] [[stresses]] the [[filmmaking]] has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's [[none]] to [[recommendations]] this [[filmmaking]] for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties [[wooded]] flicks, you [[apt]] find some enjoyment here. --------------------------------------------- Result 785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[brilliant]] chess player [[attends]] a tournament and falls in love with a [[woman]] he [[meets]] there. On itself this would be a pretty [[bad]] angle on a [[story]]. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is [[also]] completely alienated from the [[world]] because of his brilliance at the [[game]] and the fact there is some history haunting the player.

This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament tension to historic [[events]] that [[shaped]] the chess [[player]] and [[works]] [[quite]] nicely. It's easy to [[grow]] attached to the two [[main]] [[characters]] and [[easy]] to [[believe]] they might [[hit]] it off together like the [[way]] they do in this [[film]]. The [[added]] effect of the tournament is very good too and creates a nice [[tension]] [[setting]].

I have no [[idea]] of the strength of the chess [[players]] as I don't play the [[game]] myself but it looks [[nice]] and believable. [[All]] in all, most of the [[film]] goes down very [[easily]]. It is [[also]] forgotten again very [[easily]] though. [[So]] it's nice to watch but [[nothing]] more than that.

7 out of 10 [[chess]] players [[caught]] between a rook and a [[hard]] [[place]] A [[gorgeous]] chess player [[attend]] a tournament and falls in love with a [[female]] he [[satisfies]] there. On itself this would be a pretty [[rotten]] angle on a [[storytelling]]. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is [[furthermore]] completely alienated from the [[monde]] because of his brilliance at the [[gaming]] and the fact there is some history haunting the player.

This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament tension to historic [[incidents]] that [[modeled]] the chess [[protagonist]] and [[worked]] [[rather]] nicely. It's easy to [[risen]] attached to the two [[principal]] [[character]] and [[easier]] to [[think]] they might [[strike]] it off together like the [[manner]] they do in this [[cinematography]]. The [[add]] effect of the tournament is very good too and creates a nice [[tensile]] [[configured]].

I have no [[thinking]] of the strength of the chess [[actors]] as I don't play the [[gaming]] myself but it looks [[pleasant]] and believable. [[Everything]] in all, most of the [[kino]] goes down very [[conveniently]]. It is [[furthermore]] forgotten again very [[readily]] though. [[Hence]] it's nice to watch but [[anything]] more than that.

7 out of 10 [[chessboard]] players [[grabbed]] between a rook and a [[stiff]] [[placing]] --------------------------------------------- Result 786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have [[seen]] several comments here about Brando [[using]] a Southern accent, some of which felt it was a mistake. When this movie was [[made]], racism and discrimination were very strong in the [[South]]. The Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Civil Rights was in it's infancy. [[Could]] this have possibly been a subtle social commentary, a Southern man in [[love]] with a woman of another race? The same [[way]] MASH was a [[subtle]] criticism of the Viet Nam war? [[Any]] [[thoughts]]?

Another comment was made about Myoshi Umeki appearing "[[cold]]". [[Anyone]] who has been in Japan would [[understand]]. The Japanese people, at [[least]] in my [[experience]], did not [[tend]] to show emotion in front of [[strangers]]. There were [[strict]] social [[rules]], [[especially]] for men meeting [[single]] [[women]]. [[Americans]] in Japan were totally foreign to this [[culture]], and the blunt [[attempts]] to [[meet]] [[women]] were [[shocking]] to the [[ladies]]. One [[trait]] of the [[Japanese]] was to [[smile]] when embarrassed or [[uncomfortable]], which [[many]] American [[servicemen]] [[took]] as a sign that their [[advances]] were [[welcomed]]. [[Also]] remember that at the [[time]] [[represented]] in the movie, Japan had just been [[defeated]], and the occupying [[forces]] were [[treated]] with [[reluctant]] acceptance. I think Myoshi Umeki gave a very [[credible]] performance of what her situation would have been. Watching her [[interaction]] with the American actors brought back [[several]] [[memories]] of my own experiences in the country. I was able to [[meet]] a pair of lovely young ladies who, after I convinced them I was not the typical American male, taught me their language and their culture during my time in their country. I have [[watched]] several comments here about Brando [[use]] a Southern accent, some of which felt it was a mistake. When this movie was [[accomplished]], racism and discrimination were very strong in the [[Southern]]. The Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Civil Rights was in it's infancy. [[Wo]] this have possibly been a subtle social commentary, a Southern man in [[likes]] with a woman of another race? The same [[pathways]] MASH was a [[perceptive]] criticism of the Viet Nam war? [[Every]] [[thinking]]?

Another comment was made about Myoshi Umeki appearing "[[frigid]]". [[Nobody]] who has been in Japan would [[comprehend]]. The Japanese people, at [[fewer]] in my [[experiences]], did not [[tended]] to show emotion in front of [[alien]]. There were [[harsh]] social [[ordinance]], [[namely]] for men meeting [[alone]] [[females]]. [[American]] in Japan were totally foreign to this [[civilisations]], and the blunt [[endeavor]] to [[cater]] [[woman]] were [[frightening]] to the [[dame]]. One [[idiosyncrasies]] of the [[Japs]] was to [[grinning]] when embarrassed or [[uneasy]], which [[multiple]] American [[soldiers]] [[taken]] as a sign that their [[advance]] were [[praised]]. [[Similarly]] remember that at the [[period]] [[representing]] in the movie, Japan had just been [[conquered]], and the occupying [[troops]] were [[addressed]] with [[loath]] acceptance. I think Myoshi Umeki gave a very [[plausible]] performance of what her situation would have been. Watching her [[interactive]] with the American actors brought back [[numerous]] [[memoirs]] of my own experiences in the country. I was able to [[cater]] a pair of lovely young ladies who, after I convinced them I was not the typical American male, taught me their language and their culture during my time in their country. --------------------------------------------- Result 787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this dolph lundgren vehicle is a fun die hard throwback action flick, it isn't going to win any awards and its not very original but it delivers the goods you would want to see from a dolph lundgren movie. our man dolph is an ex soldier who is now a teacher at a tough inner city high school and when it gets taken over by terrorists its up to him to save the day. sure the script isn't going to win any Oscars its good fun and it has its fair share eplosive action. dolph lundgren gives a good enough performance but he comes alive more in the action scenes, and the rest of the cast are not the best actors but they hold it well. all in all detention is an enjoyable action flick, but youv'e seen it a million times before. --------------------------------------------- Result 788 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Religious bigotry is rampant [[everywhere]]. [[Australia]] is not immune to it.

A dingo [[snatched]] a baby and the mother was [[tried]] and sent to [[prison]] for having "killed" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before [[getting]] knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a prison.

[[Buy]] or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.

This is a very [[moving]] [[motion]] picture with a [[terrific]] cast of actors.

Both Meryl Streep (with her [[famous]] [[Aussie]] [[accent]]) and Sam Neill, whose [[accent]] is his native-born pronunciation, are [[outstanding]]. Those with supporting [[roles]] are [[also]] [[quite]] good.

You will [[remember]] this [[movie]] for [[many]] years.

See it! Religious bigotry is rampant [[anywhere]]. [[Australians]] is not immune to it.

A dingo [[abducted]] a baby and the mother was [[attempting]] and sent to [[jail]] for having "killed" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before [[obtaining]] knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a prison.

[[Buys]] or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.

This is a very [[shifting]] [[motions]] picture with a [[wondrous]] cast of actors.

Both Meryl Streep (with her [[notorious]] [[Australia]] [[emphasis]]) and Sam Neill, whose [[emphasis]] is his native-born pronunciation, are [[wondrous]]. Those with supporting [[duties]] are [[apart]] [[altogether]] good.

You will [[remind]] this [[films]] for [[several]] years.

See it! --------------------------------------------- Result 789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] This movie is a [[remake]] of two movies that were a lot better. The last one, Heaven Can Wait, was great, I suggest you see that one. This one is not so great. The [[last]] [[third]] of the [[movie]] is not so bad and Chris Rock starts to [[show]] some of the comic [[fun]] that got him to where he is [[today]]. However, I don't [[know]] what [[happened]] to the first two parts of this movie. It plays like some really bad "B" movie where people sound like they are in some bad TV sit-com. The situations are forced and it is like they are just trying to get the story over so they can start the real movie. It all [[seems]] real fake and the editing is just bad. I don't know how they could release this movie like that. Anyway, the last part isn't to bad, so wait for the video and see it then. This movie is a [[redo]] of two movies that were a lot better. The last one, Heaven Can Wait, was great, I suggest you see that one. This one is not so great. The [[lastly]] [[thirdly]] of the [[cinematographic]] is not so bad and Chris Rock starts to [[illustrating]] some of the comic [[funny]] that got him to where he is [[yesterday]]. However, I don't [[savoir]] what [[transpired]] to the first two parts of this movie. It plays like some really bad "B" movie where people sound like they are in some bad TV sit-com. The situations are forced and it is like they are just trying to get the story over so they can start the real movie. It all [[looks]] real fake and the editing is just bad. I don't know how they could release this movie like that. Anyway, the last part isn't to bad, so wait for the video and see it then. --------------------------------------------- Result 790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I'm tired of people [[judging]] [[films]] on their "historical accuracy". IT'S A MOVIE PEOPLE!! The writers and directors are supposed to put their own spin into the story! There are a number of movies out there that aren't entirely accurate with the history....Braveheart, Wyatt Earp, Gangs of New York, Geronimo: An American Legend, The Last of the Mohicans....all [[fantastic]] films that are mildly inaccurate historically. If you want to see a few great actors do what they do best, then I suggest you see this film and don't worry about the accuracy of the facts. Just enjoy the quality of the film, the storyline and one of the [[greatest]] actors of our time. I'm tired of people [[verdict]] [[movie]] on their "historical accuracy". IT'S A MOVIE PEOPLE!! The writers and directors are supposed to put their own spin into the story! There are a number of movies out there that aren't entirely accurate with the history....Braveheart, Wyatt Earp, Gangs of New York, Geronimo: An American Legend, The Last of the Mohicans....all [[wondrous]] films that are mildly inaccurate historically. If you want to see a few great actors do what they do best, then I suggest you see this film and don't worry about the accuracy of the facts. Just enjoy the quality of the film, the storyline and one of the [[higher]] actors of our time. --------------------------------------------- Result 791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Jeopardy]] has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only [[star]] is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a star, of [[course]].

Stanwyck is a [[tough]] lady once again as she runs into an [[escaped]] [[convict]] while [[seeking]] [[help]] for her [[trapped]] husband in the [[Mexican]] desert. The majority of the movie is [[focused]] on how she [[deals]] with her [[captor]], who wants her to [[submit]] to him in exchange for his [[help]]. Some psychological [[battling]] there.

It's a [[surprisingly]] [[effective]] little [[movie]] - its [[short]] [[length]] makes it [[taut]], and that Stanwyck is [[great]] should go without mention (but I'll [[still]] [[praise]] her [[every]] [[time]]). [[Threat]] has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only [[superstar]] is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a star, of [[cours]].

Stanwyck is a [[stiff]] lady once again as she runs into an [[eloped]] [[convicts]] while [[trying]] [[pomoc]] for her [[stuck]] husband in the [[Wetback]] desert. The majority of the movie is [[concentrating]] on how she [[deal]] with her [[kidnapper]], who wants her to [[communicate]] to him in exchange for his [[pomoc]]. Some psychological [[struggling]] there.

It's a [[unbelievably]] [[efficiency]] little [[flick]] - its [[terse]] [[duration]] makes it [[tense]], and that Stanwyck is [[gorgeous]] should go without mention (but I'll [[yet]] [[praised]] her [[any]] [[times]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 792 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surprisingly good. The acting was fun, the screenplay was fun, the music was cheesie fun, the plot was stupendously fun. This was a fun movie to watch and to give your brain some rest. Parts of the plot and quotes I found to be very creative. 7 out of 10. Actually for what it was, it would deserve a 10 out of 10. You are not supposed to compare this to an arthouse film or to a bloody slasher film. --------------------------------------------- Result 793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hawked as THE MOST OFFENSIVE MOVIE EVER, GUARANTEED TO OFFEND EVERYONE- Guess what? It worked, I'm offended that we shelled out money to rent this. Two friends and I were bored and decided to see if all that bull about the movie that we saw on TV was true. Curse Comedy Central and all the other networks that pushed this garbage on us! It was by far the worst movie I've seen since Hollow Man. I generally avoid the crappy ones, but got sucked into this one. We have since beaten the prick who suggest we rent it, and his movie picking privileges have been revoked. There is nothing remotely funny about this movie...even the "adventures of dickman" scene was sophomoric at best.. Color me p***ed. Thought maybe the production value was crap for some important reason...no..it just sucked. NEVER WATCH THIS! for any reason whatsoever. Not even with copious amounts of illegal substance would this movie be funny. That's saying ALOT. Please for the love of all that is holy, if you cherish your sanity- never view this movie. It's many things- stupid, pointless, and worthless to name a few. But the main thing it was aiming for: offensively funny- it failed miserably. Crash and burn.... --------------------------------------------- Result 794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] starts out with a certain [[amount]] of [[promise]]; but, in my view, [[begins]] to [[lose]] it when the [[protagonist]] [[kidnaps]] the good Samaritan who comes to his [[aid]] when his [[car]] breaks down. That this well-meaning [[stranger]] begins to [[fix]] his [[car]] while he is away [[making]] a [[phone]] [[call]] is implausible [[enough]], but that she is one of the few people in the [[country]] who can [[help]] him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence beginning [[writers]] are warned against [[using]] in their stories.

I found this [[movie]] average at best. [[Art]] direction [[could]] have been much better, as [[could]] have been [[cinematography]]. The acting was good, and so was Eva van [[der]] Gucht's singing. This [[filmmaking]] starts out with a certain [[sums]] of [[promises]]; but, in my view, [[outset]] to [[wasting]] it when the [[player]] [[snatches]] the good Samaritan who comes to his [[helps]] when his [[automobiles]] breaks down. That this well-meaning [[foreigner]] begins to [[remedy]] his [[motors]] while he is away [[doing]] a [[phones]] [[invitation]] is implausible [[adequately]], but that she is one of the few people in the [[nationals]] who can [[aids]] him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence beginning [[authors]] are warned against [[utilizing]] in their stories.

I found this [[film]] average at best. [[Artistry]] direction [[wo]] have been much better, as [[wo]] have been [[filmmaking]]. The acting was good, and so was Eva van [[monastery]] Gucht's singing. --------------------------------------------- Result 795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[think]] you [[would]] have to be from the [[USA]] to get a lot of the jokes. But if you [[liked]] [[Princess]] Bride and Forest Gump, You would [[like]] this [[movie]]. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of [[course]], but having the cameraman trip was [[obviously]] [[done]] on purpose. Killer [[Tomatoes]] is a hundred [[times]] better than Nepolean Dynamite. [[Just]] my [[opinion]]. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I [[know]] what I [[like]]. I couldn't stop laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie. I [[thought]] you [[ought]] have to be from the [[US]] to get a lot of the jokes. But if you [[loved]] [[Princesa]] Bride and Forest Gump, You would [[loves]] this [[films]]. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of [[cours]], but having the cameraman trip was [[apparently]] [[doing]] on purpose. Killer [[Zucchini]] is a hundred [[period]] better than Nepolean Dynamite. [[Virtuous]] my [[view]]. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I [[savoir]] what I [[fond]]. I couldn't stop laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[movie]] is the [[biggest]] [[waste]] of nine [[dollars]] that I've [[spent]] in a very, very [[long]] time. [[If]] you [[knew]] how [[often]] I went to the [[movies]] you'd probably [[say]], that's hard to [[imagine]], but never-the-less, it's [[true]]! After [[seeing]] the [[trailer]] for this [[movie]], I knew that I had to [[see]] it! If you're a [[fan]] of [[horror]], mystery, and suspense, why wouldn't you? The [[trailer]] is nothing less than [[intriguing]] and [[exciting]]; [[unfortunately]], the movie is none of these.

From the [[cinematography]], to the script, to the acting, this movie is a [[complete]] flop. If you're reading this, planning to go to the movie [[expecting]] some thrills, [[mystery]], [[action]], horror, or [[anything]] other than a [[waste]] of an hour and forty-five minutes I'm afraid you are in for disappointment.

"Why is it so [[bad]]," you might be [[asking]] yourself. [[Let]] me [[tell]] you. The movie was [[neither]] [[mysterious]] nor suspenseful. [[Nothing]] about the [[movie]] made me the least [[bit]] "on edge," [[frightened]], or curious. The [[script]] was at [[best]] [[laughable]]. There were [[numerous]] times [[throughout]] the [[film]] where the [[dialogue]] was just so [[ridiculous]] I [[began]] to [[write]] it off as comic relief only to find out a few seconds [[later]] that it wasn't. The acting was [[absolutely]] [[dreadful]]. I [[like]] Nicholas Cage but this was a miss. Without exception, [[every]] performance in this [[movie]] was [[incredibly]] below [[average]]. The [[cinematography]] was [[awful]] with not one [[moment]] of suspense or mystique. [[Finally]], the [[story]] is [[completely]] transparent. You can [[see]] the [[end]] of this movie coming a mile away.

I am not [[usually]] a very [[harsh]] critic. Frankly, when I go to [[see]] a [[comedy]] I [[want]] to [[laugh]] and when I go to see a mystery/[[suspense]]/[[horror]], I just [[want]] to be surprised. This [[movie]] was boring, poorly acted, poorly [[written]], and an [[overwhelming]] disappointment. Do yourself a favor and go see [[something]] else. This [[filmmaking]] is the [[widest]] [[squander]] of nine [[usd]] that I've [[expenditure]] in a very, very [[longer]] time. [[Though]] you [[overheard]] how [[frequently]] I went to the [[filmmaking]] you'd probably [[told]], that's hard to [[guess]], but never-the-less, it's [[authentic]]! After [[witnessing]] the [[trailers]] for this [[filmmaking]], I knew that I had to [[behold]] it! If you're a [[breather]] of [[terror]], mystery, and suspense, why wouldn't you? The [[camper]] is nothing less than [[thrilling]] and [[breathtaking]]; [[sadly]], the movie is none of these.

From the [[filmmaking]], to the script, to the acting, this movie is a [[finishing]] flop. If you're reading this, planning to go to the movie [[waits]] some thrills, [[riddle]], [[measures]], horror, or [[something]] other than a [[wastes]] of an hour and forty-five minutes I'm afraid you are in for disappointment.

"Why is it so [[negative]]," you might be [[requesting]] yourself. [[Leaving]] me [[say]] you. The movie was [[ni]] [[shadowy]] nor suspenseful. [[Anything]] about the [[flick]] made me the least [[bitten]] "on edge," [[freaked]], or curious. The [[screenplay]] was at [[better]] [[ridiculous]]. There were [[several]] times [[during]] the [[flick]] where the [[discussions]] was just so [[foolish]] I [[launches]] to [[writing]] it off as comic relief only to find out a few seconds [[afterward]] that it wasn't. The acting was [[totally]] [[scary]]. I [[fond]] Nicholas Cage but this was a miss. Without exception, [[all]] performance in this [[filmmaking]] was [[madly]] below [[averaging]]. The [[movie]] was [[horrific]] with not one [[time]] of suspense or mystique. [[Lastly]], the [[history]] is [[totally]] transparent. You can [[seeing]] the [[termination]] of this movie coming a mile away.

I am not [[routinely]] a very [[tough]] critic. Frankly, when I go to [[behold]] a [[parody]] I [[wanted]] to [[giggling]] and when I go to see a mystery/[[wait]]/[[terror]], I just [[wanted]] to be surprised. This [[movies]] was boring, poorly acted, poorly [[authored]], and an [[prodigious]] disappointment. Do yourself a favor and go see [[somethings]] else. --------------------------------------------- Result 797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I missed the [[beginning]] of this [[film]], which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've [[studied]] the fall of the [[Roman]] republic for years so I know the story. [[Then]] again, that might also be the reason why I [[disliked]] this film.

The film has more historical inaccuracies than [[extras]]. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't think they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which [[case]] it can be [[forgiven]]. The [[odd]] thing is that they sometimes go to great lengths to be historically [[accurate]] that it [[ends]] up getting [[confusing]]. Like throwing in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes [[later]]. Why even bring it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never even seen? And like calling Antonius by his [[actual]] [[name]] ([[Marcus]] Antonius) in some scenes, and by his [[strange]] English [[name]] [[Mark]] Antony in other scenes.

[[Though]] historical inaccuracies aside, the film [[could]] still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an [[ounce]] of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and completely [[lacking]] control of herself. Instead of being a clever and composed queen Cleopatra turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad case of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is also from poor script writing. Far too many stupid dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from "Dawson's Creek".

If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this. I missed the [[initiating]] of this [[filmmaking]], which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've [[investigated]] the fall of the [[Romain]] republic for years so I know the story. [[Thereafter]] again, that might also be the reason why I [[proscribed]] this film.

The film has more historical inaccuracies than [[goodies]]. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't think they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which [[cases]] it can be [[pardon]]. The [[unusual]] thing is that they sometimes go to great lengths to be historically [[meticulous]] that it [[terminates]] up getting [[confounding]]. Like throwing in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes [[thereafter]]. Why even bring it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never even seen? And like calling Antonius by his [[real]] [[naming]] ([[Markus]] Antonius) in some scenes, and by his [[peculiar]] English [[names]] [[Dialed]] Antony in other scenes.

[[Albeit]] historical inaccuracies aside, the film [[did]] still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an [[jot]] of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and completely [[missing]] control of herself. Instead of being a clever and composed queen Cleopatra turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad case of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is also from poor script writing. Far too many stupid dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from "Dawson's Creek".

If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this. --------------------------------------------- Result 798 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was initially dubious about this movie (merely because of the subject), but the richly drawn characters, the fabulous scenes of the buffalo hunt, and the dramatic conclusion make it well-worth watching. I initially had trouble distinguishing between the two buffalo hunters but as the movie progressed they increasingly distinguished themselves. I am still haunted by the final scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I've [[really]] [[enjoyed]] this [[adaptation]] of "Emma".I have seen it [[many]] [[times]] and am [[always]] looking forward to seeing it again.[[Though]] it only lasts 107 minutes, most of the [[novel]] plot and sub-plots were [[developed]] in a [[satisfactory]] [[way]]. All the [[characters]] are well-portrayed. [[Most]] of the [[dialogues]] come directly from the novel with no [[silly]] jokes added as in Emma Thompson's Sense and [[Sensibility]].

As a [[foreigner]], I [[particularly]] appreciate the [[perfect]] diction of the actors. The [[setting]] and costumes were [[beautiful]]. I [[find]] this version [[quite]] on a par with the 1995 miniseries "Pride and [[Prejudice]]" but then the [[producer]] and screenwriter were the same. Kate Beckinsale did a really [[good]] job [[portraying]] "Emma" of whom [[Jane]] Austen said she [[would]] create a heroin no-one but her [[would]] [[love]]. She is snobbish but has just [[enough]] [[youth]] and inexperience to be [[still]] likable. Mark [[Strong]] was [[also]] very good at portraying Mr Knightley, not an [[easy]] part, I think, though he has not the charisma [[shown]] by Colin Firth's Mr Darcy in [[Pride]] and [[Prejudice]]. Even the [[end]] scene (the [[harvest]] [[festival]]) which does not happen in the [[novel]] [[provides]] a [[fitting]] [[end]] except for when it [[shows]] [[Emma]] being cold and [[almost]] unpleasant with Frank Churchill whereas in the novel she was thoroughly [[reconciled]] with him, even telling him that she would have [[enjoyed]] the duplicity, had she been in his situation. A strange [[departure]] from the faithfulness otherwise [[shown]] throughout the film. I find the costumes more [[beautiful]] and [[elaborate]] than in other adaptations from Jane Austen's novels. I've [[genuinely]] [[liked]] this [[coping]] of "Emma".I have seen it [[several]] [[moments]] and am [[steadily]] looking forward to seeing it again.[[Despite]] it only lasts 107 minutes, most of the [[newer]] plot and sub-plots were [[devised]] in a [[acceptable]] [[manner]]. All the [[features]] are well-portrayed. [[Anymore]] of the [[conversations]] come directly from the novel with no [[ridiculous]] jokes added as in Emma Thompson's Sense and [[Sensitivity]].

As a [[aliens]], I [[notably]] appreciate the [[flawless]] diction of the actors. The [[settings]] and costumes were [[wondrous]]. I [[found]] this version [[pretty]] on a par with the 1995 miniseries "Pride and [[Harm]]" but then the [[manufacturers]] and screenwriter were the same. Kate Beckinsale did a really [[alright]] job [[illustrating]] "Emma" of whom [[Janie]] Austen said she [[ought]] create a heroin no-one but her [[should]] [[likes]]. She is snobbish but has just [[suitably]] [[jugend]] and inexperience to be [[yet]] likable. Mark [[Forceful]] was [[apart]] very good at portraying Mr Knightley, not an [[effortless]] part, I think, though he has not the charisma [[displayed]] by Colin Firth's Mr Darcy in [[Stolz]] and [[Prejudices]]. Even the [[termination]] scene (the [[reaping]] [[feast]]) which does not happen in the [[newer]] [[delivers]] a [[montage]] [[ceases]] except for when it [[showing]] [[Emmy]] being cold and [[hardly]] unpleasant with Frank Churchill whereas in the novel she was thoroughly [[reconciling]] with him, even telling him that she would have [[appreciated]] the duplicity, had she been in his situation. A strange [[departing]] from the faithfulness otherwise [[showed]] throughout the film. I find the costumes more [[wondrous]] and [[formulate]] than in other adaptations from Jane Austen's novels. --------------------------------------------- Result 800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Maybe "Presque Rien" is not the [[best]] movie ever made... But it is [[better]] than [[many]] of you have [[said]]. I still haven't [[seen]] a homo-themed [[movie]] better than this one.

You Americans are accustomed to watch very [[narrative]] [[movies]], with a clear [[beginning]], development and [[outcome]]. But European [[movies]] are less [[narrative]], but makes you [[think]] much and feel.

[[Many]] of you didn't understand the [[sense]] of the [[movie]].. The purpose of this one is not show us a [[simple]] "summer loving [[movie]]", with commercial [[characters]] who "[[fall]] in [[love]] and live [[happy]] [[forever]]". Summer [[Holidays]] and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to [[every]] young [[boy]] who may feel identified with those [[boys]].

[[Maybe]] some of you didn't [[understand]] well this movie, because of its 3 parts, [[showed]] as flashbacks. These 3 [[moments]] are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they [[meet]] and [[love]]. - After a [[year]] and half [[living]] [[together]] in [[Nantes]], [[Mathieu]] doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to [[suicide]] [[taking]] [[something]], and [[Cedric]] [[brings]] him to hospital. [[Later]], he appears talking with a [[psychiatrist]] to [[find]] the [[reason]] about he [[done]] that. - The last [[part]], is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, [[alone]].. to [[think]] about how his [[life]] have [[changed]], how his life [[become]] to be, and [[trying]] to [[find]] himself.

It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I [[said]] before... this is not a funny movie. [[If]] what [[someone]] [[want]] to see is meat, for that, we have Belami [[movies]].

Presque Rien, what [[want]] to [[show]] us, is how [[cruel]] can be the [[life]], for a young [[boy]] who is not sure about his [[feelings]] and not sure about what to do in [[life]]. [[Mathieu]] only [[wants]] to [[go]] away from [[home]], and [[try]] to live the [[kind]] of life that he [[thought]] [[could]] bring him the happiness.. But what seemed perfect at the [[beginning]].. [[later]] is not as good as he thought, and he [[become]] [[troubled]], and feel that he has [[lost]] the [[way]] of his [[life]]. He is [[lost]] and doesn't [[know]] what he [[really]] wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide.

So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about [[feelings]]... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, [[depression]], loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.

For me, the best homo-themed movie ever. Maybe "Presque Rien" is not the [[nicest]] movie ever made... But it is [[nicer]] than [[innumerable]] of you have [[say]]. I still haven't [[watched]] a homo-themed [[kino]] better than this one.

You Americans are accustomed to watch very [[narration]] [[theater]], with a clear [[start]], development and [[conclusions]]. But European [[theater]] are less [[narration]], but makes you [[thought]] much and feel.

[[Innumerable]] of you didn't understand the [[feeling]] of the [[films]].. The purpose of this one is not show us a [[uncomplicated]] "summer loving [[flick]]", with commercial [[features]] who "[[dipped]] in [[loves]] and live [[pleased]] [[indefinitely]]". Summer [[Holiday]] and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to [[each]] young [[guy]] who may feel identified with those [[guys]].

[[Might]] some of you didn't [[understood]] well this movie, because of its 3 parts, [[demonstrated]] as flashbacks. These 3 [[times]] are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they [[respond]] and [[amore]]. - After a [[annum]] and half [[life]] [[jointly]] in [[Portsmouth]], [[Matthew]] doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to [[suicidal]] [[take]] [[anything]], and [[Jerome]] [[bring]] him to hospital. [[Thereafter]], he appears talking with a [[shrug]] to [[unearthed]] the [[justification]] about he [[doing]] that. - The last [[portions]], is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, [[only]].. to [[believe]] about how his [[vie]] have [[modify]], how his life [[becomes]] to be, and [[tempting]] to [[unearthed]] himself.

It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I [[stated]] before... this is not a funny movie. [[Unless]] what [[person]] [[wanting]] to see is meat, for that, we have Belami [[theater]].

Presque Rien, what [[wanna]] to [[exhibit]] us, is how [[vicious]] can be the [[vida]], for a young [[kiddo]] who is not sure about his [[sentiments]] and not sure about what to do in [[vida]]. [[Matthew]] only [[desires]] to [[going]] away from [[housing]], and [[tried]] to live the [[sort]] of life that he [[brainchild]] [[did]] bring him the happiness.. But what seemed perfect at the [[launch]].. [[subsequently]] is not as good as he thought, and he [[becomes]] [[flustered]], and feel that he has [[forfeited]] the [[routing]] of his [[iife]]. He is [[forfeited]] and doesn't [[savoir]] what he [[genuinely]] wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide.

So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about [[affections]]... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, [[doldrums]], loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.

For me, the best homo-themed movie ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[loved]] this [[film]]. Not being a swooning Ed [[Wood]] Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "[[boundless]] enthusiasm" and [[acknowledge]] his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal [[story]] is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to [[find]], that this film would be about understanding his [[turbulent]] life, rather than [[simply]] heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a [[mythology]], leaving the cast and the [[viewer]] [[unexpectedly]] [[connected]] to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.

What we get are people who knew Ed [[Wood]] the best talking about him from all [[perspectives]], [[positive]] and [[negative]], and [[showing]] us their [[character]] as much as Ed's. We get [[insight]] into Ed's personal and [[professional]] [[life]]: from his romances, to his [[drinking]], to his [[sexuality]], to his friends, to his enemies, and [[even]] to his [[film]] making.

The film itself is [[shot]] in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of [[humor]] and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.

Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the [[surprisingly]] engaging and interconnected [[story]].

Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.

Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.

In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling. I [[cared]] this [[movies]]. Not being a swooning Ed [[Wooden]] Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "[[endless]] enthusiasm" and [[recognize]] his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal [[storytelling]] is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to [[finds]], that this film would be about understanding his [[choppy]] life, rather than [[merely]] heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a [[myth]], leaving the cast and the [[bystander]] [[abruptly]] [[linked]] to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.

What we get are people who knew Ed [[Timber]] the best talking about him from all [[prospects]], [[affirmative]] and [[harmful]], and [[display]] us their [[nature]] as much as Ed's. We get [[vision]] into Ed's personal and [[occupational]] [[iife]]: from his romances, to his [[alcohol]], to his [[sex]], to his friends, to his enemies, and [[yet]] to his [[movies]] making.

The film itself is [[kiiled]] in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of [[comedy]] and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.

Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the [[terribly]] engaging and interconnected [[narratives]].

Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.

Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.

In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling. --------------------------------------------- Result 802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am an avid fan of violent exploitation cinema, who would never attack a film for being violent or disturbing. I consider "Cannibal Holocaust" a masterpiece and will always defend controversial films like "Day Of The Woman" or "Last House on the Left" as genuine classics. Anyone who browses through my other user comments will notice that I am actually very pro-violence/gore when it comes to films. However, I do think that there should be at least some point to the violence. This piece of crap doesn't have any point whatsoever. The first film in the notorious "Guinea Pig" series, "The Devil's Experiment" (1985) is widely controversial, but, as opposed to many other controversial films, this stinker has nothing at all to be recommended for. I must say that, before seeing any of the Guniea-Pig films, I already had a feeling that I would hate this one, knowing what it was about. Due to its status as one of the most controversial films around, however, I decided I had to see it. I am very glad I didn't waste any money on this pile of crap, and I sure wish I hadn't wasted my time with it either.

This thing's story (I don't even want to call it a 'film'): It doesn't have one. Three scumbags torture a woman to death for some excruciating 40 minutes. That's it. There is no artistic value, no 'shocking' story, no suspense; nothing. Simply the disbelief that a film that shows NOTHING except for a woman being tortured for no reason enjoys an enormous cult-following. It IS disturbing, I give it that. Of course it is disturbing to watch a torture video for 40 minutes. What is more disturbing, however, is the fact that many people actually seem to regard this pile of garbage as some kind of masterpiece. I really cannot figure why. The fact that the gore effects look realistic cannot be the reason, I hope. The girl who plays the victim isn't a very good actor, and reacts very calm to all the torture. That makes the film look less realistic, which is, in this single case, a good thing. This is a film that is sickening; not for its gore, but for its redundancy, its existence for the sole purpose of showing 40 minutes of torture.

I strongly oppose any form of censorship. Since this is 100% fake and nobody got hurt during its production, it IS legitimate to make such a film. However, I cannot think of a single reason why anyone would like this, other than the morbid desire to watch suffering and the enjoyment of torture. This film's sequel "Flowers of Flesh and Blood" gained notoriety when actor Charlie Sheen mistook it for an actual snuff film and informed the FBI. Fortuneately, the film turned out to be fake. Overall, "The Devil's Experiment" is a fake torture/snuff film that seems to have the sole purpose of looking as close to a real snuff film as possible.

"The Devil's Experiment" is one of the worst films I have ever had the misfortune of sitting through. Don't torture yourself by giving this piece of crap a try for its controversial status. Do yourself a favor and avoid it. Zero stars out of 10, I wish there was a negative scale in order to appropriately rate this pile of crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Five passengers at a bus depot tell each other their scary dreams while waiting to be picked up. But is there more to these nightmares than meets the eye?

Lucky me, five bad movies for the price of one! Each segment features the very worst in acting, special effects, make up and music. And these were supposed to be scary? Hmm.. I think I've been more freaked out during an episode of Teletubbies. I swear, you'll sit there like I was, bored to tears waiting in vain for something interesting to happen. Don't bother. It never does. In fact, I even stopped fast forwarding the commercials, as they were a good deal more entertaining than the main feature. AND the ending is the ultimate cop-out. Yep, none of this actually ever happened. If only the same could be said for the day I set my VCR to record this cobblers.. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Being a fan of the [[first]] Lion King, I was [[definitely]] looking forward to this [[movie]], but I [[knew]] there was [[really]] no way it [[could]] be as good as the original. I [[know]] that [[many]] Disney fans are [[wary]] of the direct-to-video movies, as I have mixed [[feelings]] of them as well.

[[While]] watching The Lion King 1½, I tried to figure out what my own viewpoint was [[regarding]] this movie. Am I going to be so devout about The Lion King that I will nitpick at certain scenes, or am I just going to [[accept]] this movie as just another look at The Lion King story? Most of the time, I found myself embracing the latter.

The Lion King 1½ definitely has its cute and funny moments. Timon and Pumbaa stole the show in the first movie and definitely deserved a movie that centered around them. People just love these characters! My favorite parts of the movie include the montage of Timon & Pumbaa taking care of young Simba and the surprise ending featuring some great cameos.

I could have done without many of the bathroom jokes though, like the real reason everyone bowed to baby Simba at the beginning of Lion King 1. I guess those types of jokes are for the younger set (which after all is the target audience. I don't think many kids are really concerned about Disney's profit margin on direct-to-video movies.)

However, I will say that I was somewhat annoyed when they directly tied in scenes from the original movie to this movie. I'm just too familiar with the original that those scenes just stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Something would be different with the music or the voices that it would just distract me.

As for the music, it wasn't too bad, but don't expect any classics to come from this movie. At least LK2 had the nice ballad, "Love Will Find a Way." As for the voicework, it was well done in this movie. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella did a great job as always, and even new cast members, the classic comedic actor Jerry Stiller and Julie Kavner (best known as Marge Simpson), did a great job also. You can even enjoy these great voice talents even more by checking out the Virtual Safari on Disc 2 of the DVD. That feature is definitely a lot of fun!!

So all in all, The Lion King 1½ isn't a perfect movie, but it's cute and entertaining. I think many Lion King fans will enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - a fun, lighthearted look at the Lion King masterpiece from our funny friends' perspectives.

My IMDb Rating: 7/10. My Yahoo! Grade: B (Good) Being a fan of the [[fiirst]] Lion King, I was [[unmistakably]] looking forward to this [[kino]], but I [[overheard]] there was [[truly]] no way it [[did]] be as good as the original. I [[savoir]] that [[several]] Disney fans are [[careful]] of the direct-to-video movies, as I have mixed [[sensations]] of them as well.

[[Despite]] watching The Lion King 1½, I tried to figure out what my own viewpoint was [[relating]] this movie. Am I going to be so devout about The Lion King that I will nitpick at certain scenes, or am I just going to [[accepting]] this movie as just another look at The Lion King story? Most of the time, I found myself embracing the latter.

The Lion King 1½ definitely has its cute and funny moments. Timon and Pumbaa stole the show in the first movie and definitely deserved a movie that centered around them. People just love these characters! My favorite parts of the movie include the montage of Timon & Pumbaa taking care of young Simba and the surprise ending featuring some great cameos.

I could have done without many of the bathroom jokes though, like the real reason everyone bowed to baby Simba at the beginning of Lion King 1. I guess those types of jokes are for the younger set (which after all is the target audience. I don't think many kids are really concerned about Disney's profit margin on direct-to-video movies.)

However, I will say that I was somewhat annoyed when they directly tied in scenes from the original movie to this movie. I'm just too familiar with the original that those scenes just stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Something would be different with the music or the voices that it would just distract me.

As for the music, it wasn't too bad, but don't expect any classics to come from this movie. At least LK2 had the nice ballad, "Love Will Find a Way." As for the voicework, it was well done in this movie. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella did a great job as always, and even new cast members, the classic comedic actor Jerry Stiller and Julie Kavner (best known as Marge Simpson), did a great job also. You can even enjoy these great voice talents even more by checking out the Virtual Safari on Disc 2 of the DVD. That feature is definitely a lot of fun!!

So all in all, The Lion King 1½ isn't a perfect movie, but it's cute and entertaining. I think many Lion King fans will enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - a fun, lighthearted look at the Lion King masterpiece from our funny friends' perspectives.

My IMDb Rating: 7/10. My Yahoo! Grade: B (Good) --------------------------------------------- Result 805 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Frailty is a non-gory horror [[film]] that [[achieves]] its [[chills]] by following the logic and [[impact]] of a man's delusion/[[obsession]] straight into [[depravity]]. [[Dad]] (we never [[learn]] his [[name]]) is a [[gentle]] [[man]] and loving father who's [[raising]] his [[sons]] [[alone]] after [[Mom]] died giving birth to the [[youngest]] son, Adam. The family's [[world]] flips upside down late one [[night]] when [[Dad]] rushes into the boys' [[room]] and [[tells]] them [[God]] has [[given]] him a [[vision]]. And what a [[vision]] – the [[entire]] family's [[job]] is to [[destroy]] [[demons]], who, of course, are [[disguised]] in human [[form]].

Proceeding from this [[premise]], the movie is unflinching in following it. [[Dad]] [[kidnaps]] people/[[demons]] whom [[God]] has [[told]] him to [[destroy]], binds them, [[lays]] his hand on them to [[see]] a [[vision]] of their [[evil]], then [[kills]] them – while making his young [[sons]] watch. Fenton, the [[older]] [[boy]], is [[horrified]], [[seeing]] only a father who's [[turned]] into a [[crazed]] murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that [[Dad]] is following God's will. [[Eventually]], Dad [[takes]] his [[sons]] on [[missions]] to [[abduct]] the "[[demons]]" that [[God]] has put on Dad's [[list]], and finally, [[invites]] them to [[fully]] [[participate]] in God's mission for the [[family]].

This is not, you [[understand]], an [[abusive]] father. He loves his children. He is only following God's [[instructions]]: "This is our [[job]] now, son. We've [[got]] to do this." When Fenton, [[terrified]] and convinced his [[father]] has [[gone]] [[mad]], [[says]] he'll report him to the police, his [[father]] [[explains]], "If you do that, son, I'll [[die]]. The angel was clear on this." The pressure that the [[children]] are under is unbearable and [[tragic]], and warps their [[entire]] lives.(1) The movie's structure is [[similar]] to the one used in The [[Usual]] [[Suspects]]: a [[story]] in flashback, [[told]] in a police station to a FBI agent. The [[moody]] lighting, the [[stormy]] weather, and the [[eerie]] [[calm]] in the [[present]] day [[add]] to the [[menace]] of the backstory. I wanted to believe the [[unfolding]] horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her [[children]] by [[drowning]] them. Even then, I wanted to [[believe]] that I was watching a human tragedy, rather than a story of divine retribution.

The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the end about the veracity of Dad's vision. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a problem for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02 Frailty is a non-gory horror [[movie]] that [[attains]] its [[willies]] by following the logic and [[influences]] of a man's delusion/[[mania]] straight into [[perversion]]. [[Daddy]] (we never [[learns]] his [[naming]]) is a [[temperate]] [[dude]] and loving father who's [[augmented]] his [[son]] [[solely]] after [[Mummy]] died giving birth to the [[younger]] son, Adam. The family's [[globe]] flips upside down late one [[overnight]] when [[Pope]] rushes into the boys' [[salle]] and [[narrates]] them [[Christ]] has [[granted]] him a [[conception]]. And what a [[eyesight]] – the [[whole]] family's [[employment]] is to [[raze]] [[minions]], who, of course, are [[occult]] in human [[shape]].

Proceeding from this [[hypothesis]], the movie is unflinching in following it. [[Pope]] [[kidnappings]] people/[[devils]] whom [[Christ]] has [[said]] him to [[annihilate]], binds them, [[laying]] his hand on them to [[behold]] a [[eyesight]] of their [[malicious]], then [[murdering]] them – while making his young [[son]] watch. Fenton, the [[elderly]] [[guy]], is [[appalled]], [[witnessing]] only a father who's [[transformed]] into a [[madman]] murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that [[Dada]] is following God's will. [[Lastly]], Dad [[pick]] his [[son]] on [[tasks]] to [[kidnap]] the "[[minions]]" that [[Christ]] has put on Dad's [[listings]], and finally, [[calls]] them to [[perfectly]] [[involvement]] in God's mission for the [[families]].

This is not, you [[understood]], an [[unseemly]] father. He loves his children. He is only following God's [[guidance]]: "This is our [[employment]] now, son. We've [[did]] to do this." When Fenton, [[freaked]] and convinced his [[fathers]] has [[disappeared]] [[madman]], [[say]] he'll report him to the police, his [[fathers]] [[explaining]], "If you do that, son, I'll [[deaths]]. The angel was clear on this." The pressure that the [[kids]] are under is unbearable and [[disastrous]], and warps their [[overall]] lives.(1) The movie's structure is [[identical]] to the one used in The [[Routine]] [[Defendants]]: a [[histories]] in flashback, [[tell]] in a police station to a FBI agent. The [[quirky]] lighting, the [[turbulent]] weather, and the [[freaky]] [[serena]] in the [[presented]] day [[inserting]] to the [[threats]] of the backstory. I wanted to believe the [[unfolded]] horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her [[kids]] by [[sunk]] them. Even then, I wanted to [[believing]] that I was watching a human tragedy, rather than a story of divine retribution.

The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the end about the veracity of Dad's vision. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a problem for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02 --------------------------------------------- Result 806 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Based on one of the books by Gabriel Marquez and it might be brilliant literature, this cinema-adaption really sucks as it's more like fighting against sleep rather than enjoying some cinematographic delices. The story is about an old couple whose son died and living a life that is heavily dominated by poverty, and wherein the main character is a cock that hopefully one day brings some money for a forthcoming cockfight. I am in no mood to spill more words on this useless pretentious piece, just perhaps that you can see Salma Hayek in here, but sitting 90 minutes in front of your screen for just that? No gracias..... --------------------------------------------- Result 807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very slow-paced, but intricately structured and ultimately very touching. A nice, very true-to-life look at a small Florida beach town in the dead of winter -- I've been there, and this is absolutely accurate.

It's also the debut feature of actress Ashley Judd, and she makes a big impression here. It's hard to believe this film is 12 years old -- I remember seeing it in theaters, and I recently rented "Ruby" again. Except for the 80's looking clothes, it has held up very nicely. Ashely is so radiant and touching here, that it's hard to think of her subsequent career without wincing. Boy, talk about failing to fulfill your early promise! Anyone seeing Ashley here in "Ruby In Paradise" would assume this elegant, natural beauty went on to all kinds of interesting art films and serious acting -- instead she has become the "go to" girl for dumb action films and slasher movies! Very disappointing, but at least we have this lovely performance preserved to showcase her early promise.

As some other commenter's say, this is not for everyone as it's very slow paced. This is not an action film, nor is it really a romance. The director (Victor Nunez, "Ulees Gold", another excellent character study) treats this ordinary young woman's life with deep respect, allowing her story to build slowly and with a lot of detail. In that way, I think this is one of the most moving and respectful coming-of-age stories about young women that I can recall -- it's not about Ruby's sexual awakening or "how she lost her virginity", but about her life choices and her growing maturity.

A lovely film, if you take the time to watch it...I think it would be a really excellent film to show teens and young girls (or boys for that matter) and give them a chance to think about and discuss it.

Particular kudos to director Nunez, who also wrote the script, which is so realistic and nicely detailed that I assumed all through the movie that it was based on a female-written novel or memoir, but in fact it's Mr. Nunez's original work. Rated 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 808 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] [[Definitely]] a very good idea,screenplay was just OK.Could have been [[better]],The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an [[adventure]] lover,A [[new]] [[idea]] about the [[lost]] world of Atlantis.[[Negatives]] are that I personally feel that this [[idea]] had so [[much]] more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better adventure than this.It wasn't bad at all but it would have been much better with some more runtime.Enjoyed it a lot [[though]],[[Cant]] say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This [[movie]] is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy [[ending]]. [[Surely]] a very good idea,screenplay was just OK.Could have been [[optimum]],The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an [[adventurer]] lover,A [[novo]] [[brainchild]] about the [[forfeited]] world of Atlantis.[[Unfavorable]] are that I personally feel that this [[brainchild]] had so [[very]] more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better adventure than this.It wasn't bad at all but it would have been much better with some more runtime.Enjoyed it a lot [[if]],[[Havent]] say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This [[cinematography]] is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I had [[heard]] good things about this film and was, you guessed it, a bit disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite [[solid]], in their simple 50s American setting. The reason I didn't [[rate]] this [[film]] higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this [[pulled]] me out of the film a bit. [[Perhaps]] we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the [[film]] [[needed]] to be a bit longer. Maureen's [[character]] is [[quite]] underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and [[angry]], but why is her sister shown to be more [[upset]]? [[Because]] she's a few years older? Hasn't the [[end]] [[rather]] undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the [[movie]] makes it seem that Maureen and [[Court]] have only just [[met]], when he [[gets]] tractored ([[warning]]: this scene is [[surprisingly]] brutal, in retrospect it [[seems]] like it might have been trying to shock a [[bit]]. well it [[works]]!). It depends what you [[want]] - if you [[want]] the girls' [[happy]] [[story]] of young [[love]] that it [[seems]] like you're [[going]] to [[get]], you're in for a surprise. [[Man]] in the Moon is both quaint and dreamy and a [[harsh]] [[coming]] of age [[film]] – a [[rather]] awkward [[combination]]? I liked the [[character]] of Court though, I can see what [[girls]] [[watching]] this might be watching. And I [[loved]] that they had the [[courage]] to both let him [[hurt]] the [[younger]] sister (most [[men]] would, most films wouldn't) and get killed.

7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings scale. [[For]] some [[reason]] I found Jason London on a [[tractor]] [[funny]]. I had [[listened]] good things about this film and was, you guessed it, a bit disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite [[robust]], in their simple 50s American setting. The reason I didn't [[rates]] this [[cinematography]] higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this [[pull]] me out of the film a bit. [[Potentially]] we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the [[cinematographic]] [[required]] to be a bit longer. Maureen's [[traits]] is [[altogether]] underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and [[furious]], but why is her sister shown to be more [[annoyed]]? [[Since]] she's a few years older? Hasn't the [[terminates]] [[quite]] undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the [[cinematography]] makes it seem that Maureen and [[Tribunal]] have only just [[fulfilled]], when he [[receives]] tractored ([[warnings]]: this scene is [[terribly]] brutal, in retrospect it [[looks]] like it might have been trying to shock a [[bite]]. well it [[cooperation]]!). It depends what you [[wanted]] - if you [[wish]] the girls' [[cheerful]] [[histories]] of young [[adored]] that it [[looks]] like you're [[go]] to [[obtain]], you're in for a surprise. [[Males]] in the Moon is both quaint and dreamy and a [[stringent]] [[arriving]] of age [[movies]] – a [[quite]] awkward [[jumpsuit]]? I liked the [[trait]] of Court though, I can see what [[daughter]] [[staring]] this might be watching. And I [[cared]] that they had the [[gallantry]] to both let him [[harmed]] the [[youngest]] sister (most [[males]] would, most films wouldn't) and get killed.

7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings scale. [[Onto]] some [[rationale]] I found Jason London on a [[towing]] [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I picked this title up from a friend who had it sitting in his [[exhaustive]] DVD/Video/Laserdisc collection, so luckily I didn't personally have to pay for it. I had an inkling that it would be a bad film, but I KNOW what a truly bad [[film]] is after watching greats like Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things and The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, and now there is truly nothing that fazes me unless it is astoundingly [[bad]].

Solar Crisis is [[bad]], but it doesn't reach that [[sweet]] spot of absolute pain that some [[movies]] are at.

Anyway, the general plot is that the [[sun]] is about to unleash a [[huge]] solar flare towards the [[earth]] that will [[essentially]] [[destroy]] it. [[In]] [[order]] to counter-act this [[imminent]] [[threat]], humanity has assembled a spaceship and crew [[whose]] [[duty]] it is to fire an antimatter [[bomb]] (which the [[opening]] describes as "the [[biggest]] explosive ever") into the [[sun]], which through some convoluted sci-fi logic will cause the flare to shoot out at a [[different]] [[angle]], [[leaving]] [[earth]] unharmed.

Never mind that what I have just described to you [[sounds]] like a bad episode of the [[original]] [[Star]] [[Trek]]. Even with an [[ensemble]] cast (Charlton Heston, [[Peter]] Boyle, and [[Jack]] Palance), Solar [[Crisis]] can [[barely]] [[manage]] that [[level]] of mediocrity, thanks to a plot that [[starts]] [[simple]], [[yet]] becomes [[increasingly]] [[nonsensical]] as [[time]] [[wears]] on.

The crowning [[achievement]] of this [[debacle]] of a [[movie]] is the [[addition]] of a villain [[character]] (played by Boyle) who insists on sabotaging the [[mission]]. Through means that are never [[explained]], he sends an evil minion with an [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]] [[haircut]] to [[exercise]] some [[sort]] of [[vague]] electronic mind [[control]] over the space crew's genetically engineered [[scientist]], played by female lead Annabel Schofield. Why is he sabotaging the mission? [[Because]] by his [[moronic]] [[viewpoint]], he [[believes]] the flare won't happen and that when it doesn't, he will become [[fabulously]] [[wealthy]] because he has [[dug]] his evil claws into the stock market. [[In]] [[effect]], you have a villain with the most absurdly [[stupid]] [[motivation]] [[imaginable]].

The film's [[plot]] becomes amazingly [[convoluted]] and develops very [[slowly]], in time tapping the use of characters who have only vague or uselessly brief roles in the storyline. I could sit here and explain in detail precisely what happens to demonstrate the sheer inability of the screenwriter to make a plot that actually clicks or holds your attention, but I am sitting here writing this review on Microsoft Word and I know for a fact that this would take three pages, and I would only succeed in losing your interest. But then again, you would probably get the same effect from watching the film.

Anyway, the film is miserably bogged down with exceedingly poor dialogue. Imagine if all that ever happened on the Star Trek Enterprise was that the characters spewed sci-fi jargon back and forth at each-other. Yes, I know, they already do that, but imagine if that's ALL they did, and that they used said jargon to set up vague and near-nonsensical scenes that produce no excitement, tension, or interest in the viewer whatsoever.

This is best exemplified at the point when a character in a Zero-G environment screws a bolt back onto a metal box before proceeding to cry in agony for a couple of minutes before suddenly exploding. The script alludes previously to the character [[risking]] an explosion, but doesn't bother to give any solid [[answer]] as to why or how this occurs, nor why he can't really escape. In totality, you have a sorry cross between the bizarre and the laughable.

Then we have several scenes where dramatic build-up leads to nothing. Jack Palance's performance is wasted on a character that serves only to drive the boy hero (don't ask) around the desert, before getting roughed up and killed by a bunch of suits. On his death-bed, Palance finally tells our boy hero his last name (while wearing a horrible bruised makeup job that makes it look like somebody put a balloon under his eyeball), which he kept quiet about before. Colonel Travis J. Richards. The boy repeats it quietly after he expires, giving viewers the impression that the name is of some significance later on in the film. Perhaps Charlton Heston's grizzled admiral character knows him and the plot will advance thereby once his name is repeated. Something. Anything.

Nope. Sorry. Any hopes you have will be dashed when this moment turns out only to be another of many pathetic, failed attempts at creating drama—for a character so flat and hackneyed that it will forever be a stain on Palance's career, just as those of the rest of the cast are similarly marred.

Completing the film is a painfully abrupt ending featuring Schofield piloting the bomb into the center of the sun in an effort to redeem her deeds while under the villain's spell, a climax which features another of the film's considerably well-done visual effects sequences that, even for the visibly elaborate care put into them, still always manage to make the film look just as chintzy as it really is. The saddest part about this film is the obviously large budget, tragically wasted on a stinker of a script and a supporting cast behind Boyle, Heston, and Palance that manage to nail the coffin shut with pure over-acting.

Grade: D- I picked this title up from a friend who had it sitting in his [[comprehensive]] DVD/Video/Laserdisc collection, so luckily I didn't personally have to pay for it. I had an inkling that it would be a bad film, but I KNOW what a truly bad [[filmmaking]] is after watching greats like Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things and The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, and now there is truly nothing that fazes me unless it is astoundingly [[naughty]].

Solar Crisis is [[unfavourable]], but it doesn't reach that [[sugary]] spot of absolute pain that some [[filmmaking]] are at.

Anyway, the general plot is that the [[sunshine]] is about to unleash a [[great]] solar flare towards the [[terra]] that will [[basically]] [[ruining]] it. [[During]] [[edict]] to counter-act this [[upcoming]] [[jeopardy]], humanity has assembled a spaceship and crew [[who]] [[liability]] it is to fire an antimatter [[explodes]] (which the [[opens]] describes as "the [[bigger]] explosive ever") into the [[sunshine]], which through some convoluted sci-fi logic will cause the flare to shoot out at a [[various]] [[angles]], [[letting]] [[terra]] unharmed.

Never mind that what I have just described to you [[noises]] like a bad episode of the [[initial]] [[Superstar]] [[Hiking]]. Even with an [[whole]] cast (Charlton Heston, [[Pete]] Boyle, and [[Jacques]] Palance), Solar [[Crises]] can [[hardly]] [[administered]] that [[echelon]] of mediocrity, thanks to a plot that [[launched]] [[easy]], [[however]] becomes [[gradually]] [[counterintuitive]] as [[times]] [[gate]] on.

The crowning [[achievements]] of this [[breakup]] of a [[filmmaking]] is the [[supplement]] of a villain [[trait]] (played by Boyle) who insists on sabotaging the [[missions]]. Through means that are never [[explains]], he sends an evil minion with an [[grossly]] [[naughty]] [[coupe]] to [[exerting]] some [[genre]] of [[fuzzy]] electronic mind [[oversight]] over the space crew's genetically engineered [[investigators]], played by female lead Annabel Schofield. Why is he sabotaging the mission? [[Since]] by his [[dumb]] [[views]], he [[sees]] the flare won't happen and that when it doesn't, he will become [[fantastically]] [[rich]] because he has [[dig]] his evil claws into the stock market. [[During]] [[repercussions]], you have a villain with the most absurdly [[witless]] [[reasons]] [[unimaginable]].

The film's [[intrigue]] becomes amazingly [[complicated]] and develops very [[softly]], in time tapping the use of characters who have only vague or uselessly brief roles in the storyline. I could sit here and explain in detail precisely what happens to demonstrate the sheer inability of the screenwriter to make a plot that actually clicks or holds your attention, but I am sitting here writing this review on Microsoft Word and I know for a fact that this would take three pages, and I would only succeed in losing your interest. But then again, you would probably get the same effect from watching the film.

Anyway, the film is miserably bogged down with exceedingly poor dialogue. Imagine if all that ever happened on the Star Trek Enterprise was that the characters spewed sci-fi jargon back and forth at each-other. Yes, I know, they already do that, but imagine if that's ALL they did, and that they used said jargon to set up vague and near-nonsensical scenes that produce no excitement, tension, or interest in the viewer whatsoever.

This is best exemplified at the point when a character in a Zero-G environment screws a bolt back onto a metal box before proceeding to cry in agony for a couple of minutes before suddenly exploding. The script alludes previously to the character [[compromising]] an explosion, but doesn't bother to give any solid [[answering]] as to why or how this occurs, nor why he can't really escape. In totality, you have a sorry cross between the bizarre and the laughable.

Then we have several scenes where dramatic build-up leads to nothing. Jack Palance's performance is wasted on a character that serves only to drive the boy hero (don't ask) around the desert, before getting roughed up and killed by a bunch of suits. On his death-bed, Palance finally tells our boy hero his last name (while wearing a horrible bruised makeup job that makes it look like somebody put a balloon under his eyeball), which he kept quiet about before. Colonel Travis J. Richards. The boy repeats it quietly after he expires, giving viewers the impression that the name is of some significance later on in the film. Perhaps Charlton Heston's grizzled admiral character knows him and the plot will advance thereby once his name is repeated. Something. Anything.

Nope. Sorry. Any hopes you have will be dashed when this moment turns out only to be another of many pathetic, failed attempts at creating drama—for a character so flat and hackneyed that it will forever be a stain on Palance's career, just as those of the rest of the cast are similarly marred.

Completing the film is a painfully abrupt ending featuring Schofield piloting the bomb into the center of the sun in an effort to redeem her deeds while under the villain's spell, a climax which features another of the film's considerably well-done visual effects sequences that, even for the visibly elaborate care put into them, still always manage to make the film look just as chintzy as it really is. The saddest part about this film is the obviously large budget, tragically wasted on a stinker of a script and a supporting cast behind Boyle, Heston, and Palance that manage to nail the coffin shut with pure over-acting.

Grade: D- --------------------------------------------- Result 811 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[think]] the [[deal]] with this movie is that it has about 2 minutes of really, really [[funny]] [[moments]] and it makes a very good trailer and a [[lot]] of people [[came]] in with expectations from the [[trailer]] and this [[time]] the movie doesn't live up to the [[trailer]]. It's a little more sluggish and drags a [[little]] slowly for such an exciting premise, and i think i'm [[seeing]] from the comments people having a love/[[hate]] relationship with this movie.

[[However]], if you look at this movie for what it is and not what it could have been [[considering]] the talent of the cast, i think it's still pretty good. Julia Stiles is clearly the star, she's so [[giddy]] and [[carefree]] that set among the [[conformity]] of everyone else, she just glows and the whole audience falls in love with her along with Lee. The rest of the cast, of course, Lee's testosterone-filled coworkers, his elegant mother-in-law, his fratlike friend Jim and his bride-to-be all do an [[excellent]] job of fitting into stereotypes of conformity and boringness that make Stiles [[stand]] out in the first place.

Lee doesn't live up to his costars, i don't think, but you could view that as more that they're hard to live up to. Maybe that's one source of disappointment.

The movie itself, [[despite]] a bit of slowness and a few jokes that don't come off as funny as the writer's intended, is still pretty funny and I [[found]] a rather [[intelligent]] [[film]]. The themes of [[conformity]] and "taking the safe route" seemed to cleverly align on several layers. For example, there was the whole motif of how he would imagine scenarios but would never act on them until the last scene, or how he was listening to a radio program on the highway talking about how everyone [[conforms]], or just how everything selma blair and julia stiles' characters said and did was echoed by those themes of one person being the safe choice and one being the risky choice.

The other good thing about the movie was that it was kind of a [[screwball]] comedy in which Jason Lee has to keep lying his way through the movie and who through dumb luck (example: the pharmacy guy turning out to be a good chef) and some cleverness on his part gets away with it for the most part.

While it wasn't as funny as i expected and there was a little bit of squandered talent, but overall it's still a good movie. I [[believe]] the [[addresses]] with this movie is that it has about 2 minutes of really, really [[amusing]] [[times]] and it makes a very good trailer and a [[batch]] of people [[arrived]] in with expectations from the [[trailers]] and this [[moment]] the movie doesn't live up to the [[camper]]. It's a little more sluggish and drags a [[petite]] slowly for such an exciting premise, and i think i'm [[witnessing]] from the comments people having a love/[[loathe]] relationship with this movie.

[[Instead]], if you look at this movie for what it is and not what it could have been [[consider]] the talent of the cast, i think it's still pretty good. Julia Stiles is clearly the star, she's so [[dazed]] and [[careless]] that set among the [[accordance]] of everyone else, she just glows and the whole audience falls in love with her along with Lee. The rest of the cast, of course, Lee's testosterone-filled coworkers, his elegant mother-in-law, his fratlike friend Jim and his bride-to-be all do an [[wondrous]] job of fitting into stereotypes of conformity and boringness that make Stiles [[standing]] out in the first place.

Lee doesn't live up to his costars, i don't think, but you could view that as more that they're hard to live up to. Maybe that's one source of disappointment.

The movie itself, [[while]] a bit of slowness and a few jokes that don't come off as funny as the writer's intended, is still pretty funny and I [[discovered]] a rather [[smart]] [[films]]. The themes of [[compliant]] and "taking the safe route" seemed to cleverly align on several layers. For example, there was the whole motif of how he would imagine scenarios but would never act on them until the last scene, or how he was listening to a radio program on the highway talking about how everyone [[meets]], or just how everything selma blair and julia stiles' characters said and did was echoed by those themes of one person being the safe choice and one being the risky choice.

The other good thing about the movie was that it was kind of a [[kooky]] comedy in which Jason Lee has to keep lying his way through the movie and who through dumb luck (example: the pharmacy guy turning out to be a good chef) and some cleverness on his part gets away with it for the most part.

While it wasn't as funny as i expected and there was a little bit of squandered talent, but overall it's still a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] i wasn't a fan of [[seeing]] this movie at all, but when my gf called me and said she had a free advanced screening pass i tagged along only for the sake of seeing [[eva]] longoria and laughing at jason biggs antics.

[[overall]] it was actually [[better]] then i [[expected]] but not by much. this was like a hybrid of how to lose a guy in 10 days and just like heaven. a typical romantic comedy with its moments i guess. the movie was quite short though (around 85 min.) but it was [[enough]] to tell the whole story, build some character development and have a decent happy ending. the whole idea of a ghost haunting its former husband was a interesting plot to follow. eva did a good job of keeping up the sarcasm and paul rudd and the rest of the supporting cast (especially jason biggs) kept the laughs coming at a smooth pace.

overall i liked the movie only because it had a good amount of laughs to keep me going otherwise i would have given this movie a lower rating. hey its a chick flick and i'm reviewing this movie from a guy's persepctive alright, it would be more of a fair fight if females reviewied this movie and gave there thoughts about it. i wasn't a fan of [[witnessing]] this movie at all, but when my gf called me and said she had a free advanced screening pass i tagged along only for the sake of seeing [[ewa]] longoria and laughing at jason biggs antics.

[[entire]] it was actually [[nicer]] then i [[waited]] but not by much. this was like a hybrid of how to lose a guy in 10 days and just like heaven. a typical romantic comedy with its moments i guess. the movie was quite short though (around 85 min.) but it was [[adequately]] to tell the whole story, build some character development and have a decent happy ending. the whole idea of a ghost haunting its former husband was a interesting plot to follow. eva did a good job of keeping up the sarcasm and paul rudd and the rest of the supporting cast (especially jason biggs) kept the laughs coming at a smooth pace.

overall i liked the movie only because it had a good amount of laughs to keep me going otherwise i would have given this movie a lower rating. hey its a chick flick and i'm reviewing this movie from a guy's persepctive alright, it would be more of a fair fight if females reviewied this movie and gave there thoughts about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 813 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is quite possibly THE worst movie I have ever seen. Again I made the mistake of buying the movie because the synapse on the back sounded cool and the front cover looked pretty cool too (After buying this and the movie "Malevolence" which I reviewed on here as well, I have learned my lesson). I love horror movies that take place in the woods or in the desert or on a farm. This supposedly takes place in the woods of Texas but was probably filmed in the director's backyard. The production was probably the worst I ever seen. The actors were absolutely the WORST. The story didn't have anything to do with what the back cover said. I even tried to sell it to F.Y.E and some other "mom and pop" store that buys used DVDs and neither would take it. Thats how awful this poor miserable excuse for a movie was. I have seen some bad movies before (Troll 2 for example) but this definitely takes the cake. I didn't think there was a worse movie than "Troll 2". Boy was I wrong! Do not buy this movie unless someone hands it to you for free but even than your stuck with it unless you throw it out which is what I am about to do!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 814 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I must admit I am a big fan of South Park and was expecting Basketball to be funny but nowhere near as good as it turned out to be! I think this is what happens when you mix David Zucker, Matt Stone, and Trey Parker together. This movie has so much replay value and at no point bothers to take itself seriously. The slap stick style humor mixed with Stone and Parker just works flawlessly. The kind of humor present in Basketball was not popular upon the time of it's release and had it come out today it would be a hit. Don't bother trying to be critical, just leave your brain at the door and expect endless laughs to come. Recommended to anyone with a good sense of humor. --------------------------------------------- Result 815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] [[Where]] do you [[begin]] with a [[movie]] as [[bad]] as this?

[[Do]] you [[mention]] the [[cast]] of unlikeable heroes? The over-the-top acting? The [[dreadful]] [[script]]?

No. You just say that [[anyone]] who [[pays]] [[money]] to [[see]] a [[film]] as poor as this [[needs]] their head [[looking]] at. I know I do. I [[respect]] those poor guys who [[saw]] it with little or no [[advance]] word from [[mags]] like [[Empire]] ([[usually]] a [[bad]] sign if a preview copy isn't [[available]] to the quality [[movie]] mags). However, cinemas [[really]] should [[start]] thinking about giving out [[refunds]] if the [[customer]] isn't happy with the [[finished]] [[product]].

I went three days after it [[opened]] with two other mates. The only other [[person]] in the [[cinema]] was one [[bloke]] on his own.

And that was on cheap night.

Either the ad campaign had failed dismally or word had spread through most of the [[country]] of just what a [[stinker]] this is.

Not [[since]] the days of The Avengers (1998) have I [[felt]] so short [[changed]] since watching a [[movie]]. [[If]] a [[mate]] [[comes]] [[round]] with this on video in a few months make sure he [[pays]] your electricity bill while [[watching]] it.

Tara Fitzgerald [[deserves]] an [[award]] for not cracking up - or walking off the set; Keith Allen [[retains]] some dignity amid the cinematic [[carnage]]; Barry [[Foster]] should have been arrested on the set for his performance, [[Rhys]] Ifans does his career no [[favours]] after the [[success]] of Notting Hill and only Dani Behr is halfway likeable as a busty [[secretary]].

[[Mind]] you, [[considering]] she [[used]] to be in The Word, any viewers' expectations of her acting [[ability]] had to be pretty low to [[begin]] with.

The [[production]] [[values]] aren't bad [[considering]] the [[obviously]] [[limited]] [[budget]] but that [[script]] is [[atrocious]]. [[If]] you want to hear a bunch of unlikeable [[characters]] [[say]] "Fak!" for a [[couple]] of hours then this should be right up your street.

[[Otherwise]], bargepoles [[required]].

[[Everytime]] do you [[initiation]] with a [[filmmaking]] as [[unfavourable]] as this?

[[Doing]] you [[cite]] the [[casting]] of unlikeable heroes? The over-the-top acting? The [[scary]] [[scripts]]?

No. You just say that [[everyone]] who [[paying]] [[cash]] to [[behold]] a [[filmmaking]] as poor as this [[needed]] their head [[searching]] at. I know I do. I [[respecting]] those poor guys who [[watched]] it with little or no [[progression]] word from [[chargers]] like [[Reich]] ([[commonly]] a [[negative]] sign if a preview copy isn't [[accessible]] to the quality [[filmmaking]] mags). However, cinemas [[genuinely]] should [[begins]] thinking about giving out [[repay]] if the [[consumers]] isn't happy with the [[complete]] [[merchandise]].

I went three days after it [[inaugurated]] with two other mates. The only other [[anyone]] in the [[filmmaking]] was one [[blokes]] on his own.

And that was on cheap night.

Either the ad campaign had failed dismally or word had spread through most of the [[nations]] of just what a [[tosser]] this is.

Not [[because]] the days of The Avengers (1998) have I [[deemed]] so short [[altering]] since watching a [[filmmaking]]. [[Unless]] a [[buddy]] [[happens]] [[redondo]] with this on video in a few months make sure he [[wages]] your electricity bill while [[staring]] it.

Tara Fitzgerald [[deserve]] an [[prix]] for not cracking up - or walking off the set; Keith Allen [[keeps]] some dignity amid the cinematic [[slaughtering]]; Barry [[Promote]] should have been arrested on the set for his performance, [[Reyes]] Ifans does his career no [[encourages]] after the [[succeeded]] of Notting Hill and only Dani Behr is halfway likeable as a busty [[secretaries]].

[[Intellect]] you, [[consideration]] she [[uses]] to be in The Word, any viewers' expectations of her acting [[skill]] had to be pretty low to [[starts]] with.

The [[productivity]] [[valuing]] aren't bad [[reviewing]] the [[apparently]] [[restrained]] [[budgets]] but that [[hyphen]] is [[awful]]. [[Though]] you want to hear a bunch of unlikeable [[traits]] [[said]] "Fak!" for a [[couples]] of hours then this should be right up your street.

[[Alternately]], bargepoles [[need]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 816 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the [[concept]] work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost obligated to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the [[worst]] role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate. Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the [[notion]] work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost obligated to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the [[gravest]] role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate. --------------------------------------------- Result 817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I've never been to Paris, but after seeing "Paris, Je t'aime" I'm crazy to visit this city! I've been to NY several times and I LOVE the city and its boroughs. I kinda expected to be touched by this film, to feel like jumping into a plane and fly there right away, but, lo and behold, I [[regret]] the time and [[money]] I spent with it. There are no love [[stories]] between people or a person and the city. There's a lot of dysfunctional [[meetings]] and relations or people who know each other and it just doesn't [[work]] out fine. Maybe this reflects a characteristic of the city, where it's said to have thousands of people living on their own. Can't you find love in New York? I've never been to Paris, but after seeing "Paris, Je t'aime" I'm crazy to visit this city! I've been to NY several times and I LOVE the city and its boroughs. I kinda expected to be touched by this film, to feel like jumping into a plane and fly there right away, but, lo and behold, I [[deplore]] the time and [[moneys]] I spent with it. There are no love [[fairytales]] between people or a person and the city. There's a lot of dysfunctional [[reunions]] and relations or people who know each other and it just doesn't [[cooperates]] out fine. Maybe this reflects a characteristic of the city, where it's said to have thousands of people living on their own. Can't you find love in New York? --------------------------------------------- Result 818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was just as good as some of the other westerns made by Anthony Mann and James Stewart like Winchester '73 and The Naked Spur, and much better than Thunder Bay and Bend Of The River. This film starts out like a run of the mill western but gets more complex as it goes along. It starts out with Jimmy Stewart and Walter Brennan arriving in Seattle and Stewart is charged with murder. He is found innocent but is cattle is stolen by a corrupt judge. Stewart then agrees to lead something but i forget what it is but Stewart only cares about getting his cattle back. As the movie goes along it's like Stewart only cares about himself just like his character in the Naked Spur. It gets much better at the halfway point after they arrive in Alaska. This is one of Stewart's better westerns. --------------------------------------------- Result 819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is stale, and misses the mark. It is far off compared to the 89 Batman that it tries to coppy. That women singer whats her name can not act, and we see why her film carrier died. Notice how this film died in the box office no one see this film on tv either. My uncle and dad were expecting Batman, and the films impression is more like Cop Rock. Not worth renting 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Mysterious]] [[murders]] in a European village [[seem]] the result of THE VAMPIRE [[BAT]] horde [[plaguing]] the [[terrified]] [[community]].

This [[surprisingly]] [[effective]] [[little]] [[thriller]] was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's Poverty Row studios. The [[sparse]] production [[values]] and rough [[editing]] actually add to its [[eerie]] atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the [[viewer]] the feeling of being caught up in a bad [[dream]], which is [[appropriate]] for a thriller of this sort.

Even though the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite ludicrous and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his [[typically]] fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than [[look]] lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.

Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's [[terrified]] burgermeister. And [[little]] Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his [[weird]] roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most [[effective]] as a bat-loving lunatic. [[Cryptic]] [[slain]] in a European village [[seems]] the result of THE VAMPIRE [[WALLOP]] horde [[ravaging]] the [[terrorised]] [[communities]].

This [[unbelievably]] [[efficacious]] [[tiny]] [[thrillers]] was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's Poverty Row studios. The [[dispersed]] production [[valuing]] and rough [[edition]] actually add to its [[freaky]] atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the [[onlooker]] the feeling of being caught up in a bad [[daydreaming]], which is [[adequate]] for a thriller of this sort.

Even though the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite ludicrous and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his [[normally]] fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than [[gaze]] lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.

Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's [[horrified]] burgermeister. And [[tiny]] Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his [[squirrelly]] roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most [[efficacious]] as a bat-loving lunatic. --------------------------------------------- Result 821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This first two seasons of this comedy series were very strange and they weren't very funny and had a drama element where Bill (the mother) was struggling with all the usual problems in life but that element was a bit depressing and didn't mix well with th comedy elements which is probably why it was dropped. After that it soon became one of the funniest comedy series the BBC have ever made! The chemistry between Bill and Ben's character's were very funny and there was always so many brilliant and memorable sketches in each series. The Christmas specials were hilarious and a real treat for Christmas.

The show came to a stop when the main actor Gary Olsen playing Bill passed away which was very sad because he was a brilliant actor in films such as Up 'n' Under and a very funny man RIP

This underrated show has sadly disappeared from our television screens and doesn't to be repeated that often - Though it does appear on UKTV Gold once in a while but it should be repeated on BBC one or two to show this brilliant Comedy to a new audience --------------------------------------------- Result 822 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Remade today, this film [[would]] be a very creepy, very disturbing dark [[comedy]]. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.

[[Vastly]] [[disturbing]]; I haven't been able to look at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.

Remade today, this film [[could]] be a very creepy, very disturbing dark [[humor]]. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.

[[Eminently]] [[disconcerting]]; I haven't been able to look at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.

--------------------------------------------- Result 823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[movie]] is awesome for three [[main]] reasons. It is esthetically beautiful. I absolutely [[loved]] that. There is a bold [[color]] [[theme]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]] with [[extraordinary]] costumes and [[picturesque]] sets. A [[photography]] which [[looks]] very [[costly]] (and [[probably]] was not) [[completes]] the [[look]] . I always enjoy those stories about [[groups]] of misfits/loners [[coming]] together and [[becoming]] a family . Sometimes they [[fall]] into [[clichés]] but this one does not. This group of actors really portrays well [[flawed]], yet [[extremely]] [[likable]] characters. Alan Larkin is the [[best]] (between him , the van and the road movie theme, I could not help but remember my [[favorite]] [[movie]] of last year [[Little]] Miss [[Sunshine]]…) . I discovered Fabrizio Bentivoglio , very interesting actor, and just got annoyed a tiny little bit by Til Schweiger performance at times . The opening scene, all the scenes where they mess up their [[tricks]] are very [[funny]]. There is a mix of [[humor]] and emotion throughout the film. I like the end a [[lot]]. And of course it is all about the Magician [[theme]] . A good magician is making the audience look where he wants them to, to create an illusion. Which happens to be exactly what a movie director does and that's why they call it movie magic. This [[kino]] is awesome for three [[primary]] reasons. It is esthetically beautiful. I absolutely [[cared]] that. There is a bold [[colour]] [[topics]] [[across]] the [[film]] with [[wondrous]] costumes and [[scenic]] sets. A [[photographer]] which [[seems]] very [[burdensome]] (and [[conceivably]] was not) [[finishes]] the [[gaze]] . I always enjoy those stories about [[panels]] of misfits/loners [[come]] together and [[become]] a family . Sometimes they [[dipped]] into [[cliché]] but this one does not. This group of actors really portrays well [[misguided]], yet [[unbelievably]] [[sympathetic]] characters. Alan Larkin is the [[better]] (between him , the van and the road movie theme, I could not help but remember my [[favourite]] [[cinematographic]] of last year [[Tiny]] Miss [[Sunlight]]…) . I discovered Fabrizio Bentivoglio , very interesting actor, and just got annoyed a tiny little bit by Til Schweiger performance at times . The opening scene, all the scenes where they mess up their [[stratagems]] are very [[comical]]. There is a mix of [[mood]] and emotion throughout the film. I like the end a [[lots]]. And of course it is all about the Magician [[thematic]] . A good magician is making the audience look where he wants them to, to create an illusion. Which happens to be exactly what a movie director does and that's why they call it movie magic. --------------------------------------------- Result 824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I [[first]] [[heard]] about the title, I thought of 'The Simpsons', just like so [[many]] other reviewers, but when I saw the cast, I was completely stunned, that so [[many]] [[great]] character-actors would actually be in this! [[First]] of all, we have [[Christopher]] Walken (Deer [[Hunter]], Pulp Fiction), who plays the title [[character]], McBain. He is rescued from a Vietnam POW-camp by some of his buddies, one of which is Santos (Chick Vennera, Yanks), who splits a HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL with McBain (Vietnam soldiers are loaded with cash apparently), and tells him that he can re-do the favor to him, if he ever gets into trouble.

Then, 18 years later, Santos and his sister Christina (Maria Conchita Alonso, The Running Man, [[Predator]] 2) join the rebels in Colombia trying to get rid of their evil dictator, El Presidente (Victor Argo, Taxi Driver, King of New York), and when Santos [[fails]] the mission, [[Christina]] goes to McBain for [[help]].

McBain then asks his good ol' Vietnam buddies to help him. First there's the token [[tough]] black guy, Eastland, played by "American Ninja"'s Steve James, who was also in director James Glickenhaus' previous [[movie]], "The Exterminator", where the exterminator's real name also was Eastland, coincidence? I [[think]] not. There is [[also]] a [[lot]] of other references to The Exterminator, among other things, the most [[notable]] one being that McBain himself [[wears]] a welders-mask when Christina [[sees]] him for the [[first]] [[time]], when he is [[working]] on a welding-job on top of a bridge!

The other [[guys]] in the Vietnam-pack are: The [[rich]] guy who can afford all [[sorts]] of equipment for the team, Frank Bruce ([[Michael]] Ironside, Total [[Recall]], Starship Troopers), and then there's the doc, Dalton, (played by [[Jay]] [[Patterson]], who doesn't look [[like]] the [[guy]] the IMDb is linking to, and I haven't [[seen]] him in other movies, so who knows), and last but not least, there's the cop, Gill, who has had enough of his unsatisfying job, he's played by Thomas G. Waites, who some of us might remember from The Warriors and The Thing.

And in other big roles, we find Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights, Carlito's Way), as a small-time drug-dealer who can't get a decent job. Also, there is Dick Boccelli as the drug-dealing kingpin who gets hung up in a crane on top of a roof by the McBain-gang, almost Exactly in the same way he got hung up over a meat-grinder by John Eastland in the EXTERMINATOR-movie! Now, I haven't seen Glickenhaus' "Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop" yet, but I'm almost ready to bet half a hundred-dollar bill that Boccelli gets hung up in that movie too!

Well, back to the plot of this movie.. they go off to Colombia and saves the day, yay! But who cares about the plot anyway, the cast is great, and the action-scenes are very well done, and you're never bored while watching this movie! Highly recommended to all action-lovers! When I [[fiirst]] [[listened]] about the title, I thought of 'The Simpsons', just like so [[numerous]] other reviewers, but when I saw the cast, I was completely stunned, that so [[numerous]] [[wondrous]] character-actors would actually be in this! [[Firstly]] of all, we have [[Christophe]] Walken (Deer [[Hunting]], Pulp Fiction), who plays the title [[characters]], McBain. He is rescued from a Vietnam POW-camp by some of his buddies, one of which is Santos (Chick Vennera, Yanks), who splits a HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL with McBain (Vietnam soldiers are loaded with cash apparently), and tells him that he can re-do the favor to him, if he ever gets into trouble.

Then, 18 years later, Santos and his sister Christina (Maria Conchita Alonso, The Running Man, [[Predatory]] 2) join the rebels in Colombia trying to get rid of their evil dictator, El Presidente (Victor Argo, Taxi Driver, King of New York), and when Santos [[fail]] the mission, [[Kristina]] goes to McBain for [[aids]].

McBain then asks his good ol' Vietnam buddies to help him. First there's the token [[stiff]] black guy, Eastland, played by "American Ninja"'s Steve James, who was also in director James Glickenhaus' previous [[movies]], "The Exterminator", where the exterminator's real name also was Eastland, coincidence? I [[thought]] not. There is [[apart]] a [[batch]] of other references to The Exterminator, among other things, the most [[cannot]] one being that McBain himself [[wearing]] a welders-mask when Christina [[believes]] him for the [[fiirst]] [[moment]], when he is [[collaborated]] on a welding-job on top of a bridge!

The other [[fellas]] in the Vietnam-pack are: The [[storied]] guy who can afford all [[kind]] of equipment for the team, Frank Bruce ([[Michel]] Ironside, Total [[Recalled]], Starship Troopers), and then there's the doc, Dalton, (played by [[Jae]] [[Paterson]], who doesn't look [[iike]] the [[blokes]] the IMDb is linking to, and I haven't [[watched]] him in other movies, so who knows), and last but not least, there's the cop, Gill, who has had enough of his unsatisfying job, he's played by Thomas G. Waites, who some of us might remember from The Warriors and The Thing.

And in other big roles, we find Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights, Carlito's Way), as a small-time drug-dealer who can't get a decent job. Also, there is Dick Boccelli as the drug-dealing kingpin who gets hung up in a crane on top of a roof by the McBain-gang, almost Exactly in the same way he got hung up over a meat-grinder by John Eastland in the EXTERMINATOR-movie! Now, I haven't seen Glickenhaus' "Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop" yet, but I'm almost ready to bet half a hundred-dollar bill that Boccelli gets hung up in that movie too!

Well, back to the plot of this movie.. they go off to Colombia and saves the day, yay! But who cares about the plot anyway, the cast is great, and the action-scenes are very well done, and you're never bored while watching this movie! Highly recommended to all action-lovers! --------------------------------------------- Result 825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Billy Crystal co-wrote, co-produced and stars in this extremely safe and comfy comedy-drama about fathers and sons, adult irresponsibility, and growing old. Billy plays a heart surgeon who has a heart attack (ha ha) which causes him to seek out his estranged father (Alan King), a movie-extra who fancies himself a big star. The script is sub-Neil Simon nonsense with one-liners galore, a flat, inexpressive direction by Henry Winkler (stuck in sitcom mode), and family-conflict at the ready. Crystal and King try their best, but King is over-eager and frequently over-the-top. JoBeth Williams has another one of her thankless roles, but manages to bring her innate, down-home class to the proverbial girlfriend character. It's a comedy, I guess, but one that blinks back the tears...shamefully. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Just]] watched this early Bugs Bunny (first [[time]] he's named here) and Elmer Fudd cartoon on the ThadBlog as [[linked]] from YouTube. This was Chuck Jones' [[first]] [[time]] directing the "wascally wabbit" and as a [[result]], Bugs has a [[different]] [[voice]] [[provided]] by Mel [[Blanc]] than the Brooklyn/Bronx one we're more familiar with. [[In]] fact, according to Thad, he's channeling Jimmy Stewart (his "shy [[boy]]" [[type]] [[personality]] of that [[time]]). Anyway, after Elmer [[buys]] his pet, [[Bugs]] goes all obnoxious on him by turning the radio [[real]] loud, pretending to [[die]] after his master [[repeatedly]] [[throws]] him out of his shower, and [[saying]] "Turn off those lights!" [[whenever]] Elmer catches him in his bed. Even with the [[different]] voice, [[Bugs]] is [[definitely]] his [[mischievous]] self and I [[laughed]] myself [[blue]] the [[whole]] [[time]]! According to Thad, there was an additional scene at the end of Elmer just giving the [[house]] to Bugs after the hell he went through but that was probably considered too sad since he suffers a mental [[breakdown]] at that point so it's just as well that cut scene is lost. Anyway, I [[highly]] [[recommend]] Elmer's Pet Rabbit. [[Mere]] watched this early Bugs Bunny (first [[moment]] he's named here) and Elmer Fudd cartoon on the ThadBlog as [[associated]] from YouTube. This was Chuck Jones' [[fiirst]] [[period]] directing the "wascally wabbit" and as a [[findings]], Bugs has a [[several]] [[vocals]] [[gave]] by Mel [[White]] than the Brooklyn/Bronx one we're more familiar with. [[During]] fact, according to Thad, he's channeling Jimmy Stewart (his "shy [[guys]]" [[genre]] [[subjectivity]] of that [[period]]). Anyway, after Elmer [[purchased]] his pet, [[Insects]] goes all obnoxious on him by turning the radio [[actual]] loud, pretending to [[killed]] after his master [[perpetually]] [[castings]] him out of his shower, and [[telling]] "Turn off those lights!" [[where]] Elmer catches him in his bed. Even with the [[several]] voice, [[Insects]] is [[surely]] his [[malicious]] self and I [[smiled]] myself [[bleu]] the [[entire]] [[moment]]! According to Thad, there was an additional scene at the end of Elmer just giving the [[housing]] to Bugs after the hell he went through but that was probably considered too sad since he suffers a mental [[breakthrough]] at that point so it's just as well that cut scene is lost. Anyway, I [[vastly]] [[recommends]] Elmer's Pet Rabbit. --------------------------------------------- Result 827 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the town of Royston Vasey is a weird, but wonderful place. The characters would be just wrong and too disturbing but the fantastically brilliant writing means that it works, and it works very well. Most people will know others with a touch of some characters, but hopefully no one knows people with extremes of personalities such as Tubbs and Edward, the stranger-hating owners of the local shop, or the pen-obsessed Pauline who treats "dole scum" with much contempt.That was only a few of the strange inhabitants. The TV works consists of 3 series and a Christmas special. There are references to many horror films, such as the wicker man. A more recent addition to the range of works is a film, the league of gentlemens apocalypse, of which I will not say much but highly recommend. All in all the league of gentlemen is a hilarious comedy show with genius writing and brilliantly bonkers characters. I would definitely say that it is worth watching as you wont regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Schlocky '70s [[horror]] films...ya gotta [[love]] 'em. [[In]] contrast to today's boring slasher flicks, these K-tel specials actually do something [[scary]] and do not resort to a [[tired]] formula.

This is a B movie about the making of a B [[movie]]...that went [[horribly]] wrong. [[Faith]] Domergue (This Island [[Earth]]) stars as an over-the-hill, B movie queen [[making]] a [[movie]] about a series of grisly murders that befell a family in their home. Her boyfriend/director, who looks and acts like Gordon Jump with an attitude, is filming on location and on a tight [[schedule]]. The Ken doll co-star discovers a book of Tibetian chants that they work into the script to add "realism". Unfortunately, "realism" is something they could have done without.

John Carradine, having long since given up looking for the 17th gland (The Unearthly), now eeks out a humble existence as the caretaker for the estate. He goes about his daily work, but always seems to run afoul of the [[director]].

The [[horror]] [[builds]] slowly; a dead [[cat]] here, [[John]] Carradine entering a grave there, finally culminating in seven, [[yes]] seven murders. (At least there's truth in [[advertising]].) It's just sad that the ghoul didn't understand that there was a movie being made above him. How was [[poor]] [[Faith]] to know that those [[darn]] Tibetian [[chants]] would actually work? Face it, you just can't go around tugging on Satan's coat and expect him to take it lying down.

Sterno says perform an autopsy on The House of Seven Corpses. Schlocky '70s [[monstrosity]] films...ya gotta [[amore]] 'em. [[Among]] contrast to today's boring slasher flicks, these K-tel specials actually do something [[horrifying]] and do not resort to a [[weary]] formula.

This is a B movie about the making of a B [[kino]]...that went [[awfully]] wrong. [[Creed]] Domergue (This Island [[Land]]) stars as an over-the-hill, B movie queen [[doing]] a [[filmmaking]] about a series of grisly murders that befell a family in their home. Her boyfriend/director, who looks and acts like Gordon Jump with an attitude, is filming on location and on a tight [[timeline]]. The Ken doll co-star discovers a book of Tibetian chants that they work into the script to add "realism". Unfortunately, "realism" is something they could have done without.

John Carradine, having long since given up looking for the 17th gland (The Unearthly), now eeks out a humble existence as the caretaker for the estate. He goes about his daily work, but always seems to run afoul of the [[headmaster]].

The [[terror]] [[constructing]] slowly; a dead [[kitten]] here, [[Jon]] Carradine entering a grave there, finally culminating in seven, [[yep]] seven murders. (At least there's truth in [[ad]].) It's just sad that the ghoul didn't understand that there was a movie being made above him. How was [[deficient]] [[Creed]] to know that those [[geez]] Tibetian [[shouts]] would actually work? Face it, you just can't go around tugging on Satan's coat and expect him to take it lying down.

Sterno says perform an autopsy on The House of Seven Corpses. --------------------------------------------- Result 829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Despite]] some [[reviews]] being distinctly Luke-warm, I found the story [[totally]] engrossing and even if some critics have [[described]] the love [[story]] as 'Mills and Boon', so what? It is good to [[see]] a warm, touching [[story]] of [[real]] love in these cynical [[times]]. Many in the audience were sniffing and [[surreptitiously]] dabbing their eyes. You [[really]] believe that the young Victoria and Albert are passionately fond of each other, even though, for political [[reasons]], it was an arranged marriage. I did feel [[though]] that [[Sir]] John Conroy, who was desperate to control the young Queen, is [[perhaps]] [[played]] too like a pantomime villain. As it is rumoured that he was in fact, the [[real]] [[father]] of Victoria (as a [[result]] of an [[affair]] with her [[mother]] The [[Duchess]] of Kent) it would have been interesting to [[explore]] this [[theory]]. [[Emily]] Blunt is [[totally]] [[convincing]] as the young Princess, trapped in the [[stifling]] palace with courtiers and [[politicians]] out to manipulate her. She [[brilliantly]] [[portrays]] the strength of [[character]] and determination that eventually made Victoria a [[great]] Queen of [[England]], which [[prospered]] as never before, under her [[long]] reign. I believe word of mouth [[recommendations]] will [[ensure]] [[great]] success for this most [[enjoyable]] and [[wonderful]] looking [[movie]]. [[Although]] some [[review]] being distinctly Luke-warm, I found the story [[absolutely]] engrossing and even if some critics have [[outlining]] the love [[stories]] as 'Mills and Boon', so what? It is good to [[consults]] a warm, touching [[stories]] of [[true]] love in these cynical [[dates]]. Many in the audience were sniffing and [[stealthily]] dabbing their eyes. You [[truthfully]] believe that the young Victoria and Albert are passionately fond of each other, even though, for political [[grounds]], it was an arranged marriage. I did feel [[if]] that [[Sirs]] John Conroy, who was desperate to control the young Queen, is [[potentially]] [[served]] too like a pantomime villain. As it is rumoured that he was in fact, the [[actual]] [[pere]] of Victoria (as a [[outcomes]] of an [[fling]] with her [[mommy]] The [[Duchesse]] of Kent) it would have been interesting to [[explores]] this [[doctrine]]. [[Amelie]] Blunt is [[perfectly]] [[persuade]] as the young Princess, trapped in the [[smothering]] palace with courtiers and [[politician]] out to manipulate her. She [[brightly]] [[describes]] the strength of [[nature]] and determination that eventually made Victoria a [[awesome]] Queen of [[Britain]], which [[thrived]] as never before, under her [[longue]] reign. I believe word of mouth [[propose]] will [[guaranteeing]] [[awesome]] success for this most [[nice]] and [[wondrous]] looking [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know how and where do the Iranian directors get their inspiration in coming up with a plot like this. In fact, it's a very simple plot that many directors could come up with --- but may not be able to project it onto a movie the way Jafar Panahi did.

The film is like 2 worlds revolving at the same time, one connected to the other - the football match and the battle between sexes that's going on behind the walls of the stadium.

It makes you feel like you are in the movie and you're one of the characters, and while watching the movie, as if you also would like to have a glimpse of the football match. You will feel exactly the same excitement and sentiments as those female actors in the movie. It's gripping in a way that you wanted to see the ending, you will want to find out the verdict, you'll be dying to see what will happen to the girls.

I like the intermittent conversations between the smoking girl and one of the military trainee. It's like venus VS mars, it really shows the difference in the thinking of men and women and the struggle of women to get equal rights and opportunity especially in a very patriarchal society like Iran.

This is the second movie of Jafar Panahi that I have seen (the first being Crimson Gold) and am looking forward to watching some more.

Am already hooked with Iranian movies and this one is a must-see! --------------------------------------------- Result 831 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I remember this [[show]] being on the television when I was a [[kid]] back in the early 1990s, and there was this rage about kids with goofy leotards doing kung [[fu]] on one another and riding [[around]] in plastic [[dinosaurs]]. It was called power [[rangers]]. I [[remember]] that [[little]] [[kids]] [[would]] [[go]] around hitting each other and then the shirts and the stuff from the [[show]] was [[banned]] in many [[school]] [[districts]] all over the [[country]] because this show [[taught]] kids how to [[fight]] each other in [[solving]] their [[differences]].

I never really [[thought]] of this as a [[show]], [[especially]] when better [[shows]] [[like]] The Tick were playing on Fox [[Kids]]. [[Most]] [[older]] teens [[always]] looked at power rangers in a ridiculous and [[scornful]] [[manner]], and it's not hard to wonder why. The footage is ridiculous at [[best]]. The colored rangers [[costumes]] look like stuff you would [[work]] out in and the dinosaurs look like plastic [[nonsense]]. Then you [[get]] into the acting, and of course those really laughable haircuts. All the guys run [[around]] with earrings on, half of them are wearing 90's mullets, and they always [[wear]] the same [[clothes]] everyday, and then [[change]] into leotard wearing power rangers.

The [[toys]] are [[especially]] [[ridiculous]] as well, and was the joke of [[many]] late [[night]] talk show hosts. And of course two of the worst movies ever [[made]], and I do mean two of the worst [[movies]] ever made were based on this show with [[nearly]] every critic trashing both the films, and the [[shows]] it was based on.

Power [[rangers]] is nothing more than a bad television commericial for [[especially]] [[bad]] toy [[merchandising]]. As an adult, I don't look at it [[fondly]], but [[rather]] as another [[embarrassment]] of 1990s kids [[shows]], fashion and guys' earrings. I remember this [[exhibitions]] being on the television when I was a [[children]] back in the early 1990s, and there was this rage about kids with goofy leotards doing kung [[foo]] on one another and riding [[almost]] in plastic [[dinosaur]]. It was called power [[ringers]]. I [[remembers]] that [[tiny]] [[children]] [[could]] [[going]] around hitting each other and then the shirts and the stuff from the [[exhibition]] was [[outlawed]] in many [[tuition]] [[neighbourhoods]] all over the [[nationals]] because this show [[lectured]] kids how to [[struggle]] each other in [[addressing]] their [[difference]].

I never really [[think]] of this as a [[exhibition]], [[mainly]] when better [[exposition]] [[iike]] The Tick were playing on Fox [[Juvenile]]. [[Anymore]] [[aged]] teens [[consistently]] looked at power rangers in a ridiculous and [[disdainful]] [[modes]], and it's not hard to wonder why. The footage is ridiculous at [[nicest]]. The colored rangers [[costume]] look like stuff you would [[cooperate]] out in and the dinosaurs look like plastic [[bullshit]]. Then you [[got]] into the acting, and of course those really laughable haircuts. All the guys run [[nearly]] with earrings on, half of them are wearing 90's mullets, and they always [[wearing]] the same [[costumes]] everyday, and then [[amended]] into leotard wearing power rangers.

The [[toy]] are [[particularly]] [[absurd]] as well, and was the joke of [[innumerable]] late [[nighttime]] talk show hosts. And of course two of the worst movies ever [[brought]], and I do mean two of the worst [[filmmaking]] ever made were based on this show with [[roughly]] every critic trashing both the films, and the [[denotes]] it was based on.

Power [[ringers]] is nothing more than a bad television commericial for [[specifically]] [[negative]] toy [[marketing]]. As an adult, I don't look at it [[affectionately]], but [[somewhat]] as another [[shame]] of 1990s kids [[show]], fashion and guys' earrings. --------------------------------------------- Result 832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] First of all I would like to point out that this film has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] to see with the Dutch folklore story of the ghost [[ship]] that is [[also]] called THE FLYING DUTCHMAN. In this [[film]], you will not see a single sailing boat. You will not [[see]] sailors, ghosts, or anything remotely [[exciting]]. It is not the [[story]] of the ghost ship, and I wish they had notified it in the main credits or I wouldn't have watched it, because I really [[thought]] it was the film about the legend. It seems many people think the film has to do with the legend of the ghost ship, since the film is listed on the Wikipedia page for the "Flying Dutchman" legend... I don't understand why. It is maybe based on the resembling legend called "The Wandering Jew"? Or maybe did they just adapt the worst parts of the legend? The film begins with a fight sequence that would let anyone hope the film will have battle scenes. Unfortunately, it is the only battle scene of the film. Then you see Daniel Emilfork (who was Krank in City of Lost Children) for about two seconds, and that would let anyone hope the film will have good acting. Unfortunately he is very [[bad]] in the film. The same thing can be said about Italian actor Nino Manfredi, who was one of Italia's best actors ever, and who here is condemned to embody a crazy bird wrangler with no back story whose only purpose is to seem to be the "wise man" of the film. And boy, does that film need wiseness! Every other character of the story seems to enjoy swimming in excrement, yelling, torturing others (in excrement), fornicating (in excrement) or laying in excrement some more just for the fun of it. It [[seems]] to be such fun that each character of the story gets to have his or her turn being dumped in [[feces]] at a point or another. Coming from a Dutch [[director]], you might think that extreme dirtiness and shockingly real filth are necessary elements in a period piece, elements which contributed to make Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven's film, "Flesh + Blood", such a great film. The thought of "Flesh + Blood" would let anyone hope that a film similarly filthy and visually straight-forward would be good. Unfortunately, and unlike "Flesh + Blood", there is no dramatic progression, no fights, no good acting, and put simply, no "Flesh and Blood". The photography, as the opening sequence unfolds, is well-done and enticing. This too, stops very early in the film. The music, from Nicola Piovani (of "La vità e bella" fame) is repetitive and annoying, when not irrelevant (it sometimes implies that there is grandeur in a sequence, while on screen the actors are splashing in liquid dung). Throughout the first "act" of the film, which lasts nothing less than an hour (!), the film takes place within the same perimeter, which is around the farm where the main characters live. The characters play with excrement a lot, drown in it, play in it. A long period of time elapses through numerous ellipses to allows the main character, a young boy who loves to play in excrement, to become older and play in excrement some more. The bird-man talks a lot to say foolish things in Italian. Spanish conquistadors speak French. Nothing makes sense. Everything is confused and takes hours to happen. Then there is a second act called "the Ship", in which we see what might have been a ship, a long time ago, but which is now remains of a ship (covered with excrement did I mention?). The main character, while walking a bit further away from the farm, just happens to run into it, and decides it's really cool so let's live in it. The hunchback who lived in it before is trying to kill him, but he doesn't really mind because (did I mention?) he's not very bright. He thinks the ship can navigate and hopes to sail on it, until more conquistadors show up (at least they seemed to be conquistadors because of the Don Quixote style hats but as I've said it's really confused who's who), make the Dutchman a prisoner, along with the retarded hunchback, and they burn the ship to the ground. The last part of the film, which is really hard to bear for the spectator because it just consists of even more excrement with even more retarded middle-age peasants fighting in it, takes place in a mad asylum. Yet more torture and drowning each other with feces. Yet more loitering for the director, who seems to have definitely given up on his job, or passed onto the second crew camera assistant to do the rest of the job. In the end, a lot of the mentally-challenged new "friends" that the Dutchman made die. The woman he had sex with who was his brother's wife to begin with tries to have him meet his son. The Dutchman and his son talk. The film ends after two hours of dungy images and calamitous acting and technical performances. Then the credits roll and the spectator fells immensely free from having to watch atrocious films with no plot that pretend to be something exciting like fantasy films based on legends, while they are nothing but a mere catalog of how full of excrement some films can get when they don't have enough financing powers to put battles instead or even horses. First of all I would like to point out that this film has [[wholly]] [[none]] to see with the Dutch folklore story of the ghost [[vessels]] that is [[further]] called THE FLYING DUTCHMAN. In this [[filmmaking]], you will not see a single sailing boat. You will not [[behold]] sailors, ghosts, or anything remotely [[enthralling]]. It is not the [[conte]] of the ghost ship, and I wish they had notified it in the main credits or I wouldn't have watched it, because I really [[thinking]] it was the film about the legend. It seems many people think the film has to do with the legend of the ghost ship, since the film is listed on the Wikipedia page for the "Flying Dutchman" legend... I don't understand why. It is maybe based on the resembling legend called "The Wandering Jew"? Or maybe did they just adapt the worst parts of the legend? The film begins with a fight sequence that would let anyone hope the film will have battle scenes. Unfortunately, it is the only battle scene of the film. Then you see Daniel Emilfork (who was Krank in City of Lost Children) for about two seconds, and that would let anyone hope the film will have good acting. Unfortunately he is very [[unfavourable]] in the film. The same thing can be said about Italian actor Nino Manfredi, who was one of Italia's best actors ever, and who here is condemned to embody a crazy bird wrangler with no back story whose only purpose is to seem to be the "wise man" of the film. And boy, does that film need wiseness! Every other character of the story seems to enjoy swimming in excrement, yelling, torturing others (in excrement), fornicating (in excrement) or laying in excrement some more just for the fun of it. It [[seem]] to be such fun that each character of the story gets to have his or her turn being dumped in [[saddles]] at a point or another. Coming from a Dutch [[headmaster]], you might think that extreme dirtiness and shockingly real filth are necessary elements in a period piece, elements which contributed to make Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven's film, "Flesh + Blood", such a great film. The thought of "Flesh + Blood" would let anyone hope that a film similarly filthy and visually straight-forward would be good. Unfortunately, and unlike "Flesh + Blood", there is no dramatic progression, no fights, no good acting, and put simply, no "Flesh and Blood". The photography, as the opening sequence unfolds, is well-done and enticing. This too, stops very early in the film. The music, from Nicola Piovani (of "La vità e bella" fame) is repetitive and annoying, when not irrelevant (it sometimes implies that there is grandeur in a sequence, while on screen the actors are splashing in liquid dung). Throughout the first "act" of the film, which lasts nothing less than an hour (!), the film takes place within the same perimeter, which is around the farm where the main characters live. The characters play with excrement a lot, drown in it, play in it. A long period of time elapses through numerous ellipses to allows the main character, a young boy who loves to play in excrement, to become older and play in excrement some more. The bird-man talks a lot to say foolish things in Italian. Spanish conquistadors speak French. Nothing makes sense. Everything is confused and takes hours to happen. Then there is a second act called "the Ship", in which we see what might have been a ship, a long time ago, but which is now remains of a ship (covered with excrement did I mention?). The main character, while walking a bit further away from the farm, just happens to run into it, and decides it's really cool so let's live in it. The hunchback who lived in it before is trying to kill him, but he doesn't really mind because (did I mention?) he's not very bright. He thinks the ship can navigate and hopes to sail on it, until more conquistadors show up (at least they seemed to be conquistadors because of the Don Quixote style hats but as I've said it's really confused who's who), make the Dutchman a prisoner, along with the retarded hunchback, and they burn the ship to the ground. The last part of the film, which is really hard to bear for the spectator because it just consists of even more excrement with even more retarded middle-age peasants fighting in it, takes place in a mad asylum. Yet more torture and drowning each other with feces. Yet more loitering for the director, who seems to have definitely given up on his job, or passed onto the second crew camera assistant to do the rest of the job. In the end, a lot of the mentally-challenged new "friends" that the Dutchman made die. The woman he had sex with who was his brother's wife to begin with tries to have him meet his son. The Dutchman and his son talk. The film ends after two hours of dungy images and calamitous acting and technical performances. Then the credits roll and the spectator fells immensely free from having to watch atrocious films with no plot that pretend to be something exciting like fantasy films based on legends, while they are nothing but a mere catalog of how full of excrement some films can get when they don't have enough financing powers to put battles instead or even horses. --------------------------------------------- Result 833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Before this made for TV [[movie]] [[began]], I had relatively low expectations. That's because it was made after the final episode of the series had aired and many of the series [[originals]] were gone. There is no President Sheridan, Delenn, Lennier, Londo, Vir, G'kar or Lyta. If you remember, on the second to last episode of the series, all the regulars except Zack, Vir and Captain Lockley left B-5 permanently. Now for this film they did bring back Garibaldi (who was not in the last B-5 movie) to join Zack and the Captain and the Doctor makes a brief and irrelevant appearance. But because so much is gone of the old chemistry, this film already is severely [[handicapped]].

The movie is about a Soul Hunter (Martin Sheen) who is led to Babylon 5 in search of a globe filled with souls that had been stolen from a hidden repository by an archaeologist (Ian McShane). A lot of spooky mumbo-jumbo stuff occurs but frankly it was all pretty [[silly]] and [[pointless]]. Yeah, yeah, the station nearly blew up but was saved and all, but frankly I [[felt]] like it was a case of "been there done that--and done that a lot better in the past".

The secondary plot, provided more for comic relief, was much more interesting, as an entrepreneur installed a holo-brothel and those in command weren't sure what to do about it and when they tried to pressure them to close, they were slapped with a lawsuit. This was [[fluff]], but it did provide a few laughs--something the other [[dreary]] [[plot]] was surely lacking.

By the way, Sheen at first did a good job playing the Should Hunter--with his wild eyes and bizarre delivery. However, repeatedly throughout the episode he fell out of character. This should have been spotted and corrected.

So the final verdict is this is only for total die-hard B-5 nuts (like myself). Others seeing it might assume the series sucked--which is a great injustice. This is a great example of a show not knowing when to quit. Before this made for TV [[filmmaking]] [[launches]], I had relatively low expectations. That's because it was made after the final episode of the series had aired and many of the series [[foreground]] were gone. There is no President Sheridan, Delenn, Lennier, Londo, Vir, G'kar or Lyta. If you remember, on the second to last episode of the series, all the regulars except Zack, Vir and Captain Lockley left B-5 permanently. Now for this film they did bring back Garibaldi (who was not in the last B-5 movie) to join Zack and the Captain and the Doctor makes a brief and irrelevant appearance. But because so much is gone of the old chemistry, this film already is severely [[disabled]].

The movie is about a Soul Hunter (Martin Sheen) who is led to Babylon 5 in search of a globe filled with souls that had been stolen from a hidden repository by an archaeologist (Ian McShane). A lot of spooky mumbo-jumbo stuff occurs but frankly it was all pretty [[witless]] and [[senseless]]. Yeah, yeah, the station nearly blew up but was saved and all, but frankly I [[believed]] like it was a case of "been there done that--and done that a lot better in the past".

The secondary plot, provided more for comic relief, was much more interesting, as an entrepreneur installed a holo-brothel and those in command weren't sure what to do about it and when they tried to pressure them to close, they were slapped with a lawsuit. This was [[grope]], but it did provide a few laughs--something the other [[dismal]] [[intrigue]] was surely lacking.

By the way, Sheen at first did a good job playing the Should Hunter--with his wild eyes and bizarre delivery. However, repeatedly throughout the episode he fell out of character. This should have been spotted and corrected.

So the final verdict is this is only for total die-hard B-5 nuts (like myself). Others seeing it might assume the series sucked--which is a great injustice. This is a great example of a show not knowing when to quit. --------------------------------------------- Result 834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Jewish [[newspaper]] [[reporter]] [[Justin]] Timberlake (as [[Joshua]] "[[Josh]]" Pollack) is puzzled when a [[courtroom]] defendant whispers "[[Thank]] you" to testifying officer LL Cool J (as Rafe Deed) as he [[leaves]] the witness [[stand]]. [[In]] the [[opening]] sequences of this [[film]], you are [[given]] the explanation. You will [[see]] [[Mr]]. [[Cool]] J's [[devilish]] [[detective]] [[partner]] [[Dylan]] McDermott (as [[Frances]] "Laz" Lazerov) decide [[NOT]] to murder Damien Dante Wayans (as [[Isaiah]] [[Charles]]). The [[cops]] in the city of "Edison" are so corrupt they shoot their [[suspects]], [[steal]] their money, and [[snort]] their dope. Whether he's out to impress his [[girlfriend]] (herein, [[called]] "[[Pussy]]") or [[win]] a Pulitzer, the city's [[corruption]] does [[NOT]] [[sit]] well with the noble Mr. Timberlake.

Timberlake decides to [[investigate]] the [[corruption]], which [[reaches]] both [[unexpected]] scope and life-threatening [[levels]] of [[danger]]. [[Writer]]/[[director]] David J. Burke [[keeps]] the [[film]] above water, but just barely. LL Cool J beats Timberlake in the "[[pop]] star to [[movie]] [[star]]" sweepstakes ([[aka]] the "[[rapper]] to [[actor]]" [[progression]]). [[Mr]]. McDermott has fun with his role. Lending gravitas to the proceedings are sagely [[supporting]] [[actors]] Morgan Freeman (as [[Moses]] Ashford) and Kevin Spacey (as Levon Wallace). F.R.A.[[T]]. means [[First]] [[Response]] [[Assault]] and [[Tactical]], but it's more [[important]] to know that "Edison (Force)" stars [[Justin]] Timberlake and LL [[Cool]] J, not Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey (who seems lost).

**** Edison (9/17/05) David J. [[Burke]] ~ [[Justin]] Timberlake, LL [[Cool]] J, Morgan Freeman, [[Dylan]] McDermott Jewish [[dailies]] [[reporters]] [[Justine]] Timberlake (as [[Jeremiah]] "[[Joshi]]" Pollack) is puzzled when a [[salle]] defendant whispers "[[Appreciation]] you" to testifying officer LL Cool J (as Rafe Deed) as he [[sheets]] the witness [[standing]]. [[At]] the [[initiation]] sequences of this [[filmmaking]], you are [[granted]] the explanation. You will [[seeing]] [[Bernd]]. [[Cooling]] J's [[diabolic]] [[inspector]] [[partners]] [[Dillon]] McDermott (as [[Francis]] "Laz" Lazerov) decide [[NAH]] to murder Damien Dante Wayans (as [[Jeremiah]] [[Karel]]). The [[nypd]] in the city of "Edison" are so corrupt they shoot their [[accuser]], [[larceny]] their money, and [[sniff]] their dope. Whether he's out to impress his [[amie]] (herein, [[termed]] "[[Weakling]]") or [[victorious]] a Pulitzer, the city's [[bribery]] does [[NOPE]] [[assis]] well with the noble Mr. Timberlake.

Timberlake decides to [[inquiry]] the [[bribery]], which [[achieves]] both [[unintended]] scope and life-threatening [[tier]] of [[menace]]. [[Novelist]]/[[headmaster]] David J. Burke [[retains]] the [[filmmaking]] above water, but just barely. LL Cool J beats Timberlake in the "[[dad]] star to [[movies]] [[stars]]" sweepstakes ([[nickname]] the "[[rappers]] to [[protagonist]]" [[promotions]]). [[Olli]]. McDermott has fun with his role. Lending gravitas to the proceedings are sagely [[helping]] [[players]] Morgan Freeman (as [[Musa]] Ashford) and Kevin Spacey (as Levon Wallace). F.R.A.[[ton]]. means [[Firstly]] [[Replied]] [[Onslaught]] and [[Tactic]], but it's more [[major]] to know that "Edison (Force)" stars [[Justine]] Timberlake and LL [[Cooling]] J, not Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey (who seems lost).

**** Edison (9/17/05) David J. [[Burqa]] ~ [[Justine]] Timberlake, LL [[Cooling]] J, Morgan Freeman, [[Dillon]] McDermott --------------------------------------------- Result 835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck ([[Jon]] Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one [[degrading]] experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin [[Hoffman]]). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?

Very dark, [[disturbing]] yet [[fascinating]] movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you [[disoriented]] and off center--but I couldn't [[stop]] watching.

There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.

This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.

Also the excellent song "Everybody's Talkin'" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.

A [[great]] film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible. Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck ([[John]] Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one [[derogatory]] experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin [[Hoffmann]]). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?

Very dark, [[troubling]] yet [[enthralling]] movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you [[muddled]] and off center--but I couldn't [[ceasing]] watching.

There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.

This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.

Also the excellent song "Everybody's Talkin'" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.

A [[wondrous]] film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible. --------------------------------------------- Result 836 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Someone, some day, should do a study of architecture as it figures in [[horror]] films; of all those explorations of weirdly laid out mansions, searches for secret passageways and crypts, trackings of monsters through air ducts, and so forth. Offhand I can recall only a few films in which architecture played a major role throughout--"Demon Seed," "Cube," the remake of "Thirteen Ghosts"--but it's at the heart of every story about a [[spooky]] house or church or crypt; it's all about the character and the affect of spaces, passages, and walls. [[So]] I was looking forward to this [[thriller]] where it promised to be central. The idea is this: An architect has built--actually, rebuilt--for himself a huge and rambling house; his wife has just left him, mainly because of his own self-centeredness, but also, it is intimated, because she can't get used to the place since he remodeled it. Living in unaccustomed solitude (real this time, rather than virtual), he comes to suspect that somebody else--a stranger who had come to the door one evening asking to use the phone and then suddenly disappeared--is living into the house with him; only the place is big enough so that he never sees him.

This is a good [[start]] for a melodrama, whose development one would expect to follow some such lines as these: After searching the house for the intruder a few times without success, the architect resorts to his blueprints to undertake more systematic searches, trying in various ways to surprise, intercept, or ambush the intruder, maybe by means of some special features he built into the structure. Meanwhile the intruder has discovered hiding places and back ways between places that the architect didn't foresee or doesn't remember. The movie would turn into a cat-and-mouse game, a hunt, a battle; and finally, in trying to trap the intruder, the architect himself would end up trapped in his own creation, in some way he didn't expect. Then he would be forced to think himself out of it--and maybe at the same time out of his own self-imposed isolation--and in a final twist would nail, and maybe even kill, the ****er.

Nothing like this happens in this movie; the house is just a house, the architect is just a guy, and his nemesis is of an unknown character, if he exists at all. Here is what does happen in the movie: Once the intruder is installed in the house--if he is--the architect begins hearing noises, but when he goes to investigate finds nothing. He calls the police, they think he's slightly nuts; he persuades his estranged wife to spend the night, she thinks he's more nuts. At last, more or less accidentally, he runs into the intruder (doesn't get a good look, but figures, who else could it be?--not a hard question, in a story with, to that point, fewer than three principal characters), whereupon he locks the doors, lowers the grills on the windows, throws away the key (I don't know why he thought this necessary), and leaves his victim to starve. I missed why this was a given: the doors and walls are made of steel? In any event, the architect takes to sleeping in his car. And since the idea of the movie has languished undeveloped and cannot now be developed further, something else must be devised to take its place. And this is it: The architect--are you ready?--moves into the house of the man who (presumably) moved into his, and lives there in the same way. How is this possible? It is not, but the movie takes this route to try and make it seem so: The architect has drawn a picture of the man who came to his door; and when he leaves the house he takes the picture with him; and while sitting in his car, he throws the picture into the street; and two kids pick it up and observe that it looks like Martin, their neighbor; whereupon the architect asks where his house is and the kids point the way.

If this sequence seems to verge on the implausible, what ensues plunges right in. The architect takes up residence with Martin's wheelchair-ridden wife, unbeknownst to her; so stealthy in his moves and so cunning in his reading of his hostess that he's able always to leave a room just as she enters or to duck out of sight just as she turns around. Throughout this section the movie is clever in one way, making (or leaving it to the viewer to make) the point that his life with this stranger, who doesn't know he's there, is in essence the same life he lived with his wife, as a virtual recluse with her as a convenient buffer. But at the same time, his inability to live in the world makes his transformation into Raffles the cat-burglar entirely incredible. Not to go into the series of twists at the end--including another murder achieved by locking someone in behind another invincible door--this one in front of a landing so flimsy that it collapses under the weight of a wheelchair; two nice people who take murder in stride; and (before the story started) the unnoticed construction of a tunnel under several houses.... To the final, long-anticipated twist, the movie adds another, to make it even more offensive, and then...ends.

Here is a story that depends on the development of two things--the idea of the stranger in the house, and the character of the man whose house it is--and fumbles both. The first fumble makes it boring; the second made me angry, as it pushed its main character farther and farther along a more and more zigzaggy path, and never offered any explanation for the character who most required one: Martin the tunnel-builder and sneak-tenant. The story should be redone by someone, some day. Someone, some day, should do a study of architecture as it figures in [[monstrosity]] films; of all those explorations of weirdly laid out mansions, searches for secret passageways and crypts, trackings of monsters through air ducts, and so forth. Offhand I can recall only a few films in which architecture played a major role throughout--"Demon Seed," "Cube," the remake of "Thirteen Ghosts"--but it's at the heart of every story about a [[appalling]] house or church or crypt; it's all about the character and the affect of spaces, passages, and walls. [[Accordingly]] I was looking forward to this [[thrillers]] where it promised to be central. The idea is this: An architect has built--actually, rebuilt--for himself a huge and rambling house; his wife has just left him, mainly because of his own self-centeredness, but also, it is intimated, because she can't get used to the place since he remodeled it. Living in unaccustomed solitude (real this time, rather than virtual), he comes to suspect that somebody else--a stranger who had come to the door one evening asking to use the phone and then suddenly disappeared--is living into the house with him; only the place is big enough so that he never sees him.

This is a good [[launches]] for a melodrama, whose development one would expect to follow some such lines as these: After searching the house for the intruder a few times without success, the architect resorts to his blueprints to undertake more systematic searches, trying in various ways to surprise, intercept, or ambush the intruder, maybe by means of some special features he built into the structure. Meanwhile the intruder has discovered hiding places and back ways between places that the architect didn't foresee or doesn't remember. The movie would turn into a cat-and-mouse game, a hunt, a battle; and finally, in trying to trap the intruder, the architect himself would end up trapped in his own creation, in some way he didn't expect. Then he would be forced to think himself out of it--and maybe at the same time out of his own self-imposed isolation--and in a final twist would nail, and maybe even kill, the ****er.

Nothing like this happens in this movie; the house is just a house, the architect is just a guy, and his nemesis is of an unknown character, if he exists at all. Here is what does happen in the movie: Once the intruder is installed in the house--if he is--the architect begins hearing noises, but when he goes to investigate finds nothing. He calls the police, they think he's slightly nuts; he persuades his estranged wife to spend the night, she thinks he's more nuts. At last, more or less accidentally, he runs into the intruder (doesn't get a good look, but figures, who else could it be?--not a hard question, in a story with, to that point, fewer than three principal characters), whereupon he locks the doors, lowers the grills on the windows, throws away the key (I don't know why he thought this necessary), and leaves his victim to starve. I missed why this was a given: the doors and walls are made of steel? In any event, the architect takes to sleeping in his car. And since the idea of the movie has languished undeveloped and cannot now be developed further, something else must be devised to take its place. And this is it: The architect--are you ready?--moves into the house of the man who (presumably) moved into his, and lives there in the same way. How is this possible? It is not, but the movie takes this route to try and make it seem so: The architect has drawn a picture of the man who came to his door; and when he leaves the house he takes the picture with him; and while sitting in his car, he throws the picture into the street; and two kids pick it up and observe that it looks like Martin, their neighbor; whereupon the architect asks where his house is and the kids point the way.

If this sequence seems to verge on the implausible, what ensues plunges right in. The architect takes up residence with Martin's wheelchair-ridden wife, unbeknownst to her; so stealthy in his moves and so cunning in his reading of his hostess that he's able always to leave a room just as she enters or to duck out of sight just as she turns around. Throughout this section the movie is clever in one way, making (or leaving it to the viewer to make) the point that his life with this stranger, who doesn't know he's there, is in essence the same life he lived with his wife, as a virtual recluse with her as a convenient buffer. But at the same time, his inability to live in the world makes his transformation into Raffles the cat-burglar entirely incredible. Not to go into the series of twists at the end--including another murder achieved by locking someone in behind another invincible door--this one in front of a landing so flimsy that it collapses under the weight of a wheelchair; two nice people who take murder in stride; and (before the story started) the unnoticed construction of a tunnel under several houses.... To the final, long-anticipated twist, the movie adds another, to make it even more offensive, and then...ends.

Here is a story that depends on the development of two things--the idea of the stranger in the house, and the character of the man whose house it is--and fumbles both. The first fumble makes it boring; the second made me angry, as it pushed its main character farther and farther along a more and more zigzaggy path, and never offered any explanation for the character who most required one: Martin the tunnel-builder and sneak-tenant. The story should be redone by someone, some day. --------------------------------------------- Result 837 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] This was my first, and probably the last Angelopoulos movie. I was [[eager]] to get into it, as it featured Mastroianni, one of my favorite actors and was a film By Theo, of whom I've heard a lot. The opening was promising, a long shot over a jeep of soldiers across the Albanian-Greek border. OK! but that was all. Nothing [[left]]. The [[movie]] had big [[holes]] and I don't know which to mention first. The main plot of the story is revealed to the [[journalist]] by the old woman. during a long walk. It's like a 15 minutes monologue, [[killing]] the [[action]] and viewers patience, [[nothing]] happening on screen for 15 or even 20 minutes, apart this old lady telling a story. All that is presumed to be shown through action, was simply told to the camera by the old lady. In a moment, the equippe of TV was heading to the bar. They turn the corner and immediately the winter begins! Probably, shot in different days, continuity leaked. A lot of problems with the story-telling, it went from absurd to irrational never sticking to a style, making the viewer asking questions that never got answers. Poor Mastroianni, given a role which lacked integrity or charm. On the other hand, as many Greeks or Albanians or Balcan people would agree with, the movies showed lot of historic, ethnic, or politically incorrectness, just for the sake of making a movie about "humanity" as a red in another review. A lot more to say, but no time to lose on a [[poor]] [[movie]], which was not movie at all, but lunacies of a person impressed on film and paid with state money. This was my first, and probably the last Angelopoulos movie. I was [[enthusiastic]] to get into it, as it featured Mastroianni, one of my favorite actors and was a film By Theo, of whom I've heard a lot. The opening was promising, a long shot over a jeep of soldiers across the Albanian-Greek border. OK! but that was all. Nothing [[gauche]]. The [[filmmaking]] had big [[orifices]] and I don't know which to mention first. The main plot of the story is revealed to the [[journalism]] by the old woman. during a long walk. It's like a 15 minutes monologue, [[assassinate]] the [[measures]] and viewers patience, [[anything]] happening on screen for 15 or even 20 minutes, apart this old lady telling a story. All that is presumed to be shown through action, was simply told to the camera by the old lady. In a moment, the equippe of TV was heading to the bar. They turn the corner and immediately the winter begins! Probably, shot in different days, continuity leaked. A lot of problems with the story-telling, it went from absurd to irrational never sticking to a style, making the viewer asking questions that never got answers. Poor Mastroianni, given a role which lacked integrity or charm. On the other hand, as many Greeks or Albanians or Balcan people would agree with, the movies showed lot of historic, ethnic, or politically incorrectness, just for the sake of making a movie about "humanity" as a red in another review. A lot more to say, but no time to lose on a [[poorest]] [[filmmaking]], which was not movie at all, but lunacies of a person impressed on film and paid with state money. --------------------------------------------- Result 838 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film had a great cast going for it: Christopher Lee, Dean Jagger, Macdonald Carey, Lew Ayres -- solid b-movie actors all. But this downer of a movie didn't use any of them to any sort of advantage, with none of their characters even meeting on screen (though Christopher Lee does get to play opposite himself in several scenes).

The motivations for the aliens in this movie seem to change at the drop of a hat. First, they just want to repair their ship and leave, then they turn on the main character by killing most of his friends and not releasing his wife after he gets them the crucial part they need. Then, out of nowhere, this "peaceful" race decides they have to destroy the planet because it causes too many "diseases" (though they do offer the main character and his wife a spot in their society).

Most of the film is spent watching the man and wife drive or walk or stand around or sit at desks doing nothing. You almost wish they had gotten taken out with the rest of the planet at the end, just in vengeance for boring us to death.

Unless you really like Chris Lee or seventies low-budget sci-fi, I'd give this one a miss. It falls into that narrow range of wasted celluloid between Star Odyssey and UFO: Target Earth. --------------------------------------------- Result 839 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] Well, my goodness, am I [[disappointed]]. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and [[company]] will not ruin a film, who's [[original]] was a [[fantastic]] and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, [[subtlety]], where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is [[wonderfully]] [[photographed]]; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script [[puts]] it's fine actors to the test..asking them to [[deliver]] the kind of stilted [[dialogue]] that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual [[effects]] come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric [[mess]]...but things had [[gone]] [[terribly]] wrong long before that.

[[Everything]] in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this [[old]] haunted [[house]] monstrosity...only [[groans]]. Check out the [[original]] [[instead]].

Well, my goodness, am I [[disappoint]]. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and [[enterprise]] will not ruin a film, who's [[preliminary]] was a [[sumptuous]] and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, [[finesse]], where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is [[delightfully]] [[pictured]]; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script [[brings]] it's fine actors to the test..asking them to [[make]] the kind of stilted [[discussions]] that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual [[influences]] come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric [[chaos]]...but things had [[faded]] [[remarkably]] wrong long before that.

[[Entire]] in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this [[longtime]] haunted [[home]] monstrosity...only [[moans]]. Check out the [[preliminary]] [[however]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 840 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] SPOILERS

A [[buddy]] of mine [[said]] NEXT [[MOVIE]] was the [[best]] Cheech & Chong flick and went out of his [[way]] to have me borrow it and THE BLUES [[BROTHERS]]. NEXT [[MOVIE]] has no plot, has no pacing, really has no anything of what [[defines]] a movie ... but it is [[funny]]. And for what it is worth, Cheech and [[Chong]] [[show]] some heart.

Well, in this [[little]] [[paragraph]] I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the [[movie]], [[nothing]] happens that [[would]] [[usually]] [[start]] a story. I will just [[say]] that Cheech 's [[cousin]] [[shows]] up.

Was there no other funnier moment when [[Chong]] [[made]] Cheech [[drink]] the [[pee]] twice? What about the [[rooster]]? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's first [[movie]] appearance? You [[would]] have to watch the [[movie]] yourself to [[enjoy]] it. I don't [[think]] NEXT MOVIE has strong [[enough]] balls to [[make]] it [[awesome]], but the [[movie]] has heart and hey, my [[buddy]] [[let]] me borrow it so it [[gets]] a 7. SPOILERS

A [[copulate]] of mine [[told]] NEXT [[CINEMATOGRAPHIC]] was the [[optimum]] Cheech & Chong flick and went out of his [[ways]] to have me borrow it and THE BLUES [[SIBLING]]. NEXT [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] has no plot, has no pacing, really has no anything of what [[identifies]] a movie ... but it is [[comical]]. And for what it is worth, Cheech and [[Chung]] [[spectacle]] some heart.

Well, in this [[tiny]] [[paragraphs]] I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the [[flick]], [[anything]] happens that [[should]] [[normally]] [[cranking]] a story. I will just [[tell]] that Cheech 's [[cousins]] [[displaying]] up.

Was there no other funnier moment when [[Chung]] [[brought]] Cheech [[drinkin]] the [[peed]] twice? What about the [[dick]]? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's first [[film]] appearance? You [[ought]] have to watch the [[flick]] yourself to [[enjoys]] it. I don't [[believing]] NEXT MOVIE has strong [[adequate]] balls to [[deliver]] it [[noteworthy]], but the [[filmmaking]] has heart and hey, my [[boyfriend]] [[letting]] me borrow it so it [[get]] a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Uncompromising look at a suburb in 21st century Vienna mixing the stories of six groups of characters by former documentary maker U.Seidl is a provocative, minimalistic and intense piece of observation cinema.

After the world-wide spread of Big Brother reality shows, Hundstage takes modern voyeurism to an unsettling, profound level. Hard to like but unignorable piece of European art-cinema might seem cruel and seedy, yet manages to convey the nihilistic alienated feeling of modern society in a praiseworthy manner.

A must for lovers of world cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This self proclaimed "very talented artist" have directed easily the worst Spanish film of the 21st century. Lack of emotion, coherence, rhythm, skills, humor... it repeats the same situation over and over again. It shows no character development. It does not even show any violent and/or sexual content, and it does not add anything new to the psycho-killer sub genre. So lame it should be shown at film schools as an example of "what not to do" in a first movie.

BTW where the hell is the "talent"? there are scenes which have been shot almost identically; there are scenes which have two or more master shots and it is quite awful to see the action jumping from one master shot to another without a reason. The camera almost never moves, as if the "very talented artist" was afraid of showing his lack of visual skills. The actors playing the main roles act like amateurs, and the supporting cast is hardly believable. There are more holes than plot in the script (if ever there was one)...

A really disheartening movie, and a whatsoever talented director. --------------------------------------------- Result 843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found the film quite expressive , the way the main character was lost but at the same much more clear about certain things in life than people who mocked him ( his flatmate for example ) .

he was tortured and you loved to watch him being tortured ! it had this perverted side which was frightening but we were all happy to see him come out of the misery again .

it was like a game character or pan-man through a mine-land or to enemy and we love to watch him under sniper attack or fire but then at the end we are happy to see him survive ...

. --------------------------------------------- Result 844 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie gets it right. As a former USAF Aviation Cadet, I can tell you this movie has it all. The tedium of the application process. The waiting for word. The joy of acceptance. The worry about making it through the course. The sorrow of watching one's buddies (perhaps the best of them)wash out. The anguish of paying the ultimate price - the death of fllow student airmen. The glory of graduation. Always the flying, the flying, the flying. Many are called but few are chosen. We did for pay what we would have eagerly paid to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How can the viewer rating for this movie be just 5.4?! Just the lovely young Alisan Porter should automatically start you at 6 when you decide your rating. James Belushi is good in this too, his first good serious role, I hadn't liked him in anything but About Last Night until this. He was pretty good in Gang Related with Tupac also. Kelly Lynch, you gotta love her. Well, I do. I'm only wondering what happened to Miss Porter?

i gave Curly Sue a 7 --------------------------------------------- Result 846 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Joan Fontaine stars as the villain in this Victorian era film. She convincingly plays the married woman who has a lover on the side and also sets her sights on a wealthy man, Miles Rushworth who is played by Herbert Marshall. Mr. Marshall is quite good as Miles. Miss Fontaine acted her part to perfection--she was at the same time cunning, calculating, innocent looking, frightened and charming. It takes an actress with extraordinary talent to pull that off. Joan Fontaine looked absolutely gorgeous in the elegant costumes by Travis Banton. Also in the film is Joan's mother, Lillian Fontaine as Lady Flora. I highly recommend this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[really]] [[liked]] this Summerslam due to the [[look]] of the arena, the curtains and just the [[look]] [[overall]] was interesting to me for some [[reason]]. Anyways, this could have been one of the best Summerslam's ever if the WWF didn't have Lex Luger in the [[main]] event against Yokozuna, now for it's time it was ok to have a [[huge]] [[fat]] [[man]] [[vs]] a [[strong]] [[man]] but I'm [[glad]] [[times]] have [[changed]]. It was a [[terrible]] [[main]] [[event]] just like [[every]] match Luger is in is [[terrible]]. Other [[matches]] on the [[card]] were Razor Ramon [[vs]] Ted Dibiase, [[Steiner]] [[Brothers]] [[vs]] [[Heavenly]] [[Bodies]], [[Shawn]] Michaels [[vs]] [[Curt]] Hening, this was the [[event]] where Shawn named his [[big]] [[monster]] of a [[body]] guard Diesel, IRS [[vs]] 1-2-3 [[Kid]], Bret Hart first [[takes]] on Doink then [[takes]] on [[Jerry]] Lawler and [[stuff]] with the Harts and Lawler was [[always]] very interesting, then Ludvig Borga [[destroyed]] Marty Jannetty, [[Undertaker]] [[took]] on [[Giant]] [[Gonzalez]] in another [[terrible]] [[match]], The [[Smoking]] Gunns and Tatanka [[took]] on Bam Bam Bigelow and the Headshrinkers, and Yokozuna [[defended]] the [[world]] title against Lex Luger this [[match]] was [[boring]] and it has a [[terrible]] ending. [[However]] it [[deserves]] 8/10 I [[genuinely]] [[wished]] this Summerslam due to the [[peek]] of the arena, the curtains and just the [[glance]] [[entire]] was interesting to me for some [[justification]]. Anyways, this could have been one of the best Summerslam's ever if the WWF didn't have Lex Luger in the [[principal]] event against Yokozuna, now for it's time it was ok to have a [[monumental]] [[greasy]] [[males]] [[v]] a [[vigorous]] [[men]] but I'm [[satisfied]] [[dates]] have [[altered]]. It was a [[hideous]] [[leading]] [[events]] just like [[all]] match Luger is in is [[awful]]. Other [[couple]] on the [[postcard]] were Razor Ramon [[v]] Ted Dibiase, [[Stainer]] [[Plymouth]] [[v]] [[Godlike]] [[Institutions]], [[Sean]] Michaels [[versus]] [[Kurt]] Hening, this was the [[incidents]] where Shawn named his [[prodigious]] [[monsters]] of a [[organs]] guard Diesel, IRS [[v]] 1-2-3 [[Enfant]], Bret Hart first [[pick]] on Doink then [[pick]] on [[Jiri]] Lawler and [[thing]] with the Harts and Lawler was [[invariably]] very interesting, then Ludvig Borga [[obliterated]] Marty Jannetty, [[Mortuary]] [[taken]] on [[Monumental]] [[Melendez]] in another [[awful]] [[matches]], The [[Smokes]] Gunns and Tatanka [[picked]] on Bam Bam Bigelow and the Headshrinkers, and Yokozuna [[championed]] the [[monde]] title against Lex Luger this [[matchmaking]] was [[bored]] and it has a [[horrid]] ending. [[Instead]] it [[deserved]] 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Don't [[get]] me wrong, I'm a huge fan of many of Woody's [[movies]], [[obviously]] his late 70's masterpieces ([[Annie]] [[Hall]],[[Interiors]], Manhattan)and most of his late 80's/early 90's dramas ([[Hannah]], Crimes and Misdemeaners,Husbands and Wives) in fact I even [[liked]] some of his more [[recent]] [[efforts]] (Melinda, Anything Else, Small Time Crooks) but this was abysmal, I though it couldn't [[possibly]] be any worse than [[last]] [[years]] [[Match]] Point but how wrong I was.

It was lazily [[plotted]] - [[basically]] a [[cross]] between [[Match]] Point, Manhattan [[Murder]] [[Mystery]] and Small Time [[Crooks]],with all the jokes taken out - Woody [[seems]] to be on the [[way]] out as well, slurring most of his lines and [[delivering]] 'hilarious' catchphrases 'I [[mean]] that with all due [[respect]]...' over and over until the blandness of it all [[becomes]] to much to bare.

I know that most actors are queuing up to [[work]] with him but they should at least read the [[script]] first - Scarlett Johansson and Hugh Jackman are so [[much]] [[better]] than this - and Woody should really take a more behind the camera role in future, if he has any sense about 20 [[miles]] behind it.

It wouldn't be so [[tragic]] if we didn't have so [[many]] great Woody [[films]] to [[compare]] this to - but it is [[clear]] that his [[best]] days are behind him and [[judging]] by this effort, Woody should call it a day before he [[becomes]] an industry joke.

[[Embarrassingly]] bad Don't [[gets]] me wrong, I'm a huge fan of many of Woody's [[movie]], [[naturally]] his late 70's masterpieces ([[Annette]] [[Salle]],[[Indoor]], Manhattan)and most of his late 80's/early 90's dramas ([[Hanna]], Crimes and Misdemeaners,Husbands and Wives) in fact I even [[loved]] some of his more [[latest]] [[activities]] (Melinda, Anything Else, Small Time Crooks) but this was abysmal, I though it couldn't [[perhaps]] be any worse than [[latter]] [[ages]] [[Coupling]] Point but how wrong I was.

It was lazily [[masterminded]] - [[mostly]] a [[traverse]] between [[Matches]] Point, Manhattan [[Homicide]] [[Riddle]] and Small Time [[Cheats]],with all the jokes taken out - Woody [[seem]] to be on the [[pathway]] out as well, slurring most of his lines and [[deliver]] 'hilarious' catchphrases 'I [[imply]] that with all due [[respecting]]...' over and over until the blandness of it all [[becoming]] to much to bare.

I know that most actors are queuing up to [[collaborated]] with him but they should at least read the [[screenplay]] first - Scarlett Johansson and Hugh Jackman are so [[very]] [[optimum]] than this - and Woody should really take a more behind the camera role in future, if he has any sense about 20 [[kilometer]] behind it.

It wouldn't be so [[cataclysmic]] if we didn't have so [[various]] great Woody [[kino]] to [[comparative]] this to - but it is [[clara]] that his [[optimum]] days are behind him and [[verdict]] by this effort, Woody should call it a day before he [[becoming]] an industry joke.

[[Crudely]] bad --------------------------------------------- Result 849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] just below the [[surface]] [[lies]] what? a simply [[awful]] [[movie]] is what.

as other viewers have justifiably commented, the [[storm]] [[sequences]] are just [[plain]] ridiculous. chopping already sodden firewood in the pouring [[rain]]? now that's [[smart]]. menace? foreboding? sexual [[tension]]? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & [[overly]] contrived.

i want to [[say]] thank [[god]] for mia sara's [[shower]] scene but in [[retrospect]] i think the producers of the [[film]], having seen the completed [[mess]] [[realised]] that they had to put [[something]] in to make it half [[way]] worthwhile at all. so it just [[becomes]] [[yet]] another [[contrivance]]. do yourself a [[favour]] and give this a [[miss]]. just below the [[surfaces]] [[lurks]] what? a simply [[horrific]] [[filmmaking]] is what.

as other viewers have justifiably commented, the [[rainstorm]] [[sequencing]] are just [[lowlands]] ridiculous. chopping already sodden firewood in the pouring [[rainstorm]]? now that's [[ingenious]]. menace? foreboding? sexual [[voltage]]? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & [[disproportionately]] contrived.

i want to [[tell]] thank [[lord]] for mia sara's [[bathroom]] scene but in [[retrospective]] i think the producers of the [[filmmaking]], having seen the completed [[disarray]] [[realized]] that they had to put [[somethings]] in to make it half [[ways]] worthwhile at all. so it just [[becoming]] [[however]] another [[invention]]. do yourself a [[favouring]] and give this a [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is a lyrical and romantic memoir told through the eyes an eleven year old boy living in a rural Cuban town the year of the Castro revolution. It is an obviously genuine worthy labor of love.

The names CUBA LIBRE and CUBAN BLOOD are merely attempts to wrongly market this as an action film. DREAMING OF JULIA makes much more sense. It has more in common with European cinema than with RAMBO and the revolution is merely an inconvenience to people's daily lives and pursuits. That fact alone makes the film more honest than most works dealing with this time period in Cuban history.

The excessive use of the voice-over narrator does undermine the story but the film makes up for it with unqualified clips from Hollywood films that say so much more visually than the narrator could.

The comparisons to CINEMA PARADISO and are fair game as the film does wax melancholy about movies, but there is an underlying pain at the loss of a lifestyle that surpasses lost love.

The revolution, like the film JULIE, never seems to have an ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie is not good.the first one almost sucked,but had that unreal ending to make it worth watching.this one has nothing.there's zero scare,zero tension or suspense.this isn't really a horror movie.most of the kills don't show anything.there's no gore to speak of.this could almost be a TV,except for a bit of nudity and a bit of violence.the acting is not very good,either.and don't get me started on the dialogue.as for the surprise ending,surprise,there isn't one.i suppose it could have been worse,although i don't see how.but then again,it is less than 80 minutes long,so i guess that's a good thing.although it felt a lot longer. apparently this is the cut version of the film.i found it for a very cheap price,but it still not worth it.if you want the uncut more graphic version,check out the Anchor Bay edition.anyway,this version of Sleepaway Camp II:Unhappy Campers gets a big fat 1/10 from me. p.s.if you watch this movie,you will probably be a bored and unhappy camper.if you are a real fan,you might want to pick up Anchor Bay's Sleepaway Camp(with survival kit) three disc collection containing the first three movies uncut and with special features --------------------------------------------- Result 852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Airwolf The [[Movie]], A [[variation]] on the original 2 part [[pilot]], Yet the [[movie]] [[although]] [[shorter]], does contain extra footage [[Unseen]] in the 2 [[hour]] pilot The pilot is [[much]] more of a pilot than the movie [[Where]] as a [[pilot]] [[movie]] is [[normally]] the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and cuts there.

Worth a [[look]], even if you have the season 1 [[DVD]] set, I'd still pick up a copy of the "movie" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust [[online]] shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in stores

Airwolf was [[truly]] 1 of the 80's most under rated [[shows]].

A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress [[pictures]] are over at http://Airwolf.[[org]] [[Also]] with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's [[finally]] here to [[stay]] :) Airwolf The [[Kino]], A [[variant]] on the original 2 part [[experimental]], Yet the [[cinematography]] [[despite]] [[shortest]], does contain extra footage [[Inconspicuous]] in the 2 [[hours]] pilot The pilot is [[very]] more of a pilot than the movie [[Hence]] as a [[piloting]] [[cinematographic]] is [[fluently]] the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and cuts there.

Worth a [[glance]], even if you have the season 1 [[DVDS]] set, I'd still pick up a copy of the "movie" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust [[onscreen]] shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in stores

Airwolf was [[truthfully]] 1 of the 80's most under rated [[display]].

A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress [[photographing]] are over at http://Airwolf.[[organizational]] [[Moreover]] with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's [[eventually]] here to [[sojourn]] :) --------------------------------------------- Result 853 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Haunted [[Boat]] [[sells]] itself as 'The Fog' meets '[[Open]] Water'. In [[many]] ways this is [[accurate]]. There are scares and [[weird]] looking people to [[keep]] you interested.

However the acting [[ability]] is poor at [[best]]. [[Showing]] [[clear]] [[signs]] that this is [[merely]] a bunch of [[friends]] [[making]] a horror film. Which in all credit they do to the best of their [[ability]]. When you [[accept]] the low [[budget]] makes it very difficult for special effects, with the [[ghosts]] [[looking]] [[pretty]] much like [[men]] with rubber masks on.

Many aspects of the film are creepy and [[strange]]. But it [[suffers]] for [[using]] too [[many]] [[twists]] and turns in a short space of time which just leaves you [[bored]] and confused. In terms of keeping you awake the film does it very well. [[Ignoring]] the [[irrelevant]] [[twisting]] every 5 [[seconds]] near the end, you actually want to know what is going on. And are willing to wait the 1hr 35 minutes for the [[climax]].

This is no Ghost Ship but it'll definitely do for an [[evening]] in [[front]] of the T.V. Haunted [[Ship]] [[sell]] itself as 'The Fog' meets '[[Openings]] Water'. In [[myriad]] ways this is [[meticulous]]. There are scares and [[strange]] looking people to [[keeping]] you interested.

However the acting [[capacity]] is poor at [[optimum]]. [[Proving]] [[lucid]] [[signalling]] that this is [[alone]] a bunch of [[freund]] [[doing]] a horror film. Which in all credit they do to the best of their [[competency]]. When you [[admit]] the low [[budgets]] makes it very difficult for special effects, with the [[phantoms]] [[researching]] [[quite]] much like [[man]] with rubber masks on.

Many aspects of the film are creepy and [[peculiar]]. But it [[undergoes]] for [[utilizing]] too [[myriad]] [[spins]] and turns in a short space of time which just leaves you [[drilled]] and confused. In terms of keeping you awake the film does it very well. [[Ignores]] the [[inconsequential]] [[twist]] every 5 [[secs]] near the end, you actually want to know what is going on. And are willing to wait the 1hr 35 minutes for the [[pinnacle]].

This is no Ghost Ship but it'll definitely do for an [[tonight]] in [[newsweek]] of the T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Being]] a fan of [[cheesy]] [[horror]] [[movies]], I [[saw]] this in my video [[shop]] and [[thought]] I would give it a [[try]]. Now that I've seen it I [[wish]] it [[upon]] no [[living]] [[soul]] on the [[planet]]. I get my movie [[rentals]] for free, and I feel that I didn't get my [[moneys]] worth. I've [[seen]] some bad cheesy horror movies in my [[time]], hell I'm a [[fan]] of them, but this was just an [[insult]]. [[Ongoing]] a fan of [[dorky]] [[terror]] [[film]], I [[seen]] this in my video [[stores]] and [[thinking]] I would give it a [[seek]]. Now that I've seen it I [[desire]] it [[after]] no [[inhabit]] [[alma]] on the [[globe]]. I get my movie [[tenancy]] for free, and I feel that I didn't get my [[monies]] worth. I've [[watched]] some bad cheesy horror movies in my [[moment]], hell I'm a [[groupie]] of them, but this was just an [[offend]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Though the title may suggest examples of the 10 commandments, it is a [[definitely]] [[incorrect]] [[assumption]]. This is an [[adaptation]] of 9 SEEMINGLY unrelated stories from Giovanni Bocaccio's 14th century "Decameron" story collection.

Set within a medieval Italian town's largely peasant population, it is a diatribe on the reality of sex (and its consequences) within that world and time. A realistic view of Life within this world, it sometimes feels like a journey back in time.

Given the depicted human element of its time, one can also see the more adventurous side of morality in its protagonists - as well as the ironies of Life, at times. Or it may also be viewed as a general satire of the Catholic Church's rules.

Nothing terribly special, but definitely interesting if one comes with no expectations or assumptions. Though the title may suggest examples of the 10 commandments, it is a [[certainly]] [[misguided]] [[assumptions]]. This is an [[tailoring]] of 9 SEEMINGLY unrelated stories from Giovanni Bocaccio's 14th century "Decameron" story collection.

Set within a medieval Italian town's largely peasant population, it is a diatribe on the reality of sex (and its consequences) within that world and time. A realistic view of Life within this world, it sometimes feels like a journey back in time.

Given the depicted human element of its time, one can also see the more adventurous side of morality in its protagonists - as well as the ironies of Life, at times. Or it may also be viewed as a general satire of the Catholic Church's rules.

Nothing terribly special, but definitely interesting if one comes with no expectations or assumptions. --------------------------------------------- Result 856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is the best sci-fi that I have seen in my 29 years of watching sci-fi. I also believe that Dark Angel will become a cult favorite. The action is great but Jessica Alba is the best and most gorgeous star on TV today. --------------------------------------------- Result 857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When you compare what Brian De Palma was doing in the 80's to what passes for entertainment today, his films keep looking better and better. "Dressed To Kill, "Blow Out", "Body Double", "Scarface" and "Carlito's Way" are all superb works of a cinematic craftsman at the peak of his powers. The guy had a long run of better than average films. This is pure Hitchcock with an 80's dash of lurid perversion, an affectionately told tale of lust and murder with plenty of twists, huge helpings of style, a stunning Pino Donaggio score, and a trashy, giallo-inspired plot. De Palma's love of complex camera-work and luscious, blood-smudged visuals helps overcome the logical holes while the terrific performances of Dennis Franz, Keith Gordon (a good director in his own right), Nancy Allen (De Palma's wife at the time) and Michael Caine make every scene special. Let the virtuoso take you on a surreal, scary, erotically charged odyssey and you'll enjoy every frame of "Dressed To Kill". --------------------------------------------- Result 858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[saw]] this in the [[theater]] when it [[came]] out, and just [[yesterday]] I saw it again on [[cable]]. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the [[feeling]] of just how [[revolting]] this film is. The [[whole]] bunch of [[characters]] are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to [[celebrate]] people "finding themselves". The [[nice]] [[guys]] finish last, the jerky [[guys]] make out great, the jerkiest [[guys]] do best. The [[girls]] are all boy toy pushovers. [[Only]] one [[character]] ("Wendy") is seen doing [[anything]] remotely [[useful]] to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved [[virginity]] in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're [[supposed]] to think is [[romantic]]. What this really is is Hollywood's [[concept]] of [[young]] America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited. I [[witnessed]] this in the [[theatres]] when it [[became]] out, and just [[today]] I saw it again on [[wire]]. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the [[sentiment]] of just how [[disgusting]] this film is. The [[total]] bunch of [[nature]] are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to [[celebrating]] people "finding themselves". The [[delightful]] [[buddies]] finish last, the jerky [[boy]] make out great, the jerkiest [[boys]] do best. The [[daughter]] are all boy toy pushovers. [[Exclusively]] one [[traits]] ("Wendy") is seen doing [[somethings]] remotely [[handy]] to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved [[eternity]] in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're [[presumed]] to think is [[sentimental]]. What this really is is Hollywood's [[conceptions]] of [[youthful]] America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited. --------------------------------------------- Result 859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Her]] [[Deadly]] [[Rival]] (1995): Starring [[Harry]] Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Roma]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Anderson]], [[William]] Blair, Sean [[Bridges]], [[Robin]] Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa [[Suzanne]] McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, [[Jeff]] Sumerel, [[Daria]] Sanford....Director James [[Hayman]], Screenplay [[Dan]] Vining.

[[Actor]] [[Harry]] Hamlin (of LA [[Law]] [[fame]], Clash of The Titans and other [[films]]) [[seems]] [[perfectly]] cast in this "[[Lifetime]]" [[type]] film directed by James Hayman and [[released]] in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna [[would]] [[later]] [[work]] on a [[film]] about [[sex]] [[addiction]]. "Her [[Deadly]] [[Rival]]" is, at first glance, [[similar]] to the better known Hollywood box-office [[hit]] "[[Fatal]] [[Attraction]]". In "[[Rival]]", [[happily]] [[married]] couple Jim and [[Kris]] Lanford [[move]] into a [[new]] [[home]] in the [[typically]] [[beautiful]] suburbs. They have the seemingly [[perfect]] marriage- they are [[deeply]] in love, [[despite]] a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious [[admirer]] sets her eyes on Jim. Her [[identity]] is never [[revealed]], [[despite]] an [[attempt]] by Jim and [[even]] [[investigators]] to [[discover]] who she is. She [[constantly]] harasses Jim through [[phone]] [[calls]] and letters. His marriage [[nearly]] flounders as his [[wife]] [[begins]] to [[think]] he's having an [[affair]] and trying to [[cover]] it up. [[While]] [[Harry]] Hamlin, [[Annie]] Potts and the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Roma]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Anderson]], [[William]] Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled [[drama]] and has its good moments. There is a twist at the [[end]]. Spoiler [[Alert]]. [[All]] I have to say is "her [[deadly]] rival" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her [[marriage]]. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. [[Especially]] [[moving]] are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the "domestic thriller" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash. [[His]] [[Lethal]] [[Compete]] (1995): Starring [[Hari]] Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Rom]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Andersson]], [[Guillaume]] Blair, Sean [[Pont]], [[Robyn]] Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa [[Susan]] McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, [[Geoff]] Sumerel, [[Darya]] Sanford....Director James [[Hyman]], Screenplay [[Dana]] Vining.

[[Protagonist]] [[Hare]] Hamlin (of LA [[Lois]] [[reputation]], Clash of The Titans and other [[film]]) [[appears]] [[entirely]] cast in this "[[Lifespan]]" [[typing]] film directed by James Hayman and [[liberated]] in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna [[should]] [[then]] [[working]] on a [[flick]] about [[sexuality]] [[dependence]]. "Her [[Lethal]] [[Compete]]" is, at first glance, [[identical]] to the better known Hollywood box-office [[slapped]] "[[Murderous]] [[Lure]]". In "[[Competitors]]", [[fortunately]] [[wedding]] couple Jim and [[Chris]] Lanford [[budge]] into a [[newer]] [[dwellings]] in the [[normally]] [[awesome]] suburbs. They have the seemingly [[flawless]] marriage- they are [[seriously]] in love, [[albeit]] a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious [[fan]] sets her eyes on Jim. Her [[identities]] is never [[demonstrated]], [[while]] an [[endeavour]] by Jim and [[yet]] [[researchers]] to [[detecting]] who she is. She [[systematically]] harasses Jim through [[phones]] [[asks]] and letters. His marriage [[roughly]] flounders as his [[woman]] [[starts]] to [[ideas]] he's having an [[fling]] and trying to [[covering]] it up. [[Although]] [[Hari]] Hamlin, [[Annette]] Potts and the [[remaining]] of the [[casting]] - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, [[Romani]] Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. [[Andersson]], [[Williams]] Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled [[tragedy]] and has its good moments. There is a twist at the [[terminate]]. Spoiler [[Warnings]]. [[Everything]] I have to say is "her [[fatal]] rival" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her [[wedlock]]. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. [[Mostly]] [[shifting]] are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the "domestic thriller" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll be honest. The only reason I watched this one on TV is that it's in the IMDb bottom 100. And right now, I'm wondering if the hour and a half of my life really was worth another 'check' on that same list.

Van Damme is Luc Deveraux, who finds himself on a huge fight with the Universal Soldiers after the main computer pulled a 'HAL' to defend itself. And yes, after all the obligate explosions, shoot-outs and chases he is the last one standing. Combined with terrible acting and a bit of a boring set-up it makes sure it's place in the infamous list is just.

Only for the idiots like me who want to watch that full list. 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 861 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] "A Bug's [[Life]]" is like a favorite candy [[bar]] -- it's chock-full of [[great]] little bits that add up to something really tasty.

The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has "heart" (emotion), and every [[character]] has a nice "[[arc]]" (a [[growth]] or [[change]]). By [[comparison]], the only characters in "[[Toy]] Story" to have an "arc" are Buzz, who [[learns]] to love being a toy, and Woody, who [[overcomes]] his [[resentment]] of [[Buzz]]. There are [[tons]] of [[laughs]] and [[cute]] [[moments]] in "A Bug's Life". [[All]] of the actors turn in [[great]] voice [[work]], and the [[animation]], both the motion and [[detail]], is [[superb]].

This serious movie buff doesn't throw around "10"s lightly, but this movie [[certainly]] [[deserves]] the "10" I [[gave]] it. "A Bug's [[Living]]" is like a favorite candy [[solicitors]] -- it's chock-full of [[wondrous]] little bits that add up to something really tasty.

The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has "heart" (emotion), and every [[nature]] has a nice "[[archangel]]" (a [[grows]] or [[alter]]). By [[comparative]], the only characters in "[[Toys]] Story" to have an "arc" are Buzz, who [[learn]] to love being a toy, and Woody, who [[expires]] his [[disgust]] of [[Humming]]. There are [[shitloads]] of [[giggling]] and [[lovable]] [[times]] in "A Bug's Life". [[Totality]] of the actors turn in [[wondrous]] voice [[jobs]], and the [[animate]], both the motion and [[clarification]], is [[wondrous]].

This serious movie buff doesn't throw around "10"s lightly, but this movie [[probably]] [[deserved]] the "10" I [[supplied]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Starfucker (which reads Starstruck on my box) was the most amazing movie I have ever seen. I thought that it was one of the best movies I have ever seen. So why not a 10? Nothing is perfect. Jamie Kennedy proves why he is one of my favorite actors in this very interesting look at a darker side of Hollywood. I have forced a few others to watch the movie and they all agreed that it was an outstanding flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 863 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I have [[heard]] a [[lot]] about this [[film]], with people writing me telling me I should [[see]] it, as I am a [[fan]] of [[extremely]] bloody, gory [[movies]]. I [[got]] my hands on it [[almost]] right away, but one thing or another [[always]] kept me from watching it- until now. I [[would]] have been better off not remembering I [[even]] had it.

This [[movie]] was [[atrocious]]. The worst thing though is that it could have been so much better than it actually was. I know it was a story by Clive Barker and all, and no I have not read that story- but it appears to me that if you haven't then you will be, as I was, completely clueless and [[utterly]] [[disappointed]].

The film [[begins]] [[good]] enough- the actors are convincing, the story interesting. The [[first]] scene is bloody- a great way to catch your attention. I thought the blood looked a bit bad, but seeing as it was the very first scene I did hope for improvement later on. I was wrong.

The blood and effects are so horrible, it was almost an insult to my intelligence to be expected to believe that, for instance, someone could knock a person's head right off their shoulders using only a meat hammer. WTF? CGI blood (did they even use ANY "real" blood at all? My home made stuff looks better than any [[used]] in this [[film]]!), unbelievable acts of dismemberment (eyeballs popping out just from getting hit in the back of the head; arms cut neatly off- does no one remember there are BONES all throughout our bodies?!), too-dark scenes (every scene is either an odd yellow color, or in hidden in shadows)...it just gets [[worse]] and [[worse]]. I [[found]] myself pointing out mistake after [[mistake]]. There's just too much. [[Add]] that to the fact that what [[could]] have and should have been a [[great]] serial-killer [[movie]] turns into some demonic/[[supernatural]]/monster [[movie]] at the [[end]]...no [[thank]] you! It should have been kept as a creepy [[guy]] butchering people in the subway- OK, with a [[conspiracy]] theory thrown in- and an overzealous photographer. Maybe they murder people and sell the meat via the meat plant? [[Plausible]], [[doable]]...and a lot better I [[think]] than the "real" story. That could have and should have worked. Instead it became a "creatures living at the end of the old tunnel and everyone knows about it but you, and unless you read the book, well...you just won't ever understand it" fiasco. Tragic, what an awful thing to do to a movie with such potential. If you like mindless fake blood and gore, you'll love this. But if you have half a brain in your head then you will completely hate it. Stay away- far, far away. I have [[hear]] a [[lots]] about this [[flick]], with people writing me telling me I should [[seeing]] it, as I am a [[breather]] of [[immeasurably]] bloody, gory [[filmmaking]]. I [[ai]] my hands on it [[roughly]] right away, but one thing or another [[continuously]] kept me from watching it- until now. I [[could]] have been better off not remembering I [[yet]] had it.

This [[filmmaking]] was [[abhorrent]]. The worst thing though is that it could have been so much better than it actually was. I know it was a story by Clive Barker and all, and no I have not read that story- but it appears to me that if you haven't then you will be, as I was, completely clueless and [[completely]] [[disappointing]].

The film [[initiating]] [[alright]] enough- the actors are convincing, the story interesting. The [[outset]] scene is bloody- a great way to catch your attention. I thought the blood looked a bit bad, but seeing as it was the very first scene I did hope for improvement later on. I was wrong.

The blood and effects are so horrible, it was almost an insult to my intelligence to be expected to believe that, for instance, someone could knock a person's head right off their shoulders using only a meat hammer. WTF? CGI blood (did they even use ANY "real" blood at all? My home made stuff looks better than any [[employs]] in this [[filmmaking]]!), unbelievable acts of dismemberment (eyeballs popping out just from getting hit in the back of the head; arms cut neatly off- does no one remember there are BONES all throughout our bodies?!), too-dark scenes (every scene is either an odd yellow color, or in hidden in shadows)...it just gets [[worst]] and [[worst]]. I [[find]] myself pointing out mistake after [[blunder]]. There's just too much. [[Adds]] that to the fact that what [[did]] have and should have been a [[whopping]] serial-killer [[filmmaking]] turns into some demonic/[[uncanny]]/monster [[movies]] at the [[terminate]]...no [[thanks]] you! It should have been kept as a creepy [[dawg]] butchering people in the subway- OK, with a [[complicity]] theory thrown in- and an overzealous photographer. Maybe they murder people and sell the meat via the meat plant? [[Credible]], [[workable]]...and a lot better I [[thinking]] than the "real" story. That could have and should have worked. Instead it became a "creatures living at the end of the old tunnel and everyone knows about it but you, and unless you read the book, well...you just won't ever understand it" fiasco. Tragic, what an awful thing to do to a movie with such potential. If you like mindless fake blood and gore, you'll love this. But if you have half a brain in your head then you will completely hate it. Stay away- far, far away. --------------------------------------------- Result 864 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have always been a huge James Bond fanatic! I have seen almost all of the films except for Die Another Day, and The World Is Not Enough. The graphic's for Everything Or Nothing are breathtaking! The voice talents......... WOW! I LOVE PIERCE BROSNAN! He is finally Bond in a video game! HE IS BOND! I enjoyed the past Bond games: Goldeneye, The World Is Not Enough, Agent Under Fire, and Nightfire. This one is definitely the best! Finally, Mr. Brosnan, (may I call him Mr. Brosnan as a sign of respect? Yes I can!) He was phenomenally exciting to hear in a video game....... AT LONG LAST! DUH! I've seen him perform with Robin Williams, and let me tell you, they make a great team. Pierce Brosnan is funny, wickedly handsome ( I mean to say wickedly in a good way,) and just one of those actor's who you would want to walk up to and wrap your arms around and hug, saying: "Pierce Brosnan, thank you for being James Bond," "If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't know who James Bond is." He's a great actor! I am a huge fan of Willem Dafoe even though I've seen him in a couple of movies. His role as Nikolai Diavalo was brilliant. (Did I spell the character's name right?) LOL!!!! He does a great job with an accent. Sometimes I can't even hear an accent. I have seen Willem, I mean Mr. Dafoe, perform in two movies: Finding Nemo, and Spider-Man with my favorite actress: KIRSTEN DUNST! SHE ROCKS! Anyway, He never ceases to amaze. And Richard Kiel, wow, he's definitely got the part of Jaw's nailed. I've seen him in the movie's and he's awesome! As a matter of fact, my Grandparent's have met Mr. Kiel, and I was jealous when they told me. But, Kirsten Dunst is at the top of my list of Celebritie's that I want to meet. John Cleese was breathtaking. I have never seen a better person play as the wisecracking, and gadget creating Q! Mr. Cleese was hilarious! I've seen him work with Pierce Brosnan in Goldeneye and Tommorow Never Dies. He's awesome! John Cleese's most recent project is Shrek 2 starring Mike Myer's, Cameron Diaz, Julie Andrew's and Eddie Murphy. ( Shrek 2 is now in theatre's!) GOOD LUCK 007! Oh, yeah, and as Q alway's says: "Grow up 007!" --------------------------------------------- Result 865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Are you kidding me?! A show highlighting someone who opens cans and envelopes for a meal? How talented do you have to be to do this? She MAY be able to cook but it is NOT portrayed in this half-hour stomach churning painful production. I know she has a Martha-Stewart-esquire empire. So does Warren Buffett but I don't see him with fake knockers opening cans of cream corn and Alpo.

She has a nephew named...Brycer. Brycer? Stop talking about anyone a name that stupid.

More time is spent on "table-scapes" than actual cooking. Who has that kind of time?! Silicon should be on your spatula, not on my TV. This show should be on Cartoon Network, NOT Food Network. --------------------------------------------- Result 866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] 9/10- 30 minutes of [[pure]] [[holiday]] [[terror]]. [[Okay]], so it's not that [[scary]]. But it sure is [[fun]].

The [[Crypt]] [[Keeper]] ([[John]] Kassir) [[tales]] a [[tale]] of holiday [[FEAR]], [[giving]] us all [[Christmas]] [[Goose]]... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should [[really]] be [[careful]] what you [[AXE]] Santa for. [[Have]] a [[Scary]] [[Christmas]] and a Happy [[New]] [[Fear]]. [[Okay]] I'll stop.

[[Okay]], so in the [[story]], a [[greedy]] wife ([[Best]] [[screamer]] in the [[world]], [[Mary]] [[Ellen]] Trainor) [[kills]] her husband ([[Marshall]] Bell, the [[coach]] who [[gets]] towel [[whipped]] to [[death]] in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her [[plan]] is [[ruined]] when a [[crazy]] [[killer]] [[dressed]] in a Santa suit (Larry "[[Dr]]. Giggles" [[Drake]]) [[comes]] her [[way]].

If you [[look]] it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third [[viewing]]). But if you haven't seen it, I [[suggest]] you do. 9/10- 30 minutes of [[pur]] [[vacations]] [[horror]]. [[Alrighty]], so it's not that [[terrible]]. But it sure is [[hilarious]].

The [[Vault]] [[Keepers]] ([[Johannes]] Kassir) [[stories]] a [[conte]] of holiday [[AFFRAID]], [[confer]] us all [[Claus]] [[Geese]]... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should [[truthfully]] be [[conscientious]] what you [[AX]] Santa for. [[Ha]] a [[Awful]] [[Claus]] and a Happy [[Novo]] [[Affraid]]. [[Verywell]] I'll stop.

[[Verywell]], so in the [[conte]], a [[miserly]] wife ([[Better]] [[loudmouth]] in the [[monde]], [[Maryam]] [[Eileen]] Trainor) [[mata]] her husband ([[Marshal]] Bell, the [[coaching]] who [[attains]] towel [[horsewhipped]] to [[deaths]] in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her [[plans]] is [[destroyed]] when a [[lunatic]] [[murderer]] [[clothed]] in a Santa suit (Larry "[[Doktor]]. Giggles" [[Gregg]]) [[arrives]] her [[path]].

If you [[gaze]] it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third [[view]]). But if you haven't seen it, I [[insinuate]] you do. --------------------------------------------- Result 867 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] When I was in school I made a [[film]] about a [[couple]] roaming around in the trees and talking, and I [[realized]] [[halfway]] through editing that this was not just a failing aesthetic strategy but a cliché of Canadian [[cinema]]: sodden lyricism [[married]] to [[vacant]], metaphor-burdened stabs at [[social]] [[commentary]]. But whatever my own film's [[failings]] I feel [[much]] better after seeing this...this...[[thing]]. [[For]] one thing, mine ran 20 [[minutes]], not 85, and had more content at that: [[every]] [[pointless]] [[bit]] of [[business]] here is fawned over for four, five, six [[relentless]] minutes. The male lead is just incredible, a brow-beating, loudmouthed creep [[given]] to outbursts of drama-class improv in between philosophical [[insights]] culled from the U of T pub, and he is [[given]] lots and [[lots]] of space to make us [[hate]] him. Admittedly if he weren't such an a**hole then the third [[act]] would make even [[less]] [[sense]], as a [[couple]] snarky dudes show up to [[provide]] distant and [[thoroughly]] unhelpful echoes of 'exploitation' values; but it doesn't make it any [[easier]] to watch the caged creep whimper "please" in closeup until the magazine runs out. I [[take]] back what I said about AUTUMN BORN, which at least had the [[courage]] of its own misbegotten lechery: this [[cinematic]] [[crater]] is and will [[remain]] the very [[worst]] Canadian [[movie]] of all time. At [[least]], I really really hope so. When I was in school I made a [[filmmaking]] about a [[couples]] roaming around in the trees and talking, and I [[performed]] [[midway]] through editing that this was not just a failing aesthetic strategy but a cliché of Canadian [[cinemas]]: sodden lyricism [[wedding]] to [[vacancy]], metaphor-burdened stabs at [[societal]] [[comments]]. But whatever my own film's [[vulnerabilities]] I feel [[very]] better after seeing this...this...[[stuff]]. [[In]] one thing, mine ran 20 [[mins]], not 85, and had more content at that: [[any]] [[dispensable]] [[bitten]] of [[firms]] here is fawned over for four, five, six [[unforgiving]] minutes. The male lead is just incredible, a brow-beating, loudmouthed creep [[conferred]] to outbursts of drama-class improv in between philosophical [[ideas]] culled from the U of T pub, and he is [[awarded]] lots and [[batch]] of space to make us [[hatred]] him. Admittedly if he weren't such an a**hole then the third [[law]] would make even [[fewest]] [[feeling]], as a [[couples]] snarky dudes show up to [[furnish]] distant and [[meticulously]] unhelpful echoes of 'exploitation' values; but it doesn't make it any [[easy]] to watch the caged creep whimper "please" in closeup until the magazine runs out. I [[taking]] back what I said about AUTUMN BORN, which at least had the [[valor]] of its own misbegotten lechery: this [[cinematographic]] [[craters]] is and will [[stay]] the very [[pire]] Canadian [[cinematographic]] of all time. At [[lowest]], I really really hope so. --------------------------------------------- Result 868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[God]], I was [[bored]] out of my head as I [[watched]] this pilot. I had been expecting a lot from it, as I'm a [[huge]] [[fan]] of James Cameron (and not just [[since]] "Titanic", I [[might]] add), and his [[name]] in the [[credits]] I [[thought]] would be a [[guarantee]] of quality ([[Then]] again, he [[also]] [[wrote]] the leaden [[Strange]] Days..). But the thing [[failed]] [[miserably]] at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of [[duration]]. [[In]] all that time, it barely went beyond its two line synopsis, and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of [[coherent]] plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular "A-Team" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her "gal wit an attitude" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron! [[Deus]], I was [[boring]] out of my head as I [[seen]] this pilot. I had been expecting a lot from it, as I'm a [[whopping]] [[breather]] of James Cameron (and not just [[because]] "Titanic", I [[probability]] add), and his [[denomination]] in the [[appropriations]] I [[figured]] would be a [[collateral]] of quality ([[Thus]] again, he [[similarly]] [[texted]] the leaden [[Odd]] Days..). But the thing [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]] at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of [[length]]. [[For]] all that time, it barely went beyond its two line synopsis, and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of [[cohesion]] plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular "A-Team" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her "gal wit an attitude" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron! --------------------------------------------- Result 869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Do you [[guys]] wanna know a [[secret]]?. This [[movie]] [[sucks]]. Well [[actually]] i don't know because if you [[allow]] yourself to be indulged by plagiarised versions of original [[movies]], then [[perhaps]] you may find this movie astounding (this [[movie]] being a plagiarised [[copy]] of i [[know]] what you did [[last]] summer). The [[first]] 30 minutes of the movie is [[based]] on a typical story [[setting]]; a bunch of so-called cool [[teenagers]] relishing their vacation in Florida and being themselves by behaving very much like the [[juveniles]] they are. The only [[insight]] we get at this point is the extent to which the director succeeded in illustrating a [[pretentious]] sense of [[adolescent]] decadence within the characters. The second half hour of the movie gains a little momentum and begins to illustrate a start to the no- where-near [[unprecedented]] [[killings]]. The third half hour of the movie will most definitely remain a [[mystery]] to me because i switched it off before i could further delude myself into thinking that the movie may still have something interesting and original left to show. As far as the story is concerned, it can easily be explained in a few lines. A bunch of teenagers go to Florida on vacation. While they are busy partying, they slowly (and i mean SLOWLY) begin to get killed because they know some sort of silly secret. The only thread to the killings is that all victims were matriculates of a common high school. One thing that did [[however]] amaze me about this movie, was how much betty (im not sure about her name..the blonde character) looks like reese witherspoon. Another thing that amazed me about the movie was that it made me jump from my seat a few times. Does that make it a work of art? absolutely not because my 12 year old niece made me drop a glass of orange juice because she "boo'ed" me when i was just about to go through the guest room door..whats the difference between the [[director]] and my 12 year old niece????

Do you wanna know a secret??? I'm not sure about you guys, but i don't.. Do you [[dudes]] wanna know a [[disguised]]?. This [[filmmaking]] [[stinks]]. Well [[genuinely]] i don't know because if you [[permit]] yourself to be indulged by plagiarised versions of original [[filmmaking]], then [[maybe]] you may find this movie astounding (this [[kino]] being a plagiarised [[photocopy]] of i [[savoir]] what you did [[final]] summer). The [[fiirst]] 30 minutes of the movie is [[groundwork]] on a typical story [[configured]]; a bunch of so-called cool [[adolescence]] relishing their vacation in Florida and being themselves by behaving very much like the [[miners]] they are. The only [[eyesight]] we get at this point is the extent to which the director succeeded in illustrating a [[presumptuous]] sense of [[schoolgirl]] decadence within the characters. The second half hour of the movie gains a little momentum and begins to illustrate a start to the no- where-near [[unequaled]] [[murder]]. The third half hour of the movie will most definitely remain a [[conundrum]] to me because i switched it off before i could further delude myself into thinking that the movie may still have something interesting and original left to show. As far as the story is concerned, it can easily be explained in a few lines. A bunch of teenagers go to Florida on vacation. While they are busy partying, they slowly (and i mean SLOWLY) begin to get killed because they know some sort of silly secret. The only thread to the killings is that all victims were matriculates of a common high school. One thing that did [[still]] amaze me about this movie, was how much betty (im not sure about her name..the blonde character) looks like reese witherspoon. Another thing that amazed me about the movie was that it made me jump from my seat a few times. Does that make it a work of art? absolutely not because my 12 year old niece made me drop a glass of orange juice because she "boo'ed" me when i was just about to go through the guest room door..whats the difference between the [[headmaster]] and my 12 year old niece????

Do you wanna know a secret??? I'm not sure about you guys, but i don't.. --------------------------------------------- Result 870 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's one line that makes it worth to [[rent]] for Angel fans. Everyone [[else]]: this is just a very [[bad]] horror flick. The female [[characters]] are typical horror movies [[females]]. They are [[wooden]], annoying and dumb. You are [[glad]] when they are [[killed]] off. Long live the strong female [[character]] in a horror [[movie]]!! There's one line that makes it worth to [[rental]] for Angel fans. Everyone [[elsewhere]]: this is just a very [[unfavourable]] horror flick. The female [[personage]] are typical horror movies [[girls]]. They are [[lumber]], annoying and dumb. You are [[happier]] when they are [[assassinating]] off. Long live the strong female [[trait]] in a horror [[filmmaking]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] The coming attractions to "The [[Order]]" make it seem like a decent horror [[mystery]]/thriller, but what we [[get]] is a plot that has potential to be [[excellent]] all [[thrown]] together to [[form]] a [[pile]] of garbage.

First off the [[whole]] [[movie]] consists of [[terrible]] dialogue and [[god]] [[awful]] special affects. The acting was also nothing to be [[proud]] of, but Keath Ledger (I [[think]] I [[spelled]] that right.) saved the [[movie]] in this [[category]].

[[For]] heaven's sake: DON'T [[SEE]] THIS [[MOVIE]]! The coming attractions to "The [[Edict]]" make it seem like a decent horror [[enigma]]/thriller, but what we [[gets]] is a plot that has potential to be [[resplendent]] all [[tossed]] together to [[forms]] a [[piles]] of garbage.

First off the [[overall]] [[movies]] consists of [[abysmal]] dialogue and [[christ]] [[frightful]] special affects. The acting was also nothing to be [[prideful]] of, but Keath Ledger (I [[believing]] I [[spelt]] that right.) saved the [[flick]] in this [[class]].

[[At]] heaven's sake: DON'T [[BEHOLD]] THIS [[FILMMAKING]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 872 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Guy Thing" may not be a classic, but it sure is a good, funny comedy. The plot focuses on Paul (Jason Lee), who wakes up the morning after his bachelor party with no memory and Becky (Julia Stiles) lying naked in his bed. Before he can figure out what happened, he rushes Becky out of his apartment because his fiance Karen (Selma Blair) is coming. After that, as you could imagine, chaos ensues.

Almost every single scene in "A Guy Thing" delivers loud laughs. The funniest moments come from when Paul imagines what could happen if he tells Karen. Selma Blair is a truly talented comedian, and the worst thing about this film is that she goes underused. Although, she turns out to be more funny than Stiles' character, who actually isn't that interesting. Of course, not every comedy is perfect.

As I said, "A Guy Thing" is no classic, but it's not bad either, 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 873 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Despite]] unfortunately thinking itself to be (a) intelligent, (b) [[important]] and (c) interesting, fortunately this movie is over [[mercifully]] [[quickly]]. The [[script]] makes [[little]] sense, the whole idea of the sado-masochistic relationship between the two main characters is strangely [[trite]], and [[John]] Lydon shows us all, in the space of one movie, why he should never have let himself out of [[music]]. His performance is one-note and [[irritating]].

The only [[positive]] thing to be said is that Harvey Keitel manages to deliver a good turn. His later Bad Lieutenant would show just how badly good actors can act, but mercifully his performance here is restrained. [[While]] unfortunately thinking itself to be (a) intelligent, (b) [[notable]] and (c) interesting, fortunately this movie is over [[gaily]] [[punctually]]. The [[scripts]] makes [[scant]] sense, the whole idea of the sado-masochistic relationship between the two main characters is strangely [[commonplace]], and [[Jon]] Lydon shows us all, in the space of one movie, why he should never have let himself out of [[musica]]. His performance is one-note and [[exasperating]].

The only [[propitious]] thing to be said is that Harvey Keitel manages to deliver a good turn. His later Bad Lieutenant would show just how badly good actors can act, but mercifully his performance here is restrained. --------------------------------------------- Result 874 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as "Repo Man" or "Buckaroo Bonzai" than you're going to [[love]] this one. It's a stream of [[consciousness]] 70's Sci-fi [[spectacular]], including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" or Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" and you're ready to go! If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as "Repo Man" or "Buckaroo Bonzai" than you're going to [[amour]] this one. It's a stream of [[awareness]] 70's Sci-fi [[wondrous]], including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" or Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" and you're ready to go! --------------------------------------------- Result 875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Murphy Delirious is undoubtedly the funniest thing I have ever seen in my life. When I saw it for the first time about 2 years ago I was in stitches for weeks after it. To date I have seen it a further 17 times and i still laugh my ass off each time. For those who dont know Eddie Murphy was a brilliant stand up comedian before he was a Hollywood superstar. There is not one dull spot in this piece of genius unlike Eddie Murphy Raw which was released in 1987 which goes flat during the middle. If you are not the sort of person who can't stand swearing then I wouldn't advise you to see it as you will probably hear swearing of some form every 5-10 seconds. I gave this a 10 out of 10 because it displays the greatest comic genius of them all at his best. --------------------------------------------- Result 876 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Another violent, angry fantasy from Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven is a [[puzzle]]: it's difficult to tell whether he takes his sordid impulses seriously, with sardonic intent or operates in complete [[oblivion]]. He also seems completely ignorant of the fact that all the [[brilliant]] visuals in the world (and this has some [[outstanding]] ones) cannot hide a [[negligence]] to story, dialogue and performance. Kevin Bacon plays a corrupt scientist who has discovered invisibility and uses it to drive himself into moral bankruptcy. Bacon is normally a likable actor who occasionally shows his dark side (`The River Wild') in an attempt to offset his boyish looks; given the material, however, Bacon isn't nearly hateful enough to compel. The other principals are Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, neither of whom are gifted enough to make a solid impression and who, when forced to [[deliver]] [[inane]] [[dialogue]], embarrass themselves. The climax is a study in [[preponderance]] and disbelief has to be truly [[suspended]]. Another violent, angry fantasy from Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven is a [[enigma]]: it's difficult to tell whether he takes his sordid impulses seriously, with sardonic intent or operates in complete [[wayside]]. He also seems completely ignorant of the fact that all the [[sumptuous]] visuals in the world (and this has some [[terrific]] ones) cannot hide a [[neglect]] to story, dialogue and performance. Kevin Bacon plays a corrupt scientist who has discovered invisibility and uses it to drive himself into moral bankruptcy. Bacon is normally a likable actor who occasionally shows his dark side (`The River Wild') in an attempt to offset his boyish looks; given the material, however, Bacon isn't nearly hateful enough to compel. The other principals are Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, neither of whom are gifted enough to make a solid impression and who, when forced to [[make]] [[negligible]] [[dialog]], embarrass themselves. The climax is a study in [[dominance]] and disbelief has to be truly [[interrupted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 877 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I've never been a [[huge]] [[fan]] of Mormon films. [[Being]] a Mormon, I've always [[felt]] that the [[humor]] was too [[exclusive]] to the LDS community and [[made]] us seem like a bunch of [[obsessive]] [[wackos]]. I was [[hoping]] this would be the breath of fresh [[air]], the Halestorm movie I could finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.

Boy, was I wrong.

I figured, since this had B-list [[talent]] like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, [[Andrew]] Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this [[would]] have to be at [[least]] a [[little]] [[funny]]. And besides, church basketball is [[ripe]] with [[potential]] for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I [[must]] [[say]], [[throughout]] the [[entire]] [[movie]], it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. [[Every]] [[joke]] [[fell]] flat, and [[every]] [[opportunity]] for a [[genuinely]] funny gag went [[ignored]]. The [[dialogue]] was bland, and the [[film]] had some of the [[worst]] [[character]] [[development]] I have ever [[seen]]. [[Every]] [[single]] [[character]] but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's [[hard]] to believe that after nine re-writes the [[film]] was still as mind-numbingly [[stale]] as the train [[wreck]] I witnessed. I can't put into words the [[rage]] I [[felt]] [[sitting]] through this. My [[friends]] and I were extras in the [[final]] game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. [[Kurt]] [[Hale]], the director, was there, and I [[must]] [[say]], I [[avoided]] all contact with him after the [[show]]. He [[waited]] at the door, [[seemingly]] ready for [[feedback]]. I couldn't bring myself to [[tell]] him that his [[film]] not only [[ripped]] away a [[good]] [[hour]] and a half of my life, but it left a [[nasty]], painful scar that I will never [[forget]].

Here are a few [[specific]] [[problems]] I had: There was a [[minor]] [[love]] [[story]] subplot between the [[janitor]] and the chubby piano player, but these two [[characters]] came out of [[nowhere]], and were [[impossible]] to [[care]] about, so my [[friends]] and I were [[left]] [[constantly]] [[wondering]] why we were [[supposed]] to [[care]] about these two lame, uninteresting [[characters]]. There were many subplots that [[popped]] up [[every]] now and then, each promising the [[audience]] the [[chance]] for [[laughs]], but each one [[came]] and went in a puff of [[smoke]], [[ending]] before you could even [[start]] caring. This was [[pretty]] much how the [[whole]] [[movie]] felt.

This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the [[first]] REAL funny [[Mormon]] movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.

Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through I've never been a [[mammoth]] [[groupie]] of Mormon films. [[Ongoing]] a Mormon, I've always [[deemed]] that the [[humour]] was too [[sole]] to the LDS community and [[introduced]] us seem like a bunch of [[obsessed]] [[loonies]]. I was [[expecting]] this would be the breath of fresh [[aeronautics]], the Halestorm movie I could finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.

Boy, was I wrong.

I figured, since this had B-list [[talents]] like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, [[Andrews]] Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this [[should]] have to be at [[lowest]] a [[small]] [[hilarious]]. And besides, church basketball is [[ripen]] with [[prospective]] for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I [[needs]] [[says]], [[around]] the [[overall]] [[film]], it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. [[Any]] [[prank]] [[fallen]] flat, and [[all]] [[opportunities]] for a [[truthfully]] funny gag went [[neglected]]. The [[discussions]] was bland, and the [[filmmaking]] had some of the [[meanest]] [[characteristics]] [[developments]] I have ever [[watched]]. [[Everything]] [[exclusive]] [[nature]] but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's [[harsh]] to believe that after nine re-writes the [[filmmaking]] was still as mind-numbingly [[rancid]] as the train [[ruining]] I witnessed. I can't put into words the [[ire]] I [[believed]] [[seated]] through this. My [[friendships]] and I were extras in the [[latter]] game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. [[Curt]] [[Hill]], the director, was there, and I [[owe]] [[told]], I [[dodged]] all contact with him after the [[shows]]. He [[anticipated]] at the door, [[reportedly]] ready for [[comments]]. I couldn't bring myself to [[say]] him that his [[films]] not only [[tore]] away a [[alright]] [[hora]] and a half of my life, but it left a [[dirty]], painful scar that I will never [[forgets]].

Here are a few [[especial]] [[disorders]] I had: There was a [[smaller]] [[amore]] [[history]] subplot between the [[doorman]] and the chubby piano player, but these two [[character]] came out of [[everywhere]], and were [[unable]] to [[healthcare]] about, so my [[friend]] and I were [[exited]] [[always]] [[asks]] why we were [[alleged]] to [[healthcare]] about these two lame, uninteresting [[character]]. There were many subplots that [[tore]] up [[any]] now and then, each promising the [[audiences]] the [[opportunities]] for [[smiles]], but each one [[became]] and went in a puff of [[tobacco]], [[ended]] before you could even [[starts]] caring. This was [[quite]] much how the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] felt.

This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the [[fiirst]] REAL funny [[Mormons]] movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.

Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through --------------------------------------------- Result 878 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] 'Iedereen Beroemd' has everything we can expect from a [[straight]] to video-movie. It's the story about a man who [[believes]] his [[daughter]] [[could]] be a [[star]]. The only thing he [[needs]] is to [[get]] her on [[stage]], surrounded by [[cameras]] and [[reporters]]. A [[simple]] [[plan]] for which he has to [[kidnap]] and do some blackmail. The problem with the [[movie]] is not the basic plot, but how it is [[made]]. Everything is supposed to be [[funny]], but it isn't. It is [[trivial]] and [[clumsy]], the [[characters]] are [[shallow]], and the end-sequence is totally without climax or emotion. The [[last]] [[sequence]] is [[probably]] the only scene where you feel like laughing, but only at how [[pathetic]] the whole set-up is. 'Iedereen Beroemd' has everything we can expect from a [[successive]] to video-movie. It's the story about a man who [[feels]] his [[giri]] [[did]] be a [[stars]]. The only thing he [[needed]] is to [[gets]] her on [[phase]], surrounded by [[camera]] and [[correspondent]]. A [[uncomplicated]] [[schemes]] for which he has to [[kidnapped]] and do some blackmail. The problem with the [[filmmaking]] is not the basic plot, but how it is [[effected]]. Everything is supposed to be [[comical]], but it isn't. It is [[immaterial]] and [[awkward]], the [[trait]] are [[superficial]], and the end-sequence is totally without climax or emotion. The [[latter]] [[sequences]] is [[arguably]] the only scene where you feel like laughing, but only at how [[unfortunate]] the whole set-up is. --------------------------------------------- Result 879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen just about all of Miyazaki's films, and they are all beautiful and captivating. But this one rises above the rest. This movie totally impressed me!

I fell in love with Pazu and Sheeta, and their sweet, caring friendship. They were what made the movie for me. Of course, the animation is also superb and the music captures the feelings in the film perfectly. But the characters are the shining point in this movie: they are so well developed and full of personality.

Now, let me clarify: I'm really talking about the Japanese version of the movie (with English subs). While the English dub is good (mostly), it simply pales in comparison to the original language version. The voices are better, the dialogue, everything. So I suggest seeing (and hearing) the movie the way it originally was. --------------------------------------------- Result 880 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There are a couple of [[prior]] comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of [[clichés]] throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.

I'd read about [[Elizabeth]] Berkly's [[awful]] performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never seen - and her performance here, while not [[awful]], is [[barely]] up to the standards of Lifetime's worse [[fare]]. There was not a hint of depth to her [[character]], but then there [[probably]] shouldn't have been. If so, it [[would]] have placed the [[film]] completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or [[charisma]] - not a [[trace]] - in any one character, [[performer]], or [[portrayal]].

The principal's [[handling]] of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had [[kissed]] her in the hall was [[laughable]]. Her husband's initial reaction and [[advice]] were [[likewise]] (Forrest [[Gump]], [[attacking]] Jenny's [[boyfriend]] in his [[car]] [[provided]] a more realistic, [[intelligent]] action, and, [[hell]], he was mentally-challenged).

The smarmy, unctuous [[lawyer]] (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student [[actually]] [[performed]] [[something]] [[probably]] worthy of praise in his performance: he was both [[laughable]] and thoroughly [[annoying]] at the same [[time]], no mean feat. Her [[attorney]] was more of an [[insensitive]] nerd, [[also]] not unknown in the profession.

Finally (and frankly, I [[rather]] enjoyed this [[part]]), the [[police]] were such a [[collection]] of [[insensitive]] oafs, that you'd [[rather]] depend [[upon]] Barney Fife, without [[Andy]], to handle all [[law]] [[enforcement]] and [[investigation]] in your community. I know that most real-like [[cops]] [[fall]] a bit short of the sharpness, [[intelligence]] and [[empathy]] of the level [[displayed]] by most [[characters]] on the "[[Law]] and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level [[seem]] to be a staple on "Lifetime."

Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."

This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera.

But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.

This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." There are a couple of [[anterior]] comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of [[clichéd]] throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.

I'd read about [[Elisabetta]] Berkly's [[abhorrent]] performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never seen - and her performance here, while not [[horrific]], is [[hardly]] up to the standards of Lifetime's worse [[tariffs]]. There was not a hint of depth to her [[traits]], but then there [[presumably]] shouldn't have been. If so, it [[could]] have placed the [[flick]] completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or [[seduction]] - not a [[tracing]] - in any one character, [[performers]], or [[portrait]].

The principal's [[treating]] of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had [[kissing]] her in the hall was [[absurd]]. Her husband's initial reaction and [[counsel]] were [[also]] (Forrest [[Gimp]], [[onslaught]] Jenny's [[pal]] in his [[motors]] [[gave]] a more realistic, [[smart]] action, and, [[brothel]], he was mentally-challenged).

The smarmy, unctuous [[attorneys]] (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student [[genuinely]] [[perform]] [[somethin]] [[arguably]] worthy of praise in his performance: he was both [[farcical]] and thoroughly [[irritating]] at the same [[period]], no mean feat. Her [[prosecutor]] was more of an [[unmoved]] nerd, [[further]] not unknown in the profession.

Finally (and frankly, I [[quite]] enjoyed this [[party]]), the [[constabulary]] were such a [[collects]] of [[oblivious]] oafs, that you'd [[quite]] depend [[after]] Barney Fife, without [[Indy]], to handle all [[act]] [[implementation]] and [[survey]] in your community. I know that most real-like [[policing]] [[fell]] a bit short of the sharpness, [[intellect]] and [[sympathy]] of the level [[showed]] by most [[characteristics]] on the "[[Act]] and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level [[seems]] to be a staple on "Lifetime."

Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."

This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera.

But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.

This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." --------------------------------------------- Result 881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[David]] Burton([[Richard]] Chamberlain, quite good)is a lawyer, more adept at handling corporate [[taxation]](..and suffers from [[unusual]] dreams which bother him seeing this aboriginal man [[shrouded]] in darkness), who is [[called]] on to take a [[case]] concerning a group of aboriginals [[charged]] with the [[murder]] of one of their own named Billy..we [[see]] that he tries to steal stones with ritual painting on them and is killed when a leader of an aboriginal tribe named Charlie(Nandjiwarra Amagula)uses a "death bone" to stop his [[heart]]. Meanwhile, revolving around David, bizarre weather patterns effect Sydney such as rain beating down [[polluted]] dirt and rock-sized hail during bright blue skies(with no sights of clouds, such as the one that hits a school in central Australia), not to mention, a "[[deformed]]" rainbow which is split(!)into groups. As David [[pursues]] the case he finds that he is far closer to the weird events taking place than he could ever realize. One aboriginal named Chris(David Gulpilil)appears to him in a dream holding a stone with blood and he finds that this man is one of those he is to represent at trial! He finds that it's quite possible, after some strange meetings with Charlie and conversations with Chris, that he very well might be linked to a spirit named Mulkurul and that his dreams are actual premonitions of possible horrors yet to come.

Absorbing apocalyptic [[drama]] [[builds]] it's story [[methodically]] and is completely [[original]] and unpredictable. With [[Peter]] [[Weir]] in [[charge]], the film is visually [[arresting]] as we see these very [[overwhelming]] [[images]] of [[possible]] doom towards civilization, but the film's most [[compelling]] angle is [[certainly]] David's [[journey]] to find that [[monumental]] truth that [[plagues]] him as he questions Charlie and [[Chris]] countlessly, at first to help his [[men]] [[get]] off from a [[crime]] they didn't commit, and [[ultimately]] to find out what he has to do with [[anything]] [[catastrophic]] that is [[occurring]] or might [[occur]] [[later]]. [[Davids]] Burton([[Richie]] Chamberlain, quite good)is a lawyer, more adept at handling corporate [[taxes]](..and suffers from [[curious]] dreams which bother him seeing this aboriginal man [[wrapped]] in darkness), who is [[termed]] on to take a [[examples]] concerning a group of aboriginals [[blamed]] with the [[murdering]] of one of their own named Billy..we [[behold]] that he tries to steal stones with ritual painting on them and is killed when a leader of an aboriginal tribe named Charlie(Nandjiwarra Amagula)uses a "death bone" to stop his [[heartland]]. Meanwhile, revolving around David, bizarre weather patterns effect Sydney such as rain beating down [[polluting]] dirt and rock-sized hail during bright blue skies(with no sights of clouds, such as the one that hits a school in central Australia), not to mention, a "[[misshapen]]" rainbow which is split(!)into groups. As David [[chasing]] the case he finds that he is far closer to the weird events taking place than he could ever realize. One aboriginal named Chris(David Gulpilil)appears to him in a dream holding a stone with blood and he finds that this man is one of those he is to represent at trial! He finds that it's quite possible, after some strange meetings with Charlie and conversations with Chris, that he very well might be linked to a spirit named Mulkurul and that his dreams are actual premonitions of possible horrors yet to come.

Absorbing apocalyptic [[tragedy]] [[built]] it's story [[systematically]] and is completely [[initial]] and unpredictable. With [[Petra]] [[Spillway]] in [[charges]], the film is visually [[arrested]] as we see these very [[jumbo]] [[image]] of [[feasible]] doom towards civilization, but the film's most [[convincing]] angle is [[surely]] David's [[travel]] to find that [[vast]] truth that [[curses]] him as he questions Charlie and [[Kris]] countlessly, at first to help his [[males]] [[got]] off from a [[offence]] they didn't commit, and [[finally]] to find out what he has to do with [[nothing]] [[destructive]] that is [[happening]] or might [[arise]] [[thereafter]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is probably my favorite movie of all time. Miriam Flynn is excellent as Bunny Packard. Zane Buzby as Delores is comic genius. The rest of the cast is amazing, and the film is really really funny. A definite satire of horror films, with a zany twist. If you enjoy a fun, comedy filled evening, then go and rent this classic. You'll laugh all the way through! --------------------------------------------- Result 883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The funny sound that you may hear when you eyeball this execrable version of Jules Verne's classic "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is Verne spinning in his grave. The only thing about this 80 minute opus that has anything to do with "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is the title. Otherwise, everything else in this lackluster production is new and not worth watching. In fact, the director has written here at IMDb.COM that he directed only eight minutes of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" and the studio tacked on part of "Dollman" helmer Albert Pyun's sequel to his own "Alien from L.A." with Kathy Ireland. Evidently, the producers ran out of money and to satisfy overseas contractual obligations, they grafted Pyun's sequel onto director Rusty Lemorande's movie. Please, don't rent or buy this wretched piece of garbage.

Unlike director Henry Levin's period piece "Journey to the Center of the Earth" (1959) with James Mason and Pat Boone, Lemorande's "Journey to the Center of the Earth" takes place in contemporary times in Hawaii. Two fellows, a British nanny, and a dog are brought together for the adventure of a lifetime purely by coincidence. Richard (Paul Carafotes of "Blind Date") and his comic book obsessed brother Bryan (Ilan Mitchell-Smith of "Weird Science") are going out to explore a cave. The heroine, Crystina (Nicola Cowper of "Underworld"), works for a domestic service called 'Nannies R Us.' Being a nanny has been Crystina's life-long dream, but she has made a less of all five of her nanny jobs. Nevertheless, her sympathetic supervisor, Ms. Ferry (Lynda Marshall of "Africa Express"), sends her to Hawaii. Crystina's new client, rock star Billy Foul (Jeremy Crutchley of "Doomsday") who is scheduling one last concert to revive his flagging career, has a dog named Bernard. Foul wants Crystina to take Bernard to a doggie day spa. Crystina is waiting on the arrival of her taxi when a careless motel attendant accidentally puts the basket that conceals Bernard in Richard's jeep. You see, Foul has hidden his canine in a basket because motel management strictly prohibits pets on their premises. Foul has disguised the dog as a human baby. Anyway, Crystina catches a cab and tells the driver follow Richard.

After she catches up with them to get her dog, the cabbie cruises away and abandons her. Crystina demands that Richard drive her back to town, but he has other plans. Unhappily, Crystina joins the guys and they get lost, and then find themselves in the lost city of Atlantis, a police state ruled by a dictator, at the center of the Earth. The rulers of Atlantis repeatedly notify their citizens that life on the surface does not exist. Our heroes and heroine stumble onto Atlantis quite by accident. Atlantis resembles a disco and everybody looks like they are straight out of a punk rock opera. The ruler of Atlantis, General Rykov (Janet Du Plessis of "Operation Hit Squad"), is orchestrating a raid on the surface with clones of the first human, Wanda Saknussemm (Kathy Ireland of "Necessary Roughness"), to visit Atlantis. Predictably, General Rykov machinations to rule Atlantis and overthrow the Earth fails, and our heroes and heroine save the day.

"Journey to the Center of the Earth" is an abomination. The movie seems to be a comedy despite its superficial satire about dictatorships. Albert Pyun is one of my favorite low budget action directors, but he blew it on this lightweight shambles of a science fiction saga. --------------------------------------------- Result 884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Come on, what is the deal with this show, Power Rangers anyways? I always felt that the show, which was originally brought over from Japan in a better form, took what was great in Japan, and turned into one of the most ridiculous and pointless excuses in toy merchandising history! There is absolutely no point with this show whatsoever.

The bad haircuts, bad costumes, earrings, etc, all show what was ridiculous back in the 1990s From the two idiots, Bulk and Skull, to the "duhs", of the main cast, Jason, Trini, Tommy, Kimberly, Billy and Zack, I just want to say one thing: GIVE ME A BREAK!

Saban brought this from Japan, and then Disney bought the rights to this show around five years ago.

Now the public has to endure reruns of this show on the Disney channel and such.

All I can say once again is give me a break! --------------------------------------------- Result 885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Oh [[Geez]]... There are so many other films I [[want]] to see out there... I got stuck with my nephew for the weekend and this is what he [[wanted]] - [[Yeah]]...

I used to watch this show when I was in college...it was [[mindless]], kinda [[fun]], and [[somewhat]] action-oriented. The [[show]] had a good [[heart]] [[tho]]...and the [[characters]] were [[cute]]; no one ever got killed or [[even]] hurt [[badly]]... it was like a [[cartoon]] come to life. [[Cut]] to 2005...What happened? This one doesn't [[work]]. As others have [[said]], there [[simply]] isn't a [[cohesive]] [[story]] and the performances are weird...almost [[annoying]] - [[definitely]] not [[faithful]] to the [[original]] [[characters]]...the [[whole]] [[thing]] is a like a [[Mad]] TV [[skit]] and it [[lasts]] over 100 minutes! This was one of the few times I've been EMBARRASSED [[watching]] a [[film]]. What were they [[thinking]]? As [[best]] I can [[tell]], must've been for the product marketing, toys, etc. All I can [[say]] is, let this one die a [[quick]] death. It makes the [[original]] Dukes of Hazzard [[seem]] like [[Masterpiece]] [[Theater]]...

I [[think]] the only [[remake]] left to do from TV is Gilligan's [[Island]]... Good Luck! Oh [[Goddammit]]... There are so many other films I [[wish]] to see out there... I got stuck with my nephew for the weekend and this is what he [[wants]] - [[Yup]]...

I used to watch this show when I was in college...it was [[irrational]], kinda [[droll]], and [[slightly]] action-oriented. The [[showings]] had a good [[crux]] [[shou]]...and the [[personage]] were [[purty]]; no one ever got killed or [[yet]] hurt [[sorely]]... it was like a [[cartoons]] come to life. [[Slice]] to 2005...What happened? This one doesn't [[collaborate]]. As others have [[say]], there [[exclusively]] isn't a [[uniformity]] [[histories]] and the performances are weird...almost [[exasperating]] - [[unquestionably]] not [[loyal]] to the [[initial]] [[attribute]]...the [[together]] [[stuff]] is a like a [[Crazy]] TV [[sketch]] and it [[extends]] over 100 minutes! This was one of the few times I've been EMBARRASSED [[staring]] a [[cinema]]. What were they [[ideology]]? As [[optimum]] I can [[say]], must've been for the product marketing, toys, etc. All I can [[said]] is, let this one die a [[rapids]] death. It makes the [[preliminary]] Dukes of Hazzard [[seems]] like [[Centerpiece]] [[Drama]]...

I [[thought]] the only [[redo]] left to do from TV is Gilligan's [[Lsland]]... Good Luck! --------------------------------------------- Result 886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] There is great detail in A Bug's [[Life]]. Everything is [[covered]]. The film looks great and the animation is sometimes jaw-dropping. The film isn't too terribly orignal, it's basically a modern take on Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, only with bugs. I enjoyed the character interaction however and the bad [[guys]] in this film actually [[seemed]] bad. It seems that Disney usually makes their bad guys carbon copy cut-outs. The grasshoppers are menacing and Hopper, the lead bad guy, was a brillant creation. [[Check]] this one out. There is great detail in A Bug's [[Iife]]. Everything is [[covers]]. The film looks great and the animation is sometimes jaw-dropping. The film isn't too terribly orignal, it's basically a modern take on Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, only with bugs. I enjoyed the character interaction however and the bad [[lads]] in this film actually [[looked]] bad. It seems that Disney usually makes their bad guys carbon copy cut-outs. The grasshoppers are menacing and Hopper, the lead bad guy, was a brillant creation. [[Audit]] this one out. --------------------------------------------- Result 887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Goodnight, Mister Tom begins in an [[impossibly]] exquisite village in the south of England where the sun always seems to shine. Before we have much idea of the period we hear a radio announcement of the declaration of World War II. Soon a train blowing clouds of steam brings refugee children from London and when shy little William is billeted with reluctant, gruff old Tom (who you just know will turn out to have a heart of gold) our tale begins.

And what a [[load]] of sentimental [[claptrap]] it is. In fact it's just the old odd-couple buddy formula. Aren't any new stories being written?

As I suggested there's hardly any period feel in the village and not much more in London apart from the odd old ambulance rattling around. And certainly no hint of the horror of the Blitz as London's citizens file politely into air-raid shelters. Even when the local schoolteacher's husband is declared missing presumed killed, he is later restored to life.

I found `Goodnight, Mister Tom' cliched and obvious and John Thaw's accent conjured up a picture of Ronnie Barker of the Two Ronnies with a straw in his mouth doing his `country bumpkin' accent.

Incidentally my [[wife]] enjoyed this movie for all the reasons that I [[disliked]] it and looking at fellow-imdb reviewers I seem to be in a minority of one.

Goodnight, Mister Tom begins in an [[appallingly]] exquisite village in the south of England where the sun always seems to shine. Before we have much idea of the period we hear a radio announcement of the declaration of World War II. Soon a train blowing clouds of steam brings refugee children from London and when shy little William is billeted with reluctant, gruff old Tom (who you just know will turn out to have a heart of gold) our tale begins.

And what a [[loads]] of sentimental [[fiddlesticks]] it is. In fact it's just the old odd-couple buddy formula. Aren't any new stories being written?

As I suggested there's hardly any period feel in the village and not much more in London apart from the odd old ambulance rattling around. And certainly no hint of the horror of the Blitz as London's citizens file politely into air-raid shelters. Even when the local schoolteacher's husband is declared missing presumed killed, he is later restored to life.

I found `Goodnight, Mister Tom' cliched and obvious and John Thaw's accent conjured up a picture of Ronnie Barker of the Two Ronnies with a straw in his mouth doing his `country bumpkin' accent.

Incidentally my [[femme]] enjoyed this movie for all the reasons that I [[proscribed]] it and looking at fellow-imdb reviewers I seem to be in a minority of one.

--------------------------------------------- Result 888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a fan of Paris Je'Taime, I went to see New York, I Love You with very high expectations. I gladly walked out with all my expectations met. It was funny, sweet, fast-paced, and entertaining. The film starts out with two cab hoppers (Bradley Cooper & Justin Bartha) trying to get to the same area but arguing which way to go. That was funny, and then the film goes into some of the best skits I have ever seen anywhere. There were four amazing ones out of all the good ones. Those four I will start talking about. One features Shia LaBeouf as a bellhop at a hotel who finds love in an old lady. The next one features Orlando Bloom as a music maker who is doing business with a woman played by Christina Ricci. Another one features Anton Yelchin and Olivia Thirbly as two people going to prom, Thirbly's character being handicapped. The best one features Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman as a bickering old couple. I will bring to your attention that Nataile Portman makes an impressive directorial debut directing, and writing a skit about a caretaker, and Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q are excellent as a flirting man and a hooker. New York, I Love You is definitely as good, if not better than the 2006 Paris Je'Taime. The skits are well-paced, and the film shows how indie films should really be. The film, however, does not have as many famous directors as Paris Je'Taime, which is why it was fantastic to live up to its excellence. If you want to laugh, see some great dramatic effects, see an amazing amount of great performances, and just plain be entertained then definitely go see New York, I Love You. --------------------------------------------- Result 889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[Horrible]] acting, [[Bad]] [[story]] line, [[cheesy]] [[makeup]], and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I have never [[seen]] a [[worse]] [[movie]] in my [[life]], 5 minutes in I [[decided]] to fast [[forward]] to see if [[anything]] [[redeeming]] [[would]] happen... It didn't. (Aside from a [[nice]] breast [[shot]]) The [[movie]] [[apparently]] was filmed in some furniture [[warehouse]], and the same [[warehouse]] was [[used]] for at [[least]] 90% of the sets. You [[even]] see this same red chair in [[several]] [[different]] "[[locations]]" [[If]] you are [[going]] to make a [[film]] at [[least]] rent an office [[building]] and an apartment, not some [[warehouse]] which will echo all your actor's dialog.. ([[Note]] to producers) [[Renting]] a [[small]] office space and an apartment for a month is much cheaper than an [[entire]] warehouse, and both are [[quite]] a [[bit]] more versatile and [[believable]]) If you [[spend]] your [[money]] to [[rent]] this people I hope you got it with a [[return]] guarantee... You will be demanding your [[money]] back... I only spent $2.99 to [[rent]] this [[tonight]] and I feel ripped off. [[Abhorrent]] acting, [[Naughty]] [[conte]] line, [[corny]] [[composition]], and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I have never [[watched]] a [[worst]] [[filmmaking]] in my [[living]], 5 minutes in I [[opted]] to fast [[forwards]] to see if [[nothing]] [[redeem]] [[could]] happen... It didn't. (Aside from a [[handsome]] breast [[filmed]]) The [[filmmaking]] [[reportedly]] was filmed in some furniture [[stockroom]], and the same [[warehouses]] was [[utilized]] for at [[less]] 90% of the sets. You [[yet]] see this same red chair in [[many]] [[several]] "[[sites]]" [[Though]] you are [[go]] to make a [[filmmaking]] at [[less]] rent an office [[architectural]] and an apartment, not some [[stockroom]] which will echo all your actor's dialog.. ([[Remark]] to producers) [[Rentals]] a [[minimal]] office space and an apartment for a month is much cheaper than an [[overall]] warehouse, and both are [[pretty]] a [[bitten]] more versatile and [[dependable]]) If you [[outlay]] your [[cash]] to [[tenancy]] this people I hope you got it with a [[returnee]] guarantee... You will be demanding your [[cash]] back... I only spent $2.99 to [[rents]] this [[monday]] and I feel ripped off. --------------------------------------------- Result 890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I [[fell]] in [[love]] with this silent [[action]] [[drama]]. Kurt [[Russell]] and only Kurt Russell [[could]] have [[played]] this so well. Raised from [[childhood]] to [[know]] [[nothing]] but war and [[fighting]], Todd (Kurt Russell) is [[dumped]] on a [[planet]] after being [[made]] obsolete by genetically engineered soldiers.

The stage is set and another classic [[icon]] of [[action]] [[movies]] was [[born]] - SOLDIER. Not Rambo, not Schwarzenegger, not [[Bruce]] Willis, not Mel Gibson, not Jason Statham - Kurt Russell owns this role and [[made]] it [[entirely]] his - [[original]], [[daring]], and all too human. I miss the [[fact]] that sequels were never [[made]].

10/10

-LD

_________

my faith: http://www.angelfire.[[com]]/ny5/jbc33/ I [[decreased]] in [[amour]] with this silent [[efforts]] [[tragedy]]. Kurt [[Russel]] and only Kurt Russell [[wo]] have [[effected]] this so well. Raised from [[children]] to [[savoir]] [[none]] but war and [[battling]], Todd (Kurt Russell) is [[dump]] on a [[globe]] after being [[introduced]] obsolete by genetically engineered soldiers.

The stage is set and another classic [[icons]] of [[measures]] [[cinematography]] was [[birthed]] - SOLDIER. Not Rambo, not Schwarzenegger, not [[Bros]] Willis, not Mel Gibson, not Jason Statham - Kurt Russell owns this role and [[introduced]] it [[perfectly]] his - [[initial]], [[bold]], and all too human. I miss the [[facto]] that sequels were never [[introduced]].

10/10

-LD

_________

my faith: http://www.angelfire.[[coms]]/ny5/jbc33/ --------------------------------------------- Result 891 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] A chemist [[develops]] a fabric that never gets dirty or wears out, but it is seen as a threat to the survival of various industries. In this [[delightful]] Ealing Studios comedy, Guinness is [[marvelous]] as the mild-mannered but persistent chemist. Greenwood, with her sensual voice, plays the love interest; Parker is her harried father. Thesiger is amusing as a patriarch of the fabric industry. While [[telling]] an engaging [[story]], the film [[also]] raises some [[intriguing]] [[questions]] about science, the economy, and politics. It is adeptly directed by Mackendrick, who [[would]] go on to make "The Ladykillers" and the sublime "Sweet Smell of Success" later in the 1950s. A chemist [[develop]] a fabric that never gets dirty or wears out, but it is seen as a threat to the survival of various industries. In this [[wondrous]] Ealing Studios comedy, Guinness is [[beautiful]] as the mild-mannered but persistent chemist. Greenwood, with her sensual voice, plays the love interest; Parker is her harried father. Thesiger is amusing as a patriarch of the fabric industry. While [[saying]] an engaging [[conte]], the film [[further]] raises some [[exciting]] [[matters]] about science, the economy, and politics. It is adeptly directed by Mackendrick, who [[ought]] go on to make "The Ladykillers" and the sublime "Sweet Smell of Success" later in the 1950s. --------------------------------------------- Result 892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A [[surprising]] misfire from the [[usually]] reliable Larry Cohen ([[God]] Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full [[Moon]] [[High]] tries so [[hard]] to be [[funny]] and fails [[miserably]], [[even]] with [[decent]] [[turns]] by [[Ed]] McMahon(!) and Kenneth [[Mars]]. [[Alan]] Arkin looks embarrassed [[throughout]] his performance and son [[Adam]] [[simply]] [[looks]] numb. This makes [[Teen]] Wolf look [[like]] a [[comedy]] classic. A [[impressed]] misfire from the [[generally]] reliable Larry Cohen ([[Lord]] Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full [[Luna]] [[Higher]] tries so [[harsh]] to be [[humorous]] and fails [[spectacularly]], [[yet]] with [[presentable]] [[revolves]] by [[Comp]] McMahon(!) and Kenneth [[Mar]]. [[Alana]] Arkin looks embarrassed [[during]] his performance and son [[Adem]] [[mere]] [[seem]] numb. This makes [[Teenage]] Wolf look [[iike]] a [[humour]] classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Greenaway's films pose as [[clever]], erudite and [[innovative]]. [[Yet]] his style and grammar originate and remind viewers of [[films]] [[made]] in the [[World]] [[War]] 1 era of film-making: the [[frame]] composition, [[use]] of mid-shot, the static camera. It may be well to rub against mainstream [[movies]] with this [[style]] but it is not [[new]]. [[Perhaps]] like that other "innovator", TS Eliot, he draws more from the [[past]] than in [[looking]] forward as an authentic innovator would or [[could]].

[[Yet]] Greenaway's [[biggest]] [[failing]] is that he cannot write. His dialog and even plot structure is [[mechanical]] and logical but without the [[vitality]] of another dramatic logician, Brecht. Where this weakness is most apparent is in his humor, which is poised and logical, so the joke is dead before it's delivered. The result is [[tedium]]: if it's not funny, it has failed: ask a stand-up comedian to justify their act if the audience doesn't respond. Perhaps the well-read director could learn something from Freud on humor.

Finally, like Woody Allen, Greenaway has manipulated his [[actors]] over the years to work like clones. They speak the lines with a [[bored]], smug [[air]] like [[narcissistic]] adolescents.

This film, despite its design and [[lighting]], is meretricious. Greenaway's films pose as [[shrewd]], erudite and [[revolutionary]]. [[Nonetheless]] his style and grammar originate and remind viewers of [[film]] [[effected]] in the [[Monde]] [[Warfare]] 1 era of film-making: the [[framework]] composition, [[utilise]] of mid-shot, the static camera. It may be well to rub against mainstream [[filmmaking]] with this [[elegance]] but it is not [[novel]]. [[Maybe]] like that other "innovator", TS Eliot, he draws more from the [[bygone]] than in [[researching]] forward as an authentic innovator would or [[wo]].

[[Though]] Greenaway's [[bigger]] [[weakness]] is that he cannot write. His dialog and even plot structure is [[mechanistic]] and logical but without the [[dynamism]] of another dramatic logician, Brecht. Where this weakness is most apparent is in his humor, which is poised and logical, so the joke is dead before it's delivered. The result is [[drudgery]]: if it's not funny, it has failed: ask a stand-up comedian to justify their act if the audience doesn't respond. Perhaps the well-read director could learn something from Freud on humor.

Finally, like Woody Allen, Greenaway has manipulated his [[protagonists]] over the years to work like clones. They speak the lines with a [[drilled]], smug [[airline]] like [[narcissist]] adolescents.

This film, despite its design and [[light]], is meretricious. --------------------------------------------- Result 894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie was 100% boring, i [[swear]] i [[almost]] [[died]] from boredom at the [[theater]]. It [[wasnt]] [[funny]] and didnt really hve that much [[action]] in it [[either]], it was BORING and i hope whoever out there that liked this [[movie]], [[god]] be with you in the future when you [[find]] out what this movie was [[really]] like and [[try]] to jump off a bridge or [[something]] like that This movie was 100% boring, i [[cuss]] i [[hardly]] [[perished]] from boredom at the [[theaters]]. It [[actualy]] [[hilarious]] and didnt really hve that much [[measures]] in it [[nor]], it was BORING and i hope whoever out there that liked this [[filmmaking]], [[seigneur]] be with you in the future when you [[found]] out what this movie was [[truly]] like and [[tried]] to jump off a bridge or [[somethin]] like that --------------------------------------------- Result 895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Mean-spirited, ugly, [[nasty]] retro-action [[thriller]], about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any [[desire]] to [[apologize]] for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and [[see]] this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a [[powerful]] example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and [[effective]]. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to [[ignore]]. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a [[great]] performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie. Mean-spirited, ugly, [[squalid]] retro-action [[thrillers]], about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any [[wishing]] to [[apology]] for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and [[seeing]] this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a [[forceful]] example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and [[efficacious]]. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to [[flout]]. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a [[wondrous]] performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] i got a copy from the writer of this movie on soulseek. I have to say it is [[pathetic]] and just plain painful to watch the two cops act, but i watched the movie as a joke and since it is a homage to august's underground which i happened to have seen it is in my [[book]] as an awesome movie. Its quality and everything about it is pretty [[bad]] but its entertaining and something to talk about amongst your friends. Reminds me of troma but good stuff. I recommend seeing this under two conditions, if you are [[bored]] and need a good laugh, or high, otherwise just let it be. Recommended download for sure. o and the killings are pretty funny. like when the zombie rips the Satan worshipers dick off and stabs someone in the head with it. i got a copy from the writer of this movie on soulseek. I have to say it is [[regrettable]] and just plain painful to watch the two cops act, but i watched the movie as a joke and since it is a homage to august's underground which i happened to have seen it is in my [[ledger]] as an awesome movie. Its quality and everything about it is pretty [[unfavourable]] but its entertaining and something to talk about amongst your friends. Reminds me of troma but good stuff. I recommend seeing this under two conditions, if you are [[boring]] and need a good laugh, or high, otherwise just let it be. Recommended download for sure. o and the killings are pretty funny. like when the zombie rips the Satan worshipers dick off and stabs someone in the head with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It's really [[rare]] that you get an inside [[view]] at a media [[deception]] that has been so [[widely]] [[reported]] as [[official]] "truth" and [[caught]] so [[many]] "news" [[agencies]] with their pants down. This movie, in my view, deserves [[every]] [[price]] there is in [[journalism]] - it's objective (yes!), [[courageous]] and a [[real]] "[[scoop]]". It can do without comment, [[fake]] scenes or leading [[questions]] - [[everyone]], including [[Chavez]] equally [[gets]] to make fools of themselves in their own words. The filmmakers "only" had to keep track of events and keep their cameras rolling.

The Venezuelan elite teaches us "How to depose of a President and sell it as a victory of democracy". It's amazing that they lost in the end - so far. From what I know, the biggest TV station involved only got its terrestrial license revoked, they're still broadcasting via cable and satellite. I highly doubt whether George W. or Barack Obama would be that tolerant after an attempted coup. But then, they don't have to worry.

The fact that the "Chavez supporters shoot innocent civilians" scam was so willingly repeated around the world reveals just how biased the so-called "free" (established) media really has become, or has always been, only more so. An important lesson to anyone interested in what "really" goes on in the world.

The famous "objectivity" challenge always comes into play when journalists dare to oppose the mainstream view, or reveal unwelcome facts that accuse "us" - it has been true with the effects of the Atomic bomb, the US secret history of spreading "democracy" around the world or the Iraq war that, according to Johns Hopkins, has killed 1,3 million Iraquis by now, not to mention the 60,000 Afghans (in 2003) that are never mentioned. To be objective, Saddam Hussein was less damaging to his people than the US. And the US is ready & willing to be more damaging to the Iranians that he was.

I'm quite curious about the upcoming trial of some Khmer Rouge leaders before the International Tribunal in The Hague, whether there will be any mention of "our" involvement in supporting and training Pol Pot's guerrillas in the 80's, when they had been largely defeated by the Vietnamese. Probably not.

All the more reason to turn to the Independent media for balance, if not exposure of fraud. It's really [[uncommon]] that you get an inside [[opinion]] at a media [[misrepresentation]] that has been so [[broadly]] [[stated]] as [[servant]] "truth" and [[capturing]] so [[various]] "news" [[organs]] with their pants down. This movie, in my view, deserves [[any]] [[cost]] there is in [[columnist]] - it's objective (yes!), [[bold]] and a [[actual]] "[[spoon]]". It can do without comment, [[fakes]] scenes or leading [[subjects]] - [[anybody]], including [[Guzman]] equally [[obtains]] to make fools of themselves in their own words. The filmmakers "only" had to keep track of events and keep their cameras rolling.

The Venezuelan elite teaches us "How to depose of a President and sell it as a victory of democracy". It's amazing that they lost in the end - so far. From what I know, the biggest TV station involved only got its terrestrial license revoked, they're still broadcasting via cable and satellite. I highly doubt whether George W. or Barack Obama would be that tolerant after an attempted coup. But then, they don't have to worry.

The fact that the "Chavez supporters shoot innocent civilians" scam was so willingly repeated around the world reveals just how biased the so-called "free" (established) media really has become, or has always been, only more so. An important lesson to anyone interested in what "really" goes on in the world.

The famous "objectivity" challenge always comes into play when journalists dare to oppose the mainstream view, or reveal unwelcome facts that accuse "us" - it has been true with the effects of the Atomic bomb, the US secret history of spreading "democracy" around the world or the Iraq war that, according to Johns Hopkins, has killed 1,3 million Iraquis by now, not to mention the 60,000 Afghans (in 2003) that are never mentioned. To be objective, Saddam Hussein was less damaging to his people than the US. And the US is ready & willing to be more damaging to the Iranians that he was.

I'm quite curious about the upcoming trial of some Khmer Rouge leaders before the International Tribunal in The Hague, whether there will be any mention of "our" involvement in supporting and training Pol Pot's guerrillas in the 80's, when they had been largely defeated by the Vietnamese. Probably not.

All the more reason to turn to the Independent media for balance, if not exposure of fraud. --------------------------------------------- Result 898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] What a [[wonderful]], fanciful [[movie]] "[[Stardust]]" is.

I could easily end it with that one statement and [[suffice]] to say, one could take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.

At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, "Stardust" makes us remember why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, "Stardust" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike [[glee]] we all long for.

"Stardust" is [[full]] of all the [[characters]] we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.

"Stardust" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.

The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.

Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.

Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.

The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.

Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.

Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in "Pirates of the Caribbean" - never has death been so funny.

But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.

His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!

Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala "Blithe Spirit" and "High Spirits".

Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was "Layer Cake", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.

"Stardust" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. "Stardust" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect. What a [[wondrous]], fanciful [[kino]] "[[Dust]]" is.

I could easily end it with that one statement and [[adequate]] to say, one could take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.

At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, "Stardust" makes us remember why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, "Stardust" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike [[gladness]] we all long for.

"Stardust" is [[fullest]] of all the [[nature]] we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.

"Stardust" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.

The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.

Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.

Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.

The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.

Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.

Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in "Pirates of the Caribbean" - never has death been so funny.

But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.

His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!

Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala "Blithe Spirit" and "High Spirits".

Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was "Layer Cake", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.

"Stardust" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. "Stardust" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect. --------------------------------------------- Result 899 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is possibly the best short crime drama I've ever seen. The acting is superb especially Amanda Burton who's character goes from scary to sweet to disturbing to sad and then some...She does an amazing job balancing Rachels/Carlas feelings and acting out the pain of someone who's lost a child, its so believable that it feels more like a real life story then a drama. The other actors are of course great too which they usually are in British TV/Film. The ending,which I'm not going to give away,is fantastic mainly because you don't really get one... (you'll get what I mean after you've seen it) This is well worth buying and seeing over and over again and if you're not touched by this you're one cold hearted person. --------------------------------------------- Result 900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] In 1692 [[Salem]], a [[devious]] child's [[lies]] about a slave's [[involvement]] in [[witchcraft]] [[sends]] an [[entire]] community into an uproar. [[Costume]] [[drama]] [[starring]] Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, [[though]] [[neither]] is it a [[vivid]] depiction of [[contagious]] [[hysteria]]. [[Worked]] on by three [[writers]] ([[Walter]] Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and [[Bradley]] [[King]]), the [[story]] [[elements]] are [[rather]] interesting (especially [[coming]] out of Hollywood in 1937), [[though]] to [[anyone]] who has since read [[Arthur]] Miller's "The Crucible", the hoked-up melodrama on [[display]] here won't be tolerated for very long. [[Biggest]] [[problem]] with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from **** In 1692 [[Salim]], a [[duplicitous]] child's [[lying]] about a slave's [[involvements]] in [[sorcery]] [[dispatch]] an [[whole]] community into an uproar. [[Standup]] [[tragedy]] [[featuring]] Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, [[although]] [[either]] is it a [[lifelike]] depiction of [[infectious]] [[frenzy]]. [[Functioned]] on by three [[screenwriters]] ([[Walters]] Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and [[Bernardo]] [[Emperor]]), the [[fairytales]] [[components]] are [[quite]] interesting (especially [[incoming]] out of Hollywood in 1937), [[while]] to [[everyone]] who has since read [[Artur]] Miller's "The Crucible", the hoked-up melodrama on [[visualize]] here won't be tolerated for very long. [[Wider]] [[issues]] with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 901 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bored Londoners Henry Kendall and Joan Barry (as Fred and Emily Hill) receive an advance on an inheritance. They use the money go traveling. Their lives become more exciting as they begin relationships with exotic Betty Amann (for Mr. Kendall) and lonely Percy Marmont (for Ms. Barry). But, they remain as boring as they were before. Arguably bored director Alfred Hitchcock tries to liven up the well-titled (as quoted in the film, from Shakespeare's "The Tempest") "Rich and Strange" by ordering up some camera trickery. An opening homage to King Vidor's "The Crowd" is the highlight. The low point may be the couple dining on Chinese prepared cat.

*** Rich and Strange (12/10/31) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Henry Kendall, Joan Barry, Percy Marmont, Elsie Randolph --------------------------------------------- Result 902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] [[Greetings]] again from the [[darkness]]. What ever [[happened]] to the [[great]] Barry Levinson? He directed two of my all-time [[favorites]] in "Avalon" and "[[Diner]]". He had some fine [[movies]] as well ("Rainman"), but [[always]] [[provided]] [[something]] of interest ... until now. I [[believe]] the [[worst]] thing you can ever say about a [[comedy]] is that it is boring. "[[Envy]]" is the definition of boring. Never of [[big]] [[fan]] of pure slap stick ("[[Dumb]] and [[Dumber]]"), I was just [[stunned]] at how god-awful this [[movie]] is. There are [[maybe]] 2 chuckles in the [[whole]] thing - if you can [[pay]] attention that long. The [[best]] [[part]] of the [[film]] is the [[running]] gag of the title song by a Redbone sound-alike. [[If]] the [[film]] had been [[written]] as well as the song, it would have been [[tolerable]]. Rachel Weisz is a [[wonderful]] actress and I [[realize]] they all [[want]] to do [[comedy]] (even Julianne Moore), but the [[real]] [[world]] [[exposes]] one [[weaknesses]]. SNL cast [[member]] Amy Poehler is her [[usual]] over the top in her role as [[trailer]] park [[trash]] [[turned]] princess. The [[disaster]] of the [[film]] is Jack [[Black]] and Ben Stiller. The first [[work]] commute together [[flashes]] some [[promise]], but after that their [[chemistry]] disappears due to the poor [[script]]. This [[script]] is like most of Jack Black's character's [[ideas]] - not a [[bad]] [[thought]], but no [[hope]] for [[success]]. [[Hi]] again from the [[dark]]. What ever [[transpired]] to the [[huge]] Barry Levinson? He directed two of my all-time [[favorite]] in "Avalon" and "[[Restaurant]]". He had some fine [[theater]] as well ("Rainman"), but [[constantly]] [[gave]] [[somethin]] of interest ... until now. I [[believing]] the [[hardest]] thing you can ever say about a [[comic]] is that it is boring. "[[Jealous]]" is the definition of boring. Never of [[huge]] [[breather]] of pure slap stick ("[[Stupid]] and [[Stupider]]"), I was just [[surprised]] at how god-awful this [[filmmaking]] is. There are [[probably]] 2 chuckles in the [[together]] thing - if you can [[salaries]] attention that long. The [[optimum]] [[party]] of the [[filmmaking]] is the [[implementing]] gag of the title song by a Redbone sound-alike. [[Though]] the [[cinematic]] had been [[wrote]] as well as the song, it would have been [[allowable]]. Rachel Weisz is a [[sumptuous]] actress and I [[realizing]] they all [[wish]] to do [[farce]] (even Julianne Moore), but the [[veritable]] [[monde]] [[depicts]] one [[demerits]]. SNL cast [[members]] Amy Poehler is her [[normal]] over the top in her role as [[trailers]] park [[litter]] [[transformed]] princess. The [[calamity]] of the [[flick]] is Jack [[Calico]] and Ben Stiller. The first [[collaborate]] commute together [[flashing]] some [[promising]], but after that their [[chemicals]] disappears due to the poor [[hyphen]]. This [[screenplay]] is like most of Jack Black's character's [[insights]] - not a [[negative]] [[thinking]], but no [[amal]] for [[avail]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 903 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A team of [[archaeologists]] uncover a [[real]] [[treasure]] – the [[Crown]] of the Queen of Sheeba. From Egypt, the crown is to be transferred via [[steamship]] to San Francisco. But it won't be an [[easy]] [[journey]]. There are plenty of would-be [[thieves]] who would love to [[get]] their hands on the priceless [[jewels]] [[contained]] in the crown. [[Fortunately]] for all [[involved]], [[Mr]]. [[Moto]] is on hand to [[guard]] the crown on its [[journey]]. However, that doesn't [[mean]] [[someone]] won't [[try]] to [[get]] their hands on the treasure.

After the [[disappointment]] of Mr. Moto's [[Gamble]], I went into [[Mr]]. Moto [[Takes]] a Vacation hoping for the [[best]], but, [[admittedly]], fearing the [[worst]]. But [[within]] the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that [[features]] anything to do with [[archaeological]] digs in Egypt. And [[seeing]] Moto disguised as a German archaeologist ([[Imagine]] that, [[Peter]] Lorre [[playing]] a German?), the beginning scenes [[really]] [[drew]] me in. [[While]] the [[movie]] may have [[quickly]] [[shifted]] to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as [[enjoyable]]. Dark, sinister [[characters]] lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; [[sophisticated]] and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of [[elements]] found in a [[lot]] of the really good 1930s mysteries that I [[love]]. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's [[got]] 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the [[always]] [[enjoyable]] Lionel Atwill in a nice [[little]] role, [[comic]] [[relief]] from [[G]].P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a [[return]] to [[form]] for [[Mr]]. Moto. I've already [[mentioned]] his [[disguise]] in the movie's [[opening]] scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out [[near]] the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't [[even]] [[mentioned]] the [[wonderful]] performance [[turned]] in by Lorre. Any [[way]] you [[look]] at it, Mr. Moto [[Takes]] a [[Vacation]] is a [[winner]].

As much as I [[hate]] that the [[Mr]]. Moto [[series]] had to end after this [[installment]], it's understandable when you [[think]] about it. WWII was just [[around]] the [[corner]]. And after [[Pearl]] Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note. A team of [[archeologists]] uncover a [[actual]] [[tesoro]] – the [[Krone]] of the Queen of Sheeba. From Egypt, the crown is to be transferred via [[steamboat]] to San Francisco. But it won't be an [[simple]] [[travelling]]. There are plenty of would-be [[bandits]] who would love to [[gets]] their hands on the priceless [[gems]] [[contain]] in the crown. [[Hopefully]] for all [[participating]], [[Mister]]. [[Motorcycle]] is on hand to [[guards]] the crown on its [[travelling]]. However, that doesn't [[imply]] [[person]] won't [[trying]] to [[gets]] their hands on the treasure.

After the [[frustration]] of Mr. Moto's [[Bets]], I went into [[Mister]]. Moto [[Pick]] a Vacation hoping for the [[better]], but, [[assuredly]], fearing the [[gravest]]. But [[inside]] the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that [[traits]] anything to do with [[archeological]] digs in Egypt. And [[see]] Moto disguised as a German archaeologist ([[Imagining]] that, [[Pieter]] Lorre [[play]] a German?), the beginning scenes [[truthfully]] [[called]] me in. [[Though]] the [[cinema]] may have [[immediately]] [[changed]] to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as [[nice]]. Dark, sinister [[attribute]] lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; [[complicated]] and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of [[components]] found in a [[lots]] of the really good 1930s mysteries that I [[amour]]. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's [[did]] 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the [[continually]] [[nice]] Lionel Atwill in a nice [[small]] role, [[comedian]] [[succour]] from [[gs]].P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a [[returning]] to [[forma]] for [[Mister]]. Moto. I've already [[quoted]] his [[disguises]] in the movie's [[commencement]] scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out [[nearer]] the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't [[yet]] [[talked]] the [[noteworthy]] performance [[transformed]] in by Lorre. Any [[paths]] you [[peek]] at it, Mr. Moto [[Pick]] a [[Holiday]] is a [[winners]].

As much as I [[hated]] that the [[Mister]]. Moto [[serial]] had to end after this [[instalment]], it's understandable when you [[ideas]] about it. WWII was just [[roundabout]] the [[nook]]. And after [[Perl]] Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note. --------------------------------------------- Result 904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] After having [[seen]] Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.

When I started [[watching]] this movie nothing really [[seemed]] unusual until I got to the "Dueling Banjos" scene. In that scene the [[brutality]] and edge of this film is [[truly]] [[visible]]. As I watched [[Drew]](Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a [[seemingly]] retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.

As the plot goes it's very [[believable]] and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and [[suspense]] I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.

The acting is universally [[excellent]]. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the [[great]] cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest [[thing]] of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.

One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert "Cowboy" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.

Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie. After having [[noticed]] Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.

When I started [[staring]] this movie nothing really [[appeared]] unusual until I got to the "Dueling Banjos" scene. In that scene the [[cruelty]] and edge of this film is [[honestly]] [[overt]]. As I watched [[Phoned]](Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a [[allegedly]] retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.

As the plot goes it's very [[reliable]] and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and [[wait]] I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.

The acting is universally [[funky]]. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the [[wondrous]] cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest [[stuff]] of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.

One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert "Cowboy" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.

Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 905 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Sudden [[Impact]] was [[overall]] better than The Enforcer in my [[opinion]]. It was [[building]] up to be a great [[movie]], but then I [[saw]] the villain(s) and was [[disappointed]].

[[Sudden]] [[Impact]] was [[different]] than the [[previous]] installments. The plot went a different direction in this [[movie]], as Dirty Harry doesn't [[take]] as much of a police approach this [[time]] [[around]]. We also don't [[see]] the villain(s) until [[later]], which means [[less]] screen [[time]] for them, which is better for us all.

Clint [[Eastwood]] once again steals the [[show]] as [[Dirty]] [[Harry]], [[enough]] [[said]]. Pat Hingle was [[enjoyable]] as Chief Jannings, Harry's [[new]] [[assigned]] boss. Bradford Dillman [[seemed]] to [[change]] his [[name]] to [[Captain]] Briggs here, either [[way]], he wasn't any different. [[Michael]] Currie is decent as Lt. Donnelly, Harry's annoying [[superior]]. I personally [[enjoyed]] Kevyn [[Major]] Howard as Hawkins, the young punk who has a [[vendetta]] against [[Harry]]. [[Albert]] Popwell was [[excellent]] as Horace, Harry's [[buddy]]. Audrie J. Neenan was good as Ray Parkins, a [[famous]] lesbian [[around]] town. Jack Thibeau was well cast as Kruger, a [[pervert]]. Now for the really bad part. [[Sandra]] [[Locke]], Eastwood's long-time lover was [[horribly]] miscast as Jennifer Spencer, Harry's love interest. And Paul [[Drake]] was just horrible as [[Mick]].

The movie [[would]] have been so much better if not for better [[writing]] and acting on some parts.

8/10. Sudden [[Impacted]] was [[holistic]] better than The Enforcer in my [[vista]]. It was [[constructing]] up to be a great [[cinematography]], but then I [[noticed]] the villain(s) and was [[disenchanted]].

[[Abrupt]] [[Influenced]] was [[dissimilar]] than the [[former]] installments. The plot went a different direction in this [[cinematography]], as Dirty Harry doesn't [[taking]] as much of a police approach this [[moment]] [[about]]. We also don't [[behold]] the villain(s) until [[thereafter]], which means [[minimum]] screen [[moment]] for them, which is better for us all.

Clint [[Nolan]] once again steals the [[showings]] as [[Filthy]] [[Harri]], [[adequately]] [[say]]. Pat Hingle was [[nice]] as Chief Jannings, Harry's [[newest]] [[allocated]] boss. Bradford Dillman [[sounded]] to [[amendments]] his [[behalf]] to [[Commander]] Briggs here, either [[manner]], he wasn't any different. [[Michaela]] Currie is decent as Lt. Donnelly, Harry's annoying [[upper]]. I personally [[liked]] Kevyn [[Principal]] Howard as Hawkins, the young punk who has a [[revengeful]] against [[Hari]]. [[Alberto]] Popwell was [[super]] as Horace, Harry's [[boyfriend]]. Audrie J. Neenan was good as Ray Parkins, a [[celebrated]] lesbian [[about]] town. Jack Thibeau was well cast as Kruger, a [[kinky]]. Now for the really bad part. [[Sondra]] [[Luc]], Eastwood's long-time lover was [[terribly]] miscast as Jennifer Spencer, Harry's love interest. And Paul [[Gregg]] was just horrible as [[Mike]].

The movie [[could]] have been so much better if not for better [[handwriting]] and acting on some parts.

8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If only Eddie [[Murphy]] were born 10 [[years]] [[later]]. Then we'd all [[remember]] it. But [[even]] I was only 4 when it came out. [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] it [[yet]], rent Dr. Dolittle, [[Showtime]], I [[spy]], Pluto Nash and all Eddie's family [[comedy]] [[movies]] - then watch this. Hands down, you'll [[laugh]] 90% of the [[time]]. The other 10% you'll be wiping the [[tears]] from your [[eyes]].

It [[really]] [[needs]] to be watched more then once to [[understand]] all the jokes. From crude [[humor]] to a [[joke]] for [[kids]]!(if you've [[seen]] it you'll laugh here) - you'll [[love]] his [[stuff]]. If you can, (or are a [[big]] fan) [[try]] to [[download]] clips from Eddie's acts. Allot of the [[shows]] are [[different]] as you'd [[imagine]] and he has [[even]] more funny jokes.

But this is like the "[[best]] of" [[Eddie]] [[Murphy]] 'X-rated' if you will.

And all I can [[say]] is please don't watch Delirious if you don't like [[comedy]], don't have a [[sense]] of humor or are not fun to hang out with. You will only put down this [[great]] Eddie Murphy [[classic]] and [[possibly]] [[make]] [[someone]] [[miss]] out on it.

If you [[wanna]] know how [[Eddie]] [[got]] Beverly [[Hills]] [[Cop]] and [[got]] [[famous]] from it- [[Delirious]] is it. If only Eddie [[Murph]] were born 10 [[ages]] [[subsequently]]. Then we'd all [[rember]] it. But [[yet]] I was only 4 when it came out. [[Unless]] you haven't [[watched]] it [[even]], rent Dr. Dolittle, [[Sharpish]], I [[spying]], Pluto Nash and all Eddie's family [[parody]] [[cinematography]] - then watch this. Hands down, you'll [[laughter]] 90% of the [[moment]]. The other 10% you'll be wiping the [[rip]] from your [[eye]].

It [[truthfully]] [[needed]] to be watched more then once to [[understood]] all the jokes. From crude [[comedy]] to a [[kidding]] for [[brats]]!(if you've [[watched]] it you'll laugh here) - you'll [[loves]] his [[thing]]. If you can, (or are a [[substantial]] fan) [[endeavour]] to [[downloads]] clips from Eddie's acts. Allot of the [[showing]] are [[dissimilar]] as you'd [[guess]] and he has [[yet]] more funny jokes.

But this is like the "[[better]] of" [[Eddy]] [[Murph]] 'X-rated' if you will.

And all I can [[said]] is please don't watch Delirious if you don't like [[parody]], don't have a [[sensing]] of humor or are not fun to hang out with. You will only put down this [[wondrous]] Eddie Murphy [[conventional]] and [[potentially]] [[deliver]] [[person]] [[mademoiselle]] out on it.

If you [[desiring]] know how [[Eddy]] [[gets]] Beverly [[Foothills]] [[Policemen]] and [[did]] [[notorious]] from it- [[Delusional]] is it. --------------------------------------------- Result 907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Clint [[Eastwood]] reprises his role as [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] who this [[time]] is on the [[case]] of a [[vigilante]] (Sondra Locke)who is [[killing]] the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival [[many]] years [[ago]]. [[Eastwood]] makes the role his and the [[movie]] is [[mainly]] more action then [[talk]], not that I'm [[complaining]]. [[Sudden]] [[Impact]] is indeed [[enjoyable]] entertainment. Clint [[Nolan]] reprises his role as [[Nasty]] [[Hare]] who this [[period]] is on the [[examples]] of a [[militiaman]] (Sondra Locke)who is [[murdered]] the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival [[several]] years [[earlier]]. [[Nolan]] makes the role his and the [[kino]] is [[essentially]] more action then [[conversation]], not that I'm [[lamenting]]. [[Brusque]] [[Influenced]] is indeed [[nice]] entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "The [[Garden]] of Allah" is a prime [[example]] of "popular women's literature", [[turn]] of the XXth century [[style]], combining all the power of [[unbridled]] erotic and [[exotic]] reveries with the [[stimulating]] glamour of fake mysticism and the sado-masochistic [[bite]] of Catholic guilt. [[Just]] as Jane Eyre couldn't really be happy until her castle [[burned]] down [[around]] her and her lover was [[permanently]] [[maimed]] for his sins, or the heroine of "Rebecca" couldn't [[find]] [[true]] fulfillment in her [[marriage]] until her lordly husband was put on trial for the murder of his [[first]] wife (and her castle [[burned]] down [[around]] her), or [[poor]] [[Psyche]] couldn't [[leave]] well [[enough]] [[alone]] and had to [[extract]] Cupid's [[secret]] at all costs, Domini, the devout [[Catholic]] [[heroine]] of this piece of tripe, can only find true sexual realization by inadvertently [[marrying]] a man who has renounced his sacred religious vows. [[Like]] all such narratives aiming to stimulate the female reader and induce the [[vapours]], this one relies on the [[oldest]] [[tricks]] in the book: basic misunderstandings and the inability to express one's true feelings at the right place and at the right time until it is too late. The logic is that any [[ultimate]] sexual ecstasy can be [[indulged]] in as long as one is willing to eventually pay a [[high]] enough [[price]] for it in atonement in the [[last]] [[act]]. It is Paul Claudel reduced to beauty [[salon]] magazine standards. Oh well... It [[could]] have been much [[worse]] and it [[often]] was...

Without the religious overtones, the film's plot is that of your basic porn [[flick]]: Oversexed monk [[driven]] [[mad]] by [[abstinence]] [[escapes]] to the desert where he has a few rolls in the dunes with a romantic, shapely but naive Catholic [[heiress]] before reintegrating his [[monastery]], all [[passion]] [[spent]], leaving her to [[clean]] up his mess. And I really resent another commentator's [[comparison]] with Anatole France's "Thais", a [[sophisticated]] novel [[whose]] [[intention]] was to [[make]] [[fun]] of the [[whole]] concept of Catholic sexual [[repression]], some of which transpired in Massenet's opera of the same [[name]], [[thankfully]].

But what makes this [[picture]] [[unique]] in the annals of commercial female eroticism, of course, is the [[enormous]] constellation of talents gathered under one banner to make this [[cinematic]] [[wet]] [[dream]] come to [[shimmering]], [[vibrant]] life. [[Imperishable]] Technicolor photography that will outlive us all, a truckload of worthy character actors (including one cute dog), a music score by Max Steiner that seems determined to accomplish the "composed film" that Michael Powell (who, ironically, had a bit part in the 1927 silent version) always dreamed about, tittering at times on the brink of dissonance but always coming through in splendid symphonic, operatic exoticism, a dream-like atmosphere where material considerations are no object, characters travel as if by magic from one spot to the next, dialog is sparse, vague and suggestive, the art direction is close to celestial, flower arrangements appear in the humblest hut or tent, the heroine's wardrobe is inexhaustible and all the male characters are either aristocrats, saints, doomed but horny sinners, mystics or poets.

Ahh... Hollywood! The MGM DVD presentation of this film is bare bones but impeccable. The bit rate is very high throughout, the colour registration is almost always perfect and the 2.0 mono sound truly does justice to Max Steiner's score and to Boyer's penultimate confession.

A historical note on this sort of "women's subject": The following year (1937), Julien Duvivier, visibly inspired by "The Garden of Allah", directed "Carnet de Bal", where a very similar clothes-horse butter-won't-melt-in-her-mouth heroine (widowed after taking care of an ailing husband in the exotic remoteness of some impossibly romantic Alpine lakeside villa) wants to discover what she has missed by looking up the male dancers in her first dance book. She finds them all in time, only to realize that whatever feeling there was at one point between her beaus and herself were either misunderstood, overestimated or else had lifelong tragic consequences. It was Duvivier's cynical way of telling us to beware of impossibly idealistic notions and that we all need to grow up sooner or later. "The [[Huerta]] of Allah" is a prime [[instances]] of "popular women's literature", [[converting]] of the XXth century [[styles]], combining all the power of [[unfettered]] erotic and [[aliens]] reveries with the [[boosting]] glamour of fake mysticism and the sado-masochistic [[mouthful]] of Catholic guilt. [[Righteous]] as Jane Eyre couldn't really be happy until her castle [[burnt]] down [[about]] her and her lover was [[steadily]] [[mutilated]] for his sins, or the heroine of "Rebecca" couldn't [[found]] [[real]] fulfillment in her [[wedding]] until her lordly husband was put on trial for the murder of his [[firstly]] wife (and her castle [[burnt]] down [[about]] her), or [[pauper]] [[Psychology]] couldn't [[letting]] well [[adequately]] [[only]] and had to [[retrieved]] Cupid's [[covert]] at all costs, Domini, the devout [[Catholicism]] [[heroin]] of this piece of tripe, can only find true sexual realization by inadvertently [[wedlock]] a man who has renounced his sacred religious vows. [[Iike]] all such narratives aiming to stimulate the female reader and induce the [[vapors]], this one relies on the [[eldest]] [[gimmicks]] in the book: basic misunderstandings and the inability to express one's true feelings at the right place and at the right time until it is too late. The logic is that any [[final]] sexual ecstasy can be [[indulging]] in as long as one is willing to eventually pay a [[alto]] enough [[pricing]] for it in atonement in the [[final]] [[ley]]. It is Paul Claudel reduced to beauty [[lounge]] magazine standards. Oh well... It [[wo]] have been much [[lousiest]] and it [[normally]] was...

Without the religious overtones, the film's plot is that of your basic porn [[movie]]: Oversexed monk [[fueled]] [[madman]] by [[sobriety]] [[flees]] to the desert where he has a few rolls in the dunes with a romantic, shapely but naive Catholic [[heir]] before reintegrating his [[der]], all [[fascination]] [[expenditures]], leaving her to [[cleanse]] up his mess. And I really resent another commentator's [[comparative]] with Anatole France's "Thais", a [[complex]] novel [[who]] [[intend]] was to [[deliver]] [[droll]] of the [[ensemble]] concept of Catholic sexual [[suppression]], some of which transpired in Massenet's opera of the same [[naming]], [[mercifully]].

But what makes this [[photo]] [[sole]] in the annals of commercial female eroticism, of course, is the [[gargantuan]] constellation of talents gathered under one banner to make this [[cinematographic]] [[damp]] [[daydream]] come to [[shimmer]], [[alive]] life. [[Incorruptible]] Technicolor photography that will outlive us all, a truckload of worthy character actors (including one cute dog), a music score by Max Steiner that seems determined to accomplish the "composed film" that Michael Powell (who, ironically, had a bit part in the 1927 silent version) always dreamed about, tittering at times on the brink of dissonance but always coming through in splendid symphonic, operatic exoticism, a dream-like atmosphere where material considerations are no object, characters travel as if by magic from one spot to the next, dialog is sparse, vague and suggestive, the art direction is close to celestial, flower arrangements appear in the humblest hut or tent, the heroine's wardrobe is inexhaustible and all the male characters are either aristocrats, saints, doomed but horny sinners, mystics or poets.

Ahh... Hollywood! The MGM DVD presentation of this film is bare bones but impeccable. The bit rate is very high throughout, the colour registration is almost always perfect and the 2.0 mono sound truly does justice to Max Steiner's score and to Boyer's penultimate confession.

A historical note on this sort of "women's subject": The following year (1937), Julien Duvivier, visibly inspired by "The Garden of Allah", directed "Carnet de Bal", where a very similar clothes-horse butter-won't-melt-in-her-mouth heroine (widowed after taking care of an ailing husband in the exotic remoteness of some impossibly romantic Alpine lakeside villa) wants to discover what she has missed by looking up the male dancers in her first dance book. She finds them all in time, only to realize that whatever feeling there was at one point between her beaus and herself were either misunderstood, overestimated or else had lifelong tragic consequences. It was Duvivier's cynical way of telling us to beware of impossibly idealistic notions and that we all need to grow up sooner or later. --------------------------------------------- Result 909 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is a [[clever]] episode of TWILIGHT ZONE that was comic [[rather]] than [[strange]] or [[tragic]]. Buster Keaton is Woodrow Mulligan, a janitor from 1890 [[America]], [[works]] in a laboratory. He is constantly [[griping]] about the life problems around him: meat is too expensive (it's like $1.00 / lb. Unheard of!). He is always yelling after crazy speeders (on bicycles - [[autos]] haven't [[appeared]] yet). [[Griping]] to the end, he sees a helmet like device by a scientist, and puts it on and tries it. Suddenly he is in [[modern]] America. The beginning was a seven minute silent film. Now it is all noise, all talking, all beeping, all blowing. Keaton is here only a few minutes when he realizes that the world has changed and not for the better. He runs into Stanley Adams, a Professor Rollo, who realizes that Mulligan is from c. 1890 (he mentions President Cleveland). Rollo has always wanted to live in that charming, quiet age. He helps Mulligan get the helmet repaired, and they go back in time. Rollo gets bored after awhile, due to the lack of scientific equipment that he can use. Mulligan puts the helmet on him and sends him into the future. But now Woodrow is fully content with the quiet, simple age he lives in. He has found contentment.

In his last fifteen years Buster Keaton was frequently on television (many times for Allan Funt on [[CANDID]] CAMERA, where he could help set up sight gag tricks on the public). He did make a few films as well (most notably A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM and THE RAILRODDER). But he occasionally popped up in television plays and episodes. He is in his element here, presumably advising the director (old comedy film director Norman McLeod - he directed the Marx Brothers in HORSE FEATHERS) on the tricks he could do. Watch how Stanley Adams and he time Adams picking him up when he is snatching a pair of trousers he needs. In terms of timing it reminds one of gags he did in the 20s in films like SHERLOCK JR. The episode does show Keaton in fine fettle for a man in his sixties.

The appearances of Jesse White (here as a repairman, of all things) is always welcome. But look a bit at "Professor Rollo". Stanley Adams was a well known figure in movies and television from the 1950s onward to his tragic suicide in 1977. Plump, with unkempt appearance, and heavy, booming voice, his best known dramatic role was as the wrestling promoter in the film version of REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT (he wants Anthony Quinn to be a wrestler wearing a costume as an Indian). His best known television appearance was as the space trader who introduces the crew of the Starship Enterprise in STAR TREK to those furry, fertile little creatures "Tribbles" (as in "The Trouble With"). Adams was always worth watching (like Jesse White, and certainly like Keaton), enhancing most of the productions he appeared in. I have never understood his suicide, but it was a sad end to a first rate character performer. This is a [[artful]] episode of TWILIGHT ZONE that was comic [[somewhat]] than [[weird]] or [[cataclysmic]]. Buster Keaton is Woodrow Mulligan, a janitor from 1890 [[Latina]], [[collaborated]] in a laboratory. He is constantly [[mooning]] about the life problems around him: meat is too expensive (it's like $1.00 / lb. Unheard of!). He is always yelling after crazy speeders (on bicycles - [[automobile]] haven't [[seemed]] yet). [[Bitching]] to the end, he sees a helmet like device by a scientist, and puts it on and tries it. Suddenly he is in [[fashionable]] America. The beginning was a seven minute silent film. Now it is all noise, all talking, all beeping, all blowing. Keaton is here only a few minutes when he realizes that the world has changed and not for the better. He runs into Stanley Adams, a Professor Rollo, who realizes that Mulligan is from c. 1890 (he mentions President Cleveland). Rollo has always wanted to live in that charming, quiet age. He helps Mulligan get the helmet repaired, and they go back in time. Rollo gets bored after awhile, due to the lack of scientific equipment that he can use. Mulligan puts the helmet on him and sends him into the future. But now Woodrow is fully content with the quiet, simple age he lives in. He has found contentment.

In his last fifteen years Buster Keaton was frequently on television (many times for Allan Funt on [[FRANK]] CAMERA, where he could help set up sight gag tricks on the public). He did make a few films as well (most notably A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM and THE RAILRODDER). But he occasionally popped up in television plays and episodes. He is in his element here, presumably advising the director (old comedy film director Norman McLeod - he directed the Marx Brothers in HORSE FEATHERS) on the tricks he could do. Watch how Stanley Adams and he time Adams picking him up when he is snatching a pair of trousers he needs. In terms of timing it reminds one of gags he did in the 20s in films like SHERLOCK JR. The episode does show Keaton in fine fettle for a man in his sixties.

The appearances of Jesse White (here as a repairman, of all things) is always welcome. But look a bit at "Professor Rollo". Stanley Adams was a well known figure in movies and television from the 1950s onward to his tragic suicide in 1977. Plump, with unkempt appearance, and heavy, booming voice, his best known dramatic role was as the wrestling promoter in the film version of REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT (he wants Anthony Quinn to be a wrestler wearing a costume as an Indian). His best known television appearance was as the space trader who introduces the crew of the Starship Enterprise in STAR TREK to those furry, fertile little creatures "Tribbles" (as in "The Trouble With"). Adams was always worth watching (like Jesse White, and certainly like Keaton), enhancing most of the productions he appeared in. I have never understood his suicide, but it was a sad end to a first rate character performer. --------------------------------------------- Result 910 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The small California town of Diablo is plagued with mysterious deaths after sheriff Robert Lopez unearths an ancient box.Legend has it that the box holds the sixteenth-century Mexican demon named Azar.FBI agent Gil Vega is sent to investigate the murders and joins forces with the sheriff's daughters,Dominique and Mary to fight with evil and bloodthirsty demon."The Legend of Diablo" is an absolute garbage.The film lacks scares and gore,the acting is amateurish and the direction is bad.The animation is the only one aspect of the film I enjoyed.I'm a big fan of indie horror flicks,for example I loved "Torched","Live Feed","Bone Sickness" or "Neighborhood Watch",unfortunately "The Legend of Diablo" is a huge misfire.Definitely one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 911 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies that's trying to be moody and tense, and instead, ends up tripping all over itself. Having seen it at a queer film festival, I was intrigued by the "young college threesome gone wrong" write-up, however, over-all ended up quite disappointed.

It's hard to critique a "true story" since there's not much that can be done about the plot - but I found this disjointed, melodramatic and wholly depressing. It's dark and almost sinister, painting a darn creepy flash of the seventies with imposing music and jerky close-ups. It just doesn't work - some scenes where so cheesy that instead of hushed awe, my audience was supressing snickers and rolling eyes.

The story has an interesting premise, but this just spins downward into a dark, miserable spiral. --------------------------------------------- Result 912 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Apparently Shakespeare equals [[high]] [[brow]] which equals in turn a bunch of folks not seeing [[something]] for what it [[really]] is. [[At]] one point in this film, [[someone]] (I believe Pacino's [[producer]]) warns him that film is getting off track, that it was once about how the masses [[think]] about [[Shakespeare]] through the [[vehicle]] of RICHARD III. Instead he [[decides]] to shoot a [[chopped]] up play with random [[comments]] [[sprinkled]] [[throughout]]. Some scenes seemed to be [[included]] as [[home]] [[movies]] for Al (was there [[really]] [[ANY]] [[reason]] for the [[quick]] visit to Shakespeare's birthplace, other than for a [[laugh]] about something unexpected which [[happens]] there?), and, before the film has [[really]] [[even]] [[begun]], we are treated to [[seeing]] Al prance around and [[act]] cute and [[funny]] for the camera. I thought his silly act with Kay near the end of GODFATHER III with the knife to his throat was AN ACT - but [[apparently]] it's how Al really behaves in person.

Enough rambling. Here's a shotgun smattering of why I didn't even make it 3/4 of the way through this: 1) pretentious - Al always knows when the camera is on him, whether he's acting as Richard or in a 'real' conversation with someone - you can see it in the corner of his eyes, also, some of the actors around the rehearsal table become untethered and wax hammy to the extreme. If anyone reading this has ever spent any time with an group of actors and has witnessed this [[kind]] of thing from the [[outside]], it's [[unbearable]]. "[[Look]] at me, chewing all the scenery!" 2) Winona Ryder. When she appears as Lady Anne, this film comes to a screeching halt, which it never recovers from. She has [[nothing]] to [[add]] in the [[discussion]] scenes but the camera lingers on her to bring in the kiddoes. Her performance is [[dreadful]], to [[boot]]. 3) the only [[things]] you really [[learn]] from this are told to you by the very scholars the filmmakers are trying to keep out of the picture. Of course, you also learn that Pacino shouldn't be directing films (or doing Richard in the first place). I'd rather watch BOBBY DEERFIELD than this.

Lastly, read the play and learn it for yourself. Go out and see it performed. In 1997 I saw the play performed at the University of Washington Ethnic Cultural Theater, and it made what we see in this film seem like high school drama (except for the gratuitous throat slashing of Clarence! My God! Was that necessary?!)

It's all just a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nada. Apparently Shakespeare equals [[higher]] [[brows]] which equals in turn a bunch of folks not seeing [[algo]] for what it [[truly]] is. [[In]] one point in this film, [[everyone]] (I believe Pacino's [[manufacturers]]) warns him that film is getting off track, that it was once about how the masses [[thinking]] about [[Shakespearean]] through the [[car]] of RICHARD III. Instead he [[decided]] to shoot a [[dissected]] up play with random [[observations]] [[sprinkle]] [[in]]. Some scenes seemed to be [[inscribed]] as [[household]] [[filmmaking]] for Al (was there [[truly]] [[EVERYTHING]] [[cause]] for the [[speedy]] visit to Shakespeare's birthplace, other than for a [[chuckles]] about something unexpected which [[occurs]] there?), and, before the film has [[truly]] [[yet]] [[began]], we are treated to [[witnessing]] Al prance around and [[ley]] cute and [[comical]] for the camera. I thought his silly act with Kay near the end of GODFATHER III with the knife to his throat was AN ACT - but [[seemingly]] it's how Al really behaves in person.

Enough rambling. Here's a shotgun smattering of why I didn't even make it 3/4 of the way through this: 1) pretentious - Al always knows when the camera is on him, whether he's acting as Richard or in a 'real' conversation with someone - you can see it in the corner of his eyes, also, some of the actors around the rehearsal table become untethered and wax hammy to the extreme. If anyone reading this has ever spent any time with an group of actors and has witnessed this [[genre]] of thing from the [[outdoor]], it's [[unsustainable]]. "[[Peek]] at me, chewing all the scenery!" 2) Winona Ryder. When she appears as Lady Anne, this film comes to a screeching halt, which it never recovers from. She has [[none]] to [[added]] in the [[interviews]] scenes but the camera lingers on her to bring in the kiddoes. Her performance is [[abhorrent]], to [[starter]]. 3) the only [[matters]] you really [[learning]] from this are told to you by the very scholars the filmmakers are trying to keep out of the picture. Of course, you also learn that Pacino shouldn't be directing films (or doing Richard in the first place). I'd rather watch BOBBY DEERFIELD than this.

Lastly, read the play and learn it for yourself. Go out and see it performed. In 1997 I saw the play performed at the University of Washington Ethnic Cultural Theater, and it made what we see in this film seem like high school drama (except for the gratuitous throat slashing of Clarence! My God! Was that necessary?!)

It's all just a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nada. --------------------------------------------- Result 913 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Probably the finest fantasy film ever made. Sumptuous colour, spectacular sets, incredible, spot-on Miklos Rosza musical score that is perfect for each scene and mood. Acting is superb as well in what could have been stiff and pretentious in lesser hands, but here the poetic dialog is deftly, sensitively spoken (the humour is subtle and delightful as well).

Doubtless Spielberg and Lucas were enthralled by this one. Along with "The Four Feathers" (1939), one of the two finest motion pictures released by Alexander Korda and London Films---and one of the finest motion pictures ever made.

A true, compelling classic! --------------------------------------------- Result 914 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Genghis Cohn is a (very) [[mildly]] [[entertaining]] British [[movie]] about a German [[police]] commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish [[comedian]] that he [[killed]] 15 years [[earlier]] while serving under [[Hitler]] in the SS. The ghost comes back and [[wants]] his [[killer]] to [[live]] as a [[Jew]] to atone for the [[murders]] he committed.

Otto, the German [[policeman]] [[actually]] knows this ghost's [[name]] because, the [[last]] thing he did before he [[died]] was [[said]], in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The [[policeman]] didn't speak Yiddish, so he [[asked]] around until he [[found]] the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an [[impression]] that [[everybody]] [[involved]] with that killing learned and [[remembered]] the comedian's [[name]], Genghis Cohn.

There are a bunch of [[men]] who are [[murdered]] in the jurisdiction of the [[police]] commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The [[men]] are [[murdered]] with a set of knives that are [[missing]] from the local butcher. The butcher [[announces]] that his [[knives]] are [[missing]] while the commissioner is in the [[store]] to [[get]] a liver and [[onion]] sandwich, so the [[commissioner]] is a suspect. The first [[man]] is [[killed]] while making [[love]] to the butcher's [[wife]], so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher [[maintains]] that he would be very busy if he [[killed]] every [[man]] that [[slept]] with his [[wife]]. All the [[men]] are [[killed]] immediately after the climax of lovemaking.

I [[think]] I [[might]] be a bit angrier than the [[ghost]] of Genghis Cohn if I was [[killed]] like he was. He [[seems]] to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British [[movie]] and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very [[funny]].

I gave this movie a 4 because it was just [[kind]] of goofy. I [[thought]] it should have been a [[little]] more [[serious]] than it was. The [[movie]] [[turns]] out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The [[movie]] gave me a [[tiny]] [[look]] into [[Jewish]] [[culture]], but was only skin-deep. Do all [[Jews]] [[love]] liver and [[onion]] sandwiches? Do they all [[say]] `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?

I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day. Genghis Cohn is a (very) [[gently]] [[fun]] British [[filmmaking]] about a German [[nypd]] commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish [[comic]] that he [[murdering]] 15 years [[formerly]] while serving under [[Nazi]] in the SS. The ghost comes back and [[wanna]] his [[assassin]] to [[vivo]] as a [[Jude]] to atone for the [[killings]] he committed.

Otto, the German [[gendarme]] [[genuinely]] knows this ghost's [[behalf]] because, the [[final]] thing he did before he [[deaths]] was [[stated]], in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The [[police]] didn't speak Yiddish, so he [[wondered]] around until he [[finds]] the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an [[printing]] that [[somebody]] [[implicated]] with that killing learned and [[reminds]] the comedian's [[behalf]], Genghis Cohn.

There are a bunch of [[man]] who are [[kill]] in the jurisdiction of the [[cop]] commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The [[man]] are [[slain]] with a set of knives that are [[gone]] from the local butcher. The butcher [[announced]] that his [[daggers]] are [[gone]] while the commissioner is in the [[shop]] to [[gets]] a liver and [[tomatoes]] sandwich, so the [[commissioners]] is a suspect. The first [[guy]] is [[murder]] while making [[likes]] to the butcher's [[femme]], so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher [[argues]] that he would be very busy if he [[murder]] every [[guy]] that [[sleep]] with his [[women]]. All the [[man]] are [[murdered]] immediately after the climax of lovemaking.

I [[ideas]] I [[apt]] be a bit angrier than the [[phantom]] of Genghis Cohn if I was [[kill]] like he was. He [[seem]] to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British [[filmmaking]] and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very [[fun]].

I gave this movie a 4 because it was just [[sort]] of goofy. I [[figured]] it should have been a [[petite]] more [[weighty]] than it was. The [[filmmaking]] [[revolves]] out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The [[filmmaking]] gave me a [[minimal]] [[glance]] into [[Jews]] [[cultivation]], but was only skin-deep. Do all [[Jude]] [[loves]] liver and [[tomatoes]] sandwiches? Do they all [[tell]] `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?

I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day. --------------------------------------------- Result 915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a straight-to-video movie, so it should go without saying that it's not going to rival the first Lion King, but that said, this was downright good.

My kids loved this, but that's a given, they love anything that's a cartoon. The big shock was that *I* liked it too, it was laugh out loud funny at some parts (even the fart jokes*), had lots of rather creative tie-ins with the first movie, and even some jokes that you had to be older to understand (but without being risqué like in Shrek ["do you think he's compensating for something?"]).

A special note on the fart jokes, I was surprised to find that none of the jokes were just toilet noises (in fact there were almost no noises/imagery at all, the references were actually rather subtle), they actually had a setup/punchline/etc, and were almost in good taste. I'd like my kids to think that there's more to humor than going to the bathroom, and this movie is fine in those regards.

Hmm what else? The music was so-so, not nearly as creative as in the first or second movie, but plenty of fun for the kids. No painfully corny moments, which was a blessing for me. A little action but nothing too scary (the Secret of NIMH gave my kids nightmares, not sure a G rating was appropriate for that one...)

All in all I'd say this is a great movie for kids of any age, one that's 100% safe to let them watch (I try not to be overly sensitive but I've had to jump up and turn off the TV during a few movies that were less kid-appropriate than expected) - but you're safe to leave the room during this one. I'd say stick around anyway though, you might find that you enjoy it too :) --------------------------------------------- Result 916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I have only [[recently]] been able to catch up with the [[films]] of [[Marilyn]] [[Miller]] since they are not shown on TCM in the [[UK]].I have been much intrigued over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some [[stars]] of this era like Jolson some of the magic still shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her dancing seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her [[singing]] somewhat [[limited]] and as an [[actress]] she makes [[Ruby]] Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this [[film]] as the public had [[grown]] [[tired]] of musicals virtually all of the musical [[numbers]] have been [[deleted]].So we are left with a [[comedy]] of that period with [[little]] real appeal.She was being [[paid]] $500000 for this![[So]] i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I [[think]] that the [[truth]] is [[nearer]] the [[later]] than the [[former]]. I have only [[lately]] been able to catch up with the [[filmmaking]] of [[Marlin]] [[Meunier]] since they are not shown on TCM in the [[BRITANNICA]].I have been much intrigued over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some [[superstar]] of this era like Jolson some of the magic still shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her dancing seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her [[sing]] somewhat [[restrained]] and as an [[actor]] she makes [[Turquoise]] Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this [[filmmaking]] as the public had [[grew]] [[knackered]] of musicals virtually all of the musical [[digit]] have been [[discontinued]].So we are left with a [[farce]] of that period with [[scant]] real appeal.She was being [[credited]] $500000 for this![[Accordingly]] i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I [[thinks]] that the [[veracity]] is [[tightest]] the [[subsequently]] than the [[previous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I saw this movie on the film festival of Rotterdam (jan '06) and followed the discussion between director and public afterwards. Many people reacted shocked and protesting. He will get a lot of negative critics. But: the world is cruel like this, and it's not funny. People don't like it. That itself doesn't mean that the movie is bad. I can see that difference. Don't shoot the messenger that shows us the world outside our 'hubble'! Nevertheless I think this a [[bad]] movie. Film-technically it's a good one. Nice shots and script, most good fitting music, great actors. The director pretends to make a psychological movie, - the psychology however is of poor quality. Describing such a powerful violence itself is not the art. The art would be a powerful description of the psychological process behind that violence. How does a shy boy come to such a cruelty? The director pretends to describe that, - but is not good in that.

The director used several times the word the 'selfishness' of people, mentioning for instance the teacher. Only: this teacher wasn't selfish,- just someone in several roles, caring for his pupils, ánd worried about his script. I think it's a simplification to call him selfish. The atmosphere in the village is creepy, and the mother made awful mistakes ('you terribly let me down…') but it doesn't become believable for me, that there is caused súch a lot of pain, that the shyest boy comes to such terrible things. In fact, reality is far more complex than the way, this film describes – and it needs far better descriptions. The interesting thing would be: how does it work? Describe that process for me please, so that we understand.

With the written phrase on the end, the director said to point to an alternative way of life. It was the other extreme, and confirmed for me that director and scriptwriter are bad psychologists, promoting black/white-thinking. The connection between violence in films and in society has been proved. Use such a violence gives the responsibility to use it right. There are enough black/white-thinkers in the world, causing lots of war and misery. I hope, this movie won't be successful. I saw this movie on the film festival of Rotterdam (jan '06) and followed the discussion between director and public afterwards. Many people reacted shocked and protesting. He will get a lot of negative critics. But: the world is cruel like this, and it's not funny. People don't like it. That itself doesn't mean that the movie is bad. I can see that difference. Don't shoot the messenger that shows us the world outside our 'hubble'! Nevertheless I think this a [[unfavourable]] movie. Film-technically it's a good one. Nice shots and script, most good fitting music, great actors. The director pretends to make a psychological movie, - the psychology however is of poor quality. Describing such a powerful violence itself is not the art. The art would be a powerful description of the psychological process behind that violence. How does a shy boy come to such a cruelty? The director pretends to describe that, - but is not good in that.

The director used several times the word the 'selfishness' of people, mentioning for instance the teacher. Only: this teacher wasn't selfish,- just someone in several roles, caring for his pupils, ánd worried about his script. I think it's a simplification to call him selfish. The atmosphere in the village is creepy, and the mother made awful mistakes ('you terribly let me down…') but it doesn't become believable for me, that there is caused súch a lot of pain, that the shyest boy comes to such terrible things. In fact, reality is far more complex than the way, this film describes – and it needs far better descriptions. The interesting thing would be: how does it work? Describe that process for me please, so that we understand.

With the written phrase on the end, the director said to point to an alternative way of life. It was the other extreme, and confirmed for me that director and scriptwriter are bad psychologists, promoting black/white-thinking. The connection between violence in films and in society has been proved. Use such a violence gives the responsibility to use it right. There are enough black/white-thinkers in the world, causing lots of war and misery. I hope, this movie won't be successful. --------------------------------------------- Result 918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[Like]] most comments I [[saw]] this film under the name of The Witching which is the reissue title. [[Apparently]] Necromancy which is the original is better but I doubt it.

[[Most]] scenes of the witching still include most necromancy scenes and these are [[still]] [[bad]]. In many ways I [[think]] the [[added]] nudity of the witching at [[least]] [[added]] some entertainment [[value]]! But don't be fooled -there's only 3 scenes with nudity and it's of the people [[standing]] [[around]] [[variety]]. No diabolique rumpy pumpy involved!

This [[movie]] is so [[inherently]] [[awful]] it's [[difficult]] to know what to criticise [[first]]. The [[dialogue]] is awful and straight out of the Troma [[locker]]. [[At]] [[least]] Troma is tongue in cheek though. This is straight-faced boredom personified. The acting is variable with Pamela Franklin (Flora the [[possessed]] [[kid]] in The Innocents [[would]] you [[believe]]!) the worst with her high-pitched screechy [[voice]]. Welles [[seems]] [[merely]] waiting for his pay [[cheque]]. The other [[female]] lead has a [[creepy]] face so I don't know why Pamela thought she [[could]] [[trust]] her in the [[film]]! And the doctor is pretty [[bad]] too. He also [[looks]] worringly like Gene Wilder.

It is ineptly filmed with scenes [[changing]] for no [[reason]] and [[editing]] is choppy. This is because the witching is a [[copy]] and paste [[job]] and not a [[subtle]] one at that. [[Only]] the [[lighting]] is OK. The [[sound]] is also [[dreadful]] and it's difficult to [[hear]] with the [[appalling]] [[new]] soundtrack which never shuts up. The 'ghost' [[mother]] is also equally rubbish but the actress is so hilariously bad at acting that at [[least]] it [[provides]] some unintentional [[laughs]].

[[Really]] this film (the witching at [[least]]) is only for the unwary. It can't have [[many]] sane [[fans]] as it's pretty unwatchable and I [[actually]] [[found]] it mind-numbingly [[dull]]!

The best bit was when the credits rolled - [[enough]] [[said]] so [[simply]] [[better]] to this poor [[excuse]] for a movie LIKE THE PLAGUE! [[Iike]] most comments I [[seen]] this film under the name of The Witching which is the reissue title. [[Obviously]] Necromancy which is the original is better but I doubt it.

[[More]] scenes of the witching still include most necromancy scenes and these are [[however]] [[negative]]. In many ways I [[thoughts]] the [[add]] nudity of the witching at [[lowest]] [[adding]] some entertainment [[values]]! But don't be fooled -there's only 3 scenes with nudity and it's of the people [[permanent]] [[throughout]] [[diversity]]. No diabolique rumpy pumpy involved!

This [[filmmaking]] is so [[fundamentally]] [[horrific]] it's [[hard]] to know what to criticise [[firstly]]. The [[conversation]] is awful and straight out of the Troma [[cloakroom]]. [[In]] [[lowest]] Troma is tongue in cheek though. This is straight-faced boredom personified. The acting is variable with Pamela Franklin (Flora the [[owned]] [[kiddo]] in The Innocents [[ought]] you [[think]]!) the worst with her high-pitched screechy [[vowel]]. Welles [[looks]] [[just]] waiting for his pay [[cheques]]. The other [[girl]] lead has a [[spooky]] face so I don't know why Pamela thought she [[did]] [[trusting]] her in the [[filmmaking]]! And the doctor is pretty [[negative]] too. He also [[seems]] worringly like Gene Wilder.

It is ineptly filmed with scenes [[altered]] for no [[motif]] and [[edition]] is choppy. This is because the witching is a [[copies]] and paste [[workplace]] and not a [[nuanced]] one at that. [[Purely]] the [[illumination]] is OK. The [[sounds]] is also [[horrible]] and it's difficult to [[listen]] with the [[alarming]] [[newest]] soundtrack which never shuts up. The 'ghost' [[mommy]] is also equally rubbish but the actress is so hilariously bad at acting that at [[lowest]] it [[gives]] some unintentional [[giggles]].

[[Genuinely]] this film (the witching at [[fewer]]) is only for the unwary. It can't have [[various]] sane [[lovers]] as it's pretty unwatchable and I [[indeed]] [[find]] it mind-numbingly [[tiresome]]!

The best bit was when the credits rolled - [[satisfactorily]] [[told]] so [[solely]] [[optimum]] to this poor [[alibis]] for a movie LIKE THE PLAGUE! --------------------------------------------- Result 919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This is unlike any other movie, the [[closest]] thing I can [[compare]] it to is a Woody Allen film... But where as Woody Allen is [[constantly]] fathoming human [[foibles]] Bret Carr [[appears]] to be trying to [[figure]] out a way to [[get]] to grips with that one [[crippling]] insecurity that tends to [[define]] us for better or worse. [[In]] the [[Case]] of [[Lou]], it is the [[root]] cause of his stuttering, which can be traced back to a [[singular]] [[child]] hood trauma that is [[revealed]] through flash backs.

There are so [[many]] [[strangely]] neurotic people in the [[world]] and I [[believe]] they all [[deserve]] a chance for redemption, [[although]] diversity of human [[character]] is after all what makes the [[world]] such an [[intriguing]] place, so [[maybe]] we shouldn't [[fix]] our [[neurosis]] [[anymore]] than we should [[fix]] our noses or [[Breasts]].

This is an [[indie]] [[film]] shot on a [[long]] shoestring, but the production values are [[tremendous]] as is the scope of the [[film]]. I feel like its a [[quirky]] Gem for the self-help market. I [[really]] [[look]] forward to seeing what this filmmaker does next, i [[could]] [[imagine]] a [[career]] along the lines of Woody Allen or [[Albert]] [[Brooks]], [[although]] [[usually]] when a [[guy]] like this [[breaks]] through, he goes off and makes " X [[MEN]]" and his humble [[quirky]] [[origins]] are [[soon]] [[forgotten]] or are they.... X [[Men]] is aout a bunch of [[freaks]] if i [[remember]] [[correctly]] :) This is unlike any other movie, the [[earliest]] thing I can [[comparative]] it to is a Woody Allen film... But where as Woody Allen is [[unceasingly]] fathoming human [[demerits]] Bret Carr [[transpires]] to be trying to [[silhouette]] out a way to [[got]] to grips with that one [[cripple]] insecurity that tends to [[defined]] us for better or worse. [[During]] the [[Instances]] of [[Lew]], it is the [[origin]] cause of his stuttering, which can be traced back to a [[particular]] [[kid]] hood trauma that is [[demonstrated]] through flash backs.

There are so [[innumerable]] [[suspiciously]] neurotic people in the [[worldwide]] and I [[think]] they all [[merit]] a chance for redemption, [[though]] diversity of human [[personage]] is after all what makes the [[worldwide]] such an [[exciting]] place, so [[potentially]] we shouldn't [[repairing]] our [[neuroses]] [[longer]] than we should [[mend]] our noses or [[Tits]].

This is an [[andi]] [[movies]] shot on a [[lengthy]] shoestring, but the production values are [[considerable]] as is the scope of the [[films]]. I feel like its a [[lunatic]] Gem for the self-help market. I [[truthfully]] [[peek]] forward to seeing what this filmmaker does next, i [[did]] [[presume]] a [[carrera]] along the lines of Woody Allen or [[Hugh]] [[Creek]], [[albeit]] [[fluently]] when a [[blokes]] like this [[interrupts]] through, he goes off and makes " X [[MALE]]" and his humble [[fickle]] [[wellspring]] are [[promptly]] [[ignored]] or are they.... X [[Male]] is aout a bunch of [[monsters]] if i [[reminisce]] [[adequately]] :) --------------------------------------------- Result 920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] E! TV is a great channel and [[Talk]] Soup is so funny,in a [[flash]] you can view the [[episodes]] change. We want more [[funny]] writings by the best writer ever Stan Evans.. The patron [[Saint]] of the [[mindless]] masses... He is a [[truly]] [[talented]], [[gifted]] writer, actor, [[comic]], [[producer]],[[director]], and [[creative]] [[consultant]].[[Anna]] Nicole [[loved]] him , but he was not a $$$$[[Billionaire]] so he [[left]] him for a [[Billionaire]]. [[Many]] super [[stars]] [[wanted]] to [[make]] [[films]] with the actor [[Stan]] Evans, who has a "[[Humphrey]] Bogart" {Clark [[Gable]]}acting [[style]]. He should make [[many]] more movies. Maybe with Stephen Spielberg, or perhaps many other talented producers.We wish him a moment of FAME with a great fortune to gain. Has he produced any mock-U-dramas? or perhaps any docudrama??? A project about Bernie Madhoff would be a great TV movie written by STAN EVANS. How many screenplays has he written?? Is he under $$$$$$$$$$$$billion contract with Disney?? He should earn more than $50 Million... He could also write a TV movie about the late KING OF POP.. Michael Jackson. We want to view a lot more of and by Stan Evans in the movies and on TV. Thank you so very much. [[Elvis]] has left the building!!!!! E! TV is a great channel and [[Schmooze]] Soup is so funny,in a [[flashback]] you can view the [[spells]] change. We want more [[fun]] writings by the best writer ever Stan Evans.. The patron [[Saintly]] of the [[wanton]] masses... He is a [[really]] [[gifted]], [[talented]] writer, actor, [[comedian]], [[maker]],[[headmaster]], and [[inventive]] [[consulting]].[[Annas]] Nicole [[love]] him , but he was not a $$$$[[Millionaire]] so he [[exited]] him for a [[Millionaire]]. [[Myriad]] super [[celebrity]] [[wanting]] to [[deliver]] [[movie]] with the actor [[Stanley]] Evans, who has a "[[Humphreys]] Bogart" {Clark [[Bobble]]}acting [[styles]]. He should make [[innumerable]] more movies. Maybe with Stephen Spielberg, or perhaps many other talented producers.We wish him a moment of FAME with a great fortune to gain. Has he produced any mock-U-dramas? or perhaps any docudrama??? A project about Bernie Madhoff would be a great TV movie written by STAN EVANS. How many screenplays has he written?? Is he under $$$$$$$$$$$$billion contract with Disney?? He should earn more than $50 Million... He could also write a TV movie about the late KING OF POP.. Michael Jackson. We want to view a lot more of and by Stan Evans in the movies and on TV. Thank you so very much. [[Alves]] has left the building!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 921 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first time I saw this film, I was in shock for days afterwards. Its painstaking and absorbing treatment of the subject holds the attention, helped by good acting and some really intriguing music. The ending, quite simply, had me gasping. First rate! --------------------------------------------- Result 922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The plot has already been [[described]] by other reviewers, so I will [[simply]] [[add]] that my [[reason]] for [[wanting]] to see this film was to [[see]] [[Gabrielle]] [[Drake]] in all her [[undoubted]] glory.

Miss [[Drake]] has to be one of the [[sexiest]], [[prettiest]] examples of "[[posh]] totty" to have been committed to celluloid. Of her era and ilk, only the equally [[exquisite]] [[Jane]] Asher comes close. What was it about actresses with musical brothers? (Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired Gabrielle, her scenes in this movie will not disappoint. She has a magnificent figure and none of it is left to the imagination here.

As a whole, the movie is very poor and being of its time, very cheaply made. The song that covers the opening credits seems to go on forever and is appalling. The plot has already been [[describe]] by other reviewers, so I will [[merely]] [[adds]] that my [[motif]] for [[wanted]] to see this film was to [[seeing]] [[Gabriel]] [[Gregg]] in all her [[undeniable]] glory.

Miss [[Gregg]] has to be one of the [[hot]], [[purest]] examples of "[[luxury]] totty" to have been committed to celluloid. Of her era and ilk, only the equally [[sumptuous]] [[Jeanne]] Asher comes close. What was it about actresses with musical brothers? (Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired Gabrielle, her scenes in this movie will not disappoint. She has a magnificent figure and none of it is left to the imagination here.

As a whole, the movie is very poor and being of its time, very cheaply made. The song that covers the opening credits seems to go on forever and is appalling. --------------------------------------------- Result 923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is so awful, it is hard to find the right words to describe it!

At first the story is so ridiculous.A narrow-minded human can write a better plot! The actors are boring and untalented, perhaps they were compelled to play in this cheesy Film.

The camera receptions of the National Forest are the only good in this whole movie. I should feel ashame, because I paid for this lousy Picture.

Hopefully nobody makes a sequel or make a similar film with such a worse storyline :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was interested in the title and description of Big Rig while attending the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX. [[However]], I was [[eager]] to [[get]] the heck out of the [[seats]] as soon as Big Rig ended. Big Rig is comprised of [[several]] "[[big]] rig" drivers who set out to [[deliver]] [[goods]] driven across the United States. The characters are all [[wonderful]] people, [[however]] the filmmakers never [[dug]] deep into the [[complexity]] of them as people. Instead, the [[story]] meanders as [[much]] as the [[maps]] in the [[film]] are [[meant]] to [[guide]], but never do. [[At]] most, we get lost. We - the [[audience]] - end up going [[nowhere]] and, like the direction of the storytelling, end up somewhere but without direction, location, or plot. Why are we here? Where are we? How did we get here? The [[storytelling]] is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending. The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers. The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions. Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through [[propaganda]] that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers. I was interested in the title and description of Big Rig while attending the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX. [[Still]], I was [[anxious]] to [[got]] the heck out of the [[seating]] as soon as Big Rig ended. Big Rig is comprised of [[different]] "[[major]] rig" drivers who set out to [[make]] [[wares]] driven across the United States. The characters are all [[sumptuous]] people, [[instead]] the filmmakers never [[dig]] deep into the [[complication]] of them as people. Instead, the [[narratives]] meanders as [[very]] as the [[cartes]] in the [[filmmaking]] are [[intended]] to [[guided]], but never do. [[For]] most, we get lost. We - the [[spectators]] - end up going [[everywhere]] and, like the direction of the storytelling, end up somewhere but without direction, location, or plot. Why are we here? Where are we? How did we get here? The [[conte]] is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending. The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers. The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions. Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through [[publicity]] that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers. --------------------------------------------- Result 925 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] (spoilers)The one truly memorable [[part]] of this otherwise rather dull and tepid bit of British [[cuisine]] is Steiner's henna [[rinse]], one of the [[worst]] dye jobs ever. That, and the [[magnificent]] caterpillar eyebrows on the [[old]] evil [[dude]] who was [[trying]] to [[steal]] Steiner's [[invention]]. MST3K does an admirable job of [[making]] a wretchedly boring and [[grey]] [[film]] funny.I [[particularly]] like it when [[Crow]] [[kills]] [[Mike]] with his '[[touch]] of death', and when he [[revives]] him in the theatre, Mike [[cries]] "[[Guys]], I died, I [[saw]] [[eternal]] truth and beauty! oh, it's this [[movie]]..." That [[would]] be a letdown, having to [[come]] back from the afterlife to watch the [[rest]] of The [[Projected]] [[Man]]. The [[film]] [[could]] make a fortune being sold as a sleep aide. Some of the puns in the [[film]] were [[wicked]]: [[police]] inspector-"electrocution!" Crow-"[[Shocking]], isn't it?" [[police]] inspector-"That's [[LOwe]], all right" [[Tom]] Servo-"[[Very]] low, right down by the floor!" police inspector-"Can I [[get]] on?" Tom Servo-"He's dead, but [[knock]] yourself out" MST3K is [[definitely]] the only [[way]] to watch this snoozer. (spoilers)The one truly memorable [[party]] of this otherwise rather dull and tepid bit of British [[kitchen]] is Steiner's henna [[backwash]], one of the [[worse]] dye jobs ever. That, and the [[sumptuous]] caterpillar eyebrows on the [[archaic]] evil [[guy]] who was [[tempting]] to [[stole]] Steiner's [[contrivance]]. MST3K does an admirable job of [[doing]] a wretchedly boring and [[grays]] [[kino]] funny.I [[specifically]] like it when [[Corneille]] [[slain]] [[Mick]] with his '[[touches]] of death', and when he [[greets]] him in the theatre, Mike [[screaming]] "[[Guy]], I died, I [[observed]] [[permanent]] truth and beauty! oh, it's this [[filmmaking]]..." That [[could]] be a letdown, having to [[coming]] back from the afterlife to watch the [[roosting]] of The [[Prediction]] [[Dawg]]. The [[flick]] [[did]] make a fortune being sold as a sleep aide. Some of the puns in the [[movie]] were [[naughty]]: [[policemen]] inspector-"electrocution!" Crow-"[[Gruesome]], isn't it?" [[nypd]] inspector-"That's [[laotian]], all right" [[Tum]] Servo-"[[Enormously]] low, right down by the floor!" police inspector-"Can I [[got]] on?" Tom Servo-"He's dead, but [[knocking]] yourself out" MST3K is [[undoubtedly]] the only [[camino]] to watch this snoozer. --------------------------------------------- Result 926 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I saw the elaborate DVD box for this and the dreadful [[Red]] [[Queen]] figurine, I felt certain I was in for a big [[disappointment]], but surprise, surprise, I [[loved]] it. Convoluted [[nonsense]] of course and unforgivable that such a complicated denouement should be rushed to the point of barely being able to read the subtitles, [[let]] alone take in the ridiculous explanation. These quibbles apart, however, the film is a [[dream]]. Fabulous [[ladies]] in fabulous outfits in [[wonderful]] settings and the whole thing [[constantly]] on the move and [[accompanied]] by a [[wonderful]] Bruno Nicolai [[score]]. He may not be [[Morricone]] but in these lighter [[pieces]] he might as well be so. Really [[enjoyable]] with lots of colour, plenty of sexiness, some gory kills and minimal police interference. Super. When I saw the elaborate DVD box for this and the dreadful [[Reid]] [[Reine]] figurine, I felt certain I was in for a big [[disillusionment]], but surprise, surprise, I [[cared]] it. Convoluted [[stupidity]] of course and unforgivable that such a complicated denouement should be rushed to the point of barely being able to read the subtitles, [[allowing]] alone take in the ridiculous explanation. These quibbles apart, however, the film is a [[nightmares]]. Fabulous [[madams]] in fabulous outfits in [[funky]] settings and the whole thing [[systematically]] on the move and [[escorted]] by a [[wondrous]] Bruno Nicolai [[punctuation]]. He may not be [[Ennio]] but in these lighter [[smithereens]] he might as well be so. Really [[pleasant]] with lots of colour, plenty of sexiness, some gory kills and minimal police interference. Super. --------------------------------------------- Result 927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] By God, it's been a [[long]] time [[since]] I saw this. [[Probably]] about 18 years [[ago]]?

The [[movie]] [[tells]] us ([[kids]]) all about human blood and the circulatory system. [[Very]] professionally put together--Disney-style [[animation]], plus human actors--it was directed by Frank Capra, for pete's sake!

Kind of an overkill. I wonder if the very high production value is worth what amounts to a film-strip's worth of information on the human body? But boy will those kids watching it learn: even now I can clearly remember Dr. Baxter being challenged by Hemo himself to name what common material most resembles human blood, to which the Doctor immediately answers "sea water." By God, it's been a [[lengthy]] time [[because]] I saw this. [[Presumably]] about 18 years [[beforehand]]?

The [[kino]] [[says]] us ([[brats]]) all about human blood and the circulatory system. [[Vitally]] professionally put together--Disney-style [[animate]], plus human actors--it was directed by Frank Capra, for pete's sake!

Kind of an overkill. I wonder if the very high production value is worth what amounts to a film-strip's worth of information on the human body? But boy will those kids watching it learn: even now I can clearly remember Dr. Baxter being challenged by Hemo himself to name what common material most resembles human blood, to which the Doctor immediately answers "sea water." --------------------------------------------- Result 928 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sucked. It really was a waste of my life. The acting was atrocious, the plot completely implausible. Long, long story short, these people get "terrorized" by this pathetic "crazed killer", but completely fail to fight back in any manner. And this is after they take a raft on a camping trip, with no gear, and show up at a campsite that is already assembled and completely stocked with food and clothes and the daughters headphones. Additionally, after their boat goes missing, they panic that they're stuck in the woods, but then the daughters boyfriend just shows up and they apparently never consider that they could just hike out of the woods like he did to get to them. Like I said, this movie sucks. A complete joke. Don't let your girlfriend talk you into watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anna (Ursula Andress) is brought in as an official R.N. by ex-lover Benito Varotto (Duilio Del Prete), ostensibly to nurse an aging widower, Count Leonida Bottacin (Mario Piso), back to health after a heart attack. But Benito is actually leading a group of heirs and businessmen, including American entrepreneur Mr. Kitch (Jack Palance), with ulterior motives, reflected by what Anna hopefully will actually accomplish with the Count. He has a history of, well, liking women, and would be actually a bit more "vulnerable" as he is cured. The bad guys get derailed as Anna does not go along and grows closer to the Count. The ending might be said to be ironic, but it is probably better described as predictable.

But so much for plot--this film is totally an erotic comedy, from start to finish, and oh how good. There are many nude scenes, including ones of Anna and Jole, one of the malevolent heiresses, played by Luciana Paluzzi. Both Ursula and Luciana are noteworthy continental ex-Bond women, and thus fulfill the fantasies of male viewers. As she did in Thunderball (remember Fiona Volpe), Luciana plays a femme fatale, sort of, although less elegantly.

Perhaps the best scene is Anna's (slow) complete strip and jump in bed with the young Adone, the "other patient" (who incredibly is resisting), in an attempt to find out what he knows about the plot. But even at this point she is already two-faced (for the better), for she has decided not to go along. However, Benito is more than a two-timer with women, having had lengthy flings in the past with both Anna and Jole, and the rival best erotic scene follows an invective-filled (to put it mildly) argument between him and Jole. This is a standing-up encounter in which Luciana is down to black panties only. Another nice one is Ursula swimming fully naked in the estate's pool. The Count is free, as the client, to put his hands wherever he wants to on Ursula, and he takes advantage. Hey, somehow I've gone back to the actresses' names in my descriptions. Erotic scenes involving other women include an amusing naked wine cellar chase. "The Sensuous Nurse" is compact, 77 minutes, but it doesn't need to be--it is enjoyable without interruption, start to finish. Definitely recommended.

--------------------------------------------- Result 930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] there is a story, but more essentially, the [[world]] of this [[film]] begins in [[chaos]] and [[comes]] to [[order]] over the course of ten minutes.

it is a [[celebration]] of life and an [[optimistic]] [[assertion]] of [[objective]] truth and good. representing along an [[axis]] [[unexplored]] in previous cinema, this [[film]] should be taught in [[every]] high school.

*CHIASMUS* there is a story, but more essentially, the [[monde]] of this [[kino]] begins in [[muddle]] and [[occurs]] to [[orders]] over the course of ten minutes.

it is a [[festivities]] of life and an [[hopeful]] [[contention]] of [[purpose]] truth and good. representing along an [[shaft]] [[unrecognized]] in previous cinema, this [[movie]] should be taught in [[each]] high school.

*CHIASMUS* --------------------------------------------- Result 931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Just]] in [[time]] to capitalize on the long-awaited [[movie]] version of "Dreamgirls" is the DVD release of this semi-forgotten 1976 musical melodrama that also takes the rise of the Supremes as its inspiration. Released five years before the Broadway opening of "Dreamgirls" and partially set in the same period, it has a predominantly black cast and a story revolving around an up-and-coming girl group, and that's where the [[resemblance]] [[basically]] [[ends]]. [[Written]] by Joel Schumacher well before he [[became]] a big-league [[director]] of mainstream studio [[product]] ("Batman Forever", "The [[Phantom]] of the [[Opera]]"), this [[movie]] [[seems]] grittier on the surface. [[True]] to form, however, Schumacher [[weakens]] the storyline and [[character]] [[development]] by injecting an [[abundance]] of [[clichés]] and eye-rolling one-liners. With [[little]] affinity for staging musical [[numbers]], Sam O'Steen, a [[highly]] regarded [[film]] [[editor]] but neophyte [[director]], helms the production like a low-budget TV-movie with a frustratingly episodic [[structure]].

The [[story]] follows three Harlem sisters - sexy Sister, self-righteous Delores and sweet [[Sparkle]] - as they [[sing]] in the church [[choir]], [[meet]] smooth-talking but well-intentioned boys Stix and Levi, and then [[find]] their first [[taste]] of [[success]] as a [[singing]] [[group]] - first as a sweater-wearing quintet [[called]] the Hearts and then as a glitzy trio [[known]] as [[Sister]] and the Sisters. But naturally there are [[problems]] [[beyond]] the silly [[name]] for the [[group]] - [[Sister]] gets involved with [[nasty]] drug [[dealer]] Satin Struthers who [[beats]] her and turns her into a cocaine [[junkie]]; Levi goes to [[prison]] for [[getting]] caught in a drug pick-up for Satin; Stix [[gets]] frustrated by [[failure]] and [[unwisely]] turns to some Jewish mobsters for financial [[help]]; Delores just gets plain [[fed]] up; and poor [[little]] [[Sparkle]] has to [[decide]] what kind of [[future]] she [[wants]]. A [[big]] plus is that [[R]]&B great Curtis Mayfield wrote the atmospheric songs, some catchy and one, "Look Into [[Your]] Heart", a real [[winner]].

The solid cast does its best under the contrived circumstances. Lonette McKee's valiant attempt to make Sister a tragic figure is undercut by some of the ham-fisted [[plot]] turns, including a sad Billie Holliday-like turn at the mike. Before they hit it big on primetime TV, Philip Michael Thomas and Dorian Harewood portray Stix and Levi with boyish vitality if not much credibility. The best work comes from Mary Alice in a relatively silent turn as the girls' patient mother and a pre-"Fame" Irene Cara who effortlessly exudes sincerity in the title role (though her costumer and hair stylist should be shot for the hideous look she achieves in the final scene). The DVD just comes with the original theatrical trailer complete with an unctuous voice-over by DJ Casey Kasem and a bonus CD of five of the film's songs performed not by the original cast but by Aretha Franklin off her 1976 recording of the soundtrack. It's not a terrible movie, just an interesting if lacking curio that happens to cover the same ground as "Dreamgirls". [[Only]] in [[times]] to capitalize on the long-awaited [[film]] version of "Dreamgirls" is the DVD release of this semi-forgotten 1976 musical melodrama that also takes the rise of the Supremes as its inspiration. Released five years before the Broadway opening of "Dreamgirls" and partially set in the same period, it has a predominantly black cast and a story revolving around an up-and-coming girl group, and that's where the [[similarity]] [[broadly]] [[end]]. [[Authored]] by Joel Schumacher well before he [[came]] a big-league [[superintendent]] of mainstream studio [[products]] ("Batman Forever", "The [[Ghost]] of the [[Drama]]"), this [[film]] [[appears]] grittier on the surface. [[Veritable]] to form, however, Schumacher [[undermines]] the storyline and [[nature]] [[developments]] by injecting an [[abundant]] of [[cliché]] and eye-rolling one-liners. With [[small]] affinity for staging musical [[digit]], Sam O'Steen, a [[incredibly]] regarded [[movies]] [[editorial]] but neophyte [[headmaster]], helms the production like a low-budget TV-movie with a frustratingly episodic [[structures]].

The [[tales]] follows three Harlem sisters - sexy Sister, self-righteous Delores and sweet [[Spark]] - as they [[singing]] in the church [[choral]], [[respond]] smooth-talking but well-intentioned boys Stix and Levi, and then [[found]] their first [[liking]] of [[avail]] as a [[sings]] [[panels]] - first as a sweater-wearing quintet [[drew]] the Hearts and then as a glitzy trio [[renowned]] as [[Sisters]] and the Sisters. But naturally there are [[troubles]] [[afterlife]] the silly [[naming]] for the [[panels]] - [[Sisters]] gets involved with [[vile]] drug [[dealers]] Satin Struthers who [[beat]] her and turns her into a cocaine [[addict]]; Levi goes to [[prisons]] for [[obtain]] caught in a drug pick-up for Satin; Stix [[got]] frustrated by [[deficit]] and [[recklessly]] turns to some Jewish mobsters for financial [[aids]]; Delores just gets plain [[fueled]] up; and poor [[small]] [[Spark]] has to [[decided]] what kind of [[next]] she [[wish]]. A [[wide]] plus is that [[rs]]&B great Curtis Mayfield wrote the atmospheric songs, some catchy and one, "Look Into [[Ton]] Heart", a real [[winning]].

The solid cast does its best under the contrived circumstances. Lonette McKee's valiant attempt to make Sister a tragic figure is undercut by some of the ham-fisted [[intrigue]] turns, including a sad Billie Holliday-like turn at the mike. Before they hit it big on primetime TV, Philip Michael Thomas and Dorian Harewood portray Stix and Levi with boyish vitality if not much credibility. The best work comes from Mary Alice in a relatively silent turn as the girls' patient mother and a pre-"Fame" Irene Cara who effortlessly exudes sincerity in the title role (though her costumer and hair stylist should be shot for the hideous look she achieves in the final scene). The DVD just comes with the original theatrical trailer complete with an unctuous voice-over by DJ Casey Kasem and a bonus CD of five of the film's songs performed not by the original cast but by Aretha Franklin off her 1976 recording of the soundtrack. It's not a terrible movie, just an interesting if lacking curio that happens to cover the same ground as "Dreamgirls". --------------------------------------------- Result 932 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For die-hard Judy Garland fans only. There are two (2) numbers that are really good -- one where she does a number with an older cleaning lady (you've all seen the pics), and a pretty good number at the very end. There are a couple of scenes where the lines are funny. But, basically, the script is so bad and the movie so dated that it's hard not to cringe at the awfulness throughout. But it's worth the 2.50 to rent the movie -- just be prepared to fast-forward it. --------------------------------------------- Result 933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] But the opposite, sorry bud, i completely [[understand]] how you can be [[dragged]] into a film because you [[relate]] to the [[subject]] ( and you have). This film is terrible, the [[main]] [[character]] would [[give]] any [[charlie]] brown subtitler a [[run]] for his money he just [[constantly]] [[mumbles]] which is always a laugh, most scenes just feel awkward with [[characters]] more [[often]] than not [[gazing]] [[across]] to another with a [[look]] of...its your line now, then i will [[react]]. Best British comedy? Please [[buddy]], have a strong word with your [[bad]] [[bad]] self...at the end of the day ...the [[sun]] goes down...and this film is [[Awful]]. I [[mean]] well [[done]] to the people [[involved]]...they have [[made]] a [[film]]...and [[maybe]] [[motorbike]] [[enthusiasts]] may be into it but people that [[still]] [[live]] here on [[earth]] with an [[actual]] sense of humour will [[struggle]] with this more than smiling at the [[Christmas]] present they're nan [[bought]] them...was that [[overly]] [[harsh]]? i do apologise... But the opposite, sorry bud, i completely [[fathom]] how you can be [[languished]] into a film because you [[pertain]] to the [[topic]] ( and you have). This film is terrible, the [[principal]] [[trait]] would [[confer]] any [[vietcong]] brown subtitler a [[running]] for his money he just [[unceasingly]] [[mutters]] which is always a laugh, most scenes just feel awkward with [[personages]] more [[ordinarily]] than not [[gazed]] [[during]] to another with a [[peek]] of...its your line now, then i will [[responding]]. Best British comedy? Please [[dawg]], have a strong word with your [[amiss]] [[naughty]] self...at the end of the day ...the [[suen]] goes down...and this film is [[Odious]]. I [[meaning]] well [[doing]] to the people [[involvement]]...they have [[introduced]] a [[cinematography]]...and [[conceivably]] [[scooter]] [[followers]] may be into it but people that [[however]] [[vive]] here on [[land]] with an [[real]] sense of humour will [[tussle]] with this more than smiling at the [[Kringle]] present they're nan [[procured]] them...was that [[excessively]] [[hard]]? i do apologise... --------------------------------------------- Result 934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I haven't read this book, but all through the movie I was awestruck with only one thought in my head: This is so Vonnegut. I have never seen an author, all of the intelligence and life behind the workings of a novel, translated so well to film. This movie had the same complexities found in Vonnegut's novels: the jokes were often meaningful and symbolic, and the dramatic events and symbols were often also jokes.

Campbell was also a very Vonnegut character, portrayed perfectly by Nick Nolte. He had all of the earmarks of a Vonnegut "hero": lack of concern for political boundaries, ironic dark humor giving way to dumb inactivity in response to stress, and an unwillingness to push his version of reality on those around him.

Overall, I was constantly surprised and impressed as I watched this movie. It was the same feeling I had reading "Cat's Cradle," my first Vonnegut novel, as if the most perfectly oddball thing that could happen, he thought of THAT, and he made it real and important. Yes, he has nothing but army surplus "White Christmas" albums. So it goes! --------------------------------------------- Result 935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I show this film to university students in speech and media law because its lessons are timeless: Why speaking out against injustice is important and can bring about the changes sought by the oppressed. Why freedom of the press and freedom of speech are essential to democracy. This is a must-see story of how apartheid was brought to the attention of the world through the activism of Steven Biko and the journalism of Donald Woods. It also gives an important lesson of free speech: "You can blow out a candle, but you can't blow out a fire. Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher." (From Biko by Peter Gabriel, on Shaking the Tree). --------------------------------------------- Result 936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] SEVEN [[POUNDS]]: EMOTIONALLY FLAT, [[ILLOGICAL]], MORALLY [[DISTURBING]]

The [[movie]] was distributed in Italy as "[[Seven]] Souls". I was [[curious]] about the original title and, after some research, I found out that it refers to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where the usurer Shylock makes a terrible bond with the merchant Antonio, who will have to give him a "[[pound]]" of his flesh, in case he is not able to repay his debt. Whereas the Italian translation makes Ben's plan something deeply human, characterized by human sympathy, the original one, though cultivated enough to remain unperceived by anyone, makes it, just in its reference to the flesh, something cold, rational, deep-rooted in the physical side of man. Unfortunately, I think that the real quality of Ben's plan is revealed by the original title: it'a a cold machination, [[aimed]] at "donating" parts of his body, but lacking any authentic human empathy, at least the audience is not given the chance to see or perceive any pure relation of souls within the whole movie. The only exception is the love-story with the girl, which seems to be a sort of non-programmed [[incident]], to which Ben yields, but [[incapable]] of [[conveying]] true [[emotional]] [[involvement]]. I really didn't like the [[idea]] at the core of the movie: the idea that a person, however [[devoured]] by the pain for the death of his beloved and of other people he himself has caused, takes the resolute decision to expiate his sense of guilt through suicide: besides being [[improbable]], it makes no [[sense]]. I would have [[liked]], and I think it would have been more [[positive]] if, in the end, Ben had [[decided]] to [[abandon]] the [[idea]] of committing suicide and go on living, [[thus]] [[helping]] those same people, and [[maybe]] [[many]] more, just standing near them, and [[helping]] them through his presence. He wouldn't have [[saved]] their lives [[miraculously]], of course: this [[would]] have probably caused more suffering, but I think it [[could]] have been more constructive from a human, and moral point of view. There are [[many]] [[illogical]] and [[disturbing]] [[things]]: the [[initial]] [[reference]] to God's [[creation]] in seven days (which, by the [[way]], [[according]] to the [[Bible]], are six!): what does it [[mean]]? And what about a [[woman]] [[suffering]] from heart-disease which [[prevents]] her from [[running]] and [[even]] from singing without feeling bad, who can have [[normal]] sex with a man who, feeling, as it should be, destroyed by the death of his wife and having donated organs and pieces of his body, doesn't seem to feel so much tried, both emotionally and physically, from his impaired condition? The movie is saved by good acting, but all the rest is pure [[nonsense]], not only from a logical point of view, but also from a human and [[emotional]] one. SEVEN [[POUND]]: EMOTIONALLY FLAT, [[SENSELESS]], MORALLY [[DISCONCERTING]]

The [[filmmaking]] was distributed in Italy as "[[Sept]] Souls". I was [[nosy]] about the original title and, after some research, I found out that it refers to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where the usurer Shylock makes a terrible bond with the merchant Antonio, who will have to give him a "[[lbs]]" of his flesh, in case he is not able to repay his debt. Whereas the Italian translation makes Ben's plan something deeply human, characterized by human sympathy, the original one, though cultivated enough to remain unperceived by anyone, makes it, just in its reference to the flesh, something cold, rational, deep-rooted in the physical side of man. Unfortunately, I think that the real quality of Ben's plan is revealed by the original title: it'a a cold machination, [[destined]] at "donating" parts of his body, but lacking any authentic human empathy, at least the audience is not given the chance to see or perceive any pure relation of souls within the whole movie. The only exception is the love-story with the girl, which seems to be a sort of non-programmed [[accidents]], to which Ben yields, but [[unable]] of [[transmitting]] true [[sentimental]] [[engagement]]. I really didn't like the [[ideals]] at the core of the movie: the idea that a person, however [[tasted]] by the pain for the death of his beloved and of other people he himself has caused, takes the resolute decision to expiate his sense of guilt through suicide: besides being [[unlikely]], it makes no [[sensing]]. I would have [[loved]], and I think it would have been more [[favorable]] if, in the end, Ben had [[decide]] to [[abandoning]] the [[think]] of committing suicide and go on living, [[accordingly]] [[contribute]] those same people, and [[perhaps]] [[various]] more, just standing near them, and [[helps]] them through his presence. He wouldn't have [[rescue]] their lives [[narrowly]], of course: this [[should]] have probably caused more suffering, but I think it [[did]] have been more constructive from a human, and moral point of view. There are [[numerous]] [[irrational]] and [[disconcerting]] [[aspects]]: the [[upfront]] [[referencing]] to God's [[establishment]] in seven days (which, by the [[camino]], [[depending]] to the [[Bibles]], are six!): what does it [[imply]]? And what about a [[wife]] [[suffers]] from heart-disease which [[hinders]] her from [[executing]] and [[yet]] from singing without feeling bad, who can have [[habitual]] sex with a man who, feeling, as it should be, destroyed by the death of his wife and having donated organs and pieces of his body, doesn't seem to feel so much tried, both emotionally and physically, from his impaired condition? The movie is saved by good acting, but all the rest is pure [[absurdity]], not only from a logical point of view, but also from a human and [[affective]] one. --------------------------------------------- Result 937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I was [[really]] impressed with this [[film]]. The writing was fantastic, and the [[characters]] were all [[rich]], and [[simple]]. It's very [[easy]] to [[get]] [[emotionally]] attached to all of them. The creators of this movie [[really]] hit the nail [[right]] on the head when it [[comes]] to [[creating]] [[real]] life [[characters]], and getting the [[viewer]] sucked right into their world. Further, the music is [[terrific]]. They employed some independents to do the [[score]], and some of the soundtrack, and they do a [[fantastic]] [[job]] [[adding]] to the movie. [[If]] you have a [[chance]] to [[catch]] this movie in a [[small]] [[theater]] or at a [[film]] [[festival]] (like I did), I [[highly]] recommend that you go see it. [[Also]], on a personal [[note]], Paget Brewster is [[beautiful]] in this [[movie]]. That's [[reason]] [[enough]] to [[go]] [[check]] it out. I was [[truthfully]] impressed with this [[movies]]. The writing was fantastic, and the [[features]] were all [[wealthy]], and [[simpler]]. It's very [[simpler]] to [[gets]] [[romantically]] attached to all of them. The creators of this movie [[truthfully]] hit the nail [[rights]] on the head when it [[arrives]] to [[establishment]] [[actual]] life [[features]], and getting the [[beholder]] sucked right into their world. Further, the music is [[wondrous]]. They employed some independents to do the [[punctuation]], and some of the soundtrack, and they do a [[wondrous]] [[labor]] [[added]] to the movie. [[Unless]] you have a [[luck]] to [[capture]] this movie in a [[tiny]] [[cinemas]] or at a [[movie]] [[celebratory]] (like I did), I [[vastly]] recommend that you go see it. [[Furthermore]], on a personal [[remark]], Paget Brewster is [[wondrous]] in this [[cinematography]]. That's [[justification]] [[suffice]] to [[going]] [[auditing]] it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A really great movie and true story. Dan Jansen the Greatest skater ever. A touching and beautiful movie the whole family can enjoy. The story of Jane Jansens battle with cancer and Dan Jansen love for his sister. Of a important promise made by Jansen to win a gold medal to prove his sister Jane was right to believe in his talent in speed skating was justified. This picture is well worth the time. I wish they would make more films of this quality. Thank you for a great film with excellent actors and an excellent story. It is a very touching story about a beautiful family support and faith for their children and a special dream for their youngest son and his sister. --------------------------------------------- Result 939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Cornel [[Wilde]] and three dumbbells search for [[sunken]] treasure in the [[south]] Atlantic.

The treasure-hunters led by Wilde fight a [[group]] of territorial sharks with cute [[little]] sneers on their hungry faces. [[Wilde]] and his merry [[men]] [[must]] [[find]] a [[way]] to [[take]] themselves off the menu so they can [[begin]] [[excavating]] an [[old]] Spanish galleon filled with gold [[bullion]].

[[After]] the crew [[engages]] in a [[small]] eternity of pushing, shoving, [[arguing]], and [[listening]] to Wilde's [[annoying]] health tips, 5 crazy convicts board the [[boat]] and [[complicate]] things. [[Now]] it is a [[battle]] of [[wits]] as to who [[gets]] the [[treasure]] and who [[gets]] to [[see]] what the [[inside]] of a shark's [[stomach]] [[looks]] like.

At [[least]] [[Wilde]] is in shape wearing [[exactly]] the same [[thing]] he wore in 'The [[Naked]] Prey' 10 [[years]] earlier and he has [[remained]] in [[excellent]] condition.

Made on a budget of 75 cents. Cornel [[Feral]] and three dumbbells search for [[drowned]] treasure in the [[southern]] Atlantic.

The treasure-hunters led by Wilde fight a [[grouped]] of territorial sharks with cute [[small]] sneers on their hungry faces. [[Wild]] and his merry [[males]] [[gotta]] [[found]] a [[manner]] to [[taking]] themselves off the menu so they can [[launching]] [[digging]] an [[archaic]] Spanish galleon filled with gold [[ingot]].

[[Upon]] the crew [[participates]] in a [[tiny]] eternity of pushing, shoving, [[claiming]], and [[listen]] to Wilde's [[galling]] health tips, 5 crazy convicts board the [[battleship]] and [[intricate]] things. [[Presently]] it is a [[combat]] of [[spirit]] as to who [[receives]] the [[tesoro]] and who [[receives]] to [[behold]] what the [[inland]] of a shark's [[abdomen]] [[seem]] like.

At [[lowest]] [[Sauvage]] is in shape wearing [[precisely]] the same [[stuff]] he wore in 'The [[Barefoot]] Prey' 10 [[ages]] earlier and he has [[persisted]] in [[sumptuous]] condition.

Made on a budget of 75 cents. --------------------------------------------- Result 940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The script for this Columbo film seemed to be pulled right out of a sappy 1980's soap opera. Deeply character-driven films are great, but only if the characters are compelling. And in this film the only thing compelling was my desire to change the channel. The villain's dialog sounds as if it were written by a romance novelist. The great Lt. Columbo himself is no where near his famous, lovable, self-effacing, crumpled self; and the bride/kidnap victim is a whimpering, one-dimensional damsel-in-distress (she cowers in fear from a tiny scalpel held flimsily in the hand of her abductor - come on!!! I could have knocked the scalpel out of his hand and kicked him in the you-know-what in 2 seconds). In any sense of reality, this character would have at least TRIED to struggle or fight back at least a little. And speaking of reality....the story revolves around a kidnapping which is worked and solved by the police. The POLICE?? Give me a break. Everyone knows the FBI takes over EVERY kidnapping case. This was NO Columbo, just a shallow and totally predictable crime drama with our familiar Lt. Columbo written in and stretched to 2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This had a good [[story]]...it had a nice [[pace]] and all characters are [[developed]] cool.

I've watched a [[whole]] bunch of [[movies]] in the last two [[weeks]] and this had to be the [[best]] one I've [[seen]] in the two [[weeks]].

Jason Bigg's [[character]] was the best though.

[[Even]] [[though]] it was [[small]], it was cleverly [[crafted]] from the very [[beginning]].

This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, direction, performing, sound, [[design]] overall in all [[capacity]] just was [[really]] [[thought]] out [[pretty]] cool.

This [[film]] scored [[pretty]] [[high]] out of all the movie's I've [[seen]] [[lately]] - and the [[rest]] were [[big]] budget or better [[publicized]].

[[Good]] [[job]] in writing. This had a good [[narratives]]...it had a nice [[tempo]] and all characters are [[worded]] cool.

I've watched a [[total]] bunch of [[cinema]] in the last two [[zhou]] and this had to be the [[bestest]] one I've [[noticed]] in the two [[chow]].

Jason Bigg's [[nature]] was the best though.

[[Yet]] [[if]] it was [[scant]], it was cleverly [[elaborated]] from the very [[starts]].

This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, direction, performing, sound, [[designs]] overall in all [[capability]] just was [[truly]] [[thoughts]] out [[quite]] cool.

This [[cinematography]] scored [[quite]] [[alto]] out of all the movie's I've [[watched]] [[newly]] - and the [[stays]] were [[overwhelming]] budget or better [[advertised]].

[[Well]] [[labour]] in writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Indian Summer is a warm, multi-character film, that would make a fine afternoon film (with a bit of editing).

The film begins in the past with a group of children being shown a moose, which sets the tone perfectly before cutting into the present, when a group of adults from the "golden age" of the camp are invited back again to spend a few weeks holiday by the head of the camp, Uncle Lou. The film then allows the viewer to spend time with these characters as they remember their times at the camp, and form new memories in their latest stay.

The film succeeds in the great way it brings across its characters in this gorgeous setting, and allows them room to develop without having to worry about plot developments. Watching these people reminisce, and their relationships with each other is what the film is all about and why it works so well. It never goes to over the top and melodramatic, always keeping its warmth, charm and realism. I've never seen a film where nostalgia is captured so well, and found myself getting drawn in despite never having been to one of these camps as a child myself.

For a warm, nostalgic character movie, I sincerely recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie probably had a $750 budget, and still managed to surpass Titanic. i rented this the day i crashed my mom's car, and it was the only thing that cheered me up beyond belief! it has to be tied with 'The Assult of the Killer Bimbos'. Things to look for are: 1. The drive in blow job chinese girl scene 2. The bleach blonde in the sassoon shirt who never changes 3. The Flinstone-like screech out driving 4. The clashing ensemble worn by the redhead right before she gets killed (don't worry, i'm not ruining any surprises, for it's soooo predictable) 5. The guy who finds it necessary to howl. 6. The mental patient who plays a convincing job of being insane by poking out the eyes of a maniquen. 7. The hour long chase at the end involving the teacher and the priest. 8. the womman writing grafitti on the bathroom wall. 9. last, but not least, the wonderful special effects--especially the stab in the boob that made a... heaven help me... popping noise.

enjoy!

--------------------------------------------- Result 944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Let]] me [[start]] out by saying i will [[try]] not to put too [[many]] spoilers in this. [[Normally]] I enjoy [[Robin]] [[Williams]] movies, [[however]] this gem was not one of them. It was [[billed]] as a suspenseful thriller. The night listener was [[anything]] but. To be blunt there were 6 people in the [[theater]] opening day, 2 walked out, for [[good]] [[reason]]. The [[movie]] was in my [[opinion]] poorly [[written]] and [[directed]]. The acting was alright but again there wasn't [[anything]] to [[work]] with. The [[movie]] is about A storyteller who reads a [[good]] book by a dying [[kid]]. However *insert spooky here* no one can [[verify]] the kids existence. So Williams goes to Wisconsin to [[try]] and [[find]] the author, [[however]] all he gets is a headache and excuses from the [[boys]] caretaker. There thats it, thats all. You [[wait]] for about an [[hour]] and a half and [[movie]] ends. It had as many thrills and [[chills]] as a dentist office visit. The homosexual undertones, or overtones had [[really]] nothing to do with the [[story]], and the [[movie]] had a little [[profanity]] but it [[seemed]] to be [[thrown]] in there for [[absolutely]] no [[reason]] and [[made]] [[little]] [[sense]]. [[In]] [[conclusion]] i [[really]] can't [[write]] a [[decent]] [[review]] on this [[film]] because there was [[nothing]] to it, it was as captivating as [[watching]] [[paint]] dry. I [[gave]] it a 2 because the acting for what it was worth was alright and it wasn't [[directed]] by Uwe Boll. [[Allowing]] me [[beginning]] out by saying i will [[strive]] not to put too [[countless]] spoilers in this. [[Habitually]] I enjoy [[Robben]] [[William]] movies, [[conversely]] this gem was not one of them. It was [[billing]] as a suspenseful thriller. The night listener was [[something]] but. To be blunt there were 6 people in the [[theatres]] opening day, 2 walked out, for [[alright]] [[reasons]]. The [[filmmaking]] was in my [[view]] poorly [[wrote]] and [[aimed]]. The acting was alright but again there wasn't [[algo]] to [[collaborated]] with. The [[filmmaking]] is about A storyteller who reads a [[alright]] book by a dying [[child]]. However *insert spooky here* no one can [[checks]] the kids existence. So Williams goes to Wisconsin to [[strive]] and [[finds]] the author, [[conversely]] all he gets is a headache and excuses from the [[boy]] caretaker. There thats it, thats all. You [[awaited]] for about an [[hours]] and a half and [[film]] ends. It had as many thrills and [[shivers]] as a dentist office visit. The homosexual undertones, or overtones had [[genuinely]] nothing to do with the [[histories]], and the [[filmmaking]] had a little [[rudeness]] but it [[appeared]] to be [[threw]] in there for [[perfectly]] no [[cause]] and [[introduced]] [[small]] [[sensing]]. [[For]] [[conclusions]] i [[genuinely]] can't [[handwriting]] a [[dignified]] [[reviews]] on this [[filmmaking]] because there was [[none]] to it, it was as captivating as [[staring]] [[paintings]] dry. I [[provided]] it a 2 because the acting for what it was worth was alright and it wasn't [[oriented]] by Uwe Boll. --------------------------------------------- Result 945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This was a [[disappointing]] [[film]] for me. It came to me via a boxed set entitled, "Classic Film Noir," which was a gift from [[someone]] who knows I typically enjoy films done in that style (I insist that noir is a style, not a genre). I do not think it is a noir film at all. There seems to be a tendency these days to label and market every black and white B movie made from 1947 to 1955 as noir, and the label does not always fit. There is a persecuted male protagonist, Ed Cullen (Lee J. Cobb), and most of the film's action takes place indoors. Those are just about the only noir elements that I could see. There is no pervasive paranoia, or any real reason why one should sympathize with Ed Cullen. Jane Wyatt was overdressed and unconvincing as a femme fatale. I do not want to spoil this film for potential viewers. However, I would be interested in hearing what other connoisseurs of film noir have to say about it. This was a [[depressing]] [[filmmaking]] for me. It came to me via a boxed set entitled, "Classic Film Noir," which was a gift from [[everyone]] who knows I typically enjoy films done in that style (I insist that noir is a style, not a genre). I do not think it is a noir film at all. There seems to be a tendency these days to label and market every black and white B movie made from 1947 to 1955 as noir, and the label does not always fit. There is a persecuted male protagonist, Ed Cullen (Lee J. Cobb), and most of the film's action takes place indoors. Those are just about the only noir elements that I could see. There is no pervasive paranoia, or any real reason why one should sympathize with Ed Cullen. Jane Wyatt was overdressed and unconvincing as a femme fatale. I do not want to spoil this film for potential viewers. However, I would be interested in hearing what other connoisseurs of film noir have to say about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I was a kid we always used to be babysat, and we always used to rent a film or see a film at the cinema. This is one of the films we watched. This is one of the stupidest films I've ever seen, I think it might even be a Walt Disney Pictures film! A martian is dropped on earth, turns into a human, befriends a human, and is trying everything he can to get back home. But he is distracted by the wonders of the Earth. The only good comment I can give is the choice of actors, Back to the Future's Christopher Lloyd as the martian, Uncle Martin, Dumb and Dumber's Jeff Daniels as Tim O'Hara, Elizabeth Hurley as Brace Channing and Daryl Hannah as Lizzie. But apart from that it's complete crap. Poor! --------------------------------------------- Result 947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Where the Sidewalk [[Ends]] (1950)

Where One Ends, Another [[Begins]]

This is a prototypical [[film]] [[noir]], and as such, pretty [[flawless]], from both [[style]] and content points of [[view]]. The [[photography]] and [[night]] settings are first rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama [[ooze]] in scene after scene), and the close-ups on [[faces]] pure expressionism. I can watch this [[kind]] of [[film]] for the visuals alone, [[even]] when the actors struggle and the plot stinks.

But the acting is [[first]] rate here, and the plot [[features]] what I [[consider]] the [[core]] of most [[noir]] [[films]], the alienated male lead (representing the [[many]] [[men]] returning home to a [[changed]] United States after the [[war]] and [[feeling]] lost themselves). [[In]] fact, not only is Dana Andrews really [[convincing]] as the [[troubled]], [[loner]] detective, he has a [[small]] but [[important]] counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an [[decorated]] ex-GI [[fallen]] [[onto]] [[hard]] [[times]] and booze. The [[fact]] the one [[man]] [[kills]] the other might be of [[monumental]] [[significance]], overall-- the [[regular]] [[guy]] [[struggling]] through his [[inner]] [[problems]] to success while the medal-wearing [[soldier]] [[slips]] into an accidental death with a silver [[plate]] in his [[head]]. The [[woman]] transitions from one to the other--we [[assume]] they [[marry]] and have [[children]] as [[suggested]] earlier in the [[movie]]. Even if this is pushing an [[interpretation]] [[onto]] it after the [[fact]], we can [[still]] see the [[path]] of one [[man]] with some psychological [[baggage]] careening through a crisis to the [[highest]] [[kind]] of moral order--turning himself in for a [[small]] [[crime]] just at the point he has actually [[gotten]] away with it.

This [[movie]] belongs to [[Andrews]]. He plays a far more [[restrained]] and [[moving]] [[type]] than Kirk Douglas plays in a [[similar]] role in [[William]] Wyler's Detective [[Story]] [[made]] just one year [[later]], and [[Andrews]] certainly is less theatrical. You could easily [[see]] both [[movies]] side by side for a textbook [[compare]] and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally [[struggling]] through it all, and Douglas as [[Detective]] [[McLeod]] is not, might [[explain]] why one [[man]] gets his [[girl]] and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney [[pulls]] off a [[hugely]] sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and "[[pretty]]" [[type]] of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you [[want]] [[Dixon]] to [[actually]] [[marry]].

The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.

It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call "happy" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel. Where the Sidewalk [[End]] (1950)

Where One Ends, Another [[Embark]]

This is a prototypical [[cinema]] [[negro]], and as such, pretty [[perfecting]], from both [[elegance]] and content points of [[views]]. The [[photographed]] and [[nuit]] settings are first rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama [[muck]] in scene after scene), and the close-ups on [[confronting]] pure expressionism. I can watch this [[genus]] of [[movie]] for the visuals alone, [[yet]] when the actors struggle and the plot stinks.

But the acting is [[frst]] rate here, and the plot [[featuring]] what I [[considering]] the [[nuclei]] of most [[negro]] [[movie]], the alienated male lead (representing the [[multiple]] [[males]] returning home to a [[amended]] United States after the [[warfare]] and [[impression]] lost themselves). [[Among]] fact, not only is Dana Andrews really [[persuade]] as the [[tormented]], [[hermit]] detective, he has a [[minimal]] but [[principal]] counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an [[ornate]] ex-GI [[dropped]] [[on]] [[stiff]] [[moments]] and booze. The [[facto]] the one [[guy]] [[murdering]] the other might be of [[enormous]] [[importance]], overall-- the [[regularly]] [[boys]] [[battling]] through his [[interiors]] [[difficulty]] to success while the medal-wearing [[servicemen]] [[slip]] into an accidental death with a silver [[slab]] in his [[chief]]. The [[wife]] transitions from one to the other--we [[suppose]] they [[married]] and have [[kids]] as [[proposed]] earlier in the [[films]]. Even if this is pushing an [[explanations]] [[for]] it after the [[facto]], we can [[yet]] see the [[way]] of one [[dude]] with some psychological [[bag]] careening through a crisis to the [[higher]] [[genre]] of moral order--turning himself in for a [[petite]] [[offence]] just at the point he has actually [[become]] away with it.

This [[film]] belongs to [[Andrew]]. He plays a far more [[limited]] and [[transferring]] [[genus]] than Kirk Douglas plays in a [[analogue]] role in [[Guillaume]] Wyler's Detective [[Tale]] [[introduced]] just one year [[then]], and [[Andrew]] certainly is less theatrical. You could easily [[seeing]] both [[film]] side by side for a textbook [[comparisons]] and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally [[tussle]] through it all, and Douglas as [[Inspector]] [[macleod]] is not, might [[explained]] why one [[guy]] gets his [[girls]] and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney [[pulled]] off a [[unbelievably]] sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and "[[belle]]" [[genre]] of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you [[wish]] [[Dickson]] to [[genuinely]] [[matrimony]].

The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.

It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call "happy" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel. --------------------------------------------- Result 948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and [[reproduce]] themselves. [[So]] far for the horror-elements this [[movie]] has. All the [[rest]] of MUNCHIES plays out [[like]] a [[really]] [[retarded]] [[comedy]] that's so [[stupid]] you won't [[find]] it [[funny]] anymore after about 15 minutes. I can [[imagine]] [[little]] [[kids]] [[cheering]] for these [[little]] boogers, but adults will be left with only those [[supposedly]] "[[smart]]" [[references]] [[translating]] to on-screen stuff like [[Capt]]. Kirk's [[log]] [[entries]] from [[STAR]] [[TREK]], the most well-known scene from E.T., a [[blatant]] statement from the filmmakers [[going]] "[[Look]]! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' [[success]] here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint [[Eastwood]] [[telling]] us... what about his [[western]] [[movies]] [[exactly]]? That [[last]] one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves [[seems]] to be a bad [[thing]]. Don't know where they got that [[idea]] from.

Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable [[film]] to [[sit]] through, for that [[matter]]. It's just really, [[really]] dumb. And if you [[manage]] to crack a [[smile]] while watching it, you'll [[probably]] feel as dumb yourself for having [[done]] that after the film's [[finished]].

[[Good]] Badness? [[Yes]], but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're [[looking]] for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10. Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and [[replay]] themselves. [[Therefore]] far for the horror-elements this [[filmmaking]] has. All the [[resting]] of MUNCHIES plays out [[iike]] a [[genuinely]] [[nutcase]] [[humor]] that's so [[dumb]] you won't [[found]] it [[hilarious]] anymore after about 15 minutes. I can [[reckon]] [[petit]] [[brats]] [[chanting]] for these [[tiny]] boogers, but adults will be left with only those [[reportedly]] "[[smarter]]" [[reference]] [[convert]] to on-screen stuff like [[Captain]]. Kirk's [[registers]] [[entrances]] from [[STARS]] [[HIKING]], the most well-known scene from E.T., a [[gross]] statement from the filmmakers [[go]] "[[Peek]]! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' [[accomplishments]] here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint [[Nolan]] [[tell]] us... what about his [[west]] [[movie]] [[accurately]]? That [[latter]] one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves [[appears]] to be a bad [[stuff]]. Don't know where they got that [[ideas]] from.

Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable [[filmmaking]] to [[seated]] through, for that [[topic]]. It's just really, [[genuinely]] dumb. And if you [[managerial]] to crack a [[grin]] while watching it, you'll [[undoubtedly]] feel as dumb yourself for having [[played]] that after the film's [[finishing]].

[[Alright]] Badness? [[Yep]], but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're [[researching]] for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 949 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Any movie with "National Lampoon" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience."National Lampoon's European [[Vacation]]" is unlikely to [[rectify]] that situation. The [[appalling]] Griswalds are just that - [[appalling]].They are not [[funny]]. [[Clearly]] [[Mr]] [[Chevy]] [[Chase]] thinks he's funny, after all [[Miss]] B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's [[getting]] paid for it and didn't have to [[fork]] out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same [[old]] same [[old]] TV [[performers]], [[Messrs]] [[Idle]],Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same [[old]] same [[old]] [[tired]] clichés,[[Mr]] [[Chase]] [[gets]] lost in the hotel [[corridor]]....[[yawn]],yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham [[Palace]],[[Big]] Ben......I feel [[cheated]] that we never [[saw]] bobbies on [[bicycles]] two-by-two.........rosie red [[cheeks]] on the [[little]] chil - dren,[[need]] I go on? The [[English]] are buffoons,the French [[vicious]] - tongued Yank-haters.The [[Germans]] pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,[[Clark]]),and the [[Italians]] lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible "comic" situation is worked to [[death]],Mr [[Chase]] gurns [[desperately]],Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]]. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never [[lose]] money by underestimating public [[taste]]. Any movie with "National Lampoon" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience."National Lampoon's European [[Holiday]]" is unlikely to [[redress]] that situation. The [[terrible]] Griswalds are just that - [[shocking]].They are not [[hilarious]]. [[Clara]] [[Herr]] [[Chevrolet]] [[Hunting]] thinks he's funny, after all [[Mademoiselle]] B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's [[obtain]] paid for it and didn't have to [[pitchfork]] out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same [[longtime]] same [[former]] TV [[performer]], [[Yannick]] [[Inactive]],Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same [[longtime]] same [[former]] [[knackered]] clichés,[[Herr]] [[Hunts]] [[got]] lost in the hotel [[aisle]]....[[yawns]],yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham [[Mansions]],[[Overwhelming]] Ben......I feel [[fooled]] that we never [[noticed]] bobbies on [[motorcycle]] two-by-two.........rosie red [[cheekbones]] on the [[small]] chil - dren,[[needs]] I go on? The [[Englishman]] are buffoons,the French [[ferocious]] - tongued Yank-haters.The [[Germany]] pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,[[Clarke]]),and the [[Italia]] lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible "comic" situation is worked to [[fatalities]],Mr [[Chasing]] gurns [[frantically]],Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are [[painfully]] [[unfavourable]]. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never [[losing]] money by underestimating public [[tasting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] 'The Last Wave' is far more than the sum of its parts. It's not merely a disaster film, not [[simply]] an [[exploration]] into Australian Aboriginal spirituality, and [[certainly]] more than a [[simple]] [[court]] [[drama]]. [[Writer]]/Director Peter [[Weir]] [[manages]] to take these elements to the [[next]] [[level]] to [[produce]] a [[truly]] [[effective]] and thought-provoking film with the same eerie [[atmosphere]] he gave to 'Picnic [[At]] Hanging Rock' two years earlier, that you will continue to [[remember]] [[years]] later.

When lawyer David Burton (Chamberlain) is [[called]] to [[defend]] Chris Lee (Gulpilil) over the death of an Aboriginal for which he may or may not be directly responsible, he [[finds]] himself not merely struggling to [[get]] the truth from Lee, but [[making]] [[sense]] of what he hears when it does [[come]]. As with the [[Aboriginal]] [[belief]] that there are two [[worlds]] - the [[everyday]] and the Dreamtime, the truth exists on two completely [[different]] [[levels]], with ramifications more disastrous than Burton [[could]] ever have imagined.

No doubt the [[reason]] why '[[Picnic]] [[At]] [[Hanging]] Rock' is better [[remembered]] is because of its enduring [[mystery]]. We are [[led]] along the same [[path]] but [[forced]] to [[find]] [[answers]] for ourselves. [[In]] 'The Last Wave', we can piece everything together by the [[end]] of the [[film]]. [[However]], [[even]] with all the [[information]], we have to [[choose]] how much of it we [[want]] to [[believe]], because the [[film]] takes us [[beyond]] the [[borders]] of our normal [[realities]].

[[On]] the production side, Weir [[uses]] his budget to [[great]] [[effect]], [[progressively]] [[building]] a sense of doom in everything from soft lighting, to heavy [[rain]], to good [[use]] of sound. The incidental music is unobtrusive, never [[trying]] to be [[grandiose]]. [[Richard]] Chamberlain [[manages]] to convey the bafflement the audience [[would]] doubtless feel as he [[tries]] to [[unravel]] the mystery. David Gulpilil [[excellently]] [[portrays]] a [[man]] [[trapped]] between two worlds, [[wanting]] to do the right [[thing]], but [[afraid]] because he already knows the [[ending]].

Put all these things together, and you have a [[perfect]] [[example]] of why David Weir is a [[familiar]] [[name]] in [[cinema]] thirty [[years]] on. [[Strongly]] [[recommended]]. 'The Last Wave' is far more than the sum of its parts. It's not merely a disaster film, not [[solely]] an [[crawling]] into Australian Aboriginal spirituality, and [[probably]] more than a [[mere]] [[courthouse]] [[tragedy]]. [[Novelist]]/Director Peter [[Spillway]] [[runs]] to take these elements to the [[imminent]] [[echelon]] to [[producing]] a [[honestly]] [[efficient]] and thought-provoking film with the same eerie [[atmospheric]] he gave to 'Picnic [[During]] Hanging Rock' two years earlier, that you will continue to [[remind]] [[olds]] later.

When lawyer David Burton (Chamberlain) is [[drew]] to [[defence]] Chris Lee (Gulpilil) over the death of an Aboriginal for which he may or may not be directly responsible, he [[found]] himself not merely struggling to [[gets]] the truth from Lee, but [[doing]] [[sensing]] of what he hears when it does [[arrived]]. As with the [[Natives]] [[beliefs]] that there are two [[universe]] - the [[ordinary]] and the Dreamtime, the truth exists on two completely [[disparate]] [[grades]], with ramifications more disastrous than Burton [[would]] ever have imagined.

No doubt the [[justification]] why '[[Barbecue]] [[Under]] [[Dangling]] Rock' is better [[recalled]] is because of its enduring [[riddle]]. We are [[headed]] along the same [[route]] but [[obligated]] to [[found]] [[answer]] for ourselves. [[For]] 'The Last Wave', we can piece everything together by the [[termination]] of the [[kino]]. [[Instead]], [[yet]] with all the [[info]], we have to [[elected]] how much of it we [[wants]] to [[believing]], because the [[movie]] takes us [[afterlife]] the [[confines]] of our normal [[truths]].

[[Onto]] the production side, Weir [[used]] his budget to [[huge]] [[consequences]], [[gradually]] [[constructing]] a sense of doom in everything from soft lighting, to heavy [[acids]], to good [[employs]] of sound. The incidental music is unobtrusive, never [[attempting]] to be [[resplendent]]. [[Richards]] Chamberlain [[runs]] to convey the bafflement the audience [[should]] doubtless feel as he [[endeavour]] to [[decipher]] the mystery. David Gulpilil [[divinely]] [[denotes]] a [[males]] [[ambushed]] between two worlds, [[wants]] to do the right [[stuff]], but [[worried]] because he already knows the [[terminated]].

Put all these things together, and you have a [[perfecting]] [[instance]] of why David Weir is a [[known]] [[names]] in [[cinemas]] thirty [[yrs]] on. [[Flatly]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am amazed at the [[amount]] of [[praise]] that is heaped on this movie by other [[commentators]]. To me it was rather a [[disappointment]], especially the [[combination]] of historical facts, fantasy and the main character's internal turmoil does not [[work]] at all (in Vonnegut's [[book]] [[Slaughterhouse]] [[Five]] and [[even]] in George Roy Hill's [[adaptation]] for the screen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questions are left open. Did I [[miss]] some central [[points]]? Or did I fail to spot the lines that [[supposedly]] connect the dots?

A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home his father has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographs of heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his dad doesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family moves away from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is a married man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays does he write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actress and looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite their son to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up in Germany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful? Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likes the Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don't ask me.

Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, is a kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love with his wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife). There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in the movie, it much more seems a Republic of One.

On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcast anti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device for transmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who read between the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin park bench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to play along comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up to broadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.

So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as the Last Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages is fairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened when Campbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must have scrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies (touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such tours really happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says he goes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an American soldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to a sight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with the help of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.

AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS

BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961, Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns the loss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow they do, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitz survivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him and want him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wife for him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls in at the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big War Criminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to Adolf Eichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished, hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty the least bit.

While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, I just had the impression that the main character is a person who at all times is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of love for anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser who mourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as a potential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing the Last Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot of courage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that by accepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-win situation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matter who had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes up during the first part of the story.

One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and that nobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical development of the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to make a point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republic of Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if you consider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatile and sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forced to use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect are the different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but I guess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book a chance. I am amazed at the [[somme]] of [[applaud]] that is heaped on this movie by other [[analysts]]. To me it was rather a [[displeasure]], especially the [[jumpsuit]] of historical facts, fantasy and the main character's internal turmoil does not [[cooperated]] at all (in Vonnegut's [[ledger]] [[Abattoir]] [[Cinq]] and [[yet]] in George Roy Hill's [[adjust]] for the screen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questions are left open. Did I [[mademoiselle]] some central [[dots]]? Or did I fail to spot the lines that [[allegedly]] connect the dots?

A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home his father has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographs of heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his dad doesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family moves away from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is a married man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays does he write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actress and looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite their son to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up in Germany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful? Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likes the Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don't ask me.

Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, is a kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love with his wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife). There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in the movie, it much more seems a Republic of One.

On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcast anti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device for transmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who read between the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin park bench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to play along comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up to broadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.

So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as the Last Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages is fairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened when Campbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must have scrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies (touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such tours really happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says he goes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an American soldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to a sight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with the help of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.

AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS

BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961, Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns the loss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow they do, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitz survivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him and want him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wife for him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls in at the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big War Criminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to Adolf Eichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished, hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty the least bit.

While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, I just had the impression that the main character is a person who at all times is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of love for anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser who mourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as a potential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing the Last Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot of courage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that by accepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-win situation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matter who had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes up during the first part of the story.

One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and that nobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical development of the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to make a point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republic of Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if you consider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatile and sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forced to use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect are the different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but I guess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 952 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is absolutely the worst trash I have ever seen. When I saw it in the theater (arghhh!), it took 15 full minutes before I realized that what I was seeing was the feature, not a sick joke! --------------------------------------------- Result 953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I stumbled across rerun syndication of this show several years ago, and fell in love with it. It features Téa Leoni and Holland Taylor and kept me laughing, one episode after the next. I guess it didn't make it so big, and was cancelled after a few seasons, but I believe it was a good run, and would suggest watching it...if the opportunity arises. --------------------------------------------- Result 954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Undoubtedly]] the [[best]] heavy metal [[horror]] [[item]] made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which [[admittedly]] doesn't sound like much [[considering]] how utterly [[abysmal]] many other entries in this [[odd]] [[little]] fright film sub-genre like "Hard [[Rock]] Zombies," "Blood Tracks," "[[Terror]] on [[Tour]]," and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker "Rock'n'Roll Nightmare" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the excessive splatter and [[needlessly]] flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a [[hilarious]] bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).

Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on "Family Ties") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie "Ragman" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy [[metal]] aficionado who's [[constantly]] picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with [[painfully]] [[credible]] [[accuracy]]). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his [[rock]] star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out [[portrayal]] by [[Tony]] Fields) perishes in a [[hotel]] [[fire]]. [[Hip]] local [[disc]] jockey Nuke ([[KISS]] front-man [[Gene]] Simmons in a cool cameo) hooks Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when [[played]] backwards resurrects Curr's [[malevolent]] spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile [[scumbags]] who [[make]] [[poor]] Eddie's life the proverbial [[living]] [[hell]], only to have [[meek]] [[Eddie]] prove to be a most [[reluctant]] would-be [[accomplice]]. It's up to Eddie, [[assisted]] by token nice [[girl]] [[Leslie]] Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.

[[Ably]] directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty "jump" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing "Carrie"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing [[said]] fellow does to qualify for that special status. [[Surely]] the [[better]] heavy metal [[abomination]] [[subjects]] made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which [[surely]] doesn't sound like much [[scrutinize]] how utterly [[appalling]] many other entries in this [[inquisitive]] [[small]] fright film sub-genre like "Hard [[Rocks]] Zombies," "Blood Tracks," "[[Horror]] on [[Voyage]]," and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker "Rock'n'Roll Nightmare" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the excessive splatter and [[uselessly]] flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a [[amusing]] bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).

Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on "Family Ties") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie "Ragman" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy [[metals]] aficionado who's [[systematically]] picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with [[embarrassingly]] [[plausible]] [[accurate]]). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his [[boulder]] star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out [[depiction]] by [[Toni]] Fields) perishes in a [[motel]] [[wildfire]]. [[Hips]] local [[disks]] jockey Nuke ([[SCREWING]] front-man [[Genetics]] Simmons in a cool cameo) hooks Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when [[served]] backwards resurrects Curr's [[baleful]] spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile [[dipshits]] who [[deliver]] [[poorest]] Eddie's life the proverbial [[residing]] [[dammit]], only to have [[mick]] [[Eddy]] prove to be a most [[hesitant]] would-be [[complicit]]. It's up to Eddie, [[helped]] by token nice [[woman]] [[Lesley]] Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.

[[Expertly]] directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty "jump" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing "Carrie"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing [[asserted]] fellow does to qualify for that special status. --------------------------------------------- Result 955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll start by apologizing to filmmakers everywhere for using the terms "filmmaker", "film", or "movie" in connection with this, but "criminal" and "crime against humanity" seem a bit harsh.

The writing: pathetic.

The directing: pathetic.

The acting: pathetic.

The cinematography: too inept for words.

The technical skills used to assemble this atrocity: NONE WHATSOEVER.

This lump of waste could hardly be called cinema. The majority of family home movies come closer to earning that distinction than Revenge Quest. No, this is just a 10 car pile-up caught on video.

We'll skip the plot in this review, because there are far too many holes to be covered at once. Let's just say that it stinks worse than the rest of this movie. To call the acting one-dimensional would be giving them credit. What little there is, is atrocious to begin with, and made much worse by the terrible video and editing.

The worst part of this atrocity, though, apart from the plot, would have to be the effects... or rather the disturbing lack thereof. There are no blanks in the guns, no flashpots, and what few sound effects existed were either stock "gun" sounds, or they were generated by mouth (yeah, you read that right). The filmmaker actually had the audacity to record a "shh" sound for the elevator doors; I guess he felt it made them sound more futuristic. This is supposed to be set in the year 2031, after all. That doesn't explain the sounds he created by mouth for the fist-fight scenes, however.

If it wasn't bad enough that the sound quality is terrible (he just used the microphone that was mounted on the video camera, and it shows), the use of stock gun sounds was almost worse than not using any sounds at all. The sound effects stand out from the rest of the soundtrack like a drunken yak in a herd of sheep, and they're just as clumsy. Picture this: The bad guy enters an office building searching for his prey. A lady starts to run in fear. He raises his gun (an uzi), and shakes it. We hear a sound that is clearly not an uzi. The woman runs away from camera, and suddenly a single blood pack (only 1) explodes on her back (looked like she was hit by a paintball), and she falls flat on her face.

Bear in mind that my description does far too much justice to the ineptitude of the actual sequence.

In another sequence, one which almost- but not quite- makes the movie funny enough to watch, takes place in a stairwell. The bad guy chases the good guy and the lady he's protecting down the stairs, shaking his plastic uzi all the way. You may wish to duck; there are badly timed sound effects flying all over the place.

I supposed Alan DeHerrera can't be locked away for conceiving of this train wreck, but he did follow through all the way to editing and releasing it. If there's any justice, there's bound to be some karma out there with his name on it.

Should you decide to watch this lump of industrial waste- and I would strongly advise against it- be sure to watch for the entire scenes lifted nearly verbatim from Bladerunner, and the AM radio that doubles as a walkie-talkie. Try not to focus too hard on the plot; it will only hurt you more if you do.

0 stars of 10. And that's being generous. --------------------------------------------- Result 956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow! So much fun! Probably a bit much for normal American kids, and really it's a stretch to call this a kid's film, this movie reminded me a quite a bit of Time Bandits - very Terry Gilliam all the way through. While the overall narrative is pretty much straight forward, Miike still throws in A LOT of surreal and Bunuel-esquire moments. The whole first act violently juxtaposes from scene to scene the normal family life of the main kid/hero, with the spirit world and the evil than is ensuing therein. And while the ending does have a bit of an ambiguous aspect that are common of Miike's work, the layers of meaning and metaphor, particularly the anti-war / anti-revenge message of human folly, is pretty damn poignant. As manic and imaginatively fun as other great Miike films, only instead of over the top torture and gore, he gives us an endless amount of monsters and yokai from Japanese folk-lore creatively conceived via CG and puppetry wrapped into an imaginative multi-faceted adventure. F'n rad, and one of Miike's best! --------------------------------------------- Result 957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] *May contain spoilers*

I [[bent]] over backwards to be [[fair]] to this film. I knew it starred Madonna. I knew it lasted a [[whole]] [[week]] in [[theaters]]. I [[knew]] it got a lot of bad reviews. I wasn't [[expecting]] a deep and thoughtful examination of [[class]], [[culture]] and sexuality [[like]] we [[got]] in the Italian original. The [[benefit]] of the [[doubt]] lasted a [[whole]] ten minutes.

Madonna plays a rich, [[pretentious]], nit-witted Gorgon who goes on vacation with her henpecked husband and flippant [[friends]] (the brunette [[woman]] is as [[bad]] as Madonna, [[exhibiting]] some [[really]] dumb facial expressions). Adriano Giannini plays the ship's first-mate who the Madonna character [[delights]] in humiliating and treating like dirt in [[every]] scene they have together. Why is she such a bitch to him? [[Simply]] because the plot requires it so that later when the two of them [[get]] marooned on a [[deserted]] Mediterranean [[island]] the [[tables]] will be turned and he will [[teach]] her a lesson. Just as inexplicable is how they [[fall]] in love [[despite]] having nothing in common and having abused each other for two-thirds of the [[movie]].

"Swept Away" is a [[silly]], simplistic, [[superficial]] [[movie]] from [[beginning]] to [[end]]. Madonna [[gives]] a typically [[wooden]] performance. There are [[many]] dumb scenes: Madonna [[singing]] and [[dancing]] [[atrociously]] at the [[demand]] of Giannini, a [[fantasy]] scene with Madonna and a [[lot]] of scenes where he slaps her and kicks her in the [[butt]]. [[Guy]] [[Ritchie]] does his "[[stylish]]" [[editing]] which is [[laughable]] here. The [[film]] [[contains]] some of the [[worst]] dialog I've [[heard]] in a [[major]] [[movie]] in [[several]] [[years]]. The ending is [[sappy]] and [[implausible]]. It's [[basically]] "The [[Blue]] [[Lagoon]]" [[meets]] "Overboard" minus the nudity of the [[former]] and the [[sense]] of humor of the [[latter]].

Maybe Madonna's ego is so [[big]] that she [[insists]] on [[continuing]] to [[prove]] herself as a [[competent]] [[actress]]. [[Please]] [[give]] it up, Madge, for our sake as well as yours. This isn't her [[worst]] [[movie]] [[though]]. That distinction [[still]] [[belongs]] to "Shanghai [[Surprise]]". She hasn't made [[anything]] [[worse]] than that...[[yet]]. *May contain spoilers*

I [[warped]] over backwards to be [[justo]] to this film. I knew it starred Madonna. I knew it lasted a [[ensemble]] [[zhou]] in [[theatres]]. I [[overheard]] it got a lot of bad reviews. I wasn't [[expects]] a deep and thoughtful examination of [[kinds]], [[cultivation]] and sexuality [[iike]] we [[gets]] in the Italian original. The [[benefits]] of the [[duda]] lasted a [[ensemble]] ten minutes.

Madonna plays a rich, [[presumptuous]], nit-witted Gorgon who goes on vacation with her henpecked husband and flippant [[friendships]] (the brunette [[girl]] is as [[naughty]] as Madonna, [[proving]] some [[truly]] dumb facial expressions). Adriano Giannini plays the ship's first-mate who the Madonna character [[pleasures]] in humiliating and treating like dirt in [[each]] scene they have together. Why is she such a bitch to him? [[Simple]] because the plot requires it so that later when the two of them [[gets]] marooned on a [[uninhabited]] Mediterranean [[isla]] the [[table]] will be turned and he will [[lectured]] her a lesson. Just as inexplicable is how they [[dips]] in love [[while]] having nothing in common and having abused each other for two-thirds of the [[filmmaking]].

"Swept Away" is a [[dumb]], simplistic, [[shallow]] [[filmmaking]] from [[started]] to [[terminate]]. Madonna [[donne]] a typically [[wood]] performance. There are [[several]] dumb scenes: Madonna [[sings]] and [[danced]] [[appallingly]] at the [[asks]] of Giannini, a [[fantasia]] scene with Madonna and a [[batch]] of scenes where he slaps her and kicks her in the [[ass]]. [[Buddy]] [[Ricci]] does his "[[sleek]]" [[editorial]] which is [[nonsensical]] here. The [[movies]] [[therein]] some of the [[meanest]] dialog I've [[audition]] in a [[large]] [[cinematic]] in [[dissimilar]] [[olds]]. The ending is [[gooey]] and [[improbable]]. It's [[fundamentally]] "The [[Bleu]] [[Laguna]]" [[satisfies]] "Overboard" minus the nudity of the [[old]] and the [[feeling]] of humor of the [[latest]].

Maybe Madonna's ego is so [[prodigious]] that she [[insist]] on [[lingering]] to [[proves]] herself as a [[proficient]] [[actor]]. [[Invite]] [[lend]] it up, Madge, for our sake as well as yours. This isn't her [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] [[although]]. That distinction [[nevertheless]] [[owns]] to "Shanghai [[Surprising]]". She hasn't made [[nada]] [[worst]] than that...[[however]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw the movie as a child when it was released in the theater and it was so bad that it became the makings of a family joke. If the ranking had a zero, this movie would get it. The dinosaurs were awful. The storyline was ridiculous. The acting really doesn't qualify to be called acting. The only reason I even remember the name of the movie so well is because my family still talks about how BAD it really was. --------------------------------------------- Result 959 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Kurosawa, fresh into color, losses sight of his usual themes of truth and perception of reality and opts for a depressing take on Tokyo's slums. Kurosawa stretches for a style that was, in my opinion, his antithesis- that is to say, I feel as if Kurosawa wanted to make an Ozu picture. Poorly paced, poorly conceived, this movie is a [[rare]] dud in this auteur body of [[excellent]] [[work]]. While Ikiru, while being mundane and depressing, was still interesting and well paced, and while Stray Dog depicted the slums and social poverty of Japan without being too heavy handed or boring, do desu ka den has all the somberness that one could expect with its content, with none of the redeeming qualities of earlier Kurosawa pictures.

Be warned, this is not a movie that Kurosawa should be judged by. Kurosawa, fresh into color, losses sight of his usual themes of truth and perception of reality and opts for a depressing take on Tokyo's slums. Kurosawa stretches for a style that was, in my opinion, his antithesis- that is to say, I feel as if Kurosawa wanted to make an Ozu picture. Poorly paced, poorly conceived, this movie is a [[scarce]] dud in this auteur body of [[wondrous]] [[collaborate]]. While Ikiru, while being mundane and depressing, was still interesting and well paced, and while Stray Dog depicted the slums and social poverty of Japan without being too heavy handed or boring, do desu ka den has all the somberness that one could expect with its content, with none of the redeeming qualities of earlier Kurosawa pictures.

Be warned, this is not a movie that Kurosawa should be judged by. --------------------------------------------- Result 960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Claire [[Denis]] has [[demonstrated]] repeatedly that film does not [[need]] to tell a story, that it is [[sufficient]] to create an [[experience]] that [[allows]] the [[viewer]] to take the ingredients and make of them what they will.

Ostensibly the idea within the framework of a most non-linear film is the [[older]] man living on the French-Swiss border, a man devoted to his dogs, who still has a lover, but whose cardiac status increasingly threatens his life. He has a son with a little family who infrequently [[meet]] with him, but when he [[discovers]] he is in need of a heart transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to [[obtain]] a heart transplant on the black market and to [[rekindle]] a long lost [[relationship]] with a son he had [[form]] a Tahitian women [[years]] [[ago]].

What [[Denis]] does with this outline of a story is use her camera to [[explore]] the loneliness of the [[soul]], the vastness of nature, man's [[interaction]] with people [[vs]] [[animals]], etc. Much of the [[time]] the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we try too hard to [[connect]] all the [[dots]] laid out before us in [[beautiful]] [[pictures]]. [[Life]] is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, [[integrate]], process, and make of it what we will.

[[In]] using this form of [[film]] [[making]] (much as she did in the [[strangely]] [[beautiful]] 'Beau Travail') [[Claire]] [[Denis]] has [[developed]] a [[signature]] technique. Whether or not the viewer [[finds]] the finished [[product]] [[rewarding]] has much to do with our individual [[methods]] of [[processing]] [[visual]] and [[conceptual]] information. This is an interesting and visually [[captivating]] [[film]], but [[many]] [[viewers]] will find it an overly long discourse about very [[little]]. [[Perhaps]] [[watching]] again will [[change]] that. Grady Harp Claire [[Denny]] has [[protested]] repeatedly that film does not [[needs]] to tell a story, that it is [[suffice]] to create an [[experiences]] that [[enable]] the [[viewfinder]] to take the ingredients and make of them what they will.

Ostensibly the idea within the framework of a most non-linear film is the [[elderly]] man living on the French-Swiss border, a man devoted to his dogs, who still has a lover, but whose cardiac status increasingly threatens his life. He has a son with a little family who infrequently [[satisfy]] with him, but when he [[detect]] he is in need of a heart transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to [[obtaining]] a heart transplant on the black market and to [[revitalize]] a long lost [[relations]] with a son he had [[forms]] a Tahitian women [[ages]] [[formerly]].

What [[Dennis]] does with this outline of a story is use her camera to [[investigating]] the loneliness of the [[alma]], the vastness of nature, man's [[interactions]] with people [[v]] [[beasts]], etc. Much of the [[moment]] the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we try too hard to [[linking]] all the [[points]] laid out before us in [[excellent]] [[image]]. [[Vida]] is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, [[incorporate]], process, and make of it what we will.

[[During]] using this form of [[movie]] [[doing]] (much as she did in the [[suspiciously]] [[belle]] 'Beau Travail') [[Clara]] [[Denny]] has [[devised]] a [[signing]] technique. Whether or not the viewer [[found]] the finished [[merchandise]] [[reward]] has much to do with our individual [[procedures]] of [[treating]] [[optic]] and [[theoretical]] information. This is an interesting and visually [[riveting]] [[movies]], but [[multiple]] [[listeners]] will find it an overly long discourse about very [[kiddo]]. [[Conceivably]] [[staring]] again will [[alteration]] that. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This animation TV series is simply the best way for children to learn how the human body works. Yes, this is biology but they will never tell it is.

I truly think this is the best part of this stream of "educational cartoons". I do remember you can find little books and a plastic body in several parts: skin, skeleton, and of course: organs.

In the same stream, you'll find: "Il était une fois l'homme" which relate the human History from the big bang to the 20th century. There is: "Il était une fois l'espace" as well (about the space and its exploration) but that one is more a fiction than a description of the reality since it takes place in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] [[While]] the acting and directing [[could]] be argued as having some [[merit]] - the storyline is a very poor wannabe Vietnam movie with the country name [[simply]] changed.

At the very [[least]], for a movie to hold some credibility, try and have some semblance of accuracy in equipment, weapons and tactics. Nevermind the gross [[misrepresentation]] of the behaviour of the troops as a norm.

Aside for the limited [[use]] as silly propaganda about the South African Defence Force, it serves [[little]] purpose - [[definitely]] no entertainment value.

Aspiring [[movie]] [[makers]] - this is how not to make a war [[movie]]. Do some research, and have some pride in your product. [[Whereas]] the acting and directing [[did]] be argued as having some [[merits]] - the storyline is a very poor wannabe Vietnam movie with the country name [[straightforward]] changed.

At the very [[fewer]], for a movie to hold some credibility, try and have some semblance of accuracy in equipment, weapons and tactics. Nevermind the gross [[deception]] of the behaviour of the troops as a norm.

Aside for the limited [[usage]] as silly propaganda about the South African Defence Force, it serves [[scant]] purpose - [[unquestionably]] no entertainment value.

Aspiring [[flick]] [[strategists]] - this is how not to make a war [[filmmaking]]. Do some research, and have some pride in your product. --------------------------------------------- Result 963 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is some of the worst crap I have ever seen. I literally got a sharp pain in my head while watching this movie. The CGI was awful, and the story was just a waste of ink. Dean Cain's character was Mr-Super-Intuitive-I-can-figure-out-anything, except he can't seem to work his own helicopter correctly. The biggest problem was the split screen camera work. I felt like I was watching the Brady Bunch or something, only it wasn't different people in the boxes, just close ups and different views of the same thing. I can only figure that the actors really needed the money, because this movie wasn't worth the film it was shot on. --------------------------------------------- Result 964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Cheezy action movie starring Dolph Lungren. Lungren is a one time military man who has retreated into a teaching job. But the changes in the [[neighborhood]] and the [[student]] body have left him frustrated and he decides that he?s going to hang it up. Things get dicey when while watching over a bunch of students in detention some robbers take over the school as a base of operation for an armored car robbery. Its Dolph versus the baddies in a fight to the [[death]]. [[Jaw]] [[dropping]] throw back to the exploitation [[films]] of the late grindhouse era where bad [[guys]] dressed as punks and some of the [[bad]] women had day glow hair. What a [[stupid]] [[movie]]. Watchable in a I can?t believe people [[made]] this [[sort]] of [[way]], this is an [[action]] film that was [[probably]] doomed from the [[get]] go before the low budget, [[fake]] [[breakaway]] sets and poor [[action]] [[direction]] were [[even]] a twinkle in a [[producers]] [[eye]]. Watch how late in the [[film]] as [[cars]] drive through the [[school]] (don?t ask) they [[crash]] into the [[security]] turret (don?t [[ask]] [[since]] it [[looks]] more like a [[prison]] then a high [[school]]) and smash its barely [[constructed]] [[form]] [[apart]](it doesn't look like it did in [[earlier]] [[shots]]). What [[hath]] the [[gods]] of [[bad]] [[movies]] wrought? Actually I?m perplexed since this was directed (?) by [[Sydney]] J Furie, a really [[good]] director who [[made]] [[films]] like The [[Boys]] in [[Company]] C. [[Has]] his [[ability]] failed him, or was this [[hopeless]] from the get go and he didn't even bother? It?s a [[turkey]]. A watchable one but a [[turkey]] [[none]] the less. Cheezy action movie starring Dolph Lungren. Lungren is a one time military man who has retreated into a teaching job. But the changes in the [[barrio]] and the [[students]] body have left him frustrated and he decides that he?s going to hang it up. Things get dicey when while watching over a bunch of students in detention some robbers take over the school as a base of operation for an armored car robbery. Its Dolph versus the baddies in a fight to the [[fatalities]]. [[Chin]] [[downed]] throw back to the exploitation [[filmmaking]] of the late grindhouse era where bad [[blokes]] dressed as punks and some of the [[negative]] women had day glow hair. What a [[dumb]] [[filmmaking]]. Watchable in a I can?t believe people [[introduced]] this [[genre]] of [[ways]], this is an [[activity]] film that was [[potentially]] doomed from the [[got]] go before the low budget, [[forged]] [[dissident]] sets and poor [[actions]] [[directions]] were [[yet]] a twinkle in a [[maker]] [[eyes]]. Watch how late in the [[filmmaking]] as [[auto]] drive through the [[teaching]] (don?t ask) they [[accident]] into the [[insurance]] turret (don?t [[requests]] [[because]] it [[seems]] more like a [[imprisonment]] then a high [[schooling]]) and smash its barely [[constructing]] [[forms]] [[furthermore]](it doesn't look like it did in [[previously]] [[punches]]). What [[doth]] the [[lords]] of [[faulty]] [[film]] wrought? Actually I?m perplexed since this was directed (?) by [[Sidney]] J Furie, a really [[alright]] director who [[introduced]] [[film]] like The [[Guys]] in [[Enterprise]] C. [[Have]] his [[capacities]] failed him, or was this [[desperate]] from the get go and he didn't even bother? It?s a [[ankara]]. A watchable one but a [[turk]] [[nothing]] the less. --------------------------------------------- Result 965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i was kinda interested in this movie as a trashy cannibal flick. i was thoroughly disappointed. it was the same kind of disappointment i felt watching 'friday the 13th: jason takes manhattan'. so much potential wasted!

the opening scene is a decent attention grabber. then it grinds to a halt. copious breasts and egregious 80s fashion cannot help this movie. the only things eating near this island of cannibal monks are the piranha! i'm not asking for 'cannibal holocaust' level of gore, but i was looking for cheap over-the-top exploitative gore. i got none of that.

i found a couple parts of the fight scenes somewhat intriguing, hence the 2 stars. i don't think its really worth the time it takes to watch it, though. i could see showing it at a party where nobody cares about what is going on and you just want something on in the background. but i would not tell anyone, "oh, dude, you GOTTA see this movie." it is neither good enough nor bad enough to warrant much attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 966 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Back in 2004 I [[saw]] "True", Tom Tykwer's [[contribution]] to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me [[appreciate]] the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the [[whole]] film, and I [[would]] even check who was attached, etc.

Yesterday I [[finally]] saw it, courtesy of the [[internet]].

First of all I [[must]] say that it looks AWESOME. The photography is BEAUTIFUL in every short and shot, at the [[worst]] being nothing special - but [[still]] [[brilliant]] and clear. [[Later]] I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K [[gives]] more justice to all the DP's [[work]]. My special [[favorites]] are the "Quais de Seine" first scene (that [[sunlight]]!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) "Quartier de [[la]] Madeleine", and "14th Arrondisement" - but you know, what the hell I [[like]] them all: "[[True]]" or "Faubourg Saint-Denis" [[still]] makes me nervous with those [[brilliant]] [[colours]] (my eyes, they tremble!) and "Quartier Latin" is gold imprisoned on silver. [[Beautiful]].

[[Yes]], these are some [[BEAUTIFUL]] short [[films]].

Now let's get [[onto]] the content. I very much (and I mean [[VERY]] MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully [[felt]]. You never have have the same [[themes]] or treatment between two [[shorts]], and I [[think]] the formula is restrictive enough to let all these [[artists]] [[explore]] [[beautiful]] and deepening [[things]] inside the [[shorts]]. I [[loved]] [[coming]] from a [[simple]] love [[story]] into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social [[commentary]] into a terror comedy into a [[humble]] monologue. I [[love]] [[surprises]]! And this [[film]] has them! It's [[great]] they [[took]] a [[chance]] to let all these director's flesh out [[things]] that are not [[usual]] in mainstream [[cinema]] (which I have [[come]] to [[heavily]] despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can [[breath]] the [[breathing]] space these people had.

I like the [[small]] [[time]] and I love the acting. I love the [[simplicity]] and I [[love]] the love. I like the [[simple]] [[feelings]] and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.

There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...

What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - "Quais de Seine" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and "Père-Lachaise" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. "Tour Eiffel" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in "what will this director do with this?" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.

I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love! Back in 2004 I [[watched]] "True", Tom Tykwer's [[contributions]] to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me [[thankful]] the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the [[total]] film, and I [[should]] even check who was attached, etc.

Yesterday I [[eventually]] saw it, courtesy of the [[cyber]].

First of all I [[ought]] say that it looks AWESOME. The photography is BEAUTIFUL in every short and shot, at the [[lousiest]] being nothing special - but [[again]] [[wondrous]] and clear. [[Trailing]] I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K [[provides]] more justice to all the DP's [[jobs]]. My special [[favorite]] are the "Quais de Seine" first scene (that [[sunshine]]!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) "Quartier de [[angeles]] Madeleine", and "14th Arrondisement" - but you know, what the hell I [[fond]] them all: "[[Real]]" or "Faubourg Saint-Denis" [[again]] makes me nervous with those [[beautiful]] [[color]] (my eyes, they tremble!) and "Quartier Latin" is gold imprisoned on silver. [[Belle]].

[[Yeah]], these are some [[LEGGY]] short [[cinematography]].

Now let's get [[during]] the content. I very much (and I mean [[MUCH]] MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully [[deemed]]. You never have have the same [[item]] or treatment between two [[panties]], and I [[thought]] the formula is restrictive enough to let all these [[artist]] [[examining]] [[handsome]] and deepening [[aspects]] inside the [[pants]]. I [[cared]] [[forthcoming]] from a [[mere]] love [[tale]] into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social [[comments]] into a terror comedy into a [[lowly]] monologue. I [[amour]] [[astonishment]]! And this [[cinematic]] has them! It's [[remarkable]] they [[picked]] a [[chances]] to let all these director's flesh out [[items]] that are not [[normal]] in mainstream [[theater]] (which I have [[arrived]] to [[massively]] despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can [[murmur]] the [[inhalation]] space these people had.

I like the [[minimal]] [[period]] and I love the acting. I love the [[simpler]] and I [[amour]] the love. I like the [[mere]] [[passions]] and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.

There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...

What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - "Quais de Seine" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and "Père-Lachaise" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. "Tour Eiffel" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in "what will this director do with this?" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.

I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love! --------------------------------------------- Result 967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A bondage, humiliation, S&M show, and not much else. The plot is flat, really just a banal setup for the stylishly depraved set-pieces. The host of the aforementioned show, a silly little man who spouts drivel while prancing around the stage in dresses, was almost as painfully distracting as the attempts at artful editing. The dream-like ending felt tacked on. To the film's credit though, Aya Sugimoto was fairly convincing as the tortured lead. Flower and Snake has been compared with Eyes Wide Shut but aside from some minor surface similarities, Kubrick's is easily the more layered, artistic, and atmospheric picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I had never heard of this [[film]] [[prior]] to [[seeing]] it, I wondered if it was an [[independent]] [[film]], and I was correct, but with a good cast I [[decided]] to chance it. Basically [[drifter]] Michael Williams ([[Nicolas]] Cage) is in the town Red Rock, Wyoming, [[looking]] for a job, and meeting bar owner Wayne [[Brown]] (Pleasantville's J.T. [[Walsh]]) he is [[given]] a [[large]] sum of money, mistaken for a hit-man he has [[hired]] to kill his unfaithful wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle). He does not [[correct]] him, takes the money, and goes to warn Suzanne, and after she makes him a counteroffer, he [[decides]] he needs to leave. When Wayne knows his real identity, he [[chases]] Michael [[shooting]] a big gun, until he [[gets]] in a car with Lyle from Dallas (Dennis Hopper). But [[things]] get complicated when Michael [[realises]] Lyle is the hit-man he was mistaken for, and he makes a quick retreat. He goes back to Suzanne, and knowing they are both in danger, they plan to leave town together, and add another complication by falling for each other. Before they leave however, Suzanne insists they go and steal a big amount money in the safe. Of course things aren't going to go smoothly, and Wayne and Lyle catch up to them, and Lyle forces them and now tied-up Wayne to go and get the buried money. In the end, Lyle and Wayne both get what they deserve, Michael and Suzanne do get on a moving train together, but it is obvious she cares more about the money, and she gets what she deserves too. Also starring Craig Reay as Jim, Vance Johnson as Mr. Johnson, Timothy Carhart as Deputy Matt Greytack, Dwight Yoakam as Truck Driver and Robert Apel as Howard. The performances, [[apart]] from maybe a lame Boyle, are all fine and dandy, and it has got [[quite]] a good film [[noir]] feel for a black comedy thriller. [[Very]] good! I had never heard of this [[movies]] [[ago]] to [[witnessing]] it, I wondered if it was an [[independant]] [[kino]], and I was correct, but with a good cast I [[deciding]] to chance it. Basically [[hobo]] Michael Williams ([[Nicola]] Cage) is in the town Red Rock, Wyoming, [[researching]] for a job, and meeting bar owner Wayne [[Brownish]] (Pleasantville's J.T. [[Welch]]) he is [[yielded]] a [[substantial]] sum of money, mistaken for a hit-man he has [[engaged]] to kill his unfaithful wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle). He does not [[accurate]] him, takes the money, and goes to warn Suzanne, and after she makes him a counteroffer, he [[decide]] he needs to leave. When Wayne knows his real identity, he [[pursues]] Michael [[gunfire]] a big gun, until he [[get]] in a car with Lyle from Dallas (Dennis Hopper). But [[matters]] get complicated when Michael [[understands]] Lyle is the hit-man he was mistaken for, and he makes a quick retreat. He goes back to Suzanne, and knowing they are both in danger, they plan to leave town together, and add another complication by falling for each other. Before they leave however, Suzanne insists they go and steal a big amount money in the safe. Of course things aren't going to go smoothly, and Wayne and Lyle catch up to them, and Lyle forces them and now tied-up Wayne to go and get the buried money. In the end, Lyle and Wayne both get what they deserve, Michael and Suzanne do get on a moving train together, but it is obvious she cares more about the money, and she gets what she deserves too. Also starring Craig Reay as Jim, Vance Johnson as Mr. Johnson, Timothy Carhart as Deputy Matt Greytack, Dwight Yoakam as Truck Driver and Robert Apel as Howard. The performances, [[additionally]] from maybe a lame Boyle, are all fine and dandy, and it has got [[rather]] a good film [[negro]] feel for a black comedy thriller. [[Much]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Honestly]], when I saw this movie [[years]] [[ago]] I immediately [[wanted]] to [[turn]] it off. As I sat there for the next 10 minutes or so, I [[realized]] that the actor playing Navin [[stole]] the [[show]]. His facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me [[shake]] my head as to WHY he hasn't been in more comedies. He has this "Marty Feldman" thing [[going]] for him but MUCH, MUCH more talent...[[taking]] [[nothing]] away from Marty. The [[movie]] really shocked me by how close it was to the [[original]] Jerk, but then again, it was [[SO]] [[MUCH]] MORE. I really think that if this movie was released [[first]], and I saw the Steve [[Martin]] [[movie]] 2nd, I'd [[think]] the 2nd was a [[cheap]] rip-off. I know it sounds like a BOLD [[statement]], but it's true. I [[actually]] like Steve Martin a great deal, but his performance is 2nd to the actor in The Jerk Too. I [[wish]] I could get a [[copy]] of it for my [[collection]]. I [[urge]] you to see it if you can find it. [[Sincerely]], when I saw this movie [[yrs]] [[previously]] I immediately [[wished]] to [[converting]] it off. As I sat there for the next 10 minutes or so, I [[realised]] that the actor playing Navin [[shoplift]] the [[displays]]. His facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me [[quiver]] my head as to WHY he hasn't been in more comedies. He has this "Marty Feldman" thing [[go]] for him but MUCH, MUCH more talent...[[adopting]] [[anything]] away from Marty. The [[kino]] really shocked me by how close it was to the [[upfront]] Jerk, but then again, it was [[THEREBY]] [[VERY]] MORE. I really think that if this movie was released [[frst]], and I saw the Steve [[Martine]] [[movies]] 2nd, I'd [[reckon]] the 2nd was a [[cheaper]] rip-off. I know it sounds like a BOLD [[statements]], but it's true. I [[genuinely]] like Steve Martin a great deal, but his performance is 2nd to the actor in The Jerk Too. I [[desiring]] I could get a [[photocopies]] of it for my [[collating]]. I [[exhort]] you to see it if you can find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I must admit that at the beginning, I was sort of reticent about watching this movie. I thought it was this stupid, little, romantic film about a French woman who meets in the train an American and decides to visit Vienna with him. I was not actually enchanted about this kind of script, since it continued to make me believe that it is just a movie. Still, I watched it! And I was [[amazed]]..."Before [[Sunrise]]" is one of the few [[films]] who dare to talk in a rather philosophical way, wondering about the fact that in the moment of our birth, we are sentenced to death, or that it is a middling idea that fact that a couple should rest together for eternity, or that, we, humans, can afford sometimes to live in fairy-tales.

The ending was wonderfully chosen (we do not know if they will meet again in six months, at six o'clock, in Vienna's station) -in our optimism, we sincerely hope so. The actors acted in a very good manner, so, that, I began to believe that I, myself could live a love-story just like this. I must admit that at the beginning, I was sort of reticent about watching this movie. I thought it was this stupid, little, romantic film about a French woman who meets in the train an American and decides to visit Vienna with him. I was not actually enchanted about this kind of script, since it continued to make me believe that it is just a movie. Still, I watched it! And I was [[appalled]]..."Before [[Sunup]]" is one of the few [[kino]] who dare to talk in a rather philosophical way, wondering about the fact that in the moment of our birth, we are sentenced to death, or that it is a middling idea that fact that a couple should rest together for eternity, or that, we, humans, can afford sometimes to live in fairy-tales.

The ending was wonderfully chosen (we do not know if they will meet again in six months, at six o'clock, in Vienna's station) -in our optimism, we sincerely hope so. The actors acted in a very good manner, so, that, I began to believe that I, myself could live a love-story just like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] You talking' to Me? (1987) is a pretty [[bad]] movie starring some dude who I have never [[seen]] before or since [[starring]] as a [[guy]] from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as [[tries]] to use that shtick to make it big. When he [[learns]] the [[hard]] [[facts]] of [[life]], he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he [[scores]] with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?

This is a [[real]] lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.

xx You talking' to Me? (1987) is a pretty [[unfavourable]] movie starring some dude who I have never [[noticed]] before or since [[featuring]] as a [[buddy]] from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as [[try]] to use that shtick to make it big. When he [[learned]] the [[difficult]] [[truths]] of [[vida]], he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he [[dozens]] with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?

This is a [[veritable]] lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.

xx --------------------------------------------- Result 972 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[In]] a year of [[pretentious]] [[muck]] like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of [[Charlie]] Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly [[hard]] to watch but about three [[times]] as [[important]]. "Frownland" is a [[labor]] of [[love]] by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over [[years]] by [[friends]]. It [[traces]] a man who cannot [[communicate]] through his thoroughly [[authentic]], [[REAL]] Brooklyn world. The people that you [[see]] are a [[step]] beyond [[even]] the stylization of the "mumblecore" [[movement]]. They are [[real]] people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to [[change]], [[unable]]. The [[real]] [[world]] to them is their own set of [[delusions]] and because this is a film about people who are so [[profoundly]] out of [[touch]], it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without [[proper]] light, money or any of the other factors that [[would]] [[make]] a [[film]] "slick", but its [[honesty]] can not be [[understated]], a fact that [[would]] cause a [[room]] full of people to [[dismiss]] it and for [[Richard]] Linklater to [[give]] it an [[award]] as he did at SXSW. This does [[remind]] of [[films]] like "[[Naked]]" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a [[film]] that is not for everyone, but one that [[challenges]] you to watch and [[grows]] on you the longer you [[think]] about it. [[Into]] a year of [[ostentatious]] [[mud]] like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of [[Chas]] Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly [[strenuous]] to watch but about three [[time]] as [[principal]]. "Frownland" is a [[workforce]] of [[likes]] by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over [[yrs]] by [[boyfriends]]. It [[vestiges]] a man who cannot [[liaise]] through his thoroughly [[true]], [[REALES]] Brooklyn world. The people that you [[behold]] are a [[steps]] beyond [[yet]] the stylization of the "mumblecore" [[movements]]. They are [[actual]] people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to [[amended]], [[incapable]]. The [[authentic]] [[monde]] to them is their own set of [[ravings]] and because this is a film about people who are so [[seriously]] out of [[touches]], it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without [[appropriate]] light, money or any of the other factors that [[should]] [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]] "slick", but its [[sincerity]] can not be [[underrated]], a fact that [[ought]] cause a [[rooms]] full of people to [[refuse]] it and for [[Richards]] Linklater to [[lend]] it an [[scholarship]] as he did at SXSW. This does [[reminded]] of [[movie]] like "[[Barefoot]]" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a [[cinematography]] that is not for everyone, but one that [[defies]] you to watch and [[heighten]] on you the longer you [[thought]] about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Take [[young]], pretty people, put them in an [[exotic]] locale, [[stick]] in a few [[bad]] guys, have the two lead characters [[find]] romance after a [[couple]] of [[heavy]] [[breathing]] scenes, [[create]] the flimsiest of plots, then [[work]] out a [[happy]] [[ending]] for everybody (other than the three or four who [[get]] murdered, of [[course]]) That's the [[classic]] (and successful) [[format]] of the Harlequin Romance. It's not very good but then it's not very bad either, like most of the little yellow pocket books. And the [[location]] stuff in Budapest is especially interesting, even if they didn't [[use]] the wonderful old train station (designed by Gustave Eifel) or show the city's famous thermal baths. Take [[youthful]], pretty people, put them in an [[alien]] locale, [[wand]] in a few [[negative]] guys, have the two lead characters [[found]] romance after a [[coupling]] of [[ponderous]] [[inhaling]] scenes, [[creating]] the flimsiest of plots, then [[cooperating]] out a [[gratified]] [[ended]] for everybody (other than the three or four who [[obtain]] murdered, of [[cours]]) That's the [[typical]] (and successful) [[formats]] of the Harlequin Romance. It's not very good but then it's not very bad either, like most of the little yellow pocket books. And the [[placements]] stuff in Budapest is especially interesting, even if they didn't [[utilizes]] the wonderful old train station (designed by Gustave Eifel) or show the city's famous thermal baths. --------------------------------------------- Result 974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] THIS POST MAY CONTAIN [[SPOILERS]] :

Although it was 5 [[years]] after the [[series]] [[ended]] and WB was [[currently]] working on Justice League, this [[animated]] movie is a [[welcome]] [[addition]] to the video [[library]]. Why? Well, if [[Mask]] of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 [[episodes]] of Batman: The [[Animated]] Series and SubZero compliments the 15 [[episodes]] of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then Mystery of the Batwoman compliments the [[final]] 24 [[episodes]] of the Gotham [[Knights]] version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again [[delivers]] a voice over performance that is [[nothing]] short of excellence and [[perfection]]. I [[admit]] I was a bit leery when I [[heard]] about Batwoman and all I could [[think]] about were the [[old]] 50's comics of Batman. But I was [[blown]] away by the Batwoman [[character]], her look, her [[costume]] (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the [[costume]] on Batman [[Beyond]])and the fact that this [[movie]] keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you [[want]] to know who Batwoman is, then [[buy]] or [[rent]] the [[DVD]]. [[Barbara]] Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I [[think]] the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and [[Barbara]] had [[something]] going on between them like they did in Batman [[Beyond]]. Tim [[Drake]] [[appears]] as [[Robin]], but his role is a [[small]] one and [[sadly]], there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which [[leads]] me to believe he has [[established]] himself in Bludhaven (his [[city]] in the [[comics]]).

Of the three [[suspects]] for Batwoman, my [[favorite]] is [[Kathy]] Duquesne, who looks an [[awful]] [[lot]] like Halle Berry. [[Kelly]] Ripa did a [[great]] [[job]] as one of the other [[suspects]]. When it [[comes]] to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they [[replaced]] [[Paul]] Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. [[Same]] thing goes for [[Robin]]. The [[new]] [[guy]] did [[okay]], but just as I was [[starting]] to [[get]] [[used]] to Matt Valencia, they [[replaced]] him. It's interesting to [[note]] that Kevin Michael [[Richardson]], who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the [[voice]] of the [[Joker]] in "The Batman" [[series]]. And we [[finally]] see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped [[since]] he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.

The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9. THIS POST MAY CONTAIN [[VANDALS]] :

Although it was 5 [[olds]] after the [[serial]] [[completed]] and WB was [[now]] working on Justice League, this [[animate]] movie is a [[greet]] [[extra]] to the video [[librarian]]. Why? Well, if [[Masks]] of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 [[spells]] of Batman: The [[Animation]] Series and SubZero compliments the 15 [[spells]] of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then Mystery of the Batwoman compliments the [[latter]] 24 [[spells]] of the Gotham [[Thanes]] version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again [[offerings]] a voice over performance that is [[anything]] short of excellence and [[consummate]]. I [[accept]] I was a bit leery when I [[audition]] about Batwoman and all I could [[ideas]] about were the [[antigua]] 50's comics of Batman. But I was [[melted]] away by the Batwoman [[nature]], her look, her [[dress]] (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the [[outfits]] on Batman [[Afterlife]])and the fact that this [[cinematography]] keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you [[wish]] to know who Batwoman is, then [[purchased]] or [[leased]] the [[DVDS]]. [[Barbarian]] Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I [[thinking]] the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and [[Barbarian]] had [[anything]] going on between them like they did in Batman [[Afterlife]]. Tim [[Gregg]] [[emerges]] as [[Robyn]], but his role is a [[petit]] one and [[unfortunately]], there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which [[leeds]] me to believe he has [[formulated]] himself in Bludhaven (his [[town]] in the [[cartoons]]).

Of the three [[accuser]] for Batwoman, my [[prefer]] is [[Catherine]] Duquesne, who looks an [[horrible]] [[batch]] like Halle Berry. [[Kiley]] Ripa did a [[wondrous]] [[labour]] as one of the other [[accuser]]. When it [[arises]] to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they [[substitution]] [[Paulo]] Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. [[Identical]] thing goes for [[Rubin]]. The [[nuevo]] [[blokes]] did [[alright]], but just as I was [[startup]] to [[obtain]] [[using]] to Matt Valencia, they [[superseded]] him. It's interesting to [[remark]] that Kevin Michael [[Roberts]], who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the [[vocals]] of the [[Clown]] in "The Batman" [[serials]]. And we [[eventually]] see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped [[because]] he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.

The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9. --------------------------------------------- Result 975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I am normally a [[Spike]] Lee fan. It takes some time to really get into his "mojo", but once you see the clear message and the ability to tell the story that is close to his heart, Lee is a genius. Unlike The 25th Hour or [[Bamboozled]] (two of my favorite films of his), there was no clear [[story]] in this film. I was able to understand the struggle between Washington and the choice to play well or be influenced by others, but for some odd reason Lee was never able to get the true feeling out. Washington did a decent job with what was handed to him, but you could tell that this was not Lee's favorite film. Not only did Lee direct this film, but he also wrote it. You could tell. The camera work was horrid and the writing only contributed to the [[decay]] of the [[film]]. This film was coming full circle and it wasn't going to be pretty. Lee was not 100% behind this film as he was with Do the Right Thing. Of all the films I have seen Lee direct, this was the brightest and more modest of his films. It was almost as if he created a Hollywood movie instead of one that was all his own. I don't know if he saw the money from Do the Right Thing and ran with it, or what … but this film did not demonstrate his true talent.

For anyone out there that has seen this film, and perhaps stopped watching anything directed by Spike Lee afterwards due to this film, I suggest you give him a second chance. Don't get me wrong, I see exactly where you are coming from with this film and why you would want to put this behind you, but Lee does grow up. His work becomes more of his own, and you can see the transformation from a desire to make money to just wanting to make good films. It took me awhile to watch The 25th Hour, but when I did, it was sheer brilliance. Perhaps it was the actors, perhaps the story, but Lee crafted an amazing film out of one man's journey into the unknown. I guess that is what I was hoping Mo' Better Blues would turn out to be. This really dark journey into the life of a man that really never grew up, but instead all I got was Denzel being Denzel. He really is one of the most versatile actors of this generation, and I do consider him the Sydney Poitier of cinema, but this was not the film to showcase his talent.

Another issue that I had with this film was the use of Spike's sister playing one of the love interests. I don't know about you, and your family, but I do not think that I could have filmed a sex scene with my sister. I don't care who the actor is or how much money I am getting paid, I would never do it. It is just something that I never wish to see, but apparently that is different for Spike. He went ahead and showed the full nude image of his sister without any remorse. It was sad and it even made me blush. Also, I need somebody to answer me this. What was Flavor Flav doing introducing this film? So, I am sitting there on my couch, ready to start the film, when suddenly there is a voice from the past spelling out the studio that made this film, then he acknowledges himself. That did not build for a strong remaining of the story. Again, I felt that Lee was going for money on this film instead of actual talent. Perhaps that is how he could afford both Denzel and Wesley in the same movie without any explosions.

There were two great scenes in this film that made it worth watching through to the end. Don't get me wrong, this was a very bad movie, but there is always a diamond in every alleyway. The scene when Bleek accidentally forgets which woman he is with was mesmerizing. He continually went back and forth, weaving truth to confusion in a way that proved that Lee was actually behind the camera. It was a visionary scene that was probably lost in the shuffle due to the remaining poor scenes. The other scene that was worth watching was the way that Lee introduced and ended the film. By keeping the same pacing and direction, he was able to bring this tragic character around full circle and give him the chance to change his life. Other than these two moments, the rest of the film was pure rubbish, not worth viewing unless you are about to go blind.

Grade: ** out of ***** I am normally a [[Fortification]] Lee fan. It takes some time to really get into his "mojo", but once you see the clear message and the ability to tell the story that is close to his heart, Lee is a genius. Unlike The 25th Hour or [[Hoodwinked]] (two of my favorite films of his), there was no clear [[fairytales]] in this film. I was able to understand the struggle between Washington and the choice to play well or be influenced by others, but for some odd reason Lee was never able to get the true feeling out. Washington did a decent job with what was handed to him, but you could tell that this was not Lee's favorite film. Not only did Lee direct this film, but he also wrote it. You could tell. The camera work was horrid and the writing only contributed to the [[decomposing]] of the [[filmmaking]]. This film was coming full circle and it wasn't going to be pretty. Lee was not 100% behind this film as he was with Do the Right Thing. Of all the films I have seen Lee direct, this was the brightest and more modest of his films. It was almost as if he created a Hollywood movie instead of one that was all his own. I don't know if he saw the money from Do the Right Thing and ran with it, or what … but this film did not demonstrate his true talent.

For anyone out there that has seen this film, and perhaps stopped watching anything directed by Spike Lee afterwards due to this film, I suggest you give him a second chance. Don't get me wrong, I see exactly where you are coming from with this film and why you would want to put this behind you, but Lee does grow up. His work becomes more of his own, and you can see the transformation from a desire to make money to just wanting to make good films. It took me awhile to watch The 25th Hour, but when I did, it was sheer brilliance. Perhaps it was the actors, perhaps the story, but Lee crafted an amazing film out of one man's journey into the unknown. I guess that is what I was hoping Mo' Better Blues would turn out to be. This really dark journey into the life of a man that really never grew up, but instead all I got was Denzel being Denzel. He really is one of the most versatile actors of this generation, and I do consider him the Sydney Poitier of cinema, but this was not the film to showcase his talent.

Another issue that I had with this film was the use of Spike's sister playing one of the love interests. I don't know about you, and your family, but I do not think that I could have filmed a sex scene with my sister. I don't care who the actor is or how much money I am getting paid, I would never do it. It is just something that I never wish to see, but apparently that is different for Spike. He went ahead and showed the full nude image of his sister without any remorse. It was sad and it even made me blush. Also, I need somebody to answer me this. What was Flavor Flav doing introducing this film? So, I am sitting there on my couch, ready to start the film, when suddenly there is a voice from the past spelling out the studio that made this film, then he acknowledges himself. That did not build for a strong remaining of the story. Again, I felt that Lee was going for money on this film instead of actual talent. Perhaps that is how he could afford both Denzel and Wesley in the same movie without any explosions.

There were two great scenes in this film that made it worth watching through to the end. Don't get me wrong, this was a very bad movie, but there is always a diamond in every alleyway. The scene when Bleek accidentally forgets which woman he is with was mesmerizing. He continually went back and forth, weaving truth to confusion in a way that proved that Lee was actually behind the camera. It was a visionary scene that was probably lost in the shuffle due to the remaining poor scenes. The other scene that was worth watching was the way that Lee introduced and ended the film. By keeping the same pacing and direction, he was able to bring this tragic character around full circle and give him the chance to change his life. Other than these two moments, the rest of the film was pure rubbish, not worth viewing unless you are about to go blind.

Grade: ** out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jodie Foster, Cherie Currie (the former lead singer of the seminal all-girl rock group the Runaways in her remarkably able acting debut), Marilyn Kagan, and Kandice Stroh are uniformly believable, splendid and touching as the titular quartet, who are a tight-knit clique of troubled, fiercely loyal adolescent girls with negligent, uncaring, self-absorbed parents who do their best to grow up and fend for themselves in the affluent San Fernando Valley, California suburbs. The girls are forced to make serious decisions about sex, drugs, alcohol, commitment, and so on at a tender young age when they're not fully prepared to completely own up to the potentially harmful consequences of said decisions. Foster, giving one of her most perceptive, affecting and underrated performances to date, is basically the group's den mother who presides over the well-being of both herself and the others; she's especially concerned about the good-hearted, but reckless and self-destructive Currie, whose carelessly hedonistic lifestyle makes her likely to meet an untimely end.

This picture offers a poignant, insightful, often devastatingly credible and thoroughly absorbing examination of broken, dysfunctional families which exist directly underneath suburbia's neatly manicured surface and the tragic net result of such families: tough, resilient, but unhappy and vulnerable kids who have to confront the trials and tribulations of growing up on their own because their parents are either too inconsiderate or even nonexistent. Adrian ("Fatal Attraction," "Jacob's Ladder") Lyne's direction is both sturdy and observant while Gerald Ayres' script is somewhat messy and rambling, but overall still accurate in its frank, gritty, unsentimental depiction of your average latchkey kid's nerve-wrackingly chaotic, capricious and unpredictable everyday life. Leon Bijou's soft, dewy, almost pastoral cinematography properly suggests a delicate and easily breakable sense of tranquility and innocence. Giorgio Moroder arranged the excellent score, which makes particularly effective use of Donna Summer's elegiac "On the Radio." The top-notch cast includes Sally Kellerman as Foster's neurotic, insecure, peevish mother, Scott Baio as a sweet skateboarder dude, Randy Quaid as Kagan's rich older boyfriend, British 60's pop singer Adam Faith as Foster's feckless, absentee rock promoter father, and Lois Smith as Kagan's smothering, overprotective mother. Appearing in brief bits are Robert Romanus (Mike Damone "Fast Times at Richmont High") as one of Foster's morose ex-boyfriends and a gawky, braces-wearing Laura Dern as an obnoxious party crasher. Achingly authentic, engrossing and deeply moving (Currie's grim ultimate fate is very heart-breaking), "Foxes" is quite simply one of the most unsung and under-appreciated teen movies made about early 80's adolescence. --------------------------------------------- Result 977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to go down as almost one of the worst movies of all time. Awful acting, awful script... and they were the good points! One to Definitely miss! The jokes, if you could call them that, were so predictable as to be pathetic. Pamela Anderson is still relying on her body to detract from the fact that her acting is just as plastic! I sat willing to give it a chance, hoping that it was going to improve which, alas, it didn't! If it was a choice between this and a book, I suggest you settle down for a good read! I like Denise Richards, which is why I gave this movie a go, but why she has let her self be cast in this movie is beyond me! --------------------------------------------- Result 978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] These were over 80 minutes of semi [[unexpected]] boredom. [[First]], I was [[wondering]] how it is [[possible]] to [[produce]] something like that. Then, reaching 70th minute I was [[convincing]] myself that it's only a few more [[minutes]], and I lasted to the very end which I'm [[kinda]] proud of as I consider [[watching]] this [[movie]] as a great test for human's patience and [[crap]] tolerance. Was it worth watching at all? [[Well]], as I wrote above, if you want to test yourself, give it a [[try]] and if you're strong willed enough, you may even [[last]] to the [[end]]... The [[movie]] [[lacks]] [[coherence]] and [[characters]] seem to have no common [[sense]] at all. All happenings in the movie, you can be sure you saw [[somewhere]] before, and they [[seem]] to be put in this [[movie]] just to [[fill]] the [[film]] reel. These were over 80 minutes of semi [[unplanned]] boredom. [[Fiirst]], I was [[request]] how it is [[probable]] to [[engender]] something like that. Then, reaching 70th minute I was [[compelling]] myself that it's only a few more [[mins]], and I lasted to the very end which I'm [[sorta]] proud of as I consider [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] as a great test for human's patience and [[damnit]] tolerance. Was it worth watching at all? [[Good]], as I wrote above, if you want to test yourself, give it a [[seeks]] and if you're strong willed enough, you may even [[final]] to the [[ends]]... The [[filmmaking]] [[missing]] [[uniformity]] and [[nature]] seem to have no common [[feeling]] at all. All happenings in the movie, you can be sure you saw [[nowhere]] before, and they [[appears]] to be put in this [[filmmaking]] just to [[populate]] the [[filmmaking]] reel. --------------------------------------------- Result 979 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow, a movie about NYC politics seemingly written by someone who has never set foot in NYC. You know there's a problem when at one moment you expect the credits to roll and the movie continues on for another half hour. The characters are boring, John Cusack's accent is laughable, and the plotline teeters between boring and laughable. A horrible movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The problem with "The [[Killer]] Elite" is that just by [[seeking]] this [[film]] out, and investing time to watch it, you are putting more [[effort]] into the experience than many of its [[principals]] did, particularly [[director]] Sam Peckinpah.

The already volatile Peckinpah was heading into rough weather with this film. According to at least one biographer, this was where he became acquainted with cocaine. Add to that his binge drinking, and it's no wonder things fell [[apart]].

It's a [[shame]], because the [[concept]] behind the [[film]] is a good one, and the first ten minutes promise [[much]]. [[Mike]] Locken (James Caan) and [[George]] [[Hansen]] (Robert Duvall) are private [[contractors]] who do a lot of dirty [[work]] for the CIA. They move [[quick]], [[live]] well, and [[seem]] like the [[best]] of [[friends]] - then something happens to shatter their brotherhood.

An [[opening]] scene shows them blowing up a building - why exactly we aren't told, par for the course in terms of this film's [[murky]] [[motivation]]. But the implication is these guys hurt people and don't really care - antiheroes much like the Wild Bunch of Peckinpah's not-so-long-ago. An opening title tells us they [[work]] for ComTeg, then [[adds]] with [[obvious]] tongue in cheek "...the thought the CIA might [[employ]] such an [[organization]] for any [[purpose]] is, of course, [[preposterous]]." That's a pretty clever [[way]] of [[letting]] the [[audience]] know all [[bets]] are off.

Add to that a [[traditionally]] strong Peckinpah backup [[cast]], [[including]] Burt [[Young]], Gig Young, and Peckinpah regular [[Bo]] Hopkins in the plum role of a madman who can't pass up an opportunity to be shot at for $500 a day, and you only wish that the scriptwriters, [[including]] the [[celebrated]] Sterling Silliphant, tried to do something more with the story than turn it into a platform for lazy one-liners and [[bad]] chop-socky knockoffs. An attempt at injecting a dose of liberal social commentary is awkwardly shoehorned in. "You're so busy doing their dirty work, you can't tell who the bad guys are," someone tells Locken, as if either he or we need it pointed out.

Worse still are Peckinpah's clumsy direction and sluggish pacing. We're 40 minutes into the film before we get our first battle scene, a completely chaotic collection of random shots where a bunch of people we haven't even met before are seen fighting at San Francisco Airport, their battle intercut with a conversation in an office suite.

By the end of the film, what's left of the cast is having a battle inside a fleet of mothballed Victory Ships, ninjas running out in the open to be gunned down while Caan tosses off one liners that undercut any hint of real suspense. "Lay me seven-to-five, I'll take the little guy," he wisecracks just before a climatic samurai duel between two ninja warriors - from China, which we all know is the land of the Ninja. (The battle takes place in San Francisco, but surprisingly no Mounties arrive to break things up.)

Caan is much better in smaller scenes, like when Locken, recovering from some nasty injuries, is told by one of his bosses, played by a smooth Arthur Hill, that he's been "Humpty-dumped" by the organization. Caan refuses to stay down, and his recovery scenes, though momentum-killing for the movie, feature fine acting from him and Amy Heflin, Van's daughter, as a supportive nurse. Caan was one of the 1970s' best actors, and his laconic byplay with Heflin, Duvall, Hopkins, and both Youngs give "Killer Elite" real watchability.

But you don't watch "Killer Elite" thinking about that. You watch it thinking of the film that got away. The problem with "The [[Assassin]] Elite" is that just by [[searching]] this [[flick]] out, and investing time to watch it, you are putting more [[endeavours]] into the experience than many of its [[chiefs]] did, particularly [[headmaster]] Sam Peckinpah.

The already volatile Peckinpah was heading into rough weather with this film. According to at least one biographer, this was where he became acquainted with cocaine. Add to that his binge drinking, and it's no wonder things fell [[also]].

It's a [[pity]], because the [[concepts]] behind the [[filmmaking]] is a good one, and the first ten minutes promise [[very]]. [[Mick]] Locken (James Caan) and [[Giorgi]] [[Hanssen]] (Robert Duvall) are private [[entrepreneur]] who do a lot of dirty [[works]] for the CIA. They move [[promptly]], [[living]] well, and [[seems]] like the [[better]] of [[buddies]] - then something happens to shatter their brotherhood.

An [[initiation]] scene shows them blowing up a building - why exactly we aren't told, par for the course in terms of this film's [[shadowy]] [[motivations]]. But the implication is these guys hurt people and don't really care - antiheroes much like the Wild Bunch of Peckinpah's not-so-long-ago. An opening title tells us they [[cooperation]] for ComTeg, then [[add]] with [[manifest]] tongue in cheek "...the thought the CIA might [[hiring]] such an [[organizations]] for any [[intent]] is, of course, [[stupid]]." That's a pretty clever [[routing]] of [[allowing]] the [[spectators]] know all [[betting]] are off.

Add to that a [[generally]] strong Peckinpah backup [[casting]], [[encompassing]] Burt [[Youths]], Gig Young, and Peckinpah regular [[Pu]] Hopkins in the plum role of a madman who can't pass up an opportunity to be shot at for $500 a day, and you only wish that the scriptwriters, [[consisting]] the [[notorious]] Sterling Silliphant, tried to do something more with the story than turn it into a platform for lazy one-liners and [[unfavourable]] chop-socky knockoffs. An attempt at injecting a dose of liberal social commentary is awkwardly shoehorned in. "You're so busy doing their dirty work, you can't tell who the bad guys are," someone tells Locken, as if either he or we need it pointed out.

Worse still are Peckinpah's clumsy direction and sluggish pacing. We're 40 minutes into the film before we get our first battle scene, a completely chaotic collection of random shots where a bunch of people we haven't even met before are seen fighting at San Francisco Airport, their battle intercut with a conversation in an office suite.

By the end of the film, what's left of the cast is having a battle inside a fleet of mothballed Victory Ships, ninjas running out in the open to be gunned down while Caan tosses off one liners that undercut any hint of real suspense. "Lay me seven-to-five, I'll take the little guy," he wisecracks just before a climatic samurai duel between two ninja warriors - from China, which we all know is the land of the Ninja. (The battle takes place in San Francisco, but surprisingly no Mounties arrive to break things up.)

Caan is much better in smaller scenes, like when Locken, recovering from some nasty injuries, is told by one of his bosses, played by a smooth Arthur Hill, that he's been "Humpty-dumped" by the organization. Caan refuses to stay down, and his recovery scenes, though momentum-killing for the movie, feature fine acting from him and Amy Heflin, Van's daughter, as a supportive nurse. Caan was one of the 1970s' best actors, and his laconic byplay with Heflin, Duvall, Hopkins, and both Youngs give "Killer Elite" real watchability.

But you don't watch "Killer Elite" thinking about that. You watch it thinking of the film that got away. --------------------------------------------- Result 981 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Lost is the [[best]] TV series there is.First of all,it has GREAT actors and wonderful directing.The writing is a very [[controversial]] issue because in the first two seasons the writing was extraordinary but after season 3 the writing became [[highly]] complex.For [[instance]],who is [[Jacob]]?Why are there polar bears on the island?What's the fog?How did the island disappear?Who is Richard Alpert?A [[lot]] of people think that the writers are lost and that they have raised a lot of questions and mysteries that they can't explain.I believe these people are wrong.I have confidence in the writers.I think that if the mysteries are revealed from now all the charm of the series will be gone.Anyway,lost is [[undeniably]] the [[greatest]] TV series and it will continue to be for a long time. Lost is the [[better]] TV series there is.First of all,it has GREAT actors and wonderful directing.The writing is a very [[contentious]] issue because in the first two seasons the writing was extraordinary but after season 3 the writing became [[inordinately]] complex.For [[lawsuit]],who is [[Jakob]]?Why are there polar bears on the island?What's the fog?How did the island disappear?Who is Richard Alpert?A [[batch]] of people think that the writers are lost and that they have raised a lot of questions and mysteries that they can't explain.I believe these people are wrong.I have confidence in the writers.I think that if the mysteries are revealed from now all the charm of the series will be gone.Anyway,lost is [[admittedly]] the [[higher]] TV series and it will continue to be for a long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I just viewed the [[film]] two days [[ago]], and I was filled with [[anticipation]], being that [[Paris]] is my [[second]] [[favorite]] city in [[Europe]] and I [[spent]] a very [[romantic]] 18 [[months]] there in the '80's. I was [[somewhat]] disappointed that most of this [[group]] of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not [[capture]] the "light" and beauty of the city very well.[[Nor]] enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much [[darkness]], not only literally but [[figuratively]]. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down "flat "(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The [[uplifting]], good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the "Cowboy" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more. I just viewed the [[kino]] two days [[formerly]], and I was filled with [[expectation]], being that [[Parisien]] is my [[secondly]] [[preferable]] city in [[Eu]] and I [[expenditures]] a very [[romance]] 18 [[month]] there in the '80's. I was [[rather]] disappointed that most of this [[clusters]] of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not [[catch]] the "light" and beauty of the city very well.[[Oder]] enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much [[obscurity]], not only literally but [[metaphorically]]. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down "flat "(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The [[uplift]], good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the "Cowboy" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more. --------------------------------------------- Result 983 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Had]] this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a [[fine]] movie but [[overly]] long with a tedious subplot, i.[[e]]., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).

Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: "I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket," "Let Yourself Go," and "I'd Rather Lead the Band." Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, "But Where Are You?" and "Get Thee Behind Me, Satan" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.

The highlight of the movie comes at the end with "Let's Face the Music and Dance," one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again. [[Has]] this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a [[fined]] movie but [[disproportionately]] long with a tedious subplot, i.[[f]]., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).

Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: "I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket," "Let Yourself Go," and "I'd Rather Lead the Band." Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, "But Where Are You?" and "Get Thee Behind Me, Satan" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.

The highlight of the movie comes at the end with "Let's Face the Music and Dance," one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 984 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe I waste my time watching this garbage! I did because Leonard Maltin gave it an "AA" rating, and for TV movies this is usually a reliable indicator of some quality entertainment.

The acting was OK, but whoever wrote it should be forever denied access to any medium of communication. The plot is ludicrous, the motivations of the "bad guys" totally absent, and the various family interactions silly and shallow. For example, Dad preaches that violent reaction to aggression is BAD, but he turns out to be an "admirable" person NOT because of his "ignore the idiots" philosophy, but because he's pretty good with his fists...

The ONLY message I was able to glean from this pap was that the nuclear family is Good and alternate living arrangements are Bad. Oh, and Bad people happen to Good people. --------------------------------------------- Result 985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have to [[admit]] that this "re-imagining" of the original 1968 [[film]] was a [[huge]] [[disappointment]]. Specially when taken into [[consideration]] that this is a Tim Burton [[film]]. He is defenetly one of the most [[original]] and, might I say, cool [[directors]] Hollywood has produced.

I am personally a [[great]] [[fan]] of his work, but something [[obviously]] went wrong with his [[latest]] [[flick]], The [[Planet]] of the Apes. I really enjoyed the [[original]] film. When it first [[came]] out people expected just another cheezie 70's [[science]] fiction [[film]], but a very [[surprise]] anding totally [[proved]] that theory wrong. It had indeed a clear cut message. An [[obvious]] anti-war message. Fear of the cold [[war]], where it was [[taking]] the world and fear of the [[use]] of nuclear [[weapons]] played a big role in the mind of the film-makers. Those reasons made the film [[rise]] above all expectations and it [[became]] a [[instant]] classic. Although, the [[new]] [[film]], the "re-making" or whatever, leaves us with nothing. [[No]] message, no [[ideals]] behind it. It is just another money-minded summer blockbuster.

Visually Tim Burton does not let you down. The dark and [[creepy]] settings were excellent and of [[course]] the make up was terrific.

Obviously that is not [[enough]] to keep people intrested in a film. There has to be an exciting plot or storyline. In this movie the plot is highly uninteresting and it is extremely [[badly]] thought out. The script is very lame and it is full of gaps. It [[looks]] like this film had been written in a big hurry. The explanation for why the apes where there, and why the ruled the planet was indeed very stupid and proved the script-writers ignorance.

It raised a lot of questions, which had no [[reasonable]] [[answers]] to.

For example; Why did the apes speak English?, why were there other ape-species than chimps on the planet ([[given]] that there were only chimps in the space [[ship]] that crash-landed on the [[planet]]) [[Where]] the [[hell]] did all of those humans come from? [[How]] were a few [[chimps]] able to [[evolve]] into a [[huge]] [[raise]] of all [[kinds]] of [[monkeys]] in only a few thousands [[years]]. (I mean it took a few [[million]] [[years]] for us to [[evolve]] from [[monkey]] to man!)

And finally, the bad [[surprise]] ending was just plane dumb. It was probably just thrown in because the original film had such an end, then they felt that the audience were expecting the same kind of ending. The ending also raises a lot of questions, which I KNOW, don´t have intelligent answears. Did Theid learn to work the space ship?, which was power-less, and learnt to fly back in time and take over the earth single hand?, and, what did he do, breed with all the women? And lets say that that would happen, I higly doubt that history would stay the same, like Washington would be built exactly like it is today! (I mean wouln't there be a huge banana instead of the memorial?)

Well, just to say something posative about the film. Some of the cast was great. Helen Bonham Carter's character was interesting and well-acted, as for Tim Roth as Theid. He was very good, a little exaturated at some points of the film. Michael Clark Duncan was also fine. I was not happy with Marc Whalberg. He is not much of an actor, and plays here a very macho colour-less character. Very unbielevable and is nothing compared to Hestons character in the original. And the main female character had no reason or place in the film. She was just casted for the looks. Hardly said a word throughout the entire film.

Well, I think that in the future when people think about the Planet of the apes, they will think about the original one. The latest will soon be forgotten. I have to [[recognised]] that this "re-imagining" of the original 1968 [[filmmaking]] was a [[sizable]] [[displeasure]]. Specially when taken into [[exam]] that this is a Tim Burton [[films]]. He is defenetly one of the most [[preliminary]] and, might I say, cool [[managers]] Hollywood has produced.

I am personally a [[whopping]] [[breather]] of his work, but something [[undoubtedly]] went wrong with his [[recent]] [[gesture]], The [[Planets]] of the Apes. I really enjoyed the [[upfront]] film. When it first [[arrived]] out people expected just another cheezie 70's [[veda]] fiction [[cinematography]], but a very [[surprising]] anding totally [[evidenced]] that theory wrong. It had indeed a clear cut message. An [[overt]] anti-war message. Fear of the cold [[wars]], where it was [[adopting]] the world and fear of the [[employs]] of nuclear [[weaponry]] played a big role in the mind of the film-makers. Those reasons made the film [[hikes]] above all expectations and it [[came]] a [[immediate]] classic. Although, the [[nuevo]] [[flick]], the "re-making" or whatever, leaves us with nothing. [[None]] message, no [[ideal]] behind it. It is just another money-minded summer blockbuster.

Visually Tim Burton does not let you down. The dark and [[freaky]] settings were excellent and of [[cours]] the make up was terrific.

Obviously that is not [[sufficiently]] to keep people intrested in a film. There has to be an exciting plot or storyline. In this movie the plot is highly uninteresting and it is extremely [[sorely]] thought out. The script is very lame and it is full of gaps. It [[seem]] like this film had been written in a big hurry. The explanation for why the apes where there, and why the ruled the planet was indeed very stupid and proved the script-writers ignorance.

It raised a lot of questions, which had no [[logical]] [[reactions]] to.

For example; Why did the apes speak English?, why were there other ape-species than chimps on the planet ([[afforded]] that there were only chimps in the space [[starship]] that crash-landed on the [[planetary]]) [[Whenever]] the [[bordello]] did all of those humans come from? [[Mode]] were a few [[chimp]] able to [[evolution]] into a [[whopping]] [[augment]] of all [[genre]] of [[apes]] in only a few thousands [[ages]]. (I mean it took a few [[trillion]] [[olds]] for us to [[evolution]] from [[ape]] to man!)

And finally, the bad [[amaze]] ending was just plane dumb. It was probably just thrown in because the original film had such an end, then they felt that the audience were expecting the same kind of ending. The ending also raises a lot of questions, which I KNOW, don´t have intelligent answears. Did Theid learn to work the space ship?, which was power-less, and learnt to fly back in time and take over the earth single hand?, and, what did he do, breed with all the women? And lets say that that would happen, I higly doubt that history would stay the same, like Washington would be built exactly like it is today! (I mean wouln't there be a huge banana instead of the memorial?)

Well, just to say something posative about the film. Some of the cast was great. Helen Bonham Carter's character was interesting and well-acted, as for Tim Roth as Theid. He was very good, a little exaturated at some points of the film. Michael Clark Duncan was also fine. I was not happy with Marc Whalberg. He is not much of an actor, and plays here a very macho colour-less character. Very unbielevable and is nothing compared to Hestons character in the original. And the main female character had no reason or place in the film. She was just casted for the looks. Hardly said a word throughout the entire film.

Well, I think that in the future when people think about the Planet of the apes, they will think about the original one. The latest will soon be forgotten. --------------------------------------------- Result 986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] This is a well made informative film in the vein of PBS Frontline. The [[problem]] is, Frontline already did this piece and managed to bring L. Paul Bremer in to tell his side of the story. More troubling is the fact that the director of the film, Charles Ferguson--a former think tank wonk, was a war supporter until the occupation went south. What did he think would happen?

The invasion of Poland went really well too until it was messed up by those [[pesky]] Nazis.And that is what this film feels like--an apology for occupation rather than a deconstruction of the act of war itself.

Ferguson seems to suggest that the war could have been run better--as if any war can be better. This is a well made informative film in the vein of PBS Frontline. The [[troubles]] is, Frontline already did this piece and managed to bring L. Paul Bremer in to tell his side of the story. More troubling is the fact that the director of the film, Charles Ferguson--a former think tank wonk, was a war supporter until the occupation went south. What did he think would happen?

The invasion of Poland went really well too until it was messed up by those [[troublesome]] Nazis.And that is what this film feels like--an apology for occupation rather than a deconstruction of the act of war itself.

Ferguson seems to suggest that the war could have been run better--as if any war can be better. --------------------------------------------- Result 987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Roman]] Polanski plays Trelkovsky who [[rents]] an apartment in France.The [[previous]] [[tenant]] is in a [[hospital]] after a suicide [[attempt]].He goes to [[see]] her there where he also [[meets]] Stella ([[Isabelle]] Adjani), the friend of Simone.He and Stella become pretty close.[[Later]] Simone dies.Trelkovsky [[begins]] to [[think]] the [[landlord]] and the [[neighbors]] are trying to change him into Simone so that [[eventually]] he [[would]] [[also]] [[jump]] out of the [[window]].[[Le]] Locataire (The Tenant) from 1976 is the last film of Polanski's apartment trilogy.The [[previous]] ones were Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby.Roman Polanski does not do good job only as the director but his acting is [[also]] [[superb]].[[Isabelle]] Adjani with her [[big]] [[glasses]] is [[wonderful]].The [[landlord]], [[Monsieur]] Zy is [[played]] by the great Melvyn Douglas.Jo Van Fleet plays [[Madame]] Dioz.The [[fantastic]] Shelley [[Winters]] is The Concierge.The [[Tenant]] is [[something]] very [[scary]] from [[time]] to [[time]].It [[gives]] a lot of that [[psychological]] scare.This [[film]] is not the easiest one to understand or explain but that makes it all so [[fascinating]]. [[Romans]] Polanski plays Trelkovsky who [[renting]] an apartment in France.The [[anterior]] [[boarder]] is in a [[clinic]] after a suicide [[endeavor]].He goes to [[seeing]] her there where he also [[satisfies]] Stella ([[Isabel]] Adjani), the friend of Simone.He and Stella become pretty close.[[Subsequently]] Simone dies.Trelkovsky [[launched]] to [[thinking]] the [[landowners]] and the [[voisin]] are trying to change him into Simone so that [[lastly]] he [[should]] [[further]] [[leaping]] out of the [[windowsill]].[[Lai]] Locataire (The Tenant) from 1976 is the last film of Polanski's apartment trilogy.The [[ago]] ones were Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby.Roman Polanski does not do good job only as the director but his acting is [[similarly]] [[wondrous]].[[Isadora]] Adjani with her [[major]] [[glass]] is [[magnifique]].The [[landowner]], [[Sirs]] Zy is [[done]] by the great Melvyn Douglas.Jo Van Fleet plays [[Senora]] Dioz.The [[brilliant]] Shelley [[Winter]] is The Concierge.The [[Renter]] is [[anything]] very [[awful]] from [[moment]] to [[period]].It [[delivers]] a lot of that [[psychiatric]] scare.This [[cinematography]] is not the easiest one to understand or explain but that makes it all so [[riveting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] "Spielberg loves the smell of sentiment in the morning. But [[sentiment]] at the [[expense]] of [[narrative]] honesty? [[Nobody]] should [[love]] that." - Lucius Shepard

"The Color Purple" takes place in the [[Deep]] South during the [[early]] 1900s, and [[tells]] the [[story]] of Celie and [[Nettie]], two African American sisters. The film opens with the girls playing in a field of purple [[flowers]], an idyllic haven which is [[promptly]] shattered by the appearance of their stepfather. This [[motif]] – innocence [[interrupted]] by men – permeates the entire [[film]].

The [[film]] then [[launches]] into a series of short sequences. Celie is revealed to have been twice [[impregnated]] by her stepfather, gives birth in a dirty barn, has her newborn child taken away and is forced to marry a local widow named Albert Johnson, a violent oaf who rapes her repeatedly, forcing her to cook, clean and look after his children.

All these horrific scenes are given little screen time, and are instead surrounded by moments of pixie-dust cinematography, a meddlesome symphonic score, [[incongruous]] comedy and overly [[exuberant]] camera work. The [[cumulative]] effect is like the merging of a Disney cartoon and a rape movie, a jarring aesthetic which caused [[Stanley]] Kubrick to remark that "The Color Purple" made him so nauseated that he had to turn it off after ten minutes. Ten minutes? He lasted a long time.

The film is often said to deal which "racism", "sexism" and "black culture", but this is not true. Alice Walker, the author of the novel upon which the film is based, claims to be a bisexual but is actually a closet lesbian. Her book is a lesbian fantasy, a story of female liberation and self-discovery, which paints men as violent brutes who stymie women. For Walker, the only way out of this maze is for women to bond together in a kind of lesbian utopia, black sisterhood and female independence celebrated.

Spielberg's film, however, re-frames Walker's story through the lens of comforting American mythologies. This is a film in which the salvific power of Christianity overcomes the natural cruelty of men. A film in which Albert finds himself in various ridiculous situations, moments of [[misplaced]] [[comedy]] inserted to make him look like a bumbling [[fool]]. A [[film]] in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.

This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions. A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions. A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept. This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!" and banned Disney movies. In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV. It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.

Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed. This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.

Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community. We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community. Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by. Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.

Problematic too is the lack of white characters. Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood. No, they are cruel by nature. And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them. A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.

And so there's a hidden ideology at work here. Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites. The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them. ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.

3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless. "Spielberg loves the smell of sentiment in the morning. But [[feeling]] at the [[spending]] of [[descriptive]] honesty? [[Anyone]] should [[likes]] that." - Lucius Shepard

"The Color Purple" takes place in the [[Profound]] South during the [[swift]] 1900s, and [[told]] the [[histories]] of Celie and [[Lillie]], two African American sisters. The film opens with the girls playing in a field of purple [[bloom]], an idyllic haven which is [[faster]] shattered by the appearance of their stepfather. This [[motivations]] – innocence [[ceased]] by men – permeates the entire [[filmmaking]].

The [[filmmaking]] then [[initiate]] into a series of short sequences. Celie is revealed to have been twice [[soaked]] by her stepfather, gives birth in a dirty barn, has her newborn child taken away and is forced to marry a local widow named Albert Johnson, a violent oaf who rapes her repeatedly, forcing her to cook, clean and look after his children.

All these horrific scenes are given little screen time, and are instead surrounded by moments of pixie-dust cinematography, a meddlesome symphonic score, [[absurd]] comedy and overly [[luxuriant]] camera work. The [[accumulate]] effect is like the merging of a Disney cartoon and a rape movie, a jarring aesthetic which caused [[Stan]] Kubrick to remark that "The Color Purple" made him so nauseated that he had to turn it off after ten minutes. Ten minutes? He lasted a long time.

The film is often said to deal which "racism", "sexism" and "black culture", but this is not true. Alice Walker, the author of the novel upon which the film is based, claims to be a bisexual but is actually a closet lesbian. Her book is a lesbian fantasy, a story of female liberation and self-discovery, which paints men as violent brutes who stymie women. For Walker, the only way out of this maze is for women to bond together in a kind of lesbian utopia, black sisterhood and female independence celebrated.

Spielberg's film, however, re-frames Walker's story through the lens of comforting American mythologies. This is a film in which the salvific power of Christianity overcomes the natural cruelty of men. A film in which Albert finds himself in various ridiculous situations, moments of [[mislaid]] [[travesty]] inserted to make him look like a bumbling [[twit]]. A [[filmmaking]] in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.

This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions. A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions. A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept. This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!" and banned Disney movies. In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV. It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.

Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed. This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.

Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community. We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community. Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by. Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.

Problematic too is the lack of white characters. Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood. No, they are cruel by nature. And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them. A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.

And so there's a hidden ideology at work here. Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites. The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them. ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.

3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless. --------------------------------------------- Result 989 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie is [[basically]] about some girls in a Catholic school that [[end]] up getting into trouble because of putting red dye in one in one of their school mates shampoo and after being reprimanded for this [[act]] they decide to take off to [[Florida]] for a vacation. On their way there they meet up with some [[guys]] in a local diner and decide that they would both [[meet]] up with each other in another [[location]] later on. The [[girls]] [[end]] up on a road side near the [[woods]] and [[stop]] for awhile and while one of the girls decides to walk around a bit she sees a murder happen in which the local sheriff himself is involved. She becomes scared and runs to tell the others what happened. The other girls decide to go take a look with her and two of them get killed by the [[killer]]. Then the two remaining girls are caught by the killer and are placed in local jail cell. The deputy sheriff meanwhile is keeping watch over the girls and despite their insistence that the sheriff is the killer he ignores them both and acts as ignorant and everybody else in this [[movie]] who just can't put two and two together much less some [[lousy]] detective [[work]] at that. The best [[part]] was the rape scene between the killer and one of the girls where he decides to rape her in her jail cell and it seems that the girl actually WANTS to be raped by this [[man]] and the bare [[chest]] scene I admit was good but before their lips meet he has other things in mind. This movie reminds me of the low-budget thriller "Blood Song" with Frankie Avalon staring in it, the same [[motive]] just a different [[character]] part. It's not a movie worth [[renting]] not [[even]] for an 80's low-budget [[movie]] and the [[ending]] was the [[worst]] ending I have ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]] and it left me [[wanting]] my money back! This movie is [[broadly]] about some girls in a Catholic school that [[terminate]] up getting into trouble because of putting red dye in one in one of their school mates shampoo and after being reprimanded for this [[law]] they decide to take off to [[Fl]] for a vacation. On their way there they meet up with some [[lads]] in a local diner and decide that they would both [[respond]] up with each other in another [[positioning]] later on. The [[daughters]] [[ceases]] up on a road side near the [[bois]] and [[ceasing]] for awhile and while one of the girls decides to walk around a bit she sees a murder happen in which the local sheriff himself is involved. She becomes scared and runs to tell the others what happened. The other girls decide to go take a look with her and two of them get killed by the [[slayer]]. Then the two remaining girls are caught by the killer and are placed in local jail cell. The deputy sheriff meanwhile is keeping watch over the girls and despite their insistence that the sheriff is the killer he ignores them both and acts as ignorant and everybody else in this [[filmmaking]] who just can't put two and two together much less some [[squalid]] detective [[cooperate]] at that. The best [[parties]] was the rape scene between the killer and one of the girls where he decides to rape her in her jail cell and it seems that the girl actually WANTS to be raped by this [[bloke]] and the bare [[torso]] scene I admit was good but before their lips meet he has other things in mind. This movie reminds me of the low-budget thriller "Blood Song" with Frankie Avalon staring in it, the same [[reason]] just a different [[characteristics]] part. It's not a movie worth [[rented]] not [[yet]] for an 80's low-budget [[filmmaking]] and the [[terminated]] was the [[meanest]] ending I have ever [[noticed]] in a [[filmmaking]] and it left me [[wishing]] my money back! --------------------------------------------- Result 990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ** Warning - this post may contain spoilers **

I only got a Gamecube in September 2005, and the first two games I bought were James Bond games, the decent Agent Under Fire and the dull Goldeneye Rogue Agent. The next game I planned to get was Everything or Nothing, because my friend told me that it was better than the two games I already had. I have to say, he was right.

I bought this for a tenner in HMV, and when I got home, I slammed it in to my Cube and played it for hours on end. It was much better than my other two games, and there was a much better and more interesting storyline. Graphics were some of the best I have seen (but now that the XBOX 360 has come out, Farcry Instincts Predator has some of the best graphics known to man). The storyline was clever; mad man (Willem Dafoe, named as Nikolai Diavolo) and beautiful henchwoman (Heidi Klum, named as Katya Nadanova), try to destroy the world with tiny nanobots, which at the start of the game, you, James Bond, have to destroy on a train. The bad thing is that one of them is hidden in Katya's boobs. You then have to thwart their plans and save the world.

The great thing about this game is that it actually has actors voicing the characters, such as Cleese voicing Q. There are 27 levels, some of them short and some of them pretty long and tricky.

Gameplay - 10/10 Graphics - 9/10 Sound - 9/10 Replay value - 7/10 Multiplayer - 8/10

I give this game a grand total of 90% --------------------------------------------- Result 991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Certain [[elements]] of this [[film]] are [[dated]], of course. An all white [[male]] crew, for [[instance]]. And like most Pre-Star [[Wars]] [[Science]] Fiction, it [[tends]] to [[take]] too [[long]] admiring itself.

But, [[still]], no [[movie]] has ever [[capture]] the [[flavor]] of [[Golden]] [[Age]] Science Fiction as this one did, even down to the use of the "electronic tonalities" to [[provide]] the musical [[score]]. [[Robbie]] the [[Robot]] epitomized the Asimov [[robots]], and was the inspiration for all that followed, from C3PO to Data.

The plot line, of course, is Shakespeare's "The [[Tempest]]". Morbius is Prospero, and exiled wizard who [[finds]] his kingdom invaded by interlopers... It was a movie that treated [[Science]] Fiction as an [[adult]] genre, [[perhaps]] the first. Certain [[ingredient]] of this [[films]] are [[dating]], of course. An all white [[macho]] crew, for [[lawsuits]]. And like most Pre-Star [[War]] [[Sciences]] Fiction, it [[strives]] to [[taking]] too [[longer]] admiring itself.

But, [[nevertheless]], no [[kino]] has ever [[captures]] the [[aroma]] of [[Dore]] [[Aged]] Science Fiction as this one did, even down to the use of the "electronic tonalities" to [[provides]] the musical [[punctuation]]. [[Bobbie]] the [[Robotics]] epitomized the Asimov [[bots]], and was the inspiration for all that followed, from C3PO to Data.

The plot line, of course, is Shakespeare's "The [[Cyclone]]". Morbius is Prospero, and exiled wizard who [[discovers]] his kingdom invaded by interlopers... It was a movie that treated [[Scientifically]] Fiction as an [[grownups]] genre, [[presumably]] the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love the munna bhai MBBS but "Lagge raho..." SUX really SUX. I have never seen such a boring movie in my whole life. And these high ratings really astonished me that wat happened to the taste of Indian cinema viewers ??

**MAY BE SPOILER**

An educated girl needs an advice from a Bhai, people discussing their personal prob. on phones come on man from which part of the world u r ??? I agree that films should be fictitious but these things are really indigestible.

2 out of 10. (2 stars is for 15 mins good starting) --------------------------------------------- Result 993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[show]] [[made]] me feel [[physically]] sick, and [[totally]] [[detached]] from British society as a [[whole]]. It was [[programmes]] such as this and [[Blue]] [[Peter]] that [[pretended]] that there were/are no [[class]] divisions in Britain. They'd always say things like; "Go into your loft and you may [[find]] this.." or "[[Go]] into your back [[garden]] [[tonight]] and..." - what about us 'scummy' working class [[kids]] who never never had a "loft", and a "back [[garden]]" which was nothing more than a 1 meter [[square]] of [[balcony]] on the 14th floor of a [[council]] [[block]]? Public [[service]] [[broadcasting]] - yeah right! And on top of that, it was awfully depressing to [[see]] those stupid, [[middle]] class, up-their-own-backside kids [[mess]] about with [[bits]] of old plastic having 'fun'... do me a [[favour]], and "why don't you" go and slit your wrists or do a coke overdose on "Mama and Papa's" money... you make me [[sick]] This [[exhibit]] [[introduced]] me feel [[materially]] sick, and [[fully]] [[separated]] from British society as a [[together]]. It was [[programme]] such as this and [[Bleu]] [[Pieter]] that [[confounded]] that there were/are no [[kinds]] divisions in Britain. They'd always say things like; "Go into your loft and you may [[found]] this.." or "[[Going]] into your back [[gardens]] [[mondays]] and..." - what about us 'scummy' working class [[enfants]] who never never had a "loft", and a "back [[gardens]]" which was nothing more than a 1 meter [[squares]] of [[terrace]] on the 14th floor of a [[governments]] [[bloc]]? Public [[servicing]] [[broadcasted]] - yeah right! And on top of that, it was awfully depressing to [[seeing]] those stupid, [[mid]] class, up-their-own-backside kids [[chaos]] about with [[tib]] of old plastic having 'fun'... do me a [[favouring]], and "why don't you" go and slit your wrists or do a coke overdose on "Mama and Papa's" money... you make me [[sickly]] --------------------------------------------- Result 994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] A female [[executioner]] (played by the [[sexy]] Jennifer Thomas II) has the fun [[job]] of fulfilling all the fantasies of all the men on death row before they meet their maker. And what a [[way]] to go. [[Lucky]] this film is not real, or we would have a lot more people in this world on death row.

It [[starts]] out real [[slow]]. Low light and bad acting, like most (B) films. It [[gets]] better as it moves along. And [[ends]] with a bang.

I would rate it very high on the low cost, very sexy movies of the 90's. It's a must see once the kids are away or in bed. A female [[butcher]] (played by the [[scorching]] Jennifer Thomas II) has the fun [[labour]] of fulfilling all the fantasies of all the men on death row before they meet their maker. And what a [[camino]] to go. [[Luck]] this film is not real, or we would have a lot more people in this world on death row.

It [[launches]] out real [[sluggish]]. Low light and bad acting, like most (B) films. It [[attains]] better as it moves along. And [[terminates]] with a bang.

I would rate it very high on the low cost, very sexy movies of the 90's. It's a must see once the kids are away or in bed. --------------------------------------------- Result 995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Boasting an all-star cast so [[impressive]] that it [[almost]] [[seems]] like the "[[Mad]] Mad [[Mad]] Mad [[World]]" of [[horror]] [[pictures]], "The [[Sentinel]]" (1977) is nevertheless an [[effectively]] [[creepy]] [[film]] [[centering]] on the [[relatively]] [[unknown]] actress Cristina Raines. [[In]] this one, she plays a fashion [[model]], [[Alison]] [[Parker]], who moves into a Brooklyn Heights brownstone that is (and I don't [[think]] I'm [[giving]] away too much at this [[late]] [[date]]) very [[close]] to the gateway of Hell. And as a [[tenant]] in this [[building]], she [[suffers]] far [[worse]] conditions than [[leaky]] [[plumbing]] and the occasional water bug, to put it [[mildly]]! [[Indeed]], the scene in which [[Alison]] [[encounters]] her noisy upstairs [[neighbor]] is [[truly]] [[terrifying]], and should [[certainly]] send the ice water coursing down the [[spines]] of most [[viewers]]. [[Despite]] [[many]] critics' [[complaints]] [[regarding]] Raines' acting [[ability]], I thought she was just fine, more than [[ably]] holding her own in scenes with Ava [[Gardner]], Burgess Meredith, Arthur [[Kennedy]], Chris Sarandon and Eli Wallach. The [[picture]] [[builds]] to an effectively [[eerie]] [[conclusion]], and [[although]] some plot points go unexplained, I was left feeling more than satisfied. As the book "DVD Delirium" puts it, "any movie with Beverly D'Angelo and Sylvia Miles as [[topless]] cannibal lesbians in leotards can't be all bad"! On a side note, yesterday I walked over to 10 Montague Terrace in Brooklyn Heights to take a look at the Sentinel House. Yes, it's still there, and [[although]] shorn of its heavy coat of ivy and lacking a blind priest/nun at the top-floor window, looks much the same as it did in this picture. If this [[house]] really does sit atop the entrance to Hell, I take it that Hell is...the Brooklyn [[Queens]] [[Expressway]]. But we New Yorkers have known THAT for some time! Boasting an all-star cast so [[unbelievable]] that it [[practically]] [[looks]] like the "[[Madman]] Mad [[Madman]] Mad [[Globe]]" of [[monstrosity]] [[pictured]], "The [[Sentry]]" (1977) is nevertheless an [[efficiently]] [[frightening]] [[movie]] [[centered]] on the [[comparatively]] [[undisclosed]] actress Cristina Raines. [[At]] this one, she plays a fashion [[paragon]], [[Ellison]] [[Barker]], who moves into a Brooklyn Heights brownstone that is (and I don't [[believe]] I'm [[confer]] away too much at this [[tardy]] [[dates]]) very [[nearer]] to the gateway of Hell. And as a [[renters]] in this [[construction]], she [[suffering]] far [[lousiest]] conditions than [[porous]] [[plumber]] and the occasional water bug, to put it [[gently]]! [[Actually]], the scene in which [[Ellison]] [[confrontations]] her noisy upstairs [[nearby]] is [[honestly]] [[atrocious]], and should [[probably]] send the ice water coursing down the [[thorns]] of most [[listeners]]. [[Though]] [[countless]] critics' [[grievance]] [[relating]] Raines' acting [[competency]], I thought she was just fine, more than [[cleverly]] holding her own in scenes with Ava [[Gartner]], Burgess Meredith, Arthur [[Jfk]], Chris Sarandon and Eli Wallach. The [[photography]] [[constructing]] to an effectively [[freaky]] [[conclude]], and [[though]] some plot points go unexplained, I was left feeling more than satisfied. As the book "DVD Delirium" puts it, "any movie with Beverly D'Angelo and Sylvia Miles as [[bikini]] cannibal lesbians in leotards can't be all bad"! On a side note, yesterday I walked over to 10 Montague Terrace in Brooklyn Heights to take a look at the Sentinel House. Yes, it's still there, and [[though]] shorn of its heavy coat of ivy and lacking a blind priest/nun at the top-floor window, looks much the same as it did in this picture. If this [[dwellings]] really does sit atop the entrance to Hell, I take it that Hell is...the Brooklyn [[Fags]] [[Motorway]]. But we New Yorkers have known THAT for some time! --------------------------------------------- Result 996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Sure, it's a 50's drive-in [[special]], but don't let that fool you. In my little book, there are a number of intelligent [[touches]] with [[unexpected]] dollops of [[humor]]. Catch the [[redoubtable]] Mrs. Porter who's supposed to keep an eye on the doc's place. She not only steals the scene, but darn near the whole movie. And where did those indie producers come up with the bucks to film in color, a wise decision, since the [[blob]] would not show up well in b&w. [[Yes]], the result is ragged around the edges as the number of goofs illustrate. But except for several of the teens, the non-Hollywood cast performs well. Then too, the byplay among hot-rodders and cops comes across as lively and entertaining. Pretty darn good for a couple of directors more at home in a pulpit than on a sound stage. Apparently, they wanted to portray teens in a positive light at a time when the screen was filled with "juvenile delinquents". Then again, the 27-year old McQueen hardly qualifies in the age department, but manages the hot-rodder attitude anyway. The movie was a hit at the time, helped along, no doubt, by the catchy title tune that got a lot of radio play. And except for the unfortunate final effects, the movie is still a [[lot]] of [[fun]], drive-in or no drive-in. Meanwhile, I'm awaiting the blob's return now that the polar icecap is turning into, shall we say, refrigerator water. Sure, it's a 50's drive-in [[especial]], but don't let that fool you. In my little book, there are a number of intelligent [[touch]] with [[unplanned]] dollops of [[mood]]. Catch the [[formidable]] Mrs. Porter who's supposed to keep an eye on the doc's place. She not only steals the scene, but darn near the whole movie. And where did those indie producers come up with the bucks to film in color, a wise decision, since the [[smudge]] would not show up well in b&w. [[Yeah]], the result is ragged around the edges as the number of goofs illustrate. But except for several of the teens, the non-Hollywood cast performs well. Then too, the byplay among hot-rodders and cops comes across as lively and entertaining. Pretty darn good for a couple of directors more at home in a pulpit than on a sound stage. Apparently, they wanted to portray teens in a positive light at a time when the screen was filled with "juvenile delinquents". Then again, the 27-year old McQueen hardly qualifies in the age department, but manages the hot-rodder attitude anyway. The movie was a hit at the time, helped along, no doubt, by the catchy title tune that got a lot of radio play. And except for the unfortunate final effects, the movie is still a [[batches]] of [[funny]], drive-in or no drive-in. Meanwhile, I'm awaiting the blob's return now that the polar icecap is turning into, shall we say, refrigerator water. --------------------------------------------- Result 997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I saw this [[Documentary]] at the Cannes Film Festival, in a small 200-seat Cinema at the top of the main building at the Cannes [[Film]] Festival.

I [[absolutely]] was into it. I [[love]] the [[mix]] of awesomely made [[fictional]] scenes. It is [[amazing]] set-design. The scenes look really like they were filmed in 1920ies or 1930ies.

And the [[music]] is so nice.

I rate this experience 9/10.

* [[spoilers]] ahead *

The [[Documentary]] tells about [[awesome]] Blues-men, with black-and-white old-looking scenes of the [[black]] [[man]] [[playing]] the guitar and [[singing]]. It is [[really]] [[amazing]]. But this also [[mixes]] in new bands and that is [[maybe]] one [[thing]] I [[might]] dislike in this Documentary. It is the too abundant [[use]] of links to modern rock-bands [[playing]] those Blues songs in a modern [[way]]. I didn't [[really]] appreciate their trashed [[way]] of playing such [[awesome]] Blues [[songs]]. This is the same kind of un-perfect musical [[taste]] I found when watching Wim Wenders Buena Vista [[Social]] Club.

The [[Documentary]] was such a standing-ovation at this first screening in the [[little]] [[cinema]], that the [[next]] day this [[Documentary]] was [[shown]] for [[everyone]] and [[normal]] tourists on the [[beach]] of the Croisette at the open-air [[cinema]]. [[Though]] the sand, the quality of the [[projection]] and the bad quality of the sound probably made it a difficult [[experience]] to enjoy for the thousands of people who were [[sitting]] in the [[sand]] that night. I saw this [[Literature]] at the Cannes Film Festival, in a small 200-seat Cinema at the top of the main building at the Cannes [[Films]] Festival.

I [[totally]] was into it. I [[amour]] the [[amalgam]] of awesomely made [[fictitious]] scenes. It is [[wonderful]] set-design. The scenes look really like they were filmed in 1920ies or 1930ies.

And the [[musician]] is so nice.

I rate this experience 9/10.

* [[troublemakers]] ahead *

The [[Literature]] tells about [[marvelous]] Blues-men, with black-and-white old-looking scenes of the [[negro]] [[men]] [[playback]] the guitar and [[sing]]. It is [[truthfully]] [[unbelievable]]. But this also [[mixing]] in new bands and that is [[probably]] one [[stuff]] I [[apt]] dislike in this Documentary. It is the too abundant [[utilise]] of links to modern rock-bands [[replay]] those Blues songs in a modern [[camino]]. I didn't [[truly]] appreciate their trashed [[paths]] of playing such [[wondrous]] Blues [[lyrics]]. This is the same kind of un-perfect musical [[aftertaste]] I found when watching Wim Wenders Buena Vista [[Societal]] Club.

The [[Literature]] was such a standing-ovation at this first screening in the [[small]] [[theatre]], that the [[forthcoming]] day this [[Literature]] was [[displayed]] for [[someone]] and [[customary]] tourists on the [[beaches]] of the Croisette at the open-air [[theatre]]. [[Although]] the sand, the quality of the [[projections]] and the bad quality of the sound probably made it a difficult [[experiences]] to enjoy for the thousands of people who were [[seated]] in the [[sandstorm]] that night. --------------------------------------------- Result 998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Ever notice how in his later movies Burt Reynolds' laugh sounds like screeching brakes?

[[Must]] have been hanging out with Hal Needham too much.

And from the looks of "Stroker Ace", WAY too much.

Can you believe this was based on a book? Neither could I, but it was. And probably not a best-seller, I'll wager.

Burt's another good-old-boy in the NASCAR circuit who hitches up with Beatty as a fried chicken magnate with designs on his team. Anderson provides what love interest there is and Nabors does his umpteenth Gomer Pyle impression as faithful mechanic/best friend Lugs.

A lot of people here are friends of Burt's or Hal's. Others must have needed the work. And even real NASCAR drivers get in on the act, and look to have more talent than those with SAG cards.

As far as laughs go, Bubba Smith (pre-"Police Academy") gets them as Beatty's chauffeur. And Petersen, in full Elvira mode, gets lots of appreciative leers as a lady who wants to get to know Lugs real well. REAL WELL.

It's a shame that Burt threw away as much time and effort in a film like "Stroker Ace" where it didn't matter whether he bothered to act or not. They didn't bother to write a character for him, why [[bother]] to act?

Two stars. Mostly for Petersen, and for the out-takes at the end. Now THEY'RE funny. Ever notice how in his later movies Burt Reynolds' laugh sounds like screeching brakes?

[[Ought]] have been hanging out with Hal Needham too much.

And from the looks of "Stroker Ace", WAY too much.

Can you believe this was based on a book? Neither could I, but it was. And probably not a best-seller, I'll wager.

Burt's another good-old-boy in the NASCAR circuit who hitches up with Beatty as a fried chicken magnate with designs on his team. Anderson provides what love interest there is and Nabors does his umpteenth Gomer Pyle impression as faithful mechanic/best friend Lugs.

A lot of people here are friends of Burt's or Hal's. Others must have needed the work. And even real NASCAR drivers get in on the act, and look to have more talent than those with SAG cards.

As far as laughs go, Bubba Smith (pre-"Police Academy") gets them as Beatty's chauffeur. And Petersen, in full Elvira mode, gets lots of appreciative leers as a lady who wants to get to know Lugs real well. REAL WELL.

It's a shame that Burt threw away as much time and effort in a film like "Stroker Ace" where it didn't matter whether he bothered to act or not. They didn't bother to write a character for him, why [[disturb]] to act?

Two stars. Mostly for Petersen, and for the out-takes at the end. Now THEY'RE funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Larry Fessenden has been [[thrashed]] by most of the comments on this forum. Well, the worst [[mistake]], evidently, is the marketing of the movie and the way the DVD might have been targeted. Obviously, this is not a true horror movie, at least, not for people expecting anything that will be gory and instantly [[satisfying]].

"Wendigo" is basically a film that seems to be [[told]] from the mind of the [[young]] Miles. Things that are not [[readily]] understood by children tend to stay in their young minds and [[ultimately]] [[dominate]] their fears and the menacing [[world]] they can't comprehend. It is obvious that Kim, the [[mother]], is a [[psychologist]], but she has no clue to what is [[going]] on in the [[mind]] of her son. This is [[also]] a [[story]] of alienation. It's clear that the father, [[George]], is a [[distant]] [[figure]], [[perhaps]] a workaholic, who [[seems]] to be [[living]] in a [[different]] [[world]].

Miles' [[fears]] [[reach]] a point of crisis during the [[week]] [[end]] in the [[country]]. That [[part]] of [[New]] [[York]] state, with its winter [[landscape]], [[barren]] trees, [[play]] [[havoc]] on the [[little]] boy's [[imagination]]. It doesn't [[help]] that he [[encounters]] a [[strange]] [[figure]] in [[town]], it [[creates]] even more doubts in his [[young]] mind. Ultimately, Miles' [[world]] comes crashing down on him and he can't do anything, even [[evoking]] the Wendigo spirit.

The [[film]] is well paced and acted. Patricia Clarkson is [[excellent]], no matter where [[movie]] she is in. Jake Weber is [[perfect]] as the distant father who has an [[opportunity]] to come closer to a [[son]] he doesn't understand. [[Erik]] Per Sullivan, as Miles, [[conveys]] the [[inner]] [[turmoil]] [[within]] him. I [[thought]] he was [[extremely]] [[effective]] since the [[whole]] [[movie]] is Miles own take on what's going on around him. [[Finally]], [[John]] Spredakos is [[perfect]] as the [[menacing]] Otis, a [[man]] who resents the world for the [[way]] he has turned out.

[[Instead]] of putting this [[movie]] down, [[future]] [[viewers]] should approach it with a open [[mind]]. Larry Fessenden has been [[ruined]] by most of the comments on this forum. Well, the worst [[blunder]], evidently, is the marketing of the movie and the way the DVD might have been targeted. Obviously, this is not a true horror movie, at least, not for people expecting anything that will be gory and instantly [[pleasing]].

"Wendigo" is basically a film that seems to be [[said]] from the mind of the [[youthful]] Miles. Things that are not [[easily]] understood by children tend to stay in their young minds and [[finally]] [[overpower]] their fears and the menacing [[worldwide]] they can't comprehend. It is obvious that Kim, the [[mummy]], is a [[shrug]], but she has no clue to what is [[gonna]] on in the [[intellect]] of her son. This is [[furthermore]] a [[history]] of alienation. It's clear that the father, [[Jorge]], is a [[outlying]] [[silhouette]], [[maybe]] a workaholic, who [[looks]] to be [[vie]] in a [[multiple]] [[worldwide]].

Miles' [[worries]] [[accomplish]] a point of crisis during the [[weeks]] [[terminating]] in the [[nations]]. That [[parties]] of [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] state, with its winter [[landscaping]], [[sterile]] trees, [[playing]] [[mayhem]] on the [[tiny]] boy's [[novelty]]. It doesn't [[assistance]] that he [[confrontation]] a [[peculiar]] [[silhouette]] in [[ciudad]], it [[engenders]] even more doubts in his [[youthful]] mind. Ultimately, Miles' [[worldwide]] comes crashing down on him and he can't do anything, even [[invocation]] the Wendigo spirit.

The [[cinema]] is well paced and acted. Patricia Clarkson is [[beautiful]], no matter where [[kino]] she is in. Jake Weber is [[faultless]] as the distant father who has an [[likelihood]] to come closer to a [[sons]] he doesn't understand. [[Arik]] Per Sullivan, as Miles, [[transmits]] the [[indoor]] [[disturbance]] [[inside]] him. I [[ideology]] he was [[very]] [[efficacy]] since the [[ensemble]] [[cinema]] is Miles own take on what's going on around him. [[Eventually]], [[Jon]] Spredakos is [[faultless]] as the [[threat]] Otis, a [[dude]] who resents the world for the [[path]] he has turned out.

[[However]] of putting this [[kino]] down, [[next]] [[audience]] should approach it with a open [[esprit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This is [[certainly]] one of the most [[bizarre]] films ever made - [[even]] for Fellini. About the only one more bizarre is his SATYRICON. This is a two and a half hour romp through a strange nightmarish world of decadence, opulence and sexual [[challenge]]. Sutherland makes a curiously [[unappealing]] Casanova and the odd goings on in a series of unrelated vignettes taken from the great lover's autobiography fail to [[engage]] the viewer. The art [[direction]] and costume design are [[however]] OUTSTANDING. The Academy missed on not even nominating the former but did itself justice by rewarding an OSCAR for the latter. Also nominated (oddly) was the [[disjointed]], pointless and almost inacessible screenplay. Go figure!! The film on video is only 150 minutes, 16 minutes short of the original running time. This [[viewer]] was grateful. This is [[assuredly]] one of the most [[surreal]] films ever made - [[yet]] for Fellini. About the only one more bizarre is his SATYRICON. This is a two and a half hour romp through a strange nightmarish world of decadence, opulence and sexual [[challenging]]. Sutherland makes a curiously [[unattractive]] Casanova and the odd goings on in a series of unrelated vignettes taken from the great lover's autobiography fail to [[embark]] the viewer. The art [[directorate]] and costume design are [[still]] OUTSTANDING. The Academy missed on not even nominating the former but did itself justice by rewarding an OSCAR for the latter. Also nominated (oddly) was the [[unconnected]], pointless and almost inacessible screenplay. Go figure!! The film on video is only 150 minutes, 16 minutes short of the original running time. This [[beholder]] was grateful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This movie is a [[great]] way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this girl comes to [[destroy]] the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she [[listens]] to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say "This is THE final movie in the series..." This movie is a [[wondrous]] way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this girl comes to [[annihilate]] the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she [[listen]] to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say "This is THE final movie in the series..." --------------------------------------------- Result 1002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I could go back, even as an adult and relive the days of my Summer's spent at camp...I would be there so fast. The Camps I went to weren't even this great. They were in Texas where the mosquitoes actually carry people off but we had horses and fishing. The movie cinematography was astounding, the characters funny and believable especially Perkins, Pollack and Arkin. Sam Raimi's character and sub-antics were priceless. So who ever thought this movie was lame...I have deep pity for because they can't suspend their disbelief long enough to imagine camp life again as an adult or they never went as kids. The whole point was that these people had an opportunity to regress and become juvenile again and so they did at every opportunity. I wish I could. It was funny, intelligent, beautifully scripted, brilliantly cast and the artistry takes me back so I want to watch it over and over just for the scenery even. Sorta like Dances with Wolves and LadyHawk...good movies but the wilderness becomes a character as much as the actors. Rent it, see it, buy it and watch it over and over and over...never gets old. ;0) --------------------------------------------- Result 1003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Farewell Friend aka Adieu L'Ami/Honour Among Thieves isn't perfect but it is a neat and entertaining thriller that sees mismatched demobbed French Algerian War veterans Alain Delon and Charles Bronson trapped in the same basement vault, one to return stolen bonds, the other to clean out the two million in wages sitting there over the Christmas weekend. Naturally things aren't quite that simple even after they open the vault, leading to some neat twists and turns. On the debit side, there's a very bizarre striptease scene in a car park, Bronson has a very irritating Fonzie-like catchphrase he uses at the most inopportune moments, Brigitte Fossey, sporting perhaps the most hideously misconceived hairstyle of the 60s (it makes her look like a bald woman whose wig is blown back off the top of her head by a high wind), is something of a liability – her "I'll cook spaghetti! I'll learn to make love well! I'll read Shakespeare!" speech is hysterical in all the wrong ways – and it's a shame about the horrible last line/shot, but otherwise this is a surprisingly entertaining and unpretentious number that's worth checking out if you can find a decent print.

Cinema Club's UK DVD only offers the English soundtrack, but since Delon voices himself and the rest of the cast are fairly well dubbed that's no great problem, especially since the widescreen transfer is pretty good quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 1004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jackie Chan name is synonomus to stunts. This movie never let you down.The opening best chase scene and last roll down scene from the pole is so risky than one wonder ,if he knows the meaning of fear.This movie comes very close to Jackie's best which is PROJECT A.But the main difference being that PROJECT A contains three stars where as in this movie Jackie carries the film entirely on his shoulders.This is perhaps the main reason that this movie made jackie an biggest martial arts star followed by Bruce Lee.The film has nice comic touches too. What makes this film work is Jakie's ability to show his venerable side which his in contract to the typical martial arts action hero.This movie was followed by a sequel which was good but was quite tame in comparison to its predecessor. --------------------------------------------- Result 1005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Lynn]] Hollister, a small-town [[lawyer]], [[travels]] to the [[nearby]] [[big]] [[city]] on [[business]] [[connected]] with the death of his friend [[Johnny]]. ([[Yes]], Lynn is a man [[despite]] the feminine-sounding [[Christian]] [[name]]. [[Were]] the scriptwriters trying to make a snide reference to the fact that [[John]] Wayne's birth name was "Marion"?) Hollister at first believes Johnny's [[death]] to have been an [[accident]], but soon realises that Johnny was [[murdered]]. Further investigations reveal a web of [[corruption]], criminality and election rigging [[connected]] to [[Boss]] Cameron, the [[leading]] light in city 's [[political]] machine.

That [[sounds]] like the plot of a gritty [[crime]] thriller, possibly made in the film [[noir]] [[style]] which was [[starting]] to [[become]] [[popular]] in 1941. It isn't. "A [[Man]] Betrayed", [[despite]] its [[theme]], is more like a light [[romantic]] comedy than a [[crime]] drama. Hollister falls in [[love]] with Cameron's [[attractive]] [[daughter]] Sabra, and the [[film]] then concentrates as much on their resulting romance as on the suspense elements.

This [[film]] might just have [[worked]] if it had been [[made]] as a straightforward [[serious]] drama. One reviewer states that [[John]] Wayne is not at all believable as a lawyer, but he couldn't [[play]] a [[cowboy]] in every [[movie]], and a tough crusading lawyer taking on the forces of organised [[crime]] would [[probably]] have been well [[within]] his compass. Where I do agree with that [[reviewer]] is when he [[says]] that Wayne was no [[Cary]] [[Grant]] impersonator. [[Romantic]] [[comedy]] just wasn't up his street. One of the weaknesses of the studio system is that [[actors]] [[could]] be [[required]] to [[play]] any [[part]] their bosses [[demanded]] of them, regardless of whether it was up their street or not, and as Wayne was one of the few [[major]] [[stars]] working for Republic [[Pictures]] they doubtless wanted to [[get]] as much mileage out of him as they [[could]].

That [[said]], not even Cary [[Grant]] himself [[could]] have made "A [[Man]] Betrayed" [[work]] as a [[comedy]]. That's not a [[reflection]] on his [[comic]] talents; it's a [[reflection]] on the [[total]] [[lack]] of [[amusing]] material in this [[film]]. I doubt if [[anyone]], no [[matter]] how well [[developed]] their [[sense]] of [[humour]] might be, could find [[anything]] to [[laugh]] at in it. The film's light-hearted tone doesn't make it a successful [[comedy]]; it just [[prevents]] it from being [[taken]] [[seriously]] as [[anything]] [[else]]. This is one of those films that are neither fish nor flesh nor fowl nor good red herring. 3/10 [[Lyn]] Hollister, a small-town [[lawyers]], [[trip]] to the [[contiguous]] [[prodigious]] [[town]] on [[enterprise]] [[tied]] with the death of his friend [[Jonny]]. ([[Yep]], Lynn is a man [[though]] the feminine-sounding [[Cristian]] [[naming]]. [[Was]] the scriptwriters trying to make a snide reference to the fact that [[Jon]] Wayne's birth name was "Marion"?) Hollister at first believes Johnny's [[mortality]] to have been an [[casualty]], but soon realises that Johnny was [[killed]]. Further investigations reveal a web of [[bribery]], criminality and election rigging [[tied]] to [[Chef]] Cameron, the [[culminating]] light in city 's [[politician]] machine.

That [[sound]] like the plot of a gritty [[crimes]] thriller, possibly made in the film [[negro]] [[styles]] which was [[onset]] to [[becoming]] [[fashionable]] in 1941. It isn't. "A [[Men]] Betrayed", [[although]] its [[subject]], is more like a light [[sentimental]] comedy than a [[crimes]] drama. Hollister falls in [[adore]] with Cameron's [[seductive]] [[maid]] Sabra, and the [[filmmaking]] then concentrates as much on their resulting romance as on the suspense elements.

This [[filmmaking]] might just have [[collaborated]] if it had been [[introduced]] as a straightforward [[severe]] drama. One reviewer states that [[Jon]] Wayne is not at all believable as a lawyer, but he couldn't [[gaming]] a [[denim]] in every [[cinematic]], and a tough crusading lawyer taking on the forces of organised [[felony]] would [[maybe]] have been well [[inside]] his compass. Where I do agree with that [[examiner]] is when he [[said]] that Wayne was no [[Carey]] [[Subsidies]] impersonator. [[Sentimental]] [[humor]] just wasn't up his street. One of the weaknesses of the studio system is that [[protagonists]] [[did]] be [[require]] to [[gaming]] any [[party]] their bosses [[asked]] of them, regardless of whether it was up their street or not, and as Wayne was one of the few [[big]] [[celebrity]] working for Republic [[Photographed]] they doubtless wanted to [[gets]] as much mileage out of him as they [[wo]].

That [[say]], not even Cary [[Awarding]] himself [[wo]] have made "A [[Guy]] Betrayed" [[jobs]] as a [[humor]]. That's not a [[meditation]] on his [[comical]] talents; it's a [[meditation]] on the [[whole]] [[scarcity]] of [[entertaining]] material in this [[filmmaking]]. I doubt if [[nobody]], no [[topic]] how well [[crafted]] their [[feeling]] of [[comedy]] might be, could find [[something]] to [[laughter]] at in it. The film's light-hearted tone doesn't make it a successful [[farce]]; it just [[prevented]] it from being [[picked]] [[conscientiously]] as [[algo]] [[elsewhere]]. This is one of those films that are neither fish nor flesh nor fowl nor good red herring. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie once as a kid on the late-late show and fell in love with it.

It took 30+ years, but I recently did find it on DVD - it wasn't cheap, either - in a catalog that specialized in war movies. We watched it last night for the first time. The audio was good, however it was grainy and had the trailers between reels. Even so, it was better than I remembered it. I was also impressed at how true it was to the play.

The catalog is around here someplace. If you're sincere in finding it, fire me a missive and I'll see if I can get you the info. cartwrightbride@yahoo.com --------------------------------------------- Result 1007 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Another horror [[flick]] in which a goof-ball [[teenager]] [[battles]] a [[madman]] and his [[supernatural]] [[sidekick]] who [[want]] to [[take]] over?! Yes, but the fact that this one was from Canada [[gives]] it a [[slightly]] different feel. "The Brain" has troublesome [[teenager]] Jim Majelewski getting put into a [[treatment]] whose [[leader]] [[turns]] out to be a cult [[leader]] aided by a big [[ugly]] "brain". Can Jim [[stop]] him? I [[guess]] that since our [[northern]] [[neighbor]] has [[accomplished]] all that they have [[accomplished]], they're [[entitled]] to make at [[least]] one [[ridiculous]] horror [[movie]]. But [[still]], they'll [[probably]] [[want]] to be [[known]] for having national [[health]] [[care]] and all.

The [[bad]] guy had a brain. Why didn't the people who [[made]] this movie? Another horror [[film]] in which a goof-ball [[adolescence]] [[struggles]] a [[psycho]] and his [[uncanny]] [[henchman]] who [[wantto]] to [[taking]] over?! Yes, but the fact that this one was from Canada [[donne]] it a [[modestly]] different feel. "The Brain" has troublesome [[adolescence]] Jim Majelewski getting put into a [[treat]] whose [[fuhrer]] [[revolves]] out to be a cult [[fuhrer]] aided by a big [[grisly]] "brain". Can Jim [[discontinue]] him? I [[reckon]] that since our [[norden]] [[neighbourhood]] has [[performed]] all that they have [[effected]], they're [[titled]] to make at [[less]] one [[farcical]] horror [[filmmaking]]. But [[nevertheless]], they'll [[arguably]] [[wanted]] to be [[renowned]] for having national [[gesundheit]] [[caring]] and all.

The [[rotten]] guy had a brain. Why didn't the people who [[accomplished]] this movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 1008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the greatest movies ever maybe even the greatest movie ever. I had forgotten about the movie for about 12 years. Until I saw an add on TV for ADGTH and it brought back fond memories of me watching it when I was a little kid. And when I watched it a few nights ago I became addicted to the movie. Usually I don't like animated family movies but this one is special it is the perfect family movie.

The ending of the movie always touches my heart and saddens me very much but that is what makes this movie amazing better than all of the garbage that is coming out for kid movies today. I mean the movie is G rated and it is about 2 dogs who are involved with gambling, there is a lot of smoking, drinking, murder, death and hell depicted in the movie. Which I Believe makes the movie from good to great. I mean movies today don't bring reality to kids and in this movie they did.

RIP Judith Barsi & Dom DeLuise --------------------------------------------- Result 1009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] What is this ? A low budget [[sex]] [[comedy]] ? Anyway it [[describes]] [[perfectly]] the people in Spain. They [[could]] [[come]] up with a [[better]] [[idea]], I [[mean]] they do this [[kind]] of [[movies]] since the 60s.. and people like them ! This is neither a [[teen]] [[comedy]] nor a [[family]] one (you can't [[let]] your 12 year [[old]] watch 2 [[guys]] in [[bed]] [[kissing]], he'll never [[want]] to go to Spain). This should be rated "[[R]]", because only people 35+ [[seem]] to laugh [[watching]] :S I'm [[truly]] [[disappointed]], maybe I don't like [[gays]] (which is quite an [[important]] [[part]] of the [[movie]]).

[[Foreign]] [[humor]] is [[awful]] in [[films]] (except Kusturica), [[stick]] with doing dramas! If you [[want]] a [[new]] comedy try Talladega [[Nights]] What is this ? A low budget [[sexuality]] [[humor]] ? Anyway it [[portray]] [[fully]] the people in Spain. They [[would]] [[arrived]] up with a [[best]] [[ideals]], I [[imply]] they do this [[type]] of [[cinema]] since the 60s.. and people like them ! This is neither a [[adolescents]] [[charade]] nor a [[families]] one (you can't [[leave]] your 12 year [[longtime]] watch 2 [[boys]] in [[bedside]] [[kissed]], he'll never [[wanna]] to go to Spain). This should be rated "[[rs]]", because only people 35+ [[seems]] to laugh [[staring]] :S I'm [[genuinely]] [[frustrating]], maybe I don't like [[queers]] (which is quite an [[notable]] [[portions]] of the [[filmmaking]]).

[[Exterior]] [[mood]] is [[abysmal]] in [[kino]] (except Kusturica), [[twig]] with doing dramas! If you [[wish]] a [[newest]] comedy try Talladega [[Evenings]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this film because I had do (my job includes seeing movies of all kinds). I couldn't stop thinking "who gave money to make such an awful film and also submit it to Cannes Festival!" It wasn't only boring, the actors were awful as well. It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1011 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I am [[surprised]] at IMDb's low [[rating]] of this movie. With all due [[respect]], its low [[rating]] is representative of the IQ [[level]] of those who rated it so poor. They would rather [[see]] a movie with cheap thrills, a [[bigger]] budget, and more [[gore]].

The first [[misconception]] by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film [[mislead]] you into [[believing]] it is one. It is a [[psychological]] thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual [[experience]] when [[watching]] a [[movie]]. [[Reel]].com's [[review]] is the perfect example of how I feel about this [[movie]]. All the other [[negative]] [[reviews]] doesn't make much sense. It's [[almost]] as if [[trying]] to make an [[original]] [[movie]] for a change- very [[rare]] these days- is [[something]] [[bad]] and not worth it.

I will [[reveal]] some [[spoilers]] for the [[morons]] who [[said]] it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and [[performing]] experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she [[really]] was an [[evil]] [[Nazi]] who [[would]] [[kill]] without [[warning]]. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at [[first]] viewing, we [[sympathize]] with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the [[movie]] is a [[testament]] to the film's direction and [[writing]].

I [[definitely]] feel that this [[movie]] should at [[least]] be rated in the 6's [[range]] on originality [[alone]]. I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] for the people on the other [[end]] of the [[IQ]] scale- [[aka]] smart people- [[since]] this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch [[Scream]] or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. [[For]] such a low budget film, you are [[amazed]] that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be [[fooled]] by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I [[actually]] [[recommend]] [[buying]] the film since a first [[viewing]] on a [[rent]] will not do this justice. I am [[horrified]] at IMDb's low [[assessing]] of this movie. With all due [[respecting]], its low [[assessing]] is representative of the IQ [[tier]] of those who rated it so poor. They would rather [[behold]] a movie with cheap thrills, a [[greatest]] budget, and more [[gora]].

The first [[fallacy]] by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film [[deceptive]] you into [[think]] it is one. It is a [[psychiatric]] thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual [[enjoying]] when [[staring]] a [[film]]. [[Coil]].com's [[exam]] is the perfect example of how I feel about this [[films]]. All the other [[injurious]] [[scrutinize]] doesn't make much sense. It's [[hardly]] as if [[tempting]] to make an [[upfront]] [[film]] for a change- very [[rarity]] these days- is [[anything]] [[amiss]] and not worth it.

I will [[disclose]] some [[troublemakers]] for the [[fools]] who [[told]] it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and [[fulfilling]] experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she [[genuinely]] was an [[malicious]] [[Hitler]] who [[ought]] [[killings]] without [[alerted]]. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at [[outset]] viewing, we [[commiserate]] with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the [[flick]] is a [[wills]] to the film's direction and [[writes]].

I [[obviously]] feel that this [[films]] should at [[fewer]] be rated in the 6's [[ranges]] on originality [[lonely]]. I [[recommendation]] this [[cinematic]] for the people on the other [[termination]] of the [[QI]] scale- [[pseudonym]] smart people- [[because]] this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch [[Howling]] or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. [[Onto]] such a low budget film, you are [[appalled]] that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be [[hoodwinked]] by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I [[indeed]] [[recommended]] [[acquiring]] the film since a first [[opinion]] on a [[rental]] will not do this justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 1012 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't stand it when people go see a movie when they know they won't like it. My mom likes violent movies, so why did she see it? She rated it just to bring down the rating. So I know that's why it didn't have a higher rating. I give it a 6/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Story starts slow and nothing funny happens for a while. All the action is in the end, but you won't have to laugh because the movie is funny, but because the story is pathetic.

The funniest part is when Harvey 'I'm not Paranoia' Keitel really loses it and the judge starts a massacre. Oscars for this guy! --------------------------------------------- Result 1014 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Legend of Zu is possibly the most [[exciting]] movie ive seen in recent years. It [[transcends]] all expectations and is [[truly]] a [[work]] of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and [[story]] of [[divine]] proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its [[viewers]] with its [[majesty]]. This movie is wonderously crafted through the use of high tech cgi which [[allows]] fans of the [[fantasy]] [[genre]] to [[see]] their [[visions]] [[come]] to life. The acting is [[perfect]] for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I would think you'd [[keep]] more to yourself.

Unlike the [[comments]] of many, the plot is actually [[quite]] [[EASY]] to follow while maintaining a [[quick]] pace that [[adds]] a sense of [[urgency]]. [[Anyone]] that [[cannot]] keep track of the [[different]] characters simply must not be paying attention since or are [[used]] to such [[levels]] of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and [[layered]] with themes so epic that they will [[leave]] you gasping for [[air]]. Legend of Zu is on a [[level]] of [[greatness]] so [[high]] that [[perhaps]] [[many]] people are put off by its [[grandeur]]. [[Allow]] yourself to be [[completely]] [[engulfed]] [[within]] its fantastical [[vision]] and you will [[grow]] to [[love]] this [[movie]]. Legend of Zu is possibly the most [[excite]] movie ive seen in recent years. It [[exceeds]] all expectations and is [[honestly]] a [[cooperate]] of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and [[narratives]] of [[godlike]] proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its [[audiences]] with its [[empress]]. This movie is wonderously crafted through the use of high tech cgi which [[allowed]] fans of the [[chimera]] [[genera]] to [[consults]] their [[conceptions]] [[arrive]] to life. The acting is [[faultless]] for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I would think you'd [[preserving]] more to yourself.

Unlike the [[comment]] of many, the plot is actually [[rather]] [[UNCOMPLICATED]] to follow while maintaining a [[faster]] pace that [[adding]] a sense of [[emergency]]. [[Whoever]] that [[significant]] keep track of the [[multiple]] characters simply must not be paying attention since or are [[using]] to such [[echelons]] of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and [[laminated]] with themes so epic that they will [[let]] you gasping for [[airline]]. Legend of Zu is on a [[echelon]] of [[size]] so [[supremo]] that [[presumably]] [[multiple]] people are put off by its [[greatness]]. [[Allowed]] yourself to be [[entirely]] [[plunged]] [[inside]] its fantastical [[eyesight]] and you will [[raising]] to [[loves]] this [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Shinjuku [[Triad]] Society: Chinese Mafia Wars is unlikely to get distribution in the West outside film [[festivals]]. Why? Could your censors stomach a [[film]] where [[policemen]] anally [[rape]] [[male]] and female [[suspects]] to [[get]] them to [[talk]] (and the victims [[enjoy]] it) or see an [[old]] lady have her [[eye]] [[torn]] out of her skull? These are just a few of the [[shocks]] in [[store]] for [[viewers]] of this ultraviolent [[cops]] and [[gangsters]] [[story]]. It makes [[Clockwork]] Orange which was banned for years in the UK look like a Disney cartoon.

[[Should]] you [[see]] this film? YES It is [[fantastic]] and [[essential]] [[viewing]] for fans of Asian cinema. The shocking [[moments]] are there to illustrate what goers on in the world of these [[characters]]. If you like this make sure you catch Dead or Alive which is very [[similar]] ([[barring]] the insane ending in DOA of course). Great for Japan that they have a [[talent]] like Miike working at the same [[time]] as [[Takeshi]] [[Kitano]]. The best chance of [[seeing]] this film outside a Takashi Miike retrospective at a film festival is on DVD. If I haven't put you off [[try]] hunting for a Hong [[Kong]] version on the web as I'm sure it will come out in that country. Shinjuku [[Triads]] Society: Chinese Mafia Wars is unlikely to get distribution in the West outside film [[festivities]]. Why? Could your censors stomach a [[cinematography]] where [[cop]] anally [[violating]] [[men]] and female [[accuser]] to [[got]] them to [[chat]] (and the victims [[enjoying]] it) or see an [[ancient]] lady have her [[eyes]] [[buzzed]] out of her skull? These are just a few of the [[convulsions]] in [[storage]] for [[moviegoers]] of this ultraviolent [[constabulary]] and [[bandits]] [[history]]. It makes [[Triumph]] Orange which was banned for years in the UK look like a Disney cartoon.

[[Oughta]] you [[seeing]] this film? YES It is [[wondrous]] and [[critical]] [[opinion]] for fans of Asian cinema. The shocking [[times]] are there to illustrate what goers on in the world of these [[attribute]]. If you like this make sure you catch Dead or Alive which is very [[analogue]] ([[forbidding]] the insane ending in DOA of course). Great for Japan that they have a [[talents]] like Miike working at the same [[period]] as [[Takeuchi]] [[Veloso]]. The best chance of [[witnessing]] this film outside a Takashi Miike retrospective at a film festival is on DVD. If I haven't put you off [[trying]] hunting for a Hong [[Hong]] version on the web as I'm sure it will come out in that country. --------------------------------------------- Result 1016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's been so long since I've seen this movie (at least 15 years) and yet it still haunts me with a vivid image of the horrific consequences that prisoners of war can face despite the terms of the Geneva Convention.

A unit of Australian underwater demolitions experts are captured in an archipelago near Japan following a successful mission to set mines in a Japanese harbor.

Once in prison these men expect the same treatment as any other POWs but to their dismay soon learn from a friendly Japanese prison guard that they are being tried as spies since they were out of uniform when captured. The consequences of such an infraction, by Japanese martial code, is execution by beheading.

Despite their pleas, and the pleas of the sympathetic prison guard, the day of reckoning approaches like a ticking time bomb. The tension is so high you will actually hear the ticking, though it may just be your chest pounding with the percussion of a marching execution squad.

The ending is actually too painful to reenact in my head much less write it here. But I can promise you-- you'll never forget it. Good luck finding the video in the U.S. --------------------------------------------- Result 1017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was saved before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was forced to watch it in a youth group at my church. This movie was highly [[disturbing]]. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me. I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was saved before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was forced to watch it in a youth group at my church. This movie was highly [[disconcerting]]. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Amicus made close to a good half dozen of these horror anthologies in the 70's, and this, from leading horror scribe Robert Bloch, is one of their best efforts. There are four stories, all worthwhile, but two -- "Sweets For The Sweet" and "Method For Murder" -- distinguish themselves as highly effective journeys into fear.

In "Sweets", Christopher Lee plays an impatient widower whose lovely daughter (Chloe Franks) becomes resentful of his neglect and brutish intolerance, so she sculpts a voodoo doll with which she expresses her distaste for his methods. Franks is a beautiful figure of mischievous evil and delivers one of the greatest child performances in a horror film since Martin Stephens in "The Innocents". This installment is directed with great subtlety and the final outrage, occurring off-screen, is a moment of purest horror.

"Method of Murder" is about a horror novelist (Denholm Elliott) who is menaced by one of his own creations, the creepy Dominic. This episode is striking for its simplicity and stark terror. Dominic may or may not be real, so director Peter Duffell has a great time playing with our expectations. The brief shots of Dominic reflected in a pond or seen as a fleeting phantasm in a meadow are truly haunting.

The original poster art, featuring a skeletal figure clasping a tray holding Peter Cushing's severed head, was a rich enticement for punters fixed on fear. --------------------------------------------- Result 1019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] OK, I know that a lot of people will [[probably]] resent this [[review]] as Watership Down is a "[[classic]]" and a standard part of most people's [[childhood]], but [[seeing]] this film for the first time at the [[tender]] age of 18, I [[must]] admit: I really [[hated]] it.

We watched this film because my sister had read the book and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words "Watership Down"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an exception. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly dull. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't "do it" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.

I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic [[story]] about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the [[characters]] were uninspiring, annoying, [[dull]] and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.

If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.

So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't "Torque" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.

Hope this helps. OK, I know that a lot of people will [[undeniably]] resent this [[scrutinize]] as Watership Down is a "[[classical]]" and a standard part of most people's [[infant]], but [[see]] this film for the first time at the [[tenders]] age of 18, I [[gotta]] admit: I really [[abhor]] it.

We watched this film because my sister had read the book and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words "Watership Down"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an exception. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly dull. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't "do it" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.

I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic [[histories]] about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the [[trait]] were uninspiring, annoying, [[boring]] and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.

If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.

So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't "Torque" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.

Hope this helps. --------------------------------------------- Result 1020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If you are viewing this show for the first time, you may start wondering if you are in an alternate reality. Colorful and imaginative characters? Entertaining [[dialogue]]? Plots that seem to have some depth to them, even creating atmospheres of suspense and drama at times? I mean, this is a syndicated children's show right? This is the same venue that has brought kids such drek as "Pokemon", "Pepper Ann", "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", and "VR Troopers" (please note that three of the titles mentioned above are crass Japanese exports, courtesy of the Fox Network and Saban Entertainment). Don't worry, you are just sampling some of the quality fare that was available to kids during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Some examples of this period would be "Transformers", "Garfield and Friends", "Captain Power", and "C.O.P.S." (a cartoon NOT to be confused with the live action show on Fox). Besides these prime examples, Disney also returned to syndicated programs for kids, coming up with a lineup called "The Disney Afternoon". Aside from a dumbed-down show called "The Gummi Bears", early shows like "Darkwing Duck", "Duck Tales", and "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers" gave credence to the Disney animation teams that were also turning out theatrical classics like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "The Great Mouse Detective". But above all these wonders [[shines]] "TaleSpin". The premiere of "Plunder and Lightning" was a two-hour thrill ride, and won an Emmy. Much to my [[delight]], the [[rest]] of the [[episodes]] were up to par on the promise of the premiere.

While I enjoy the plots and dialogue, I guess for me the greatest attraction are the [[characters]]. There's Rebecca Cunningham, an independent female, but [[still]] fallible; Kit Cloudkicker, full of pre-teen [[angst]] and optimism; Louie, with his loyalty and support; Frank Wildcat, the most [[entertaining]] engineer [[since]] Scotty on the original "Star Trek"; Molly Cunningham, cute and witty, but with some [[depth]] that most [[child]] [[characters]] don't have, and of course in the [[middle]] of it all, there's Baloo, whom I would describe as a slobby version of James Bond. This is because whenever there's [[trouble]], Baloo saves the day with the assistance of his sleeker-than-most, fastest-of-all Sea Duck (Read: [[James]] Bond's Aston Martin). Of course every great show has to have great villains, and TaleSpin doesn't disappoint here [[either]]. From the megalomania of businesstiger Shere Kahn, to the vain and always failing air pirate Don Karnage, to the hilarious and inept Soviet-satirized Thembrians. The animation is good, the music appropriate, and the episodes are (for me) the finest that children's programming has ever had to offer. Great fun for the WHOLE family! If you are viewing this show for the first time, you may start wondering if you are in an alternate reality. Colorful and imaginative characters? Entertaining [[discussions]]? Plots that seem to have some depth to them, even creating atmospheres of suspense and drama at times? I mean, this is a syndicated children's show right? This is the same venue that has brought kids such drek as "Pokemon", "Pepper Ann", "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", and "VR Troopers" (please note that three of the titles mentioned above are crass Japanese exports, courtesy of the Fox Network and Saban Entertainment). Don't worry, you are just sampling some of the quality fare that was available to kids during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Some examples of this period would be "Transformers", "Garfield and Friends", "Captain Power", and "C.O.P.S." (a cartoon NOT to be confused with the live action show on Fox). Besides these prime examples, Disney also returned to syndicated programs for kids, coming up with a lineup called "The Disney Afternoon". Aside from a dumbed-down show called "The Gummi Bears", early shows like "Darkwing Duck", "Duck Tales", and "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers" gave credence to the Disney animation teams that were also turning out theatrical classics like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "The Great Mouse Detective". But above all these wonders [[glows]] "TaleSpin". The premiere of "Plunder and Lightning" was a two-hour thrill ride, and won an Emmy. Much to my [[gladness]], the [[resting]] of the [[spells]] were up to par on the promise of the premiere.

While I enjoy the plots and dialogue, I guess for me the greatest attraction are the [[nature]]. There's Rebecca Cunningham, an independent female, but [[again]] fallible; Kit Cloudkicker, full of pre-teen [[anxiety]] and optimism; Louie, with his loyalty and support; Frank Wildcat, the most [[amusing]] engineer [[because]] Scotty on the original "Star Trek"; Molly Cunningham, cute and witty, but with some [[depths]] that most [[kid]] [[nature]] don't have, and of course in the [[oriente]] of it all, there's Baloo, whom I would describe as a slobby version of James Bond. This is because whenever there's [[difficulty]], Baloo saves the day with the assistance of his sleeker-than-most, fastest-of-all Sea Duck (Read: [[Jacobo]] Bond's Aston Martin). Of course every great show has to have great villains, and TaleSpin doesn't disappoint here [[neither]]. From the megalomania of businesstiger Shere Kahn, to the vain and always failing air pirate Don Karnage, to the hilarious and inept Soviet-satirized Thembrians. The animation is good, the music appropriate, and the episodes are (for me) the finest that children's programming has ever had to offer. Great fun for the WHOLE family! --------------------------------------------- Result 1021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is definitely an [[appropriate]] [[update]] for the original, except that "[[party]] on the left is now party on the right." [[Like]] the original, this movie rails against a federal [[government]] which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how [[tenuous]] our [[political]] liberties are in an era of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal government. Kowalski [[serves]] as a [[metaphor]] for Waco and [[Ruby]] [[Ridge]], where the US [[government]], with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw [[around]] [[words]] [[like]] "[[white]] [[supremacist]]" and "right wing [[extremists]] as well as trumped-up [[drug]] [[charges]] to abridge the most [[fundamental]] of its' [[citizens]] rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film [[could]] be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and [[countless]] others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he [[brilliantly]] [[portrays]] "the voice," and that sums up the [[dangerous]] (to some) message of this film.

This is definitely an [[adequate]] [[modernize]] for the original, except that "[[part]] on the left is now party on the right." [[Iike]] the original, this movie rails against a federal [[council]] which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how [[flimsy]] our [[politically]] liberties are in an era of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal government. Kowalski [[contributes]] as a [[analogy]] for Waco and [[Robbie]] [[Leng]], where the US [[council]], with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw [[roundabout]] [[expression]] [[iike]] "[[branca]] [[supremacists]]" and "right wing [[extremist]] as well as trumped-up [[medicines]] [[accusations]] to abridge the most [[critical]] of its' [[citizen]] rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film [[wo]] be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and [[multiple]] others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he [[brightly]] [[depicts]] "the voice," and that sums up the [[perilous]] (to some) message of this film.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I Am [[Curious]] is really two films in one - half of it is the sexual experimental side of [[Lena]] and the other half is her curiosity with political/socialism. Whatever the director's intention, the two don't really mesh together. The director should have just stuck with the romantic side of Lena and made a separate movie for the politics. There is a [[bizarre]] mixture of political/war rallies, [[Dr]]. King, serious political interviews, flopping breasts, and pubic hair. The [[film]] [[feels]] more [[like]] a [[fictional]] [[documentary]] than a movie. Other than the interesting sex scenes, you'll be [[bored]] [[dry]] watching this film. Unlike [[many]] other reviewers, I think the nude/sexual scenes are [[overdone]] for what it is. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] [[real]] porn, I'm sure there are [[better]] [[choices]]. The pervasive nudity is a [[major]] distraction from whatever plot there is. I [[think]] the cast did a fine job [[however]]. They [[played]] their parts believably. There is little of the over-the-topness I'm so used to [[seeing]] in the American [[films]] during this time. I Am [[Outlandish]] is really two films in one - half of it is the sexual experimental side of [[Lina]] and the other half is her curiosity with political/socialism. Whatever the director's intention, the two don't really mesh together. The director should have just stuck with the romantic side of Lena and made a separate movie for the politics. There is a [[outlandish]] mixture of political/war rallies, [[Doktor]]. King, serious political interviews, flopping breasts, and pubic hair. The [[filmmaking]] [[deems]] more [[iike]] a [[notional]] [[literature]] than a movie. Other than the interesting sex scenes, you'll be [[boring]] [[driest]] watching this film. Unlike [[innumerable]] other reviewers, I think the nude/sexual scenes are [[overkill]] for what it is. [[Though]] you [[wants]] to [[consults]] [[genuine]] porn, I'm sure there are [[optimum]] [[selects]]. The pervasive nudity is a [[grandes]] distraction from whatever plot there is. I [[thought]] the cast did a fine job [[still]]. They [[effected]] their parts believably. There is little of the over-the-topness I'm so used to [[witnessing]] in the American [[filmmaking]] during this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In Budapest, Margaret Sullavan (as Klara Novak) gets a job as clerk in a gift shop; there, she bickers with co-worker James Stewart (as Alfred Kralik). The two don't get along on the job because each has fallen in love with a unseen pen pal. Watching Ernst Lubitsch direct these stars through the inevitable is predictably satisfying.

Even better is a sub-plot involving shop owner Frank Morgan (as Hugo Matuschek), who suspects his wife is having an affair. Hiring a private detective, Mr. Morgan confirms his wife of 22 years is having sex with one of his younger employees. Morgan, painfully realizing, "She just didn't want to grow old with me," and the supporting characters are what keeps this film from getting old.

********* The Shop Around the Corner (1/12/40) Ernst Lubitsch ~ James Stewart, Margaret Sullavan, Frank Morgan, Joseph Schildkraut --------------------------------------------- Result 1024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] As I am from Hungary I have heard many people saying better and better things about Üvegtigris so far, but [[actually]] I don't [[understand]] the [[reason]] of all the fuss.

I liked many points of the movie, some of the quotes really [[cheered]] me up, but the stereotyped [[characters]] are present again, like in every Hungarian [[film]], and the [[story]] is also pretty [[dull]]. I liked the first half, but then I started to get bored, and then I found the whole [[film]] just BORING.

[[Rudolf]] Péter is good as always, Reviczky is [[brilliant]] also, but the others are just there... doing [[nothing]].

How many years still have to pass for a GOOD Hungarian film??? As I am from Hungary I have heard many people saying better and better things about Üvegtigris so far, but [[genuinely]] I don't [[understands]] the [[grounds]] of all the fuss.

I liked many points of the movie, some of the quotes really [[yelled]] me up, but the stereotyped [[personages]] are present again, like in every Hungarian [[filmmaking]], and the [[tales]] is also pretty [[monotonous]]. I liked the first half, but then I started to get bored, and then I found the whole [[filmmaking]] just BORING.

[[Rodolphe]] Péter is good as always, Reviczky is [[sumptuous]] also, but the others are just there... doing [[none]].

How many years still have to pass for a GOOD Hungarian film??? --------------------------------------------- Result 1025 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The Treasure [[Island]] DVD should be [[required]] viewing in any [[film]] [[production]] course! It's a [[textbook]] [[example]] of how NOT to [[make]] a [[movie]]. Watching the [[movie]] and then [[listening]] to the [[writer]]/director's commentary [[demonstrates]] graphically the vast [[chasm]] between what he knows about the characters and what he communicates to his [[audience]] about them. [[Call]] me old-fashioned, but I think of [[movies]] as a means of communication, and communication isn't complete if the audience doesn't know what the [[hell]] the [[director]] is [[talking]] about. The director's avowed [[purpose]] is to make a movie [[void]] of "Hollywood conventions". Among those conventions, [[alas]], is consistency of character and clarity of concept. The director himself realizes that audiences often don't understand points where he has purposely avoided a "Hollywood cliché". However, he never seems to grasp the idea that clichés exist for a reason. They are shorthand for conveying complex ideas quickly and clearly. It's fine to avoid them, but they need to be replaced with some other way of communicating the same idea, not simply eliminated. The film is built on an intriguing [[premise]], rich with potential. Two puppets are assigned to fabricate a personality and background for an unidentified corpse that is to be used in a disinformation mission in the closing days of WWII. Soon each begins to populate their personal fantasies with the character and their invention becomes increasingly real to them. [[Someone]] with less disdain for the "Hollywood convention" of traditional storytelling [[could]] create a wonderful film with this idea. This film certainly isn't it! The puppets do everything they can to bring consistency to these characters, but they are all too often defeated by the dazed and confused script. In particular, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Gonzo, who plays the lively corpse. In a number of muppet films, he always stands out as a very charismatic puppet. The Treasure [[Lsland]] DVD should be [[obliged]] viewing in any [[movie]] [[productivity]] course! It's a [[schoolbooks]] [[examples]] of how NOT to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]]. Watching the [[flick]] and then [[listen]] to the [[novelist]]/director's commentary [[illustrates]] graphically the vast [[gulf]] between what he knows about the characters and what he communicates to his [[spectators]] about them. [[Calling]] me old-fashioned, but I think of [[film]] as a means of communication, and communication isn't complete if the audience doesn't know what the [[brothel]] the [[superintendent]] is [[chitchat]] about. The director's avowed [[targets]] is to make a movie [[vacuum]] of "Hollywood conventions". Among those conventions, [[alack]], is consistency of character and clarity of concept. The director himself realizes that audiences often don't understand points where he has purposely avoided a "Hollywood cliché". However, he never seems to grasp the idea that clichés exist for a reason. They are shorthand for conveying complex ideas quickly and clearly. It's fine to avoid them, but they need to be replaced with some other way of communicating the same idea, not simply eliminated. The film is built on an intriguing [[assumption]], rich with potential. Two puppets are assigned to fabricate a personality and background for an unidentified corpse that is to be used in a disinformation mission in the closing days of WWII. Soon each begins to populate their personal fantasies with the character and their invention becomes increasingly real to them. [[Person]] with less disdain for the "Hollywood convention" of traditional storytelling [[wo]] create a wonderful film with this idea. This film certainly isn't it! The puppets do everything they can to bring consistency to these characters, but they are all too often defeated by the dazed and confused script. In particular, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Gonzo, who plays the lively corpse. In a number of muppet films, he always stands out as a very charismatic puppet. --------------------------------------------- Result 1026 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Greetings from this Portuguese guy :)

I believe The Sopranos are one of the best production ever, it has reality and fiction mixed in such a way, that it's hard to see the difference. It has the same quality as GodFather! James Gandolfini fits at the paper as a glove! I would love The Sopranos would never finish at all. It's perfect! It should be a subject in school :) I saw Sopranos when I was a kid, but I was too young to stay waked until the episode ends, so now I bought the all Episodes in DVD format and I am watching all episodes at home before and after dinner and I am getting addicted, like I did with Prison Break. In my opinion Prison Break and The Sopranos are the best-ever series made for television. The argument of both are splendid and the actors are perfect. Congratulations for such a work.

Sorry about my English. Thanks for reading. --------------------------------------------- Result 1027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yet another example of what British cinema can achieve: a simple story, told and acted well. Brenda Blethyn gives a layered and warming performance as the recently widowed and financially straitened Grace, ably assisted by a solid supporting cast. The "quirky small town" card gets played to the hilt, similar to many TV series and films that have come from the British Isles in recent years (Ballykissangel, Hamish Macbeth and others come to mind). Like the forementioned, this film makes use of some ravishingly beautiful rural scenery, in this case the wet and wild Cornish coast.

Some viewers might find wholesale acceptance of cannabis use a bit challenging, others might find the ending just a little too cute and safe. But it's an enjoyable spliff, to be sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[saw]] this film [[first]] in the [[Soviet]] Union and many erotic scenes were simply edited out by the censorship committee. But then, in Poland in 2000, I watched it in a complete form. And so what? The plot is [[incredibly]] [[unwise]] - 2 men survive the genetic catastrophe and [[find]] themselves on the planet full of feminist strong, straight and [[fundamentally]] severe ladies. The [[men]] now try to fight it and then the whole bunch of [[extremely]] silly clichés follow - sex-drive, [[constant]] masculine desire for sex, feminists who are shown like complete idiots (you may agree with them or not, but idiots [[certainly]] they are not), and so on. The performance even of the stellar Jerzy Stuhr is here [[wooden]] and [[strangely]] bad - he just pulls unfunny faces and [[repeats]] on saying [[phrases]] like "I am in the elevator with a nude chick and I haven't [[done]] [[anything]] to her!". This was [[intended]] to be a [[comedy]], instead, it turned out to be a vapid [[farce]], full of predictable jokes and below-the-waist innuendos. Do not waste your [[time]] on it - this is just [[bad]]. I [[seen]] this film [[fiirst]] in the [[Ussr]] Union and many erotic scenes were simply edited out by the censorship committee. But then, in Poland in 2000, I watched it in a complete form. And so what? The plot is [[surprisingly]] [[foolhardy]] - 2 men survive the genetic catastrophe and [[finds]] themselves on the planet full of feminist strong, straight and [[predominantly]] severe ladies. The [[man]] now try to fight it and then the whole bunch of [[exceptionally]] silly clichés follow - sex-drive, [[perpetual]] masculine desire for sex, feminists who are shown like complete idiots (you may agree with them or not, but idiots [[definitely]] they are not), and so on. The performance even of the stellar Jerzy Stuhr is here [[timber]] and [[surprisingly]] bad - he just pulls unfunny faces and [[rehearsals]] on saying [[expression]] like "I am in the elevator with a nude chick and I haven't [[accomplished]] [[algo]] to her!". This was [[meant]] to be a [[parody]], instead, it turned out to be a vapid [[giggle]], full of predictable jokes and below-the-waist innuendos. Do not waste your [[moment]] on it - this is just [[unfavourable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Incredibly]] [[intriguing]] and captivating, I found it impossible to [[turn]] away once I [[began]] to watch. I am [[usually]] one of the [[harshest]] [[critics]] but to me this [[film]] was just [[brilliant]], [[strange]] as this may sound I [[could]] [[almost]] [[smell]] the air and feel the textures of the [[locations]].

From a cinematographic I thought there was [[great]] [[use]] of [[light]] and [[texture]]. From the orange glow of the summer [[light]], down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a [[distinct]] [[air]] of [[realism]] to me.

From a [[character]] perspective I thought the [[notion]] of Victor Vargas as [[almost]] the [[glue]] that connects the [[story]] was [[quite]] inspired, each of the other [[members]] of the family having a more [[complete]] [[background]] simply caused [[greater]] intrigue in the [[main]] [[character]] himself.

Beyond that, having known someone just like the [[grandmother]] and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly [[realistic]]. The [[awkwardness]], the [[accent]], the [[cooking]] and even down to the comments made felt so [[authentic]] to me.

I [[think]] this [[film]] [[worked]] for me because I [[began]] to watch it with no [[expectations]] and [[found]] it [[completely]] immersing and [[brought]] back [[memories]] of teenage emotion, well worth a watch. [[Strikingly]] [[exciting]] and captivating, I found it impossible to [[converting]] away once I [[starts]] to watch. I am [[routinely]] one of the [[trickiest]] [[detractors]] but to me this [[cinematography]] was just [[wondrous]], [[unusual]] as this may sound I [[did]] [[hardly]] [[perfume]] the air and feel the textures of the [[location]].

From a cinematographic I thought there was [[wondrous]] [[usage]] of [[lighting]] and [[fabric]]. From the orange glow of the summer [[lighting]], down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a [[separate]] [[aerial]] of [[pragmatism]] to me.

From a [[characters]] perspective I thought the [[concept]] of Victor Vargas as [[hardly]] the [[paste]] that connects the [[tale]] was [[rather]] inspired, each of the other [[member]] of the family having a more [[finish]] [[backdrop]] simply caused [[largest]] intrigue in the [[principal]] [[characters]] himself.

Beyond that, having known someone just like the [[granny]] and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly [[practical]]. The [[embarrassment]], the [[focus]], the [[galley]] and even down to the comments made felt so [[vera]] to me.

I [[believe]] this [[cinematography]] [[functioned]] for me because I [[begun]] to watch it with no [[outlook]] and [[uncovered]] it [[entirely]] immersing and [[lodged]] back [[memorabilia]] of teenage emotion, well worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1030 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] *** Spoilers*

My dad had taped this movie for me when I was 3. By age 5, I had watched it over 400 times. I just watched it and watched it. And I still do today! It has a grim storyline, a lamb's mother is killed by a wolf--a very emotional scene--and wants to become a wolf, like him. After years of training, the lamb is made into a really REALLY evil looking thing. He and the wolf travel to his old barn, but he cannot kill the lambs, no matter how much he wishes to. He ends up killing the wolf, but is no longer seen as a lamb by his former friends, and can't return to his previous way of life.

The art is beautiful, the songs are..well, okay, and the voice acting is better than some things today.

All in all, you just *have* to see this movie, it is a great masterpiece. Although, it's very hard to find today.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very sad movie. Really. Nothing happens in this movie. The Script is bad!!! I guess they've just copy-paste the first 15 pages to 90 pages. The Producers must have thought let's create a Hollywood movie here in Belgium. They didn't succeed. Now in the third week it is only running in Antwerp and Brussels at 22h45 or something. In the past we have had really good movies in Belgium, like Daens. Shades is a waste of your time. Maybe you could sneak in the theater after you've seen a real movie. If you've seen 10 minutes of Shades, you've seen it all. It was advertised to death on local radio and TV. I hope it will disappear in the Shades soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 1032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Matador" stars Pierce Brosnan as a burned out assassin. He's James Bond gone to seed, in too-tight, garish clothes, gold chains, and an ugly haircut. Our struggling assassin, Julian Noble, is in Mexico, trying to regain his nerve. Staying at the same hotel is a likable, down-on-his luck businessman Danny Wright (Greg Kinnear), also trying to regain his equilibrium. Danny is desperate to close a deal and return to his wife in Denver (Hope Davis) with good news.

Noble and Wright unexpectedly become friends. Wright convinces Noble to reveal certain techniques, which he demonstrates at a bullfight. Noble is eventually targeted by his employers and shows up in Denver.

Writer and director Richard Shepard did the Q&A after this delightful movie at the Austin Film Festival. Shepard was also down on his luck. After suffering the loss of his agent and rejection of recent scripts, he decided to write a story no one would buy and create a character no one would want to play. Then Pierce Brosnan called. Brosnan regains his equilibrium in this movie. (There is life after Bond!) He has a wonderful flair for self-deprecating comedy. Don't miss it.

Stay for the closing credits to read what the filmmakers say about bullfighting. I look forward to more of Richard Shepard's projects. --------------------------------------------- Result 1033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[WARNING]]: REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS

A couple of years back I managed to see the first five [[films]] in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. However, just two years on and I find I can't [[remember]] enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do [[recall]], some of the sequels – [[Dream]] Warriors in particular – weren't as bad as is often made out, though even the original was no [[classic]]. Generally, the predictability of the [[premise]] (if people [[fall]] asleep they get murdered in their [[dreams]]) doesn't [[lend]] itself to narrative [[tension]]. But while I cannot recall much of the first five [[films]], I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's [[Dead]].

An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be [[judged]] by the fact that the film was [[promoted]] [[solely]] on the character's [[demise]]. The fact that the movie's [[conclusion]] is not even [[hidden]], but in fact the entire [[purpose]] for the film's being goes to [[illustrate]] how [[vacant]], soulless and cynical this venture was.

Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's mockery of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this [[tripe]]. It's like Englund's crying out "we know this is garbage – but you're paying to [[see]] it, so who's the one laughing?" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an [[insensitive]] depiction of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so rudimentary? All he gets to do here is a few "haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.

Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written "you're f**ked". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds "well the map says we're f**ked". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?

Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. "Nice hearing from you, Carlos", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.

The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with "shut the f**k up, man" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.

[[ALERT]]: REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS

A couple of years back I managed to see the first five [[filmmaking]] in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. However, just two years on and I find I can't [[reminisce]] enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do [[remembered]], some of the sequels – [[Nightmares]] Warriors in particular – weren't as bad as is often made out, though even the original was no [[typical]]. Generally, the predictability of the [[prerequisite]] (if people [[tumbles]] asleep they get murdered in their [[daydreaming]]) doesn't [[give]] itself to narrative [[tensions]]. But while I cannot recall much of the first five [[filmmaking]], I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's [[Death]].

An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be [[considered]] by the fact that the film was [[emboldened]] [[exclusively]] on the character's [[downfall]]. The fact that the movie's [[finding]] is not even [[disguising]], but in fact the entire [[intents]] for the film's being goes to [[depict]] how [[unoccupied]], soulless and cynical this venture was.

Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's mockery of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this [[gut]]. It's like Englund's crying out "we know this is garbage – but you're paying to [[consults]] it, so who's the one laughing?" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an [[indelicate]] depiction of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so rudimentary? All he gets to do here is a few "haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.

Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written "you're f**ked". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds "well the map says we're f**ked". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?

Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. "Nice hearing from you, Carlos", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.

The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with "shut the f**k up, man" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Bizarre [[take]] on the Cinderella tale. [[Terribly]] poor [[script]], but Kathleen Turner [[turns]] in a pretty decent [[evil]] step-mother performance.

Visually stunning in some parts, but that's about it. The [[period]] costumes range from the Elizabethan era to the 1990s. [[Fast]] forward until you see something interesting and [[save]] yourself the [[full]] 90 minutes of [[drivel]].

If you're really in the mood for a Cinderella story - I suggest "Ever After: A Cinderella Story" or "The Glass Slipper". Bizarre [[taking]] on the Cinderella tale. [[Extraordinarily]] poor [[hyphen]], but Kathleen Turner [[revolves]] in a pretty decent [[malevolent]] step-mother performance.

Visually stunning in some parts, but that's about it. The [[timeline]] costumes range from the Elizabethan era to the 1990s. [[Speedily]] forward until you see something interesting and [[rescuing]] yourself the [[fullest]] 90 minutes of [[whim]].

If you're really in the mood for a Cinderella story - I suggest "Ever After: A Cinderella Story" or "The Glass Slipper". --------------------------------------------- Result 1035 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'd have to say that this was a little [[embarrassing]] for the 'King of the Cowboys'; [[made]] in 1948, the picture came out a decade after Roy Rogers' earliest pictures in which he had a [[starring]] role. Roy's character comes off as a bit clueless in this one, along with his female co-star Jane Frazee, who alternates her allegiance between Roy and Robert Livingston, portraying chief bad guy Bill Regan. The whole story seems kind of [[muddled]], with missed [[opportunities]] for what [[could]] have been an [[entertaining]] hour or so. Like the legend of the 'Hangman's Hotel' for [[example]], which says the hanged man comes to life at midnight. With Andy Devine in the cast as Cookie Bullfincher, you would think the story would get a little mileage out of that set up. Instead, you have some convoluted proceedings that would have been better served if this had been a Bowery Boys flick. It was a sad attempt at a haunted hotel [[gimmick]] that relied on poor old Genevieve, who truth be told, wound up getting more screen time than Trigger, who's contract as 'Smartest Horse in the Movies' didn't have anything to say about getting upstaged by a mule. And then you have Foy Willing and his Riders of the Purple Sage replacing Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers for your musical interlude. I don't know about you, but it was already half way into the picture and I was still looking for Pat Brady - oh well!

Yet there was still an interesting element to be found here if you were looking hard enough, and that turned out to be Roy's athletic dismount of Trigger while still on the run from the bad guys. OK, it was probably a stunt double, but I haven't seen that one before in a couple hundred Westerns.

Jane Frazee does the honors as the female lead in this picture, as she would in four other films opposite Roy in the 1947/1948 time frame. In "Under California Stars", she appeared as Andy Devine's cousin, appropriately named Caroline Bullfincher. You're never quite convinced what side she'll come in on in this story though, since she starts out pretending to be someone she's not, and winds up on the good guy side almost by accident.

Fans of the old Laurel and Hardy films might be as surprised as I was to see James Finlayson here as the Sheriff of Sintown. I would have liked a little more comedy relief written into his role, but he played it pretty straight after all. I had to wonder, when it was all over, why he and old Vanderpool (Charle Coleman) wound up in the mine shaft with Cookie when there was no reason for that to be. Just a way to close it out I guess, with about as much thought as went into the rest of the picture. I hate to be that harsh, but if you've seen enough Roy Rogers flicks, you've got to know that this was not one of his finer efforts.

Say, Sintown - I wonder if that's the same place that grew up to be Sin City? I'd have to say that this was a little [[distracting]] for the 'King of the Cowboys'; [[effected]] in 1948, the picture came out a decade after Roy Rogers' earliest pictures in which he had a [[championships]] role. Roy's character comes off as a bit clueless in this one, along with his female co-star Jane Frazee, who alternates her allegiance between Roy and Robert Livingston, portraying chief bad guy Bill Regan. The whole story seems kind of [[puzzled]], with missed [[chances]] for what [[did]] have been an [[entertain]] hour or so. Like the legend of the 'Hangman's Hotel' for [[case]], which says the hanged man comes to life at midnight. With Andy Devine in the cast as Cookie Bullfincher, you would think the story would get a little mileage out of that set up. Instead, you have some convoluted proceedings that would have been better served if this had been a Bowery Boys flick. It was a sad attempt at a haunted hotel [[ploy]] that relied on poor old Genevieve, who truth be told, wound up getting more screen time than Trigger, who's contract as 'Smartest Horse in the Movies' didn't have anything to say about getting upstaged by a mule. And then you have Foy Willing and his Riders of the Purple Sage replacing Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers for your musical interlude. I don't know about you, but it was already half way into the picture and I was still looking for Pat Brady - oh well!

Yet there was still an interesting element to be found here if you were looking hard enough, and that turned out to be Roy's athletic dismount of Trigger while still on the run from the bad guys. OK, it was probably a stunt double, but I haven't seen that one before in a couple hundred Westerns.

Jane Frazee does the honors as the female lead in this picture, as she would in four other films opposite Roy in the 1947/1948 time frame. In "Under California Stars", she appeared as Andy Devine's cousin, appropriately named Caroline Bullfincher. You're never quite convinced what side she'll come in on in this story though, since she starts out pretending to be someone she's not, and winds up on the good guy side almost by accident.

Fans of the old Laurel and Hardy films might be as surprised as I was to see James Finlayson here as the Sheriff of Sintown. I would have liked a little more comedy relief written into his role, but he played it pretty straight after all. I had to wonder, when it was all over, why he and old Vanderpool (Charle Coleman) wound up in the mine shaft with Cookie when there was no reason for that to be. Just a way to close it out I guess, with about as much thought as went into the rest of the picture. I hate to be that harsh, but if you've seen enough Roy Rogers flicks, you've got to know that this was not one of his finer efforts.

Say, Sintown - I wonder if that's the same place that grew up to be Sin City? --------------------------------------------- Result 1036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I was [[surprised]] at just how much I [[enjoyed]] this most thoughtfully [[delivered]] [[drama]], which owing to its [[rather]] unimpressive 6.6 [[rating]], I nearly [[missed]]; as I rarely give the time of day to any movie rated below 7/10. Having said that, I'm so glad I [[gave]] Stone Angel the viewing it so very much deserved. And so should you, if you are one of the [[increasingly]] [[rare]] sensitive, soulful and [[thoughtful]] [[sorts]] of person left on this earth in living [[form]].

I must say that in [[many]] [[ways]] ([[though]] not all), viz. its themes, execution, style, production etc., Stone Angel very [[much]] reminded me of the much [[praised]] "The Notebook". I am so [[surprised]] that other [[commentators]] didn't [[pick]] up on the [[many]] similarities which repeatedly struck me [[throughout]] this movie, so I can only [[assume]] that those who've [[written]] [[comments]] have [[yet]] to [[see]] the Notebook. They may not share any Alzheimer's theme, [[yet]] I can confidently [[say]] that if you very [[much]] [[enjoyed]] "The [[Notebook]]" you will [[certainly]] find much to [[engage]] your time most fruitfully with "The Stone Angel". But [[even]] If you've not seen The Notebook, nor read the book on which this move is based, (which, incidentally, I haven't either) you should definitely find much to hold your attention firmly - as long as your favourite genres don't include fast paced action thrillers. This is a movie for thinkers and those who like to reminisce about time's passing, how life changes as the years pass, and what might have happened in one's life as one gazes back through the years.

This bizarrely [[underrated]] yet [[great]] movie [[really]] deserves a [[rating]] of [[approximately]] 8/10. I can only blame its current lowish rating of 6.6/10 on the 11% of [[idiots]] who [[gave]] it 1/10. After all it has attracted [[less]] than 300 votes at the [[time]] of my writing this comment. Nonetheless, if those 11% who [[gave]] it the lowest ranking [[possible]] were really [[expecting]] [[car]] [[chases]] and [[explosions]] why didn't they [[look]]... for even a few seconds at the movie's [[premise]] and promotional lines? Oh dear... [[Whatever]] the [[world]] is [[coming]] to, don't [[miss]] this most underrated gem of a [[movie]] - but only *if* you have a brain (i.e., your top [[ten]] doesn't [[include]] Transformers, Fight Club nor The Terminator). I was [[horrified]] at just how much I [[appreciated]] this most thoughtfully [[handed]] [[tragedy]], which owing to its [[quite]] unimpressive 6.6 [[scoring]], I nearly [[mistook]]; as I rarely give the time of day to any movie rated below 7/10. Having said that, I'm so glad I [[given]] Stone Angel the viewing it so very much deserved. And so should you, if you are one of the [[gradually]] [[rarity]] sensitive, soulful and [[pensive]] [[type]] of person left on this earth in living [[shape]].

I must say that in [[myriad]] [[method]] ([[if]] not all), viz. its themes, execution, style, production etc., Stone Angel very [[very]] reminded me of the much [[commended]] "The Notebook". I am so [[horrified]] that other [[analysts]] didn't [[opted]] up on the [[several]] similarities which repeatedly struck me [[during]] this movie, so I can only [[assumes]] that those who've [[typed]] [[commentaries]] have [[even]] to [[seeing]] the Notebook. They may not share any Alzheimer's theme, [[again]] I can confidently [[said]] that if you very [[very]] [[appreciated]] "The [[Laptop]]" you will [[arguably]] find much to [[embark]] your time most fruitfully with "The Stone Angel". But [[yet]] If you've not seen The Notebook, nor read the book on which this move is based, (which, incidentally, I haven't either) you should definitely find much to hold your attention firmly - as long as your favourite genres don't include fast paced action thrillers. This is a movie for thinkers and those who like to reminisce about time's passing, how life changes as the years pass, and what might have happened in one's life as one gazes back through the years.

This bizarrely [[underestimated]] yet [[huge]] movie [[truthfully]] deserves a [[punctuation]] of [[roughly]] 8/10. I can only blame its current lowish rating of 6.6/10 on the 11% of [[morons]] who [[delivered]] it 1/10. After all it has attracted [[lesser]] than 300 votes at the [[times]] of my writing this comment. Nonetheless, if those 11% who [[handed]] it the lowest ranking [[feasible]] were really [[waiting]] [[motor]] [[chase]] and [[bombs]] why didn't they [[peek]]... for even a few seconds at the movie's [[assumption]] and promotional lines? Oh dear... [[Whichever]] the [[worldwide]] is [[upcoming]] to, don't [[missed]] this most underrated gem of a [[movies]] - but only *if* you have a brain (i.e., your top [[dix]] doesn't [[containing]] Transformers, Fight Club nor The Terminator). --------------------------------------------- Result 1037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is really films outside (not in a motel room). With real costumes (not only strings and swimsuits). You have to see this movie. it's the only porn movie I know that is worth watching between the sex scenes.

Bon Cinema

Laurent --------------------------------------------- Result 1038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There are few [[films]] or [[movies]] I [[consider]] favorites over the [[years]]. The Gospel [[road]] was one of them. I [[watched]] this as a young [[teen]] and [[would]] [[like]] the [[opportunity]] to watch it again. My [[favorite]] parts were the [[fact]] that

1/Jesus was blond,

2/the last [[supper]] was a [[huge]] [[meal]],

3/ he [[liked]] playing with the [[children]],

4/His [[death]] was for all people and for all time.

The [[movie]] may not have been theologically [[sound]] or high quality acting, but it touched my [[heart]] at that [[time]]. Besides I am a Johnny Cash fan and it was a [[brave]] venture. If it ever [[comes]] out on DVD, I will [[purchase]] it [[purely]] for [[sentimental]] [[reasons]]. There are few [[movie]] or [[kino]] I [[considering]] favorites over the [[yrs]]. The Gospel [[chemin]] was one of them. I [[observed]] this as a young [[teenagers]] and [[should]] [[loves]] the [[luck]] to watch it again. My [[prefer]] parts were the [[facto]] that

1/Jesus was blond,

2/the last [[meals]] was a [[gigantic]] [[diet]],

3/ he [[loved]] playing with the [[kiddies]],

4/His [[decease]] was for all people and for all time.

The [[movies]] may not have been theologically [[audible]] or high quality acting, but it touched my [[crux]] at that [[period]]. Besides I am a Johnny Cash fan and it was a [[adventurous]] venture. If it ever [[happens]] out on DVD, I will [[procurement]] it [[solely]] for [[romantic]] [[justification]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was shown on the biography channel and was about as informative as a children's comic! I gave it 2 out of 10 for it's attention to detail because for the most part it had a 70s feel to it and the three ladies that played the original three angels looked like them so the make-up was good.

This was supposed to be a biography on the biography channel but it was void of everything that is normally / usually seen in one of their biographies. No interviews with surviving cast members, crew members, production team members etc., or their friends, families, and any biographers of those people. In fact I know just as much now about the programme as I did before I watched this film that was based on the (supposedly) biographical book. As for actually learning something that no-one knew about the program and wasn't common knowledge well that never happened. --------------------------------------------- Result 1040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Well, it was [[funny]] in [[spots]]. This [[film]] is a 4 or maybe a 3. Its a [[film]] that [[sits]] on the [[video]] [[shelf]] and gathers [[dust]]. [[Rent]] this one after you seen everything else. [[Beats]] boredom, but not by that much. My [[wife]] like like this [[film]] better then I do, [[maybe]] its not that [[bad]]. Well, it was [[hilarious]] in [[speckles]]. This [[filmmaking]] is a 4 or maybe a 3. Its a [[filmmaking]] that [[headquarters]] on the [[videotape]] [[bookshelf]] and gathers [[stardust]]. [[Renting]] this one after you seen everything else. [[Defeats]] boredom, but not by that much. My [[woman]] like like this [[flick]] better then I do, [[probably]] its not that [[negative]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I'd have given this film a few stars, simply because it was a "[[Lifetime]]" [[presentation]] actually filmed in the location represented in the [[story]] - here, New York City. [[Most]] on this [[channel]], whether "set" there, in rural Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, L.A. etc., are filmed in Vancouver, Ottawa, Toronto or some other Canadian locale.

But if there ever were one deserving the top rating - 10* on this site, it's this movie. Certainly not for originality, for this story has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]], in many [[variations]], with several very [[similar]] to this [[specific]] one. It's [[also]] been done pretty [[often]] on the [[big]] screen, with mega-stars, [[past]] and present, from Cary Grant, James Garner, Harrison Ford, [[Tom]] Hanks, et al - and Deborah Kerr, Doris Day, Meg Ryan, and [[many]] more. I can [[think]] of at [[least]] 10-12 more, just as [[prominent]], past to present, off the [[top]] of my head, who [[could]] be [[added]] now, and there are [[probably]] [[many]] others which could be brought to [[mind]].

Not to drone on, but my point is that, in my [[opinion]], this is by far one of the [[best]] of this [[genre]] I've [[seen]]. I [[caught]] it by [[chance]] on a mid-day Friday, at a time when I had the TV on only because I was [[taking]] a couple of [[hours]] following a [[particularly]] [[hectic]] [[week]]. I'd never run [[across]] this [[flick]] in the 8 [[years]] since it was [[made]]. And, while the two leads have [[done]] [[enough]] to be known to most, they were [[completely]] unknown to me. The only two actors I [[knew]] were Phyllis [[Newman]] (Anna's mother) whom I'd [[seen]] in some things from her younger days, and Michael Rispoli ([[Henry]], Charlie's best [[friend]]) who was [[outstanding]] as "Gramma," the [[menacing]] juice [[loan]], [[tough]], street guy from "Rounders."

The chance meeting and [[coupling]] between both leads' best friends, as a sub-story romance, with the correlation of their being such to Anna and Charlie being only revealed to all [[later]], is an oft-done plot contrivance within the genre, but makes no [[difference]] to the enjoyment here (in fact, it [[enhances]] it).

Checking some other comments, I agree [[completely]] with those which are the most positive. The primary word describing this film is ENGAGING, in caps. This adjective describes the performers; the characters; the chemistry between and among all of the characters, in whatever combination [[presented]], and all of the supporting and even minor roles.

I love films with a "harder edge:" "Rounders;" the escapist Schwarzenegger/Stallone fare; "Goodfellows;" even the classics like "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," "Citizen Kane." But for pure, uncomplicated enjoyment, this one was outstanding. With a bare fraction of their budgets, it was equal to the results achieved by "You've Got Mail" and "Sleepless in Seattle." And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan couldn't have done better than Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan here; the co-stars and support personnel here were equivalent to those in these mega-films, as well. I'd have given this film a few stars, simply because it was a "[[Lifetimes]]" [[introductions]] actually filmed in the location represented in the [[narratives]] - here, New York City. [[Plus]] on this [[canals]], whether "set" there, in rural Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, L.A. etc., are filmed in Vancouver, Ottawa, Toronto or some other Canadian locale.

But if there ever were one deserving the top rating - 10* on this site, it's this movie. Certainly not for originality, for this story has been [[doing]] [[multiple]] [[period]], in many [[variant]], with several very [[identical]] to this [[particular]] one. It's [[similarly]] been done pretty [[usually]] on the [[huge]] screen, with mega-stars, [[previous]] and present, from Cary Grant, James Garner, Harrison Ford, [[Thom]] Hanks, et al - and Deborah Kerr, Doris Day, Meg Ryan, and [[various]] more. I can [[believing]] of at [[less]] 10-12 more, just as [[conspicuous]], past to present, off the [[supreme]] of my head, who [[would]] be [[add]] now, and there are [[maybe]] [[multiple]] others which could be brought to [[intellect]].

Not to drone on, but my point is that, in my [[visualise]], this is by far one of the [[bestest]] of this [[gender]] I've [[saw]]. I [[catch]] it by [[possibilities]] on a mid-day Friday, at a time when I had the TV on only because I was [[take]] a couple of [[hour]] following a [[namely]] [[feverish]] [[chow]]. I'd never run [[during]] this [[film]] in the 8 [[olds]] since it was [[accomplished]]. And, while the two leads have [[accomplished]] [[adequate]] to be known to most, they were [[utterly]] unknown to me. The only two actors I [[overheard]] were Phyllis [[Neumann]] (Anna's mother) whom I'd [[watched]] in some things from her younger days, and Michael Rispoli ([[Gregg]], Charlie's best [[boyfriend]]) who was [[wondrous]] as "Gramma," the [[threatens]] juice [[loans]], [[stiff]], street guy from "Rounders."

The chance meeting and [[couple]] between both leads' best friends, as a sub-story romance, with the correlation of their being such to Anna and Charlie being only revealed to all [[subsequently]], is an oft-done plot contrivance within the genre, but makes no [[divergence]] to the enjoyment here (in fact, it [[reinforces]] it).

Checking some other comments, I agree [[absolutely]] with those which are the most positive. The primary word describing this film is ENGAGING, in caps. This adjective describes the performers; the characters; the chemistry between and among all of the characters, in whatever combination [[lodged]], and all of the supporting and even minor roles.

I love films with a "harder edge:" "Rounders;" the escapist Schwarzenegger/Stallone fare; "Goodfellows;" even the classics like "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," "Citizen Kane." But for pure, uncomplicated enjoyment, this one was outstanding. With a bare fraction of their budgets, it was equal to the results achieved by "You've Got Mail" and "Sleepless in Seattle." And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan couldn't have done better than Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan here; the co-stars and support personnel here were equivalent to those in these mega-films, as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A 14 year old girl develops her first serious crush on the 17 year old boy that lives near by, while simultaneously trying to overcome her feelings of inadequacy in comparison to her older sister. That is the simple premise of this beautiful, poetic coming of age film from Director Robert Mulligan. Mulligan is famous for previously directing Summer of '42 in 1971 and To Kill A Mockingbird in 1962, two giants of the coming of age genre. Here he directs newcomers in the principal roles: Reese Witherspoon, in her film debut, as the 14 year old girl; Emily Warfield, as the older sister; Jason London, as Court, the 17 year old boy. Reese Witherspoon is astonishingly good in her film debut, displaying every emotion that a 14 year old girl feels in experiencing young love and hurt, never striking a false note. Warfield and London are both equally good as well. The film accurately depicts each adolescent's thoughts or feelings in regard to love with heartfelt sensitivity, never crossing over into maudlin excess even once. Kudos to the autobiographical screenplay from Jenny Wingfield; this is one of the very few films about young love that is honest and consistent in tone without being emotionally dishonest or sensationalist. The music is wonderfully simple, accentuating the tone and mood from scene to scene, but never becoming intrusive. The beautiful cinematography is by famed horror director Freddie Francis, who was in his 70's when this was shot. Tess Harper and Sam Waterston play the girls' parents with dead aim accuracy for 1957, caring, strict, and emotionally simple. Gail Strickland is good also as the boy's mother. There are feelings to sort out, lessons to learn, and truths to face in this sweet-natured film that packs an emotional wallop. To date, this is Robert Mulligan's last film. This is one of the very best films of 1991. **** of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Chang Cheh's "Shaolin Temple" might very well be the highwater mark of the Shaw Brothers martial arts film cycle. This rousing kung fu epic boasts an amazing cast - a veritable who's who of the Shaw stable. Though the plot is fairly standard and the fight choreography is superb as usual, it is Cheh's handling of the subject matter that makes this film remarkable and enjoyable. The sense of reverence displayed for the history and traditions of the Shaolin Temple is palpable in every frame. Not unlike William Keighley's paean to the fabled Fighting 69th in that same self titled film or John Ford's salute to West Point in "The Long Gray Line," Cheh's "Shaolin Temple" is a lovingly crafted ode in that same style.

The cultural correlation I am tempted to make, is to compare the Shaolin Temple to the Alamo. Watching this film will give the same admiring and nostalgic feelings that you experienced many years ago in grade school history when you learned of the courage and sacrifice of those doomed heroes of the Alamo. At the end of the film, you too might be tempted to call out, Remember the Shaolin Temple! --------------------------------------------- Result 1044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In fact, it never was. I'm not sure why Billy Crystal wanted to recreate a 1940s screwball comedy. What a vacuous shambles! None of these people come close to a Cary Grant, Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn, etc, and anyway, today's audience isn't as receptive to this facile muck. Writing is trivial. The hackneyed plot is razor thin and obvious. The chemistry between the leading characters is non-existent. It's interesting that Julia Roberts seems to think she's a reincarnation of some big star from the "golden age of Hollywood", whenever that may be. It's an effect she tries and fails to attain yet again with Richard Gere in Runaway Bride. --------------------------------------------- Result 1045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hilariously obvious "drama" about a bunch of high school (I think) kids who enjoy non-stop hip-hop, break dancing, graffiti and trying to become a dj at the Roxy--or something. To be totally honest I was so bored I forgot! Even people who love the music agree this movie is terribly acted and--as a drama--failed dismally. We're supposed to find this kids likable and nice. I found them bland and boring. The one that I REALLY hated was Ramon. He does graffiti on subway trains and this is looked upon as great. Excuse me? He's defacing public property that isn't his to begin with. Also these "great" kids tap into the city's electricity so they can hold a big dance party at an abandoned building. Uh huh. So we're supposed to find a bunch of law breakers lovable and fun.

I could forgive all that if the music was good but I can't stand hip hop. The songs were--at best--mediocre and they were nonstop! They're ALWAYS playing! It got to the point that I was fast-forwarding through the many endless music numbers. (Cut out the music and you haver a 30 minute movie--maybe) There are a few imaginative numbers--the subway dance fight, a truly funny Santa number and the climatic Roxy show. If you love hip hop here's your movie. But it you're looking for good drama mixed in--forget it. Also HOW did this get a PG rating? There's an incredible amount of swearing in this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Julia ([[Kristina]] Copeland) [[travels]] with her husband [[Steven]] Harris ([[Steven]] [[Man]]) and their baby son [[Alex]] to [[spend]] a [[couple]] of days with her family in [[Savage]] [[Island]], an island of their own. The [[couple]] [[expects]] to [[resolve]] their issues along the [[weekend]] in the remote [[island]]. [[While]] waiting for the [[boat]], Julia and [[Steven]] meet two weird [[men]] in the harbor, and when her brother [[Peter]] (Brendan Beiser) [[arrives]], he explains that a family of [[hillbilly]] squatters is [[living]] in the [[island]]. The reckless [[Peter]] smoke [[pot]] while [[driving]] the truck in the [[night]] and turns the headlight off to [[show]] off; however, he accidentally [[runs]] over the [[young]] [[son]] of the Savage's family, but in the [[dark]] he [[believes]] he has [[hit]] an animal. [[Later]], the [[Savage]] family [[claims]] Alex as a compensation for their lost [[son]]. The [[Young]] family does not [[accept]] the trade, and they [[initiate]] a [[deadly]] [[war]] between families.

"[[Savage]] [[Island]]" is a very low-budget [[movie]], with a stupid [[screenplay]], amateurish [[cinematography]] but surprisingly good acting. The flawed story is totally [[absurd]], and there are many unbelievable situations. For example, how could two men leave two women with the baby alone in the road during the night with the menace of the deranged family? The logical procedure would be going immediately to the continent and bringing police force to rescue Peter. Then the Young family vanishes; Julia and Steven leave their car in the continent and their house and friends, and nobody chases them? Peter calls his sister Julia of Alex when he arrives with the boat in the beginning. There are so many [[flaws]] in this flick that I could spend many lines [[writing]] about this subject. I [[believe]] this [[film]] was filmed with a [[home]] [[video]] [[camera]] so [[awful]] the [[images]] are. The [[good]] cast [[deserved]] a better material to [[work]]. My [[vote]] is four.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "Ilha de Sangue" ("[[Island]] of [[Blood]]") Julia ([[Christina]] Copeland) [[traveling]] with her husband [[Stevens]] Harris ([[Stefan]] [[Guy]]) and their baby son [[Allie]] to [[spends]] a [[matching]] of days with her family in [[Ferocious]] [[Isle]], an island of their own. The [[match]] [[waits]] to [[resolutions]] their issues along the [[weekends]] in the remote [[isla]]. [[Although]] waiting for the [[ships]], Julia and [[Stephane]] meet two weird [[man]] in the harbor, and when her brother [[Pete]] (Brendan Beiser) [[arrived]], he explains that a family of [[backwoods]] squatters is [[residing]] in the [[isla]]. The reckless [[Pete]] smoke [[herb]] while [[drives]] the truck in the [[nighttime]] and turns the headlight off to [[exposition]] off; however, he accidentally [[manages]] over the [[youthful]] [[sons]] of the Savage's family, but in the [[somber]] he [[feels]] he has [[knocked]] an animal. [[Subsequent]], the [[Cruel]] family [[claim]] Alex as a compensation for their lost [[sons]]. The [[Youth]] family does not [[accepted]] the trade, and they [[inaugurated]] a [[mortal]] [[wars]] between families.

"[[Feral]] [[Isla]]" is a very low-budget [[filmmaking]], with a stupid [[scenarios]], amateurish [[movies]] but surprisingly good acting. The flawed story is totally [[senseless]], and there are many unbelievable situations. For example, how could two men leave two women with the baby alone in the road during the night with the menace of the deranged family? The logical procedure would be going immediately to the continent and bringing police force to rescue Peter. Then the Young family vanishes; Julia and Steven leave their car in the continent and their house and friends, and nobody chases them? Peter calls his sister Julia of Alex when he arrives with the boat in the beginning. There are so many [[defect]] in this flick that I could spend many lines [[handwriting]] about this subject. I [[reckon]] this [[filmmaking]] was filmed with a [[houses]] [[videos]] [[cameras]] so [[scary]] the [[image]] are. The [[buena]] cast [[deserves]] a better material to [[cooperating]]. My [[votes]] is four.

Title ([[Brasilia]]): "Ilha de Sangue" ("[[Isola]] of [[Chrissakes]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 1047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I watched it with my mom and we were like...

What the hell? We didn't get it at all. I [[may]] have this wrong, but a [[chair]] had something to do with the [[death]] of this woman's father. That [[movie]] was [[terrible]]! This is not a movie for those who love a good suspense movie. Bad suspense [[movie]]! *shakes cane at movie* I'm never seeing it again. And I'm a big fan of [[lifetime]] [[movies]], too! They kinda need to quit trying to make movies outta books. It's driving me crazy!!!

And Whit was butt-ugly and yet, she loves him more than Hugh, who was a TINY bit nicer-looking.

My rating: 1/10 I watched it with my mom and we were like...

What the hell? We didn't get it at all. I [[maggio]] have this wrong, but a [[president]] had something to do with the [[died]] of this woman's father. That [[filmmaking]] was [[scary]]! This is not a movie for those who love a good suspense movie. Bad suspense [[movies]]! *shakes cane at movie* I'm never seeing it again. And I'm a big fan of [[lifespan]] [[cinema]], too! They kinda need to quit trying to make movies outta books. It's driving me crazy!!!

And Whit was butt-ugly and yet, she loves him more than Hugh, who was a TINY bit nicer-looking.

My rating: 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1048 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Bo [[Derek]] might have had a [[career]] had she not let her late husband, [[John]], [[take]] over as her [[director]]. It's a real [[shame]], no really, with the right [[direction]] and the right [[part]] (see "10"), Bo was okay. She wouldn't [[win]] any awards even at her best, but she is no worse than many an actress who has [[made]] it [[big]] in the past 15 years or so based on looks alone. But therein lay the [[problem]], John was determined to ride the wave that Bo created with her [[appearance]] in 10, that of Bo being the "perfect 10," "the hottest woman in America," "the [[sex]] [[symbol]] of the 1980s." [[Problem]] is, in John's hands, this wave crashed with a resounding thud in only a few year's [[time]]. Maybe he knew her limitations as an [[actress]], [[perhaps]] that is why he [[fashioned]] [[movies]] for her that [[concentrated]] on her [[body]], not her acting [[skills]]. But it [[got]] [[old]] [[real]] [[quick]]. It didn't [[help]] [[matters]] any that the [[films]] of [[John]] and Bo [[Derek]] are (let's be honest) really, [[really]] [[bad]]. And [[bad]] [[sums]] up their take on Edgar Rice Burrough's literary icon, the Lord of the Jungle, Tarzan of the [[Apes]].

You know what's worst? This [[film]] is boring! Make me laugh, make me cry, just don't bore me. Not [[even]] Bo's stunning looks and [[figure]] can rouse any interest, and that is what the film is of course built around. Richard Harris (God bless his soul, he and Bo were previously in Orca btw) [[hams]] it up and makes his scenes at least a little interesting and Miles O'Keefe makes a physically impressive Tarzan. Maybe he got the last laugh, after being hit with a ton of venom from the critics over this film, Miles went on to a solid [[career]] as a B movie icon, in films that were not great art, but a million times more fun than this one. But other than that, it's Bo's body,and you can only see it so many times before you long for something else to go with it. Tarzan the Ape Man has nothing else. John Derek was a truly dynamic [[actor]], he was not a director. He should have stayed with his strength. This film unfolds at a mind numbingly slow pace and nothing really happens in the action scenes. Burrough's Tarzan was all about excitement and wish fulfillment (who wouldn't want to be as agile, strong and good looking as Lord Greystoke?) and fun! You get none of that here. Watch it, and you will have wasted 107 minutes of your life. On second thought, you may come away with a valuable lesson, how not to handle someone's movie career.

Bo Derek is all right in my book [[though]]. She stood by [[John]] until his dying day, has a [[true]] [[love]] of animals and [[nature]] and even looks back with a giggle at her time in the spotlight. She has also proven that she is not the [[dumb]] blonde many want her to make her out to be. If she could survive Tarzan and Bolero, she can survive anything. So come back Bo, all is forgiven.

And as an aside, is the Steve Strong who plays the bad guy the same Steve Strong who a brief pro wrestling career? Bo [[Derrick]] might have had a [[quarries]] had she not let her late husband, [[Giovanni]], [[taking]] over as her [[superintendent]]. It's a real [[pity]], no really, with the right [[directions]] and the right [[party]] (see "10"), Bo was okay. She wouldn't [[won]] any awards even at her best, but she is no worse than many an actress who has [[accomplished]] it [[wide]] in the past 15 years or so based on looks alone. But therein lay the [[difficulty]], John was determined to ride the wave that Bo created with her [[apparition]] in 10, that of Bo being the "perfect 10," "the hottest woman in America," "the [[sexuality]] [[icons]] of the 1980s." [[Troubles]] is, in John's hands, this wave crashed with a resounding thud in only a few year's [[times]]. Maybe he knew her limitations as an [[actor]], [[maybe]] that is why he [[shaped]] [[film]] for her that [[focusing]] on her [[agency]], not her acting [[dexterity]]. But it [[did]] [[antigua]] [[veritable]] [[faster]]. It didn't [[assists]] [[questions]] any that the [[cinematographic]] of [[Jon]] and Bo [[Derrick]] are (let's be honest) really, [[genuinely]] [[negative]]. And [[naughty]] [[amounts]] up their take on Edgar Rice Burrough's literary icon, the Lord of the Jungle, Tarzan of the [[Baboons]].

You know what's worst? This [[filmmaking]] is boring! Make me laugh, make me cry, just don't bore me. Not [[yet]] Bo's stunning looks and [[silhouette]] can rouse any interest, and that is what the film is of course built around. Richard Harris (God bless his soul, he and Bo were previously in Orca btw) [[hamas]] it up and makes his scenes at least a little interesting and Miles O'Keefe makes a physically impressive Tarzan. Maybe he got the last laugh, after being hit with a ton of venom from the critics over this film, Miles went on to a solid [[carrera]] as a B movie icon, in films that were not great art, but a million times more fun than this one. But other than that, it's Bo's body,and you can only see it so many times before you long for something else to go with it. Tarzan the Ape Man has nothing else. John Derek was a truly dynamic [[protagonist]], he was not a director. He should have stayed with his strength. This film unfolds at a mind numbingly slow pace and nothing really happens in the action scenes. Burrough's Tarzan was all about excitement and wish fulfillment (who wouldn't want to be as agile, strong and good looking as Lord Greystoke?) and fun! You get none of that here. Watch it, and you will have wasted 107 minutes of your life. On second thought, you may come away with a valuable lesson, how not to handle someone's movie career.

Bo Derek is all right in my book [[albeit]]. She stood by [[Giovanni]] until his dying day, has a [[authentic]] [[adore]] of animals and [[character]] and even looks back with a giggle at her time in the spotlight. She has also proven that she is not the [[foolish]] blonde many want her to make her out to be. If she could survive Tarzan and Bolero, she can survive anything. So come back Bo, all is forgiven.

And as an aside, is the Steve Strong who plays the bad guy the same Steve Strong who a brief pro wrestling career? --------------------------------------------- Result 1049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] You will marvel at the incredibly sophisticated computer animation, and the novelty [[probably]] won't wear off on the [[first]], second or third [[viewing]], but you?ll be [[drawn]] in by the [[characters]] which are so simple [[yet]] [[intriguing]], that you may [[find]] yourself [[actually]] [[caring]] for them in an [[unexpected]] way, which may or may not make you feel a little childish due to the [[medium]].

Disney continues to firmly hold the title of "[[Greatest]] Animation in the [[World]]", with "A Bug?s [[Life]]" standing as one of their [[greatest]] [[achievements]]. One of the [[innovative]] attachments being the [[delightful]] "out-takes" [[added]] to the [[end]] of the [[film]]. The DVD has two sets of these out-takes where as I?m told the VHS cassette has one [[alternating]] version per tape. The DVD [[also]] [[features]] "[[Gerry]]?s [[Game]]" which is a [[delightful]] little PIXAR short that was [[also]] [[shown]] [[prior]] to the [[film]] in [[theaters]].

This is by far the [[superior]] insect-film in comparison to Dreamworks? "Antz", which in all fairness is [[pretty]] good, but lacks [[something]] in the animation and in the [[story]] development and [[characters]]. If you [[look]] at the [[star]] voices of both [[films]], "Antz" is [[largely]] cast with [[big]] [[name]] "[[movie]]" [[stars]] with a few [[familiar]] "TV" [[star]] voices, where "A Bug?s [[Life]]" is just the [[opposite]], loaded with "TV" [[stars]] with Kevin Spacey as the only stand out [[exception]]. But the difference in quality is [[distinct]] and [[obvious]].

Dreamworks can?t be blamed or surprised though, when you go [[head]] to head with Disney, you have your work cut out for you. This is the [[kind]] of film that [[almost]] makes me wish I had children to [[share]] it with. [[Don]]?t [[think]] for a second that this is just a [[movie]] for [[kids]], [[though]]. You will marvel at the incredibly sophisticated computer animation, and the novelty [[surely]] won't wear off on the [[outset]], second or third [[opinion]], but you?ll be [[lured]] in by the [[nature]] which are so simple [[still]] [[exciting]], that you may [[unearth]] yourself [[indeed]] [[care]] for them in an [[unintended]] way, which may or may not make you feel a little childish due to the [[mid]].

Disney continues to firmly hold the title of "[[Bigger]] Animation in the [[Monde]]", with "A Bug?s [[Vie]]" standing as one of their [[bigger]] [[accomplishment]]. One of the [[imaginative]] attachments being the [[excellent]] "out-takes" [[adding]] to the [[termination]] of the [[kino]]. The DVD has two sets of these out-takes where as I?m told the VHS cassette has one [[substitutes]] version per tape. The DVD [[additionally]] [[featuring]] "[[Jerry]]?s [[Games]]" which is a [[wondrous]] little PIXAR short that was [[apart]] [[indicated]] [[previously]] to the [[cinematographic]] in [[cinema]].

This is by far the [[upper]] insect-film in comparison to Dreamworks? "Antz", which in all fairness is [[belle]] good, but lacks [[anything]] in the animation and in the [[history]] development and [[traits]]. If you [[gaze]] at the [[superstar]] voices of both [[movies]], "Antz" is [[fundamentally]] cast with [[overwhelming]] [[names]] "[[cinema]]" [[superstar]] with a few [[accustomed]] "TV" [[superstar]] voices, where "A Bug?s [[Living]]" is just the [[converse]], loaded with "TV" [[celebrity]] with Kevin Spacey as the only stand out [[immunities]]. But the difference in quality is [[seperate]] and [[overt]].

Dreamworks can?t be blamed or surprised though, when you go [[jefe]] to head with Disney, you have your work cut out for you. This is the [[sorting]] of film that [[hardly]] makes me wish I had children to [[exchanges]] it with. [[Donated]]?t [[idea]] for a second that this is just a [[films]] for [[brats]], [[despite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Any one who saw the original would have to go out and destroy this dreadful remake. [[Alex]] Baldwin trying to [[imitate]] the late Steve Mcqueen in a word for word remake just doesn't [[work]]. [[While]] Baldwin has done some [[admirable]] work this is a [[flop]] from [[start]] to [[finish]]. McQueen had charisma, never try to compete with a star. As for [[Kim]] in the role of Ali McGraw [[enough]] [[said]]. McQueen looked [[dangerous]], menacing and believable as Doc, the film had [[excitement]] and suspense,Baldwin and [[company]] [[made]] this into a [[comedy]],I laughed the one and only time I [[saw]] this [[miserable]] film. And that [[dreadful]] hairstyle for [[Michael]] Madsen who is one of today's more exciting and believable actors! [[Did]] the makeup people have it in for Michael, what were they thinking.If you [[wish]] to see movie-making the [[way]] it was under Sam Peckinpah's direction Get the original! Any one who saw the original would have to go out and destroy this dreadful remake. [[Xander]] Baldwin trying to [[replicate]] the late Steve Mcqueen in a word for word remake just doesn't [[cooperation]]. [[Although]] Baldwin has done some [[sumptuous]] work this is a [[implosion]] from [[commences]] to [[iend]]. McQueen had charisma, never try to compete with a star. As for [[Kima]] in the role of Ali McGraw [[satisfactorily]] [[asserted]]. McQueen looked [[unsafe]], menacing and believable as Doc, the film had [[exhilaration]] and suspense,Baldwin and [[corporation]] [[effected]] this into a [[humour]],I laughed the one and only time I [[seen]] this [[ratty]] film. And that [[scary]] hairstyle for [[Michele]] Madsen who is one of today's more exciting and believable actors! [[Wo]] the makeup people have it in for Michael, what were they thinking.If you [[wanna]] to see movie-making the [[route]] it was under Sam Peckinpah's direction Get the original! --------------------------------------------- Result 1051 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] the 1930s studios [[would]] [[use]] [[short]] [[films]] like this one [[sort]] of as testing [[grounds]] for [[new]] actors, given their [[relative]] ease of [[production]] in comparison with full [[length]] [[feature]] [[films]], so it's interesting that this one should star Shirley Temple, who had long [[since]] [[established]] herself as The [[Most]] Famous [[Child]] [[Star]] of [[All]] [[Time]]. Then again, she probably wasn't the one being tested, I would [[imagine]] that would have been [[Frank]] Coghlan Jr., who played Shirley's brother [[Sonny]] in the [[movie]] and delivered a [[comparatively]] [[less]] [[impressive]] performance. [[Then]] again, a 9-year-old Shirley Temple was [[probably]] not an [[easy]] act to [[accompany]].

The film [[opens]] with an unimpressive sight gag [[involving]] a leaky ceiling, which I [[suppose]] was designed to have Shirley Temple give a scornful look at the ceiling, [[illustrate]] the [[working]] class status of the family in the movie, and [[provide]] a [[clean]] [[transition]] into the next scene, which features Shirley gleefully stomping in the rain.

It's Sonny'y birthday, and his father makes occasional and horrendously botched efforts to hide the fact that he wants to give Sonny a dog that he really wants for himself, but Sonny is afraid of dogs because he was bitten by one once and has been creeped out ever since. It's curious that, when his father insists on getting a dog, Sonny decides to run away from home rather than have a dog in the house, and as he is running away with no destination in sight, it's also curious that the movie [[illustrates]] what seems to be an indifference to homeless people that surpasses even the astounding indifference that exists today.

Sonny passes a man cooking bacon in an iron skillet at the side of the train tracks (right after a train flew by which, given how close to the tracks he was, you would think would have blown the guy right off the tracks, but no matter). After Sonny gives up on sharing breakfast due to the sour stare that his gleeful smile receives from the guy, he continues on and the homeless guy disappears from the movie. It's interesting to consider what a longer film would have done, because this one leaves this poor [[guy]] as a loose end.

Not that that matters, Sonny soon hears a dog whining underneath a trestle as he passes over it, and jumps down to find a dog covered in burrs. It might seem trite that he immediately takes the dog up and adopts it since he just left home because of his fear of dogs, but it seemed to me that he just needed to be reminded not of his power over dogs, but of their lack of power over him. As soon as he saw a dog in need he overcame his fear.

Hey, if that's all it takes, all I have to do is find a helpless spider and I'm set!

It's a very convenient movie in which everything works out exactly as it is supposed to, but it's cute enough and enjoyable enough (and short enough, as it were) to still be a fun movie. We already don't expect an epic plot in a 19-minute film, but Pardon My Pups still packs in a substantial amount of story and character development in its short running time. And it also features a fight scene at the end of the movie that must have made Charlie Chaplin proud. I am hardly an expert of Shirley Temple's films, but it's not hard to see how she became The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. [[Into]] the 1930s studios [[could]] [[utilizes]] [[succinct]] [[movies]] like this one [[genre]] of as testing [[justification]] for [[newest]] actors, given their [[pertaining]] ease of [[productivity]] in comparison with full [[lifespan]] [[attribute]] [[cinematography]], so it's interesting that this one should star Shirley Temple, who had long [[because]] [[elaborated]] herself as The [[Biggest]] Famous [[Enfant]] [[Superstar]] of [[Entire]] [[Period]]. Then again, she probably wasn't the one being tested, I would [[imagining]] that would have been [[Candid]] Coghlan Jr., who played Shirley's brother [[Crockett]] in the [[kino]] and delivered a [[fairly]] [[fewer]] [[wondrous]] performance. [[Thereafter]] again, a 9-year-old Shirley Temple was [[presumably]] not an [[easier]] act to [[escort]].

The film [[inaugurated]] with an unimpressive sight gag [[encompassing]] a leaky ceiling, which I [[supposing]] was designed to have Shirley Temple give a scornful look at the ceiling, [[showcase]] the [[collaborating]] class status of the family in the movie, and [[furnishes]] a [[pur]] [[changeover]] into the next scene, which features Shirley gleefully stomping in the rain.

It's Sonny'y birthday, and his father makes occasional and horrendously botched efforts to hide the fact that he wants to give Sonny a dog that he really wants for himself, but Sonny is afraid of dogs because he was bitten by one once and has been creeped out ever since. It's curious that, when his father insists on getting a dog, Sonny decides to run away from home rather than have a dog in the house, and as he is running away with no destination in sight, it's also curious that the movie [[proves]] what seems to be an indifference to homeless people that surpasses even the astounding indifference that exists today.

Sonny passes a man cooking bacon in an iron skillet at the side of the train tracks (right after a train flew by which, given how close to the tracks he was, you would think would have blown the guy right off the tracks, but no matter). After Sonny gives up on sharing breakfast due to the sour stare that his gleeful smile receives from the guy, he continues on and the homeless guy disappears from the movie. It's interesting to consider what a longer film would have done, because this one leaves this poor [[mec]] as a loose end.

Not that that matters, Sonny soon hears a dog whining underneath a trestle as he passes over it, and jumps down to find a dog covered in burrs. It might seem trite that he immediately takes the dog up and adopts it since he just left home because of his fear of dogs, but it seemed to me that he just needed to be reminded not of his power over dogs, but of their lack of power over him. As soon as he saw a dog in need he overcame his fear.

Hey, if that's all it takes, all I have to do is find a helpless spider and I'm set!

It's a very convenient movie in which everything works out exactly as it is supposed to, but it's cute enough and enjoyable enough (and short enough, as it were) to still be a fun movie. We already don't expect an epic plot in a 19-minute film, but Pardon My Pups still packs in a substantial amount of story and character development in its short running time. And it also features a fight scene at the end of the movie that must have made Charlie Chaplin proud. I am hardly an expert of Shirley Temple's films, but it's not hard to see how she became The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[bought]] this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in [[almost]] mint [[condition]], and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.

I can't believe my luck. You go through the whole [[realm]] of [[emotions]] and it attempts to get over a [[complex]] message - the very moral and non-triumphalist [[stance]] of the Mandela [[Party]], undoubtedly. Despite its [[enormous]] length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a [[book]] one couldn't put down. [[Perhaps]] the songs are not all that memorable, but the [[spirit]] of the [[thing]] glows on [[forever]]. I cannot [[understand]] [[comments]] that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen "South Pacific" and read the [[book]] too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll [[treasure]] this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.

I [[buying]] this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in [[hardly]] mint [[stipulation]], and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.

I can't believe my luck. You go through the whole [[domain]] of [[sentiments]] and it attempts to get over a [[sprawling]] message - the very moral and non-triumphalist [[posture]] of the Mandela [[Part]], undoubtedly. Despite its [[jumbo]] length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a [[cookbook]] one couldn't put down. [[Conceivably]] the songs are not all that memorable, but the [[geist]] of the [[stuff]] glows on [[siempre]]. I cannot [[realise]] [[remark]] that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen "South Pacific" and read the [[workbook]] too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll [[hoard]] this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Okay, I've tried and I've tried, but I STILL DON'T GET this Guy Maddin thing. Tales From the Gimli Hospital left me cold, that movie about the Austrian villagers and the one about the Ice Nymph were pretty to look but lacking in the story department...and this nudie movie about abortion and hockey is just boring. I'm glad Maddin has an appreciation for silent film, but I dislike his films for the same reason I dislike the films of Quentin Tarantino: they're empty homages to better, more imaginative films--films that advanced the art form or broke new ground--and are all style and no substance. No amount of jump cuts and odd camera angles can disguise the fact that Maddin is an unoriginal David Lynch wannabe, though he DOES have one advantage over Tarantino: he generally doesn't write embarrassing dialogue, because most of his films rely on intertitles. The bottom line is, Maddin's schtick is clever clever film-making for aspiring film majors. --------------------------------------------- Result 1054 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Another [[comedy]] about a [[plucky]] little country struggling through the jungle of the modern (for the [[forties]]) global [[world]] with only [[native]] wit and pluck to [[guide]] them, this is a [[fine]] [[entry]] in the Ealing [[cannon]]. Terry-Thomas [[sparkles]] as usual in the lead, as a [[feckless]] ministry [[man]] led to the [[brink]] of disaster when a nation he is supposedly in charge of [[starts]] attracting the interest of the world, Ian Bannen makes a [[great]] romantic lead, Peter Sellers puts in one of his quieter performances as a corrupt politico and the uber-suave John [[Le]] Mesurier plays against [[type]] as a [[rugged]] revolutionary leader. Lots of [[fun]] is had by all, [[especially]] the [[viewer]]; [[perhaps]] not in the very [[top]] [[echelon]] of Ealing classics, but pretty high up. Another [[comedian]] about a [[brave]] little country struggling through the jungle of the modern (for the [[fifties]]) global [[worldwide]] with only [[indigenous]] wit and pluck to [[manual]] them, this is a [[fined]] [[inlet]] in the Ealing [[barrel]]. Terry-Thomas [[sparklers]] as usual in the lead, as a [[irresponsible]] ministry [[dawg]] led to the [[rand]] of disaster when a nation he is supposedly in charge of [[launch]] attracting the interest of the world, Ian Bannen makes a [[huge]] romantic lead, Peter Sellers puts in one of his quieter performances as a corrupt politico and the uber-suave John [[Lai]] Mesurier plays against [[genera]] as a [[rough]] revolutionary leader. Lots of [[amusing]] is had by all, [[concretely]] the [[viewfinder]]; [[presumably]] not in the very [[topped]] [[level]] of Ealing classics, but pretty high up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say? I think I have to write "Spoiler alert" and then "reveal" they used the F-word a LOT in this movie - like in every two sentences. I did not like this movie at all - too much hints on sexual perversions, sidesteps and cheating. And that swearing was totally out the window. I gave this movie "3" and two of those points are for Mira Sorvino's sexy movements on the dance floor. --------------------------------------------- Result 1056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I grew up watching this movie ,and I still love it just as much today as when i was a kid. Don't listen to the critic reviews. They are not accurate on this film.Eddie Murphy really shines in his roll.You can sit down with your whole family and everybody will enjoy it.I recommend this movie to everybody to see. It is a comedy with a touch of fantasy.With demons ,dragons,and a little bald kid with God like powers.This movie takes you from L.A. to Tibet , of into the amazing view of the wondrous temples of the mountains in Tibet.Just a beautiful view! So go do your self a favor and snatch this one up! You wont regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is only the second time I stopped a video/DVD part way through.

I was willing to give this film the benefit of the doubt at first, even though it managed to be both shallow, clichéd and stupid.. AND joyless, plodding and pretentious.

It was like an After School Special directed by that weird grade nine kid who thinks nobody understands him... creepy and sad, with voice-over narration that only the most deluded adolescent would consider poetry... and some singing, and... no, really, the poor child's suffering...

Enough, already, especially when it morphed into a brazen, clumsy, and insulting Clockwork Orange ripoff. And did I mention the singing?

This isn't the worst film I've ever seen, but certainly the one I've felt least compelled to sit through. I don't recommend it to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 1058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Back when I was a [[kid]] and I lived with my sister, she bought every horror movie she could find and this was one of them. VCR'S had just became a household item and we didn't have but about 150 movies and we watched the [[hell]] out of all of them.

I was at a [[yard]] sale the other day and I [[saw]] this VHS copy of BLOOD [[LEGACY]] and I [[buy]] any [[horror]] [[movie]] I don't have and I knew this [[movie]] [[looked]] familiar. I thought for a second and realized it was one that my sister had [[bought]]. She had sold it years [[ago]] in a yard [[sale]] I am guessing - who knows.

I didn't recall anything at all about it and I watched it the night I [[bought]] it and it [[refreshed]] my [[memory]] because of a few scenes. I am not [[sure]] how I felt about it as a [[kid]] but I am sure I enjoyed it because it was new to me and I'd watch and [[enjoy]] anything back then.

I am a horror freak, but there are certain [[requirements]] in [[order]] for me to consider it "good" and this one [[fell]] very short. It was one of those talk talk talk and bore me to death [[types]]. What death scenes you see are done using the shadow on the wall followed by blood splatter and thats if you're lucky you get that much.

The story is good and I have seen a few with similar plots, so I think this one should be buried and forgotten. Don't watch this people unless you're hard up. Back when I was a [[petit]] and I lived with my sister, she bought every horror movie she could find and this was one of them. VCR'S had just became a household item and we didn't have but about 150 movies and we watched the [[inferno]] out of all of them.

I was at a [[backyard]] sale the other day and I [[noticed]] this VHS copy of BLOOD [[BEQUEST]] and I [[purchase]] any [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]] I don't have and I knew this [[filmmaking]] [[seemed]] familiar. I thought for a second and realized it was one that my sister had [[acquired]]. She had sold it years [[beforehand]] in a yard [[sales]] I am guessing - who knows.

I didn't recall anything at all about it and I watched it the night I [[acquiring]] it and it [[modernized]] my [[memories]] because of a few scenes. I am not [[persuaded]] how I felt about it as a [[enfant]] but I am sure I enjoyed it because it was new to me and I'd watch and [[enjoying]] anything back then.

I am a horror freak, but there are certain [[requirement]] in [[orders]] for me to consider it "good" and this one [[declined]] very short. It was one of those talk talk talk and bore me to death [[genera]]. What death scenes you see are done using the shadow on the wall followed by blood splatter and thats if you're lucky you get that much.

The story is good and I have seen a few with similar plots, so I think this one should be buried and forgotten. Don't watch this people unless you're hard up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The opening scene of this film sets the pace for the [[entirety]] of its ninety minutes. The shots are generic, conventional, and of [[television]] [[movie]] quality. The snow drenched [[scenery]] is [[gorgeous]], [[yet]] the characters held with in it have a [[similar]] quality to that of looking at a [[photograph]] of such [[scenery]], the overwhelming feeling being that of distance. Some of the editing is fairly high quality and the work of an veteran professional, the dialogue however is clunky and artificial, having [[little]] bearing on 'real' [[conversations]] at all seemingly. Any [[emotional]] [[insight]] is displaced in favour of swearing, which is of course the [[way]] in which everyone shows their true feelings. The action is slow and underwhelming, the overall feeling being one of someone trickling cold water over your head, but so slowly that you barely notice, yet eventually you feel pathetic and slightly sorry for yourself for being caught in such a [[incomprehensible]] situation.

The mixture of genres that the Fessenden has seemingly tried to use; psychological thriller, horror and family drama, although commendable suffers from a serious [[lack]] of tension and interesting dialogue. The way in which the husband, wife and child trio interact is [[particularly]] [[unrealistic]]. The themes of family relationships being played out in haunting setting have been covered countless times before by far superior films, an instant example being that of The Shining (1980). The family unit here are torn by innocuous troubles which are hard to understand or sympathise with considering the relative ambiguity of the script.

The family unit is hardly stalked throughout the film, Fessenden playing down the thriller possibilities of the narrative in favour of a slow family drama for the majority of the running time. The 'stalker' figure Otis has few apparent motives for his behaviour and despite being perhaps the most interesting and well acted character is still very [[underdeveloped]]. The main characters are empty [[husks]] of people who it was extremely hard to relate to, their relationships with each other being particularly [[void]] of any sentiment or feeling. Although the ignorance of the Erik per Sullivan's young character by his parents is presumably part of the story, surely any reasonable person would question their son if he allegedly spoke to someone who seemingly doesn't exist? People can accept this film as intelligent because of its relative lack of conventional aspects regarding creature based horror movies but this film fails in respect of whichever genre you wished to pigeonhole it in. You can read deep psychological meanings into every single minute detail of anything if you should so wish to but I think people would be better off over analysing their carpet for some deep emotional meaning, rather than these vacuous sub-human creations. The opening scene of this film sets the pace for the [[totality]] of its ninety minutes. The shots are generic, conventional, and of [[tv]] [[filmmaking]] quality. The snow drenched [[panorama]] is [[sumptuous]], [[even]] the characters held with in it have a [[identical]] quality to that of looking at a [[pictures]] of such [[landscape]], the overwhelming feeling being that of distance. Some of the editing is fairly high quality and the work of an veteran professional, the dialogue however is clunky and artificial, having [[scant]] bearing on 'real' [[debate]] at all seemingly. Any [[sentimental]] [[vision]] is displaced in favour of swearing, which is of course the [[ways]] in which everyone shows their true feelings. The action is slow and underwhelming, the overall feeling being one of someone trickling cold water over your head, but so slowly that you barely notice, yet eventually you feel pathetic and slightly sorry for yourself for being caught in such a [[unexplained]] situation.

The mixture of genres that the Fessenden has seemingly tried to use; psychological thriller, horror and family drama, although commendable suffers from a serious [[shortfall]] of tension and interesting dialogue. The way in which the husband, wife and child trio interact is [[principally]] [[unreal]]. The themes of family relationships being played out in haunting setting have been covered countless times before by far superior films, an instant example being that of The Shining (1980). The family unit here are torn by innocuous troubles which are hard to understand or sympathise with considering the relative ambiguity of the script.

The family unit is hardly stalked throughout the film, Fessenden playing down the thriller possibilities of the narrative in favour of a slow family drama for the majority of the running time. The 'stalker' figure Otis has few apparent motives for his behaviour and despite being perhaps the most interesting and well acted character is still very [[undeveloped]]. The main characters are empty [[dregs]] of people who it was extremely hard to relate to, their relationships with each other being particularly [[emptiness]] of any sentiment or feeling. Although the ignorance of the Erik per Sullivan's young character by his parents is presumably part of the story, surely any reasonable person would question their son if he allegedly spoke to someone who seemingly doesn't exist? People can accept this film as intelligent because of its relative lack of conventional aspects regarding creature based horror movies but this film fails in respect of whichever genre you wished to pigeonhole it in. You can read deep psychological meanings into every single minute detail of anything if you should so wish to but I think people would be better off over analysing their carpet for some deep emotional meaning, rather than these vacuous sub-human creations. --------------------------------------------- Result 1060 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This film is [[amazing]] - it's just like a nightmare. The bizarre story, the dark decors, the swarming insects everywhere, the [[idea]] [[jumps]] and the [[surrealistic]] [[dreams]]... Really [[great]]! People who love cult [[movies]] or very dark thrillers will [[find]] this [[fantastic]]. It seems a little to the films of David [[Lynch]]: the [[strange]] [[story]], the bizarre dreams, the red curtains. Nuit Noire contains [[almost]] no plot. It's rather a succession of surrealistic happenings, nightmares and meetings. That's a [[drawback]]. If the film had a really fascinating plot full of tension with a captivating denouement, I [[would]] [[give]] it a 10 out of 10. But that's [[missing]], and that's why I [[gave]] the movie an 8. Nuit Noire is a film worth [[watching]]. [[Search]] that DVD and you'll be rewarded! This film is [[wondrous]] - it's just like a nightmare. The bizarre story, the dark decors, the swarming insects everywhere, the [[concept]] [[soars]] and the [[unreal]] [[nightmares]]... Really [[huge]]! People who love cult [[cinematography]] or very dark thrillers will [[finds]] this [[unbelievable]]. It seems a little to the films of David [[Bastien]]: the [[curious]] [[saga]], the bizarre dreams, the red curtains. Nuit Noire contains [[approximately]] no plot. It's rather a succession of surrealistic happenings, nightmares and meetings. That's a [[inadequacy]]. If the film had a really fascinating plot full of tension with a captivating denouement, I [[ought]] [[lend]] it a 10 out of 10. But that's [[extinct]], and that's why I [[provided]] the movie an 8. Nuit Noire is a film worth [[staring]]. [[Frisk]] that DVD and you'll be rewarded! --------------------------------------------- Result 1061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is horrible! It rivals "Ishtar" in the number of embarrassingly bad moments. I would have rated it lower than a 3, save for a couple of funny lines; but, overall, this film was crap! It looked like they made it over a weekend at some bankrupt resort somewhere. Joe Roth should join Elaine May on the directing sidelines forever! --------------------------------------------- Result 1062 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Love is overwhelming... In all it's manifestations... Gorgeous, absolutely gorgeous... Tudor Chirila, Maria Popistasu and Ioana Barbu, one truly dramatic story about love in all it's shapes, a story about the undecipherable ways of young hearts, about life and lost innocence all directed by the skillful eye of Tudor Giurgiu. With a magnificent soundtrack featuring Faultline & Chris Martin and Vama Veche it surprises in every way leaving behind the sour taste of misunderstanding love... Truly remarkable... Is it me or is Romanian cinematography slowly but surely advancing and gaining respect? This is a brilliant film... Two thumbs up to everybody involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 1063 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] I was fooled to rent this movie by its [[impressive]] [[cover]]. [[Alas]]. It is easily one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. Judging by the acting of the [[film]] [[characters]], it's more a [[comedy]] than a [[horror]] [[film]]. No [[surprise]] why no one else has [[written]] [[comments]] on the imdb. [[Avoid]] it. I was fooled to rent this movie by its [[marvellous]] [[covering]]. [[Alack]]. It is easily one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. Judging by the acting of the [[movie]] [[trait]], it's more a [[farce]] than a [[terror]] [[movie]]. No [[amaze]] why no one else has [[authored]] [[sightings]] on the imdb. [[Shirk]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This picture was banned from American movies houses in the 1930 because of nudity by Hedy Lamarr, (Eva Hermann) which caused all kinds of problems among the ladies in the 1930's but not so much for the male population. This story concerns a young woman named Eva Hermann who gets married to an older man and is carried over the threshold on the wedding night and the husband never consummates the marriage and worries about all kinds of very petty things like his shoes and killing bugs. Eva leaves her husband's house and lives with her father and tries to explain her situation. On a hot Summer day Eva takes a ride on her horse and decides to go for a swim naked in a lake in the woods. Her horse runs off and she runs after him and is observed by a young man who finds her clothes and returns them to Eva. These two people become very acquainted and there is a romance that starts to bloom. There are many more interesting problems that arise as you view this film to its very end. Enjoy a great Classic film which was a Shocker Film in 1933. Enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I believe that The Sopranos is an awesome show because of all the supporting characters in it. i have bought every video so far and am waiting for the rest to be released. In all 42 episodes so far, the best one is definitely episode #3, Denial, Anger, Acceptance. This episode deals with my most favorite character of all time in The Sopranos. His name was Brendan Filone. He was killed for hijacking the wrong truck and accidentally killing a truck driver. Brendan was awesome because he was actually one of the few characters who actually stood against Tony and his gang. In the end, he ended up getting shot through the eye while taking a bath, and that's my most favorite scene ever in the history of The Sopranos. Brendan Filone is # 1 for me. And my # 2 most favorite character ever was Matthew Bevilaqua, who was killed after attempting to murder Christopher Moltisanti. Tony and Pussy shoot him in Hucklebarney park after they catch and torture him. My # 3 most favorite character is Sean Gismonte, who was killed right after shooting Christopher. And finally, my # 4 most favorite character is Chucky Signore, one of Uncle Junior's henchmen. He was killed on a boat by Tony. All the awesome characters are dead. That's the only bad thing about the Sopranos. All the cool guys always get killed. You know what would be great to change about the Sopranos? They should have a whole episode where they show all the dead supporting characters in hell and they are all trying to torture Chris, Tony, Uncle Junior, Silvio, and Paulie, because they need to get their revenge. Brendan Filone shall strike back!!!!!!!!!1 --------------------------------------------- Result 1066 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not sure why it doesn't play in Peoria, apparently, but this is a very funny, clever British comedy. It's set at the end of the "swinging sixties". Peter Sellars is fantastic as the rich, forty-something serial womaniser. The perfectly delectable Goldie Hawn, playing a 19 year American girl in London, is, initially, Sellars' "catch of the day". But the urbane TV food critic can't stop himself from falling for the dizzy American blond.

Humour, pathos, great script, strong performances from the leads and supporting caste.

It's a great film, and the best gag is the very last line.

Try it, you'll like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1067 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Considering its popularity, I found this movie a [[huge]] disappointment. Maybe I was expecting too [[much]] from this film. After all, it is one of the most well known martial arts [[films]] of the 1970s, but I [[could]] never figure out why. The [[story]] is uninteresting. It is also a very talky movie with [[sporadic]] action sequences. My [[biggest]] problem with the [[movie]] was that the [[story]] does not [[offer]] a [[character]] that I [[could]] root for, since the [[intended]] hero is an [[idiot]]. Director Chang has no sense of [[style]], and he is unable to [[hide]] the [[glaring]] [[imperfections]] found in the [[narrative]]. I know this is not supposed to be high art, but I [[found]] the movie boring. [[Definitely]] not the best example of this much-beloved genre. Its cult status escapes me. I [[recommend]] you to [[skip]] it. Considering its popularity, I found this movie a [[whopping]] disappointment. Maybe I was expecting too [[very]] from this film. After all, it is one of the most well known martial arts [[filmmaking]] of the 1970s, but I [[did]] never figure out why. The [[conte]] is uninteresting. It is also a very talky movie with [[casual]] action sequences. My [[strongest]] problem with the [[filmmaking]] was that the [[tales]] does not [[offering]] a [[trait]] that I [[did]] root for, since the [[conceived]] hero is an [[goofball]]. Director Chang has no sense of [[styles]], and he is unable to [[hiding]] the [[seeming]] [[drawbacks]] found in the [[descriptive]]. I know this is not supposed to be high art, but I [[find]] the movie boring. [[Admittedly]] not the best example of this much-beloved genre. Its cult status escapes me. I [[recommending]] you to [[jumping]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1068 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] We [[first]] watched this [[film]] as part of a [[festival]] of new [[Argentine]] films in 2000 at the Walter Reade. [[Although]] we liked it, we didn't think it was [[extraordinary]]. Watching it for a [[second]] [[time]], we [[found]] a [[different]] [[meaning]] in this [[look]] at life in [[Buenos]] Aires.

The film takes place in one of the darkest days of Argentina, as the DeLaRua administration was ending. The country was in turmoil after the economy, which had flourished earlier in the 1990s, under the artificially [[climate]] [[President]] Menen created. It was a time when bank accounts in dollars were frozen and people got themselves living a nightmare.

The story begins just as Santamarina, a bank employee, is fired because the collapse of the economy. Instead of receiving sympathy from his wife, she locks him out of the apartment and he, for all practical purposes, becomes a homeless man. He takes to the streets trying to make ends meet.

The other story introduces us to Ariel, a young Jew, interviewing for a job in a Spanish company. It's almost a miracle he gets the job. His father, Simon, owns a small restaurant in the Jewish quarter of "El Once" in the center of the city. Things go from bad to worse, when Ariel's mother dies suddenly. Only Estela, the young woman who is in love with Ariel, comes to help father and son.

Santamarina, who is a clean man, has to resort to take showers wherever he can. He chooses a ladies' room in one of the subway stations. When the attendant, Elsa, finds him naked, she becomes furious, but she comes to her senses when she realizes the unhappy circumstances of this man who has seen better times. They become romantically involved, and Santamarina in one of his trips through the street garbage, finds an infant. Elsa, while surprised, wants to do the right thing. But Santamarina convinces her of the meaning of an innocent life in their lives will cement their love.

Ariel, who has met the gorgeous Laura at work, begins a turbulent and heavy sexual affair with his beautiful co-worker, who unknown to him, is involved in a lesbian affair. Ariel who free lances by photographing weddings and other occasions, feels a passion for Laura, but he realizes what Estela has sacrificed in order to help his father and still loves him.

Daniel Burman, whose "El Abrazo Partido" we thought was excellent, did wonders with this film. Things are put in its proper perspective after a second viewing recently and we must apologize for not having perceived it the first time around. If anything, this second time, the nuances of the screen play Mr. Burman and Emiliano Torres wrote, make more sense because they reflect the turmoil of what the country was living during those dark days.

Daniel Hendler, who plays Ariel, has collaborated with Mr. Burman before to surprising results. He is not 'movie star pretty', yet, he is handsome. This actor projects a tremendous sincerity in his work. Enrique Pineyro is another magnificent surprise. His Santamarina is disarming. In spite of all the bad things that have fallen on him, he keeps a rosy attitude toward everyone he meets. Stefania Sandrelli, the interesting Italian actress, makes a great contribution to the film with her Elsa. Hector Alterio, one of the best Argentine actors plays the small part of Simon. The gorgeous Chiara Coselli is seen as Laura and Melina Petrielli appears as the noble Estela.

"Esperando al mesias" proves Daniel Burman is a voice to be reckoned with in the Argentine cinema. We [[frst]] watched this [[cinematography]] as part of a [[celebratory]] of new [[Argentinean]] films in 2000 at the Walter Reade. [[Despite]] we liked it, we didn't think it was [[noteworthy]]. Watching it for a [[secondly]] [[period]], we [[detected]] a [[several]] [[mean]] in this [[peek]] at life in [[Beyonce]] Aires.

The film takes place in one of the darkest days of Argentina, as the DeLaRua administration was ending. The country was in turmoil after the economy, which had flourished earlier in the 1990s, under the artificially [[climactic]] [[Chairperson]] Menen created. It was a time when bank accounts in dollars were frozen and people got themselves living a nightmare.

The story begins just as Santamarina, a bank employee, is fired because the collapse of the economy. Instead of receiving sympathy from his wife, she locks him out of the apartment and he, for all practical purposes, becomes a homeless man. He takes to the streets trying to make ends meet.

The other story introduces us to Ariel, a young Jew, interviewing for a job in a Spanish company. It's almost a miracle he gets the job. His father, Simon, owns a small restaurant in the Jewish quarter of "El Once" in the center of the city. Things go from bad to worse, when Ariel's mother dies suddenly. Only Estela, the young woman who is in love with Ariel, comes to help father and son.

Santamarina, who is a clean man, has to resort to take showers wherever he can. He chooses a ladies' room in one of the subway stations. When the attendant, Elsa, finds him naked, she becomes furious, but she comes to her senses when she realizes the unhappy circumstances of this man who has seen better times. They become romantically involved, and Santamarina in one of his trips through the street garbage, finds an infant. Elsa, while surprised, wants to do the right thing. But Santamarina convinces her of the meaning of an innocent life in their lives will cement their love.

Ariel, who has met the gorgeous Laura at work, begins a turbulent and heavy sexual affair with his beautiful co-worker, who unknown to him, is involved in a lesbian affair. Ariel who free lances by photographing weddings and other occasions, feels a passion for Laura, but he realizes what Estela has sacrificed in order to help his father and still loves him.

Daniel Burman, whose "El Abrazo Partido" we thought was excellent, did wonders with this film. Things are put in its proper perspective after a second viewing recently and we must apologize for not having perceived it the first time around. If anything, this second time, the nuances of the screen play Mr. Burman and Emiliano Torres wrote, make more sense because they reflect the turmoil of what the country was living during those dark days.

Daniel Hendler, who plays Ariel, has collaborated with Mr. Burman before to surprising results. He is not 'movie star pretty', yet, he is handsome. This actor projects a tremendous sincerity in his work. Enrique Pineyro is another magnificent surprise. His Santamarina is disarming. In spite of all the bad things that have fallen on him, he keeps a rosy attitude toward everyone he meets. Stefania Sandrelli, the interesting Italian actress, makes a great contribution to the film with her Elsa. Hector Alterio, one of the best Argentine actors plays the small part of Simon. The gorgeous Chiara Coselli is seen as Laura and Melina Petrielli appears as the noble Estela.

"Esperando al mesias" proves Daniel Burman is a voice to be reckoned with in the Argentine cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When i finally had the [[opportunity]] to watch Zombie 3(Zombie Flesheaters 2 in [[Europe]])on an import [[Region]] 2 Japanese dvd,i was blown away by just how entertaining this [[zombie]] [[epic]] is.The [[transfer]] is just about [[immaculate]],as good as it's ever going to [[look]] [[unless]] [[Anchor]] Bay gets a hold of it.The gore truly stands out like it should and you can really appreciate the excellent makeup and gore fx.The [[sound]] is also terrific.It's only 2 channel dolby but if you have a receiver with Dolby Prologic 2,you can really appreciate the cheesy music(actually a very good score),and the effective although cheap sound effects.It never sounded so good,and the excellent transfer adds to the overall enjoyment.

I never realized just how much blood flows in this film,it's extremely brutal with exploding head shots,exploding puss filled mega pimples,a cleaver to a zombies throat,a woman's burned off extremities(how come it did'nt burn the guy also),[[intestinal]] munching,zombie [[babies]] and so much more i [[lost]] track.

This is no doubt for hardcore Zombie action fans,[[especially]] of the Italian kind.There is some [[excellent]] set pieces and cinematography to be found,i [[think]] people don't give it enough credit,if you [[see]] a clean [[print]],and not some [[horrendous]] [[pirate]] [[copy]],it's a whole other [[experience]] entirely.

This film never lets up for a second,and i [[realize]] it's [[inconsistent]] plotwise,the dubbing is [[horrible]],the acting is [[stiff]],and it's sense of irreverence is [[celebrated]] in [[grand]] [[fashion]],but that's part of it's charm.

To me this is one of the best [[horror]] films ever made,you can't make a [[film]] this [[bad]],so [[good]],on purpose.It's [[accidental]] genius of the [[highest]] order.[[If]] they [[played]] it for [[laughs]] it would have been a [[disaster]],but they played it straight as an [[arrow]] and the [[result]] is a terrific [[cult]] classic that thumbs it's [[nose]] at any and all [[traditional]] moviemaking standards.

[[Tons]] of action sequences,exotic locales,[[excellent]] set [[design]],good,[[sometimes]] great cinematography,wonderfully cheesy acting,and [[inconsistent]] but still interesting plot,great makeup effects,beautiful women who can kick butt,excellent music,and sometimes hilarious,sometimes creepy,but always entertaining zombies.How can you go wrong with this film,it has it all,a cult classic that stands the test of time. When i finally had the [[luck]] to watch Zombie 3(Zombie Flesheaters 2 in [[Eu]])on an import [[Regions]] 2 Japanese dvd,i was blown away by just how entertaining this [[ghoul]] [[saga]] is.The [[transferring]] is just about [[spotless]],as good as it's ever going to [[gaze]] [[if]] [[Anchorage]] Bay gets a hold of it.The gore truly stands out like it should and you can really appreciate the excellent makeup and gore fx.The [[sounds]] is also terrific.It's only 2 channel dolby but if you have a receiver with Dolby Prologic 2,you can really appreciate the cheesy music(actually a very good score),and the effective although cheap sound effects.It never sounded so good,and the excellent transfer adds to the overall enjoyment.

I never realized just how much blood flows in this film,it's extremely brutal with exploding head shots,exploding puss filled mega pimples,a cleaver to a zombies throat,a woman's burned off extremities(how come it did'nt burn the guy also),[[digestive]] munching,zombie [[babe]] and so much more i [[outof]] track.

This is no doubt for hardcore Zombie action fans,[[mainly]] of the Italian kind.There is some [[exquisite]] set pieces and cinematography to be found,i [[believing]] people don't give it enough credit,if you [[behold]] a clean [[fingerprints]],and not some [[fearsome]] [[piracy]] [[copies]],it's a whole other [[experiences]] entirely.

This film never lets up for a second,and i [[attain]] it's [[incongruous]] plotwise,the dubbing is [[scary]],the acting is [[tough]],and it's sense of irreverence is [[celebrating]] in [[prodigious]] [[manner]],but that's part of it's charm.

To me this is one of the best [[monstrosity]] films ever made,you can't make a [[cinematographic]] this [[unfavorable]],so [[buena]],on purpose.It's [[involuntary]] genius of the [[greatest]] order.[[Unless]] they [[effected]] it for [[laughed]] it would have been a [[cataclysm]],but they played it straight as an [[spits]] and the [[consequence]] is a terrific [[worship]] classic that thumbs it's [[nosedive]] at any and all [[classic]] moviemaking standards.

[[Ton]] of action sequences,exotic locales,[[sumptuous]] set [[designs]],good,[[intermittently]] great cinematography,wonderfully cheesy acting,and [[incoherent]] but still interesting plot,great makeup effects,beautiful women who can kick butt,excellent music,and sometimes hilarious,sometimes creepy,but always entertaining zombies.How can you go wrong with this film,it has it all,a cult classic that stands the test of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Fantastically]] [[putrid]]. I don't mean to imply above that only a few people should avoid "Doc Savage." Almost every demographic group would be [[bored]] by this [[trivial]], TV-movie-quality [[production]]. It's a [[little]] [[like]] the 60's "Batman" [[TV]] series, except it's not [[funny]]. Even [[accidentally]]. You're [[better]] off taking a [[nap]]. [[Marvellously]] [[fetid]]. I don't mean to imply above that only a few people should avoid "Doc Savage." Almost every demographic group would be [[drilled]] by this [[immaterial]], TV-movie-quality [[productivity]]. It's a [[small]] [[iike]] the 60's "Batman" [[TELEVISION]] series, except it's not [[hilarious]]. Even [[unwittingly]]. You're [[best]] off taking a [[naps]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like Miikes movies about Yakuza, this one I saw about 2 years ago and it really fu**ed my head. Never before seen such a sick and twisted thing. The Story is good and the actors do their thing very well. I haven't seen the UK or Japan version, but I have to say that I believe that the German DVD is a bit censored. If you haven't seen the movie already and live in Germany maybe you better look out for a DVD from the Nederlands or Austria. The I-ON DVD contains a lot of very hard and nasty scenes, but at the showdown I felt that something was missing, about one or two very short scenes.

All in all a good perverted movie with crazy characters and a high level of violence, that's what I like Miike for!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1072 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[film]] [[would]] [[usually]] [[classify]] as the [[worst]] [[movie]] production ever. Ever. But in my [[opinion]] it is [[possibly]] the funniest. The [[horrifying]] direction and screenplay makes this [[film]] priceless. I [[bought]] the movie whilst sifting through the [[bargain]] DVD's at my local [[pound]] [[shop]]. Me and some [[friends]] then watched it, [[admittedly]] [[whilst]] [[rather]] drunk. It [[soon]] occurred that this wasn't any [[normal]] [[film]]. Instead a [[priceless]] [[relic]] of what will [[probably]] be James Cahill's last [[film]]. [[At]] first we were confused and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but [[thankfully]] in our [[abnormal]] state no-one could be [[bothered]]. [[Instead]] we watched the film right through. At the end we soon realised we had [[found]] any wasters [[dream]], [[something]] that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, whilst laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon showed all our other [[friends]] and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of [[abysmal]] film. This was a [[film]] that you can [[truly]] [[wet]] yourself laughing at. This was a [[film]] that anyone can enjoy. This was [[genius]]. This [[kino]] [[should]] [[fluently]] [[rank]] as the [[worse]] [[films]] production ever. Ever. But in my [[views]] it is [[potentially]] the funniest. The [[excruciating]] direction and screenplay makes this [[movies]] priceless. I [[buys]] the movie whilst sifting through the [[bargaining]] DVD's at my local [[lbs]] [[store]]. Me and some [[friend]] then watched it, [[definitely]] [[whereas]] [[quite]] drunk. It [[rapidly]] occurred that this wasn't any [[habitual]] [[cinema]]. Instead a [[precious]] [[hangover]] of what will [[potentially]] be James Cahill's last [[flick]]. [[Under]] first we were confused and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but [[hopefully]] in our [[unnatural]] state no-one could be [[disturbed]]. [[Alternatively]] we watched the film right through. At the end we soon realised we had [[discovered]] any wasters [[dreaming]], [[anything]] that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, whilst laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon showed all our other [[friend]] and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of [[horrible]] film. This was a [[cinema]] that you can [[honestly]] [[damp]] yourself laughing at. This was a [[cinema]] that anyone can enjoy. This was [[engineering]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1073 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Now what's wrong with the actors that took part in that crap? Michael Dorn should stick to the Star Treck merchandise. John Diehl, does anyone remember him in Miami Vice? Liked him there... Well, whatever - what can one expect from a movie with one of the lifeguards from baywatch in the lead? Nothing, and that's what we get. None of the characters is even likable, the special effects are hilarious (but not funny). The story is a (very bad) joke. There is no logic whatsoever for what's happening. I got the feeling that the film makers were trying some kind of "Attack of the killer tomatoes" kind of thing. Especially in the scene where all the important people were discussing national security in some kind of a closet...

If you happen to see it on TV, switch channels - your TV set will be ever thankful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The Danes character [[finally]] let's [[Buddy]] have the [[awful]] truth. ""Leave me alone, kiss men if you [[want]] to," she [[screams]] self-righteously in front of everyone, thus [[destroying]] the man who has been in love with her for so [[long]]. Nice [[girl]]. This might be the place to [[reconsider]] all of the giggly charm that Danes pours into this character. Great reason to feel [[sympathy]] for her lying in bed and dying, but [[hey]], remember, there are no [[mistakes]], except, maybe, [[seeing]] this [[film]].

Wait a minute. This [[irony]] is intended! This is actually a [[masterpiece]] of [[ironic]] wit, [[yes]]! But somehow I [[doubt]] that's what the creators of this [[film]] had in [[mind]], [[sadly]]. [[Maybe]] there are a few [[mistakes]], after all. The Danes character [[ultimately]] let's [[Mate]] have the [[hideous]] truth. ""Leave me alone, kiss men if you [[wish]] to," she [[cries]] self-righteously in front of everyone, thus [[destroy]] the man who has been in love with her for so [[longer]]. Nice [[women]]. This might be the place to [[rethink]] all of the giggly charm that Danes pours into this character. Great reason to feel [[compassion]] for her lying in bed and dying, but [[hello]], remember, there are no [[wrongs]], except, maybe, [[see]] this [[movies]].

Wait a minute. This [[mockery]] is intended! This is actually a [[centerpiece]] of [[ironical]] wit, [[yea]]! But somehow I [[duda]] that's what the creators of this [[cinematography]] had in [[esprit]], [[regrettably]]. [[Perhaps]] there are a few [[error]], after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1075 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] VIVAH in my opinion is the best movie of 2006, coming from a director that has proved successful throughout his career. I am not too keen in romantic movies these days, because i see them as "old wine in a new bottle" and so predictable. However, i have watched this movie three times now...and believe me it's an awesome movie.

VIVAH goes back to the traditional route, displaying simple characters into a sensible and realistic story of the journey between engagement and marriage. The movie entertains in all manners as it can be reflected to what we do (or would do) when it comes to marriage. In that sense Sooraj R. Barjatya has done his homework well and has depicted a very realistic story into a well-made highly entertaining movie.

Several sequences in this movie catch your interest immediately:

* When Shahid Kapoor comes to see the bride (Amrita Rao) - the way he tries to look at her without making it too obvious in front of his and her family. The song 'Do Anjaane Ajnabi' goes well with the mood of this scene.

* The first conversation between Shahid and Amrita, when he comes to see her - i.e. a shy Shahid not knowing exactly what to talk about but pulling of a decent conversation. Also Amrita's naive nature, limited eye-contact, shy characteristics and answering softly to Shahid's questions.

* The emotional breakdown of Amrita and her uncle (Alok Nath) when she feeds him at Shahid's party in the form of another's daughter-in-law rather than her uncle's beloved niece.

Clearly the movie belongs to Amrita Rao all the way. The actress portrays the role of Poonam with such conviction that you cannot imagine anybody else replacing her. She looks beautiful throughout the whole movie, and portrays an innocent and shy traditional girl perfectly.

Shahid Kapoor performs brilliantly too. He delivers a promising performance and shows that he is no less than Salman Khan when it comes to acting in a Sooraj R. Barjatya film. In fact Shahid and Amrita make a cute on-screen couple, without a shadow of doubt. Other characters - Alok Nath (Excellent), Anupam Kher (Brilliant), Mohan Joshi (Very good).

On the whole, VIVAH delivers what it promised, a well made and realistic story of two families. The movie has top-notch performances, excellent story and great music to suit the film, as well as being directed by the fabulous Sooraj R. Barjatya. It's a must see! --------------------------------------------- Result 1076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of [[late]] 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is [[pretty]] much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is [[unmistakably]] an extremely low-budget venture! [[While]] not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of [[unintentional]] laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents! I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of [[iate]] 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is [[belle]] much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is [[explicitly]] an extremely low-budget venture! [[Though]] not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of [[coincidental]] laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents! --------------------------------------------- Result 1077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]], and at times, I was unnerved [[believing]] this [[movie]] '[[saw]] me.' Munchie sullies the 'farce' for years to [[come]]. Re-watch Star Wars, Don't-watch Munchie.

As a [[responsible]] [[parent]] (I'm [[speaking]] to those who are [[parents]] now), I (you) [[would]] not [[let]] my (your) [[child]] ever partake of this video [[festival]] of the pseudo-occult. To insinuate Munchie is [[satanic]], to a co-viewer, is likely to illicit a [[chilled]] 'duh.' He is fiendish, [[alien]], rodential, and wholly [[malevolent]] - like the Bogey man [[made]] flesh, invisible to adults, [[tempting]] children with lifestyles they [[could]] never afford (without the [[income]] made possible by years of self denial and [[prudent]] stewardship). He is a peddler of easy [[answers]], and [[false]] ideals. He is everything the morally conscious viewer is not. He is the devil's own Ron Popeil.

I pray (I mean this literally and figuratively, with an emphasis on the [[former]]) that this [[movie]] has not made the format [[jump]] to DVD. It is my hope that this type of 'yellow [[film]] making' [[died]] an un-mourned death in the [[cold]] nights of 1994.

Munchie also loves [[pizza]]. I forgot to mention that. It comes up a lot. I [[noticed]] this [[filmmaking]], and at times, I was unnerved [[think]] this [[filmmaking]] '[[observed]] me.' Munchie sullies the 'farce' for years to [[arrive]]. Re-watch Star Wars, Don't-watch Munchie.

As a [[answerable]] [[parents]] (I'm [[discussing]] to those who are [[parent]] now), I (you) [[ought]] not [[allowing]] my (your) [[children]] ever partake of this video [[celebratory]] of the pseudo-occult. To insinuate Munchie is [[unholy]], to a co-viewer, is likely to illicit a [[coolant]] 'duh.' He is fiendish, [[exotic]], rodential, and wholly [[satanic]] - like the Bogey man [[introduced]] flesh, invisible to adults, [[attractive]] children with lifestyles they [[wo]] never afford (without the [[revenue]] made possible by years of self denial and [[judicious]] stewardship). He is a peddler of easy [[answering]], and [[untruthful]] ideals. He is everything the morally conscious viewer is not. He is the devil's own Ron Popeil.

I pray (I mean this literally and figuratively, with an emphasis on the [[previous]]) that this [[filmmaking]] has not made the format [[jumps]] to DVD. It is my hope that this type of 'yellow [[kino]] making' [[perished]] an un-mourned death in the [[chilly]] nights of 1994.

Munchie also loves [[pizzeria]]. I forgot to mention that. It comes up a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 1078 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Now I had the [[best]] [[intentions]] when watching this one. I [[like]] some of Tony Scott's [[work]], also a [[friend]] of [[mine]] told me it was a [[great]] movie, even [[though]] I [[heard]] [[otherwise]] from other people. But this was [[simply]] [[hopeless]].

[[In]] my [[humble]] opinion, Tony Scott was [[trying]] too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to [[elaborate]].

[[Miss]] Knightley was overacting, and not in a good way. The people who did [[perform]] well, were [[Mickey]] Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and [[Christopher]] Walken, but their screen [[time]] just wasn't able to [[save]] the [[movie]].

There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, [[yet]] [[somehow]] it [[felt]] like they were [[written]] by [[someone]] other than the [[main]] writer. A certain [[tune]] was [[used]] around 4 [[times]], which [[really]] [[started]] to [[bug]] after the second [[time]]. I'm a firm believer of not [[using]] the same [[tune]] more than once.

Also, the editing [[really]] went out on this one, as the cutting rate is rather [[high]]. [[Oh]], and the [[repetitive]] echoing of some of Keira's lines [[simply]] [[sounded]] cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on.

[[Basically]], my [[opinion]] is that if you [[want]] to [[see]] an action-flick that is high-paced and "[[somewhat]]" [[funny]], and you don't [[care]] about everything I [[mentioned]] above, you [[might]] [[like]] it.

([[On]] a side [[note]]: I'm not a Keira Knightley [[fan]].) Now I had the [[optimum]] [[purposes]] when watching this one. I [[fond]] some of Tony Scott's [[cooperation]], also a [[friends]] of [[mines]] told me it was a [[whopping]] movie, even [[despite]] I [[listened]] [[else]] from other people. But this was [[exclusively]] [[incorrigible]].

[[Among]] my [[modest]] opinion, Tony Scott was [[attempting]] too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to [[elaborated]].

[[Mademoiselle]] Knightley was overacting, and not in a good way. The people who did [[fulfilling]] well, were [[Mikey]] Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and [[Christophe]] Walken, but their screen [[moment]] just wasn't able to [[saves]] the [[filmmaking]].

There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, [[even]] [[someplace]] it [[smelled]] like they were [[authored]] by [[everyone]] other than the [[primary]] writer. A certain [[tuning]] was [[utilized]] around 4 [[dates]], which [[truly]] [[inaugurated]] to [[insect]] after the second [[period]]. I'm a firm believer of not [[used]] the same [[melody]] more than once.

Also, the editing [[genuinely]] went out on this one, as the cutting rate is rather [[supreme]]. [[Ah]], and the [[repeated]] echoing of some of Keira's lines [[mere]] [[rang]] cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on.

[[Mostly]], my [[opinions]] is that if you [[wants]] to [[behold]] an action-flick that is high-paced and "[[slightly]]" [[comical]], and you don't [[healthcare]] about everything I [[talked]] above, you [[presumably]] [[loves]] it.

([[Onto]] a side [[memo]]: I'm not a Keira Knightley [[admirer]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 1079 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Don't be [[deceived]] as I was by the 'glowing' reviews quoted on the DVD box. "Wildly [[entertaining]].", "a seriously [[scary]] freakout.", and the worst of all, "ON PAR WITH [[JAWS]]." This [[movie]] is [[none]] of the above.

[[Normally]] I don't bother with [[writing]] [[bad]] [[reviews]] for [[films]] but I can't believe this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't [[deserve]] it.

After a so-so [[opening]] daylight [[attack]] by a monster created by, what [[else]], chemicals [[dumped]] by lazy scientists, this [[movie]] goes absolutely [[nowhere]] and it goes there sloooowly. [[Basically]] and improbably, a girl is snagged by the monster (I'll give them points for a [[good]] [[creature]] [[design]] but this ain't no WETA [[creation]]) and her semi-comical [[family]] spend an hour-and-a-half [[tracking]] her down...in the [[sewers]] [[surrounding]] the Han river. Their [[search]] [[lacks]] any suspense-again, someone called this on par with [[Jaws]]?-and by the [[time]] they find her you [[realize]] it was all [[pretty]] much [[pointless]]. Other than that, a [[big]] bulk of the movie is [[committed]] to a [[government]] quarantine that culminates in one [[funny]] scene [[involving]] a [[guy]] spitting in a gutter in front of a crowded bus [[stop]].

Blech. This was [[bad]]. I'm not kidding. You want to [[see]] a [[rotten]] monster movie? Rent Deep [[Rising]]. [[At]] [[least]] you'll [[save]] 30 minutes of your life. Don't be [[duped]] as I was by the 'glowing' reviews quoted on the DVD box. "Wildly [[amusing]].", "a seriously [[fearful]] freakout.", and the worst of all, "ON PAR WITH [[GAGS]]." This [[filmmaking]] is [[nothing]] of the above.

[[Ordinarily]] I don't bother with [[handwriting]] [[unfavorable]] [[review]] for [[movie]] but I can't believe this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't [[deserved]] it.

After a so-so [[opens]] daylight [[attacks]] by a monster created by, what [[elsewhere]], chemicals [[dump]] by lazy scientists, this [[filmmaking]] goes absolutely [[wherever]] and it goes there sloooowly. [[Mostly]] and improbably, a girl is snagged by the monster (I'll give them points for a [[well]] [[creatures]] [[designs]] but this ain't no WETA [[creations]]) and her semi-comical [[families]] spend an hour-and-a-half [[tracks]] her down...in the [[sewer]] [[surrounds]] the Han river. Their [[frisk]] [[missing]] any suspense-again, someone called this on par with [[Gags]]?-and by the [[times]] they find her you [[realizing]] it was all [[belle]] much [[dispensable]]. Other than that, a [[prodigious]] bulk of the movie is [[commit]] to a [[councils]] quarantine that culminates in one [[hilarious]] scene [[encompassing]] a [[buddy]] spitting in a gutter in front of a crowded bus [[cease]].

Blech. This was [[unfavourable]]. I'm not kidding. You want to [[behold]] a [[naughty]] monster movie? Rent Deep [[Climbs]]. [[Under]] [[slightest]] you'll [[rescued]] 30 minutes of your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1080 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] By rights, there should never have been a "First Blood Part II". The original [[script]] for "[[First]] Blood" had [[John]] Rambo committing suicide at the end of the [[film]], but this was changed to allow him to [[live]], not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone [[obviously]] thought that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the [[hero]] of two more films in the eighties, plus the [[recently]] released fourth instalment.

The official title of this film was "Rambo: First Blood Part [[II]]", but it is more commonly known simply as "Rambo". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in "First Blood", [[although]] this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.

What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. [[Unfortunately]] for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in [[hellish]] conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The [[rest]] of the [[film]] is more or less one long [[battle]] between Rambo and a few allies ([[including]] a [[beautiful]] Vietnamese [[girl]]) and the evil [[commie]] soldiers and their Russian [[allies]]. Most of the evil commies, of course, [[end]] up [[dead]], [[although]] I was surprised to [[learn]] from your "trivia" section that the [[total]] death toll was as low as 67. At times it [[seemed]] as [[though]] Rambo was [[trying]] to wipe out the [[entire]] Vietnamese army.

The tone of this film is very different from the first. In "First Blood" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In "Rambo" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made "The Cassandra Crossing", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and "Rambo" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.

"First Blood" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. "Rambo", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong!

By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to "Rambo", "The Green Berets" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10 By rights, there should never have been a "First Blood Part II". The original [[scripts]] for "[[Outset]] Blood" had [[Giovanni]] Rambo committing suicide at the end of the [[filmmaking]], but this was changed to allow him to [[vivo]], not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone [[evidently]] thought that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the [[superhero]] of two more films in the eighties, plus the [[freshly]] released fourth instalment.

The official title of this film was "Rambo: First Blood Part [[SECONDLY]]", but it is more commonly known simply as "Rambo". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in "First Blood", [[while]] this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.

What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. [[Sadly]] for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in [[infernal]] conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] is more or less one long [[battaglia]] between Rambo and a few allies ([[encompassing]] a [[sumptuous]] Vietnamese [[women]]) and the evil [[communist]] soldiers and their Russian [[ally]]. Most of the evil commies, of course, [[termination]] up [[die]], [[while]] I was surprised to [[learning]] from your "trivia" section that the [[unmitigated]] death toll was as low as 67. At times it [[appeared]] as [[while]] Rambo was [[seeking]] to wipe out the [[total]] Vietnamese army.

The tone of this film is very different from the first. In "First Blood" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In "Rambo" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made "The Cassandra Crossing", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and "Rambo" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.

"First Blood" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. "Rambo", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong!

By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to "Rambo", "The Green Berets" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Having low expectations going in, the opening new footage (clocked at over five minutes) of 'Husbands' came as a pleasant surprise. I won't say the new footage was grade A material, but it provided a very solid [[foundation]] for what "could have been" a [[good]] all-original film.

[[Unfortunately]], this was put together in 1955, during a time of one day shooting schedules. After the new footage, Jules [[White]] decided to just thumbtack stock footage from 'Brideless Groom' into this short, making for a not-so-smooth story transition, which Jules and Felix Adler try to remedy with a quickie bit of new footage at the end, [[giving]] us the old, worn-out ending of the boys (Moe & Larry in this case) getting shot in the butt.

3/10 Having low expectations going in, the opening new footage (clocked at over five minutes) of 'Husbands' came as a pleasant surprise. I won't say the new footage was grade A material, but it provided a very solid [[cornerstone]] for what "could have been" a [[alright]] all-original film.

[[Unluckily]], this was put together in 1955, during a time of one day shooting schedules. After the new footage, Jules [[Bianchi]] decided to just thumbtack stock footage from 'Brideless Groom' into this short, making for a not-so-smooth story transition, which Jules and Felix Adler try to remedy with a quickie bit of new footage at the end, [[conferring]] us the old, worn-out ending of the boys (Moe & Larry in this case) getting shot in the butt.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1082 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[saw]] this movie a few years back on the BBC i sat thru it. How? i don't know,this is way up there in the "so [[bad]] it'Good " charts Kidman ,Baldwin,and Pullman must [[cringe]] when they see it now.I think Woody Allen [[would]] have [[worked]] wonders with the [[outlandish]] plot, and Baldwin's [[part]] [[could]] have been [[played]] with gusto by Leslie [[Nelson]].it was on again tonight i tried to watch it again but life's too short. the few [[minutes]] i watched was for the [[lovely]] [[Nicole]] she was so hot [[around]] 93, has Baldwin ever made a [[good]] [[movie]]? Pullman played his stock in [[trade]] "nice but dim" character the F-word coming out of his [[mouth]] when the lady from "frasier" miscast ed as a detective accuses him of murder sounds so wrong. stay well away. I [[noticed]] this movie a few years back on the BBC i sat thru it. How? i don't know,this is way up there in the "so [[rotten]] it'Good " charts Kidman ,Baldwin,and Pullman must [[shudder]] when they see it now.I think Woody Allen [[could]] have [[collaborated]] wonders with the [[odd]] plot, and Baldwin's [[parties]] [[did]] have been [[effected]] with gusto by Leslie [[Nielsen]].it was on again tonight i tried to watch it again but life's too short. the few [[mins]] i watched was for the [[sumptuous]] [[Nichol]] she was so hot [[about]] 93, has Baldwin ever made a [[well]] [[filmmaking]]? Pullman played his stock in [[trading]] "nice but dim" character the F-word coming out of his [[kisser]] when the lady from "frasier" miscast ed as a detective accuses him of murder sounds so wrong. stay well away. --------------------------------------------- Result 1083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pakeezah is in my mind the greatest achievement of Indian cinema. The film is visually overwhelming but also emotionally breathtaking. The music, the songs, the sets, the costumes, the cinematography, in fact every creative element is worthy of superlatives. --------------------------------------------- Result 1084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The [[movie]] had a good concept, but the [[execution]] just didn't [[live]] up to it.

What is this concept? Well, story-wise, it's "Dirty Harry" meets "[[M]]". A [[child]] killer has begun terrorizing a city. The lead detectives ([[Dennis]] Hopper and Frederic [[Forest]]) have never dealt with a serial killer before. The Mayor and the [[Police]] Chief, in desperation, secretly hire the local mob to speed things up...to go places and do things that the [[police]] wouldn't be able to in order to [[bring]] an end to this [[mess]] as [[soon]] as possible.

To be fair, this [[film]] DOES genuinely have some good things to [[offer]].

Besides the concept, I liked the look of the killer's hideout. Norman Bates has his basement. This guy has an eerie sewer. In some of the shots, the light bounces off the water and creates rippling reflections on the walls; often giving these scenes a creepy, dreamlike quality.

The acting was good too. Dennis Hopper is one of those actors who gets better with age.

Once you get past that, however, it more-or-less goes downhill.

The film is paced way too fast. The actual investigation process from both teams feels very rushed as opposed to feeling intricate and fascinating. This could have been fixed in two ways: either make the film longer or cut out some of the many subplots. Either of these would have allowed the crew to devote more time to the actual mystery.

For an example of how [[bad]] this is, one of the crucial clues that helps them zero in on just the right suspect is this: at one point in his life, the suspect went to a pet shop...That's right...I'm being totally serious here. It's like they went from point A (the first clue) to point Z (the suspect) and skipped over all the "in-between" steps.

Then there's the characters. The only ones I actually liked were two pick-pockets you meet about half-way through the movie. Considering that they're minor characters, I'd call that a bad sign.

Finally, there's the mob angle. This is the one that gets me the most because THIS is why I coughed up the $3 to buy the DVD in the first place. I mean, what a hook! There's been an absolute glut of serial killer flicks in the last 10-15 years. The mob angle was a gimmick that COULD have helped it rise above the rest..., but it didn't.

I figured the gangsters's methods would be brutal, but fun and thrilling at the same time; kind of like a vigilante movie or something...maybe they'd even throw in some heist movie elements too. We ARE talking about criminals, after all. Instead, we're given some of the most repulsive protagonists committed to celluloid. The detectives question witnesses. What does the mob do? They interrogate and kill them. It's not even like these witnesses are really even that bad either. I actually found the criminals less likable than the killer they're hunting.

Unless the good points I mentioned are enough to get your interest, I'd say give this one a miss. Maybe some day, they'll reuse the same story idea and do it RIGHT. I hope so. I hate to see such a good concept go to waste. The [[filmmaking]] had a good concept, but the [[enforcement]] just didn't [[vivo]] up to it.

What is this concept? Well, story-wise, it's "Dirty Harry" meets "[[meters]]". A [[enfants]] killer has begun terrorizing a city. The lead detectives ([[Denys]] Hopper and Frederic [[Woods]]) have never dealt with a serial killer before. The Mayor and the [[Nypd]] Chief, in desperation, secretly hire the local mob to speed things up...to go places and do things that the [[policemen]] wouldn't be able to in order to [[bringing]] an end to this [[chaos]] as [[speedily]] as possible.

To be fair, this [[filmmaking]] DOES genuinely have some good things to [[offering]].

Besides the concept, I liked the look of the killer's hideout. Norman Bates has his basement. This guy has an eerie sewer. In some of the shots, the light bounces off the water and creates rippling reflections on the walls; often giving these scenes a creepy, dreamlike quality.

The acting was good too. Dennis Hopper is one of those actors who gets better with age.

Once you get past that, however, it more-or-less goes downhill.

The film is paced way too fast. The actual investigation process from both teams feels very rushed as opposed to feeling intricate and fascinating. This could have been fixed in two ways: either make the film longer or cut out some of the many subplots. Either of these would have allowed the crew to devote more time to the actual mystery.

For an example of how [[naughty]] this is, one of the crucial clues that helps them zero in on just the right suspect is this: at one point in his life, the suspect went to a pet shop...That's right...I'm being totally serious here. It's like they went from point A (the first clue) to point Z (the suspect) and skipped over all the "in-between" steps.

Then there's the characters. The only ones I actually liked were two pick-pockets you meet about half-way through the movie. Considering that they're minor characters, I'd call that a bad sign.

Finally, there's the mob angle. This is the one that gets me the most because THIS is why I coughed up the $3 to buy the DVD in the first place. I mean, what a hook! There's been an absolute glut of serial killer flicks in the last 10-15 years. The mob angle was a gimmick that COULD have helped it rise above the rest..., but it didn't.

I figured the gangsters's methods would be brutal, but fun and thrilling at the same time; kind of like a vigilante movie or something...maybe they'd even throw in some heist movie elements too. We ARE talking about criminals, after all. Instead, we're given some of the most repulsive protagonists committed to celluloid. The detectives question witnesses. What does the mob do? They interrogate and kill them. It's not even like these witnesses are really even that bad either. I actually found the criminals less likable than the killer they're hunting.

Unless the good points I mentioned are enough to get your interest, I'd say give this one a miss. Maybe some day, they'll reuse the same story idea and do it RIGHT. I hope so. I hate to see such a good concept go to waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 1085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This so-called "documentary" tries to tell that USA faked the moon-landing. Year right.

All those who have actually studied the case knows different.

First of all: there is definitely proof. When the astronauts was on the moon, they brought back MANY pounds of rock from the moon - for geological studies. These where spread around the world to hundreds of labs, who tested them. And they all concluded that they came from the same planet, not earth: because the inner isotopes of the basic elements are different from those found on earth, but similar to those calculated to be on the moon. I.E. the conspiracy theorists never studies anything: they only take the thing that fit into their theory and ignores the rest.

Another wrongful claim from them is that their was wind in the hangar where they shot the moon landing, I.E. the flag moves. There is a logical explanation: the astronaut moved it with his hand, so it moved. And what proves this: well, if the conspiracy theorists even studied the footage, they would see that the flag NEVER moves after the astronaut have let it be, I.E. the conspiracy theorists are bad-scientists, they cant study a subject properly, or only studies it until they have what they came for, so that they can make a lie from that, and make a profit (I.E. this so-called "documentary").

A claim says that it cant possible have been filmed on the moon because all the shadows come from different places, because there are different light-sources, the artificial lighting from the studio. Once again the conspiracy theorists are wrong (as usual), the same would happen in an earth desert at night, with no light-sources. But i doubt that any Conspiracy theorists have ever been outside their grandmothers basement for more than how many days a Star Treck-convention is held over.

The Conspiracy theorists are in denial, BIG TIME. They only see what they want to see. So they make up all these lies to seem important - that is a fact. --------------------------------------------- Result 1086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The only reason I wanted to see this was because of Orlando Bloom. [[Simply]] put, the movie was spectacularly average. It's not [[bad]], but it's really not very good. The [[editing]] is good; the [[film]] is well-paced. The direction is competent and [[assured]]. The [[story]] is plodding. The film is averagely acted by Ledger, [[Bloom]], and the [[normally]] [[great]] Watts and [[Rush]]. The accents are [[impenetrable]] if you're from the US so just sit back and enjoy the scenery (or as I like to call it, Orlando Bloom). By the [[end]] of the [[film]], I was [[neither]] bored nor moved. Some people have asked what happened to Ned Kelly at the end of the movie. I have to say, I so did not care by that point.

Really, the only reason I can recommend this is that Orlando Bloom kind of, sort of shows some hints of range (although the oft-present "I'm pretty and confused" look is prominent), so fangirls may find it worth the matinee price. Other than that, just don't see it. It's neither good enough nor bad enough to be entertaining. The only reason I wanted to see this was because of Orlando Bloom. [[Simple]] put, the movie was spectacularly average. It's not [[inclement]], but it's really not very good. The [[edition]] is good; the [[flick]] is well-paced. The direction is competent and [[ensured]]. The [[history]] is plodding. The film is averagely acted by Ledger, [[Flowers]], and the [[ordinarily]] [[whopping]] Watts and [[Scramble]]. The accents are [[incomprehensible]] if you're from the US so just sit back and enjoy the scenery (or as I like to call it, Orlando Bloom). By the [[terminates]] of the [[kino]], I was [[either]] bored nor moved. Some people have asked what happened to Ned Kelly at the end of the movie. I have to say, I so did not care by that point.

Really, the only reason I can recommend this is that Orlando Bloom kind of, sort of shows some hints of range (although the oft-present "I'm pretty and confused" look is prominent), so fangirls may find it worth the matinee price. Other than that, just don't see it. It's neither good enough nor bad enough to be entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 1087 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] [[Welcome]] to Our Town, [[welcome]] to your [[town]]? As we are introduced into the worlds of its [[townsfolk]] of 1901 [[America]], this three act play is [[opened]] before us with the help of "The Stage Manager", a visual narrator if you like. After his initial introductions, we are lead into the homes of two particular [[families]]; The Webb's and the Gibb's.

This is most definitely [[middle]] [[America]] at the turn of the century, and the progressive [[way]] of life of the American [[Dream]] and its saccharine [[overtones]] that can [[seem]] a little biased in this dream town. Here we see the everyday lives of some of its 2642 populace of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, even if there are, too, the migrant Polish workers that add another 500 to is numbers, they, never get a look-in.

Once the daily lives of these families have been introduced; wives cooking, children home-working, fathers working, kids falling in love and the clean picket-fences painted white, the second act is started three years later, after young George (a young and unrecognisable William Holden, then aged 22) and Emily have fallen in love and intend to marry. Blossoming lovebirds reaching for the stars and reaching, too, a turning point in their own lives, from the nest they lived and now, into the [[anxieties]] and [[woes]] of young adulthood they nervously step. The third act is slightly more sour and foreboding, it is in this act that the movies intentions become apparent, here we see not life, not celebration but death, and it is in this [[predicament]] that the dead, as they return to [[revisit]] and reconcile their own life past, are here to remind us, to tell us, that life, and every last minute, every precious breath is not to be wasted and [[squandered]].

It is in this last third that the movies own political stance also [[seems]] more apparent too, [[feeling]] more of a [[propaganda]] [[stunt]] on the moral [[lecturing]] on, and by, middle America and how it should direct its home and how it should also put it in order. This isn't just about "Our" [[town]], this is moral diction aimed at "Our" souls and how America can better itself if its peoples', (excluding the Poles, the Irish, the Native [[American]] and the freed ethnic minorities', and minorities' in general, plus the supporting backbone of the Americana's who, still, have not had a fair part in this narrative), such as the middle classes, can [[live]] up to the expectations of the American Dream through honest, decent living. The purveyors of the American Dream with special invitation only.

I was entertained, slightly, by this movie too, but I felt that its narrative held a stronger impact than anything else that took [[part]] in it albeit the bland acting, the musical score or how well, or not, it was made. This was the movies intention to exclude other groups, and to only include the likes of the Webb's and the Gibb's, in the future of the developing country of the USA, a good movie, but also a slightly biased in its stance, I thought.

Taken from the play by US' born Thornton Wilder (1897 - 1975) this Pulitzer Prize winning play, and six Academy Award nominated movie, was the focal point on the perpetual motion of life and its three main attributes; Life, love and death, the plays translation onto celluloid comes across as a slightly to the right blurb of social consciousness. Our Town [[starts]] off with what seems a lesson in pointlessness, like other towns, nothing too exciting ever happens here, if anything at all, this town only has the "right sort of people", you can still leave your back-door unlocked here, we are seeing the developing lives of these two families, but it is their moral and social stance that is more [[important]] than them themselves. Our Town may just have been "Any Town", just as long as you came from the right part of town that is. [[Congratulated]] to Our Town, [[rejoice]] to your [[ville]]? As we are introduced into the worlds of its [[townspeople]] of 1901 [[Latina]], this three act play is [[inaugurated]] before us with the help of "The Stage Manager", a visual narrator if you like. After his initial introductions, we are lead into the homes of two particular [[family]]; The Webb's and the Gibb's.

This is most definitely [[milieu]] [[Latina]] at the turn of the century, and the progressive [[camino]] of life of the American [[Daydream]] and its saccharine [[connotations]] that can [[looks]] a little biased in this dream town. Here we see the everyday lives of some of its 2642 populace of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, even if there are, too, the migrant Polish workers that add another 500 to is numbers, they, never get a look-in.

Once the daily lives of these families have been introduced; wives cooking, children home-working, fathers working, kids falling in love and the clean picket-fences painted white, the second act is started three years later, after young George (a young and unrecognisable William Holden, then aged 22) and Emily have fallen in love and intend to marry. Blossoming lovebirds reaching for the stars and reaching, too, a turning point in their own lives, from the nest they lived and now, into the [[worries]] and [[ills]] of young adulthood they nervously step. The third act is slightly more sour and foreboding, it is in this act that the movies intentions become apparent, here we see not life, not celebration but death, and it is in this [[plight]] that the dead, as they return to [[revoir]] and reconcile their own life past, are here to remind us, to tell us, that life, and every last minute, every precious breath is not to be wasted and [[wasted]].

It is in this last third that the movies own political stance also [[appears]] more apparent too, [[sense]] more of a [[advocacy]] [[understudy]] on the moral [[lecture]] on, and by, middle America and how it should direct its home and how it should also put it in order. This isn't just about "Our" [[ville]], this is moral diction aimed at "Our" souls and how America can better itself if its peoples', (excluding the Poles, the Irish, the Native [[Americas]] and the freed ethnic minorities', and minorities' in general, plus the supporting backbone of the Americana's who, still, have not had a fair part in this narrative), such as the middle classes, can [[iive]] up to the expectations of the American Dream through honest, decent living. The purveyors of the American Dream with special invitation only.

I was entertained, slightly, by this movie too, but I felt that its narrative held a stronger impact than anything else that took [[parte]] in it albeit the bland acting, the musical score or how well, or not, it was made. This was the movies intention to exclude other groups, and to only include the likes of the Webb's and the Gibb's, in the future of the developing country of the USA, a good movie, but also a slightly biased in its stance, I thought.

Taken from the play by US' born Thornton Wilder (1897 - 1975) this Pulitzer Prize winning play, and six Academy Award nominated movie, was the focal point on the perpetual motion of life and its three main attributes; Life, love and death, the plays translation onto celluloid comes across as a slightly to the right blurb of social consciousness. Our Town [[began]] off with what seems a lesson in pointlessness, like other towns, nothing too exciting ever happens here, if anything at all, this town only has the "right sort of people", you can still leave your back-door unlocked here, we are seeing the developing lives of these two families, but it is their moral and social stance that is more [[critical]] than them themselves. Our Town may just have been "Any Town", just as long as you came from the right part of town that is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I was [[hoping]] for some [[sort]] of in-depth [[background]] [[information]] on the [[Apollo]] 11 [[mission]] and what I got was some [[decent]] [[interview]] [[material]] with Buzz Aldrin Gene Krantz and other people [[involved]] in the mission, [[linked]] by over-hyped disaster-predicting sensationalising voice-over in the [[worst]] tradition of TV production.

[[If]] you [[could]] cut out the voice-over and [[change]] the [[spin]] of the [[program]] to a [[positive]] [[testament]] of how people can [[overcome]] setbacks to [[achieve]] a [[goal]] out of the [[ordinary]] then this could've been [[great]] - but I feel I've wasted about 45 minutes of my [[life]] whilst watching a 60 minute [[programme]]. I [[want]] those minutes back. I was [[expecting]] for some [[kinds]] of in-depth [[backgrounds]] [[informational]] on the [[Adonis]] 11 [[missions]] and what I got was some [[presentable]] [[interrogation]] [[materials]] with Buzz Aldrin Gene Krantz and other people [[implicated]] in the mission, [[related]] by over-hyped disaster-predicting sensationalising voice-over in the [[meanest]] tradition of TV production.

[[Though]] you [[would]] cut out the voice-over and [[shifting]] the [[revolve]] of the [[agendas]] to a [[positively]] [[wills]] of how people can [[overcoming]] setbacks to [[accomplishing]] a [[intents]] out of the [[everyday]] then this could've been [[resplendent]] - but I feel I've wasted about 45 minutes of my [[iife]] whilst watching a 60 minute [[program]]. I [[wish]] those minutes back. --------------------------------------------- Result 1089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] With the release of [[Peter]] Jackson's famed "Lord of the [[Rings]]" [[trilogy]], it is even easier to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated Lord of the [[Rings]] [[film]] as [[inferior]]. I agree with the majority that Jackson's trilogy is the essential film [[adaptation]] of Tolkien's work, but that does not [[prevent]] me from enjoying Bakshi's ambitious pioneering effort. Jackson has admitted that he received at least some inspiration from seeing Bakshi's [[film]] and there are some clear similarities between their [[adaptations]].

The film's [[colorful]] picturesque backdrops are [[excellent]] and the [[score]] is [[memorable]]. I was for the most part satisfied by the drawings of the [[characters]]. The pairs of [[Pippin]] and [[Merry]] and Eowyn and Galadriel are [[mostly]] [[indistinguishable]] from each other visually, the Balrog and Treebeard were unimpressive, but these [[points]] didn't bother me very much. [[However]], the Nazgul are [[aptly]] drawn and made [[sufficiently]] eerie. The only [[character]] representation I was bothered by was Sam's; he was made to [[look]] unbecomingly silly.

This [[film]] is [[novel]] for its animation [[techniques]]. [[In]] [[addition]] to hand-drawn [[characters]], [[live]] actors are incorporated into the animation through rotoscoping. It is quite [[apparent]] which [[characters]] are hand-drawn and which are rotoscoped, but none the [[less]] I [[found]] that the film's style was a novelty. The [[use]] of rotoscoped live [[actors]] for the [[battle]] scenes was a good [[decision]] and [[helped]] these scenes [[turn]] out well.

The [[voice]] acting was [[generally]] of [[high]] quality. [[Particularly]] good was John [[Hurt]], who [[provided]] an [[authoritative]] [[voice]] for [[Aragorn]]. [[Aragorn]] isn't a [[favorite]] [[character]] of [[mine]] from the [[stories]], but [[backed]] by [[John]] Hurt's [[voice]] he was my [[favorite]] [[character]] in this [[adaptation]]. My other [[favorite]] was William Squire, whose [[voice]] is [[appropriately]] strong for Gandalf. The only actor who [[seemed]] [[inappropriate]] was [[Michael]] Scholes as Sam, whose [[voice]] acting was irritating and added to Sam's [[unfortunately]] silly image. The only other [[bothersome]] part of the voice acting is the mispronunciation of [[character]] and place names. Particularly [[strange]] was the [[decision]] to [[frequently]] have Saruman [[referred]] to as "Aruman".

[[In]] [[producing]] this [[film]], [[Ralph]] Bakshi [[expected]] to have the [[ability]] to produce two [[films]]. Hence, this film contains about half the story, from the start of "The Fellowship of the Ring" to the end of the battle at Helm's Deep in "The Two Towers". The obvious implication of this is that the film's story is a highly condensed version of the story from the books. I enjoy the original stories and more thorough adaptations, but the liberties taken to compress the story didn't bother me, even the choice to leave Arwen out of the story. Enough of the key elements of the story were in this film to keep me engaged for the duration and there was even a novelty in being able to [[breeze]] through half the Lord of the Rings story in 132 minutes. The battle scenes were impressive and in particular the orc march to and battle at Helm's Deep were [[tremendous]].

Ralph Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings" isn't perfect and no doubt a number of Lord of the Rings readers lament the cuts to the story. However, for me the drawbacks of this film were minor compared to the thrill of seeing an effective adaptation of half of a great trilogy. My only strong lament is that I am unable to see the second part of this "first great tale" of The Lord of the Rings since Bakshi was not given the budget to create a sequel. With the release of [[Peters]] Jackson's famed "Lord of the [[Piercings]]" [[triad]], it is even easier to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated Lord of the [[Piercings]] [[flick]] as [[shoddy]]. I agree with the majority that Jackson's trilogy is the essential film [[adapt]] of Tolkien's work, but that does not [[prevented]] me from enjoying Bakshi's ambitious pioneering effort. Jackson has admitted that he received at least some inspiration from seeing Bakshi's [[cinematography]] and there are some clear similarities between their [[modifications]].

The film's [[scenic]] picturesque backdrops are [[noteworthy]] and the [[notation]] is [[landmark]]. I was for the most part satisfied by the drawings of the [[attribute]]. The pairs of [[Smiley]] and [[Jolly]] and Eowyn and Galadriel are [[basically]] [[indistinct]] from each other visually, the Balrog and Treebeard were unimpressive, but these [[dots]] didn't bother me very much. [[Still]], the Nazgul are [[justly]] drawn and made [[properly]] eerie. The only [[characters]] representation I was bothered by was Sam's; he was made to [[gaze]] unbecomingly silly.

This [[cinematography]] is [[newer]] for its animation [[technologies]]. [[For]] [[addendum]] to hand-drawn [[nature]], [[living]] actors are incorporated into the animation through rotoscoping. It is quite [[conspicuous]] which [[nature]] are hand-drawn and which are rotoscoped, but none the [[least]] I [[unearthed]] that the film's style was a novelty. The [[usage]] of rotoscoped live [[players]] for the [[warfare]] scenes was a good [[rulings]] and [[supporting]] these scenes [[converting]] out well.

The [[vowel]] acting was [[normally]] of [[supremo]] quality. [[Principally]] good was John [[Harmed]], who [[gave]] an [[bossy]] [[voices]] for [[Legolas]]. [[Legolas]] isn't a [[prefer]] [[characteristics]] of [[mining]] from the [[tale]], but [[supported]] by [[Giovanni]] Hurt's [[vowel]] he was my [[preferred]] [[nature]] in this [[readjust]]. My other [[prefer]] was William Squire, whose [[vowel]] is [[correctly]] strong for Gandalf. The only actor who [[sounded]] [[unfit]] was [[Michel]] Scholes as Sam, whose [[vocals]] acting was irritating and added to Sam's [[sadly]] silly image. The only other [[pesky]] part of the voice acting is the mispronunciation of [[characteristics]] and place names. Particularly [[nosy]] was the [[decisions]] to [[periodically]] have Saruman [[mentioned]] to as "Aruman".

[[At]] [[generating]] this [[cinematography]], [[Ralf]] Bakshi [[predicted]] to have the [[proficiency]] to produce two [[kino]]. Hence, this film contains about half the story, from the start of "The Fellowship of the Ring" to the end of the battle at Helm's Deep in "The Two Towers". The obvious implication of this is that the film's story is a highly condensed version of the story from the books. I enjoy the original stories and more thorough adaptations, but the liberties taken to compress the story didn't bother me, even the choice to leave Arwen out of the story. Enough of the key elements of the story were in this film to keep me engaged for the duration and there was even a novelty in being able to [[nasim]] through half the Lord of the Rings story in 132 minutes. The battle scenes were impressive and in particular the orc march to and battle at Helm's Deep were [[awesome]].

Ralph Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings" isn't perfect and no doubt a number of Lord of the Rings readers lament the cuts to the story. However, for me the drawbacks of this film were minor compared to the thrill of seeing an effective adaptation of half of a great trilogy. My only strong lament is that I am unable to see the second part of this "first great tale" of The Lord of the Rings since Bakshi was not given the budget to create a sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 1090 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] THE MAN IN THE MOON is a warm and moving coming of age drama centering around a farming family in the 1950's. The main story follows a 14-year old girl (Reese Witherspoon) who develops a crush on a 17-year old neighbor (Jason London) who ends up falling for her older sister (Emily Warfield) and how an unexpected tragedy alters this family's dynamics forever. The 1950's are lovingly evoked here and the screenplay gives you characters you come to care about almost immediately. Witherspoon already begins to show the Oscar-winning talent she would develop in this early role and London makes a charming leading man. Warfield lends a quiet maturity to the role of the older sister that is effective as well. Kudos to Sam Waterston and Tess Harper who play the girls' parents and Gail Strickland, who plays London's mom. I was unexpectedly moved by this quiet and affecting drama that stirs up strong emotions and gives deeper meaning to the phrase "family ties." --------------------------------------------- Result 1091 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this movie. It is great film that combines English and Indian cultures with feminist-type issues, such as girls wanting to play sports that were previously reserved for men. It shows the struggles of both an Indian person wanting to break outside her cultural barriers and women wanting to break outside the gender restrictions found in sports, especially in England at the time. I feel that the cultural struggles are more emphasized than the other issues.

In contrast to the other comment, I do not think this movie is anything like Dirty Dancing or any other such chick flick. This move is loved by many types of people, men and women, young and old alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 1092 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the silliest movies I have ever had the misfortune to watch! I should have expected it, after seeing the first two, but I keep getting suckered into these types of movies with the idea of "Maybe they did it right this time". Nope - not even close.

Where do I begin? How about with the special effects... To give you an idea of what passes for SFX in this movie, at one point a soldier is shooting at a "Raptor" as it runs down a hallway. Even with less than a second of screen time, the viewer can easily see that it is just a man with a tail apparently taped to him running around. Bad bad bad bad.

How about the acting? If that's what you can call it. There is one character who, I suppose, is supposed to be from the south. However, after living in the south for six years now, I have never heard this way of talking. Perhaps he has some sort of weird disability - the inability to talk normally. I find it fascinating that the character does nothing that requires him to have that accent - therefore there was no reason for the actor to try to do one.

How about the plot? It's pretty basic - Raptors escape, people with guns must hunt them down. I'm starting to wonder why the dinosaurs in these movies always seem to run into the nearest system of tunnels... wouldn't they stay outside to hunt prey? Oh well, at least they have the good sense to appear very very little in the movie which supposedly revolves around them.

Other things - Let's say you are in a building and you know that there are man eating raptors running around in it. Would you decide to take time out to have an argument about who is better - Army or Marine? And then decide to have an arm wrestling contest to settle it? How about the idiotic idea that they have to track down the raptors - Split up into groups of two. Didn't they ever watch any horror movies (Or at least an episode of Scooby Doo)? In short, this is one of the dumber movies out there. Miss it unless you want to groan your way through a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] There are some great philosophical [[questions]]. What is the [[purpose]] of [[life]]? What [[happens]] when we die? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS [[BAD]]??? The premise is [[absurd]]. Thre acting is one dimensional. The special [[effects]] are overdone. And the movie is one [[unending]] [[gun]] battle [[among]] some of the [[lousiest]] shots Hollywood ever [[produced]]. But then, if they had been [[good]] [[shots]], everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no movie. Too bad it didn't happen that way. [[Tempted]] to turn it off several times, I stuck with it to see just how [[bad]] it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the [[last]] line is the crowning [[stupidity]] of the whole dopey, [[dismal]] scenario.It is not [[even]] [[worthy]] of second [[feature]] status at a [[third]] [[rate]] drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the [[film]], I [[worry]] deeply about its impact on young [[audiences]]. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly [[banal]] [[cinema]] on a Brobdingnagian [[scale]]! There are some great philosophical [[issues]]. What is the [[aimed]] of [[lives]]? What [[occurs]] when we die? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS [[NEGATIVE]]??? The premise is [[ridiculous]]. Thre acting is one dimensional. The special [[consequences]] are overdone. And the movie is one [[undying]] [[gunpoint]] battle [[in]] some of the [[trickiest]] shots Hollywood ever [[generated]]. But then, if they had been [[buena]] [[punches]], everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no movie. Too bad it didn't happen that way. [[Attempted]] to turn it off several times, I stuck with it to see just how [[rotten]] it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the [[final]] line is the crowning [[madness]] of the whole dopey, [[dusky]] scenario.It is not [[yet]] [[meritorious]] of second [[traits]] status at a [[thirds]] [[rates]] drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the [[filmmaking]], I [[disturb]] deeply about its impact on young [[viewers]]. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly [[commonplace]] [[filmmaking]] on a Brobdingnagian [[amplitude]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] by Dane [[Youssef]]

"Coonskin" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical [[indictment]] of blaxploitation [[films]] and [[negative]] black stereotypes, as well as a [[look]] at [[life]] black in [[modern]] America (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount [[dropped]] it like a hot potato that just burst into flame.

But this is a Bakshi [[film]], controversial, [[thrilling]], and a must-see [[almost]] by [[definition]] [[alone]]. Not just another [[random]] "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by [[Ralph]] Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Coonskin" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Coonskin" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but [[actually]] seems to show love, [[beauty]] and [[heart]] in the strangest [[places]].

"Coonskin" [[tells]] a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Coonskin" world [[alone]] makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates [[tells]] a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian [[mob]] is running all the real action.

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, [[hip]], deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "sublety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs [[extremism]]. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or [[minority]] of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these "dirty n-----s" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

You have been warned...

by Dane Youssef by Dane [[Yusef]]

"Coonskin" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical [[prosecution]] of blaxploitation [[film]] and [[bad]] black stereotypes, as well as a [[glance]] at [[lives]] black in [[fashionable]] America (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount [[slid]] it like a hot potato that just burst into flame.

But this is a Bakshi [[films]], controversial, [[exciting]], and a must-see [[virtually]] by [[define]] [[lonely]]. Not just another [[haphazard]] "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by [[Ralf]] Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Coonskin" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Coonskin" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but [[indeed]] seems to show love, [[beaut]] and [[nub]] in the strangest [[locations]].

"Coonskin" [[narrates]] a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Coonskin" world [[only]] makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates [[narrates]] a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian [[rabble]] is running all the real action.

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, [[hips]], deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "sublety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs [[fundamentalism]]. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or [[minorities]] of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these "dirty n-----s" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

You have been warned...

by Dane Youssef --------------------------------------------- Result 1095 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This [[could]] have been the gay [[counterpart]] to Gone With The Wind given its epic lenght, but instead it satisfied itself by being a [[huge]] [[chain]] of empty [[episodes]] in which [[absolutely]] nothing [[occurs]]. The [[characters]] are uni-dimensional and have no other [[development]] in the story (there's actually no story either) than looking for each other and kissing. It's a shame that an interesting [[aesthetic]] proposition like having [[almost]] no dialog is completely wasted in a film than makes no effort in [[examining]] the [[psychology]] of its characters with some dignity, and [[achieving]] true emotional resonance. On top of that, it pretends to be an "art" [[film]] by using the worst naive clichés of the cinematic snobbery. But anyway, if [[someone]] can identify with its heavy [[banality]], I guess that's fine. This [[did]] have been the gay [[counterparts]] to Gone With The Wind given its epic lenght, but instead it satisfied itself by being a [[prodigious]] [[chaining]] of empty [[bouts]] in which [[perfectly]] nothing [[transpires]]. The [[personages]] are uni-dimensional and have no other [[developments]] in the story (there's actually no story either) than looking for each other and kissing. It's a shame that an interesting [[cosmetic]] proposition like having [[nearly]] no dialog is completely wasted in a film than makes no effort in [[scrutinized]] the [[psychiatric]] of its characters with some dignity, and [[realize]] true emotional resonance. On top of that, it pretends to be an "art" [[filmmaking]] by using the worst naive clichés of the cinematic snobbery. But anyway, if [[everybody]] can identify with its heavy [[triviality]], I guess that's fine. --------------------------------------------- Result 1096 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a physics student, I've become aware of many idiot professors, and other so-called experts, in the field. As I continue with my studies, I learn more and more about real physics experiments going on, and about the people who are doing things right.

Then, my friends tell me of this "physics movie" they want to see. Knowing nothing of it, I'm excited, hoping that the information will be presented well.

I've done REAL quantum mechanics; this wasn't it.

This movie starts with the basic assumption that anything that occurs to a subatomic particle can, and will, occur to you, if you just open your eyes. Let's think about that, for just a moment.

Our bodies are composed of somewhere around 10^30 such subatomic particles. That is a million billion billion billion particles! The more "mysterious" quantum effects of just two particles can have a 50% probability of cancelling each other out completely. As you add more and more particles into the mix, it becomes almost impossible to have a large net quantum result. To tell us to believe that this is a valid assumption, with no rationality behind it...it's just stupid.

My friend, also in physics, and I counted 3 facts during the course of this movie. But they were presented in the most misleading manner I've EVER SEEN.

I cannot say as much for the neural portion of the movie, as I have not had any kind of medical training. It seemed as though it might have had a slight bit more truth to it, remembering my days in biology, but I cannot say.

At least this film had a redeeming quality: the dancing peptides (or whatever they actually were) scene. Not to ruin the invaluable plot that drives this movie, but the main character goes to a wedding, where she sees all different types of personalities "driven" by their peptides*, and then the film cuts to the dance floor, where we are spliced between people dancing, sometimes surrounded by CG peptides, and a fully CG scene, filled with dancing peptides. The film, at that point, was trying to tell us how we're "addicted to emotions," so we're treated to the full song of that smash hit, "Addicted to Love."

This scene was redeeming, because anyone who could go through THAT scene, and still take this movie seriously...well, you are the ones that need to "open your eyes." --------------------------------------------- Result 1097 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[CITY]] HALL is a somewhat mixed [[bag]]. [[Part]] vignettes of NYC political life, and [[part]] moralizing tale. Al Pacino, a Dukakis-esque Boss with Presidential dreams, gives an oft times sullen or subdued performance. There's a couple times when he [[chews]] the scenery, and in the case of CITY HALL, this is where he shines. [[John]] Cusack gives a subdued and generally [[flawless]] performance, without [[going]] into [[caricature]] of a New [[Orleans]] [[dialect]], or sliding into melodrama during the films climax. Danny Aiello as a burrough political chief, is [[also]] very good. I [[love]] showtunes, too.

The major problem with [[CITY]] HALL, and it is a good [[movie]] in [[many]] [[ways]], is the [[general]] [[feeling]] of a lack of momentum. It [[comes]] off more like a [[documentary]], than a [[motion]] [[picture]]. We [[see]] the [[action]] or follow the [[story]] from a detached [[perspective]], and naturally, the viewer doesn't [[become]] [[involved]]. When the [[viewer]] doesn't [[get]] [[involved]] to a certain [[degree]], they [[become]] apathetic [[towards]] the characters, and [[eventually]], the plot.

This [[tends]] to alienate, and what should have been a riveting, [[detail]] divulging finale, came off as a "[[Hmmm]]...[[uh]]...[[okay]]." They [[say]] you "Can't fight [[city]] [[hall]]," as the tread worn [[cliche]] goes. Yet, it [[still]] can't [[stop]] you from thinking what might have been, if they had just [[tightened]] up the [[screenplay]] and pacing of this [[movie]]. [[VILLE]] HALL is a somewhat mixed [[satchel]]. [[Portion]] vignettes of NYC political life, and [[portions]] moralizing tale. Al Pacino, a Dukakis-esque Boss with Presidential dreams, gives an oft times sullen or subdued performance. There's a couple times when he [[timbers]] the scenery, and in the case of CITY HALL, this is where he shines. [[Johannes]] Cusack gives a subdued and generally [[faultless]] performance, without [[go]] into [[parody]] of a New [[Nola]] [[dialects]], or sliding into melodrama during the films climax. Danny Aiello as a burrough political chief, is [[apart]] very good. I [[amour]] showtunes, too.

The major problem with [[VILLE]] HALL, and it is a good [[kino]] in [[countless]] [[pathways]], is the [[overall]] [[sense]] of a lack of momentum. It [[occurs]] off more like a [[literature]], than a [[petition]] [[photo]]. We [[behold]] the [[activities]] or follow the [[storytelling]] from a detached [[perspectives]], and naturally, the viewer doesn't [[becoming]] [[engaged]]. When the [[viewfinder]] doesn't [[obtain]] [[embroiled]] to a certain [[diploma]], they [[becomes]] apathetic [[toward]] the characters, and [[finally]], the plot.

This [[strives]] to alienate, and what should have been a riveting, [[details]] divulging finale, came off as a "[[Uh]]...[[eh]]...[[ok]]." They [[says]] you "Can't fight [[town]] [[salle]]," as the tread worn [[cliches]] goes. Yet, it [[again]] can't [[parada]] you from thinking what might have been, if they had just [[toughened]] up the [[script]] and pacing of this [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] They [[screwed]] up this [[story]]! In the end Nell is all heroic and taking on for the team to save all their asses from Hill House and a bunch of nonsense like that! They added heads getting chopped, wires cutting peoples faces, and the ceiling turning into a giant hand! What the hell is that about??? I own and [[love]] the [[original]] [[movie]], I read the [[book]] and I love it! The reason why the [[original]] movie and the book are so great is because it scares you so much without even showing the ghost. There is no [[gore]]. There is no ceiling hand. It is only the ghost ad how ghosts can truly kill a person. They cannot kill us, they cannot throw us about the room or fly a knife into our head. No. They can only drive us mad. Taking away all our senses of security. Nell was a selfish woman. She only wanted good things for herself. Yes, she cared a little for the others, but not too much. David Self and Jan de Bont have taken a crap on this great story! I [[hate]] this damn remake! They [[shafted]] up this [[fairytales]]! In the end Nell is all heroic and taking on for the team to save all their asses from Hill House and a bunch of nonsense like that! They added heads getting chopped, wires cutting peoples faces, and the ceiling turning into a giant hand! What the hell is that about??? I own and [[amore]] the [[upfront]] [[kino]], I read the [[ledger]] and I love it! The reason why the [[upfront]] movie and the book are so great is because it scares you so much without even showing the ghost. There is no [[gora]]. There is no ceiling hand. It is only the ghost ad how ghosts can truly kill a person. They cannot kill us, they cannot throw us about the room or fly a knife into our head. No. They can only drive us mad. Taking away all our senses of security. Nell was a selfish woman. She only wanted good things for herself. Yes, she cared a little for the others, but not too much. David Self and Jan de Bont have taken a crap on this great story! I [[detest]] this damn remake! --------------------------------------------- Result 1099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Jim Belushi is having a mid life crisis, nothing is going right, when his car goes out on him..he goes into an empty bar where Michael Caine shows him what life wouldve been like if one event in high school had come out differently.. A good premise with some moments..but mostly flat and uninteresting. on a scale of one to ten..3 --------------------------------------------- Result 1100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] That is the only thing I can positive to say about this [[movie]]. Cleveland is the [[star]], I've been there and never saw the city [[look]] this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.

This [[movie]] moves ahead at such a [[pace]] they hope you won't [[notice]] the lack of real world relevance. People running [[around]] and shooting guns without any [[consequence]]. For [[example]], there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the [[cops]] don't show up there till much later in the [[movie]]. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.

Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it. That is the only thing I can positive to say about this [[filmmaking]]. Cleveland is the [[superstar]], I've been there and never saw the city [[gaze]] this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.

This [[film]] moves ahead at such a [[rhythm]] they hope you won't [[noticing]] the lack of real world relevance. People running [[approximately]] and shooting guns without any [[consequences]]. For [[cases]], there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the [[nypd]] don't show up there till much later in the [[filmmaking]]. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.

Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I found this a bit [[hard]] to follow to the [[extent]] that it [[seemed]] to [[dip]] in the [[middle]] while I [[tried]] to [[make]] [[head]] or [[tail]] of who was [[fighting]] who and why. One of the [[problems]] is the cultural/[[language]] one. Here we have a Chinese/Taiwanese/Japanese [[problem]] of which we [[know]] [[little]] and because we are [[simply]] reading English [[subtitles]] [[inevitably]] [[loose]] some of the [[subtleties]]. Another [[problem]] is that there seem to be just too [[many]] only half explained [[twists]] and coincidences. [[Nevertheless]], it [[seems]] [[unlikely]] that there is a [[wholly]] [[bad]] Miiki [[film]] and this certainly is not that. Plenty of [[stylish]] and [[bone]] crunching violence, a [[window]] [[upon]] some less than orthodox sexual goings on plus the family aspect. All in all a decent ride but maybe checking out the storyline might actually be helpful before watching this one. I found this a bit [[stiff]] to follow to the [[magnitude]] that it [[looked]] to [[dipped]] in the [[medium]] while I [[strived]] to [[deliver]] [[leader]] or [[dick]] of who was [[struggling]] who and why. One of the [[difficulty]] is the cultural/[[linguistics]] one. Here we have a Chinese/Taiwanese/Japanese [[difficulty]] of which we [[savoir]] [[tiny]] and because we are [[solely]] reading English [[subtitle]] [[unavoidably]] [[slack]] some of the [[niceties]]. Another [[problems]] is that there seem to be just too [[various]] only half explained [[kinks]] and coincidences. [[Nonetheless]], it [[appears]] [[improbable]] that there is a [[perfectly]] [[amiss]] Miiki [[kino]] and this certainly is not that. Plenty of [[sleek]] and [[bony]] crunching violence, a [[luna]] [[after]] some less than orthodox sexual goings on plus the family aspect. All in all a decent ride but maybe checking out the storyline might actually be helpful before watching this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is the Columbo that [[got]] directed by Steven Spielberg at an early point in his [[career]]. It's [[nothing]] sensational but some small hint of [[great]] things to [[come]] for Spielberg can be [[seen]] in this movie. The movie is basically in the same [[style]] as most of Spierlberg's '70's movies and TV works. So that means that some characters [[tend]] to show some quirkiness's and no I'm not just talking about the Columbo [[character]] alone. The kind of [[character]] quirkiness which perhaps can be best seen in the 1975 Spielberg movie "Jaws". But other than some small hints of typical early Spielberg elements, you can't [[call]] this movie the work of- and [[fine]] [[example]] of a rising director star. Not that its bad, of course it isn't but as I said earlier, it also isn't anything too sensational.

This movie [[began]] really well and very promising but after it's [[fine]] opening, in which as always the murder occurred, the movie became [[sort]] of more slow and also dull to watch. Dull because it's [[mostly]] a Columbo movie by the book that doesn't have real memorable moments in it, not [[dull]] because it's a boring movie to watch.

The murder itself was [[quite]] [[ingenious]] and the [[concept]] of having a [[crime]] [[story]] [[writer]] murdering his writing partner [[showed]] some [[great]] and interesting potential. The story however didn't really [[explored]] all of its possibilities. At least that's the feeling this movie left me with.

The movie was still a good one to watch nevertheless thanks to the character of [[Jack]] Cassidy, who thinks he's smarter then Columbo, due to his mystery/crime writing experience and tries to give him all kinds of possible [[hints]], leading away from himself. But of course [[Columbo]] knows better and he is his number one suspect from the first moment on but he as usual plays the game along.

The movie does have a good [[overall]] style and uses some fine camera position and editing. Funny to see that also most of this was all mostly consistent with Spielberg's later work, especially some of the camera-angles.

A [[fine]] and [[perfectly]] watchable Columbo [[movie]] but don't [[let]] the name of Spielberg attached to it rise your expectations for it too [[highly]].

7/10 This is the Columbo that [[gets]] directed by Steven Spielberg at an early point in his [[quarry]]. It's [[anything]] sensational but some small hint of [[wondrous]] things to [[arrive]] for Spielberg can be [[watched]] in this movie. The movie is basically in the same [[styles]] as most of Spierlberg's '70's movies and TV works. So that means that some characters [[tending]] to show some quirkiness's and no I'm not just talking about the Columbo [[characteristics]] alone. The kind of [[trait]] quirkiness which perhaps can be best seen in the 1975 Spielberg movie "Jaws". But other than some small hints of typical early Spielberg elements, you can't [[invitation]] this movie the work of- and [[fined]] [[cases]] of a rising director star. Not that its bad, of course it isn't but as I said earlier, it also isn't anything too sensational.

This movie [[initiating]] really well and very promising but after it's [[alright]] opening, in which as always the murder occurred, the movie became [[sorts]] of more slow and also dull to watch. Dull because it's [[especially]] a Columbo movie by the book that doesn't have real memorable moments in it, not [[uninspiring]] because it's a boring movie to watch.

The murder itself was [[abundantly]] [[clever]] and the [[notions]] of having a [[offence]] [[history]] [[novelist]] murdering his writing partner [[indicated]] some [[huge]] and interesting potential. The story however didn't really [[scrutinize]] all of its possibilities. At least that's the feeling this movie left me with.

The movie was still a good one to watch nevertheless thanks to the character of [[Jacques]] Cassidy, who thinks he's smarter then Columbo, due to his mystery/crime writing experience and tries to give him all kinds of possible [[suggestions]], leading away from himself. But of course [[Colombo]] knows better and he is his number one suspect from the first moment on but he as usual plays the game along.

The movie does have a good [[general]] style and uses some fine camera position and editing. Funny to see that also most of this was all mostly consistent with Spielberg's later work, especially some of the camera-angles.

A [[fined]] and [[totally]] watchable Columbo [[flick]] but don't [[leaving]] the name of Spielberg attached to it rise your expectations for it too [[enormously]].

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1103 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[guess]] this [[movie]] will only [[work]] on people who were all turned off by the giant [[hype]] of [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]. [[Well]], so I was. And so I [[really]] [[love]] this [[movie]]. [[Especially]] I [[like]] all those [[flawless]] superheroes from LotR being so [[perfectly]] and disrespectfully parodied. Most [[brilliantly]] is the [[counterpart]] of Gandalf (the [[brave]] and wise and [[completely]] humorless know-it-all [[wizard]]): Almghandi, the [[cowardice]] and brain dead transvestite. Sauron's counterpart ("Sauraus" from East Germany, of course) is wearing a [[simply]] [[bucket]] with [[eye]] [[holes]] as a helmet. Aragorns [[alter]] ego is [[yet]] another [[accident]] prone idiot who [[tries]] to [[fix]] his [[broken]] sword ("Ulrike" the legend) with [[scotch]] tape. And "Strunzdumm" (the counterpart of Wormtong) [[indeed]] has some strong [[resemblance]] with [[Brad]] Dourif! And don't forget Grmpfli and Heidi... huh-huh I [[imagine]] this [[kino]] will only [[collaborate]] on people who were all turned off by the giant [[threshing]] of [[God]] of the [[Piercings]]. [[Good]], so I was. And so I [[truthfully]] [[iove]] this [[movies]]. [[Namely]] I [[fond]] all those [[impeccable]] superheroes from LotR being so [[utterly]] and disrespectfully parodied. Most [[admirably]] is the [[counterparts]] of Gandalf (the [[heroic]] and wise and [[totally]] humorless know-it-all [[magician]]): Almghandi, the [[gutless]] and brain dead transvestite. Sauron's counterpart ("Sauraus" from East Germany, of course) is wearing a [[solely]] [[pail]] with [[eyes]] [[orifices]] as a helmet. Aragorns [[modification]] ego is [[again]] another [[misadventure]] prone idiot who [[endeavours]] to [[remedy]] his [[raped]] sword ("Ulrike" the legend) with [[whiskies]] tape. And "Strunzdumm" (the counterpart of Wormtong) [[admittedly]] has some strong [[analogy]] with [[Rad]] Dourif! And don't forget Grmpfli and Heidi... huh-huh --------------------------------------------- Result 1104 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I agree [[totally]] with the last commenter this could be the [[worst]] movie ever [[made]] .I too had to [[fast]] forward through most of this [[movie]]. Michael Madsen must have [[done]] this [[movie]] as a favor to [[someone]].The [[picture]] quality is [[grainy]] all the [[way]] through .And what [[little]] plot there is,is just plain stupid .I [[give]] this [[movie]] a 1 out of 10 if I [[could]] give it a [[lower]] [[score]] I [[would]] .Don't [[waste]] your [[time]] on this [[movie]] or you'll [[regret]] it. I agree [[absolutely]] with the last commenter this could be the [[meanest]] movie ever [[introduced]] .I too had to [[prompt]] forward through most of this [[filmmaking]]. Michael Madsen must have [[effected]] this [[filmmaking]] as a favor to [[everyone]].The [[pictures]] quality is [[hazy]] all the [[pathway]] through .And what [[scant]] plot there is,is just plain stupid .I [[confer]] this [[flick]] a 1 out of 10 if I [[did]] give it a [[downsized]] [[punctuation]] I [[should]] .Don't [[squandering]] your [[period]] on this [[filmmaking]] or you'll [[sorrow]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1105 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] This [[movie]] is about a [[young]] [[scientist]] who creates a serum that re-animates the [[dead]]. He first uses it on his [[brother]] when he is shot dead in a [[drive]] by. His brother then infects the other gang members.In some scenes the zombies are seen walking very [[slowly]] and in other scenes they [[run]] pretty [[fast]] which makes [[little]] sense. The acting is mediocre but the [[story]] doesn't [[help]] the film. The [[makeup]] [[consists]] of [[blood]] on the [[face]] of the zombies. The [[budget]] for this [[film]] I'm sure was very [[limited]]. I believe the [[film]] [[could]] have been better made had the [[story]] been more [[original]] and with a [[better]] budget. [[If]] you wan't to [[see]] a good zombie flick don't see this one. This [[filmmaking]] is about a [[youthful]] [[investigator]] who creates a serum that re-animates the [[death]]. He first uses it on his [[sibling]] when he is shot dead in a [[drives]] by. His brother then infects the other gang members.In some scenes the zombies are seen walking very [[softly]] and in other scenes they [[executing]] pretty [[quickly]] which makes [[scant]] sense. The acting is mediocre but the [[conte]] doesn't [[helped]] the film. The [[composition]] [[involves]] of [[transfusion]] on the [[confronts]] of the zombies. The [[budgets]] for this [[filmmaking]] I'm sure was very [[narrow]]. I believe the [[filmmaking]] [[would]] have been better made had the [[narratives]] been more [[initial]] and with a [[improved]] budget. [[Unless]] you wan't to [[seeing]] a good zombie flick don't see this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This film is like marmite. You either [[love]] it or you hate it. If you go into this film [[expecting]] a proper film with decent production values, a good plot and great characters you'll hate it. If you go into this film [[expecting]] a low budget slasher you'll probably hate it.

If you go into this film expecting to see one of the most [[deranged]] [[characters]] ever put to film in the form of Harry [[Russo]] you will [[love]] it. John Giancaspro is [[absolutely]] [[brilliant]] in his over the top portrayal of the insane, murderous coke fiend.

The special effects are abysmal at best but really, who cares? If you're the kind of person who's prepared to watch a film Schizophreniac: The Whore Mangler you've undoubtedly seen scores of horror films filled with gore. With the budget this film was made for even if they had tried it probably would've mediocre at best. I'd much rather be able to laugh at something abysmal than be unaffected by the mediocre.

To sum it up, you'll probably hate this film but if you're one of the few who decide to see it anyway it'll become the [[best]] thing [[since]] sliced bread #2 I hate marmite. This film is like marmite. You either [[iove]] it or you hate it. If you go into this film [[awaits]] a proper film with decent production values, a good plot and great characters you'll hate it. If you go into this film [[awaits]] a low budget slasher you'll probably hate it.

If you go into this film expecting to see one of the most [[unhinged]] [[features]] ever put to film in the form of Harry [[Rousseau]] you will [[iove]] it. John Giancaspro is [[abundantly]] [[wondrous]] in his over the top portrayal of the insane, murderous coke fiend.

The special effects are abysmal at best but really, who cares? If you're the kind of person who's prepared to watch a film Schizophreniac: The Whore Mangler you've undoubtedly seen scores of horror films filled with gore. With the budget this film was made for even if they had tried it probably would've mediocre at best. I'd much rather be able to laugh at something abysmal than be unaffected by the mediocre.

To sum it up, you'll probably hate this film but if you're one of the few who decide to see it anyway it'll become the [[better]] thing [[because]] sliced bread #2 I hate marmite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] The first series of Lost kicked off with a bang... literally and slowly decreased in pace. This may have put some viewers off and people who started to watch halfway through would either be bored or just plain confused.

I would advise people new to the world of Lost to simply watch from the beginning and don't get pt off by the slower episodes. The acting throughout is [[excellent]] but why have 5 series' planned... WHY??? All this means is that there will be no answers for at least 4 years, oh well, i'll keep watching if it keeps the tension up and dialogue flowing. The first series of Lost kicked off with a bang... literally and slowly decreased in pace. This may have put some viewers off and people who started to watch halfway through would either be bored or just plain confused.

I would advise people new to the world of Lost to simply watch from the beginning and don't get pt off by the slower episodes. The acting throughout is [[wondrous]] but why have 5 series' planned... WHY??? All this means is that there will be no answers for at least 4 years, oh well, i'll keep watching if it keeps the tension up and dialogue flowing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1108 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shot in the Heart is wonderful. It brilliantly illustrates the plight of Gary Gimore, a convicted murder who requested death. Shot in the Heart shows the ordeal that Gilmore's family, torn up by hatred, went through. This movie is an incredible psychological study, and is wonderfully depressing and uplifting. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] One of Boris Karloff's [[real]] clinkers. Essentially the dying Karloff (looking about 120 years older than he was)is a scientist in need of cash to finish his experiments before he dies. Moving from Morocco where his funding is taken over by someone else he goes to the South of France where he works a s physician while trying to scrap enough money to prove his theories. Desperate for money he makes a deal with the young rich wife of a cotton baron who is dying. She will fund him if he helps her poison the husband so she can take his money and carry on with a gigolo (who I think is married). If you think I got that from watching the movie you're wrong, I had to read what other people posted to figure out happened. Why? because this movie had me lost from two minutes in.I had no idea what was going on with its numerous characters and multiple converging plot lines. Little is spelled out and much isn't said until towards the end by which time I really didn't care. Its a dull mess of interest purely for Karloff's performance which is rather odd at times. To be honest this is the only time I've ever seen him venture into Bela Lugosi bizarre territory. Its not every scene but a few and makes me wonder how much they hung out. One of Boris Karloff's [[veritable]] clinkers. Essentially the dying Karloff (looking about 120 years older than he was)is a scientist in need of cash to finish his experiments before he dies. Moving from Morocco where his funding is taken over by someone else he goes to the South of France where he works a s physician while trying to scrap enough money to prove his theories. Desperate for money he makes a deal with the young rich wife of a cotton baron who is dying. She will fund him if he helps her poison the husband so she can take his money and carry on with a gigolo (who I think is married). If you think I got that from watching the movie you're wrong, I had to read what other people posted to figure out happened. Why? because this movie had me lost from two minutes in.I had no idea what was going on with its numerous characters and multiple converging plot lines. Little is spelled out and much isn't said until towards the end by which time I really didn't care. Its a dull mess of interest purely for Karloff's performance which is rather odd at times. To be honest this is the only time I've ever seen him venture into Bela Lugosi bizarre territory. Its not every scene but a few and makes me wonder how much they hung out. --------------------------------------------- Result 1110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As a [[cinema]] fan [[White]] [[Noise]] was an [[utter]] [[disappointment]], as a filmmaker the [[cinematography]] was pretty good, nicely [[lit]], good camera [[work]], [[reasonable]] [[direction]]. But as a [[film]] it just seamed as predictable as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the [[market]] has recently been [[flooded]] with. [[Although]] it did have a [[little]] bit of the 'chill factor' the [[whole]] [[concept]] of the [[E]].[[V]].O ([[Electronic]] Voice [[Phenomena]]) did'not [[seem]] believable. This [[movie]] did not [[explain]] the reasonings for certain [[occurrences]] but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the [[main]] character [[portrayed]] no emotion, like many [[recent]] thriller/horror [[movies]].

Definitely not a [[movie]] I will be [[buying]] on DVD and [[would]] not [[recommend]] [[anyone]] rushes out to [[see]] it. As a [[theaters]] fan [[Blanc]] [[Audible]] was an [[absolute]] [[dissatisfaction]], as a filmmaker the [[movie]] was pretty good, nicely [[illuminated]], good camera [[cooperation]], [[logical]] [[directorate]]. But as a [[films]] it just seamed as predictable as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the [[marketplace]] has recently been [[submerged]] with. [[While]] it did have a [[petit]] bit of the 'chill factor' the [[overall]] [[notions]] of the [[f]].[[vs]].O ([[Electron]] Voice [[Phenomenon]]) did'not [[looks]] believable. This [[filmmaking]] did not [[explaining]] the reasonings for certain [[phenomena]] but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the [[primary]] character [[depicted]] no emotion, like many [[newer]] thriller/horror [[cinematography]].

Definitely not a [[cinematography]] I will be [[acquiring]] on DVD and [[should]] not [[recommendations]] [[nobody]] rushes out to [[behold]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoy quality crapness, and this ranks up there with some of the finest. the cg is out of this world, or at least pre-dates our world, and the insanity of a 6 foot bloke in a rat outfit chasing after people is laughably bad. I quite enjoyed some of this, but the acting is so goddamn awful, and even the obligatory nude scene doesn't really have any baps out in it. just a complete waste of time if ever i saw one. I don't know who wasted more time, me watching this, or the poor saps who got dragged into making it in the faint hope that this will launch their acting careers. I can assure you, it wont. However, on a brighter note, I have managed to successfully do the 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon from this movie, so I think it was almost worthwhile watching the 91 minutes of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I grew up with H.R. Pufnstuff and the dashingly talented Jack Wild and now my daughters are adoring fans of Jack Wild too. This movie is exactly what movies should be: fun and entertaining. This movie is not limited to children either. A lot of the dialogue is directed to adults and Witchiepoo's performance is something you do not want to miss. The music in this movie suited Jack Wild and Mama Cass beautifully. And as a Jack Wild fan, I would never miss the chance to watch him dance or hear him sing. Knowing the hard life that Jack had now makes this movie even more wonderful especially when he sings the opening song "If I Could". It makes me pause in loving adoration for him for giving me wonderful childhood memories that I am now passing on to my children. Let's all go to Living Island where there is friendship and fun! And keep Jack Wild's memory alive by passing Pufnstuff on to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 1113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] the [[costumes]], the dialog, historical accuracy are [[terrible]]. For instance, - Stacey Dash and the hanging scene. The noose was [[accurate]] ( as for as I could tell), but that type of noose broke the person's neck. Ms. Dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. This type of not did not [[strangle]] the person, it killed them at the end of the drop.

And right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback), they pause on the street for a group hug - with their bandannas hiding their faces - that would have been obvious to people on the street.

The poor [[editing]] - that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious, the clip of the "long ride" shows them riding along, then reverses the film.

I did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap - it seemed symbolic. The entire movie was crap. the [[attire]], the dialog, historical accuracy are [[abysmal]]. For instance, - Stacey Dash and the hanging scene. The noose was [[meticulous]] ( as for as I could tell), but that type of noose broke the person's neck. Ms. Dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. This type of not did not [[muffle]] the person, it killed them at the end of the drop.

And right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback), they pause on the street for a group hug - with their bandannas hiding their faces - that would have been obvious to people on the street.

The poor [[edition]] - that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious, the clip of the "long ride" shows them riding along, then reverses the film.

I did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap - it seemed symbolic. The entire movie was crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 1114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film earlier today, and I was amazed at how accurate the dialog is for the main characters. It didn't feel like a film - it felt more like a documentary (the part I liked best). The leading ladies in this film seemed as real to me as any fifteen year-old girls I know.

All in all, a very enjoyable film for those who enjoy independent films. --------------------------------------------- Result 1115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As if the storyline wasn't depressing [[enough]], this [[movie]] shows cows being butchered graphically in a slaughterhouse for all of five minutes while the [[protagonist]] is narrating her [[early]] [[life]] as a butcher. Weird stuff. Then there's the core premise of the hero/heroine who goes and cuts his dick off because a he's besot-ten with at [[work]] says he would have gone with him if he was a girl. Is this person a psycho, a masochist, just a doomed [[queen]] who takes things too far? And what [[sort]] of traumatic childhood did he have? [[Just]] that he didn't [[get]] [[adopted]] and had to [[live]] it out with nuns who at [[first]] [[loved]] him and then [[later]] [[hated]] him because he was [[unruly]]. He [[tries]] to [[explain]] to us the [[reasons]] he did what he did, but it's [[really]] [[really]] so [[hard]] to empathize. Such sad and [[unusual]] self [[destruction]]. Was it [[supposed]] to be [[funny]]? What was it all about really? As if the storyline wasn't depressing [[suitably]], this [[filmmaking]] shows cows being butchered graphically in a slaughterhouse for all of five minutes while the [[player]] is narrating her [[prematurely]] [[lives]] as a butcher. Weird stuff. Then there's the core premise of the hero/heroine who goes and cuts his dick off because a he's besot-ten with at [[cooperate]] says he would have gone with him if he was a girl. Is this person a psycho, a masochist, just a doomed [[quinn]] who takes things too far? And what [[kind]] of traumatic childhood did he have? [[Mere]] that he didn't [[obtain]] [[passed]] and had to [[vivo]] it out with nuns who at [[fiirst]] [[loves]] him and then [[subsequently]] [[disliked]] him because he was [[disorderly]]. He [[try]] to [[explains]] to us the [[motive]] he did what he did, but it's [[truthfully]] [[truly]] so [[laborious]] to empathize. Such sad and [[curious]] self [[obliterating]]. Was it [[presumed]] to be [[comical]]? What was it all about really? --------------------------------------------- Result 1116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I've never been impressed by JD anyway, and Final Justice (which I hadn't [[seen]] [[prior]] to its MST3k airing) [[proves]] to be no [[exception]]. It's not that the [[character]] is any less [[likeable]] than [[Mitchell]]: it's just that there's less that [[Geronimo]] ("Call me 'Heronimo') to dislike.

[[In]] fact, one suspects that [[Mitchell]] and Final Justice were all [[schemes]] of a revenge-seeking agent of Joe Don's trying to [[get]] the "star" [[killed]] by inducing a heart [[attack]].

[[Joe]] Don must have [[found]] a [[new]] agent, [[since]] he's now graduated to "[[comic]] relief" in James Bond movies. The [[problem]] is, it's [[hard]] to [[tell]] the difference between his [[comedy]] [[characters]] there, and his "[[serious]]" [[characters]] in his action-movies [[like]] this one.

As for the plot...[[umm]], what plot? They [[repeat]] the same set [[pieces]] so [[repeatedly]] you'll think you were watching Groundhog's Day 2. [[Presumably]], the [[fact]] they [[keep]] [[using]] the same scene of Geronimo getting out of [[jail]] is [[supposed]] to be [[comic]] relief of some sort. [[Ummm]], yeah, whatever.

On the plus side, the Malta [[scenery]] is [[pretty]] gorgeous, so that [[kicked]] it up to a 2 for me. One suspects this [[flick]] set Maltese tourism back a [[couple]] of decades, [[though]]. I've never been impressed by JD anyway, and Final Justice (which I hadn't [[watched]] [[formerly]] to its MST3k airing) [[testifies]] to be no [[exceptions]]. It's not that the [[traits]] is any less [[likable]] than [[Michel]]: it's just that there's less that [[Banzai]] ("Call me 'Heronimo') to dislike.

[[During]] fact, one suspects that [[Michel]] and Final Justice were all [[scheme]] of a revenge-seeking agent of Joe Don's trying to [[obtain]] the "star" [[murdered]] by inducing a heart [[onslaught]].

[[Evel]] Don must have [[detected]] a [[novo]] agent, [[because]] he's now graduated to "[[comedian]] relief" in James Bond movies. The [[difficulty]] is, it's [[difficult]] to [[telling]] the difference between his [[humour]] [[trait]] there, and his "[[severe]]" [[nature]] in his action-movies [[iike]] this one.

As for the plot...[[um]], what plot? They [[repetition]] the same set [[slices]] so [[regularly]] you'll think you were watching Groundhog's Day 2. [[Probably]], the [[facto]] they [[retaining]] [[used]] the same scene of Geronimo getting out of [[slammer]] is [[suspected]] to be [[comedian]] relief of some sort. [[Uhh]], yeah, whatever.

On the plus side, the Malta [[panorama]] is [[quite]] gorgeous, so that [[knocked]] it up to a 2 for me. One suspects this [[gesture]] set Maltese tourism back a [[coupling]] of decades, [[albeit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] if you didn't live in the 90's or didn't listen to [[rapper]] EVER!! this movie might be OK for you, but any for any fan or any single person who ever [[listened]] to [[rap]] this movie was boring and there was no point in the movie where i [[said]] thats interesting or i didn't know that. another thing that [[bugged]] me was it [[made]] it [[look]] like anything in his [[life]] he did was very easy there was no [[struggle]] he made jail [[look]] [[easy]], selling drugs, and even rapping it wasn't [[realistic]]. i [[think]] if the [[movie]] where released in about 15 years from now it might have more of an [[impact]] [[maybe]]!!! good rap [[movies]] hustle and [[flow]], get [[rich]] or die [[trying]] not [[notorious]] if you didn't live in the 90's or didn't listen to [[rap]] EVER!! this movie might be OK for you, but any for any fan or any single person who ever [[overheard]] to [[rapper]] this movie was boring and there was no point in the movie where i [[avowed]] thats interesting or i didn't know that. another thing that [[tapped]] me was it [[introduced]] it [[gaze]] like anything in his [[lives]] he did was very easy there was no [[battles]] he made jail [[peek]] [[simple]], selling drugs, and even rapping it wasn't [[practical]]. i [[reckon]] if the [[filmmaking]] where released in about 15 years from now it might have more of an [[consequences]] [[conceivably]]!!! good rap [[film]] hustle and [[flows]], get [[richest]] or die [[seeking]] not [[infamous]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] With all this stuff going down at the moment with [[MJ]] i've started listening to his music, watching the odd documentary here and there, watched The Wiz and watched Moonwalker again. [[Maybe]] i just want to [[get]] a certain [[insight]] into this guy who i [[thought]] was really cool in the eighties just to [[maybe]] [[make]] up my [[mind]] whether he is [[guilty]] or innocent. Moonwalker is part [[biography]], [[part]] [[feature]] [[film]] which i [[remember]] going to see at the cinema when it was originally [[released]]. Some of it has subtle [[messages]] about MJ's [[feeling]] [[towards]] the [[press]] and also the obvious message of [[drugs]] are bad m'kay.

Visually [[impressive]] but of course this is all about Michael Jackson so [[unless]] you remotely like MJ in anyway then you are going to hate this and find it boring. Some may call MJ an [[egotist]] for consenting to the making of this movie BUT MJ and most of his fans would say that he made it for the fans which if true is really nice of him.

The actual feature film bit when it finally starts is only on for 20 minutes or so excluding the Smooth Criminal sequence and Joe Pesci is [[convincing]] as a psychopathic all powerful [[drug]] lord. Why he wants MJ dead so bad is beyond me. Because MJ overheard his plans? Nah, Joe Pesci's character ranted that he wanted people to know it is he who is supplying [[drugs]] etc so i dunno, [[maybe]] he just hates MJ's music.

[[Lots]] of [[cool]] [[things]] in this like MJ turning into a car and a robot and the whole Speed Demon sequence. Also, the director must have had the patience of a saint when it came to filming the kiddy Bad [[sequence]] as [[usually]] directors [[hate]] working with one kid let alone a whole bunch of them performing a complex dance scene.

Bottom [[line]], this movie is for people who like MJ on one level or another (which i think is most people). If not, then stay away. It does try and give off a [[wholesome]] [[message]] and ironically MJ's bestest buddy in this movie is a girl! Michael Jackson is truly one of the most talented people ever to grace this planet but is he guilty? Well, with all the attention i've gave this subject....hmmm well i don't know because people can be different behind closed doors, i know this for a fact. He is either an extremely nice but stupid guy or one of the most sickest liars. I hope he is not the latter. With all this stuff going down at the moment with [[DJ]] i've started listening to his music, watching the odd documentary here and there, watched The Wiz and watched Moonwalker again. [[Potentially]] i just want to [[obtain]] a certain [[vision]] into this guy who i [[figured]] was really cool in the eighties just to [[potentially]] [[deliver]] up my [[intellect]] whether he is [[guilt]] or innocent. Moonwalker is part [[biographies]], [[parties]] [[idiosyncratic]] [[cinematography]] which i [[remind]] going to see at the cinema when it was originally [[publicized]]. Some of it has subtle [[message]] about MJ's [[sentiment]] [[toward]] the [[pressing]] and also the obvious message of [[medication]] are bad m'kay.

Visually [[unbelievable]] but of course this is all about Michael Jackson so [[if]] you remotely like MJ in anyway then you are going to hate this and find it boring. Some may call MJ an [[egoist]] for consenting to the making of this movie BUT MJ and most of his fans would say that he made it for the fans which if true is really nice of him.

The actual feature film bit when it finally starts is only on for 20 minutes or so excluding the Smooth Criminal sequence and Joe Pesci is [[persuade]] as a psychopathic all powerful [[medications]] lord. Why he wants MJ dead so bad is beyond me. Because MJ overheard his plans? Nah, Joe Pesci's character ranted that he wanted people to know it is he who is supplying [[medication]] etc so i dunno, [[probably]] he just hates MJ's music.

[[Batch]] of [[refrigerate]] [[matters]] in this like MJ turning into a car and a robot and the whole Speed Demon sequence. Also, the director must have had the patience of a saint when it came to filming the kiddy Bad [[sequencing]] as [[traditionally]] directors [[loathed]] working with one kid let alone a whole bunch of them performing a complex dance scene.

Bottom [[linea]], this movie is for people who like MJ on one level or another (which i think is most people). If not, then stay away. It does try and give off a [[salubrious]] [[messages]] and ironically MJ's bestest buddy in this movie is a girl! Michael Jackson is truly one of the most talented people ever to grace this planet but is he guilty? Well, with all the attention i've gave this subject....hmmm well i don't know because people can be different behind closed doors, i know this for a fact. He is either an extremely nice but stupid guy or one of the most sickest liars. I hope he is not the latter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1119 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The movie starts off in a [[classroom]] setting where not surprisingly, our main actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. [[Later]] in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her [[answer]] was [[simple]] for a child she is; [[coz]] she's already [[known]] the Malay Language well.

It's a bit of a romance one may thought of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much [[critics]] and [[go]] for it, you'll notice the typical elements of Malaysia. The [[movie]] basically [[focuses]] on 10 year old Orked who [[met]] 12 year [[old]] Mukhsin in a game of which many [[would]] [[think]] of it as a boy's game. Running out of [[players]], Mukhsin (who was new in that [[village]]) was [[forced]] to allow Orked into the game, in which she [[eagerly]] [[showed]] the male side of her. Orked is no such [[ordinary]] [[girl]] as she [[depicts]] more of the [[male]] behavior as you will [[see]] in the movie, [[defending]] Mukhsin from much violent [[encounter]] with her school-bullies, [[throwing]] one of the bully's [[bag]] out from the school bus window, throwing [[punches]] and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were [[awesome]] buddies, and stick [[closer]] than that, but with a [[slightest]] of misunderstanding in which most of us [[would]] all [[respond]] to in the same [[way]], parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin [[left]] [[town]].

Now the [[movie]] [[depicts]] the first [[love]] between Orked and Mukhsin, they [[started]] out as [[friends]], but [[slowly]] evolving into [[somewhat]] more of a [[closer]] [[relationship]] and then towards BGR. You [[would]] notice, the [[changes]] [[Yasmin]] [[made]] in the [[movies]] for each of the [[main]] [[actor]] and the [[actress]] when they go through [[love]]. The [[different]] character was [[portrayed]] with [[eagerness]] and mild humor. The scenes were all in [[random]] but it depicted so much [[reality]] in it that you'd be stuck on the screen for a [[long]] [[time]]. You will [[love]] the [[movie]] for what it is, and not because that you want to be patriotic to the local scenes, coz it means much more.

As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.

The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.

The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. The movie starts off in a [[classrooms]] setting where not surprisingly, our main actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. [[Subsequent]] in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her [[answering]] was [[easy]] for a child she is; [[cuz]] she's already [[renowned]] the Malay Language well.

It's a bit of a romance one may thought of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much [[detractors]] and [[going]] for it, you'll notice the typical elements of Malaysia. The [[films]] basically [[focusing]] on 10 year old Orked who [[complied]] 12 year [[former]] Mukhsin in a game of which many [[ought]] [[thinking]] of it as a boy's game. Running out of [[protagonists]], Mukhsin (who was new in that [[villages]]) was [[obliged]] to allow Orked into the game, in which she [[impatiently]] [[proved]] the male side of her. Orked is no such [[mundane]] [[chick]] as she [[describe]] more of the [[masculine]] behavior as you will [[behold]] in the movie, [[defend]] Mukhsin from much violent [[face]] with her school-bullies, [[hurling]] one of the bully's [[backpack]] out from the school bus window, throwing [[shots]] and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were [[wonderful]] buddies, and stick [[nearest]] than that, but with a [[lowest]] of misunderstanding in which most of us [[ought]] all [[cater]] to in the same [[route]], parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin [[exited]] [[municipality]].

Now the [[kino]] [[exposes]] the first [[amore]] between Orked and Mukhsin, they [[launches]] out as [[mates]], but [[softly]] evolving into [[slightly]] more of a [[nearer]] [[relations]] and then towards BGR. You [[ought]] notice, the [[amendment]] [[Yasmine]] [[brought]] in the [[theater]] for each of the [[principal]] [[protagonist]] and the [[actor]] when they go through [[loves]]. The [[several]] character was [[depicted]] with [[enthusiasm]] and mild humor. The scenes were all in [[haphazard]] but it depicted so much [[actuality]] in it that you'd be stuck on the screen for a [[lengthy]] [[moment]]. You will [[amour]] the [[kino]] for what it is, and not because that you want to be patriotic to the local scenes, coz it means much more.

As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.

The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.

The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. --------------------------------------------- Result 1120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] First off [[let]] me [[say]] that this has to be on the [[top]] of my list of boring [[movies]]. [[Nothing]], and I [[mean]] nothing in this [[movie]] is even remotely [[thrilling]]. Most of it is very [[confusing]] and as it [[progresses]] you just [[wish]] it [[would]] [[end]]!! Some people [[want]] a movie that makes them "[[think]]" through the entire thing, to which I [[say]]..."More power to you"!! I on the other hand just want to be entertained. Which [[brings]] me back to this [[stinker]], [[entertainment]] it is not. This [[movie]] is stupid and a [[complete]] [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[Seems]] that most here agree also. Most of this didn't make any [[sense]], and by the [[time]] you [[think]] you have one scene [[figured]] out another lame scene [[comes]] [[around]] and....well I [[guess]] you [[see]] where this is going. [[Avoid]], this one sucks....[[bad]]!! First off [[letting]] me [[said]] that this has to be on the [[topped]] of my list of boring [[movie]]. [[None]], and I [[imply]] nothing in this [[filmmaking]] is even remotely [[enthralling]]. Most of it is very [[disconcerting]] and as it [[evolves]] you just [[want]] it [[could]] [[terminate]]!! Some people [[wanting]] a movie that makes them "[[thinking]]" through the entire thing, to which I [[said]]..."More power to you"!! I on the other hand just want to be entertained. Which [[puts]] me back to this [[tosser]], [[amusement]] it is not. This [[filmmaking]] is stupid and a [[finish]] [[wastes]] of [[times]]. [[Seem]] that most here agree also. Most of this didn't make any [[feeling]], and by the [[moment]] you [[believing]] you have one scene [[thought]] out another lame scene [[happens]] [[roundabout]] and....well I [[imagine]] you [[seeing]] where this is going. [[Forestall]], this one sucks....[[negative]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[At]] [[first]] i didn't think that Ben Affleck could really [[pull]] off a funny [[Christmas]] [[movie]],, [[boy]] was i [[wrong]], my daughter invited me to watch this with her and i was not [[disappointed]] at all. James Gandolfini was funny,, i really liked [[Christina]] Appelagate, and [[Catherine]] O' Hara was good too, the storyline is what really sold me,, i mean,, too put up with family,, at the [[table]] for people you only [[hardly]] see but once or twice a year,, and [[probably]] don't get along with [[anyway]],, you really do need as much alcohol as you're system can [[stand]] to [[deal]] with [[Christmas]],, so i [[thought]] that the [[premise]] was good there, [[buying]] the family with 250000 [[dollars]], was a little on the far fetched side,, but it turned out to [[work]] [[pretty]] good for me,, cause it was a [[riot]] all the [[way]] through, it [[shows]] the [[class]] [[struggle]] of the [[different]] families. it has lot's of funny moments, [[including]] embarrassing stuff on the computer for a [[teenage]] [[boy]]. all in all i [[loved]] this movie and will watch it again [[next]] [[Christmas]] or [[sooner]] if my [[daughter]] [[wants]] too. [[During]] [[frst]] i didn't think that Ben Affleck could really [[pulled]] off a funny [[Kringle]] [[cinematography]],, [[guy]] was i [[amiss]], my daughter invited me to watch this with her and i was not [[frustrated]] at all. James Gandolfini was funny,, i really liked [[Kristina]] Appelagate, and [[Kathrin]] O' Hara was good too, the storyline is what really sold me,, i mean,, too put up with family,, at the [[tables]] for people you only [[practically]] see but once or twice a year,, and [[arguably]] don't get along with [[writ]],, you really do need as much alcohol as you're system can [[stands]] to [[dealing]] with [[Claus]],, so i [[think]] that the [[hypothesis]] was good there, [[procurement]] the family with 250000 [[usd]], was a little on the far fetched side,, but it turned out to [[cooperate]] [[belle]] good for me,, cause it was a [[mutiny]] all the [[ways]] through, it [[showing]] the [[categories]] [[struggling]] of the [[varied]] families. it has lot's of funny moments, [[containing]] embarrassing stuff on the computer for a [[teenagers]] [[guy]]. all in all i [[cared]] this movie and will watch it again [[imminent]] [[Claus]] or [[earlier]] if my [[girl]] [[wish]] too. --------------------------------------------- Result 1122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Monarch Cove was one of the best Friday night's drama shown in a [[long]] time.I am asking the writer to please [[write]] a long series and air it on Lifetime, SOON.Each person was very interesting and did a wonderful job with their lines to make the plot come true. However, the [[movie]] [[needs]] to [[continue]] for a [[long]] time. I would love to [[see]] Bianca and Jake's child grow-up and get a major role in the movie, along with the new grandparents planning for her educational future. Also, bring kathy back to see her niece and help foster her life.It was great seeing the grandparents work out their problems, but the family business needed to be restored to working status,and let us see how Jake and Bianca survive through the marriage years. Monarch Cove was one of the best Friday night's drama shown in a [[longue]] time.I am asking the writer to please [[writes]] a long series and air it on Lifetime, SOON.Each person was very interesting and did a wonderful job with their lines to make the plot come true. However, the [[cinematography]] [[required]] to [[persevere]] for a [[protracted]] time. I would love to [[seeing]] Bianca and Jake's child grow-up and get a major role in the movie, along with the new grandparents planning for her educational future. Also, bring kathy back to see her niece and help foster her life.It was great seeing the grandparents work out their problems, but the family business needed to be restored to working status,and let us see how Jake and Bianca survive through the marriage years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I am astounded at the positive reviews for this thoroughly uninspiring film.

Often with foreign films I skip over reviews that complain about slow pace and seeming "absence of action" as [[many]] of the [[best]] [[international]] films do not [[live]] up to the Western Hollywood [[model]] of [[cinematic]] storytelling.

I enjoy the frequent artfulness and lack of cliché in the [[foreign]] film arena. I [[enjoy]] that [[many]] foreign films don't tie things up in a neat palatable little bow.

That said, this particular [[film]] offered no redemptive [[value]] for the time I wasted watching it. [[No]] meaningful [[character]] development, no engaging [[story]] arc, no [[way]] to get emotionally involved with any of the [[characters]] on screen.

Synopsis: A bunch of emotionally immature uptight prejudiced colonials mistreat their [[slaves]], and a little [[girl]] gets hurt by her only friend when the "house-boy" finally gets fed up and takes his abuse out on her.

[[While]] the above paragraph is poignant and [[dramatic]], this movie will [[bore]] you while [[playing]] out the scenario. I was so unengaged that it took three sittings to [[finish]] it, and I wouldn't have [[even]] done that were it not for the positive [[ratings]].

[[Unless]] you have an academic interest in the period I strongly [[suggest]] steering [[clear]] of this one. I am astounded at the positive reviews for this thoroughly uninspiring film.

Often with foreign films I skip over reviews that complain about slow pace and seeming "absence of action" as [[various]] of the [[optimum]] [[global]] films do not [[inhabit]] up to the Western Hollywood [[modeling]] of [[cinematographic]] storytelling.

I enjoy the frequent artfulness and lack of cliché in the [[external]] film arena. I [[enjoying]] that [[numerous]] foreign films don't tie things up in a neat palatable little bow.

That said, this particular [[filmmaking]] offered no redemptive [[valuing]] for the time I wasted watching it. [[Nos]] meaningful [[personages]] development, no engaging [[histories]] arc, no [[camino]] to get emotionally involved with any of the [[nature]] on screen.

Synopsis: A bunch of emotionally immature uptight prejudiced colonials mistreat their [[slavic]], and a little [[chica]] gets hurt by her only friend when the "house-boy" finally gets fed up and takes his abuse out on her.

[[Despite]] the above paragraph is poignant and [[prodigious]], this movie will [[bored]] you while [[gaming]] out the scenario. I was so unengaged that it took three sittings to [[finis]] it, and I wouldn't have [[yet]] done that were it not for the positive [[assessments]].

[[If]] you have an academic interest in the period I strongly [[proposes]] steering [[clara]] of this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've been going through the AFI's list of the top 100 comedies, and I must say that this is truly one of the worst. Not just of the 90 movies on the list I've seen, but of any movie I've ever seen. Drunks are funny sometimes, Dudley isn't. Liza almost made it worthwhile, but alas... just go watch Arrested Development if you want to see her in something good. Seriously, Dudley laughing and drinking is supposed to be funny? I would highly recommend almost ANY other movie on the AFI's top 100 comedies for more laughs than this. If you want to see a funnier "drunk", try The Thin Man. Funnier movie in general, any Marx Brothers movie will kill (especially if you're as drunk as Arthur). --------------------------------------------- Result 1125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The film begins with a bunch of [[kids]] in [[reform]] school and [[focuses]] on a kid named 'Gabe', who has [[apparently]] [[worked]] hard to [[earn]] his parole. Gabe and his sister move to a new [[neighborhood]] to [[make]] a fresh [[start]] and [[soon]] Gabe meets up with the [[Dead]] [[End]] Kids. The [[Kids]] in this film are [[little]] [[punks]], but they are much less antisocial than they'd been in other [[previous]] [[films]] and down deep, they are well-meaning [[punks]]. [[However]], in this [[neighborhood]] there are [[also]] some [[criminals]] who are perpetrating [[insurance]] [[fraud]] through arson and [[see]] Gabe as a [[convenient]] scapegoat--after all, he'd been to [[reform]] school and no one [[would]] [[believe]] he was innocent once he was framed. So, when Gabe is about ready to be [[sent]] back to "The Big House", it's up to the [[rest]] of the gang to save him and [[expose]] the [[real]] [[crooks]].

The "[[Dead]] [[End]] [[Kids]]" appeared in [[several]] [[Warner]] Brothers [[films]] in the late 1930s and the [[films]] were [[generally]] very [[good]] ([[particularly]] ANGELS WITH [[DIRTY]] FACES). [[However]], after the boys' contracts expired, they went on to Monogram Studios and the [[films]], to put it charitably, were very [[weak]] and formulaic--with Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey being pretty much the [[whole]] [[show]] and the [[group]] being renamed "The Bowery [[Boys]]". Because [[ANGELS]] WASH THEIR [[FACES]] had the [[excellent]] [[writing]] and production [[values]] [[AND]] Hall and Gorcey were not [[constantly]] mugging for the camera, it's a pretty good film--and [[almost]] earns a score of 7 (it's [[REAL]] [[close]]). [[In]] fact, while this isn't a [[great]] [[film]] aesthetically, it's [[sure]] a lot of fun to watch, so I will give it a 7! Sure, it was a tad hokey-particularly towards the [[end]] when the [[kids]] take the [[law]] into their own hands and [[Reagan]] ignores the [[Bill]] of Rights--but it was also [[quite]] [[entertaining]]. The Dead [[End]] [[Kids]] are doing their [[best]] performances and [[Ronald]] [[Reagan]] and Ann Sheridan [[provided]] excellent [[support]]. Sure, this part of the film was illogical and impossible but [[somehow]] it was [[still]] [[funny]] and rather charming--so if you can [[suspend]] [[disbelief]], it [[works]] well. The film begins with a bunch of [[brats]] in [[reformation]] school and [[concentrations]] on a kid named 'Gabe', who has [[allegedly]] [[working]] hard to [[winning]] his parole. Gabe and his sister move to a new [[neighbourhood]] to [[deliver]] a fresh [[startup]] and [[promptly]] Gabe meets up with the [[Deceased]] [[Terminates]] Kids. The [[Kid]] in this film are [[petite]] [[bullies]], but they are much less antisocial than they'd been in other [[anterior]] [[movie]] and down deep, they are well-meaning [[bullies]]. [[Instead]], in this [[vicinity]] there are [[similarly]] some [[perpetrators]] who are perpetrating [[security]] [[deception]] through arson and [[seeing]] Gabe as a [[handy]] scapegoat--after all, he'd been to [[reformation]] school and no one [[should]] [[think]] he was innocent once he was framed. So, when Gabe is about ready to be [[dispatched]] back to "The Big House", it's up to the [[stays]] of the gang to save him and [[reveal]] the [[actual]] [[frauds]].

The "[[Deceased]] [[Terminating]] [[Kid]]" appeared in [[dissimilar]] [[Werner]] Brothers [[film]] in the late 1930s and the [[cinema]] were [[usually]] very [[alright]] ([[namely]] ANGELS WITH [[FILTHY]] FACES). [[Instead]], after the boys' contracts expired, they went on to Monogram Studios and the [[cinematography]], to put it charitably, were very [[flimsy]] and formulaic--with Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey being pretty much the [[total]] [[demonstrating]] and the [[cluster]] being renamed "The Bowery [[Guy]]". Because [[ANGEL]] WASH THEIR [[FACE]] had the [[impressive]] [[write]] and production [[value]] [[UND]] Hall and Gorcey were not [[steadily]] mugging for the camera, it's a pretty good film--and [[hardly]] earns a score of 7 (it's [[TRUE]] [[closing]]). [[During]] fact, while this isn't a [[awesome]] [[movie]] aesthetically, it's [[persuaded]] a lot of fun to watch, so I will give it a 7! Sure, it was a tad hokey-particularly towards the [[ends]] when the [[youths]] take the [[ley]] into their own hands and [[Regan]] ignores the [[Billing]] of Rights--but it was also [[pretty]] [[amusing]]. The Dead [[Ending]] [[Youths]] are doing their [[better]] performances and [[Hsia]] [[Regan]] and Ann Sheridan [[gave]] excellent [[assists]]. Sure, this part of the film was illogical and impossible but [[somewhere]] it was [[yet]] [[fun]] and rather charming--so if you can [[suspending]] [[atheism]], it [[worked]] well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1126 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A squashy slapstick mess posing as a comedy. Elvis Presley plays an Indian bull-riding champ who leaves the rodeo for a stay at home on his folks' desert-spread in Arizona, where government suits have just invested in the family's herd of cattle (which is in dire need of a stud). What director Peter Tewksbury is in dire need of is some narrative skills, though what he lacks in assessment he makes up for in sloppy comedic montages (his social commentary isn't exactly pointed, but Tewksbury does have a satiric bend to his outlandishness and there are some funny scenes). Despite colorful supporting turns by Katy Jurado and Joan Blondell, the general wackiness gets way out of hand, and there's too much hoopin' and hollerin' to sustain much interest. As for Elvis, he's loose and frisky throughout--and while it's nice to see him having fun on-screen, one has to wonder if he had just given up on movies at this point. This shambles of a picture has a distinct what-the-hell feel to it, and though spirits are high, the returns are mostly low. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This is without a [[doubt]] the best film [[Rainer]] Werner Fassbinder ever [[made]] and even with the [[marvelous]] script the film is [[enhanced]] by a great performance by Hanna Schygulla. [[Film]] [[starts]] out with [[Maria]] (Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch) just getting married as the bombs continue to fall and Hermann is shipped out towards the waning days of the war and now Maria and her mother and sister [[must]] [[scrape]] by to survive. Maria decides to [[get]] a job as a dancer/prostitute in a club that caters to American GI's and she meets a black Army soldier named [[Bill]] (Greg Eagles) and they [[start]] to see one another on a [[steady]] [[basis]]. Maria hears that her husband Hermann has died in the [[war]] so she [[gets]] very [[serious]] with [[Bill]]. But one day while getting intimate with [[Bill]] they [[see]] Hermann at the [[door]]. He hasn't [[died]] and when he enters the [[room]] a scuffle [[occurs]] and Maria [[breaks]] a [[bottle]] over Bill's head and he [[dies]]. Hermann takes the blame and he is [[sentenced]] to a [[long]] term in [[jail]] so [[Maria]] [[tells]] him that she will succeed at something and [[get]] him out. The war has [[ended]] and [[Germany]] [[must]] [[rebuild]] and one day on a [[train]] Maria [[meets]] [[Karl]] Oswald ([[Ivan]] Desny) who is a successful [[businessman]] in textiles and she [[uses]] her [[charms]] to [[get]] a [[job]]. Maria is determined to do well and [[climbs]] the corporate [[ladder]] and [[becomes]] Karl's mistress. She [[tells]] him that she will never [[marry]] him but he is in [[love]] with her. Hermann [[gets]] out of [[jail]] but goes to Canada to [[try]] and [[get]] over everything that Maria has [[done]] [[since]] he has been [[locked]] up.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

One day [[Karl]] [[dies]] and leaves Maria just about everything in his will and Maria [[buys]] her own [[house]]. Then Hermann [[finally]] comes [[home]] to his wife and they are both [[ready]] to [[start]] they're [[marriage]] even [[though]] they have been married for some [[time]] now. But Maria [[leaves]] the [[gas]] on the stove and the [[house]] explodes with both of them [[still]] in it.

There are so [[many]] interesting things in this [[film]] that its one of those [[movies]] that can be [[studied]] and [[talked]] about to [[great]] lengths. Like in all Fassbinder [[films]] the use of [[color]] is [[used]] in a very interesting way. As the film begins the tones are brown and gray to represent war torn Germany but as Maria starts to become successful they change to bright rich colors like red and white. The rebuilding of Germany with all the sounds of construction are used as only backdrop and the film stays focused on the exploits of Maria. Fassbinder did want the sounds of rebuilding to remind us of what was going on in Germany at that time. Hanna Schygulla was never better and her performance is the key to the success of this film. With a lesser actress this would have been just another interesting film but Schygulla is so strong that her performance elevates this film to an elite status. Schygulla shows Maria as very determined and smart but at the same time she uses her beauty and femininity to get what she wants. She's not embarrassed nor does she feel guilty about this and Fassbinder wanted to show Maria as a woman who practically sells her soul to survive. Schygulla wasn't nominated for an Academy Award but she gave a great performance that will stand the test of time. Fassbinder himself appears in the film as a peddler and his own mother Lilo Pempeit plays Frau Ehmke. I have heard many things about the ending of the film and it has to do with whether Maria purposely left the gas on. Later in the bathroom she is running water over her wrist and she appears to be sad. This is only speculation and if you think I'm wrong please e-mail me. I think she was overly excited by Hermann being home and left it on by accident (Remember her putting on a dress for no reason?). Then when the will is being read to her its at that point that she learns that Hermann and Karl had become friendly without her knowledge and I think she felt that everything she had done was for nothing. Thats the reason for the bathroom scene. So when the house explodes its by accident. But I think the reason for Fassbinder having an ending like that is to show that anyone who would sell their soul has no business living. Fassbinder was fascinated by survivors but he was also incredibly passionate. In his view Maria can't have it both ways. A fascinating film. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This is without a [[duda]] the best film [[Rainier]] Werner Fassbinder ever [[brought]] and even with the [[wondrous]] script the film is [[improve]] by a great performance by Hanna Schygulla. [[Kino]] [[launch]] out with [[Mario]] (Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch) just getting married as the bombs continue to fall and Hermann is shipped out towards the waning days of the war and now Maria and her mother and sister [[owe]] [[scratching]] by to survive. Maria decides to [[got]] a job as a dancer/prostitute in a club that caters to American GI's and she meets a black Army soldier named [[Billings]] (Greg Eagles) and they [[launch]] to see one another on a [[stables]] [[foundations]]. Maria hears that her husband Hermann has died in the [[wars]] so she [[get]] very [[grave]] with [[Billing]]. But one day while getting intimate with [[Billings]] they [[behold]] Hermann at the [[wears]]. He hasn't [[dying]] and when he enters the [[bedroom]] a scuffle [[transpires]] and Maria [[break]] a [[vial]] over Bill's head and he [[died]]. Hermann takes the blame and he is [[condemned]] to a [[lang]] term in [[imprisonment]] so [[Marija]] [[narrates]] him that she will succeed at something and [[gets]] him out. The war has [[terminated]] and [[Germans]] [[owes]] [[rebuilding]] and one day on a [[forming]] Maria [[conforms]] [[Carl]] Oswald ([[Evan]] Desny) who is a successful [[businessmen]] in textiles and she [[used]] her [[psalms]] to [[got]] a [[labor]]. Maria is determined to do well and [[climbed]] the corporate [[stairway]] and [[become]] Karl's mistress. She [[narrates]] him that she will never [[wedding]] him but he is in [[likes]] with her. Hermann [[get]] out of [[imprisonment]] but goes to Canada to [[endeavour]] and [[got]] over everything that Maria has [[accomplished]] [[because]] he has been [[bolted]] up.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

One day [[Carl]] [[dying]] and leaves Maria just about everything in his will and Maria [[purchased]] her own [[dwellings]]. Then Hermann [[eventually]] comes [[dwellings]] to his wife and they are both [[prepared]] to [[launch]] they're [[marriages]] even [[if]] they have been married for some [[period]] now. But Maria [[sheets]] the [[petrol]] on the stove and the [[households]] explodes with both of them [[yet]] in it.

There are so [[multiple]] interesting things in this [[flick]] that its one of those [[cinema]] that can be [[examined]] and [[mentioned]] about to [[wondrous]] lengths. Like in all Fassbinder [[movie]] the use of [[dye]] is [[utilised]] in a very interesting way. As the film begins the tones are brown and gray to represent war torn Germany but as Maria starts to become successful they change to bright rich colors like red and white. The rebuilding of Germany with all the sounds of construction are used as only backdrop and the film stays focused on the exploits of Maria. Fassbinder did want the sounds of rebuilding to remind us of what was going on in Germany at that time. Hanna Schygulla was never better and her performance is the key to the success of this film. With a lesser actress this would have been just another interesting film but Schygulla is so strong that her performance elevates this film to an elite status. Schygulla shows Maria as very determined and smart but at the same time she uses her beauty and femininity to get what she wants. She's not embarrassed nor does she feel guilty about this and Fassbinder wanted to show Maria as a woman who practically sells her soul to survive. Schygulla wasn't nominated for an Academy Award but she gave a great performance that will stand the test of time. Fassbinder himself appears in the film as a peddler and his own mother Lilo Pempeit plays Frau Ehmke. I have heard many things about the ending of the film and it has to do with whether Maria purposely left the gas on. Later in the bathroom she is running water over her wrist and she appears to be sad. This is only speculation and if you think I'm wrong please e-mail me. I think she was overly excited by Hermann being home and left it on by accident (Remember her putting on a dress for no reason?). Then when the will is being read to her its at that point that she learns that Hermann and Karl had become friendly without her knowledge and I think she felt that everything she had done was for nothing. Thats the reason for the bathroom scene. So when the house explodes its by accident. But I think the reason for Fassbinder having an ending like that is to show that anyone who would sell their soul has no business living. Fassbinder was fascinated by survivors but he was also incredibly passionate. In his view Maria can't have it both ways. A fascinating film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[In]] 1958, Clarksberg was a [[famous]] [[speed]] [[trap]] [[town]]. Much [[revenue]] was [[generated]] by the Sheriff's Department [[catching]] speeders. The ones who [[tried]] to outrun the Sheriff? [[Well]], that [[gave]] the Sheriff a [[chance]] to push them off the Clarksberg [[Curve]] with his [[Plymouth]] cruiser. [[For]] example, in the [[beginning]] of the movie, a couple of [[servicemen]] on [[leave]] [[trying]] to [[get]] back to [[base]] on time are [[pushed]] off to their [[deaths]], if I [[recall]] correctly. [[Then]] one day, a [[stranger]] drove into town. [[Possibly]] the [[coolest]] hot rodder in the [[world]]. Michael McCord. Even his [[name]] is a [[car]] [[name]], as in McCord gaskets. [[In]] [[possibly]] the [[ultimate]] hot rod. A black flamed '34 Ford [[coupe]]. The [[colors]] of death, [[evil]] and [[hellfire]]. He [[gets]] [[picked]] up for [[speeding]] by the Sheriff on [[purpose]]. He [[checks]] out the lay of the [[land]]. He is the brother of one of the Sheriff's victims. He knows how his brother died. The Clarksberg [[government]] is all in favor of the Sheriff. There's only one way to get justice served for the killing of his brother and to fix things so "this ain't a-ever gonna happen again to anyone": [[recreate]] the chase and settle the contest hot-rodder style to the death. He goes out to the Curve and practices. The Sheriff knows McCord knows. The race begins... This is a movie to be remembered by anyone who ever tried to master maneuvering on a certain stretch of road. [[Into]] 1958, Clarksberg was a [[celebrated]] [[rapidity]] [[trapping]] [[municipality]]. Much [[earnings]] was [[produced]] by the Sheriff's Department [[capturing]] speeders. The ones who [[try]] to outrun the Sheriff? [[Good]], that [[delivered]] the Sheriff a [[possibilities]] to push them off the Clarksberg [[Curved]] with his [[Siblings]] cruiser. [[At]] example, in the [[startup]] of the movie, a couple of [[soldiers]] on [[leaving]] [[try]] to [[got]] back to [[based]] on time are [[shoved]] off to their [[dying]], if I [[remember]] correctly. [[Subsequently]] one day, a [[alien]] drove into town. [[Presumably]] the [[coldest]] hot rodder in the [[monde]]. Michael McCord. Even his [[naming]] is a [[motor]] [[naming]], as in McCord gaskets. [[For]] [[conceivably]] the [[final]] hot rod. A black flamed '34 Ford [[haircut]]. The [[coloured]] of death, [[baleful]] and [[hell]]. He [[obtains]] [[taken]] up for [[accelerates]] by the Sheriff on [[intents]]. He [[inspected]] out the lay of the [[territory]]. He is the brother of one of the Sheriff's victims. He knows how his brother died. The Clarksberg [[council]] is all in favor of the Sheriff. There's only one way to get justice served for the killing of his brother and to fix things so "this ain't a-ever gonna happen again to anyone": [[reconstitute]] the chase and settle the contest hot-rodder style to the death. He goes out to the Curve and practices. The Sheriff knows McCord knows. The race begins... This is a movie to be remembered by anyone who ever tried to master maneuvering on a certain stretch of road. --------------------------------------------- Result 1129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It is [[noteworthy]] that [[mine]] is only the third review of this film, [[whereas]] `Patton- Lust for Glory', producer Frank McCarthy's earlier biography of a controversial American general from the Second World [[War]], has to date attracted [[nearly]] a hundred [[comments]]. Like a [[previous]] reviewer, I am intrigued by why one film should have received so much more attention than the other.

One [[difference]] between the two films is that `Patton' is more focused, concentrating on a relatively short period at and immediately after the end of the Second World War, whereas `MacArthur' [[covers]] not only this war but also its subject's role in the Korean war, as well as his period as American governor of occupied Japan during the interlude.

The main difference, however, lies in the way the two leaders are played. Gregory Peck dominates this film even more than George C. Scott dominated `Patton'. Whereas Scott had another major star, Karl Malden, playing opposite him as General Bradley, none of the other actors in `MacArthur' are household names, at least for their film work. Scott, of course, portrayed Patton as aggressive and fiery-tempered, a man who at times was at war with the rest of the human race, not just with the enemy. I suspect that in real life General MacArthur was as volcanic an individual as Patton, but that is not how he appears in this film. Peck's MacArthur is of a more reflective, [[thoughtful]] [[bent]], [[comparable]] to the liberal intellectuals he [[played]] in some of his other films. At [[times]], he even seems to be a man of the political left. Much of his speech on the occasion of the Japanese surrender in 1945 could have been written by a paid-up member of CND, and his policies for reforming Japanese society during the American occupation have a semi-socialist air to them. In an attempt to show something of MacArthur's gift for inspiring leadership, Peck makes him a fine speaker, but his speeches always seem to owe more to the studied tricks of the practised rhetorician than to any fire in the heart. It is as if Atticus Finch from `To Kill a Mockingbird' had put on a general's uniform.

[[Whereas]] Scott attempted a `warts and all' portrait of Patton, the [[criticism]] has been [[made]] that `MacArthur' attempts to gloss over some of its subject's [[less]] attractive qualities. I think that this criticism is a [[fair]] one, particularly as far as the Korean War is concerned. The film gives the impression that MacArthur was a brilliant general who dared stand up to interfering, militarily ignorant politicians who did not know how to fight the war and was sacked for his pains when victory was within his grasp. Many historians, of course, feel that Truman was forced to sack MacArthur because the latter's conduct was becoming a risk to world peace, and had no choice but to accept a stalemate because Stalin would not have allowed his Chinese allies to be humiliated. Even during the Korean scenes, Peck's MacArthur comes across as more idealistic than his real-life original probably was; we see little of his rashness and naivety about political matters. (Truman 's remark `he knows as much about politics as a pig knows about Sunday' was said about Eisenhower, but it could equally well have been applied to MacArthur's approach to international diplomacy). Perhaps the film's attempt to paint out some of MacArthur's warts reflects the period in which it was made. The late seventies, after the twin traumas of Vietnam and Watergate, was a difficult time for America, and a public looking for reassurance might have welcomed a reassuringly heroic depiction of a military figure from the previous generation. Another criticism I would make of the film is that it falls between two stools. If it was intended to be a full biography of MacArthur, something should have been shown of his early life, which is not covered at all. (The first we see of the general is when he is leading the American resistance to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines). One theme that runs throughout the film is the influence of General MacArthur's father, himself a military hero. I would have liked to see what sort of man Arthur MacArthur was, and just why his son considered him to be such a hero and role model. Another interesting way of making the film would have been to concentrate on Korea and on MacArthur's clash with Truman, with equal prominence given to the two men and with actors of similar stature playing them. The way in which the film actually was made seemed to me to be less interesting than either of these alternative approaches.

It would be wrong, however, to give the impression that I disliked the film altogether. Although I may not have agreed with Peck's interpretation of the main role, there is no denying that he played it with his normal professionalism and seriousness. The film as a whole is a good example of a solid, workmanlike biopic, thoughtful and informative. It is a good film, but one that could have been a better one. 7/10.

On a pedantic note, the map which MacArthur is shown using during the Korean War shows the DMZ, the boundary between the two Korean states that did not come into existence until after the war. (The pre-war boundary was the 38th parallel). Also, I think that MacArthur was referring to the `tocsin' of war. War may be toxic, but it is difficult to listen with thirsty ear for a toxin. It is [[dramatic]] that [[mining]] is only the third review of this film, [[although]] `Patton- Lust for Glory', producer Frank McCarthy's earlier biography of a controversial American general from the Second World [[Warfare]], has to date attracted [[practically]] a hundred [[commentaries]]. Like a [[former]] reviewer, I am intrigued by why one film should have received so much more attention than the other.

One [[dispute]] between the two films is that `Patton' is more focused, concentrating on a relatively short period at and immediately after the end of the Second World War, whereas `MacArthur' [[covering]] not only this war but also its subject's role in the Korean war, as well as his period as American governor of occupied Japan during the interlude.

The main difference, however, lies in the way the two leaders are played. Gregory Peck dominates this film even more than George C. Scott dominated `Patton'. Whereas Scott had another major star, Karl Malden, playing opposite him as General Bradley, none of the other actors in `MacArthur' are household names, at least for their film work. Scott, of course, portrayed Patton as aggressive and fiery-tempered, a man who at times was at war with the rest of the human race, not just with the enemy. I suspect that in real life General MacArthur was as volcanic an individual as Patton, but that is not how he appears in this film. Peck's MacArthur is of a more reflective, [[pensive]] [[bend]], [[analogous]] to the liberal intellectuals he [[effected]] in some of his other films. At [[period]], he even seems to be a man of the political left. Much of his speech on the occasion of the Japanese surrender in 1945 could have been written by a paid-up member of CND, and his policies for reforming Japanese society during the American occupation have a semi-socialist air to them. In an attempt to show something of MacArthur's gift for inspiring leadership, Peck makes him a fine speaker, but his speeches always seem to owe more to the studied tricks of the practised rhetorician than to any fire in the heart. It is as if Atticus Finch from `To Kill a Mockingbird' had put on a general's uniform.

[[Whilst]] Scott attempted a `warts and all' portrait of Patton, the [[criticizing]] has been [[effected]] that `MacArthur' attempts to gloss over some of its subject's [[least]] attractive qualities. I think that this criticism is a [[justo]] one, particularly as far as the Korean War is concerned. The film gives the impression that MacArthur was a brilliant general who dared stand up to interfering, militarily ignorant politicians who did not know how to fight the war and was sacked for his pains when victory was within his grasp. Many historians, of course, feel that Truman was forced to sack MacArthur because the latter's conduct was becoming a risk to world peace, and had no choice but to accept a stalemate because Stalin would not have allowed his Chinese allies to be humiliated. Even during the Korean scenes, Peck's MacArthur comes across as more idealistic than his real-life original probably was; we see little of his rashness and naivety about political matters. (Truman 's remark `he knows as much about politics as a pig knows about Sunday' was said about Eisenhower, but it could equally well have been applied to MacArthur's approach to international diplomacy). Perhaps the film's attempt to paint out some of MacArthur's warts reflects the period in which it was made. The late seventies, after the twin traumas of Vietnam and Watergate, was a difficult time for America, and a public looking for reassurance might have welcomed a reassuringly heroic depiction of a military figure from the previous generation. Another criticism I would make of the film is that it falls between two stools. If it was intended to be a full biography of MacArthur, something should have been shown of his early life, which is not covered at all. (The first we see of the general is when he is leading the American resistance to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines). One theme that runs throughout the film is the influence of General MacArthur's father, himself a military hero. I would have liked to see what sort of man Arthur MacArthur was, and just why his son considered him to be such a hero and role model. Another interesting way of making the film would have been to concentrate on Korea and on MacArthur's clash with Truman, with equal prominence given to the two men and with actors of similar stature playing them. The way in which the film actually was made seemed to me to be less interesting than either of these alternative approaches.

It would be wrong, however, to give the impression that I disliked the film altogether. Although I may not have agreed with Peck's interpretation of the main role, there is no denying that he played it with his normal professionalism and seriousness. The film as a whole is a good example of a solid, workmanlike biopic, thoughtful and informative. It is a good film, but one that could have been a better one. 7/10.

On a pedantic note, the map which MacArthur is shown using during the Korean War shows the DMZ, the boundary between the two Korean states that did not come into existence until after the war. (The pre-war boundary was the 38th parallel). Also, I think that MacArthur was referring to the `tocsin' of war. War may be toxic, but it is difficult to listen with thirsty ear for a toxin. --------------------------------------------- Result 1130 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Visually [[stunning]] and full of [[Eastern]] Philosophy, this [[amazing]] martial arts [[fantasy]] is [[brought]] to you by master [[director]] [[Tsui]] Hark, the [[man]] [[behind]] some of the [[best]] [[films]] [[Hong]] Kong [[cinema]] has produced. The special effects are [[beautiful]] and [[imaginative]]. The [[plot]] is a [[bit]] on the cerebral side, but is a refreshing [[change]] from [[films]] that [[treat]] their [[audience]] as if they were morons. [[If]] [[thinking]] is not your forte, [[however]], this may not be your [[movie]]. [[Maybe]] you should [[go]] [[see]] the [[latest]] from the Hollywood studio's no brain club, but if you are [[looking]] for [[something]] more, he's where you will [[find]] it. Visually [[unbelievable]] and full of [[Timor]] Philosophy, this [[wondrous]] martial arts [[utopia]] is [[tabled]] to you by master [[headmaster]] [[Choi]] Hark, the [[men]] [[backside]] some of the [[better]] [[cinema]] [[Kong]] Kong [[film]] has produced. The special effects are [[belle]] and [[creative]]. The [[intrigue]] is a [[bitten]] on the cerebral side, but is a refreshing [[amendment]] from [[cinematography]] that [[processed]] their [[spectators]] as if they were morons. [[Unless]] [[thoughts]] is not your forte, [[still]], this may not be your [[cinematography]]. [[Likely]] you should [[going]] [[behold]] the [[recent]] from the Hollywood studio's no brain club, but if you are [[researching]] for [[somethings]] more, he's where you will [[unearth]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] [[Amazing]] documentary. Saw it on original airdate and on DVD a few times in the last few years. I was shocked that it wasn't even nominated for a Best Documentary Oscar for 2002, the year it was released. No other documentary even comes close.

It was on TV recently for the 5th anniversary, but I missed the added "where are they now" segment at the end, except I did catch that tony now works for the hazmat unit.

I've seen criticism on documentary film-making from a few on this list. I can't see how this could have been done any different. They had less than 6 months to assemble this and get it on the air. The DVD contains more material and background.

I'm also surprised that according to IMDb.com, the brother have had no projects in the four years since. What have they been doing? [[Wondrous]] documentary. Saw it on original airdate and on DVD a few times in the last few years. I was shocked that it wasn't even nominated for a Best Documentary Oscar for 2002, the year it was released. No other documentary even comes close.

It was on TV recently for the 5th anniversary, but I missed the added "where are they now" segment at the end, except I did catch that tony now works for the hazmat unit.

I've seen criticism on documentary film-making from a few on this list. I can't see how this could have been done any different. They had less than 6 months to assemble this and get it on the air. The DVD contains more material and background.

I'm also surprised that according to IMDb.com, the brother have had no projects in the four years since. What have they been doing? --------------------------------------------- Result 1132 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] This is a movie that should be [[seen]] by everyone if you [[want]] to [[see]] [[great]] acting. [[Mr]]. [[Torn]] and Ms Farrel do an [[outstanding]] [[job]]. I think they should have it on TV again so a [[new]] [[audience]] can [[enjoy]] it. [[Wonderful]] performances.

It [[gives]] you a [[real]] feel of what the [[pioneers]] had to [[go]] through both physically and [[emotionally]]. [[Great]] unheard of movie.

It was [[done]] when Ms. Farrel was very young. I had always thought of her as a comedian, but this [[certainly]] is not a [[comedy]] and she is just [[wonderful]]. There is very little dialogs, but that just make it seem more [[real]]. [[Mr]]. [[Torn]] as [[always]] is a [[great]] [[presence]] and just his [[breathing]] has [[great]] [[feeling]]. I [[must]] [[see]] movie. This is a movie that should be [[noticed]] by everyone if you [[wanted]] to [[consults]] [[wondrous]] acting. [[Mister]]. [[Buzzed]] and Ms Farrel do an [[unpaid]] [[workplace]]. I think they should have it on TV again so a [[newer]] [[viewers]] can [[enjoying]] it. [[Wondrous]] performances.

It [[donne]] you a [[genuine]] feel of what the [[pioneer]] had to [[going]] through both physically and [[romantically]]. [[Terrific]] unheard of movie.

It was [[played]] when Ms. Farrel was very young. I had always thought of her as a comedian, but this [[obviously]] is not a [[comedian]] and she is just [[wondrous]]. There is very little dialogs, but that just make it seem more [[actual]]. [[Hannes]]. [[Ripped]] as [[unceasingly]] is a [[wondrous]] [[attendance]] and just his [[respiration]] has [[wondrous]] [[impression]]. I [[gotta]] [[consults]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You could stage a version of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" with sock puppets and I'll probably watch it. Ever since I was a child, this has been one of my favorite stories. Maybe it's the idea that there is good in everyone, and that therefore no one is beyond redemption, that appeals to me, but for whatever reason I never miss an opportunity to watch one of the many screen adaptations of this timeless classic when they're on TV as they inevitably are this time of year.

What makes this version really stand out is the somber gravitas that the cast bring to their respective roles. Lines we've heard dozens of times in the past take on a whole new intensity, and each character becomes more real and believable in the hands of this wonderful ensemble.

George C. Scott was nominated for an Emmy in 1985 for this role. It is to his everlasting credit that rather than sleepwalking through this oft-portrayed role of Scrooge, he instead gave it a fresh interpretation that was, in my opinion, one of his finest performances ever. He wisely did not attempt a British accent, instead delivering his lines in that famous gravelly voice. His Scrooge is not merely a cranky old man (as he is so often portrayed), but a man who harbors a profound anger against the world. As he is visited in turn by each of the Three Spirits, we understand how this anger took root, grew, and ultimately strangled his soul. As he is forced to review his life, we see him alternately softening, and then relapsing again into unrepentant obstinacy. And in the great dramatic scene when he, kneeling and weeping at his own grave, begs for mercy as he attempts to convince the third spirit of his repentance and desire to alter his life, we see a man who has been utterly broken and brought to his knees literally and figuratively. Scott has made Scrooge utterly believable and painfully human.

Impressive as Scott's performance is, the ensemble of supporting actors contributes significantly the this version's dark beauty. Fred Holywell, Scrooge's nephew, is an excellent example of this. Often portrayed as an affable buffoon, here he is played by Roger Rees with an emotional intensity missing from earlier portrayals. When he implores Scrooge, "I ask nothing of you. I want nothing from you. Why can't we be friends?", we see in his face not only his frustration, but his pain at Scrooge's self-imposed separation from his only living relative. It is a moving performance, and one of the movie's most dramatic scenes.

Even more magnificent is the performance given by the wonderful English actor Frank Finlay as Scrooge's late partner, Jacob Marley. In most versions of this tale, the scene with Marley tends to be a bit of a low point in the film, simply because it's difficult to portray a dead man convincingly, and the results are usually just plain silly (ooooh, look, it's a scary ghost.......not!) In this version, it is perhaps the most riveting scene in the whole movie. Marley's entrance, as the locks on Scrooge's door fly open of their own accord and the sound of chains rattling echo throughout the house, is wonderfully creepy. But Finlay's Marley is no ethereal spirit. He is a tortured soul, inspiring both horror and pity. Marley may be a ghost, but his rage and regret over a life wasted on the pursuit of wealth, and his despair at his realization that his sins are now beyond redress, are still very human. As portrayed by Finlay, we have no problem believing that even the flinty Scrooge would be shaken by this nightmarish apparition. Finlay really steals the scene here, something not easy to do when you're opposite George C. Scott.

And it just goes on and on, one remarkable performance after another, making it seem like you're experiencing this story for the first time. Edward Woodward (remember him from the Equalizer?) is by turns both jovial and menacing as the Ghost of Christmas Present. When he delivers the famous line, "it may well be that in the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than MILLIONS like this poor man's child" he is no longer a jolly Santa Claus surrogate, but an avenging angel who gives Scrooge a much needed verbal spanking.

Susannah York is a wonderfully tart tongued Mrs. Cratchit, and David Warner brings marvelous depth to the long suffering Bob Cratchit, a man who goes through life bearing the triple crosses of poverty, a sick child, and an insufferable boss. His face alternately shows his cheerful courage, and also, at times, his weariness, in the face of intolerable circumstances. Later, in the scene in which Scrooge is shown by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come the Cratchit family after the death of Tiny Tim, Warner's performance, while hardly uttering a word, will move you to tears. --------------------------------------------- Result 1134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Im not a big Tim Matheson fan but i have to admit i liked this film.It was dark and a small bit disturbing with some scenes a bit edgy,i don't know were to classify this film its a bit SF and a bit horror slash thriller.I saw this at about 2.00am or so on my local channel there was nothing else on so i decided to watch it.If you have not seen this film id recommend it its not really that bad,the characters are interesting enough but not really explored to their full potential which could have made this film even more better.I don,t know if this film went to the cinema but it felt like it was made for TV or went straight to video,i for one would buy this if it,s on DVD it fits well with my type of film and has a small bit of the X-FILES story attached to it.Government undertakings or shifty corporations involved in dodgy shadowy dealings.Overall a good film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Would have better strengthened considerably by making it as a

50 minute episode of the Outer Limits. Too much superfluous material and stuff like the chief bad guy looking like he'd escaped from The Phantom of the Opera didn't help. The whole 'Night of the Living Dead' sequence was extremely silly and quite unnecessary. After all, if the dead were to punish anyone for their sins, now remind me exactly who was killing everyone again? --------------------------------------------- Result 1136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ****SPOILERS**** Powerhouse movie that shows how men in desperate situations can go so far as sacrifice their best friends and family members and not realize what monsters that they are by doing it. Until like in the case of bull-like Gypo Noland, Victor Mclaglen, it's too much too late.

It's 1922 and the hight of the Black & Tan Irish revolt against the mighty British Empire with the Tans, British occupying troops, on the lookout for wanted Irish Republican rebel Frankie McPhillip, Wallace Ford, wanted for the killing of a Briish soldier. Gypo a good, really the best, friend of the fugitive McPhillip is down on his luck not having a job with his girlfriend Katie, Margot Grahame, forced to turn tricks in the Dublin red-light district in order to pay her rent.

After an outraged Gypo worked over a potential John who want's to spend a few hours with Katie, for a shilling or two, an angry Katie tells the not so bright Gyro that he's preventing her for supporting herself with the only bankable asset she has , her body. Katie also tells Gypo that he should wake up to reality and realize what a desperate situation that she's in. Telling the mind-numbed Gypo that it would only cost ten pound sterling for her to go to America, and get out of the poverty of Ireland, Gypo suddenly remembers a poster of his good friend Frankie McPhillip that he just saw announcing a reward of 20 pound sterling. Thats enough money for both him and Kaite to travel to America.

Gypo going to a local Dublin flop house and soup kitchen to get a free meal is startled to run into his friend Frankie McPhillip. Frankie tells him that he snuck into Dublin to see both his mother Mrs. McPhillip and sister Mary, Una O'Connor & Heather Angel, and if he can make sure that everything is safe for him to go home and later leave for his Irish Republican unit outside the city.

All Gypo can see in Frankie's face is the 20 pound sterling reward for him being turned into the police! Without as much of a second thought, after he assured Frankie that everything is all right, Gypo secretly goes to the police and informs on his friend who's later shot and killed in a police and Tan shootout in his moms house.

With the deed done the chief of police hands over the 20 pound sterling, much like thirty pieces of silver, to an almost emotionless Gypo who takes it and sneaks out the back door of the police station so that one one can see him. You can see in the police chief's face and actions that he has nothing but utter contempt for Gypo's betrayal of his friend Frankie McPhillip. Even though he was wanted for murder and an enemy of the British Empire. That's how low traitors or informers are held even by those whom they secretly work for.

Gypo turns out to be his own worst enemy after his betrayal of Frankie as his conscience takes control of his mind. Gypo sees and hears everyone, including his unsuspecting girlfriend Katie, pointing a finger and implicating him in Frankie's betrayal and death at the hands of the British authorities. Gypo's guilty mind has him getting himself royally and gloriously drunk, on the reward money, that by the time he's forced to to admit his crime to his Irish Republican Army colleagues, who had the almost dead drunk and slobbering Gypo on trial, the money was just about gone in his partying drinking and whoring.

Whatever good feelings, if that's possible, that you had for the weak minded and strong shouldered Gypo was completely demolished when in an act of total desperation, in order to keep from getting shot, he falsely implicate an innocent man Mulligan, Donald Meek, in his crime of informing on his friend Frankie McPhillip. Which is quickly exposed as a total fabrication by non other then the guilt-ridden Gypo himself. The dye is then cast as straws are drawn for who would be the one to put a bullet in Gypo's head for the final gut spilling chapter of this heart wrenching and unforgettable Crime & Punishment classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 1137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just the ultimate masterpiece in my opinion. Every line, every phrase, every picture is exactly in place and Lindsay Crouse and Joe Mantegna are just THE cool shrink and the sleazy con-man, so well cast. 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] The [[Education]] of Little Tree is just not as good as it [[could]] have been. [[Little]] Tree's education is about things [[like]] the [[circle]] of [[life]] and how you should [[look]] at a [[star]] to [[help]] you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the [[idiot]] back [[talks]] the [[teacher]] at the boarding [[school]] [[place]] he starts crying and [[talking]] to the [[sky]]. [[Oh]] my gosh. Sure, the [[lady]] was a [[little]] harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the [[audience]] [[thinking]] that [[Little]] Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! [[Talking]] to a star is not [[going]] to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring [[guardians]] are not [[always]] right. The [[Tuition]] of Little Tree is just not as good as it [[did]] have been. [[Small]] Tree's education is about things [[iike]] the [[circling]] of [[lives]] and how you should [[peek]] at a [[superstar]] to [[aids]] you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the [[jackass]] back [[talking]] the [[professors]] at the boarding [[tuition]] [[placing]] he starts crying and [[talk]] to the [[skye]]. [[Ah]] my gosh. Sure, the [[dame]] was a [[petit]] harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the [[spectators]] [[thoughts]] that [[Small]] Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! [[Speaking]] to a star is not [[go]] to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring [[keepers]] are not [[perpetually]] right. --------------------------------------------- Result 1139 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This incredibly overrated anime [[television]] series (26 episodes, 25 minutes each) is about a 14-year-old boy (and two of his [[girl]] classmates) who pilots a [[giant]] robot to [[defend]] Japan against invading beings called [[Angels]]. There is very little explanation [[given]] to the Angels or why their [[numbers]] have [[increased]] in [[recent]] times, and they just seem to pop out of nowhere for no [[apparent]] [[reason]] (why not [[attack]] all at once [[instead]] of at spaced out [[intervals]] that are convenient for the [[humans]] you're attempting to [[destroy]]?). The [[robot]] [[fight]] scenes attempt to [[employ]] a [[variety]] of [[obstacles]], but the [[action]] itself is poorly [[executed]] and boring to watch. [[Almost]] [[every]] episode [[seems]] like a [[waste]] of space where [[nothing]] of interest [[occurs]].

Some might be [[intrigued]] by [[fans]] who [[mention]] the (very few) [[symbolic]] [[references]] herein, but that's all they are - [[shallow]] one-liners to [[religious]] or philosophical [[concepts]] that are randomly [[tossed]] in with zero [[craftsmanship]]. As a [[whole]] the [[series]] is [[incredibly]] [[tedious]] due to the superficiality of the [[characters]], who are [[really]] nothing more than self-pitying [[crybabies]]. The [[psychology]] is [[pathetic]], with [[hopelessly]] [[simplistic]] [[conflicts]] like "I [[hate]] my father" repeated over and over and over and over again with no [[progression]] beyond their face [[value]]. It's no understatement to [[say]] that these characters plunge this series from time-wasting mediocrity to anger-inducing [[garbage]] during the [[final]] [[episodes]] with their [[endless]], angst-ridden diatribes of [[excessively]] repetitive psychobabble (some of which is [[totally]] [[meaningless]]).

I'm not [[kidding]] when I [[say]] that this series just [[got]] [[worse]] and worse as it [[progressed]]. [[Every]] day I'd [[look]] at the DVD set sitting on my [[living]] room [[table]] and [[say]] to myself, "[[Damn]], I've gotta watch the [[next]] episode at some point. (sigh) I may as well slug through another one tonight." The [[real]] kicker was that the [[episodes]] were only 25 minutes [[long]], [[yet]] they were somehow able to digress into a [[completely]] uninteresting borefest within the [[opening]] 10 minutes. This is [[coming]] from a guy who will happily [[sit]] through 150-minute [[films]] with [[glacial]] pacing, so my [[criticism]] of this [[series]] is most [[damning]] [[indeed]].

Never in my entire life have I [[despised]] watching a series as much as "Evangelion." I had already [[purchased]] it based off of all the fanatical comments on IMDb, and I certainly wasn't going to let it collect dust after spending my hard-earned money. What followed was 10 hours of pure, unmitigated torture. My love/hate relationship with anime is turning into a hate/love relationship after this highly acclaimed disaster.

"Evangelion" represents everything anime should NOT be - massive quantities of dull, pretentious tripe under the guise of intelligent cinema. The universal acclaim for this piece of crap is simply unbelievable; and the ridiculous assertions by fans that this series as "one of mankind's greatest achievements" is probably the most stupifying comment I've ever heard on IMDb - and I've seen some doozies. This incredibly overrated anime [[televisions]] series (26 episodes, 25 minutes each) is about a 14-year-old boy (and two of his [[girls]] classmates) who pilots a [[monumental]] robot to [[defending]] Japan against invading beings called [[Angel]]. There is very little explanation [[bestowed]] to the Angels or why their [[digit]] have [[widen]] in [[freshly]] times, and they just seem to pop out of nowhere for no [[overt]] [[reasons]] (why not [[attacks]] all at once [[however]] of at spaced out [[ranges]] that are convenient for the [[beings]] you're attempting to [[destruction]]?). The [[robots]] [[combat]] scenes attempt to [[employing]] a [[multiple]] of [[obstacle]], but the [[measures]] itself is poorly [[conducted]] and boring to watch. [[Circa]] [[each]] episode [[seem]] like a [[wastes]] of space where [[nothin]] of interest [[happens]].

Some might be [[puzzled]] by [[enthusiasts]] who [[mentioning]] the (very few) [[emblematic]] [[reference]] herein, but that's all they are - [[superficial]] one-liners to [[religion]] or philosophical [[conceptions]] that are randomly [[thrown]] in with zero [[workmanship]]. As a [[entire]] the [[serial]] is [[inordinately]] [[tiresome]] due to the superficiality of the [[attribute]], who are [[truly]] nothing more than self-pitying [[whiners]]. The [[psyche]] is [[unhappy]], with [[irretrievably]] [[facile]] [[squabbles]] like "I [[hates]] my father" repeated over and over and over and over again with no [[promotions]] beyond their face [[values]]. It's no understatement to [[told]] that these characters plunge this series from time-wasting mediocrity to anger-inducing [[refuse]] during the [[last]] [[bouts]] with their [[countless]], angst-ridden diatribes of [[exceedingly]] repetitive psychobabble (some of which is [[entirely]] [[unnecessary]]).

I'm not [[mocking]] when I [[told]] that this series just [[did]] [[worst]] and worse as it [[advances]]. [[Everything]] day I'd [[peek]] at the DVD set sitting on my [[iife]] room [[chalkboard]] and [[says]] to myself, "[[Fuck]], I've gotta watch the [[forthcoming]] episode at some point. (sigh) I may as well slug through another one tonight." The [[veritable]] kicker was that the [[bouts]] were only 25 minutes [[longer]], [[again]] they were somehow able to digress into a [[perfectly]] uninteresting borefest within the [[opens]] 10 minutes. This is [[forthcoming]] from a guy who will happily [[seated]] through 150-minute [[film]] with [[glacier]] pacing, so my [[critic]] of this [[serials]] is most [[stinging]] [[actually]].

Never in my entire life have I [[despise]] watching a series as much as "Evangelion." I had already [[acquire]] it based off of all the fanatical comments on IMDb, and I certainly wasn't going to let it collect dust after spending my hard-earned money. What followed was 10 hours of pure, unmitigated torture. My love/hate relationship with anime is turning into a hate/love relationship after this highly acclaimed disaster.

"Evangelion" represents everything anime should NOT be - massive quantities of dull, pretentious tripe under the guise of intelligent cinema. The universal acclaim for this piece of crap is simply unbelievable; and the ridiculous assertions by fans that this series as "one of mankind's greatest achievements" is probably the most stupifying comment I've ever heard on IMDb - and I've seen some doozies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I would of given this film a zero out of [[ten]], but i will give it a two. Reason One is that Shah Rukh Khan appears in the film, which is not really a reason. Last Point is that Rani Appears in this film and does a smooch with Kamal. I [[Love]] Rani very much and have a respect that she is a great actress. Which is why i didn't enjoy her in this movie [[kissing]] [[Kamal]], but its no big [[deal]]. Anyway enough of the bedroom scenes that made this [[film]] [[noticeable]], lets actually talk about this film. Is it good or [[bad]], I think its a [[completely]] [[rubbish]] movie that [[made]] me [[yawn]]. Me being a [[Fantastic]] [[critic]], you can [[see]] my other 250+ review's by clicking on my name, I have great taste. The [[movie]] is not [[entertaining]] is one thing and if this is [[suppose]] to be hard hitting [[cinema]], why is there no [[morale]] in this movie. Its a biased movie [[thats]] not a [[true]] [[story]] and it [[stinks]]. Watching Kamal [[kissing]] these actresses makes me sick, Man [[cant]] kiss properly anyway. I would of given this film a zero out of [[dix]], but i will give it a two. Reason One is that Shah Rukh Khan appears in the film, which is not really a reason. Last Point is that Rani Appears in this film and does a smooch with Kamal. I [[Amore]] Rani very much and have a respect that she is a great actress. Which is why i didn't enjoy her in this movie [[hugging]] [[Kemal]], but its no big [[treat]]. Anyway enough of the bedroom scenes that made this [[filmmaking]] [[notable]], lets actually talk about this film. Is it good or [[unfavourable]], I think its a [[fully]] [[trash]] movie that [[accomplished]] me [[yawns]]. Me being a [[Exquisite]] [[criticisms]], you can [[seeing]] my other 250+ review's by clicking on my name, I have great taste. The [[cinematographic]] is not [[entertain]] is one thing and if this is [[presume]] to be hard hitting [[film]], why is there no [[morals]] in this movie. Its a biased movie [[aint]] not a [[veritable]] [[conte]] and it [[reeks]]. Watching Kamal [[kissed]] these actresses makes me sick, Man [[isnt]] kiss properly anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 1141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you hate redneck accents, you'll hate this movie. And to make it worse, you see Patrick Swayze, a has been trying to be a redneck. I really can't stand redneck accents. I like Billy Bob Thornton, he was good in Slingblade, but he was annoying in this movie. And what kind of name is Lonnie Earl? How much more hickish can this movie get? The storyline was stupid. I'm usually not this judgemental of movies, but I couldn't stand this movie. If you want a good Billy Bob Thornton movie, go see Slingblade.

My mom found this movie for $5.95 at Wal Mart...figures...I think I'll wrap it up and give it to my Grandma for Christmas. It could just be that I can't stand redneck accents usually, or that I can't stand Patrick Swayze. Maybe if Patrick Swayze wasn't in it. I didn't laugh once in the movie. I laugh at anything stupid usually. If they had shown someones fingers getting smashed, I might have laughed. people's fingers getting smashed by accident always makes me laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's very sad that Lucian Pintilie does not stop making movies. They get worse every time. Niki and Flo (2003) is a depressing stab at the camera. It's unfortunate that from the many movies that are made yearly in Romania , the worst of them get to be sent abroad ( e.g. Chicago International Film Festival). This movie without a plot , acting or script is a waste of time and money. Score: 0.02 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1143 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[really]] [[liked]] this version of '[[Vanishing]] Point' as [[opposed]] to the 1971 [[version]]. I [[found]] the 1971 version [[quite]] [[boring]]. [[If]] I can get up in the middle of a movie a few [[times]](as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that [[great]]. Of course, this [[could]] be due to the [[fact]] that I was only nine at the [[time]] the 1971 [[version]] was [[brought]] out. [[However]], I have [[seen]] [[many]] remakes, where I have [[liked]] the original and older one better. I found that the [[plot]] of the 1997 [[version]] was more [[understandable]] and had [[basically]] kept [[true]] to the original without [[undermining]] the [[meaning]] of the 1971 [[version]]. [[In]] my [[opinion]], I [[felt]] the 1997 [[version]] had more [[excitement]] and wasn't so "blase".([[Boring]]) I [[truthfully]] [[loved]] this version of '[[Disappearing]] Point' as [[opposing]] to the 1971 [[stepping]]. I [[uncovered]] the 1971 version [[pretty]] [[bored]]. [[Though]] I can get up in the middle of a movie a few [[moments]](as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that [[fantastic]]. Of course, this [[wo]] be due to the [[facto]] that I was only nine at the [[times]] the 1971 [[stepping]] was [[lodged]] out. [[Still]], I have [[watched]] [[innumerable]] remakes, where I have [[enjoyed]] the original and older one better. I found that the [[intrigue]] of the 1997 [[stepping]] was more [[comprehensible]] and had [[essentially]] kept [[authentic]] to the original without [[eroding]] the [[sens]] of the 1971 [[stepping]]. [[For]] my [[vista]], I [[deemed]] the 1997 [[stepping]] had more [[ferment]] and wasn't so "blase".([[Bored]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 1144 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The short that [[starts]] this [[film]] is the [[true]] footage of a guy named Gary, apparently it was taken [[randomly]] in the parking lot of a television station where [[Gary]] works in the [[town]] of [[Beaver]]. [[Gary]] is a little "different"; he is an impersonator and drives an old Chevy named Farrah (after Fawcett). [[Lo]] and [[behold]] the filmmaker gets a letter from Gary some time later inviting him to return to Beaver to get some footage of the local talent contest he has put together, including Gary's [[staggering]] performace as Olivia Newton [[Dawn]]. Oh, my. The two shorts that follow are Gary's [[story]], the same one you just witnessed only the first is portrayed by Sean Penn and the second by Crispin Glover titled "The Orkly Kid." If you are in the mood for making fun of someone this is definitely the film to watch. I was doubled over with laughter through most of it, especially Crispins performance which could definitely stand on it's own. [[When]] it was over, I had to rewind the film to once again watch the [[real]] Gary and all his [[shining]] [[idiocy]]. Although Olivia was the focus, I would have liked to have seen one of the "fictitious" shorts take a jab at Gary's Barry Manilow impersonation, whic h was equally ridiculous. The short that [[launch]] this [[movie]] is the [[real]] footage of a guy named Gary, apparently it was taken [[indiscriminately]] in the parking lot of a television station where [[Gari]] works in the [[urban]] of [[Beavers]]. [[Garry]] is a little "different"; he is an impersonator and drives an old Chevy named Farrah (after Fawcett). [[Oscillator]] and [[admire]] the filmmaker gets a letter from Gary some time later inviting him to return to Beaver to get some footage of the local talent contest he has put together, including Gary's [[dazzling]] performace as Olivia Newton [[Aurore]]. Oh, my. The two shorts that follow are Gary's [[history]], the same one you just witnessed only the first is portrayed by Sean Penn and the second by Crispin Glover titled "The Orkly Kid." If you are in the mood for making fun of someone this is definitely the film to watch. I was doubled over with laughter through most of it, especially Crispins performance which could definitely stand on it's own. [[Whenever]] it was over, I had to rewind the film to once again watch the [[actual]] Gary and all his [[glittering]] [[ineptitude]]. Although Olivia was the focus, I would have liked to have seen one of the "fictitious" shorts take a jab at Gary's Barry Manilow impersonation, whic h was equally ridiculous. --------------------------------------------- Result 1145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] yes i have a copy of it on VHS uncut in great condition that i transfered to DVD and if anyone one wants to bring back the memories of a Christmas classic please emil me at dmd2222@verizon.net.i searched everywhere and i found nothing on this and i thought that i cant be the only one on this planet that has this classic on tape there has to be other people and if they do i fit in with them being that very very few that has this classic so i consider myself lucky and i have all of the muppets Christmas except one that john denver did with the muppets again i thinks its called a smokey mountain holiday im not to sure but its close. --------------------------------------------- Result 1146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Well, was Morgan Freeman any more [[unusual]] as God than [[George]] Burns? This [[film]] sure was better than that bore, "[[Oh]], [[God]]". I was [[totally]] [[engrossed]] and LMAO all the way through. Carrey was [[perfect]] as the out of [[sorts]] anchorman wannabe, and Aniston carried off her part as the [[frustrated]] girlfriend in her [[usual]] well played performance. I, for one, don't [[consider]] her to be either ugly or untalented. I think my [[favorite]] scene was when [[Carrey]] [[opened]] up the [[file]] [[cabinet]] [[thinking]] it could never hold his [[life]] [[history]]. See if you can [[spot]] the [[file]] in the [[cabinet]] that holds the [[events]] of his [[bathroom]] [[humor]]: I was rolling over this one. [[Well]] [[written]] and even [[better]] [[played]] out, this comedy will go down as one of this funnyman's best. Well, was Morgan Freeman any more [[exceptional]] as God than [[Georges]] Burns? This [[cinematography]] sure was better than that bore, "[[Ohhh]], [[Christ]]". I was [[downright]] [[absorbed]] and LMAO all the way through. Carrey was [[irreproachable]] as the out of [[genus]] anchorman wannabe, and Aniston carried off her part as the [[disappointed]] girlfriend in her [[ordinary]] well played performance. I, for one, don't [[examining]] her to be either ugly or untalented. I think my [[preferred]] scene was when [[Cary]] [[started]] up the [[filing]] [[ministers]] [[think]] it could never hold his [[lives]] [[story]]. See if you can [[blemish]] the [[dossiers]] in the [[ministers]] that holds the [[happenings]] of his [[crapper]] [[comedy]]: I was rolling over this one. [[Good]] [[writes]] and even [[best]] [[served]] out, this comedy will go down as one of this funnyman's best. --------------------------------------------- Result 1147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The main problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't really saying what it thinks it's saying.

[[In]] an audacious - I hesitate to use the word "inspired" - [[act]] of street [[theater]], Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two [[student]] filmmakers from the [[Czech]] Republic, pulled off a [[major]] corporate hoax to serve as the [[basis]] for their [[movie]]: they [[deliberately]] [[fabricated]] a [[phony]] "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart [[Super]] [[Store]]), built an [[entire]] ad [[campaign]] around it - replete with billboards, [[radio]] and TV [[spots]], an [[official]] logo, a catchy [[theme]] song and [[photos]] of fake [[merchandise]] - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" [[would]] show up to their [[creation]] on [[opening]] day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually [[existed]].

One might well [[ask]], "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good [[question]], but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that [[satisfying]] a one. Essentially, we're [[told]] that the [[purpose]] of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of [[advertising]]. And the [[movie]] makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. [[higher]]) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the [[advertisements]] [[encouraging]] them to [[join]] the [[European]] Union. Fair enough - [[especially]] when one [[considers]] that the actual [[advertisers]] who agree to [[go]] along with the stunt declaim against the [[unethical]] nature of [[lying]] to customers, all the while [[justifying]] their [[collaboration]] in the [[deception]] by claiming it to be a [[form]] of "[[research]]" into what does and does not [[work]] in [[advertising]]. In a [[way]], by [[allowing]] themselves to be [[caught]] on camera making these [[comments]], these ad [[men]] and [[women]] are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor [[unsuspecting]] people who are the [[primary]] target of the [[ruse]].

But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not [[hit]] its [[intended]] target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who [[ultimately]] come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they proceed to make fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.

No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.

I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed. The main problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't really saying what it thinks it's saying.

[[For]] an audacious - I hesitate to use the word "inspired" - [[acts]] of street [[cinema]], Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two [[pupils]] filmmakers from the [[Czechoslovak]] Republic, pulled off a [[principal]] corporate hoax to serve as the [[foundations]] for their [[filmmaking]]: they [[advisedly]] [[manufactured]] a [[fraudulent]] "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart [[Gorgeous]] [[Storing]]), built an [[whole]] ad [[campaigns]] around it - replete with billboards, [[radios]] and TV [[commercials]], an [[formal]] logo, a catchy [[thematic]] song and [[pictures]] of fake [[commodities]] - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" [[ought]] show up to their [[formation]] on [[opened]] day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually [[prevailed]].

One might well [[calls]], "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good [[issue]], but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that [[pleasing]] a one. Essentially, we're [[say]] that the [[goal]] of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of [[advertisement]]. And the [[filmmaking]] makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. [[supreme]]) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the [[advertising]] [[stimulating]] them to [[participates]] the [[Europe]] Union. Fair enough - [[specially]] when one [[believes]] that the actual [[publicists]] who agree to [[going]] along with the stunt declaim against the [[immoral]] nature of [[lied]] to customers, all the while [[justify]] their [[cooperating]] in the [[cheating]] by claiming it to be a [[shape]] of "[[investigate]]" into what does and does not [[works]] in [[advertisement]]. In a [[routing]], by [[enables]] themselves to be [[captured]] on camera making these [[observations]], these ad [[man]] and [[woman]] are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor [[naive]] people who are the [[elemental]] target of the [[trick]].

But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not [[slugged]] its [[destined]] target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who [[eventually]] come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they proceed to make fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.

No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.

I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Perfectly Stupid Weapon. I think the guys dancing at the beginning of one of Steven Segal's movies was intented to mock Jeff doing his forms to dance music at the beginning of this stupid movie. The plot is predictable, the fights were fair and Jeff acts about as well as the sofa he beats with some sort of weapon in one scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 1149 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Remember]] [[Ralph]] Bakshi? The guy that was an animator on Terrytoons, then on Paramount Cartoon Studios, after that, he was a director on Fritz the Cat 1 & 2 and [[Heavy]] Traffic? [[Well]], this is Coonskin. And it's actually pretty [[good]]. Racist, but good. The movie takes place in Harlem [[Nights]] (No, duh, it was a working title.) but with a twist that becomes a lampoon of a Disney movie, Song of the South.

It's about [[Sampson]] ([[Barry]] White) and the Preacherman (Charles Gordone) [[rush]] to help their friend, Randy (Philip Michael Thomas) [[escape]] from prison, but are stopped by a roadblock and wind up in a shootout with the police. While waiting for them, Randy unwillingly listens to fellow escapee Pappy (Scatman Crothers), as he begins to tell Randy a story about "three guys, I [[used]] to know, just like you and your [[friends]]". Pappy's [[story]] is [[told]] in animation set against live-action background photos and footage.

Brother Rabbit (voice of Thomas), Brother Bear (voice of White), and [[Preacher]] Fox (voice of Gordone) decide to pack up and leave their Southern settings after the bank mortgages their [[home]] and [[sells]] it to a man who turns it into a brothel. [[Arriving]] in Harlem, Rabbit, Bear, and Fox find that it isn't all that it's made out to be. They encounter a con man named Simple Savior, a phony revolutionary leader who purports to be the "cousin" of Black Jesus, and that he gives his followers "the strength to kill whites". [[In]] a flashy stage performance in his "[[church]]", Savior acts out being brutalized by symbols of black oppression—represented by images of John Wayne, Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon, before asking his parishioners for "donations".

Rabbit first goes up against Madigan, a virulently racist and homophobic white [[police]] officer and the [[bag]] [[man]] for the [[Mafia]], who [[demonstrates]] his contempt for African [[Americans]] in [[various]] [[ways]], [[including]] a [[refusal]] to [[bathe]] before an [[anticipated]] encounter with them (he [[believes]] they're not worth it). When Madigan [[finds]] out that [[Rabbit]] has been [[taking]] his payoffs, he and his cohorts, [[Ruby]] and [[Bobby]], are [[led]] to a nightclub called "The Cottontail".

A black stripper distracts him while an LSD sugar cube is dropped into his drink. Madigan, while under the influence of his spiked drink, is then maneuvered into a sexual liaison with a stereotypically effeminate gay man, and then shoved into clothes that women were representative of the racist archetype, adorned in something racist, and finally shoved out the back of the club where he discovers that Ruby and Bobby are dead.

Then, while recovering from his delirium of being drugged, [[shoots]] his gun around [[randomly]], and is shot to death by the police after shooting one of them.

Rabbit, Bear, Fox and the opponent boxer rush out of the boxing arena as it blows up. The live-action story ends with Randy and Pappy escaping while being shot at by various white cops, but managing to make it out alive.

This movie was controversial at that time of release, and was re-edited by the director several times under the title, Street Fight, which is obvious, since Street Fight is a 2005 documentary about racism in the streets. In fact, this movie has the same subject as the documentary.

That caused Bryanston Pictures, the distributor of this film and the original Tobe Hopper classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, to go out of business. Because Paramount wanted to produce and distribute this film, but due to racism, Bryanston took over Bakshi's production.

Despite the controversy, it was worth the entertainment. The animation was awesome at that time, the plot makes sense, and it's actually funny too.

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10 [[Rember]] [[Raph]] Bakshi? The guy that was an animator on Terrytoons, then on Paramount Cartoon Studios, after that, he was a director on Fritz the Cat 1 & 2 and [[Hefty]] Traffic? [[Good]], this is Coonskin. And it's actually pretty [[alright]]. Racist, but good. The movie takes place in Harlem [[Noches]] (No, duh, it was a working title.) but with a twist that becomes a lampoon of a Disney movie, Song of the South.

It's about [[Samson]] ([[Bari]] White) and the Preacherman (Charles Gordone) [[haste]] to help their friend, Randy (Philip Michael Thomas) [[flee]] from prison, but are stopped by a roadblock and wind up in a shootout with the police. While waiting for them, Randy unwillingly listens to fellow escapee Pappy (Scatman Crothers), as he begins to tell Randy a story about "three guys, I [[employs]] to know, just like you and your [[mates]]". Pappy's [[narratives]] is [[said]] in animation set against live-action background photos and footage.

Brother Rabbit (voice of Thomas), Brother Bear (voice of White), and [[Reverend]] Fox (voice of Gordone) decide to pack up and leave their Southern settings after the bank mortgages their [[homes]] and [[selling]] it to a man who turns it into a brothel. [[Come]] in Harlem, Rabbit, Bear, and Fox find that it isn't all that it's made out to be. They encounter a con man named Simple Savior, a phony revolutionary leader who purports to be the "cousin" of Black Jesus, and that he gives his followers "the strength to kill whites". [[Among]] a flashy stage performance in his "[[basilica]]", Savior acts out being brutalized by symbols of black oppression—represented by images of John Wayne, Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon, before asking his parishioners for "donations".

Rabbit first goes up against Madigan, a virulently racist and homophobic white [[policemen]] officer and the [[backpack]] [[guy]] for the [[Shay]], who [[testify]] his contempt for African [[American]] in [[disparate]] [[shapes]], [[containing]] a [[repudiate]] to [[bath]] before an [[awaited]] encounter with them (he [[considers]] they're not worth it). When Madigan [[find]] out that [[Cottontail]] has been [[picked]] his payoffs, he and his cohorts, [[Robbie]] and [[Robbie]], are [[drove]] to a nightclub called "The Cottontail".

A black stripper distracts him while an LSD sugar cube is dropped into his drink. Madigan, while under the influence of his spiked drink, is then maneuvered into a sexual liaison with a stereotypically effeminate gay man, and then shoved into clothes that women were representative of the racist archetype, adorned in something racist, and finally shoved out the back of the club where he discovers that Ruby and Bobby are dead.

Then, while recovering from his delirium of being drugged, [[canes]] his gun around [[arbitrarily]], and is shot to death by the police after shooting one of them.

Rabbit, Bear, Fox and the opponent boxer rush out of the boxing arena as it blows up. The live-action story ends with Randy and Pappy escaping while being shot at by various white cops, but managing to make it out alive.

This movie was controversial at that time of release, and was re-edited by the director several times under the title, Street Fight, which is obvious, since Street Fight is a 2005 documentary about racism in the streets. In fact, this movie has the same subject as the documentary.

That caused Bryanston Pictures, the distributor of this film and the original Tobe Hopper classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, to go out of business. Because Paramount wanted to produce and distribute this film, but due to racism, Bryanston took over Bakshi's production.

Despite the controversy, it was worth the entertainment. The animation was awesome at that time, the plot makes sense, and it's actually funny too.

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] What a [[shame]] that a [[really]] [[competent]] director like [[Andre]] de Toth who [[specialized]] in slippery, [[shifting]] alliances didn't get hold of this [[concept]] [[first]]. He [[could]] have [[helped]] [[bring]] out the [[real]] [[potential]], [[especially]] with the interesting [[character]] [[played]] by [[William]] [[Bishop]]. As the movie [[stands]], it's pretty much of a [[mess]] (as [[asserted]] by reviewer Chipe). The main problems are with the direction, cheap budget, and poor [[script]]. The strength lies in an excellent [[cast]] and an interesting [[general]] concept-- characters [[pulled]] in different [[directions]] by [[conflicting]] [[forces]]. What was needed was [[someone]] with vision enough to [[pull]] together the positive elements by reworking the [[script]] into some [[kind]] of [[coherent]] [[whole]], instead of the [[sprawling]], awkward [[mess]] that it is, (try to figure out the motivations and interplay if you can). Also, a bigger budget could have matched up contrasting [[location]] and studio shots, and gotten the [[locations]] out of the all-too-obvious LA [[outskirts]]. The real [[shame]] lies in a [[waste]] of an excellent cast-- Hayden, Taylor (before his teeth were capped), Dehner, Reeves, along with James Millican and William Bishop shortly before their untimely deaths. Few films illustrate the importance of an auteur-with-vision more than this [[lowly]] obscure Western, which, in the right hands, [[could]] have been so much more. What a [[pity]] that a [[truthfully]] [[proficient]] director like [[Andrey]] de Toth who [[specializing]] in slippery, [[changing]] alliances didn't get hold of this [[notions]] [[firstly]]. He [[did]] have [[assisted]] [[brings]] out the [[veritable]] [[prospective]], [[concretely]] with the interesting [[trait]] [[accomplished]] by [[Guillaume]] [[Monseigneur]]. As the movie [[stand]], it's pretty much of a [[disarray]] (as [[argued]] by reviewer Chipe). The main problems are with the direction, cheap budget, and poor [[hyphen]]. The strength lies in an excellent [[casting]] and an interesting [[overall]] concept-- characters [[pulling]] in different [[guideline]] by [[contrasting]] [[troop]]. What was needed was [[everyone]] with vision enough to [[pulls]] together the positive elements by reworking the [[screenplay]] into some [[genus]] of [[cohesive]] [[total]], instead of the [[complicated]], awkward [[chaos]] that it is, (try to figure out the motivations and interplay if you can). Also, a bigger budget could have matched up contrasting [[locations]] and studio shots, and gotten the [[places]] out of the all-too-obvious LA [[environs]]. The real [[pity]] lies in a [[squandering]] of an excellent cast-- Hayden, Taylor (before his teeth were capped), Dehner, Reeves, along with James Millican and William Bishop shortly before their untimely deaths. Few films illustrate the importance of an auteur-with-vision more than this [[modest]] obscure Western, which, in the right hands, [[wo]] have been so much more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1151 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Action & Adventure.Billie Clark is twenty years old, very pretty, and without a care in the world,until a brutal street gang violates her life, and she turns into an ALLEY CAT bent on revenge! When the gang attacks her grandparents house and her car, Billie uses her black belt prowess to fight them off. But at the same time she earns their hatred, and she and her grandparents are marked for vengence.When her grandparents lose their lives to the brutal thugs. Billie becomes like a cat stalking her prey-and no prison,police force,boyfriend,or crooked judge can get in the way of her avenging claws. She's a one-woman vigilante squad,a martial arts queen,a crack shot with no mercy. She's the ALLEY CAT.Watch for the dramatic ending versus the Gang leader! Rated R for Nudity & Violence, Other Films with Karin Mani: Actress - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) .... Janie Soon Lee , "From Here to Eternity" (1979) (mini) TV Series .... Tawny, Filmography as: Actress, Stunts - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) (stunts)P.S. She should have been Catwoman in the Batman Movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 1152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the best love stories I have ever seen. It is a bit like watching a train wreck in slow motion, but lovely nonetheless... Big Edie and Little Edie seem a bit like family members after watching this movie repeatedly, and are infinitely quotable: "It's a goddamned beautiful day, now will you just shut up?" The opening explanation of Little Edie's costume only promises that the movie will live on forever, and so will Big Edie "The World Famous Singer" and Little Edie " The World Famous Dancer." --------------------------------------------- Result 1153 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Hello I am from Denmark, and one day i was having a [[film]] evening with my friends. One brought this movie with him "Russian terminator" and it was [[extremely]] awful. After [[watching]] [[less]] than half a minute we decided to [[fast]] forward only [[stopping]] at some [[laughable]] "[[highlights]]" or should i [[say]] "lowlights" in the movie. I was actually mostly surprised to find out that this [[film]] was [[produced]] here in my [[homeland]] [[Denmark]]...that must have been the [[biggest]] [[mistake]] this country ever made. Hello I am from Denmark, and one day i was having a [[movies]] evening with my friends. One brought this movie with him "Russian terminator" and it was [[critically]] awful. After [[staring]] [[lowest]] than half a minute we decided to [[faster]] forward only [[stopped]] at some [[silly]] "[[emphasizes]]" or should i [[told]] "lowlights" in the movie. I was actually mostly surprised to find out that this [[filmmaking]] was [[generated]] here in my [[patria]] [[Danes]]...that must have been the [[greatest]] [[mistaken]] this country ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 1154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It SURPRISINGLY had a plot! ;) I've seen [[movies]] with less plot (I don't wanna mention Asian movies but...). I thought the camera wasn't bad at all for a [[cheap]] [[movie]] like this, and [[also]] the atmosphere wasn't too bad. There is no [[real]] [[reason]] for most things people do and the way they [[react]] to what happens. [[Although]] I do think that about a [[lot]] of [[movies]], in this case it was [[horrible]], of course.

It [[ripped]] off some movies [[SO]] badly just for single scenes. The acting was bad but I've [[seen]] worse. The movie was [[bad]] but I've [[seen]] [[worse]]. [[Watching]] this film is an [[experience]] between boredom, laughing fits, [[death]] wish, sadism, horniness and entertainment on a low [[level]].

So if you [[like]] gory movies with [[stupid]] plots this one is the right [[film]] for you.

I [[gave]] it 3/10, because it CAN be [[entertaining]] if you don't [[expect]] to [[see]] a [[good]] [[movie]] and you're in the right [[mood]]. It SURPRISINGLY had a plot! ;) I've seen [[film]] with less plot (I don't wanna mention Asian movies but...). I thought the camera wasn't bad at all for a [[cheaply]] [[filmmaking]] like this, and [[similarly]] the atmosphere wasn't too bad. There is no [[actual]] [[grounds]] for most things people do and the way they [[responding]] to what happens. [[While]] I do think that about a [[lots]] of [[movie]], in this case it was [[abysmal]], of course.

It [[buzzed]] off some movies [[CONSEQUENTLY]] badly just for single scenes. The acting was bad but I've [[watched]] worse. The movie was [[negative]] but I've [[saw]] [[worst]]. [[Staring]] this film is an [[experiences]] between boredom, laughing fits, [[mortality]] wish, sadism, horniness and entertainment on a low [[tier]].

So if you [[fond]] gory movies with [[silly]] plots this one is the right [[filmmaking]] for you.

I [[supplied]] it 3/10, because it CAN be [[amusing]] if you don't [[awaited]] to [[behold]] a [[buena]] [[film]] and you're in the right [[ambiance]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] My [[husband]] and I [[enjoy]] The DoodleBops as much as our 8 [[month]] old [[baby]] does. We have [[bought]] him DVD's and CD's just so we can watch and [[listen]] to them ourselves. They are fun, energetic, and very entertaining. They [[encourage]] children to be active, [[share]] and [[care]]. They always have a [[positive]] [[message]] along with fun [[entertainment]]. [[Every]] [[time]] our [[son]] [[hears]] the theme [[song]] he [[quickly]] turns his [[head]] toward the television and [[starts]] bouncing up and down in [[excitement]]. Dee Dee is a [[wonderful]] singer, she has a [[great]] voice. [[Moe]] is a [[great]] [[dancer]]. I [[would]] [[recommend]] The DoodleBops to [[anyone]] with [[children]]. Our [[favorite]] song is The Bird [[Song]]. You just can not help but [[smile]] and [[want]] to [[dance]] when you [[hear]] it. My [[hubby]] and I [[enjoys]] The DoodleBops as much as our 8 [[months]] old [[babies]] does. We have [[buying]] him DVD's and CD's just so we can watch and [[listens]] to them ourselves. They are fun, energetic, and very entertaining. They [[foster]] children to be active, [[sharing]] and [[healthcare]]. They always have a [[supportive]] [[messaging]] along with fun [[amusement]]. [[Entire]] [[period]] our [[yarns]] [[listens]] the theme [[chanson]] he [[swiftly]] turns his [[jefe]] toward the television and [[began]] bouncing up and down in [[restlessness]]. Dee Dee is a [[wondrous]] singer, she has a [[wondrous]] voice. [[Ome]] is a [[wondrous]] [[dancing]]. I [[should]] [[recommended]] The DoodleBops to [[somebody]] with [[kids]]. Our [[preferable]] song is The Bird [[Chanson]]. You just can not help but [[smirk]] and [[wanted]] to [[dancing]] when you [[overheard]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I am writing this [[review]] having [[watched]] it [[several]] months [[ago]]....the trailer looked promising enough for me to [[buy]] this lame excuse for a [[movie]]. It is a [[complete]] [[joke]]....and literally a spit in the [[face]] of [[real]] classics of the early [[generation]] of [[horror]] like Texas [[Chainsaw]] Massacre (1974) which they even had the gall to compare itself to on the back of the [[cover]] art. The [[producer]] who [[played]] Brandon should go flip burgers and serve up [[greasy]] [[hamburgers]]....[[hell]] he might not even be good at that [[either]]! The lighting was [[bad]] [[bad]] bad and a [[big]] annoyance through out the [[film]] you couldn't even [[see]] the actor's [[faces]] sometimes. I don't even [[remember]] the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] members which is [[sad]] really, [[bad]] they never do [[anything]] to impress you to [[make]] them [[memorable]]. That's all the time I will waste on this review PLEASE stay as far away as you can from this pile of [[junk]] even if you get it for 25 cents don't do it [[buy]] s piece of gum at [[least]] IT would keep you entertained!

If you [[want]] [[good]] quality low budget [[fun]], far better than this... then [[check]] out a Jeff Hayes film....because it takes [[talent]] to make it in horror and the [[kid]] has it!

I [[gave]] this 1 [[star]] just for the [[cover]] art....[[thats]] the only [[thing]] worth liking abut this so [[called]] "[[film]]"

-Rick Blalock I am writing this [[examine]] having [[saw]] it [[various]] months [[before]]....the trailer looked promising enough for me to [[acquire]] this lame excuse for a [[flick]]. It is a [[finished]] [[farce]]....and literally a spit in the [[confronting]] of [[veritable]] classics of the early [[jill]] of [[terror]] like Texas [[Sawing]] Massacre (1974) which they even had the gall to compare itself to on the back of the [[covered]] art. The [[producers]] who [[done]] Brandon should go flip burgers and serve up [[fat]] [[burgers]]....[[brothel]] he might not even be good at that [[nor]]! The lighting was [[naughty]] [[naughty]] bad and a [[hefty]] annoyance through out the [[movies]] you couldn't even [[seeing]] the actor's [[confronting]] sometimes. I don't even [[recall]] the [[remaining]] of the [[casting]] members which is [[deplorable]] really, [[negative]] they never do [[somethings]] to impress you to [[deliver]] them [[unforgettable]]. That's all the time I will waste on this review PLEASE stay as far away as you can from this pile of [[trash]] even if you get it for 25 cents don't do it [[bought]] s piece of gum at [[slightest]] IT would keep you entertained!

If you [[wanting]] [[alright]] quality low budget [[funny]], far better than this... then [[inspecting]] out a Jeff Hayes film....because it takes [[talents]] to make it in horror and the [[kids]] has it!

I [[supplied]] this 1 [[superstar]] just for the [[covered]] art....[[aint]] the only [[stuff]] worth liking abut this so [[drew]] "[[kino]]"

-Rick Blalock --------------------------------------------- Result 1157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] No, there is another !

Because every Star Wars fan had to have an opinion about I, II & III and because that opinion was biased since we missed so much the atmosphere and the characters of the original trilogy, I will state the good [[points]] of "The Return of the Jedi" and a few corresponding bad points of the prequel. Of [[course]], I loved the music, the special effects, the two droids, but this has been overly [[debated]] [[elsewhere]].

What we get in the original trilogy and in this particular movie : - [[A]] strong [[ecological]] concern - Anti-militarist positions - [[Fascinating]] [[insights]] about the Jedi Order and the Force - Cute creatures - Harrison Ford's smile - A [[killer]] scene : Near the ending, when Vader looks alternatively at his son and at the Emperor. The lightning of the lethal bolts reflected on his Black helmet. And when he grabs and betrays his Master to save Luke, thereby risking his own life ! Oh, boy !

What is wrong in the prequel INMHO : - the whole "human factor" element that the original cast was able to push forward is somehow missing - The Force seems to be more about superpowers and somersaults, than about wisdom - Too many Jedis at once and too many Light Sabers on the screen - The lack of experience of a few actors too often threatens the coherence of the plot

By the way, if you enjoy the theory of the Force as explained by Obi Web (Obi Wen, I mean) and Yoda, then you should read a few books about Buddhism and the forms it took in Ancient Japan.

The magic of Star Wars, IMHO lies mainly in the continuing spiritual heritage from a master to his apprentice, from a father to his son, albeit the difficulties. "De mon âme à ton âme", (from my soul to yours), as would write Bejard to the late Zen master T. Deshimaru. No, there is another !

Because every Star Wars fan had to have an opinion about I, II & III and because that opinion was biased since we missed so much the atmosphere and the characters of the original trilogy, I will state the good [[dots]] of "The Return of the Jedi" and a few corresponding bad points of the prequel. Of [[cours]], I loved the music, the special effects, the two droids, but this has been overly [[discussing]] [[else]].

What we get in the original trilogy and in this particular movie : - [[una]] strong [[environmental]] concern - Anti-militarist positions - [[Intriguing]] [[ideas]] about the Jedi Order and the Force - Cute creatures - Harrison Ford's smile - A [[callin]] scene : Near the ending, when Vader looks alternatively at his son and at the Emperor. The lightning of the lethal bolts reflected on his Black helmet. And when he grabs and betrays his Master to save Luke, thereby risking his own life ! Oh, boy !

What is wrong in the prequel INMHO : - the whole "human factor" element that the original cast was able to push forward is somehow missing - The Force seems to be more about superpowers and somersaults, than about wisdom - Too many Jedis at once and too many Light Sabers on the screen - The lack of experience of a few actors too often threatens the coherence of the plot

By the way, if you enjoy the theory of the Force as explained by Obi Web (Obi Wen, I mean) and Yoda, then you should read a few books about Buddhism and the forms it took in Ancient Japan.

The magic of Star Wars, IMHO lies mainly in the continuing spiritual heritage from a master to his apprentice, from a father to his son, albeit the difficulties. "De mon âme à ton âme", (from my soul to yours), as would write Bejard to the late Zen master T. Deshimaru. --------------------------------------------- Result 1158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was the best movie I have ever seen. Being LDS I highly recommend this movie because you are able to feel a more understanding about the life of Joseph Smith. Although the movie was not made with highly acclaimed actors it is a remarkable and life changing movie that can be enjoyed and appreciated by everyone. I saw this movie with my family and I can bear witness that we have all had a change of heart. This movie allows people to really understand how hard the life was for the prophet and how much tribulation he was faced with. After I saw this movie,there was not a single dry eye in the entire room. Everyone was touched by what they saw and I have not been the same since I have seen it. I highly recommend this movie for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 1159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] In the bygone days of the Catholic Church, a sin-eater was an individual that, through ritual, would take the sins of a dying person upon themselves. Often, these people were excommunicate or similar individuals who the church would not absolve, thereby denying them entrance into Heaven. The sin-eaters were seen as [[blasphemous]], circumventing the chruch's monopoly on redemption. [[Sex]] this up a bit with some [[overt]] [[supernatural]] mojo, let the [[concept]] [[wander]] where it may, and you have "The Order", a movie that combines "[[Stigmata]]"'s religious anti-authoritarianism, "The X-Files"' paranormal investigation, and "The Thorn Birds"' sexual spirituality into an odd melange that sometimes works.

Alex (Heath Ledger) is a rogue priest, one of the last members of the Order of the Carolingians, a semi-heretical order of knowledge-seeking, demon-fighting priests. When Alex's mentor is found dead under bizarre circumstances, Bishop Driscoll (Peter Weller) sends Alex to investigate. Tagging along are fellow Carolingian Thomas (Mark Addy) and Mara (Shannyn Sossman), who was subject to one of Alex's exorcisms a year prior. The three go to Rome to investigate and are drawn into a dark underworld of bizarre Catholic heresy, ominous prophecies, demonic intrusions, and a man claiming to be the last surviving Sin-Eater (Benno Furmann).

Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (who worked with the same principals on the scattershot and half-hearted "A Knight's Tale"), the film is an odd one, and difficult to classify. It wants to be several things at once -- supernatural thriller, religious [[intrigue]], dramatic television pilot -- and only sometimes succeeds at any of them. This isn't helped by the slow pace or the fact that most of the actors seem to be sleepwalking through their performances with occasional bursts of brilliance. Ledger, in particular, has a particularly stunning scene of despair in an otherwise monochromatic performance. Sossman, however, displayed the same disconnected performance that she's given in all of her films (most notably in "The Rules Of Attraction").

The plot itself meanders back and forth between several different story arcs, leading you to wonder which is the main one with each arc containing its share of red herrings. Large gaps of narrative appear to be lost between scenes at times, which can be confusing for many, but this is also one of the film's saving graces. The structure of the film -- coupled by the fact that there is never a truly clear antagonist until the very end of the film -- forces the viewer to analyze and reason in a time when most films are blatantly obvious about everything (the exception to this is historical background on the Carolingians and the practice of sin-eating, both of which are explained in dry exposition). Even at the beginning of the film, character relationships and history are inferred instead of explained. Combine this with the on-location shooting and judicious use of special effects, and you have a very old-world supernatural thriller, with even the opening credits reminiscent of something from the late 70's/early 80's.

A brief mention here, as well, for the subtle and organic score by David Torn, a combination of minimalist orchestration and Lisa Gerrard-style exotic vocals. A very nice score that is evocative without being bombastic and exists in a very deceptive simplicity.

A confusing plot, a lack of purpose, and sometimes sleepy performances would often damn a movie, but for some reason, "The Order" remains watchable. Many people will be very turned off by the movie for its odd sensibilities, and some may even become angry that they are forced to engage the higher functions of their brain to understand it. Still, the film's sheer intangibility will prevent it from being either a critical or commercial success until the DVD, which I'm sure will be stocked with copious amounts of deleted scenes. A recommended film only for people who like to think while they watch. 6 out of 10. In the bygone days of the Catholic Church, a sin-eater was an individual that, through ritual, would take the sins of a dying person upon themselves. Often, these people were excommunicate or similar individuals who the church would not absolve, thereby denying them entrance into Heaven. The sin-eaters were seen as [[sacrilegious]], circumventing the chruch's monopoly on redemption. [[Sexuality]] this up a bit with some [[palpable]] [[uncanny]] mojo, let the [[conceptions]] [[roam]] where it may, and you have "The Order", a movie that combines "[[Stigma]]"'s religious anti-authoritarianism, "The X-Files"' paranormal investigation, and "The Thorn Birds"' sexual spirituality into an odd melange that sometimes works.

Alex (Heath Ledger) is a rogue priest, one of the last members of the Order of the Carolingians, a semi-heretical order of knowledge-seeking, demon-fighting priests. When Alex's mentor is found dead under bizarre circumstances, Bishop Driscoll (Peter Weller) sends Alex to investigate. Tagging along are fellow Carolingian Thomas (Mark Addy) and Mara (Shannyn Sossman), who was subject to one of Alex's exorcisms a year prior. The three go to Rome to investigate and are drawn into a dark underworld of bizarre Catholic heresy, ominous prophecies, demonic intrusions, and a man claiming to be the last surviving Sin-Eater (Benno Furmann).

Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (who worked with the same principals on the scattershot and half-hearted "A Knight's Tale"), the film is an odd one, and difficult to classify. It wants to be several things at once -- supernatural thriller, religious [[plot]], dramatic television pilot -- and only sometimes succeeds at any of them. This isn't helped by the slow pace or the fact that most of the actors seem to be sleepwalking through their performances with occasional bursts of brilliance. Ledger, in particular, has a particularly stunning scene of despair in an otherwise monochromatic performance. Sossman, however, displayed the same disconnected performance that she's given in all of her films (most notably in "The Rules Of Attraction").

The plot itself meanders back and forth between several different story arcs, leading you to wonder which is the main one with each arc containing its share of red herrings. Large gaps of narrative appear to be lost between scenes at times, which can be confusing for many, but this is also one of the film's saving graces. The structure of the film -- coupled by the fact that there is never a truly clear antagonist until the very end of the film -- forces the viewer to analyze and reason in a time when most films are blatantly obvious about everything (the exception to this is historical background on the Carolingians and the practice of sin-eating, both of which are explained in dry exposition). Even at the beginning of the film, character relationships and history are inferred instead of explained. Combine this with the on-location shooting and judicious use of special effects, and you have a very old-world supernatural thriller, with even the opening credits reminiscent of something from the late 70's/early 80's.

A brief mention here, as well, for the subtle and organic score by David Torn, a combination of minimalist orchestration and Lisa Gerrard-style exotic vocals. A very nice score that is evocative without being bombastic and exists in a very deceptive simplicity.

A confusing plot, a lack of purpose, and sometimes sleepy performances would often damn a movie, but for some reason, "The Order" remains watchable. Many people will be very turned off by the movie for its odd sensibilities, and some may even become angry that they are forced to engage the higher functions of their brain to understand it. Still, the film's sheer intangibility will prevent it from being either a critical or commercial success until the DVD, which I'm sure will be stocked with copious amounts of deleted scenes. A recommended film only for people who like to think while they watch. 6 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had to see this gem twice to really appreciate all of it. When a widowed father of two interrupts his two sons' sleep with a shocking revelation, they are torn between believing him and not. As the horrifying events of this tale unfold, we learn a lot about the father, about his two sons, and about their destinies. With shocking twist after shocking twist, this film never allows for a lull in the plot. Bill Paxton plays the father, but the most notable performances are that of his older son, Fenton, played by Matthew O'Leary and his younger son, Adam, played by Jeremy Sumpter. This is one of the best thrillers that I have seen in a while, and you will want to watch this a few times to appreciate every intricate aspect of the plot. I give this film a 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** From its very [[opening]] credits this fantastic movie sets the record straight: it's an instant classic. It doesn't take long to realize that this movie is big, bigger than `Kindergarten Cop' or `Police Academy 7.' The sheer greatness of it left me speechless as I walked out of the movie theater and proceeded right back to the ticket counter to purchase myself another dozen of tickets.

This is a [[movie]] that [[simply]] [[requires]] multiple viewings. The first watching will surely leave you with that strange `Huh?' feeling, but don't feel embarrassed - it happens to the best of us. The story is so diabolically clever that one has to wonder about the mortality of its authors. What seems to be a simple story of an idiot infiltrating the FBI, turns out to be an allegorical story that works on several levels and teaches us all about the really important things in life. The complexity of the plot structure will baffle you on your first viewing, but don't give up! Not until my sixth or seventh viewing did I only begin to unravel some of the hidden mysteries of `Corky Romano.' And watch out for the unexpected twist at the end, otherwise you might be caught completely off guard when it is revealed that FBI agent Brick Davis is FBI's most-wanted criminal, Corky is not a real FBI agent, Pops Romano is innocent, Peter Romano admits he's illiterate and Paulie Romano comes out of the closet as a homosexual. Surprised the hell out of me, I can tell you that much.

Chris Kattan's comedic talents are unmatched as he leads his character Corky Romano through a maze of totally unpredictable situations. Reminiscent of John Reynolds' performance in `Manos, the Hands of Fate,' Kattan takes on innumerable multiple personalities and tackles all scenes with perfect comedic timing. However, Kattan is not just about comedy. He is a master of drama as well, as he controls the audience's feelings with the slightest moves of his face. His facial expressions reflect life itself, in a way. For example, in the scene in which he farts into his brothers' faces, you can see the expression of social injustice and alienation clearly reflected on his anguished face. At a moment like that, it's hard to find a dry eye in the house.

Screenwriters David Garret and Jason Ward are the real heroes of `Corky Romano.' With a story of such proportions, it's easy to understand why two experienced writers had to be employed to complete this ambitious project. Their skillful storytelling and unorthodox structuring makes `Pulp Fiction' look like a mediocre Saturday Night Live skit. Garret and Ward's story is so compelling and alluring that it grips you by your hair, swallows you entirely, shakes you around and spits you right out. At the end of the out-of-this-world experience known as `Corky Romano' you find yourself a different person with different worldviews and different ideas, and with only one question on your mind:

Why, God? Why?!? ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** From its very [[open]] credits this fantastic movie sets the record straight: it's an instant classic. It doesn't take long to realize that this movie is big, bigger than `Kindergarten Cop' or `Police Academy 7.' The sheer greatness of it left me speechless as I walked out of the movie theater and proceeded right back to the ticket counter to purchase myself another dozen of tickets.

This is a [[filmmaking]] that [[exclusively]] [[requiring]] multiple viewings. The first watching will surely leave you with that strange `Huh?' feeling, but don't feel embarrassed - it happens to the best of us. The story is so diabolically clever that one has to wonder about the mortality of its authors. What seems to be a simple story of an idiot infiltrating the FBI, turns out to be an allegorical story that works on several levels and teaches us all about the really important things in life. The complexity of the plot structure will baffle you on your first viewing, but don't give up! Not until my sixth or seventh viewing did I only begin to unravel some of the hidden mysteries of `Corky Romano.' And watch out for the unexpected twist at the end, otherwise you might be caught completely off guard when it is revealed that FBI agent Brick Davis is FBI's most-wanted criminal, Corky is not a real FBI agent, Pops Romano is innocent, Peter Romano admits he's illiterate and Paulie Romano comes out of the closet as a homosexual. Surprised the hell out of me, I can tell you that much.

Chris Kattan's comedic talents are unmatched as he leads his character Corky Romano through a maze of totally unpredictable situations. Reminiscent of John Reynolds' performance in `Manos, the Hands of Fate,' Kattan takes on innumerable multiple personalities and tackles all scenes with perfect comedic timing. However, Kattan is not just about comedy. He is a master of drama as well, as he controls the audience's feelings with the slightest moves of his face. His facial expressions reflect life itself, in a way. For example, in the scene in which he farts into his brothers' faces, you can see the expression of social injustice and alienation clearly reflected on his anguished face. At a moment like that, it's hard to find a dry eye in the house.

Screenwriters David Garret and Jason Ward are the real heroes of `Corky Romano.' With a story of such proportions, it's easy to understand why two experienced writers had to be employed to complete this ambitious project. Their skillful storytelling and unorthodox structuring makes `Pulp Fiction' look like a mediocre Saturday Night Live skit. Garret and Ward's story is so compelling and alluring that it grips you by your hair, swallows you entirely, shakes you around and spits you right out. At the end of the out-of-this-world experience known as `Corky Romano' you find yourself a different person with different worldviews and different ideas, and with only one question on your mind:

Why, God? Why?!? --------------------------------------------- Result 1162 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "ASTONISHING" Screams the LA Times from the front of the DVD box. They must have been referring to the fact that such a sorry piece of crap was ever released. The film revolves around a bunch of girls who have a disease which forces them to become cannibals, and murder innocent people just to stay alive. Their skin peels off throughout the film, we also see severed legs, heads etc that are about as convincing as a Halloween Fuzzy Felt set. There is an awful lot of talking b*ll**ks, a bit of human cuisine and some weird zombie hunter chap who imprisons the sufferers of said skin illness in his closet strapped to a chair, before stabbing them in the head, chopping them into bits...

You get the picture. Considering there is no acting talent on display at all, and the gore is laughably unrealistic, what is the point of this whole farrago? Again looking at the video box, the guy responsible for it is an "underground cult director". Would that be like those weird religious cults where they brainwash you into thinking one way when clearly the opposite is true? Because that's the only possible reason I can think of for anyone to derive pleasure by watching this tax write-off. Then, on the same paragraph he compares himself to Mike Leigh, Ken Loach and George Romero. HAHAHAHAHA oh stop it. Now you're just being silly.

Do you enjoy this film? Are you offended by the above opinion? If so, you must be a member of said cult. Do they pocket your wages? Do they let you see other family members? Do they force you to watch Andrew Parkinson films till you think he's the best director since A.Hitchcock? Do tell... this sounds like a Panorama special brewing to me. And say hello to the critic of the LA times when you return to your colony, will you? 0/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i was hoping this was going to be good as a fan of timothy dalton's james bond and although it wasn't his deserved '3rd bond outing' it was a laugh. Belushi brought some good humour to his part and dalton hammed it up nicely, but was probably underused. his part was liked a camped up version of jack nicholson in a few good men. the other brit in it was a bit shocking, but overal it was a laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And I thought The Beach was bad, with the difference that this movie has one of the greatest actors of our time, Nicolas Cage. Don't blame him for the awful script, if any one can make any sense of what the hell was the point of that movie, give your self a pat on the back. Its a cross between The Village and a crappier script. Its starts off kinda catching your eye, and then as it goes further into the plot, it just makes no sense, and don't get me started about the ending!!!! What was that? The only thing that makes this movie exist is Nicolas Cage usual great humor, and his ability to be funny in the weirdest situations. If you go to a blockbuster and this is the only movie to watch, save yourself five bucks and just go back home and turn put some thing on fire and when some ones asks you why, just say the stupidest thing that comes into your mind, and there you go! --------------------------------------------- Result 1165 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] "A trio of treasure hunters is [[searching]] the [[West]] [[Indies]] for a hidden fortune. The [[lure]] of gold makes for a [[rise]] in tension as the [[men]] [[come]] closer to the treasure's location. The deep-sea [[divers]] [[hope]] to track down the gold, but [[find]] that greed and hatred [[leads]] to murder," [[according]] to the [[DVD]] sleeve's [[synopsis]]. "Manfish" is the [[name]] of their [[boat]], not a monster. The [[skeleton]] who gives muscular [[Captain]] [[John]] Bromfield (as Brannigan) his half of the [[treasure]] [[map]] is very [[good]]. [[Old]] [[salt]] [[Victor]] Jory (as [[Professor]]) provides the other half of the [[map]]. First [[mate]] [[Lon]] [[Chaney]] Jr. (as Swede) plays [[dumb]], and sexy Tessa Prendergast (as Alita) [[guards]] the rum (not very well, [[obviously]]). Serious editing and continuity problems mar the [[picture]], which [[otherwise]] might have amounted to something.

*** Manfish (2/56) W. [[Lee]] Wilder ~ John Bromfield, Victor Jory, Lon Chaney Jr. "A trio of treasure hunters is [[looking]] the [[Ouest]] [[Andean]] for a hidden fortune. The [[attraction]] of gold makes for a [[augmentation]] in tension as the [[man]] [[coming]] closer to the treasure's location. The deep-sea [[diver]] [[expectancy]] to track down the gold, but [[finds]] that greed and hatred [[leeds]] to murder," [[depending]] to the [[DVDS]] sleeve's [[outline]]. "Manfish" is the [[denomination]] of their [[ship]], not a monster. The [[skeletal]] who gives muscular [[Capitaine]] [[Johannes]] Bromfield (as Brannigan) his half of the [[darling]] [[charting]] is very [[buena]]. [[Archaic]] [[salty]] [[Viktor]] Jory (as [[Educator]]) provides the other half of the [[maps]]. First [[comrade]] [[Ldn]] [[Cheney]] Jr. (as Swede) plays [[daft]], and sexy Tessa Prendergast (as Alita) [[custodians]] the rum (not very well, [[naturally]]). Serious editing and continuity problems mar the [[imaging]], which [[else]] might have amounted to something.

*** Manfish (2/56) W. [[Rhee]] Wilder ~ John Bromfield, Victor Jory, Lon Chaney Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 1166 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I got this [[movie]] out of [[Blockbuster]] in one of those racks were you can [[get]] like 5 [[movies]] for 20 bucks. I'd have to say I [[got]] my money's worth on this one. I had [[expected]] [[horrible]] [[dialogue]], crappy monsters, and shaky [[cameras]]. Well, as Meatloaf [[said]], two [[outta]] three ain't [[bad]].

The acting is [[bad]], though not as bad as some movies I've [[seen]]. [[Or]] maybe I've [[watched]] so [[many]] low [[budget]] [[movies]] recently I've lost perspective. There are some bits were the acting is downright [[terrible]], but for the most part it's of at [[least]] [[High]] [[School]] [[Play]] level.

The CG for the Sasquatch in this movie is probably the second-worst [[part]]. The first thing I [[thought]] when I [[saw]] it (and I [[noticed]] another [[reviewer]] [[agreed]] with me) was that a [[man]] in an [[ape]] suit [[would]] have been [[better]]. Clunky stop-motion animation [[would]] have [[looked]] better.

[[So]] you may be asking why I [[call]] the CG the second-worst [[part]]. That's because the very worst [[part]] of the [[movie]] is the [[sound]] effects. They are [[loud]], [[annoying]], and [[constant]]. I've been camping, I know what [[insects]] sound like in the [[woods]] at [[night]], and while they can be loud, they're not deafening like the cacophony in this [[movie]]. [[Usually]] when the "[[background]]" sounds [[drown]] out the movie's [[dialogue]], it's a bad [[thing]], but from what I [[caught]] of the [[dialogue]] of this [[film]], I wasn't missing much.

The action was infrequent and [[boring]]. The [[tension]] was non-existent, as was any [[sense]] of [[empathy]] with the [[characters]]. Speaking of the [[characters]], they were all cookie-cutter and bland. The only [[mildly]] engaging byplay was between...actually, I can't think of anything. There was a line or two that made me [[crack]] a [[wan]] [[smile]], but that was about it.

The [[cinematography]] was decent, a [[step]] or two above what you'd normally see in a movie like this. However, it still had that "[[home]] [[movie]]" quality to it that you get with [[movies]] [[made]] on pocket [[change]] and a prayer.

[[If]] you're like me and [[get]] a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, [[think]] about grabbing it. Otherwise, stay away at all costs. I got this [[film]] out of [[Blockbusters]] in one of those racks were you can [[gets]] like 5 [[cinematography]] for 20 bucks. I'd have to say I [[did]] my money's worth on this one. I had [[predicted]] [[scary]] [[discussions]], crappy monsters, and shaky [[camera]]. Well, as Meatloaf [[indicated]], two [[outa]] three ain't [[unfavorable]].

The acting is [[unfavourable]], though not as bad as some movies I've [[saw]]. [[Nor]] maybe I've [[observed]] so [[several]] low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]] recently I've lost perspective. There are some bits were the acting is downright [[horrible]], but for the most part it's of at [[lowest]] [[Higher]] [[Scholastic]] [[Gaming]] level.

The CG for the Sasquatch in this movie is probably the second-worst [[parties]]. The first thing I [[think]] when I [[sawthe]] it (and I [[remarked]] another [[reviewers]] [[accepted]] with me) was that a [[dude]] in an [[monkey]] suit [[ought]] have been [[best]]. Clunky stop-motion animation [[should]] have [[seemed]] better.

[[Therefore]] you may be asking why I [[calling]] the CG the second-worst [[parte]]. That's because the very worst [[parties]] of the [[filmmaking]] is the [[audible]] effects. They are [[vocal]], [[exasperating]], and [[steady]]. I've been camping, I know what [[bugs]] sound like in the [[bois]] at [[nuit]], and while they can be loud, they're not deafening like the cacophony in this [[filmmaking]]. [[Traditionally]] when the "[[context]]" sounds [[drowns]] out the movie's [[discussions]], it's a bad [[stuff]], but from what I [[apprehended]] of the [[dialog]] of this [[filmmaking]], I wasn't missing much.

The action was infrequent and [[dull]]. The [[tensions]] was non-existent, as was any [[feeling]] of [[compassion]] with the [[personages]]. Speaking of the [[hallmarks]], they were all cookie-cutter and bland. The only [[slightly]] engaging byplay was between...actually, I can't think of anything. There was a line or two that made me [[cracks]] a [[cove]] [[smirk]], but that was about it.

The [[filmmaking]] was decent, a [[stride]] or two above what you'd normally see in a movie like this. However, it still had that "[[habitation]] [[flick]]" quality to it that you get with [[cinema]] [[effected]] on pocket [[modifying]] and a prayer.

[[Though]] you're like me and [[gets]] a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, [[believe]] about grabbing it. Otherwise, stay away at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I've [[seen]] this movie today for the first time and I never heard of it before, probably because of it's [[poor]] [[message]].

First of all, the [[directing]] itself is [[quite]] [[good]], the [[actors]] played well and the CGI (I'm not a fan of CGI) is magnificent. But that [[alone]] doesn't make a [[movie]]. [[No]] [[story]] at all, no [[message]] behind beautiful [[exploited]] [[talents]].

Or do I have to make people remember, the art of a [[director]] is not only your vision but to know how to tell a story. And this is what's [[missing]] the whole 7 [[minutes]].

There for a [[simple]] 4 [[rating]]. I've [[watched]] this movie today for the first time and I never heard of it before, probably because of it's [[poorest]] [[messages]].

First of all, the [[instructing]] itself is [[altogether]] [[buena]], the [[players]] played well and the CGI (I'm not a fan of CGI) is magnificent. But that [[jen]] doesn't make a [[filmmaking]]. [[Nos]] [[conte]] at all, no [[messages]] behind beautiful [[utilized]] [[talent]].

Or do I have to make people remember, the art of a [[headmaster]] is not only your vision but to know how to tell a story. And this is what's [[faded]] the whole 7 [[mins]].

There for a [[mere]] 4 [[assessment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was one film i [[wanted]] to watch always when it released The promos were [[eye]] [[catching]] and Govinda in a negative role was a surprise

But the film isn't that good

It has lot of [[flaws]]

The [[start]] is good and till the [[murder]] everything goes well but the [[film]] falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the [[songs]] that follow

Then the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in [[love]] leaves more doubts and [[flaws]] and then How come Govinda turns into a [[rich]] criminal from a poor villager?

The [[last]] [[flashback]] too is [[prolonged]] and also the [[entire]] clash between Govinda-Karisma and Tabu

N Chandra disappoints Music is [[okay]], Bahot Khoobsurat stands out

Govinda [[tries]] a [[negative]] role and does very well in it [[though]] he overdoes it too [[much]] at times Karisma is good but [[irritates]] at times with her [[cries]] Tabu is [[okay]] Nirmal Pandey [[still]] doesn't know the [[difference]] between [[loud]] [[screaming]] and acting [[rest]] are [[okay]] This was one film i [[wanna]] to watch always when it released The promos were [[eyes]] [[captures]] and Govinda in a negative role was a surprise

But the film isn't that good

It has lot of [[faults]]

The [[induction]] is good and till the [[kill]] everything goes well but the [[filmmaking]] falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the [[melodies]] that follow

Then the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in [[amore]] leaves more doubts and [[defect]] and then How come Govinda turns into a [[richest]] criminal from a poor villager?

The [[latter]] [[flash]] too is [[lengthy]] and also the [[overall]] clash between Govinda-Karisma and Tabu

N Chandra disappoints Music is [[alright]], Bahot Khoobsurat stands out

Govinda [[strive]] a [[inauspicious]] role and does very well in it [[despite]] he overdoes it too [[very]] at times Karisma is good but [[disturbs]] at times with her [[shrieks]] Tabu is [[alrighty]] Nirmal Pandey [[yet]] doesn't know the [[divergence]] between [[vocal]] [[shout]] and acting [[remainder]] are [[ok]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] What a gem of a [[movie]], so [[good]] that they [[made]] a sequel.

The film starts off really good with a nasty monster who eats a few people and a party where the 2 main characters first set eyes on each other.

Bendan Hughes plays the eccentric Vlad, a bit of an inkling there to who this character is, who has moved into town and uses the services of a particular real estate agent to find him a house.

Hell, we've all seen vampire [[movies]], we know the format.

The movie is watchable, but the actors' performances are very wooden and they seem as they don't [[want]] to be in this [[film]], but may be that's just all part of the [[decadent]] [[ambiance]].

Didn't like the ending, but there is a sequel, must [[track]] it down.

[[When]] I watched the film I thought Brendan Hughes didn't really fit the part. Later on, I couldn't stop thinking about him, he sort of exudes an eerie sensuality, so maybe he was right for the part.

BRENDAN HUGHES Last seen in 'Hitler - the rise of evil' as Lt. Guffman.

Where is he now? What a gem of a [[films]], so [[buena]] that they [[accomplished]] a sequel.

The film starts off really good with a nasty monster who eats a few people and a party where the 2 main characters first set eyes on each other.

Bendan Hughes plays the eccentric Vlad, a bit of an inkling there to who this character is, who has moved into town and uses the services of a particular real estate agent to find him a house.

Hell, we've all seen vampire [[cinematography]], we know the format.

The movie is watchable, but the actors' performances are very wooden and they seem as they don't [[desiring]] to be in this [[cinematography]], but may be that's just all part of the [[sleazebag]] [[mood]].

Didn't like the ending, but there is a sequel, must [[trajectory]] it down.

[[Whenever]] I watched the film I thought Brendan Hughes didn't really fit the part. Later on, I couldn't stop thinking about him, he sort of exudes an eerie sensuality, so maybe he was right for the part.

BRENDAN HUGHES Last seen in 'Hitler - the rise of evil' as Lt. Guffman.

Where is he now? --------------------------------------------- Result 1170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Recently]] when i was [[shopping]], i [[saw]] the box-set of Americian [[Gothic]], and i thought 'I remember that!' I used to set my alarm to [[get]] back up & watch this when it was on CH 4 in 1996 at 1.30am (i was 14). I [[remember]] it mostly because it was really scary and [[weird]], no [[person]] could ever be as frightening as Lucas Buck (with a B!!) No one ever was anyway.

What [[annoyed]] me [[though]] was they did the same thing to the box-set as when on TV. [[Episodes]] in funny [[order]], I kept [[thinking]] when does [[Dr]] Matt leave??? - they made it so confusing.

However this is not the writers, producers or directors fault (its TV people in background the money makers They still do the same - [[Just]] look at [[shows]] like Carnivale and Farscape they don't like originality in studios!!!!!)

To [[finish]] - If you've not [[seen]] this and you call yourself a Sci-Fi Fantasy, Horror, supernatural drama..Fan = [[YOU]] MUST. They even said the same in SFX when reviewing the box-set. [[Newly]] when i was [[buying]], i [[sawthe]] the box-set of Americian [[Goth]], and i thought 'I remember that!' I used to set my alarm to [[gets]] back up & watch this when it was on CH 4 in 1996 at 1.30am (i was 14). I [[remembering]] it mostly because it was really scary and [[nosy]], no [[individuals]] could ever be as frightening as Lucas Buck (with a B!!) No one ever was anyway.

What [[angered]] me [[if]] was they did the same thing to the box-set as when on TV. [[Bouts]] in funny [[ordering]], I kept [[thought]] when does [[Doktor]] Matt leave??? - they made it so confusing.

However this is not the writers, producers or directors fault (its TV people in background the money makers They still do the same - [[Mere]] look at [[exhibition]] like Carnivale and Farscape they don't like originality in studios!!!!!)

To [[finalise]] - If you've not [[saw]] this and you call yourself a Sci-Fi Fantasy, Horror, supernatural drama..Fan = [[DOYOU]] MUST. They even said the same in SFX when reviewing the box-set. --------------------------------------------- Result 1171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Jack Black is an annoying character.This is an annoying [[indie]] movie for 14 year [[olds]].Do I have to [[write]] eight more lines?Ana de la Reguera is dang fine to look at,as a Mexican nun who puts up with the [[rather]] forward and rude advances of [[Jack]] [[Black]].This movie is a PG 13 [[version]] of an indie [[film]].I really like a movie that has the courage to [[explore]] Mexican culture.This movie explores Mexican culture-deeply. I just [[choke]] on its cultural [[rudeness]]:Jack Black is just so rude. A white person like Jack Black is not my most valuable emissary into Mexican culture, as it were.Mexican Wrestling culture is not the most diaphanous venue a white guy, such as myself could seek.I suspect Mexico is more culturally opaque than Jack Black has presented here.

I think IMDb changed my review.Has anyone else had his review changed as well?Just a question. Jack Black is an annoying character.This is an annoying [[andy]] movie for 14 year [[years]].Do I have to [[writing]] eight more lines?Ana de la Reguera is dang fine to look at,as a Mexican nun who puts up with the [[somewhat]] forward and rude advances of [[Jacques]] [[Negro]].This movie is a PG 13 [[stepping]] of an indie [[filmmaking]].I really like a movie that has the courage to [[investigate]] Mexican culture.This movie explores Mexican culture-deeply. I just [[muffle]] on its cultural [[impudence]]:Jack Black is just so rude. A white person like Jack Black is not my most valuable emissary into Mexican culture, as it were.Mexican Wrestling culture is not the most diaphanous venue a white guy, such as myself could seek.I suspect Mexico is more culturally opaque than Jack Black has presented here.

I think IMDb changed my review.Has anyone else had his review changed as well?Just a question. --------------------------------------------- Result 1172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] [[Absolutely]] one of my favorite movies of all time. I have [[seen]] it at [[least]] a hundred times and I can't [[go]] through it without crying. I [[defy]] [[anyone]] to watch the [[reunion]] of Celie and [[Nettie]], or Shug and father and not feel your eyes [[getting]] misty. Whoopie [[Goldberg]] should have one an [[award]] for [[amazing]] [[portrayal]]. And for the [[person]] who [[said]] you can't [[love]] the [[movie]] if you [[loved]] the [[book]], [[wrong]]! Im a testament to that. [[Altogether]] one of my favorite movies of all time. I have [[watched]] it at [[fewest]] a hundred times and I can't [[going]] through it without crying. I [[defying]] [[somebody]] to watch the [[grouping]] of Celie and [[Nannie]], or Shug and father and not feel your eyes [[obtaining]] misty. Whoopie [[Tucker]] should have one an [[scholarship]] for [[dazzling]] [[portrait]]. And for the [[someone]] who [[indicated]] you can't [[loved]] the [[cinema]] if you [[worshipped]] the [[books]], [[amiss]]! Im a testament to that. --------------------------------------------- Result 1173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The film is a bit [[tedious]]. It's mostly a [[silent]] [[film]], with the bulk o the story provided through a series of voice-overs. While [[making]] a [[silent]] film like this is not such a [[bad]] [[idea]], this is one of those films where the [[lack]] of [[dialog]] and the repetitive early scenes make it [[simply]] tedious. You don't [[understand]] the [[reason]] for the [[tedium]] until well into the picture, and by then it's too late. The first 40 minutes of [[film]] is something of a slow piece of Mexican soft porn, and unimaginative soft porn at that. [[Later]] in the [[film]] the [[style]] of the first 40 minutes [[starts]] to makes sense, but it's too late, because by then the [[audience]] is lost. There is some [[nice]] [[location]] shooting at the National [[Autonomous]] [[University]] of Mexico. I've [[often]] [[wondered]] why more [[films]] aren't shot there. The [[campus]] is [[built]] on the edge of lava [[fields]] that lend the [[campus]] a very otherworldly feel. My [[biggest]] [[problem]] with the [[film]] is that the director/[[writer]] has [[made]] the film the way he [[wanted]] to [[see]] it without regard for how a viewer who doesn't know the [[story]] will view it. You can't [[ignore]] the [[audience]] when you tell a story. The film is a bit [[monotonous]]. It's mostly a [[quiet]] [[filmmaking]], with the bulk o the story provided through a series of voice-overs. While [[doing]] a [[quiet]] film like this is not such a [[wicked]] [[thoughts]], this is one of those films where the [[failure]] of [[dialogue]] and the repetitive early scenes make it [[straightforward]] tedious. You don't [[understands]] the [[reasons]] for the [[drudgery]] until well into the picture, and by then it's too late. The first 40 minutes of [[filmmaking]] is something of a slow piece of Mexican soft porn, and unimaginative soft porn at that. [[Subsequent]] in the [[movies]] the [[styles]] of the first 40 minutes [[initiated]] to makes sense, but it's too late, because by then the [[audiences]] is lost. There is some [[pleasurable]] [[positioning]] shooting at the National [[Independent]] [[Academies]] of Mexico. I've [[routinely]] [[questioned]] why more [[cinema]] aren't shot there. The [[campuses]] is [[builds]] on the edge of lava [[realms]] that lend the [[college]] a very otherworldly feel. My [[highest]] [[difficulty]] with the [[flick]] is that the director/[[screenwriter]] has [[effected]] the film the way he [[desired]] to [[seeing]] it without regard for how a viewer who doesn't know the [[fairytales]] will view it. You can't [[ignoring]] the [[audiences]] when you tell a story. --------------------------------------------- Result 1174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is ironic that during the '50s, when Douglas Sirk was at his most successful in terms of audience appeal, he was virtually ignored by the critics… He is now seen, however, as a director of formidable intellect who achieved his best work in melodrama…

"Written on the Wind" is about the downfall of a Texan oil dynasty surrounded by worthless reputation, alcoholism, and nymphomania… It is about the twisted, fatal connections between sex, power, and money...

Stack draws a compelling portrait of a tormented drunken destroyed by frustration, arrogance, jealousy, insanity, and some deep insecurities…

Dorothy Malone succeeds as an attractive woman with an excessive sexual appetites, degrading herself for Hudson and to other fellows in town… Her best line: "I'm filthy." In one frantic scene, we see her shaking, quivering and sweating to a provocative mambo… In another weeping alone over a model oil-derrick at her father's desk—symbol of excessive wealth and masculine tyranny…

The frenetic atmosphere is both made palatable and intensified by Sirk's magnificent use of colors, lights, and careful use of mirrors… --------------------------------------------- Result 1175 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It seems to me that [[Stephen]] King's "Bachman" pen-name was a way for him to put out some of the grimmer, rawer, more mean-spirited [[stuff]] that he [[wanted]] to [[write]] without 'contaminating' his '[[brand]] name'. [[If]] you [[look]] back at the "Bachman [[Books]]" ([[Running]] [[Man]], The [[Long]] [[Walk]], Roadwork, [[Thinner]]) you [[notice]] they have a sealed-in [[feeling]] of airlessness and [[hopelessness]] about them that is distinct from mainstream [[King]]. I realize that we are [[talking]] about the [[guy]] [[whose]] first novel featured a humiliated, blood-covered, emotionally crippled [[teenage]] girl [[slaughtering]] everyone at her [[high]] [[school]] [[prom]]...but mainstream King [[always]] at have characters and plot elements that leaven the grimness of the [[proceedings]] a bit, and mostly have endings that [[offer]] at [[least]] a glimpse of hope and human feeling. Bachman books are just plain mean and [[always]] [[end]] [[badly]]. (BTW, "[[Pet]] Semetary" [[could]] have easily been a Bachman book if King hadn't [[revealed]] the [[alias]] by then. And "The [[Dark]] Half" seems to be at [[least]] [[partially]] about his "Bachman" persona.)

"[[Thinner]]" was the last Bachman [[book]], and [[man]], with its themes of class [[warfare]], [[revenge]], and [[death]] by [[starvation]], it is nasty. So it should be no [[surprise]] that the [[movie]] follows suit.

What is a [[surprise]] is that the [[adaptation]] seems to be [[filmed]] at a "TV [[Movie]] Of the Week" [[level]] of talent [[instead]] of something worthy of a theatrical [[release]]. (These days, something like this would [[probably]] go [[directly]] to DVD or cable). The [[makeup]] [[work]] and the [[striking]] [[motif]] ([[starving]] to [[death]] in the midst of plenty, a metaphor for the overfed, undernourished [[American]] middle class if there ever was one) is all that keeps you watching this misfire.

What went [[wrong]]? My first [[thought]] is that the [[director]] was going for the [[nasty]] Bachman [[vibe]], but he also [[somehow]] sucked all the interest out of the [[movie]] with poor [[casting]] [[choices]] - the [[actors]] here (with the [[exception]] of Joe Monetegna) [[simply]] can't carry the [[movie]]. And then he [[squished]] the warmth and life out of the [[rest]] of the movie with [[awkward]] pacing and scene structure. Plus he couldn't [[leave]] the plot [[alone]], and his changes don't really help. The [[script]] and dialog ought to work, but mostly the movie just lies there. Everything is muffled, dull, airless, and no fun to watch...with the vivid exception of the spectacle of the main character getting....thinner, and thinner, and thinner.

As other have pointed out, "Thinner" is by no means the worst King movie ever made (or even the second worst). And it does have a dreadful, compelling fascination owing to the [[theme]] and the careful makeup work. But first time viewers should approach this one with lowered expectations. It seems to me that [[Stephane]] King's "Bachman" pen-name was a way for him to put out some of the grimmer, rawer, more mean-spirited [[thing]] that he [[wanting]] to [[writing]] without 'contaminating' his '[[brands]] name'. [[Though]] you [[gaze]] back at the "Bachman [[Ledgers]]" ([[Executing]] [[Men]], The [[Prolonged]] [[Stroll]], Roadwork, [[Finer]]) you [[notification]] they have a sealed-in [[sense]] of airlessness and [[impotence]] about them that is distinct from mainstream [[Emperor]]. I realize that we are [[chat]] about the [[man]] [[whom]] first novel featured a humiliated, blood-covered, emotionally crippled [[teens]] girl [[culled]] everyone at her [[alto]] [[schooling]] [[promo]]...but mainstream King [[consistently]] at have characters and plot elements that leaven the grimness of the [[lawsuits]] a bit, and mostly have endings that [[offers]] at [[less]] a glimpse of hope and human feeling. Bachman books are just plain mean and [[constantly]] [[terminate]] [[desperately]]. (BTW, "[[Pets]] Semetary" [[did]] have easily been a Bachman book if King hadn't [[shown]] the [[nickname]] by then. And "The [[Darkness]] Half" seems to be at [[lowest]] [[partly]] about his "Bachman" persona.)

"[[Finer]]" was the last Bachman [[books]], and [[dude]], with its themes of class [[battlefield]], [[retaliation]], and [[dies]] by [[famine]], it is nasty. So it should be no [[surprises]] that the [[filmmaking]] follows suit.

What is a [[astonishment]] is that the [[adjust]] seems to be [[shot]] at a "TV [[Film]] Of the Week" [[levels]] of talent [[conversely]] of something worthy of a theatrical [[freeing]]. (These days, something like this would [[certainly]] go [[immediately]] to DVD or cable). The [[composition]] [[works]] and the [[staggering]] [[grounds]] ([[starved]] to [[mortality]] in the midst of plenty, a metaphor for the overfed, undernourished [[America]] middle class if there ever was one) is all that keeps you watching this misfire.

What went [[awry]]? My first [[ideology]] is that the [[headmaster]] was going for the [[sordid]] Bachman [[ambience]], but he also [[someplace]] sucked all the interest out of the [[filmmaking]] with poor [[pouring]] [[pick]] - the [[protagonists]] here (with the [[immunities]] of Joe Monetegna) [[exclusively]] can't carry the [[filmmaking]]. And then he [[smushed]] the warmth and life out of the [[roosting]] of the movie with [[tricky]] pacing and scene structure. Plus he couldn't [[leaving]] the plot [[lonely]], and his changes don't really help. The [[hyphen]] and dialog ought to work, but mostly the movie just lies there. Everything is muffled, dull, airless, and no fun to watch...with the vivid exception of the spectacle of the main character getting....thinner, and thinner, and thinner.

As other have pointed out, "Thinner" is by no means the worst King movie ever made (or even the second worst). And it does have a dreadful, compelling fascination owing to the [[subject]] and the careful makeup work. But first time viewers should approach this one with lowered expectations. --------------------------------------------- Result 1176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Jamie Foxx is fun but this [[movie]] has been [[done]] before. The [[bad]] [[guy]] plays a "malkovichian" [[character]] from "[[In]] the Line of [[Fire]]". The [[cops]] will do anything to find the [[bad]] [[guy]] - and of [[course]] the good guy has two sets of bad [[guys]] and one set of [[cops]] after him - all the while he is just [[trying]] to turn over a new [[leaf]]... Jamie Foxx is fun but this [[filmmaking]] has been [[performed]] before. The [[naughty]] [[man]] plays a "malkovichian" [[trait]] from "[[Across]] the Line of [[Wildfire]]". The [[nypd]] will do anything to find the [[naughty]] [[dude]] - and of [[cours]] the good guy has two sets of bad [[boy]] and one set of [[nypd]] after him - all the while he is just [[attempting]] to turn over a new [[sheeting]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 1177 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is truly boring. It was banned in Chinese cinema and i can see why. It's not because it's critical of the communist regime but simply because the movie is of such low quality. I would never want to pay money to watch this. I love movies from Chen Kaige and Zhang Yimou and i am disappointed such a poor movie could come out of China. It totally seems to ignore the audience and the director seems to have made the movie for himself. The shots of a person standing there doing nothing for up to a minute are hilarious and there's plenty of them. The cinematography and video quality are unbelievably bad. I looked this film up on the Net and it seems like people actually like this film. The only explanation i have for this is that some film buffs think that if a film is not in English it is automatically good. I can't see any reason why people would like this. this is not an art film it's of waste of celluloid.(That's if they actually shot it on film , which they didn't) --------------------------------------------- Result 1178 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the absolute worst movie I have ever seen!! There was absolutely nothing good to say about this movie. I have seen some bad movies but this one takes it. There is no plot and most of the movie you are either fast forwarding the movie to get it done faster or you are wondering what the hell is going on because you can't seriously think that someone thought of this movie and you are watching it. I feel sorry for anyone who has to sit through this painful hour and a half. Please take my advice and DO NOT WATCH this movie for I know you will think it is the biggest waste of time you have ever spent in your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] This film Evil Breed: The legend of samhain contains very little thought or effort. It is ridiculed with specs of ultra fast "slasher" style death and plain disgusting acts of death. The acting was rated a D as the actors show very little ability, and the stupidity of them in the film is too questionable. The way they portrayed what people their ages act like was [[incredibly]] [[different]]. The odd split of porn is fit in thought it really doesn't offer much, and any area that is respectable but is quite quickly run down with absolute gut wrenching death. Example is the poor fellow whom is disemboweled from his anus, and the scene lasts for about 5 minutes. It is terribly obvious of how little of a fight the kids put up. This film is a good choice for someone who likes to watch some awful deaths and practically torture. This film Evil Breed: The legend of samhain contains very little thought or effort. It is ridiculed with specs of ultra fast "slasher" style death and plain disgusting acts of death. The acting was rated a D as the actors show very little ability, and the stupidity of them in the film is too questionable. The way they portrayed what people their ages act like was [[unbelievably]] [[several]]. The odd split of porn is fit in thought it really doesn't offer much, and any area that is respectable but is quite quickly run down with absolute gut wrenching death. Example is the poor fellow whom is disemboweled from his anus, and the scene lasts for about 5 minutes. It is terribly obvious of how little of a fight the kids put up. This film is a good choice for someone who likes to watch some awful deaths and practically torture. --------------------------------------------- Result 1180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[Eye]] in the [[Labyrinth]] is not your average Giallo...and to be honest, I'm not really sure that it [[really]] is a Giallo; but Giallo or not, [[despite]] some [[problems]], this is [[certainly]] a very interesting [[little]] [[film]]. I'm [[hesitant]] to call it a Giallo because the [[film]] doesn't feature most of the things that [[make]] these [[films]] what they are; but [[many]] genre [[entries]] [[break]] the [[mould]], and this would [[seem]] to be one of them. The [[film]] doesn't feature any [[brutal]] murders as many Giallo's do, but this is [[made]] up for with a [[surreal]] atmosphere and a plot just about confusing enough to remain interesting for the [[duration]]. The plot [[seems]] [[simple]] enough in that it [[focuses]] on a [[doctor]] who is [[murdered]] by Julie, his [[patient]] who, for some [[reason]], she [[sees]] him as her lover and father and is [[offended]] when he [[walks]] out on her. We then [[relocate]] to a [[big]] [[house]] lived in by a number of people, but nothing is [[really]] what it [[seems]] as there are a number of [[secrets]] [[surrounding]] [[various]] [[events]] that happened before Julie's arrival...

The [[film]] [[seems]] to be professing [[something]] about how the [[mind]] is like a [[labyrinth]]. This never [[really]] [[comes]] off, and I [[preferred]] to just [[sit]] back and [[enjoy]] what was going on rather than [[worrying]] about what point (if any) the [[film]] is [[trying]] to make. Eye in the [[Labyrinth]] is directed by [[Mario]] Caiano, the [[director]] behind the [[excellent]] Night of the Doomed some [[years]] earlier. He doesn't [[create]] the [[atmosphere]] as well in this [[film]] as he did in the earlier one; but the [[surreal]] aspects of the [[story]] [[come]] off well, and the [[mystery]] is [[always]] kept up which stops the film from [[becoming]] boring. The [[film]] [[stars]] Rosemary [[Dexter]], who [[provides]] [[eye]] candy [[throughout]] and [[also]] [[delivers]] a good performance. Most of the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] aren't really worth mentioning, with the exceptions of Adolfo Celi, who is good as the [[villain]] of the piece and Alida [[Valli]], whom cult [[fans]] will remember from a [[whole]] host of [[excellent]] [[cult]] flicks. The [[film]] does explain itself at the [[end]]; which is [[lucky]] as I'm sure I'm not the only viewer who was more than a [[little]] [[confused]] by then! [[Overall]], this may not be classic [[stuff]]; but its [[good]] [[enough]] and worth seeing. [[Eyeball]] in the [[Daedalus]] is not your average Giallo...and to be honest, I'm not really sure that it [[genuinely]] is a Giallo; but Giallo or not, [[although]] some [[trouble]], this is [[probably]] a very interesting [[tiny]] [[cinematography]]. I'm [[loath]] to call it a Giallo because the [[flick]] doesn't feature most of the things that [[deliver]] these [[movies]] what they are; but [[myriad]] genre [[entrances]] [[interruption]] the [[mussel]], and this would [[appears]] to be one of them. The [[movies]] doesn't feature any [[cruel]] murders as many Giallo's do, but this is [[accomplished]] up for with a [[bizarre]] atmosphere and a plot just about confusing enough to remain interesting for the [[length]]. The plot [[appears]] [[mere]] enough in that it [[focused]] on a [[doctors]] who is [[murdering]] by Julie, his [[ill]] who, for some [[justification]], she [[believes]] him as her lover and father and is [[slighted]] when he [[walking]] out on her. We then [[resettlement]] to a [[major]] [[dwellings]] lived in by a number of people, but nothing is [[genuinely]] what it [[appears]] as there are a number of [[clandestine]] [[neighboring]] [[varied]] [[phenomena]] that happened before Julie's arrival...

The [[flick]] [[seem]] to be professing [[anything]] about how the [[intellect]] is like a [[maze]]. This never [[truly]] [[occurs]] off, and I [[favored]] to just [[sits]] back and [[enjoying]] what was going on rather than [[disturbing]] about what point (if any) the [[flick]] is [[tempting]] to make. Eye in the [[Maze]] is directed by [[Maria]] Caiano, the [[superintendent]] behind the [[super]] Night of the Doomed some [[olds]] earlier. He doesn't [[creating]] the [[mood]] as well in this [[movie]] as he did in the earlier one; but the [[bizarre]] aspects of the [[narratives]] [[coming]] off well, and the [[riddle]] is [[steadily]] kept up which stops the film from [[become]] boring. The [[kino]] [[superstar]] Rosemary [[Dex]], who [[provide]] [[eyes]] candy [[during]] and [[additionally]] [[offer]] a good performance. Most of the [[remainder]] of the [[casting]] aren't really worth mentioning, with the exceptions of Adolfo Celi, who is good as the [[rascal]] of the piece and Alida [[Valle]], whom cult [[buffs]] will remember from a [[overall]] host of [[noteworthy]] [[heresy]] flicks. The [[flick]] does explain itself at the [[ceases]]; which is [[fortunate]] as I'm sure I'm not the only viewer who was more than a [[petite]] [[muddled]] by then! [[Aggregate]], this may not be classic [[thing]]; but its [[alright]] [[sufficiently]] and worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] According to IMDb Takashi Miike's Master of Horror-segment, [[Imprint]], was banned in the US. So I figured I'd [[translate]] the Swedish [[review]] I just [[wrote]] for it...

It was hard to NOT have any sort of [[expectations]] from Ichi The Killer-director [[Takashi]] Miike's episode in the Masters of [[Horror]] [[series]]. And the DVD-cover of [[Imprint]] did in deed look very promising.

The story mostly takes place in a remote Japanese [[bordello]], some time during the 19th century, and it tells the tale of a [[journalist]] [[searching]] for Komomo, the woman he [[left]] behind and whom he promised to return for. Tired and dejected he [[arrives]] at the bordello, [[hoping]] that this will be the [[end]] of his very [[long]] [[journey]]. It turns out that one of the [[prostitutes]], a deformed and quiet girl, know about Komomo, and the desperate man makes her tell him where she is and what has happened to her [[since]] he left. The story she tells him is as deplorable as it is hard to swallow...

The first thing that hit me about the episode was how unnatural it seemed that the Japanese [[cast]] for the most [[part]] spoke [[fluent]] American-English. But I will [[leave]] it at that, it's not that big a deal. What IS a [[big]] [[deal]] [[however]] is how [[miserable]] the [[rest]] of it was. Miike's [[tale]] [[moves]] at such a [[slow]] [[pace]] that I couldn't [[help]] looking at my watch several times during the 63 minutes. The extended torure-scene, that takes place [[somewhere]] in the middle of the [[movie]], [[felt]] so unmotivated - and pornographically [[intrusive]] - that not [[even]] THAT scene became interesting. I [[felt]] like it was violent just for the sake of violence itself - with no sense of [[style]] or purpose. The only scenes that [[provoked]] any kind of emotion out of me were the images of bloody [[fetuses]] rolling along the bottom of the swiftly flowing water...and, in all honesty, the only [[emotions]] they [[provoked]] were feelings of disgust.

The journalist seeking the love he left behind is played by Billy Drago, for me most memorable as Frank Nitti - Al Capones whiteclad assassin in Brian De [[Palmas]] The Untouchables (1987). I've always found Dragos portrayal of Nitti to be very icy (and I mean that in a good way), and that is probably why I was almost annoyed when I found him to be so terrible (NOT in a good way) in this one. His acting seems to flow between no feelings or empathy whatsoever to displays of some really bad overacting. When his character is supposed to react to the awful things Komomo has been subjected to I was sitting in the sofa, twisting and turning in an attempt to escape the horrible actingjob put forth by Drago. I'm grateful that most of the story is told by Yuoki Kudoh (Memoirs of a geisha, 2005), who plays the deformed prostitute.

The finale is probably supposed to be chocking, maybe even revolting and horrid, but I just found it to be kind of...you know... "blah" (and I looked at my watch again, for the umptieth time, just wishing the crappy episode would end). Maybe the finale caused me to smile just a bit, but that's only because I couldn't help thinking of an episode of Red Dwarf, and the upside-down chins of Craig Charles and Danny John-Jules, with eyes glued on them to make them look like aliens... Lucky you, if you've seen that episode and now decide to see Imprint, I will forever have ruined the visuals of the ending for you.

My first thought, when Imprint finally ended, was that the only thing that made the pain of watching it worth it, was hearing the main title theme by Edward Shearmur (the same music I believe is used in every episode of this series), and that - if anything - is a big friggin warning, don't you think?

One might point to the costume design, by Michiko Kitamura, and say that there, at least, is something NOT lacking in style and refinement...but there are so many other films and TV-shows that is so much better at showing off the Japanese "geisha-fashion". This is nothing but inferior and I am disappointed. Takashi Miike's Masters of Horror-episode is boring, uninspiring and pointless. In other words; It's really, really BAD! According to IMDb Takashi Miike's Master of Horror-segment, [[Imprints]], was banned in the US. So I figured I'd [[translated]] the Swedish [[inspecting]] I just [[texted]] for it...

It was hard to NOT have any sort of [[prognosis]] from Ichi The Killer-director [[Hau]] Miike's episode in the Masters of [[Abomination]] [[serials]]. And the DVD-cover of [[Imprints]] did in deed look very promising.

The story mostly takes place in a remote Japanese [[cathouse]], some time during the 19th century, and it tells the tale of a [[correspondents]] [[seeking]] for Komomo, the woman he [[exited]] behind and whom he promised to return for. Tired and dejected he [[comes]] at the bordello, [[waits]] that this will be the [[terminate]] of his very [[lang]] [[voyager]]. It turns out that one of the [[harlots]], a deformed and quiet girl, know about Komomo, and the desperate man makes her tell him where she is and what has happened to her [[because]] he left. The story she tells him is as deplorable as it is hard to swallow...

The first thing that hit me about the episode was how unnatural it seemed that the Japanese [[casting]] for the most [[portions]] spoke [[fluids]] American-English. But I will [[letting]] it at that, it's not that big a deal. What IS a [[prodigious]] [[treat]] [[nevertheless]] is how [[regrettable]] the [[repose]] of it was. Miike's [[fable]] [[shift]] at such a [[slower]] [[rhythm]] that I couldn't [[helps]] looking at my watch several times during the 63 minutes. The extended torure-scene, that takes place [[nowhere]] in the middle of the [[filmmaking]], [[deemed]] so unmotivated - and pornographically [[invasive]] - that not [[yet]] THAT scene became interesting. I [[believed]] like it was violent just for the sake of violence itself - with no sense of [[styles]] or purpose. The only scenes that [[induced]] any kind of emotion out of me were the images of bloody [[fetus]] rolling along the bottom of the swiftly flowing water...and, in all honesty, the only [[passions]] they [[caused]] were feelings of disgust.

The journalist seeking the love he left behind is played by Billy Drago, for me most memorable as Frank Nitti - Al Capones whiteclad assassin in Brian De [[Palma]] The Untouchables (1987). I've always found Dragos portrayal of Nitti to be very icy (and I mean that in a good way), and that is probably why I was almost annoyed when I found him to be so terrible (NOT in a good way) in this one. His acting seems to flow between no feelings or empathy whatsoever to displays of some really bad overacting. When his character is supposed to react to the awful things Komomo has been subjected to I was sitting in the sofa, twisting and turning in an attempt to escape the horrible actingjob put forth by Drago. I'm grateful that most of the story is told by Yuoki Kudoh (Memoirs of a geisha, 2005), who plays the deformed prostitute.

The finale is probably supposed to be chocking, maybe even revolting and horrid, but I just found it to be kind of...you know... "blah" (and I looked at my watch again, for the umptieth time, just wishing the crappy episode would end). Maybe the finale caused me to smile just a bit, but that's only because I couldn't help thinking of an episode of Red Dwarf, and the upside-down chins of Craig Charles and Danny John-Jules, with eyes glued on them to make them look like aliens... Lucky you, if you've seen that episode and now decide to see Imprint, I will forever have ruined the visuals of the ending for you.

My first thought, when Imprint finally ended, was that the only thing that made the pain of watching it worth it, was hearing the main title theme by Edward Shearmur (the same music I believe is used in every episode of this series), and that - if anything - is a big friggin warning, don't you think?

One might point to the costume design, by Michiko Kitamura, and say that there, at least, is something NOT lacking in style and refinement...but there are so many other films and TV-shows that is so much better at showing off the Japanese "geisha-fashion". This is nothing but inferior and I am disappointed. Takashi Miike's Masters of Horror-episode is boring, uninspiring and pointless. In other words; It's really, really BAD! --------------------------------------------- Result 1182 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For anyone with a moderate sensibility, a moderate feeling of the human and humane condition, for anyone capable of getting above the Hollywood ilk, for anyone who is satisfied seeing cinema which does not have a series of Seagals/Willis/Van Dammes blasting the brains out of anybody or seeing who gets into bed with whom, for anyone whose intellectual level reaches a capacity to grasp, sympathise with, comprehend, laugh WITH, cry WITH natural tender heart-warming hilarious compassionate HUMAN BEINGS, `Le Huitième Jour' is waiting for you. Jaco van Dormael has not achieved simply a masterpiece, that would have been too simplistic; he has achieved one of those rare monumental works of art in the cinematographic world which defies any kind of encapsuling. Is it a drama? Is it a comedy? No: it is the story of Georges, a wonderful funny pitiful laughable loving frightened beautiful personality, a sufferer of the Downes Syndrome. It is a story which has you laughing through your tears, but this is not one of those classic tear-jerkers; this film moves through a world that has you at once mixing your feelings of compassion or pity or even shame with those of admiration, warmth and even love. A successful banking salesman, Harry, bumps into Georges: they were both going in opposite directions with absolutely opposing ideas, problems and priorities; skillfully van Dormael melts these two unlikely men into a warm friendship, but which is so much more than the good buddy friendship of those having a beer down the road. This is a relationship which develops into a profound needing by both for the other. The cuasi-surrealist scenes fit in perfectly: Georges recalls (or invents) past scenes of his life while either day-dreaming or sleeping; even the almost phantasmagorical final scene is totally correct. The only scene which might be considered a little out of place is when they steal a bus and drive it out of the show-rooms. However, this does not detract from the whole. This film is a monument. Even if your French is not up to much, please bear seeing it with sub-titles. `Le Huitième Jour' is worth the trouble. As for anything else, well, just read the following commentaries – I go along with all of them. This film is a joy, it is majestic, it is unique. If you have seen `Rain Man' which I consider an excellent film, you must see this one: it is far superior because it has not the superficial veneer of famous Hollywood-produced world-renowned actors; it has Pascal Duquenne and Daniel Auteuil – TEN oscars for these two, and three more for Jaco van Dormael. Who cares…………? Yes: 11 out of 10 if the IMDb rating doesn't break down under the strain.

Magnifique! Chapeau! --------------------------------------------- Result 1183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Fot the most [[part]], this [[movie]] feels [[like]] a "made-for-TV" effort. The direction is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. [[Denise]] Crosby, [[particularly]], [[delivers]] her lines [[like]] she's [[cold]] reading them off a cue card. [[Only]] one [[thing]] makes this film worth [[watching]], and that is once Gage [[comes]] back from the "Semetary." There is [[something]] [[disturbing]] about watching a [[small]] [[child]] [[murder]] [[someone]], and this [[movie]] might be more than some can handle just for that [[reason]]. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This [[film]] only does one [[thing]] [[right]], but it knocks that one thing [[right]] out of the park. Worth [[seeing]] just for the [[last]] 10 minutes or so. Fot the most [[parties]], this [[filmmaking]] feels [[iike]] a "made-for-TV" effort. The direction is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. [[Denis]] Crosby, [[notably]], [[gives]] her lines [[iike]] she's [[colder]] reading them off a cue card. [[Exclusively]] one [[stuff]] makes this film worth [[staring]], and that is once Gage [[occurs]] back from the "Semetary." There is [[anything]] [[worrying]] about watching a [[tiny]] [[children]] [[kills]] [[everyone]], and this [[filmmaking]] might be more than some can handle just for that [[motif]]. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This [[flick]] only does one [[stuff]] [[rights]], but it knocks that one thing [[rights]] out of the park. Worth [[see]] just for the [[latter]] 10 minutes or so. --------------------------------------------- Result 1184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A Bugs Life is a great film that is not just for kids but for adults too. The story is set around a colony of ants and their struggle against the evil Grasshoppers who come back every year and steal their food ( A Mirror of the Magnifiscent seven). There is some wonderfull computer animation and the voices are great too. You will love it!! 8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Fascinating]] [[yet]] [[unsettling]] [[look]] at [[Edith]] Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter ([[Little]] [[Edie]]) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent [[infested]], rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the [[city]]. It becomes quite clear very [[quickly]] that these two are well past eccentric. Little Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the [[mindset]] of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the conversations were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is [[perfect]] and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big [[Edie]] actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very [[captivating]] [[yet]] one gets the [[feeling]] that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the [[world]] has simply past these two by. Their hopes and [[dreams]] as decayed as the mansion they [[live]] in. Despite their bickering these two [[need]] each other more than ever. [[For]] without the other there [[would]] be no [[refuge]] from the loneliness. Most [[amazing]] [[line]] comes from Big [[Edie]] [[whose]] [[many]] cats [[relieve]] themselves [[throughout]] her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply [[unbelievable]]. [[Exciting]] [[again]] [[ominous]] [[gaze]] at [[Gertrude]] Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter ([[Tiny]] [[Caballero]]) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent [[infected]], rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the [[town]]. It becomes quite clear very [[promptly]] that these two are well past eccentric. Little Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the [[mentality]] of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the conversations were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is [[irreproachable]] and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big [[Caballero]] actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very [[fascinating]] [[again]] one gets the [[impression]] that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the [[globe]] has simply past these two by. Their hopes and [[daydream]] as decayed as the mansion they [[vive]] in. Despite their bickering these two [[requisite]] each other more than ever. [[At]] without the other there [[ought]] be no [[sanctuary]] from the loneliness. Most [[wondrous]] [[bloodline]] comes from Big [[Caballero]] [[who]] [[myriad]] cats [[relieving]] themselves [[around]] her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply [[inconceivable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie is one of the most [[provocative]] Jesus movies I have ever [[seen]]. It does not [[seek]] to [[tell]] the [[whole]] [[story]], but only to portray an interpretive [[expression]] of the [[last]] day of Jesus [[Christ]]. It is darkly witty, playful and [[seriously]] [[faithful]] to [[elements]] of the Jewish tradition and to [[modern]] scriptural [[interpretation]]. [[Judas]] is much more ordinary than other portrayals, not the dark and sinister [[evil]] that we sometimes [[imagine]], but a grossly mistaken [[man]], horribly misguided in his zeal. Chris Saranden's Jesus is [[playful]] and [[serious]], [[faithful]] and committed--very human while [[also]] [[divine]]. The final [[dialog]] is thoughtfully done and serves as the kind of [[small]] [[talk]] that two [[powerful]] men might do when they have just [[committed]] an atrocity. I would watch this [[movie]] again and [[recommend]] it to others. This movie is one of the most [[inflammatory]] Jesus movies I have ever [[saw]]. It does not [[trying]] to [[told]] the [[overall]] [[tale]], but only to portray an interpretive [[phrase]] of the [[latter]] day of Jesus [[Jeez]]. It is darkly witty, playful and [[gravely]] [[trusty]] to [[ingredients]] of the Jewish tradition and to [[modernity]] scriptural [[interpreting]]. [[Judea]] is much more ordinary than other portrayals, not the dark and sinister [[wicked]] that we sometimes [[imagining]], but a grossly mistaken [[bloke]], horribly misguided in his zeal. Chris Saranden's Jesus is [[mischievous]] and [[gravest]], [[fiel]] and committed--very human while [[furthermore]] [[godlike]]. The final [[dialogues]] is thoughtfully done and serves as the kind of [[petite]] [[schmooze]] that two [[forceful]] men might do when they have just [[commit]] an atrocity. I would watch this [[cinematography]] again and [[recommendation]] it to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 1187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] IQ is a cute romantic comedy featuring two great actors that seem to click well on screen. Plot is a typical guy wrong for girl, guy gets girl format, but makes the solid point that one must love with the heart and not the the mind. Addition of Albert Einstein and his band of geniuses provides excellent comic relief. Overall, a good movie. Not great, but good --------------------------------------------- Result 1188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was terrible. The plot sucked, the acting was bad, the editing was inept and this movie makes me want to poke my eyes out. I wish I had the time I spent watching this movie back. The balloon scene was stupid, the Mormon jokes are really old, the soundtrack sucked, I saw no chemistry between the two leads, it's full of stereotypes, stupid local "celeb" cameo's..most noted was Del "I'm going to drive as fast as I want to.." computer idiot. What is worst is that these actors had to play themselves on the spiritual side and even they screwed that up. This movie help create a long line of lackluster efforts to mainstream LDS beliefs into Hollywood. I.E. The RM, Church ball, etc. etc. I would forgo watching this movie and instead run head first into a brick wall. You will be more entertained than watching this poor excuse for a show. --------------------------------------------- Result 1189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] What a [[wonderful]] movie, eligible for so many [[labels]] it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.

Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely [[use]] polysyllabic, science reference words like "polymer" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like "long chain molecules" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.

The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, [[charm]], pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.

Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.

It's wonderful. What a [[wondrous]] movie, eligible for so many [[stickers]] it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.

Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely [[utilised]] polysyllabic, science reference words like "polymer" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like "long chain molecules" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.

The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, [[amulet]], pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.

Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.

It's wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] What an [[overlooked]] 80's soundtrack. I [[imagine]] [[John]] Travolta sang some of the [[songs]] but in [[watching]] the movie it did [[seem]] to personify everything that was 80s cheese. [[Clearly]] [[movies]] that rely on mechanical bulls, [[bartenders]] and immature [[relationships]] were in [[style]]. The best was his [[lousy]] Texas accent. [[Compare]] that to [[Friday]] Night Lights.I suggest [[watching]] Cocktail and Stir [[Crazy]] to [[start]] [[really]] getting into the dumbing down of film. Also, as a side note [[Made]] in America with Ted Danson and Whoopie [[Goldberg]] is an awesomely [[bad]] [[movie]]. I was so [[shocked]] to [[realize]] I had never [[watched]] it. One more [[weird]] [[movie]] of this genre [[would]] have to [[include]] Cadilac [[Man]] with [[Robin]] [[Williams]]. [[Just]] remember all of these [[BIG]] stars [[played]] big roles in these [[CHEESY]] movies.. Tom Cruise, Richard Pryor, Robin Williams and John Travolta What an [[omitted]] 80's soundtrack. I [[imagining]] [[Johannes]] Travolta sang some of the [[melodies]] but in [[staring]] the movie it did [[looks]] to personify everything that was 80s cheese. [[Definitely]] [[films]] that rely on mechanical bulls, [[waitresses]] and immature [[relations]] were in [[styles]]. The best was his [[pathetic]] Texas accent. [[Comparative]] that to [[Tuesday]] Night Lights.I suggest [[staring]] Cocktail and Stir [[Lunatic]] to [[embark]] [[genuinely]] getting into the dumbing down of film. Also, as a side note [[Accomplished]] in America with Ted Danson and Whoopie [[Tucker]] is an awesomely [[amiss]] [[films]]. I was so [[aghast]] to [[accomplishing]] I had never [[seen]] it. One more [[bizarre]] [[film]] of this genre [[ought]] have to [[incorporate]] Cadilac [[Males]] with [[Reuben]] [[William]]. [[Only]] remember all of these [[GRAND]] stars [[accomplished]] big roles in these [[CORNY]] movies.. Tom Cruise, Richard Pryor, Robin Williams and John Travolta --------------------------------------------- Result 1191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] What can I say about Cruel [[intentions]] 2? Well, I can [[say]] in all honesty, I will only watch this [[film]] again if I am fastened to a [[chair]] and have my eyes [[opened]] clockwork-orange-style.

The [[film]] 'stars' [[Robin]] [[Dunne]] (No, I never heard of him either), whose [[awful]] [[impression]] of Ryan [[Phillipe]] made me [[cringe]] [[throughout]]. [[In]] a [[case]] of terrible casting, Dunne attempts (and fails) to [[carry]] off [[playing]] a [[handsome]] charismatic, [[charmer]]. Since the [[actor]] is not handsome, nor charismatic nor charming, the [[character]] is left [[wholly]] [[unbelievable]]. Amy Adams, (she was in an episode of buffy one [[time]]), [[tries]] to [[pick]] up where [[Sarah]] Michelle Gellar left off and [[bring]] scheming Katherine to life... However, Adams is not that good a an actress and her performance was flat and [[lacking]] in any real emotion, [[often]] she looked like she was reading cue cards just off [[camera]]. There were two good actors in the [[film]] [[however]], Barry Flatman (Saw 2 & Saw 3) and [[Mimi]] [[Rogers]] ([[Mrs]] Kensington in Austion Powers), [[made]] very [[good]] and entertaining performances as the [[parents]] of Sebastian and [[Katherine]] and are the only [[reason]] why I rated the [[film]] as a 2, not a 1.

The [[film]] itself is a [[poor]] version of the [[original]], with such lows as [[carbon]] copy's of [[dialogue]] and mimicked scenes which [[lacked]] the originality of the [[previous]] [[film]].

I [[think]] that as a [[TV]] show, it might have [[worked]], but if it had been recasted with people who [[could]] actually [[act]] in the [[main]] parts. What can I say about Cruel [[intent]] 2? Well, I can [[tell]] in all honesty, I will only watch this [[filmmaking]] again if I am fastened to a [[wheelchair]] and have my eyes [[started]] clockwork-orange-style.

The [[movie]] 'stars' [[Robben]] [[Dunn]] (No, I never heard of him either), whose [[scary]] [[printout]] of Ryan [[Philip]] made me [[shudder]] [[during]]. [[During]] a [[lawsuit]] of terrible casting, Dunne attempts (and fails) to [[transporting]] off [[gaming]] a [[sumptuous]] charismatic, [[charming]]. Since the [[protagonist]] is not handsome, nor charismatic nor charming, the [[personages]] is left [[totally]] [[unimaginable]]. Amy Adams, (she was in an episode of buffy one [[times]]), [[attempted]] to [[opted]] up where [[Sara]] Michelle Gellar left off and [[brings]] scheming Katherine to life... However, Adams is not that good a an actress and her performance was flat and [[missing]] in any real emotion, [[normally]] she looked like she was reading cue cards just off [[cameras]]. There were two good actors in the [[flick]] [[instead]], Barry Flatman (Saw 2 & Saw 3) and [[Myrtle]] [[Rutgers]] ([[Margot]] Kensington in Austion Powers), [[brought]] very [[buena]] and entertaining performances as the [[relatives]] of Sebastian and [[Katie]] and are the only [[cause]] why I rated the [[filmmaking]] as a 2, not a 1.

The [[kino]] itself is a [[poorest]] version of the [[initial]], with such lows as [[coal]] copy's of [[talks]] and mimicked scenes which [[lack]] the originality of the [[former]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[believe]] that as a [[TELEVISION]] show, it might have [[collaborating]], but if it had been recasted with people who [[did]] actually [[ley]] in the [[leading]] parts. --------------------------------------------- Result 1192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] Man, what the hell were the people who [[made]] this [[film]] on? And more importantly where can I get some? The opening scene sets the tone for the film: a woman writhing naked in a circle of fire, transforming into a werewolf. And this is no Rick Baker 'American werewolf' [[transformation]], folks. We're talking some of the [[worst]] makeup ever [[captured]] on film here. I can just imagine some stoned Italian spreading glue on naked Annik Borel (who plays Daniela, the film's protagoness (is that a word?)), and asking her to roll in fur. That's how [[bad]] it is.

From here on in it doesn't get much [[better]]. Minutes are wasted as the scenery chewing male actors waffle on about [[Daniela]] and her condition or something (I can't [[remember]], but the [[dialogue]] is so [[bad]] if you don't laugh at it you'll [[cry]]).

The [[funny]] thing is Daniela isn't even a werewolf, she's a psycho who goes [[mental]] whenever there is a [[man]] around ([[understandable]], as she was [[raped]] as a [[child]]) so she [[thinks]] she [[becomes]] a werewolf like her ancestor (the [[opening]] scene). She can't [[help]] but [[tear]] out the throat of every [[man]] she meets, and she only [[wants]] to be [[loved]]! Things [[start]] [[looking]] up for Daniela as she meets and falls in [[love]] with a buff stuntman who doesn't trigger her 'episodes'. Check out the montage here, one of the cheesiest you'll ever [[see]] (laughing and [[hugging]] after diving headfirst through a [[window]]).

Daniela's [[luck]] doesn't [[hold]] out as the [[film]] takes a brutal [[turn]], she is [[suddenly]] [[viciously]] beaten and [[raped]] by a [[group]] of [[thugs]] who [[kill]] the stuntman. Reminiscent of "I spit on your [[grave]]", Daniela extracts bloody vengeance on her rapists.

This is 100 minutes of my life I will never get back. But [[hey]], that's the game you [[play]] when you're a film geek. Man, what the hell were the people who [[effected]] this [[filmmaking]] on? And more importantly where can I get some? The opening scene sets the tone for the film: a woman writhing naked in a circle of fire, transforming into a werewolf. And this is no Rick Baker 'American werewolf' [[conversion]], folks. We're talking some of the [[gravest]] makeup ever [[apprehended]] on film here. I can just imagine some stoned Italian spreading glue on naked Annik Borel (who plays Daniela, the film's protagoness (is that a word?)), and asking her to roll in fur. That's how [[unfavourable]] it is.

From here on in it doesn't get much [[best]]. Minutes are wasted as the scenery chewing male actors waffle on about [[Daniel]] and her condition or something (I can't [[recalling]], but the [[discussions]] is so [[naughty]] if you don't laugh at it you'll [[cries]]).

The [[hilarious]] thing is Daniela isn't even a werewolf, she's a psycho who goes [[psychological]] whenever there is a [[guy]] around ([[readable]], as she was [[broken]] as a [[kids]]) so she [[feels]] she [[become]] a werewolf like her ancestor (the [[initiation]] scene). She can't [[helps]] but [[tears]] out the throat of every [[males]] she meets, and she only [[wanted]] to be [[enjoyed]]! Things [[startup]] [[researching]] up for Daniela as she meets and falls in [[amore]] with a buff stuntman who doesn't trigger her 'episodes'. Check out the montage here, one of the cheesiest you'll ever [[behold]] (laughing and [[kiss]] after diving headfirst through a [[windows]]).

Daniela's [[chances]] doesn't [[held]] out as the [[filmmaking]] takes a brutal [[converting]], she is [[unexpectedly]] [[brutally]] beaten and [[broken]] by a [[groups]] of [[bandits]] who [[murder]] the stuntman. Reminiscent of "I spit on your [[tombs]]", Daniela extracts bloody vengeance on her rapists.

This is 100 minutes of my life I will never get back. But [[hiya]], that's the game you [[playing]] when you're a film geek. --------------------------------------------- Result 1193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Okay, we've [[got]] extreme Verhoeven violence ([[Although]] not as extreme as other Verhoeven flicks), we've [[got]] plenty of sex and nudity, but [[something]] is [[missing]]...Oh, yes, it's missing the intelligence that [[Paul]] Verhoeven is [[known]] for in his sci-fi movies. I admire the [[way]] Verhoeven [[introduces]] the characters and how they have a sense of humor, but unlike most Verhoeven films, the movie itself doesn't have enough humor for it to [[fall]] into the comedy [[genre]]. The acting [[overall]] was above [[average]] [[compared]] to most slasher films.

What makes Hollow [[Man]] a good [[movie]] is not the story, not the cast or characters, but the [[amazing]] special effects work that would otherwise make a film like this impossible. The crew has truly made an invisible man, without the use of things like a floating hat suspended on piano wires and other practical effects (effects done on set). The most stunning effects scenes are not seen while Kevin Bacon is invisible, they are when Kevin Bacon is becoming invisible and visible.

The problem is that this invisible man story deserves to be more imaginitive. Here, it takes place at a lab for the most part. I would have enjoyed seeing the invisible Kevin Bacon robbing a bank and getting away with it, or let's say steal something from people's purses, or something like that. But what is shown is decent enough to make [[Hollow]] [[Man]] an [[entertaining]] [[movie]]. Grade: B Okay, we've [[did]] extreme Verhoeven violence ([[Despite]] not as extreme as other Verhoeven flicks), we've [[did]] plenty of sex and nudity, but [[somethin]] is [[gone]]...Oh, yes, it's missing the intelligence that [[Paolo]] Verhoeven is [[renowned]] for in his sci-fi movies. I admire the [[camino]] Verhoeven [[presents]] the characters and how they have a sense of humor, but unlike most Verhoeven films, the movie itself doesn't have enough humor for it to [[autumn]] into the comedy [[sorts]]. The acting [[totals]] was above [[medium]] [[comparing]] to most slasher films.

What makes Hollow [[Fella]] a good [[filmmaking]] is not the story, not the cast or characters, but the [[wondrous]] special effects work that would otherwise make a film like this impossible. The crew has truly made an invisible man, without the use of things like a floating hat suspended on piano wires and other practical effects (effects done on set). The most stunning effects scenes are not seen while Kevin Bacon is invisible, they are when Kevin Bacon is becoming invisible and visible.

The problem is that this invisible man story deserves to be more imaginitive. Here, it takes place at a lab for the most part. I would have enjoyed seeing the invisible Kevin Bacon robbing a bank and getting away with it, or let's say steal something from people's purses, or something like that. But what is shown is decent enough to make [[Empty]] [[Males]] an [[amusing]] [[movies]]. Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 1194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Astaire and Rogers at the [[height]] of their [[popularity]]. [[In]] 1936 Americans thought of the [[Navy]] as a [[place]] for song and [[dance]]. WWII was [[still]] a few years away. Fred and [[Ginger]] [[dance]] up the town.

The plot is decent, but who cares... By the [[way]], notice the cameo [[roles]] for Betty Grable and a [[glamorous]] Lucile Ball.

A [[load]] of Irving [[Berlin]] [[songs]], [[including]] the [[famous]] "Let's [[Face]] the [[Music]] and [[Dance]]". [[In]] that scene, Ginger's [[heavy]] swooping [[dress]] smacks Fred in the face during one of her spins and [[almost]] knocks him unconscious. Fred [[insisted]] on [[keeping]] the take as the [[dancing]] was [[superb]] [[nonetheless]].

Ginger once [[commented]] that she was a [[better]] [[dancer]] than Fred, since she had to do all the same moves, in [[step]], and [[backwards]]...

Come to [[think]] of it, Fred's [[voice]] was nice too. The [[man]] was [[effortless]] in [[motion]].

Here's a [[movie]] to cozy up on the [[couch]] with a loved-one, [[kick]] off the shoes, and enjoy the [[entertainment]]. Astaire and Rogers at the [[elevation]] of their [[vogue]]. [[Onto]] 1936 Americans thought of the [[Armada]] as a [[placing]] for song and [[dancers]]. WWII was [[however]] a few years away. Fred and [[Kang]] [[danced]] up the town.

The plot is decent, but who cares... By the [[path]], notice the cameo [[duties]] for Betty Grable and a [[beautiful]] Lucile Ball.

A [[burdening]] of Irving [[Berliner]] [[tunes]], [[include]] the [[acclaimed]] "Let's [[Faces]] the [[Musical]] and [[Choreography]]". [[For]] that scene, Ginger's [[onerous]] swooping [[garments]] smacks Fred in the face during one of her spins and [[virtually]] knocks him unconscious. Fred [[stressed]] on [[preserving]] the take as the [[choreography]] was [[wondrous]] [[still]].

Ginger once [[remarked]] that she was a [[improved]] [[dancers]] than Fred, since she had to do all the same moves, in [[steps]], and [[backward]]...

Come to [[believe]] of it, Fred's [[vowel]] was nice too. The [[males]] was [[easier]] in [[petition]].

Here's a [[film]] to cozy up on the [[sofa]] with a loved-one, [[whoop]] off the shoes, and enjoy the [[amusement]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1195 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Most Stoogephiles consider this to be the best Stooges short bar none, and they're right. Curly is a scream dressed up in drag as "Senorita Cucaracha", and Moe and Larry are in top form as "Senor Mucho" and "Senor Gusto", respectively. Christine McIntyre's beautiful operatic voice is given full rein--she actually was a trained opera singer--and it's wonderful. The great Gino Corrado is hilarious as a pompous Italian singer terrorized by the Stooges at a society party. Some truly funny gags, good direction and very tight editing make this rise to the very top of the Stooges' prolific output. What's even more amazing is that Curly was having severe health problems at the time, and in several of the shorts he made during this period, you can see that he is obviously ill; his timing is way off, he speaks very slowly and haltingly, and has trouble getting around. Fortunately, his health was in an upswing when he made this film, and it shows. Classic Stooge comedy, and enjoyed by even non-Stooge fans (I had a girlfriend who couldn't stand the Stooges, but even she laughed at this one). A must-see. --------------------------------------------- Result 1196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Flat, ordinary thriller about a conniving woman who deceives all those she supposedly loves in order to boost her bank account. Nicole Kidman plays the deceptive Tracey, married to the doting Andy (Bill Pullman). When an old school friend of Andy's named Jed Hill (Alec Baldwin) turns up as the resident surgeon, trouble is not far behind him.

Script fails in that it does not carefully develop the promising premise into an effective, tantalising thriller, and the severe lack of character motivation, background and development leaves the whole show reaching. None of the cast are able to generate interest in their shallow characters, especially Bill Pullman, whose own inexplicably curious Andy is impossible to believe.

Poor director Harold Becker is left trying to resurrect an impossibly dead project, and is unable to make entertainment from any of it. By the time the 'secret' of the plot is revealed, you just won't care.

At least the cinematography has Massachusetts looking good. Also stars George C. Scott, Peter Gallagher and Josef Sommer.

Sunday, February 25, 1996 - T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 1197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just got back from this free screening, and this "Osama Witch Project" is the hands-down worst film I've seen this year, worse than even "Catwoman" - which had the decency to at least pass itself off as fiction.

In "September Tapes," a "film crew" of "documentary journalists" heads to Afghanistan - despite being thoroughly unprepared for the trip, the conditions and, oh yeah, the psychotic and ridiculous vendetta of their filmmaker leader to avenge his wife's death on Sept. 11 - to track down Osama bin Laden.

They "made" eight tapes on their journey, which now "document" their travels and, of course, their attempts to kill the terrorist leader. (The eight tapes, thankfully, all end at points significant in the narrative, which is convenient for a "documentary.")

The psychotic, idiotic protagonist - who is given to long, significant speeches that he probably learned watching "MacGyver" - cares nothing for his own life or the life of his innocent crew as he gets them further and further into danger through a series of completely dumb mishaps. I don't know why he didn't just wear a sign on his back that said "Shoot me."

The crew's translator, supposedly their sensible voice-of-reason, does little more than whine and gets baffled as the idiot hero leads them into doom.

You wish they'd brought along someone on their trip to call them all morons.

Around "Tape 4," I began rooting for the terrorists to shoot the film crew. --------------------------------------------- Result 1198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Avoid this one, unless you want to watch an expensive but badly made movie. Example? The sound is good but the dialogue is not clear - a cardinal sin in a French film.

This film attempts to combine western, drug intrigue and ancien regime costume epic. What? Well, consider this. The cowboy music is hilarious during sword fights. Or how about the woman in her underwear, holding a knife and jumping up and down on the bed?

Someone should do a 'What's Up Tiger Lily' on this bomb. Rewrite the script and then either dub or subtitle it. Heck, it's almost that now. (BTW, Gerard Depardieu and Carole Bouquet, both known to American audiences, have roles.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] First of all I [[saw]] this movie without knowing [[anything]] about it I just knew that [[Joel]] Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A [[friend]] and I went to [[see]] it at a Danish film festival called the night-film [[festival]] which is a lot of [[different]] movies [[shown]] after hours the festival [[pretty]] much specializes in [[showing]] [[movies]] that wouldn't otherwise be [[shown]] in Danish [[theaters]].

[[Anyway]] My [[friend]] and I went to [[see]] it and we were [[astonished]] at how [[real]] it [[seemed]] and that it really [[struck]] a [[cord]] with our [[feelings]], we really [[got]] caught up in the [[plot]] without being [[able]] to figure out the ending which is a [[great]] [[plus]] in our [[book]].

The [[film]] is [[recorded]] in a [[style]] that [[reminds]] me of the Danish [[initiative]] "[[dogma]] 95" which was [[started]] by 4 Danish [[directors]] [[including]] [[Lars]] [[Von]] Trier ([[Dancer]] [[In]] the [[Dark]]).

In [[conclusion]] the [[movie]] is [[really]] worth [[seeing]] it [[gives]] a [[different]] [[perspective]] on how [[things]] were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being [[expected]] to [[serve]] their [[country]] in [[battle]] a [[long]] [[way]] from [[home]].

[[Also]] [[Colin]] Farrell is [[exceptional]] in this movie I haven't [[seen]] him before but I can't [[wait]] to [[see]] more of him.

[[Lars]] P. Helvard First of all I [[watched]] this movie without knowing [[something]] about it I just knew that [[Yoel]] Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A [[boyfriend]] and I went to [[consults]] it at a Danish film festival called the night-film [[feast]] which is a lot of [[various]] movies [[indicated]] after hours the festival [[quite]] much specializes in [[proving]] [[cinematography]] that wouldn't otherwise be [[demonstrated]] in Danish [[cinema]].

[[Writ]] My [[freund]] and I went to [[seeing]] it and we were [[horrified]] at how [[authentic]] it [[appeared]] and that it really [[slugged]] a [[cords]] with our [[sentiments]], we really [[get]] caught up in the [[intrigue]] without being [[capable]] to figure out the ending which is a [[remarkable]] [[anymore]] in our [[workbook]].

The [[cinematographic]] is [[taped]] in a [[styles]] that [[reminded]] me of the Danish [[efforts]] "[[doctrine]] 95" which was [[begun]] by 4 Danish [[administrators]] [[consisting]] [[Bjorn]] [[Fon]] Trier ([[Ballerina]] [[For]] the [[Darkness]]).

In [[conclusions]] the [[kino]] is [[truthfully]] worth [[see]] it [[delivers]] a [[dissimilar]] [[viewpoint]] on how [[items]] were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being [[prophesied]] to [[serving]] their [[nations]] in [[combats]] a [[prolonged]] [[manner]] from [[dwellings]].

[[Moreover]] [[Collin]] Farrell is [[wondrous]] in this movie I haven't [[watched]] him before but I can't [[hoping]] to [[seeing]] more of him.

[[Bjorn]] P. Helvard --------------------------------------------- Result 1200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The fluttering of butterfly wings in the Atlantic can unleash a hurricane in the Pacific. According to this theory (somehow related to the Chaos Theory, I'm not sure exactly how), every action, no matter how small or insignificant, will start a chain reaction that can lead to big events. This small jewel of a film shows us a series of seemingly-unrelated characters, most of them in Paris, whose actions will affect each others' lives. (The six-degrees-of-separation theory can be applied as well.) Each story is a facet of the jewel that is this film. The acting is finely-tuned and nuanced (Audrey Tautou is luminous), the stories mesh plausibly, the humor is just right, and the viewer leaves the theatre nodding in agreement. --------------------------------------------- Result 1201 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] When DEATHTRAP was [[first]] released, the poster--reproduced on the [[cover]] of this DVD--offered a graphic akin to a Rubik's Cube. It is an [[appropriate]] [[image]]: originally [[written]] for the [[stage]] by Ira [[Levin]], who authored such memorable [[works]] as ROSEMARY'S [[BABY]] and THE STEPFORD WIVES, the play was one of Broadway's most famous twisters, and under Sidney Lumet's [[direction]] it translates to the screen [[extremely]] well.

DEATHTRAP is one of those [[films]] that it is very [[difficult]] to [[discuss]], for to do so in any detail [[gives]] away the very plot for which it is [[famous]]. But the [[opening]] premise is [[extremely]] [[clever]]: [[Sidney]] Bruhl ([[Michael]] Caine) is the [[famous]] author of mystery plays, but these days he [[seems]] to have lost his touch. After a [[particularly]] [[brutal]] opening night, an [[old]] student named Clifford [[Anderson]] (Christopher Reeve) sends him a script for a play he has [[written]]. It is called "Deathtrap," and [[Sidney]] [[recognizes]] it as a surefire hit. [[Just]] the [[sort]] of [[hit]] that [[would]] revive his [[career]]... [[indeed]], a [[hit]] to [[die]] for. And when Clifford visits to [[discuss]] the [[play]], events [[suddenly]] [[begin]] to [[twist]] in the most [[unexpected]] [[manner]] possible.

Like [[Anthony]] Shaffer's [[equally]] twisty SLEUTH, DEATHTRAP is [[really]] a [[story]] more at [[home]] on the [[stage]] than the screen--to reach full power it needs the immediacy that a live performance [[offers]]. Still, under the [[expert]] [[guidance]] of [[director]] [[Sidney]] Lumet, it makes a more-than-respectable showing on the screen. [[Much]] of this is due to the cast, which is [[remarkably]] fine. Michael Caine gives a truly [[brilliant]] performance, Dyan Cannon is [[funny]] and endearing as Sidney's [[relentlessly]] [[anxious]] wife, and Christopher Reeve [[gives]] what might be the single [[finest]] performance in his regrettably short acting [[career]]. If you can't see it in a first-rate theatrical production, this will more than do until one comes along.

Gary [[F]]. Taylor, aka GFT, [[Amazon]] [[Reviewer]] When DEATHTRAP was [[firstly]] released, the poster--reproduced on the [[covered]] of this DVD--offered a graphic akin to a Rubik's Cube. It is an [[adequate]] [[photo]]: originally [[writes]] for the [[phases]] by Ira [[Levine]], who authored such memorable [[cooperating]] as ROSEMARY'S [[BABIES]] and THE STEPFORD WIVES, the play was one of Broadway's most famous twisters, and under Sidney Lumet's [[directions]] it translates to the screen [[critically]] well.

DEATHTRAP is one of those [[cinematography]] that it is very [[troublesome]] to [[discussing]], for to do so in any detail [[provides]] away the very plot for which it is [[notorious]]. But the [[opens]] premise is [[critically]] [[smart]]: [[Sydney]] Bruhl ([[Michel]] Caine) is the [[acclaimed]] author of mystery plays, but these days he [[looks]] to have lost his touch. After a [[specifically]] [[brute]] opening night, an [[elderly]] student named Clifford [[Andersen]] (Christopher Reeve) sends him a script for a play he has [[writes]]. It is called "Deathtrap," and [[Sydney]] [[admits]] it as a surefire hit. [[Jen]] the [[sorting]] of [[slapped]] that [[could]] revive his [[careers]]... [[actually]], a [[struck]] to [[died]] for. And when Clifford visits to [[discusses]] the [[playing]], events [[abruptly]] [[starts]] to [[twisting]] in the most [[unplanned]] [[way]] possible.

Like [[Anton]] Shaffer's [[similarly]] twisty SLEUTH, DEATHTRAP is [[genuinely]] a [[histories]] more at [[housing]] on the [[stages]] than the screen--to reach full power it needs the immediacy that a live performance [[offerings]]. Still, under the [[specialised]] [[advice]] of [[headmaster]] [[Sid]] Lumet, it makes a more-than-respectable showing on the screen. [[Very]] of this is due to the cast, which is [[impossibly]] fine. Michael Caine gives a truly [[wondrous]] performance, Dyan Cannon is [[comical]] and endearing as Sidney's [[ruthlessly]] [[eager]] wife, and Christopher Reeve [[offers]] what might be the single [[meanest]] performance in his regrettably short acting [[quarry]]. If you can't see it in a first-rate theatrical production, this will more than do until one comes along.

Gary [[e]]. Taylor, aka GFT, [[Amazonian]] [[Rater]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The rating is only a 5 because it's a movie that could have used better acting and direction (or at least music!). However, for the achievements of Walt Whitman, it deserves a 10. A previous poster calls the movie cheesy, however, I think it's a simple case of not seeing the forest for the trees. The film makers were apparently more interested in getting the story out there than to have a Hollywood shiny feature film. And for this, I applaud them - the fact it is non-mainstream reflects the life of Whitman as well. This film is more documentary than for the sake of acting. To be fascinated with a story such as this, when you rarely hear of these types of stories that shape current day mental health, is the most important thing. I found it a highly enjoyable look at history. --------------------------------------------- Result 1203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is the first of "The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full [[text]] of the play is everything this "Romeo & Juliet" has [[going]] for it, lacking in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a [[dreadful]] director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally [[lacks]] passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge [[mistake]] that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of "Prince Valium" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.

At 168 minutes, this production is [[unable]] to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't [[empathize]] with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as [[bad]] as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10. This is the first of "The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full [[texts]] of the play is everything this "Romeo & Juliet" has [[gonna]] for it, lacking in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a [[abysmal]] director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally [[missing]] passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge [[mistaken]] that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of "Prince Valium" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.

At 168 minutes, this production is [[impossible]] to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't [[commiserate]] with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as [[naughty]] as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1204 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] One piece of [[trivia]] that is [[often]] [[forgotten]] about this [[family]] [[film]] is one of [[business]].

At the [[time]], in 1994, this [[movie]] held the [[record]] for the biggest movie premiere in motion [[picture]] history (and may continue to hold). It was held in [[Pittsburgh]], Pennsylvania - no [[doubt]] in honor of the original film's "[[Angels]]" who "haunted" the Pittsburgh Pirates. In this [[remake]] they "[[haunt]]" the California Angels.

Anyway, the premiere was held at the [[long]] [[gone]] Three Rivers Stadium which was the home of the [[Pittsburgh]] [[Pirates]] and the Pittsburgh Steelers at the time (the Pirates are now housed in PNC Park and the Steelers at [[Heinz]] Field). The premiere was held on a movie screen that was five stories in height inside the stadium and held (and may even continue to hold) the record for the largest movie premiere in history, shown to 60,000 [[fans]]. Danny Glover, Tony Danza and Christopher Lloyd were all in attendance to the admiration of thousands of sports fans. One piece of [[trifles]] that is [[ordinarily]] [[overlooked]] about this [[families]] [[cinematography]] is one of [[corporations]].

At the [[times]], in 1994, this [[cinema]] held the [[recordings]] for the biggest movie premiere in motion [[imagery]] history (and may continue to hold). It was held in [[Cincinnati]], Pennsylvania - no [[duda]] in honor of the original film's "[[Angel]]" who "haunted" the Pittsburgh Pirates. In this [[redo]] they "[[torments]]" the California Angels.

Anyway, the premiere was held at the [[protracted]] [[faded]] Three Rivers Stadium which was the home of the [[Cincinnati]] [[Pirate]] and the Pittsburgh Steelers at the time (the Pirates are now housed in PNC Park and the Steelers at [[Hynes]] Field). The premiere was held on a movie screen that was five stories in height inside the stadium and held (and may even continue to hold) the record for the largest movie premiere in history, shown to 60,000 [[stalkers]]. Danny Glover, Tony Danza and Christopher Lloyd were all in attendance to the admiration of thousands of sports fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1205 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How they got Al Pacino to play in this movie is beyond me. This movie is absolutely terrible. I discovered, after reading some of the other reviews, that a couple of people actually enjoyed this film, which deeply puzzles me, because I do not see how anyone in their right mind could possibly enjoy a movie as awful as Revolution. It's not just that it's a bad movie, with a lame plot and overall strangeness that is extremely unpleasant, but it seems as if the filmmakers were either mentally retarded (which is a very possible explanation as to why this movie sucks like it does, though it probably still sucks even compared to other films made by retards) or deliberately made every illogical decision to make this movie suck as much as possible. For example, we see Donald Sutherland running around with a huge, fat ugly mole on his face. He does not normally have a mole. The mole does not add to his character. It is extremely ugly and distracting. It's not like Robert De Niro's mole; it's much worse. Why the hell has he got that mole? It's as if the filmmakers just said, "Let's see, how could we make this movie even worse than it already is? I know, let's give Mr. Sutherland a giant, ugly-ass mole right on his face."

Another example of the filmmakers' stupidity is the character Ned. We see, for the first three-quarters of the movie, young Ned. At one point, "six months later" appears on the screen. We see Ned again, and it is, of course, the same actor playing the boy. Five minutes later, "three weeks later" appears on the screen, and all of a sudden we've got a different actor playing as the now older Ned. What, do they think we're idiots? Good God! Again, it's like the filmmakers are saying, "How can we possibly make it any worse? I don't think we can...Oh wait! I just had a terrible idea!" I know a kid doesn't grow much in half a year, which is fine, but he at least grows more than he does in three weeks. Just don't get another actor to play Ned, or at least get him to play the five minutes when he's three weeks younger. Furthermore, the kid who plays the "older" Ned does not look any older than "young" Ned. As a matter of fact, he just looks completely different, much skinnier, and no taller or older than the original actor, which is very confusing, as I, like any rational human being, thought at first that it was a new and different character.

What, did the first kid die while they were filming the movie? Because he was in it for the first hour and a half, and then all of a sudden, three weeks later, the guy from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is playing Ned for the last five minutes of the movie. And even if the original actor did die, the filmmakers should have at least gotten an actor who looks like him to play the remainder of his role, and re-shoot the measly five minutes of "six months later" scenes. Better yet, just scrap the movie completely, never finish it and never release, never even tell anybody about it, because by that point they should have realized that their movie sucks and in finishing it they would only waste more money and time and succeed in making one of the worst movies of all time.

I'm not saying that this movie is so bad you shouldn't watch it; it's so bad that you SHOULD watch it, just to see how badly it sucks. It's terrible, terrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 1206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The autobiography on which this movie is based remains one of the most heart-rending books I have ever read. It tells the amazing stories of two sisters, both who earned devotion and respect working well into their 70's as a teacher and a dentist, then lived another 30 years with dignity. Ruby Dee steals the film with her perfectly nuanced performance as the rebellious "blacker" Bessie, the dentist. She not only expresses her anger, angst, and wisdom well; she lets you know exactly where they've come from using an economy of words. Diahnn Carroll has the feel of the older sister, the teacher, down perfectly, but I'm afraid she never makes me believe that she's over 100. No matter -- the stories are well worth telling. Amy Madigan is a bit too extreme and intrusive in acting overwhelmed and insecure in the first half of the movie as the Caucasian NY Times reporter. This, too, is only a minor distraction. The stories, all true, are the attraction and although two or three get slightly damaged in the translation, most of them make it through just fine.

I recommend the book as essential reading to all people I recommend any books to. I cannot quite but this TV-movie in that rarefied air, but it certainly captures enough of the flavor to be highly worthwhile in its own right. --------------------------------------------- Result 1207 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I expected a bad [[movie]], and got a [[bad]] movie. But I couldn't really [[imagine]] in my [[worst]] [[fantasy]] how [[bad]] this movie was. I don't even [[want]] to [[try]] to explain what [[Blood]] Surf is about. Is not about blood [[surfing]], but a [[big]] a$$ [[crocodile]]. They are [[complaining]] about the fake shark in [[Jaws]], but Spielberg was wise and didn't show the shark until the [[end]]. Here the crocodile is [[shown]] a lot of times, and it's the [[worst]] fake [[crocodile]] I have ever [[seen]], and they don't [[try]] to [[hide]] it. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a [[good]] [[fake]] [[crocodile]] watch [[Lake]] [[Placid]].

The [[director]] had an [[opportunity]] to make a decent [[surf]]/shark movie, but he had to [[make]] a [[bad]] b-monster [[movie]]. He had the [[chance]] to [[make]] an [[original]] [[surf]] movie, but he [[wanted]] to make a monster movie. So you have understand how bad this movie is, does it have some good parts? Not really, it [[got]] some nudity, and a [[sex]] scene that is [[taken]] straight out of a playboy movie. The acting isn't half [[bad]] [[either]], and Kate Fischer looks good. Too [[bad]] she doesn't take her [[top]] off. The lead actors aren't [[bad]] either. They had some [[potential]]. The [[location]] was beautiful and the [[movie]] [[start]] good with some [[nice]] [[surf]] scenes. The [[blame]] is on the untalented [[writer]] and [[director]]. The dialogue is some of the [[worst]] I have ever [[seen]], and the script is really badly [[written]], and the [[director]] [[got]] no talent what so ever, and not much of a [[fantasy]] [[either]].

Don't watch it. [[Even]] if you [[want]] to watch the [[beautiful]] Kate Fischer. It isn't worth it. Watch Sirens to watch Kate [[nude]], and watch [[Lake]] Placid if you want some good [[crocodile]] action.

3/10 because I'm in a [[good]] [[mood]], and Maureen Larrazabal [[looks]] [[good]] [[naked]], and [[Kate]] [[looks]] good (but is [[bad]] actress,)and [[Dex]] [[Miller]], Joel [[West]] and Matt Borlenghi did a good [[job]] with the [[piece]] of sh#t they had to [[work]] with. I expected a bad [[filmmaking]], and got a [[rotten]] movie. But I couldn't really [[presume]] in my [[meanest]] [[utopia]] how [[unfavourable]] this movie was. I don't even [[wanting]] to [[attempt]] to explain what [[Chrissake]] Surf is about. Is not about blood [[surfer]], but a [[prodigious]] a$$ [[alligator]]. They are [[whining]] about the fake shark in [[Gags]], but Spielberg was wise and didn't show the shark until the [[terminating]]. Here the crocodile is [[illustrated]] a lot of times, and it's the [[meanest]] fake [[alligator]] I have ever [[noticed]], and they don't [[attempt]] to [[disguising]] it. [[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[behold]] a [[alright]] [[faux]] [[alligator]] watch [[Lakes]] [[Tranquil]].

The [[headmaster]] had an [[luck]] to make a decent [[surfer]]/shark movie, but he had to [[deliver]] a [[rotten]] b-monster [[filmmaking]]. He had the [[luck]] to [[deliver]] an [[initial]] [[surfer]] movie, but he [[wished]] to make a monster movie. So you have understand how bad this movie is, does it have some good parts? Not really, it [[did]] some nudity, and a [[sexuality]] scene that is [[picked]] straight out of a playboy movie. The acting isn't half [[negative]] [[nor]], and Kate Fischer looks good. Too [[negative]] she doesn't take her [[superior]] off. The lead actors aren't [[unhealthy]] either. They had some [[prospective]]. The [[placements]] was beautiful and the [[cinematography]] [[outset]] good with some [[enjoyable]] [[surfer]] scenes. The [[culpa]] is on the untalented [[novelist]] and [[headmaster]]. The dialogue is some of the [[worse]] I have ever [[noticed]], and the script is really badly [[writes]], and the [[headmaster]] [[get]] no talent what so ever, and not much of a [[fantasia]] [[nor]].

Don't watch it. [[Yet]] if you [[wants]] to watch the [[sumptuous]] Kate Fischer. It isn't worth it. Watch Sirens to watch Kate [[naked]], and watch [[Lakes]] Placid if you want some good [[alligator]] action.

3/10 because I'm in a [[alright]] [[humor]], and Maureen Larrazabal [[seem]] [[alright]] [[barefoot]], and [[Cate]] [[seems]] good (but is [[negative]] actress,)and [[Dexter]] [[Meunier]], Joel [[Occidental]] and Matt Borlenghi did a good [[workplace]] with the [[slice]] of sh#t they had to [[cooperate]] with. --------------------------------------------- Result 1208 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I watched this film for 45 minutes and [[counted]] 9 mullets. That's a mullet every 5 minutes. [[Seriously]] [[though]], this film is living proof that formula [[works]]. If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin. A streetwise-yet-vulnerable [[heroine]], a hardened ex-cop martial arts master with a heart of gold and a serial killer with 'issues'. [[Pure]] [[magic]]. I watched this film for 45 minutes and [[accounted]] 9 mullets. That's a mullet every 5 minutes. [[Profoundly]] [[although]], this film is living proof that formula [[cooperated]]. If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin. A streetwise-yet-vulnerable [[heroin]], a hardened ex-cop martial arts master with a heart of gold and a serial killer with 'issues'. [[Sheer]] [[magical]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[absolutely]] fail to see what is [[funny]] in this [[film]]. The [[humor]] [[seems]] to be destined for [[corpses]]. It's [[slow]]. The [[story]] is too simple to be [[true]]. The [[characters]] do not [[raise]] [[much]] sympathy, a few non-important [[characters]] aside. Nothing [[surprising]] [[happens]]. What did the writers of this [[script]] [[think]]? "[[Oooo]] [[funny]]! Let's [[make]] some [[old]] lady's high on [[pot]]! Let's [[make]] them.... giggle! Let's [[make]] them... behave like [[little]] [[children]]!! Oooo, yes, that's [[absolutely]] brilliant and original!"

This [[film]] has [[irritated]] me most from all the [[films]] I've [[seen]] in the [[last]] five [[years]]. I [[totally]] fail to see what is [[hilarious]] in this [[flick]]. The [[humour]] [[looks]] to be destined for [[cadavers]]. It's [[sluggish]]. The [[conte]] is too simple to be [[veritable]]. The [[hallmarks]] do not [[hikes]] [[very]] sympathy, a few non-important [[traits]] aside. Nothing [[breathtaking]] [[occurs]]. What did the writers of this [[screenplay]] [[thought]]? "[[Ohhh]] [[amusing]]! Let's [[deliver]] some [[former]] lady's high on [[teapot]]! Let's [[deliver]] them.... giggle! Let's [[deliver]] them... behave like [[petit]] [[kiddies]]!! Oooo, yes, that's [[altogether]] brilliant and original!"

This [[filmmaking]] has [[outraged]] me most from all the [[kino]] I've [[saw]] in the [[final]] five [[ages]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I must say that I am fairly [[disappointed]] by this "horror" movie. I did not get scared even once while watching it. It also is not very suspenseful either.... I was able to [[guess]] the ending half way through the movie... So.. what's left?

"The Ring" is a [[trully]] scary [[movie]]... I wish other movies [[would]] stop [[copying]] from it ([[e]].g. the trade-mark: long hair). Please give me some originality.

Will not [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. I must say that I am fairly [[disappoint]] by this "horror" movie. I did not get scared even once while watching it. It also is not very suspenseful either.... I was able to [[imagines]] the ending half way through the movie... So.. what's left?

"The Ring" is a [[truely]] scary [[filmmaking]]... I wish other movies [[should]] stop [[copies]] from it ([[f]].g. the trade-mark: long hair). Please give me some originality.

Will not [[recommendation]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh Dear Lord, How on Earth was any part of this film ever approved by anyone? It reeks of cheese from start to finish, but it's not even good cheese. It's the scummiest, moldiest, most tasteless cheese there is, and I cannot believe there is anyone out there who actually, truly enjoyed it. Yes, if you saw it with a load of drunk/stoned buddies then some bits might be funny in a sad kind of way, but for the rest of the audience the only entertaining parts are when said group of buddies are throwing popcorn and abusive insults at each other and the screen. I watched it with an up-for-a-few-laughs guy, having had a few beers in preparation to chuckle away at the film's expected crapness. We got the crapness (plenty of it), but not the chuckles. It doesn't even qualify as a so-bad-it's-good movie. It's just plain bad. Very, very bad. Here's why (look away if you're spoilerphobic): The movie starts out with a guy beating another guy to death. OK, I was a few minutes late in so not sure why this was, but I think I grasped the 'this guy is a bit of a badass who you don't want to mess with' message behind the ingenious scene. Oh, and a guy witnesses it. So, we already have our ultra-evil bad guy, and wussy but cute (apparently) good guy. Cue Hero. Big Sam steps on the scene in the usual fashion, saving good guy in the usual inane way that only poor action films can accomplish, i.e. Hero is immune to bullets, everyone else falls over rather clumsily. Cue first plot hole. How the bloody hell did Sammy know where this guy was, or that he'd watched the murder. Perhaps this, and the answers to all my plot-hole related questions, was explained in the 2 minutes before I got into the cinema, but I doubt it. In fact, I'm going to stop poking holes in the plot right here, lest I turn the movie into something resembling swiss cheese (which we all know is good cheese). So, the 'plot' (a very generous word to use). Good guy must get to LA, evil guy would rather he didn't, Hero Sam stands between the two. Cue scenery for the next vomit-inducing hour - the passenger plane. As I said, no more poking at plot holes, I'll just leave it there. Passenger plane. Next, the vital ingredient up until now missing from this gem of a movie, and what makes it everything it is - Snakes. Yay! Oh, pause. First we have the introduction to all the obligatory characters that a lame movie must have. Hot, horny couple (see if you can guess how they die), dead-before-any-snakes-even-appear British guy (those pesky Brits, eh?), cute kids, and Jo Brand. For all you Americans that's an English comic famous for her size and unattractiveness. Now that we've met the cast, let's watch all of them die (except of course the cute kids). Don't expect anything original, it's just snake bites on various and ever-increasingly hilarious (really not) parts of the body. Use your imagination, since the film-makers obviously didn't use theirs.

So, that's most of the film wrapped up, so now for the best bit, the ending. As expected, everything is just so happy as the plane lands that everyone in sight starts sucking face. Yep, Ice-cool Sammy included. But wait, we're not all off the plane yet! The last guy to get off is good guy, but just as he does he gets bitten by a (you guessed it) snake (of all things). Clearly this one had been hiding in Mr. Jackson's hair the whole time, since it somehow managed to resist the air pressure trick that the good old hero had employed a few minutes earlier, despite the 200ft constrictor (the one that ate that pesky British bugger) being unable to. So, Sam shoots him and the snake in one fell swoop. At this point I prayed that the movie was about to make a much-needed U-turn and reveal that all along the hero was actually a traitor of some sort. But no. In a kind of icing on the cake way (but with stale cheese, remember), it is revealed that the climax of the film was involving a bullet proof vest. How anyone can think that an audience 10 years ago, let alone in 2006 would be impressed by their ingenuity is beyond me, but it did well in summing up the film.

Actually, we're not quite done yet. After everyone has sucked face (Uncle Sam with leading actress, good guy with Tiffany, token Black guy with token White girl, and the hot couple in a heart warming bout of necrophilia), it's time for good guy and hero to get it on....In Bali!!! Nope, it wasn't at all exciting, the exclamation marks were just there to represent my utter joy at seeing the credits roll. Yes, the final shot of the film is a celebratory surfing trip to convey the message that a bit of male bonding has occurred, and a chance for any morons that actually enjoyed the movie to whoop a few times. That's it. This is the first time I've ever posted a movie review, but I felt so strongly that somebody must speak out against this scourge of cinematography. If you like planes, snakes, Samuel L.Jackson, air hostesses, bad guys, surfing, dogs in bags or English people, then please, please don't see this movie. It will pollute your opinion of all of the above so far that you'll never want to come into contact with any of them ever again. Go see United 93 instead. THAT was good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1212 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The title says it all. "Tail Gunner Joe" was a [[tag]] [[given]] to the Senator which [[relied]] upon the ignorance of the [[public]] about World War II [[aircraft]]. The rear facing [[moving]] [[guns]] [[relied]] [[upon]] a [[latch]] that [[would]] [[prevent]] the rear gunner from [[shooting]] off the tail of the [[airplane]] by [[preventing]] the [[gun]] from firing when it [[pointed]] at the tail. When the Senator was [[practicing]] on the [[ground]] one day, he succeeded in shooting off the tail of the [[airplane]]. He couldn't have [[done]] that if the [[gun]] had been [[properly]] aligned. The [[gunnery]] [[officer]] responsible for that [[admitted]], in public, before a camera, that he was [[responsible]] -- he had made the error, not the [[Senator]]. The fact that the [[film]] did not report that fact, [[shows]] how one-sided it is. This [[film]] was [[designed]] to do one [[thing]], [[destroy]] the [[reputation]] of a [[complex]] person.

A much better program was the PBS special done on him. He was a hard working, intelligent, ambitious politician who overcame extraordinary [[disadvantages]] to rise to extraordinary heights. He made some mistakes, some serious mistakes, but shooting the tail off an airplane was not one of them.

The popularity of this film is due to the fact that the public [[likes]] simple [[stories]], one=sided stories, so that they don't have to think. The title says it all. "Tail Gunner Joe" was a [[label]] [[conferred]] to the Senator which [[rested]] upon the ignorance of the [[populace]] about World War II [[planes]]. The rear facing [[relocating]] [[firearms]] [[rested]] [[after]] a [[closure]] that [[could]] [[deter]] the rear gunner from [[gunshot]] off the tail of the [[flight]] by [[avoid]] the [[firearm]] from firing when it [[noted]] at the tail. When the Senator was [[practiced]] on the [[terrain]] one day, he succeeded in shooting off the tail of the [[planes]]. He couldn't have [[accomplished]] that if the [[handgun]] had been [[sufficiently]] aligned. The [[tir]] [[officials]] responsible for that [[conceded]], in public, before a camera, that he was [[liable]] -- he had made the error, not the [[Senators]]. The fact that the [[filmmaking]] did not report that fact, [[showcase]] how one-sided it is. This [[filmmaking]] was [[conceived]] to do one [[stuff]], [[destroying]] the [[repute]] of a [[difficult]] person.

A much better program was the PBS special done on him. He was a hard working, intelligent, ambitious politician who overcame extraordinary [[handicaps]] to rise to extraordinary heights. He made some mistakes, some serious mistakes, but shooting the tail off an airplane was not one of them.

The popularity of this film is due to the fact that the public [[adores]] simple [[story]], one=sided stories, so that they don't have to think. --------------------------------------------- Result 1213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Randall "Memphis" Raines is a retired master car thief who is forced back into the "game" when his younger brother faces death for not filling an order for British crime boss Raymond Calitri. The job involves "lifting" 50 cars in 24 hours or Calitri will enact his punishment. So Raines quickly assembles a crew he can trust and sets about the task to hand. But the police are on to him and some of the cars on the list are not easy takes. It would seem a near impossible job to complete.

It's got quite a cast has Gone In 60 Seconds, Nicolas Cage, Angelina Jolie, Robert Duvall, Will Patton, Delroy Lindo, Vinnie Jones, Giovanni Ribisi, Christopher Ecclestone, Scott Caan & Timothy Olyphant. All of whom deserve better. Enough acting horsepower there to propel a Porsche 998 Turbo. Trouble is, is that this is very much a case of too many cars overstocking the car park, mucho characters, not enough zest. From the off we are in no doubt that this is a Bruckheimer/Simpson production, bonkers script laced with loud noises and lashings of cheese, scattergun editing, and directed with sledgehammer subtly by Dominic Sena. It's essentially a big budget remake of H.B. Halicki's 1974 indie movie of the same name, with the premise offering up the potential for an adrenalin fuelled car based movie. Potential that sadly is never realised. There's one or two high impact moments, daft for sure, but enjoyable none the less. But if you pardon the pun, the film never gets out of first gear, it's more content to labour with its ream of characters who mope about trying to make the boorish screenplay {Scott Rosenberg} work.

Car fans will get something from it {the cars are ace on the eye}, as will fans of unintentional comedy movies {check out Ecclestone's carpenter grief moment}. But no, it's really rather poor all told. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have enjoyed Criminal Intent [[series]] of [[Law]] and [[Order]] for a [[long]] time. Kathryn Erbe, Det. Alexandra Eames, the female detective is [[rather]] hard and [[seems]] a bit bitter in the Criminal [[Intent]] Series. See her other side in this [[movie]].

This [[movie]] shows the [[marvelous]] [[soft]] side of this talented actresses and if you are a Criminal [[Intent]] fan this [[movie]] is a [[revelry]] in her acting and you [[get]] a [[pretty]] darn good [[yarn]] of family [[hardships]] in the South.

I did not like Albert Finneys role in this [[movie]] because he did such a convincing acting [[job]] of the [[older]] [[Southern]] [[fellow]] that is [[hard]] [[headed]] and intolerant and unaccepting of [[change]]. He [[reminds]] me of so [[many]] [[men]] from my youth and the [[portrayal]] is [[divine]], but you will likely [[find]] him [[hard]] to [[like]] in this [[movie]].

Katryn Erbe is [[easy]] to like in this [[movie]] and why I [[recommend]] it as a 10 star for Criminal [[Intent]], [[law]] and [[order]] [[fans]]. I have enjoyed Criminal Intent [[serial]] of [[Legislation]] and [[Ordering]] for a [[lengthy]] time. Kathryn Erbe, Det. Alexandra Eames, the female detective is [[fairly]] hard and [[looks]] a bit bitter in the Criminal [[Goal]] Series. See her other side in this [[movies]].

This [[cinematography]] shows the [[wondrous]] [[mild]] side of this talented actresses and if you are a Criminal [[Targeting]] fan this [[film]] is a [[merriment]] in her acting and you [[obtain]] a [[belle]] darn good [[fil]] of family [[sufferings]] in the South.

I did not like Albert Finneys role in this [[films]] because he did such a convincing acting [[jobs]] of the [[aged]] [[Southerly]] [[coworkers]] that is [[stiff]] [[led]] and intolerant and unaccepting of [[modify]]. He [[remembered]] me of so [[several]] [[man]] from my youth and the [[depiction]] is [[godlike]], but you will likely [[finds]] him [[difficult]] to [[fond]] in this [[cinematography]].

Katryn Erbe is [[easier]] to like in this [[film]] and why I [[recommended]] it as a 10 star for Criminal [[Purposes]], [[lois]] and [[orders]] [[amateurs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Let]] me [[give]] a quick summery of the film: A [[rotten]], rude kid named Max stumbles upon a radio that contains Kazaam: a rapping genie. Like all genies, he [[grants]] 3 wishes but, being good natured, [[also]] [[helps]] Max with his personal life, as he has to [[deal]] with bullies and a father mixed up in [[organized]] [[crime]]. [[During]] all this, Kazaam raps from time to time, (also showcasing Shaq's dismal rap skills).

This [[movie]] proves what we all [[know]]: [[Athletes]] [[need]] to [[stick]] to sports. I [[admit]] that it never looked like an Oscar-worthy movie, but [[EVERYTHING]] about this waste of [[film]] is horrible. The [[characters]] are either unlikable or stupid, the plot is not [[even]] worth mentioning, the [[dialog]] is a [[joke]], and [[Shaq]] is only a quarter of the [[problem]]. [[Hell]], even if Denzel Washington [[played]] Kazaam this [[movie]] would [[still]] be a [[joke]]. I know that the [[movie]] only [[drew]] [[ANYBODY]] was because Shaq was so [[big]] (no pun intended) at the [[time]]. I [[honestly]] cannot [[think]] of a [[single]] [[positive]] [[thing]] to [[say]] about this waste of [[time]]. Shaq should have put the [[time]] had [[used]] to make this [[movie]] [[toward]] practicing free throws. [[Letting]] me [[confer]] a quick summery of the film: A [[naughty]], rude kid named Max stumbles upon a radio that contains Kazaam: a rapping genie. Like all genies, he [[subsidy]] 3 wishes but, being good natured, [[apart]] [[contributes]] Max with his personal life, as he has to [[dealing]] with bullies and a father mixed up in [[organising]] [[offences]]. [[Onto]] all this, Kazaam raps from time to time, (also showcasing Shaq's dismal rap skills).

This [[film]] proves what we all [[savoir]]: [[Sport]] [[required]] to [[wand]] to sports. I [[confess]] that it never looked like an Oscar-worthy movie, but [[ENTIRE]] about this waste of [[filmmaking]] is horrible. The [[personage]] are either unlikable or stupid, the plot is not [[yet]] worth mentioning, the [[dialogue]] is a [[kidding]], and [[Chak]] is only a quarter of the [[issues]]. [[Brothel]], even if Denzel Washington [[done]] Kazaam this [[filmmaking]] would [[however]] be a [[joking]]. I know that the [[movies]] only [[called]] [[EVERYBODY]] was because Shaq was so [[overwhelming]] (no pun intended) at the [[period]]. I [[sincerely]] cannot [[thinking]] of a [[lonely]] [[favorable]] [[stuff]] to [[told]] about this waste of [[times]]. Shaq should have put the [[period]] had [[utilized]] to make this [[filmmaking]] [[about]] practicing free throws. --------------------------------------------- Result 1216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I am [[sad]] that a period of history that is so fascinating and so rich in material for film can be [[made]] into a ho-hum event . Wm C Quantrill was [[barely]] [[shown]] in the film , probably the most intriquing figure of the period. Frank James was never mentioned, Cole Younger , ditto , and [[Bloody]] Bill Anderson , who would weep for his murdered sister every time he went into battle was completely absent in the [[script]]. Instead we were [[forced]] to watch fictitious [[characters]] that never developed into anyone we cared about. how [[sad]]. The costumes were [[wonderful]] however, as was the [[location]] shooting in [[Missouri]]. I hope Ang Lee will make another film from the period and [[try]] again, or some other [[film]] maker will [[look]] into the tremendous wealth of material to [[write]] a screen [[play]] on . I am [[regretful]] that a period of history that is so fascinating and so rich in material for film can be [[effected]] into a ho-hum event . Wm C Quantrill was [[hardly]] [[revealed]] in the film , probably the most intriquing figure of the period. Frank James was never mentioned, Cole Younger , ditto , and [[Murderous]] Bill Anderson , who would weep for his murdered sister every time he went into battle was completely absent in the [[hyphen]]. Instead we were [[coerced]] to watch fictitious [[hallmarks]] that never developed into anyone we cared about. how [[unfortunate]]. The costumes were [[sumptuous]] however, as was the [[placements]] shooting in [[Mo]]. I hope Ang Lee will make another film from the period and [[attempting]] again, or some other [[filmmaking]] maker will [[gaze]] into the tremendous wealth of material to [[writing]] a screen [[playing]] on . --------------------------------------------- Result 1217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Women]] have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's film Piedras. [[Although]] editor's [[cut]] here and there might [[help]] the film, it is exciting and [[enjoyable]] with an [[intense]] [[mark]] from [[Pedro]] Almodovar's [[latest]] [[films]]. 5 [[different]] [[women]] are [[coping]] with their male partners and [[families]]. [[Beginning]] with several [[different]] [[stories]] bound to [[meet]] as the plot goes on, Salazar [[portraits]] his women [[characters]] in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society [[lady]] with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque [[house]] [[madam]] taking [[care]] of her disabled [[daughter]], a drug addict [[dancer]] obsessed with her [[former]] boyfriend and a taxi-driver taking [[care]] of her late husband's disturbed [[kids]], all [[roaming]] the streets of Madrid in well [[designed]] scenes. [[Using]] some of Almodovar's familiar actresses, the director [[succeeds]] in it's [[first]] [[film]] to give depth to all the [[characters]] [[sharing]] the [[film]], and to [[create]] [[genuine]] sympathy with each of them. The women [[controls]] the plot line, and the men are bound to be [[left]] with each other, [[eventually]]... [[Surprisingly]] good for a first [[film]], and worth the [[time]] in any [[standard]]. It is [[noticeable]] that Salazar [[hesitated]] in some needed guidelines to the actresses, but an impressible [[act]] is [[shown]] anyway on the screen, [[especially]] by Monica Cervera, which played in his [[former]] short [[film]].

A [[must]] to all Almodovar's [[fans]], and [[enjoyable]] to all. [[Girl]] have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's film Piedras. [[While]] editor's [[slice]] here and there might [[aid]] the film, it is exciting and [[nice]] with an [[intensive]] [[brands]] from [[Peter]] Almodovar's [[newer]] [[movie]]. 5 [[several]] [[girl]] are [[adapting]] with their male partners and [[family]]. [[Starts]] with several [[various]] [[story]] bound to [[cater]] as the plot goes on, Salazar [[sketches]] his women [[features]] in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society [[dame]] with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque [[housing]] [[madame]] taking [[caring]] of her disabled [[girls]], a drug addict [[dancers]] obsessed with her [[old]] boyfriend and a taxi-driver taking [[caring]] of her late husband's disturbed [[children]], all [[wandering]] the streets of Madrid in well [[destined]] scenes. [[Uses]] some of Almodovar's familiar actresses, the director [[succeeding]] in it's [[firstly]] [[movie]] to give depth to all the [[nature]] [[exchange]] the [[movie]], and to [[creating]] [[real]] sympathy with each of them. The women [[audit]] the plot line, and the men are bound to be [[exited]] with each other, [[finally]]... [[Terribly]] good for a first [[movies]], and worth the [[times]] in any [[standards]]. It is [[obvious]] that Salazar [[grinned]] in some needed guidelines to the actresses, but an impressible [[legislation]] is [[indicated]] anyway on the screen, [[namely]] by Monica Cervera, which played in his [[old]] short [[flick]].

A [[ought]] to all Almodovar's [[stalkers]], and [[nice]] to all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[Party]] [[Girl]]" capitalizes on the [[tremendous]] [[charm]] of Parker [[Posey]]. [[In]] fact, at [[times]], the [[movie]] [[seems]] to be a [[vehicle]] in which Ms. Posey is [[allow]] to play herself, as she [[normally]] is in [[real]] [[life]].

The film, directed by Daisy Von Scherler Mayer, is a [[treat]] for Ms. Posey's fans. Ms. [[Von]] Scherler Mayer takes us on a [[wild]] trip into lower Manhattan to [[show]] us this aimless soul whose [[life]] is [[dedicated]] to have fun in the [[different]] clubs she [[constantly]] frequents. This is an era that still was more [[naive]] than what that [[area]] and the [[adjacent]] Meat Market [[districts]] [[became]]. [[At]] least, there are no [[pretensions]] in the films and we [[see]] down to earth people going about their [[lives]] in a [[normal]] [[way]], if we can call it that [[way]].

Parker Posey makes an [[amazing]] Mary. It's because of [[Parker]] Posey we [[enjoy]] the movie more than if another [[actress]] [[would]] have [[played]] Mary. She is the [[whole]] picture. The [[rest]] of the cast is good. "[[Part]] [[Chick]]" capitalizes on the [[awesome]] [[glamour]] of Parker [[Posse]]. [[At]] fact, at [[period]], the [[cinema]] [[looks]] to be a [[autos]] in which Ms. Posey is [[enable]] to play herself, as she [[ordinarily]] is in [[actual]] [[lifetime]].

The film, directed by Daisy Von Scherler Mayer, is a [[treatment]] for Ms. Posey's fans. Ms. [[Fon]] Scherler Mayer takes us on a [[wilde]] trip into lower Manhattan to [[spectacle]] us this aimless soul whose [[iife]] is [[specialised]] to have fun in the [[assorted]] clubs she [[systematically]] frequents. This is an era that still was more [[gullible]] than what that [[region]] and the [[contiguous]] Meat Market [[region]] [[was]]. [[Under]] least, there are no [[pretexts]] in the films and we [[behold]] down to earth people going about their [[iife]] in a [[ordinary]] [[manner]], if we can call it that [[path]].

Parker Posey makes an [[wondrous]] Mary. It's because of [[Barker]] Posey we [[enjoys]] the movie more than if another [[actor]] [[ought]] have [[served]] Mary. She is the [[entire]] picture. The [[remaining]] of the cast is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]]

I have [[seen]] this [[movie]] [[many]] [[times]]. At least a Dozen. But unfortunatly not recently. [[However]], [[Etched]] in my memory never to [[leave]] me is a scene in which Mickey [[Rooney]], -"[[Killer]] Mears" knows that he is to be [[executed]] and it's [[getting]] close to the [[moment]] of truth, He dances, and [[cries]], and laughs, he vacillates from hesteria to euphoria and runs the [[gambit]] of ever emotion. Never have I [[seen]] such a [[brilliant]] performance by any actor [[living]] or dead, past or present. It was then I know for sure that Mickey [[Rooney]], yes, "[[Andy]] Hardy" was and is a actor of great genius. However I kept it, my [[opinion]] to myself for years thinking, surely I [[must]] be alone in this [[viewpoint]]. [[About]] 15 years or so after I saw this [[film]] for the [[last]] [[time]] on [[television]], I chanced to read the [[old]] Q & A section of the Los Angeles Times. The [[question]] was posed to Lawrence Olivier, and the [[question]] was: "Mr. Olivier You are considered one of the [[greatest]] [[actors]] of all [[time]], whom then do YOU [[consider]] to be among the [[greatest]] [[actors]]?" [[His]] [[answer]] was, "[[Peter]] Finch and Mickey Rooney" I was stunned, but not surprised. I [[immediatly]] flashed back to his "Killer Mears" And I felt very good for having seen this great ability in him, and now having my view supported by another whos work I admired.. Later of course there was "Bill" and many other great moments with [[Mikey]] Rooney. This film, "The Last Mile" should be seen by all acting students. I Frankly cannot [[remember]] a great deal about the film after all these years but Mr. Rooney in it, will never leave me. If anyone out there remembers this film the same as I do? I would be interested in hearing from you. For this picture etched in my heart alone I [[gave]] it a 10 just on the face of his performance.

I have [[watched]] this [[cinematography]] [[various]] [[moments]]. At least a Dozen. But unfortunatly not recently. [[Instead]], [[Engraved]] in my memory never to [[let]] me is a scene in which Mickey [[Ronnie]], -"[[Murderer]] Mears" knows that he is to be [[conducted]] and it's [[obtaining]] close to the [[time]] of truth, He dances, and [[mourns]], and laughs, he vacillates from hesteria to euphoria and runs the [[masterstroke]] of ever emotion. Never have I [[noticed]] such a [[wondrous]] performance by any actor [[life]] or dead, past or present. It was then I know for sure that Mickey [[Roni]], yes, "[[Indie]] Hardy" was and is a actor of great genius. However I kept it, my [[opinions]] to myself for years thinking, surely I [[ought]] be alone in this [[perspective]]. [[Around]] 15 years or so after I saw this [[cinematography]] for the [[final]] [[period]] on [[tv]], I chanced to read the [[archaic]] Q & A section of the Los Angeles Times. The [[issue]] was posed to Lawrence Olivier, and the [[issue]] was: "Mr. Olivier You are considered one of the [[biggest]] [[actresses]] of all [[times]], whom then do YOU [[examining]] to be among the [[biggest]] [[players]]?" [[Her]] [[replied]] was, "[[Petra]] Finch and Mickey Rooney" I was stunned, but not surprised. I [[swiftly]] flashed back to his "Killer Mears" And I felt very good for having seen this great ability in him, and now having my view supported by another whos work I admired.. Later of course there was "Bill" and many other great moments with [[Mickey]] Rooney. This film, "The Last Mile" should be seen by all acting students. I Frankly cannot [[recollect]] a great deal about the film after all these years but Mr. Rooney in it, will never leave me. If anyone out there remembers this film the same as I do? I would be interested in hearing from you. For this picture etched in my heart alone I [[given]] it a 10 just on the face of his performance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are some extremely talented black directors Spike Lee,Carl Franklin,Billy Dukes,Denzel and a host of others who bring well deserved credit to the film industry . Then there are the Wayans Brothers who at one time(15,years ago) had an extremely funny television show'In Living Colour' that launched the career of Jim Carrey amongst others . Now we have stupidity substituting for humour and gross out gags(toilet humour) as the standard operating procedure . People are not as stupid as those portrayed in 'Little Man' they couldn't possibly be . A baby with a full set of teeth and a tattoo is accepted as being only months old ? Baby comes with a five o'clock shadow that he shaves off . It is intimated that the baby has sex with his foster mother behind her husbands,Darryl's, back .Oh, yea that is just hilarious . As a master criminal 'Little Man' is the stupidest on planet earth . He stashes a stolen rock that is just huge in a woman's purse and then has to pursue her . Co-star Chazz Palminteri,why Chazz, offers the best line: "I'm surrounded by morons." Based, without credit, on a Chuck Jones cartoon, Baby Buggy Bunny . This is far too stupid to be even remotely funny . A clue as to how bad this film is Damon Wayans appeared on Jay Leno the other night,prior to the BAT awards and he did not,even mention this dreadful movie . When will Hollywood stop green lighting trash from the Wayans Brothers . When they get over their white mans guilt in all likelihood . --------------------------------------------- Result 1221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] *SPOILERS*

This is only the second pay-per-view I've given a perfect 10, the first being the 1991 Royal Rumble. It was full of exciting matches that weren't memorable, just disposable fun. And that's why I love it.

The opening match between Razor and DiBiase, as well as Ludvig Borga vs. Marty Jannetty were the only low points. They were OK matches, but DiBiase deserved better in his final pay per view match. These days, a match like this would have run-ins and a bigger climax for Razor's first major babyface push. And Jannetty, fresh off a Intercontinental title run, could have had a better match with Borga. But I don't think anyone really cared. They just needed a Borga push on pay per view television.

IRS and The Kid were great, as were Michaels and Perfect. I wish Perfect could have won, but Michaels lies down for no one. Notice how right after this, he left the WWF so he wouldn't have to job to Razor. Bret Hart had two great brawls with Doink (notice how everyone's best match is against the Hit-man) and then Lawler. Their rivalry was a classic; that's why that year's Feud of the Year was a no-brainer. How often do you see two legends win Feud of the Year this late in their careers?

The Steiners-Heavenly Bodies match was one of the best of the year. Who knew the Bodies could hold their own against one of the best teams ever?

Many say that the Undertaker-Giant Gonzalez match was a waste of time. But I loved it. Remember, what made the old WWF (as in, pre-WWE) great was the mix of athleticism and freak show. Is there a soul out there who didn't like Akeem?

The main event wasn't bad, although nowhere near match of the year status. They put Lex Luger over well, but made a wise choice in having Yokozuna keep the belt. He was the first heel since Superstar Graham to hold the belt for more than two months. Nowadays, heels are champions all the time. But from the beginning of the WWWF through the WWF of the 90s, if you blinked, you missed a heel title reign.

As an old school wrestling fan, this one and SummerSlam '88 are my favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I was aware of Rohmer's [[admiration]] for the late works of the ones he considered like [[great]] cineasts, and that [[normal]] spectators generally considered as artistic failures (as Renoir's or Chaplin's very [[last]] movies ; yes, the "politique des auteurs" [[also]] has its [[dark]] side). But with "Les amours d'Astrée et de Céladon", it's as if Rohmer himself wanted, for what may be his [[last]] [[movie]], to perpetuate this tradition of great [[directors]], who [[made]] a last senile [[movie]], by [[adapting]] Urfé's "L'astrée", with [[ridiculous]] [[aesthetic]] [[codes]], witch just [[look]] like a [[parody]] of Rosselini's [[last]] [[movies]] (the ones he [[made]] for TV from Descartes or Marx's [[lives]]).

[[In]] his [[version]] of "Perceval", Rohmer [[refused]] to film [[real]] landscapes in order to give a re-transcription of what may have been a middle age [[classical]] representation of [[things]]. The director [[apparently]] [[changed]] his [[mind]] when the XVII century is involved, and films [[actors]], [[dressed]] like 1600's peasants [[reciting]] their antic [[text]] surrounded by [[contemporary]] [[trees]] and landscapes. But the all thing looks even more [[ridiculous]] than Luchini and its [[fake]] [[trees]]. It's not that the story itself is [[stupid]], but the way Rohmer mixes naturalism with artifices [[seems]] so [[childish]] and amateurism that it [[rapidly]] becomes involuntarily funny (and I'm not [[even]] [[talking]] about the irritating pronunciation of the [[actors]], the [[annoying]] and sad humorist [[tries]] by [[Rodolphe]] [[Pauly]], the [[ridiculous]] soft-erotic tone, the poor musical tentatives, or the [[strange]] [[fascination]] for trasvestisment!).

The [[radical]] aesthetic of the [[film]] [[ultimately]] makes it [[looks]] like a [[joke]], which [[mixes]] a soft-erotic [[movie]] [[made]] for TV with [[theological]] scholastic [[discussions]] (sic !). [[At]] the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]], Rohmer teaches us that the [[original]] french [[region]] of the [[story]] is now [[disfigured]] by [[modernity]], and that's why he had to [[film]] "L'Astrée" in other parts of the [[country]]. However, I'm [[sure]] the [[movie]] would have [[look]] more modern and interesting, if Rohmer [[would]] have [[actually]] [[still]] filmed the same [[story]] in a modern area with same [[narrative]] [[codes]] and artistically decisions. This film may interest a few historians, but most of the cinephiles may laugh at this last and sad Rohmer's movie. I was aware of Rohmer's [[awe]] for the late works of the ones he considered like [[wondrous]] cineasts, and that [[habitual]] spectators generally considered as artistic failures (as Renoir's or Chaplin's very [[latter]] movies ; yes, the "politique des auteurs" [[additionally]] has its [[darkened]] side). But with "Les amours d'Astrée et de Céladon", it's as if Rohmer himself wanted, for what may be his [[latter]] [[filmmaking]], to perpetuate this tradition of great [[managers]], who [[accomplished]] a last senile [[filmmaking]], by [[adjusting]] Urfé's "L'astrée", with [[absurd]] [[cosmetic]] [[code]], witch just [[peek]] like a [[comedy]] of Rosselini's [[final]] [[cinematography]] (the ones he [[introduced]] for TV from Descartes or Marx's [[vie]]).

[[Throughout]] his [[stepping]] of "Perceval", Rohmer [[refuses]] to film [[actual]] landscapes in order to give a re-transcription of what may have been a middle age [[conventional]] representation of [[aspects]]. The director [[visibly]] [[altering]] his [[intellect]] when the XVII century is involved, and films [[players]], [[clothed]] like 1600's peasants [[recite]] their antic [[texts]] surrounded by [[current]] [[tree]] and landscapes. But the all thing looks even more [[farcical]] than Luchini and its [[pseudo]] [[tree]]. It's not that the story itself is [[dumb]], but the way Rohmer mixes naturalism with artifices [[seem]] so [[boyish]] and amateurism that it [[timely]] becomes involuntarily funny (and I'm not [[yet]] [[debates]] about the irritating pronunciation of the [[protagonists]], the [[irritating]] and sad humorist [[seeks]] by [[Rudolf]] [[Paulo]], the [[farcical]] soft-erotic tone, the poor musical tentatives, or the [[peculiar]] [[passion]] for trasvestisment!).

The [[extremist]] aesthetic of the [[filmmaking]] [[finally]] makes it [[seem]] like a [[farce]], which [[mixture]] a soft-erotic [[filmmaking]] [[accomplished]] for TV with [[theologian]] scholastic [[deliberations]] (sic !). [[Into]] the [[initiation]] of the [[movies]], Rohmer teaches us that the [[initial]] french [[zoning]] of the [[stories]] is now [[scarred]] by [[modernization]], and that's why he had to [[films]] "L'Astrée" in other parts of the [[nationals]]. However, I'm [[persuaded]] the [[kino]] would have [[peek]] more modern and interesting, if Rohmer [[should]] have [[genuinely]] [[however]] filmed the same [[history]] in a modern area with same [[descriptive]] [[code]] and artistically decisions. This film may interest a few historians, but most of the cinephiles may laugh at this last and sad Rohmer's movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After the success of the second instalment, Richard Curtis and Ben Elton decided that Blackadder should have a third appearance. This time instead of Tudor times or Elizabethan times, Edmund Blackadder (BAFTA nominated Rowan Atkinson) is living in the time of the French Revolution. Accompanied by the now stupid but lovable Baldrick (Tony Robinson) Blackadder is the "faithful" butler to George, the Prince Regent of Wales (Hugh Laurie). Throughout this third series to the wonderfully written sitcom Blackadder tries everything he can to get rich and powerful. He tries electing a lord for a rotten borough, tries to sell a book, tries to win a bet about The Scarlet Pimpernel, tries to be a highway man and finally poses as the Prince. This is a very good instalment to the popular comedy. Includes appearances from Robbie Coltrane, Tim McInnerny, Miranda Richardson and Stephen Fry. It won the BAFTA for Best Comedy Series, and it was nominated for Best Design and Best Make Up. Rowan Atkinson was number 18 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 24 on The Comedians' Comedian, and he was number 8 on Britain's Favourite Comedian, Edmund Blackadder was number 3 on The 100 Greatest TV Characters, and he was number 3 on The World's Greatest Comedy Characters, and Blackadder (all four series) was number 2 on Britain's Best Sitcom. Outstanding! --------------------------------------------- Result 1224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] In the same vein as Natural Born [[Killers]], another movie that was not so popular with critics because of its excessive violence but that I also [[loved]], Kalifornia is a movie that [[clearly]] glamorizes violence, but I [[like]] to think that it turns that around in the [[final]] [[act]]. [[Kind]] of like how The Basketball Diaries glamorizes [[drugs]] at first, but shows the [[bad]] side by the [[end]] of the [[movie]], which is far worse than the [[good]] side is good. [[David]] Duchovny plays Brian Kessler, an artistic yuppie with an even more artistically yuppie girlfriend, who is into that violent sexy black and white photography generally reserved for, I don't know where, places where nudity passes for art. Maybe it really does and I just don't [[understand]] it. At any rate, Brian and Carrie (Duchovny and Michelle Forbes, who fits the role flawlessly), make the perfect couple to go on a documentary tour of famous murder sites. Brian, the writer, will write the book, Carrie can take the pictures.

Being artistic types, Brian and Carrie are not quite financially prepared for such a trip, so they put out an ad for someone to share gas and travel expenses, and are contacted by Early Grace and Adele Corners (Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis). Early is on parole and assigned to janitorial work at the local university by his parole officer, sees the ad on a bulletin board, and decides to leave the state for a while, violating his parole but also leaving the scene of his landlord's murder so he won't have to deal with a pesky murder investigation. Two birds with one stone, you know.

The movie has a [[curious]] ability to portray two stereotypes, the artsy yuppies and the greasy trailer trash, without resorting to [[clichés]] or even ending up with caricatures of either type. Brian and Carrie are artsy liberals, but while Carrie catches on to Early and Adele, Brian is [[fascinated]] with Early's status as an outlaw, as [[seen]] in the scene where Brian shoots Early's gun. Never having fired a gun before, he's as fascinated as a little kid. While Adele and Carrie are back at a hotel and Adele reveals such things in her childlike way as the fact that Early "broke her" of smoking and that she's not allowed to drink (Early doesn't think women should), Early and Brian are out at the local bar. Brian reacts nervously to a drunk trying to start a fight with him, and Early first gives advice to Brian on what to do and then steps in and dishes out a quick lesson for the guy. "Hit him, Bri, it's comin'." This is one of my favorite scenes in the movie, partly because it's so funny what Early gleefully says as the guy's friends drag him away, bloodied and battered, but also because as it is intercut with the girls back at the hotel, we learn so much all at once about the two couples, their differences, and the conflicts that are likely to come up because of them. And besides that, because Brian benefited from Early's actions and Carrie is appalled by what she hears from Adele, it also illustrates the different way that Carrie and Brian react to Early and Adele.

Clearly, by now, you can tell that this is not your typical odd couple type of thriller, where the city folk run into the country folk and all sorts of stereotypical mayhem ensues. On one hand it seems a little too convenient that Brian and Carrie go on a tour of murder sites and just happen to be accompanied by a real life murderer, but on the other hand it's a great way to counteract the glorifying of murder that is inherent within a cross-country trip designed to bring fame to murderers and their crimes. While studying the actions of past murderers, Brian and Carrie ultimately find themselves face to face with the very material that they are studying, and realize that murder is not as pretty or morbidly fascinating when it's in your face as it is through disconnected studies of murders past.

I am constantly amazed at Brad Pitt's versatility as an actor. Consider, for example, his roles in movies like Kalifornia, 12 Monkeys, Fight Club, and Ocean's 11 and 12. Pitt is like Tom Hanks in that he can change his appearance drastically or just enough to fit a given character, and is completely believable. Incidentally, I tried in vain to be Early Grace for Halloween this year, but just couldn't get the hair and beard right. I even got the hat right, which initially I thought would be the hardest part.

It's easy to understand why a lot of people disliked Kalifornia or why they think that it glorifies violence and murder, but I think that whatever glorifying it does is done with the intention of clarifying the audience's understanding of its subject matter. A film that didn't glorify violence, at least initially, could never be as effective as Kalifornia, but the movie structures it perfectly. The glorification is all embodied in Brian's and Carrie's fascination with the idea of murder and the auras of the places in which is happened, but their realization, and ours, is embodied in the real thing, which they encounter with Early and Adele. The movie's very purpose is to describe that difference between idealizing violence and seeing the horror of it up close and for real. In the same vein as Natural Born [[Assassins]], another movie that was not so popular with critics because of its excessive violence but that I also [[cared]], Kalifornia is a movie that [[apparently]] glamorizes violence, but I [[iike]] to think that it turns that around in the [[ultimate]] [[law]]. [[Sorting]] of like how The Basketball Diaries glamorizes [[medicine]] at first, but shows the [[amiss]] side by the [[ceases]] of the [[kino]], which is far worse than the [[buena]] side is good. [[Davids]] Duchovny plays Brian Kessler, an artistic yuppie with an even more artistically yuppie girlfriend, who is into that violent sexy black and white photography generally reserved for, I don't know where, places where nudity passes for art. Maybe it really does and I just don't [[comprehend]] it. At any rate, Brian and Carrie (Duchovny and Michelle Forbes, who fits the role flawlessly), make the perfect couple to go on a documentary tour of famous murder sites. Brian, the writer, will write the book, Carrie can take the pictures.

Being artistic types, Brian and Carrie are not quite financially prepared for such a trip, so they put out an ad for someone to share gas and travel expenses, and are contacted by Early Grace and Adele Corners (Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis). Early is on parole and assigned to janitorial work at the local university by his parole officer, sees the ad on a bulletin board, and decides to leave the state for a while, violating his parole but also leaving the scene of his landlord's murder so he won't have to deal with a pesky murder investigation. Two birds with one stone, you know.

The movie has a [[bizarre]] ability to portray two stereotypes, the artsy yuppies and the greasy trailer trash, without resorting to [[clichéd]] or even ending up with caricatures of either type. Brian and Carrie are artsy liberals, but while Carrie catches on to Early and Adele, Brian is [[preoccupied]] with Early's status as an outlaw, as [[watched]] in the scene where Brian shoots Early's gun. Never having fired a gun before, he's as fascinated as a little kid. While Adele and Carrie are back at a hotel and Adele reveals such things in her childlike way as the fact that Early "broke her" of smoking and that she's not allowed to drink (Early doesn't think women should), Early and Brian are out at the local bar. Brian reacts nervously to a drunk trying to start a fight with him, and Early first gives advice to Brian on what to do and then steps in and dishes out a quick lesson for the guy. "Hit him, Bri, it's comin'." This is one of my favorite scenes in the movie, partly because it's so funny what Early gleefully says as the guy's friends drag him away, bloodied and battered, but also because as it is intercut with the girls back at the hotel, we learn so much all at once about the two couples, their differences, and the conflicts that are likely to come up because of them. And besides that, because Brian benefited from Early's actions and Carrie is appalled by what she hears from Adele, it also illustrates the different way that Carrie and Brian react to Early and Adele.

Clearly, by now, you can tell that this is not your typical odd couple type of thriller, where the city folk run into the country folk and all sorts of stereotypical mayhem ensues. On one hand it seems a little too convenient that Brian and Carrie go on a tour of murder sites and just happen to be accompanied by a real life murderer, but on the other hand it's a great way to counteract the glorifying of murder that is inherent within a cross-country trip designed to bring fame to murderers and their crimes. While studying the actions of past murderers, Brian and Carrie ultimately find themselves face to face with the very material that they are studying, and realize that murder is not as pretty or morbidly fascinating when it's in your face as it is through disconnected studies of murders past.

I am constantly amazed at Brad Pitt's versatility as an actor. Consider, for example, his roles in movies like Kalifornia, 12 Monkeys, Fight Club, and Ocean's 11 and 12. Pitt is like Tom Hanks in that he can change his appearance drastically or just enough to fit a given character, and is completely believable. Incidentally, I tried in vain to be Early Grace for Halloween this year, but just couldn't get the hair and beard right. I even got the hat right, which initially I thought would be the hardest part.

It's easy to understand why a lot of people disliked Kalifornia or why they think that it glorifies violence and murder, but I think that whatever glorifying it does is done with the intention of clarifying the audience's understanding of its subject matter. A film that didn't glorify violence, at least initially, could never be as effective as Kalifornia, but the movie structures it perfectly. The glorification is all embodied in Brian's and Carrie's fascination with the idea of murder and the auras of the places in which is happened, but their realization, and ours, is embodied in the real thing, which they encounter with Early and Adele. The movie's very purpose is to describe that difference between idealizing violence and seeing the horror of it up close and for real. --------------------------------------------- Result 1225 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is without a doubt one of the [[worst]] movies EVER, I emphasize, EVER [[made]]. What´s worse, my [[old]] [[hero]] Dolph is in it and he´s [[starring]] it. [[Jesus]]... The [[story]] is [[actually]] [[quite]] good but the [[way]] it´s carried out [[made]] even my body hurt. The [[fighting]] scenes for starters are about as well choreographed as a [[fight]] between two drunks slugging it out in the gutter. The [[actors]], except for Dolph who kinda sucks also, [[perform]] so [[badly]] you can´t [[help]] but wonder if their reason for being there is that they´re all [[friends]] of the [[director]], who by the [[way]] [[must]] have been [[absent]] most, if not all, of the [[time]]. This is §12 million [[spent]] in an unimaginable [[way]], because by the [[look]] of the [[effects]] and [[scenery]], the [[cost]] can´t be a cent above §1000. This is without a doubt one of the [[meanest]] movies EVER, I emphasize, EVER [[introduced]]. What´s worse, my [[former]] [[heroin]] Dolph is in it and he´s [[featuring]] it. [[Damn]]... The [[tales]] is [[indeed]] [[perfectly]] good but the [[ways]] it´s carried out [[effected]] even my body hurt. The [[battles]] scenes for starters are about as well choreographed as a [[battles]] between two drunks slugging it out in the gutter. The [[players]], except for Dolph who kinda sucks also, [[fulfilling]] so [[desperately]] you can´t [[helps]] but wonder if their reason for being there is that they´re all [[amigos]] of the [[superintendent]], who by the [[camino]] [[owe]] have been [[nonexistent]] most, if not all, of the [[period]]. This is §12 million [[spending]] in an unimaginable [[camino]], because by the [[peek]] of the [[impact]] and [[landscaping]], the [[prices]] can´t be a cent above §1000. --------------------------------------------- Result 1226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The [[effects]] of [[job]] related [[stress]] and the [[pressures]] [[born]] of a [[moral]] dilemma that pits conscience against the [[obligations]] of a [[family]] [[business]] (albeit a [[unique]] one) all [[brought]] to a [[head]] by-- or perhaps the catalyst of-- a midlife [[crisis]], are [[examined]] in the [[dark]] and absorbing drama, `Panic,' [[written]] and [[directed]] by [[Henry]] Bromell, and starring William H. [[Macy]] and Donald Sutherland. It's a telling [[look]] at how [[indecision]] and denial can [[bring]] about the [[internal]] strife and misery that ultimately leads to apathy and that [[moment]] of truth when the conflict [[must]], of [[necessity]], at last be resolved.

Alex (Macy) is tired; he has a loving wife, [[Martha]] ([[Tracey]] Ullman), a precocious six-year-old son, [[Sammy]] (David Dorfman), a mail [[order]] [[business]] he [[runs]] out of the [[house]], as well as his [[main]] [[source]] of [[income]], the `family' [[business]] he [[shares]] with his father, [[Michael]] (Sutherland), and his [[mother]], [[Deidre]] ([[Barbara]] Bain). But he's [[empty]]; [[years]] of plying this [[particular]] [[trade]] have [[left]] him numb and detached, putting him in a [[mental]] state that has [[driven]] him to [[see]] a [[psychologist]], Dr. Josh Parks ([[John]] [[Ritter]]). And to make [[matters]] worse (or [[maybe]] better, [[depending]] upon [[perspective]]), in Dr. Parks' [[waiting]] room he meets a [[young]] [[woman]], [[Sarah]] Cassidy (Neve Campbell), [[whose]] presence [[alone]] makes him feel alive for the first time since he can [[remember]]. She quickly [[becomes]] another brick in the wall of the moral conflict his job has [[visited]] upon him, as in the days after their meeting he [[simply]] cannot [[stop]] thinking about her. His [[whole]] [[life]], it [[seems]], has become a `situation'-- one from which he is [[seemingly]] [[unable]] to successfully extirpate himself without hurting the ones he [[loves]]. He can [[deny]] his [[age]] and the fact that he has, indeed, [[slipped]] into a genuine [[midlife]] crisis, but he is about to [[discover]] that the [[problems]] he is [[facing]] are simply not [[going]] to [[go]] away on their own. He's at a [[crossroads]], and he's going to have to [[decide]] which [[way]] to [[go]]. And he's going to have to do it very [[soon]].

From a concept that is [[intrinsically]] interesting, Bromell has fashioned an [[engrossing]] [[character]] [[study]] that is [[insightful]] and incisive, and he presents it is a way that [[allows]] for moments of [[reflection]] that enable the audience to empathize and understand what Alex is going through. He makes it very clear that there are no simple answers, that in real life there is no easy way out. His characters are well defined and very real people who represent the diversity found in life and, moreover, within any given family unit. The film resoundingly implies that the sins of the father are irrefutably passed on to the progeny, with irrevocable consequences and effects. When you're growing up, you accept your personal environment as being that of the world at large; and often it is years into adulthood that one may begin to realize and understand that there are actually moral parameters established by every individual who walks upon the planet, and that the ones set by the father may not be conducive to the tenets of the son. And it is at that point that Alex finds himself as the story unfolds; ergo, the midlife crisis, or more specifically, the crisis of conscience from which he cannot escape. It's a powerful message, succinctly and subtly conveyed by Bromell, with the help of some outstanding performances from his actors.

For some time, William H. Macy has been one of the premiere character actors in the business, creating such diverse characters as Quiz Kid Donnie Smith in `Magnolia,' The Shoveler in `Mystery Men' and Jerry Lundegaard in `Fargo.' And that's just a sampling of his many achievements. At one point in this film, Sarah mentions Alex's `sad eyes,' and it's a very telling comment, as therein lies the strength of Macy's performance here, his ability to convey very real emotion in an understated, believable way that expresses all of the inner turmoil he is experiencing. Consider the scene in which he is lying awake in bed, staring off into the darkness; in that one restless moment it is clear that he is grappling, not only with his immediate situation, but with everything in his life that has brought him, finally, to this point. In that scene you find the sum total of a life of guilt, confusion and uncertainty, all of which have been successfully suppressed until now; all the things that have always been at the core of Alex's life, only now gradually breaking through his defense mechanisms and finally surfacing, demanding confrontation and [[resolution]]. It's a [[complex]] character created and delivered by Macy with an absolute precision that makes Alex truly memorable. It's a character to whom anyone who has ever faced a situation of seemingly insurmountable odds will be able to relate. It's a terrific piece of work by one of the finest actors around.

Sutherland is extremely effective, as well; his Michael is despicably sinister in a way that is so real it's chilling. It's frightening, in fact, to consider that there are such people actually walking the earth. This is not some pulp fiction or James Bond type villain, but a true personification of evil, hiding behind an outward appearance that is so normal he could be the guy next door, which is what makes it all the more disconcerting. And Sutherland brings it all to life brilliantly, with a great performance.

Neve Campbell looks the part of Sarah, but her performance (as is the usual case with her) seems somewhat pretentious, although her affected demeanor here just happens to fit the character and is actually a positive aspect of the film. If only she would occasionally turn her energies inward, it would make a tremendous difference in the way she presents her characters. `Panic,' however, is one of her best efforts; a powerful film that, in the end, is a journey well worth taking. 9/10.

The [[effect]] of [[jobs]] related [[stressing]] and the [[presses]] [[birthed]] of a [[ethical]] dilemma that pits conscience against the [[commitments]] of a [[familia]] [[companies]] (albeit a [[especial]] one) all [[made]] to a [[chief]] by-- or perhaps the catalyst of-- a midlife [[crises]], are [[reviewing]] in the [[murky]] and absorbing drama, `Panic,' [[wrote]] and [[aimed]] by [[Gregg]] Bromell, and starring William H. [[Tragedies]] and Donald Sutherland. It's a telling [[gaze]] at how [[timidity]] and denial can [[bringing]] about the [[inside]] strife and misery that ultimately leads to apathy and that [[time]] of truth when the conflict [[should]], of [[need]], at last be resolved.

Alex (Macy) is tired; he has a loving wife, [[Tasha]] ([[Tracy]] Ullman), a precocious six-year-old son, [[Sami]] (David Dorfman), a mail [[orders]] [[companies]] he [[manages]] out of the [[households]], as well as his [[primary]] [[backgrounds]] of [[incomes]], the `family' [[companies]] he [[exchange]] with his father, [[Michel]] (Sutherland), and his [[mam]], [[Deej]] ([[Barbarian]] Bain). But he's [[hollow]]; [[olds]] of plying this [[specific]] [[trading]] have [[exited]] him numb and detached, putting him in a [[psychological]] state that has [[propelled]] him to [[behold]] a [[analyst]], Dr. Josh Parks ([[Johannes]] [[Knight]]). And to make [[themes]] worse (or [[potentially]] better, [[relying]] upon [[perspectives]]), in Dr. Parks' [[hoping]] room he meets a [[youths]] [[women]], [[Baroness]] Cassidy (Neve Campbell), [[who]] presence [[merely]] makes him feel alive for the first time since he can [[remind]]. She quickly [[becoming]] another brick in the wall of the moral conflict his job has [[toured]] upon him, as in the days after their meeting he [[merely]] cannot [[ceasing]] thinking about her. His [[ensemble]] [[living]], it [[seem]], has become a `situation'-- one from which he is [[allegedly]] [[incapable]] to successfully extirpate himself without hurting the ones he [[likes]]. He can [[reject]] his [[older]] and the fact that he has, indeed, [[stumbled]] into a genuine [[quarantine]] crisis, but he is about to [[uncovering]] that the [[problem]] he is [[confronting]] are simply not [[go]] to [[going]] away on their own. He's at a [[juncture]], and he's going to have to [[decided]] which [[manner]] to [[going]]. And he's going to have to do it very [[speedily]].

From a concept that is [[inherently]] interesting, Bromell has fashioned an [[captivating]] [[nature]] [[studies]] that is [[shrewd]] and incisive, and he presents it is a way that [[allow]] for moments of [[contemplation]] that enable the audience to empathize and understand what Alex is going through. He makes it very clear that there are no simple answers, that in real life there is no easy way out. His characters are well defined and very real people who represent the diversity found in life and, moreover, within any given family unit. The film resoundingly implies that the sins of the father are irrefutably passed on to the progeny, with irrevocable consequences and effects. When you're growing up, you accept your personal environment as being that of the world at large; and often it is years into adulthood that one may begin to realize and understand that there are actually moral parameters established by every individual who walks upon the planet, and that the ones set by the father may not be conducive to the tenets of the son. And it is at that point that Alex finds himself as the story unfolds; ergo, the midlife crisis, or more specifically, the crisis of conscience from which he cannot escape. It's a powerful message, succinctly and subtly conveyed by Bromell, with the help of some outstanding performances from his actors.

For some time, William H. Macy has been one of the premiere character actors in the business, creating such diverse characters as Quiz Kid Donnie Smith in `Magnolia,' The Shoveler in `Mystery Men' and Jerry Lundegaard in `Fargo.' And that's just a sampling of his many achievements. At one point in this film, Sarah mentions Alex's `sad eyes,' and it's a very telling comment, as therein lies the strength of Macy's performance here, his ability to convey very real emotion in an understated, believable way that expresses all of the inner turmoil he is experiencing. Consider the scene in which he is lying awake in bed, staring off into the darkness; in that one restless moment it is clear that he is grappling, not only with his immediate situation, but with everything in his life that has brought him, finally, to this point. In that scene you find the sum total of a life of guilt, confusion and uncertainty, all of which have been successfully suppressed until now; all the things that have always been at the core of Alex's life, only now gradually breaking through his defense mechanisms and finally surfacing, demanding confrontation and [[resolutions]]. It's a [[complicated]] character created and delivered by Macy with an absolute precision that makes Alex truly memorable. It's a character to whom anyone who has ever faced a situation of seemingly insurmountable odds will be able to relate. It's a terrific piece of work by one of the finest actors around.

Sutherland is extremely effective, as well; his Michael is despicably sinister in a way that is so real it's chilling. It's frightening, in fact, to consider that there are such people actually walking the earth. This is not some pulp fiction or James Bond type villain, but a true personification of evil, hiding behind an outward appearance that is so normal he could be the guy next door, which is what makes it all the more disconcerting. And Sutherland brings it all to life brilliantly, with a great performance.

Neve Campbell looks the part of Sarah, but her performance (as is the usual case with her) seems somewhat pretentious, although her affected demeanor here just happens to fit the character and is actually a positive aspect of the film. If only she would occasionally turn her energies inward, it would make a tremendous difference in the way she presents her characters. `Panic,' however, is one of her best efforts; a powerful film that, in the end, is a journey well worth taking. 9/10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1227 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "I have looked into the [[eye]] of this [[island]], and what I [[saw]] was [[beautiful]]," proclaims one of the main characters in ABC's award winning [[television]] show "Lost". The series could be summarized as a drama story about a group of [[plane]] crash survivors stranded on an unknown island, but that would be doing the show a disservice. "Lost" follows a [[large]] group of [[characters]] who come into conflict with the island, each other, and ultimately themselves as they struggle with their new way of life and their dependency on each other. The situation [[becomes]] more complicated when it becomes clear this isn't an [[ordinary]] island, [[either]] - and that they may not be alone.

My initial fear after hearing the concept of this series was the [[lack]] of new stories they could tell us after a certain period, but this proved to be unfounded. The narrative flows naturally, the dialogue is witty, the characters are memorable and the [[execution]] is [[superb]]. The island is a character all on its own, and to understand this comment you'd have to see the series for yourself, which only goes to show its originality and greatness.

At the time of writing this review, only the first two seasons have aired, and they're filled with strong [[episodes]]. My only mild [[criticism]] is that the second season seems to slow down a bit halfway, but then fortunately comes back in admirable shape for the final episodes.

If I can recommend one television series you should be following right now, it would certainly be this one. If you like excitement, adventure, character driven stories, an extremely strong cast and crew, beautiful locations, and an island that seems more spiritual than natural, "Lost" is for you. Just be sure you start at the beginning. "I have looked into the [[eyeball]] of this [[insular]], and what I [[noticed]] was [[wondrous]]," proclaims one of the main characters in ABC's award winning [[tv]] show "Lost". The series could be summarized as a drama story about a group of [[airplanes]] crash survivors stranded on an unknown island, but that would be doing the show a disservice. "Lost" follows a [[big]] group of [[characteristic]] who come into conflict with the island, each other, and ultimately themselves as they struggle with their new way of life and their dependency on each other. The situation [[becoming]] more complicated when it becomes clear this isn't an [[banal]] island, [[neither]] - and that they may not be alone.

My initial fear after hearing the concept of this series was the [[inadequacy]] of new stories they could tell us after a certain period, but this proved to be unfounded. The narrative flows naturally, the dialogue is witty, the characters are memorable and the [[executions]] is [[extraordinaire]]. The island is a character all on its own, and to understand this comment you'd have to see the series for yourself, which only goes to show its originality and greatness.

At the time of writing this review, only the first two seasons have aired, and they're filled with strong [[bouts]]. My only mild [[critique]] is that the second season seems to slow down a bit halfway, but then fortunately comes back in admirable shape for the final episodes.

If I can recommend one television series you should be following right now, it would certainly be this one. If you like excitement, adventure, character driven stories, an extremely strong cast and crew, beautiful locations, and an island that seems more spiritual than natural, "Lost" is for you. Just be sure you start at the beginning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] OK, I [[kinda]] like the [[idea]] of this [[movie]]. I'm in the age demographic, and I kinda identify with some of the [[stories]]. Even the sometimes tacky and [[meaningless]] [[dialogue]] [[seems]] semi-realistic, and in a different [[movie]] would have been forgivable.

I'm trying as hard as [[possible]] not to trash this [[movie]] like the [[others]] did, but it's not that [[easy]] when the [[filmmakers]] weren't [[trying]] at all.

The editing in this [[movie]] is [[terrible]]! [[Possibly]] the [[worst]] editing I've ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]]! There are things that you don't have to [[go]] to [[film]] school to [[learn]], leaning [[good]] [[editing]] is not one of them, but [[identifying]] a [[bad]] one is.

Also, the shot... [[Oh]] my [[God]] the shots, just [[awful]]! I can't even go into the [[details]], but we sometimes just see random [[things]] popping up, and that, in [[conjunction]] with the [[editing]] will [[give]] you the most painful [[film]] viewing [[experience]].

This [[movie]] being [[made]] on low or no budget with 4 cast and crew is not an [[excuse]] also. I've seen short [[films]] on youtube with a [[lot]] more artistic integrity! Joe, Greta, I don't know what the heck you were thinking, but this [[movie]] is [[nothing]] but a [[masturbation]] of both your egos. You should be ashamed of yourselves! [[In]] [[conclusion]], this [[movie]] is like what a [[really]] lazy amateur porn movie will be if it was filled with 3 or 4 [[lousy]] sex scenes [[separated]] by long [[boring]] [[conversations]] and one disgusting [[masturbation]] scene. If that's not your [[kind]] of [[thing]], [[avoid]] this at all [[cost]]! OK, I [[sorta]] like the [[thinking]] of this [[cinematography]]. I'm in the age demographic, and I kinda identify with some of the [[story]]. Even the sometimes tacky and [[unnecessary]] [[conversations]] [[appears]] semi-realistic, and in a different [[filmmaking]] would have been forgivable.

I'm trying as hard as [[probable]] not to trash this [[filmmaking]] like the [[alia]] did, but it's not that [[easier]] when the [[cinematographers]] weren't [[try]] at all.

The editing in this [[filmmaking]] is [[horrific]]! [[Maybe]] the [[worse]] editing I've ever [[noticed]] in a [[filmmaking]]! There are things that you don't have to [[going]] to [[movie]] school to [[learns]], leaning [[alright]] [[edition]] is not one of them, but [[detecting]] a [[rotten]] one is.

Also, the shot... [[Ahh]] my [[Goodness]] the shots, just [[scary]]! I can't even go into the [[particulars]], but we sometimes just see random [[aspects]] popping up, and that, in [[cooperates]] with the [[edition]] will [[confer]] you the most painful [[movie]] viewing [[experiences]].

This [[filmmaking]] being [[introduced]] on low or no budget with 4 cast and crew is not an [[apologies]] also. I've seen short [[film]] on youtube with a [[lots]] more artistic integrity! Joe, Greta, I don't know what the heck you were thinking, but this [[filmmaking]] is [[anything]] but a [[masturbate]] of both your egos. You should be ashamed of yourselves! [[For]] [[conclude]], this [[filmmaking]] is like what a [[truly]] lazy amateur porn movie will be if it was filled with 3 or 4 [[squalid]] sex scenes [[segregated]] by long [[dull]] [[debate]] and one disgusting [[masturbate]] scene. If that's not your [[type]] of [[stuff]], [[forestall]] this at all [[expenses]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] After perusing the large amount of [[comments]] on this [[movie]] it is clear that there are two kinds of science fiction movie-goers. There are the ones who are well read, [[extremely]] [[literate]], and [[intelligent]]. They know the [[history]] of the genre and more importantly they know to what heights it can [[reach]] in the hands of a [[gifted]] author. For many [[years]] science fiction languished in the [[basement]] of literature. Considered my most [[critic]] to be [[little]] more than stories of ray guns and aliens meant for pre-pubescent teenagers. Today's well read fan knows well this [[history]], and knows the great authors Asimov, Heinlein, [[Bradbury]], and Ellison, who helped bring science fiction out of that basement. In doing so they created thought provoking, intelligent stories that stretched the boundaries and redefined the human condition. This well informed fans are critical of anything Hollywood throws at them. They are not critical for it's own sake, but look upon each offering with a skeptical eye. (As they should as Hollywood's record has been less than stellar.) To these fans the story must take supreme importance. They cannot be fooled by flashy computer graphics, and non stop action sequences. When the emperor has no clothes they scream it the loudest.

The second type of science fiction movie goer has little knowledge about the written aspect of the genre. (Look at many of the above comments that state "Well I haven't read the book or anything by this author...) Their total exposure to science fiction is from movies or the Scifi channel. They are [[extremely]] uncritical, willing to overlook huge plot holes, [[weak]] premises, and thin story lines if they are given a healthy dose of wiz bang action and awesome special effects. They are, in effect, willing to turn off their critical thinking skills (or maybe they never had them!) for the duration of the movie. Case in point, I Robot. While supposedly based on Asimov's short stories and named after one of his novels, it contains [[little]] of what Asimov wrote and even less of what he tried to tell us about humanity and our robotic creations. (Those of you that will run out and buy I, Robot will be very much surprised-this [[movie]] isn't even based on that story at all!)

The film has enormous plot holes, that at some points are stretched to the limits of credulity. I won't point them out. I won't spoon feed you. You need to practice you thinking skills and discover them for yourself. The characters, which are named after many of Asimov's characters, do not possess the critical intelligence that was a hallmark of his stories. The plot itself with all it's action sequences goes against everything that the author stood for. His belief that humanity possesses the capacity to solve problems using their minds, not their fists, is vital to understanding his vision of the future. In short, other than the name, their is very little of Isaac in anything about this movie. There will always be those uncritical (i.e. unthinking) who will state: "The movie doesn't have to be like the book. Due to the medium, movies sometimes require that changes be made." But what about a case where the movie never even tried to stay close to the book (or books) from the start? What if all they took from the written work was the title? This begs the question: Why tarnish a great body of work by slapping it's title on your vacuous piece of crap? Save money and don't buy the rights to the works. Title it something else. Don't use the character's names. Believe me no one will accuse you of plagiarism. In fact it won't matter what you title it to the unread moviegoer who accepts everything you throw at him. But it will upset those who read, who think, who are unwilling to simply let you give them a pretty light show.

I, Robot, like much of Hollywood's take on the genre, pushes Science fiction back down into that basement it lived in years ago. Hollywood could not do this alone. It takes an uncritical mindless audience that will accept puerile dredge like this. After perusing the large amount of [[feedback]] on this [[film]] it is clear that there are two kinds of science fiction movie-goers. There are the ones who are well read, [[terribly]] [[schooled]], and [[smart]]. They know the [[histories]] of the genre and more importantly they know to what heights it can [[attaining]] in the hands of a [[talented]] author. For many [[yrs]] science fiction languished in the [[cava]] of literature. Considered my most [[critique]] to be [[scant]] more than stories of ray guns and aliens meant for pre-pubescent teenagers. Today's well read fan knows well this [[historic]], and knows the great authors Asimov, Heinlein, [[Baek]], and Ellison, who helped bring science fiction out of that basement. In doing so they created thought provoking, intelligent stories that stretched the boundaries and redefined the human condition. This well informed fans are critical of anything Hollywood throws at them. They are not critical for it's own sake, but look upon each offering with a skeptical eye. (As they should as Hollywood's record has been less than stellar.) To these fans the story must take supreme importance. They cannot be fooled by flashy computer graphics, and non stop action sequences. When the emperor has no clothes they scream it the loudest.

The second type of science fiction movie goer has little knowledge about the written aspect of the genre. (Look at many of the above comments that state "Well I haven't read the book or anything by this author...) Their total exposure to science fiction is from movies or the Scifi channel. They are [[eminently]] uncritical, willing to overlook huge plot holes, [[breakable]] premises, and thin story lines if they are given a healthy dose of wiz bang action and awesome special effects. They are, in effect, willing to turn off their critical thinking skills (or maybe they never had them!) for the duration of the movie. Case in point, I Robot. While supposedly based on Asimov's short stories and named after one of his novels, it contains [[scant]] of what Asimov wrote and even less of what he tried to tell us about humanity and our robotic creations. (Those of you that will run out and buy I, Robot will be very much surprised-this [[filmmaking]] isn't even based on that story at all!)

The film has enormous plot holes, that at some points are stretched to the limits of credulity. I won't point them out. I won't spoon feed you. You need to practice you thinking skills and discover them for yourself. The characters, which are named after many of Asimov's characters, do not possess the critical intelligence that was a hallmark of his stories. The plot itself with all it's action sequences goes against everything that the author stood for. His belief that humanity possesses the capacity to solve problems using their minds, not their fists, is vital to understanding his vision of the future. In short, other than the name, their is very little of Isaac in anything about this movie. There will always be those uncritical (i.e. unthinking) who will state: "The movie doesn't have to be like the book. Due to the medium, movies sometimes require that changes be made." But what about a case where the movie never even tried to stay close to the book (or books) from the start? What if all they took from the written work was the title? This begs the question: Why tarnish a great body of work by slapping it's title on your vacuous piece of crap? Save money and don't buy the rights to the works. Title it something else. Don't use the character's names. Believe me no one will accuse you of plagiarism. In fact it won't matter what you title it to the unread moviegoer who accepts everything you throw at him. But it will upset those who read, who think, who are unwilling to simply let you give them a pretty light show.

I, Robot, like much of Hollywood's take on the genre, pushes Science fiction back down into that basement it lived in years ago. Hollywood could not do this alone. It takes an uncritical mindless audience that will accept puerile dredge like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Though]] derivative, "[[Labyrinth]]" still stands as the highlight of the mid-half of the six-year-old [[show]]. [[Finally]] a [[story]] allows Welling to show how he has grown as an actor. It's not [[easy]] playing a character that is the embodiment of "truth, justice, and the American [[way]]" on a weekly basis with very little variation. His performance, [[permitting]] him to [[show]] how one might [[react]] if he/she discovers that all that he [[knew]] may be a [[lie]], was [[quite]] [[believable]].

Welling rose to the occasion [[marvelously]].

As [[always]], Michael Rosenbaum, as the "[[handicapped]]" Lex, [[delivered]], as did [[Kristen]] Kreuk as a too-sweet-to-be-believed [[Lana]]. [[Allison]] Mack, the ever-present Chloe, [[also]] scored as a slightly "off-her-rocker" version.

The use of an annoying hum in the background [[added]] to the tone of the [[installment]] and [[made]] for an [[engaging]] [[drama]]. [[While]] derivative, "[[Maze]]" still stands as the highlight of the mid-half of the six-year-old [[exposition]]. [[Eventually]] a [[narratives]] allows Welling to show how he has grown as an actor. It's not [[simple]] playing a character that is the embodiment of "truth, justice, and the American [[routes]]" on a weekly basis with very little variation. His performance, [[letting]] him to [[illustrates]] how one might [[responds]] if he/she discovers that all that he [[overheard]] may be a [[lying]], was [[rather]] [[credible]].

Welling rose to the occasion [[divinely]].

As [[unceasingly]], Michael Rosenbaum, as the "[[disabled]]" Lex, [[gave]], as did [[Christians]] Kreuk as a too-sweet-to-be-believed [[Wool]]. [[Ellison]] Mack, the ever-present Chloe, [[apart]] scored as a slightly "off-her-rocker" version.

The use of an annoying hum in the background [[adding]] to the tone of the [[instalments]] and [[introduced]] for an [[participate]] [[tragedy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I bought this while I was playing chess in Hastings. I am from Denmark though. It is very good. Definitely with an understanding of the horror genre. The monster towards the end is very scary. People who criticise this on IMDB should recall that it was a huge succes among serious horror critics.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A nice Shirely Temple short. Child actors screaming their lines seemed to be the norm for that day and time. Perhaps being "seen and not heard" needed to be made up for. Aside from that this is fun. Given the films era there are certain aspects of the thing, from a social viewpoint, that strike me as both very progressive and liberal. I won't go into those here, I'd rather not spoil it for you but let you watch it for yourself and see if you spot those elements. As early on as it was its easy to see from this short the fascination that was already developing for Temple. That makes it worth watching if you're a Temple fan. For others its a cool way to kill ten minutes while you're waiting for your good night glass of milk to warm up on the stove. --------------------------------------------- Result 1233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I should have figured that any movie with the Poltergeist lady in it isn't going to be good. It actually starts out okay, but during the first murder scene you find out that the movie you're watching is a movie inside of a movie. There's people sitting in a movie theatre watching that movie. One girl in the audience is so annoying that I would have turned around and strangled her. A bit strange, but far from good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] From everything I'd read about the [[movie]], I was excited to [[support]] a [[film]] with a [[Christian]] [[theme]]. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally [[done]]. [[Especially]] the [[writing]]! Without good writing a [[movie]] doesn't have a [[chance]]. The writer/director [[said]] in an interview that he didn't [[want]] to [[give]] away how the title [[relates]] to the [[story]]. [[Believe]] me, it was [[NO]] big surprise. I [[kept]] [[waiting]] for the [[teenage]]/young [[adult]] back-story to [[unfold]], but it never did. As [[someone]] who has [[gone]] through a [[divorce]], I was very [[disappointed]]. This [[movie]] would have been [[NO]] [[comfort]] to me when I first went through the emotional [[turmoil]] that [[divorce]] can [[bring]] to your [[life]] as a [[Christian]]! From everything I'd read about the [[filmmaking]], I was excited to [[helps]] a [[filmmaking]] with a [[Cristian]] [[themes]]. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally [[played]]. [[Mostly]] the [[writes]]! Without good writing a [[cinematography]] doesn't have a [[opportunities]]. The writer/director [[asserted]] in an interview that he didn't [[wanting]] to [[lend]] away how the title [[pertains]] to the [[storytelling]]. [[Reckon]] me, it was [[NOS]] big surprise. I [[maintained]] [[expects]] for the [[schoolgirl]]/young [[grownups]] back-story to [[unfolding]], but it never did. As [[everybody]] who has [[vanished]] through a [[divorcing]], I was very [[frustrated]]. This [[filmmaking]] would have been [[NOPE]] [[consolation]] to me when I first went through the emotional [[uproar]] that [[divorces]] can [[brings]] to your [[iife]] as a [[Cristian]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[At]] last! A decent British [[comedy]] that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a [[TV]] series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive [[tale]] of [[discovery]], dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are [[gentle]] [[fools]] with a penchant for [[failure]] and each at a turning point in their [[lives]], giving a [[sensitive]], [[emotional]] trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous [[comedy]] together. The chemistry between the three amigos is [[palpable]] and makes for a [[touching]] companionship with [[hilarious]] [[dialogue]] and some [[classic]] comedic moments. It [[feels]] [[part]] Withnail and I, part American [[Werewolf]] in London, and [[part]] Quadraphenia (but only because of the [[bike]] gangs, and [[Phil]] Daniels). [[In]] [[fact]], [[Phil]] Daniels' [[lovable]] rogue [[reminds]] you of Danny the [[dealer]] in Withnail and I, with his scholarly [[approach]] and scientific [[commitment]] to [[drugs]]. This is a [[great]] [[film]], [[particularly]] for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the [[past]], who will relate to [[many]] [[moments]] in the [[film]]. A personal favourite is the [[brilliant]] scene in the [[Welsh]] corner [[shop]], [[buying]] [[munchies]] while tripping on 'shrooms. This [[gentle]] [[comedy]] will warm the [[cockles]] of your heart and have you [[laughing]] out loud. And you don't have to ride [[bikes]] or even like them to [[enjoy]] it. But it'll [[add]] to it if you do. [[Brilliant]]. [[In]] last! A decent British [[comic]] that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a [[TELEVISION]] series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive [[story]] of [[detect]], dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are [[mild]] [[idiots]] with a penchant for [[insufficiency]] and each at a turning point in their [[vie]], giving a [[touchy]], [[sentimental]] trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous [[comedian]] together. The chemistry between the three amigos is [[overt]] and makes for a [[touch]] companionship with [[funny]] [[discussions]] and some [[conventional]] comedic moments. It [[thinks]] [[portion]] Withnail and I, part American [[Werewolves]] in London, and [[portions]] Quadraphenia (but only because of the [[bicycling]] gangs, and [[Elephant]] Daniels). [[Among]] [[facto]], [[Elephant]] Daniels' [[adorable]] rogue [[remembered]] you of Danny the [[distributors]] in Withnail and I, with his scholarly [[approaching]] and scientific [[pledge]] to [[drug]]. This is a [[wondrous]] [[movies]], [[notably]] for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the [[yesteryear]], who will relate to [[several]] [[times]] in the [[cinematography]]. A personal favourite is the [[sparkly]] scene in the [[Welch]] corner [[storage]], [[buys]] [[crocs]] while tripping on 'shrooms. This [[mild]] [[humor]] will warm the [[hulls]] of your heart and have you [[giggling]] out loud. And you don't have to ride [[bicycles]] or even like them to [[enjoys]] it. But it'll [[inserting]] to it if you do. [[Sparkly]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Rather then long [[dance]] sequences and close ups of the characters which made the film drag on - the movie [[would]] have been better served explaining the story and motivations of the characters.

The marginalisation of Nubo, the minister, auntie, mother - and the dumbing down of the [[dynamic]] and [[IMPORTANT]] rivalry between hatsumo and mameha and hatsumo and sayuri [[made]] the movie [[lack]] any real depth. If you hadn't read the [[book]] you [[would]] not really understand why Sayuri [[loved]] the [[Chairman]] and why Mameha [[became]] her mentor at all.

Visually the film was stunning - and the actors all did the best with the C rate [[script]] they were given, but that was all that was good about this movie. Rather then long [[ballet]] sequences and close ups of the characters which made the film drag on - the movie [[could]] have been better served explaining the story and motivations of the characters.

The marginalisation of Nubo, the minister, auntie, mother - and the dumbing down of the [[energetic]] and [[SIZABLE]] rivalry between hatsumo and mameha and hatsumo and sayuri [[effected]] the movie [[imperfection]] any real depth. If you hadn't read the [[cookbook]] you [[could]] not really understand why Sayuri [[worshipped]] the [[Preside]] and why Mameha [[was]] her mentor at all.

Visually the film was stunning - and the actors all did the best with the C rate [[screenplay]] they were given, but that was all that was good about this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1237 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] does anyone think that this [[show]] actually [[helps]] some people, or does it only anger the people who watch it? when i am flipping through the [[channels]] and come upon this [[show]] i half to watch out of morbid curiosity. i understand that pat Roberson is not all together. what i do not know is if his viewers are like him or if they are [[good]] people and think they will have a [[better]] life if they listening to what he has to say. pat Roberson is of [[little]] [[consequence]]. he is an old man who thinks in an old way. fear of damnation no [[longer]] has the same affects as it once did (thank [[god]]). now if someone will please answer my question i will be dodging lightning bolts for the rest of eternity. does anyone think that this [[exposition]] actually [[aids]] some people, or does it only anger the people who watch it? when i am flipping through the [[canal]] and come upon this [[exhibition]] i half to watch out of morbid curiosity. i understand that pat Roberson is not all together. what i do not know is if his viewers are like him or if they are [[buena]] people and think they will have a [[best]] life if they listening to what he has to say. pat Roberson is of [[scant]] [[effect]]. he is an old man who thinks in an old way. fear of damnation no [[most]] has the same affects as it once did (thank [[deus]]). now if someone will please answer my question i will be dodging lightning bolts for the rest of eternity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1238 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] This [[movie]] is [[funny]] and [[suitable]] for any age. It is [[definitely]] family-type entertainment. The cast does a [[fine]] [[job]] playing folks in the mid-western [[town]] of [[Big]] [[Bean]], Illinois. [[Where]] we [[must]] [[assume]] [[nothing]] ever [[happens]] [[since]] the excitement (pre-invasion) of the decade is the new (and only) exit ramp from the [[Interstate]]. The [[location]] [[appeals]] as suitably [[boring]] and [[totally]] unlikely for the invasion of [[earth]] by Martians. But these Martians are [[totally]] inept, [[despite]] being well-equipped with an arsenal of [[suitably]] [[ghastly]] and [[deadly]] [[weapons]]... [[including]] one set on [[eradicating]] the Martians, too! The Martians dead-pan their lines and throw in just the right accents to [[make]] us the [[viewers]] and the locals [[wish]] to [[help]] them... leave [[earth]]. J. J. [[Anderson]] playing the very young Halloween carnivorous duck has just [[great]] lines. Watch this [[movie]] for laugher and entertainment; thought-provoking it isn't. But subtle and [[enjoyable]] it is. This [[cinema]] is [[comical]] and [[adequate]] for any age. It is [[surely]] family-type entertainment. The cast does a [[fined]] [[labour]] playing folks in the mid-western [[cities]] of [[Large]] [[Beans]], Illinois. [[Hence]] we [[gotta]] [[suppose]] [[anything]] ever [[comes]] [[because]] the excitement (pre-invasion) of the decade is the new (and only) exit ramp from the [[Motorway]]. The [[locations]] [[appellate]] as suitably [[bored]] and [[altogether]] unlikely for the invasion of [[land]] by Martians. But these Martians are [[altogether]] inept, [[although]] being well-equipped with an arsenal of [[adequately]] [[ugly]] and [[fatal]] [[firearms]]... [[consisting]] one set on [[deleting]] the Martians, too! The Martians dead-pan their lines and throw in just the right accents to [[deliver]] us the [[audience]] and the locals [[wants]] to [[aids]] them... leave [[overland]]. J. J. [[Andersen]] playing the very young Halloween carnivorous duck has just [[wondrous]] lines. Watch this [[films]] for laugher and entertainment; thought-provoking it isn't. But subtle and [[nice]] it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1239 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. [[Renting]] Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current "B" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.

It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just [[missed]] it.

Well this WAS a really pleasant [[surprise]]! This is also no B movie. It's not a "blockbuster" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.

The special effects are [[powerfully]] [[presented]] when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they [[get]] it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is [[top]] notch. In any case the affects are secondary.

I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).

Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a [[master]] stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a [[brilliant]] choice! And Lucy [[Liu]] is [[also]] just right with her "will she kiss me - will she shoot me" edge.

I rarely watch [[movies]] several [[times]] within [[days]] - this is one of them. Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. [[Leased]] Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current "B" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.

It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just [[flunked]] it.

Well this WAS a really pleasant [[amaze]]! This is also no B movie. It's not a "blockbuster" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.

The special effects are [[severely]] [[tabled]] when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they [[obtains]] it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is [[topped]] notch. In any case the affects are secondary.

I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).

Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a [[padrone]] stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a [[wondrous]] choice! And Lucy [[Lio]] is [[apart]] just right with her "will she kiss me - will she shoot me" edge.

I rarely watch [[cinematography]] several [[moments]] within [[jours]] - this is one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] As a [[big]] fan of the original [[film]], it's hard to watch this show. The garish set decor and harshly lighted sets rob any [[style]] from this remake. The mood is never there. Instead, it has the look and feel of so many [[television]] [[movies]] of the [[Seventies]]. Crenna is not a bad choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy [[wardrobe]] and "[[swank]]" apartment don't fit the [[mood]] of the [[original]], or make him an interesting character.He does his best to [[make]] it [[work]] but Samantha Egger is a [[really]] [[bad]] choice. The [[English]] accent and California [[looks]] can't [[hold]] a candle to [[Barbara]] Stanwick's velvet [[voice]] and [[sex]] appeal. Lee J.Cobb [[tries]] [[mightily]] to fashion Barton Keyes,but [[even]] his performance is just gruff, without [[style]].

It feels [[like]] the [[TV]] [[movie]] it was and again reminds me of what a remarkable film the original still is. As a [[mammoth]] fan of the original [[filmmaking]], it's hard to watch this show. The garish set decor and harshly lighted sets rob any [[styling]] from this remake. The mood is never there. Instead, it has the look and feel of so many [[tv]] [[filmmaking]] of the [[Seventy]]. Crenna is not a bad choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy [[closet]] and "[[chic]]" apartment don't fit the [[ambiance]] of the [[initial]], or make him an interesting character.He does his best to [[deliver]] it [[collaborated]] but Samantha Egger is a [[truly]] [[unfavourable]] choice. The [[Francais]] accent and California [[seem]] can't [[held]] a candle to [[Barbarian]] Stanwick's velvet [[voices]] and [[sexuality]] appeal. Lee J.Cobb [[attempts]] [[forcefully]] to fashion Barton Keyes,but [[yet]] his performance is just gruff, without [[styles]].

It feels [[fond]] the [[TVS]] [[flick]] it was and again reminds me of what a remarkable film the original still is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Rarely do I [[see]] a [[film]] that I am totally [[engrossed]] with; this was one of them. It had good acting, [[dialogue]], plot, and the scenery was [[beautiful]]. I laughed out loud [[many]] times, [[especially]] the scene [[dealing]] with the [[kitchen]] [[raid]]. The slapstick [[comedy]] [[performed]] by the lunkhead hired hand had me one the floor, but I admit that I am a sucker for slapstick. The [[story]] dealt with a [[group]] of people in their 30's [[coming]] back to a summer [[camp]] that they had attended 20 [[years]] [[previously]]. It was a [[farewell]] [[week]] of camping, as the place [[would]] be [[closed]] down [[permanently]] at the end of the season. As [[adults]] the camp looked [[different]], and they felt differently about it and each other. I [[recommend]] this funny, [[moving]] [[movie]] to all.

Rarely do I [[consults]] a [[kino]] that I am totally [[absorbed]] with; this was one of them. It had good acting, [[conversations]], plot, and the scenery was [[wondrous]]. I laughed out loud [[various]] times, [[concretely]] the scene [[addressing]] with the [[cuisine]] [[raided]]. The slapstick [[travesty]] [[done]] by the lunkhead hired hand had me one the floor, but I admit that I am a sucker for slapstick. The [[history]] dealt with a [[groupings]] of people in their 30's [[come]] back to a summer [[encampment]] that they had attended 20 [[ages]] [[formerly]]. It was a [[bye]] [[chou]] of camping, as the place [[ought]] be [[shutting]] down [[steadily]] at the end of the season. As [[grownups]] the camp looked [[diversified]], and they felt differently about it and each other. I [[recommendation]] this funny, [[relocating]] [[kino]] to all.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watch a [[lot]] of films, good, bad and [[indifferent]]; there is [[usually]] something of interest to fixate upon, [[even]] if it is only set design, or the [[reliable]] [[labor]] of a [[good]] character actor, or the [[fortuitous]] laughter that [[emerges]] from watching [[ineptitude]] [[captured]] [[forever]].

[[However]], I was [[quite]] pleasantly [[surprised]] by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham [[Greene]] has been [[translated]] into [[film]] [[many]] times of course, in such masterpieces as "Thin Man" and in lesser vehicles. "Confidential [[Agent]]" is one of those [[lesser]] vehicles, [[yet]] it manages to get me [[somewhere]] anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's [[depictions]] as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost [[complete]] non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last "problem" actually begins to [[work]] in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. [[Yet]] I found that plodding [[accentuated]] rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was [[compelled]] to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The [[film]] does not rise to the [[level]] of art, and thus cannot [[hope]] to [[answer]] such [[questions]], but it is much more than [[mere]] entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly [[drawn]]. The lack of glitz, of "[[bubble]]," of narrative "bounce" help to [[make]] this [[movie]] very [[worthwhile]].

And there is no [[happy]] ending, for [[history]] wrote the [[ending]]. I watch a [[batch]] of films, good, bad and [[oblivious]]; there is [[traditionally]] something of interest to fixate upon, [[yet]] if it is only set design, or the [[credible]] [[jobs]] of a [[alright]] character actor, or the [[unintended]] laughter that [[arises]] from watching [[inability]] [[caught]] [[permanently]].

[[Instead]], I was [[utterly]] pleasantly [[horrified]] by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham [[Archer]] has been [[translating]] into [[cinematography]] [[countless]] times of course, in such masterpieces as "Thin Man" and in lesser vehicles. "Confidential [[Officers]]" is one of those [[lowest]] vehicles, [[still]] it manages to get me [[nowhere]] anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's [[representations]] as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost [[finish]] non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last "problem" actually begins to [[cooperating]] in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. [[Though]] I found that plodding [[compounded]] rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was [[obligated]] to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The [[cinematographic]] does not rise to the [[levels]] of art, and thus cannot [[esperanza]] to [[replying]] such [[issues]], but it is much more than [[simple]] entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly [[draws]]. The lack of glitz, of "[[moniker]]," of narrative "bounce" help to [[deliver]] this [[cinematography]] very [[actionable]].

And there is no [[pleased]] ending, for [[stories]] wrote the [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This is another one of those 'humans vs insects/eco-horror' [[features]]; a theme that was [[popular]] in the late 70's. Only you can't really [[call]] it horror. There's zero [[suspense]] and no gruesome [[events]]. [[In]] other words: this movie is [[pretty]] lame. It's not that it's really bad or something; it's just very boring. A construction site near a [[hotel]] uncovers a big nest of [[ants]]. [[Later]] on we learn that, [[probably]] due to [[different]] [[sorts]] of pesticides [[used]] in the [[past]], their [[bite]] [[became]] [[poisonous]]. Some people get bitten and rushed to the hospital and it takes [[ages]] for the residents of the hospital to figure out what's [[going]] on. [[Robert]] Foxworth figures it out first and then you can see him [[go]] berserk with a [[digging]] [[machine]] for what [[seems]] like [[several]] [[hours]]. [[Then]] they [[flee]] in the [[house]], [[waiting]] to [[get]] [[rescued]]. And, [[man]], you should [[see]] all the [[efforts]] they make for [[rescuing]] them. I won't spoil too much, but at one point they even use a [[big]] [[helicopter]]. All the [[time]] when I was watching this, I sat there thinking "Come on, people, you all got shoes on. [[Just]] [[run]] out of the building. I'm sure a bunch of ants won't catch up with you." It's all [[pretty]] [[ridiculous]].

Of course, [[lots]] of close-ups of [[crawling]] ants are [[shown]] [[throughout]] the whole [[movie]]. Ants in the garden. Ants in the [[garbage]]. Ants in the [[kitchen]]. Ants on the [[roof]]. Ants in the [[bedroom]]. Ants in the [[sink]]. And the [[best]] [[part]]: Ants crawling on people's [[faces]] while the actors are [[breathing]] through [[straws]]. But when you [[see]] [[groups]] of ants in wider shots, they [[indeed]] look like black rice the set designers glued to the wall.

One [[small]] surprise [[came]] near the end. No, it has nothing to do with a [[twist]] in the plot. It was just that Brian Dennehy [[made]] an appearance as a chief-fireman. Ehrr... What more can I [[say]]? This [[movie]] is called IT [[HAPPENED]] [[AT]] LAKEWOOD [[MANOR]] but the box-art of my [[copy]] read ANTS and the title during the opening [[credits]] was [[PANIC]] [[AT]] LAKEWOOD [[MANOR]]. There you have it. [[Now]], [[since]] this is a made-for-TV [[movie]] from the 70's, I'll be once again extremely [[mild]] in my [[final]] [[rating]]. Now, THE SAVAGE BEES, another 'humans vs insects' TV-movie from 1976 was much better than this one. I even feel I have to go back and add a few points to its rating after having seen ANTS. Lacking suspense, action, thrills, shocks and creepiness, the only thing you'll be left with after seeing ANTS is an annoying itch. This is another one of those 'humans vs insects/eco-horror' [[traits]]; a theme that was [[fashionable]] in the late 70's. Only you can't really [[invitation]] it horror. There's zero [[sufferance]] and no gruesome [[incidents]]. [[During]] other words: this movie is [[belle]] lame. It's not that it's really bad or something; it's just very boring. A construction site near a [[guesthouse]] uncovers a big nest of [[mules]]. [[Then]] on we learn that, [[certainly]] due to [[several]] [[sorting]] of pesticides [[utilise]] in the [[yesteryear]], their [[bit]] [[came]] [[prejudicial]]. Some people get bitten and rushed to the hospital and it takes [[years]] for the residents of the hospital to figure out what's [[go]] on. [[Roberto]] Foxworth figures it out first and then you can see him [[going]] berserk with a [[dig]] [[machines]] for what [[seem]] like [[different]] [[hour]]. [[Later]] they [[fled]] in the [[maison]], [[hoping]] to [[gets]] [[saved]]. And, [[guy]], you should [[behold]] all the [[activities]] they make for [[saved]] them. I won't spoil too much, but at one point they even use a [[huge]] [[chopper]]. All the [[moment]] when I was watching this, I sat there thinking "Come on, people, you all got shoes on. [[Jen]] [[running]] out of the building. I'm sure a bunch of ants won't catch up with you." It's all [[quite]] [[silly]].

Of course, [[lot]] of close-ups of [[creeping]] ants are [[illustrated]] [[in]] the whole [[filmmaking]]. Ants in the garden. Ants in the [[junk]]. Ants in the [[cuisine]]. Ants on the [[ceilings]]. Ants in the [[room]]. Ants in the [[sinking]]. And the [[optimum]] [[party]]: Ants crawling on people's [[facing]] while the actors are [[breathe]] through [[twigs]]. But when you [[seeing]] [[panel]] of ants in wider shots, they [[actually]] look like black rice the set designers glued to the wall.

One [[little]] surprise [[arrived]] near the end. No, it has nothing to do with a [[twisting]] in the plot. It was just that Brian Dennehy [[effected]] an appearance as a chief-fireman. Ehrr... What more can I [[says]]? This [[filmmaking]] is called IT [[ARRIVED]] [[INTO]] LAKEWOOD [[MANSION]] but the box-art of my [[copies]] read ANTS and the title during the opening [[credit]] was [[SCARE]] [[DURING]] LAKEWOOD [[MANSION]]. There you have it. [[Presently]], [[because]] this is a made-for-TV [[movies]] from the 70's, I'll be once again extremely [[gentle]] in my [[definitive]] [[scoring]]. Now, THE SAVAGE BEES, another 'humans vs insects' TV-movie from 1976 was much better than this one. I even feel I have to go back and add a few points to its rating after having seen ANTS. Lacking suspense, action, thrills, shocks and creepiness, the only thing you'll be left with after seeing ANTS is an annoying itch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] How can there be that many corrupt cops without any one of them slipping up? With enough cops to run a mini-war that include such [[weapons]] as flamethrowers, you [[would]] think they would have been caught before [[someone]] [[writing]] for a weekly [[coupon]] newspaper overheard someone [[saying]] 'thanks' to a corrupt cop.

You will never get your 90ish minutes back. [[Life]] is too [[precious]] to [[rent]] this movie.

I feel [[bad]] for the big named [[actors]] that made the [[mistake]] of making this movie.

[[If]] you like Justin Timberlake, feel free to rent this [[movie]]. He does have a very major part in it, so fans might enjoy seeing him.

However, I believe most of his fans are young [[girls]], who may be turned off by the violence in this movie. How can there be that many corrupt cops without any one of them slipping up? With enough cops to run a mini-war that include such [[firearms]] as flamethrowers, you [[could]] think they would have been caught before [[person]] [[literary]] for a weekly [[voucher]] newspaper overheard someone [[arguing]] 'thanks' to a corrupt cop.

You will never get your 90ish minutes back. [[Iife]] is too [[treasured]] to [[lease]] this movie.

I feel [[negative]] for the big named [[players]] that made the [[mistaken]] of making this movie.

[[Though]] you like Justin Timberlake, feel free to rent this [[filmmaking]]. He does have a very major part in it, so fans might enjoy seeing him.

However, I believe most of his fans are young [[woman]], who may be turned off by the violence in this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[Even]] by 1942 [[standards]] of movie-making the setup which HER [[CARDBOARD]] LOVER presents was [[dated]] to the extreme. The machinations of one half of a pair (of husband/wife, ex-husband/ex-wife) to get the other back at the threat of marriage to another, divorce, or an eventual separation by means of jealousy, humiliation, or other schemes had been [[done]] much better in [[classics]] such as HIS GIRL Friday and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. Both of these [[movies]] [[features]] [[women]] with a strong, indomitable screen presence and who played independent, proto-feminist characters. In both movies, both women were estranged/divorced from their (witty) first husbands and set to marry colorless men who were their exact opposite, and both would be bamboozled into rejecting their soon-to-be husbands and re-igniting their passion for each other.

The plot in HER CARDBOARD LOVER switches the gender: here, it's Norma Shearer in the Cary Grant role out, this time, to ward off an ex-boyfriend (George Sanders) by means of hiring Robert Taylor to pose as her gigolo. The problem is, Shearer is much too old to be playing a role more suited to an actress in her mid-to-late twenties; Sanders is about as involved as a piece of furniture for the most -- any man who would be in love with his fiancée, on seeing a strange man come out of her bathroom as happens here, would knock the lights out of him and cause a huge scene. Not here. And Robert Taylor plays his part as if he were trying to channel Cary Grant half the time, not in speech inflections but in overall essence.

But the [[worst]] part of it is Shearer herself. For an [[actress]] used to parts which gave her a sense of intellectual sexiness and dramatic presence, playing Consuelo Craydon [[seems]] to put her into throes of [[complete]] over-acting, over-emoting, and over-gesturing which, while still a [[part]] of her style of acting and more appropriate ten years earlier, makes her look like an extremely mannered performer wrenching the joke out of a situation like water from a fairly dry sponge. It only [[fuels]] the fires that tell the theory which gives Irving Thalberg the maker of her career and chooser of (most of her) roles; why she passed on roles such as Charlotte Vale and Mrs. Miniver on mega-hits NOW VOYAGER and MRS. MINIVER is a mystery, but then again, most accounts also state that by this time she had just burnt out from acting, that she'd had lost interest in the whole thing altogether and it's no secret that anyone who has experienced this sort of thing has essentially lost focus and can't wait until retirement or the end of a contract is near to leave as soon as possible. Such could be the case here. She seems lost, she seems tired, she seems ill at ease, going through autopilot instead of living the part. After this film she would make no more, but would be responsible of discovering Janet Leigh who would come into her own as a screen star during the late 40s and into the 60s. [[Yet]] by 1942 [[norms]] of movie-making the setup which HER [[CARTON]] LOVER presents was [[dating]] to the extreme. The machinations of one half of a pair (of husband/wife, ex-husband/ex-wife) to get the other back at the threat of marriage to another, divorce, or an eventual separation by means of jealousy, humiliation, or other schemes had been [[completed]] much better in [[masterpieces]] such as HIS GIRL Friday and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. Both of these [[kino]] [[idiosyncrasies]] [[femmes]] with a strong, indomitable screen presence and who played independent, proto-feminist characters. In both movies, both women were estranged/divorced from their (witty) first husbands and set to marry colorless men who were their exact opposite, and both would be bamboozled into rejecting their soon-to-be husbands and re-igniting their passion for each other.

The plot in HER CARDBOARD LOVER switches the gender: here, it's Norma Shearer in the Cary Grant role out, this time, to ward off an ex-boyfriend (George Sanders) by means of hiring Robert Taylor to pose as her gigolo. The problem is, Shearer is much too old to be playing a role more suited to an actress in her mid-to-late twenties; Sanders is about as involved as a piece of furniture for the most -- any man who would be in love with his fiancée, on seeing a strange man come out of her bathroom as happens here, would knock the lights out of him and cause a huge scene. Not here. And Robert Taylor plays his part as if he were trying to channel Cary Grant half the time, not in speech inflections but in overall essence.

But the [[pire]] part of it is Shearer herself. For an [[actor]] used to parts which gave her a sense of intellectual sexiness and dramatic presence, playing Consuelo Craydon [[seem]] to put her into throes of [[finished]] over-acting, over-emoting, and over-gesturing which, while still a [[party]] of her style of acting and more appropriate ten years earlier, makes her look like an extremely mannered performer wrenching the joke out of a situation like water from a fairly dry sponge. It only [[flammable]] the fires that tell the theory which gives Irving Thalberg the maker of her career and chooser of (most of her) roles; why she passed on roles such as Charlotte Vale and Mrs. Miniver on mega-hits NOW VOYAGER and MRS. MINIVER is a mystery, but then again, most accounts also state that by this time she had just burnt out from acting, that she'd had lost interest in the whole thing altogether and it's no secret that anyone who has experienced this sort of thing has essentially lost focus and can't wait until retirement or the end of a contract is near to leave as soon as possible. Such could be the case here. She seems lost, she seems tired, she seems ill at ease, going through autopilot instead of living the part. After this film she would make no more, but would be responsible of discovering Janet Leigh who would come into her own as a screen star during the late 40s and into the 60s. --------------------------------------------- Result 1246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] OK, here is my personal list of top Nicktoons [[shows]] as in [[today]]:

1. All Grown Up/SpongeBob SquarePants

2. My Life as a Teenage Robot

3. Invader Zim

4. CATSCRATCH/Rugrats

Notice a word with only capital letters? That means this is the Nick [[show]] I'm going to talk about.

"Catscratch" is basically a [[simple]] but [[great]] animated comedy about three wealthy cats - Mr. Blik, Gordon, and Waffles - who get into weird and REALLY surreal situations, from attempting to join Human Kimberely's slumber party for root beer to saving a planet of slugs from the evil spaceship. This is one Nick show that you will simply have your funny bone tickled sooner or later! The theme song is catchy and memorable. Voice actors - including Wayne Knight from the "Seinfield" franchise - [[brings]] the characters to fresh life with very quirky personalities. The [[stories]] are [[enjoyable]] (fans' [[episodes]] [[would]] be "King of All Root Beer" and "Gordon's Lucky Claw"). And the [[humor]] is all done in some style of Earthworm Jim.

So in conclusion, "Catscratch" is one of the Nicktoons series, like "Invader Zim" and "MLAATR", which becomes very, very popular all over the world in just 3 seasons or less. OK, here is my personal list of top Nicktoons [[showcase]] as in [[hoy]]:

1. All Grown Up/SpongeBob SquarePants

2. My Life as a Teenage Robot

3. Invader Zim

4. CATSCRATCH/Rugrats

Notice a word with only capital letters? That means this is the Nick [[display]] I'm going to talk about.

"Catscratch" is basically a [[mere]] but [[awesome]] animated comedy about three wealthy cats - Mr. Blik, Gordon, and Waffles - who get into weird and REALLY surreal situations, from attempting to join Human Kimberely's slumber party for root beer to saving a planet of slugs from the evil spaceship. This is one Nick show that you will simply have your funny bone tickled sooner or later! The theme song is catchy and memorable. Voice actors - including Wayne Knight from the "Seinfield" franchise - [[poses]] the characters to fresh life with very quirky personalities. The [[tale]] are [[nice]] (fans' [[spells]] [[should]] be "King of All Root Beer" and "Gordon's Lucky Claw"). And the [[mood]] is all done in some style of Earthworm Jim.

So in conclusion, "Catscratch" is one of the Nicktoons series, like "Invader Zim" and "MLAATR", which becomes very, very popular all over the world in just 3 seasons or less. --------------------------------------------- Result 1247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] I have yet to read a negative [[professional]] [[review]] of this [[movie]]. I [[guess]] I must have missed something. The [[beginning]] is [[intriguing]], the three [[main]] [[characters]] meet late at [[night]] in an otherwise empty [[bar]] and [[entertain]] each other with invented [[stories]]. That's the best part. After the three go their separate [[ways]], the [[film]] splits into three [[threads]]. That's when boredom sets in. Certainly, the thread with the Felliniesque babushkas who make dolls out of chewed bread is at first an [[eye]] [[opening]] curiosity. Unfortunately, the [[director]] beat this one to death, even [[injecting]] a wild plot [[line]] that [[leads]] [[nowhere]] in [[particular]]. Bottom line: a two-hour plot-thin listlessness. If you suffer from [[insomnia]], [[view]] it in [[bed]] and you will have a [[good]] [[night]] sleep. I have yet to read a negative [[occupational]] [[reviews]] of this [[filmmaking]]. I [[suppose]] I must have missed something. The [[launches]] is [[captivating]], the three [[primary]] [[characteristics]] meet late at [[nighttime]] in an otherwise empty [[solicitors]] and [[distract]] each other with invented [[histories]]. That's the best part. After the three go their separate [[shapes]], the [[flick]] splits into three [[cords]]. That's when boredom sets in. Certainly, the thread with the Felliniesque babushkas who make dolls out of chewed bread is at first an [[eyeball]] [[opened]] curiosity. Unfortunately, the [[superintendent]] beat this one to death, even [[injection]] a wild plot [[linea]] that [[leeds]] [[everywhere]] in [[special]]. Bottom line: a two-hour plot-thin listlessness. If you suffer from [[drowsiness]], [[visualise]] it in [[bedside]] and you will have a [[alright]] [[nighttime]] sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 1248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[love]] John Saxon in [[anything]] he's in. The one time he takes over the camera though he directs a [[movie]] that should have more aptly been been [[titled]] "[[Please]] Do Not Watch This [[Movie]] Called: Zombie [[Death]] [[House]]". The $1000 [[dollar]] Shock Insurance Certificate is [[dear]] Fred Olen Ray's tricky way of making you [[spend]] 14 [[dollars]] on a [[filmed]] dump churned out by a [[major]] 70's cheese legend. [[Ray]] being the front man at RetroMedia. Ray by the way makes Charles Band look hotter than stucco [[ceilings]] on a Ford Falcon. [[Just]] plain [[bad]] now, the both of them- and [[boring]] besides. It's great that Ray is digging up this [[old]] stuff and in some cases it's public domain like the rest of the [[dollar]] video hucksters but in the case of Zombie Death House- (the word "Zombie" sloppily superimposed to add ownership and interest on the part of F.O.R.) THE [[ONLY]] [[WAY]] TO DO SERVICE TO THIS [[TRIPE]] IS TO [[RELEASE]] IT ON THE DOLLAR [[MARKET]] FOR THE CURIOUS COLLECTOR AND FANS OF SAXON!!! If you wanna see real Saxon, pick up Black [[Christmas]], Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] or The [[Glove]]. I [[iike]] John Saxon in [[something]] he's in. The one time he takes over the camera though he directs a [[filmmaking]] that should have more aptly been been [[entitled]] "[[Invite]] Do Not Watch This [[Filmmaking]] Called: Zombie [[Mortality]] [[Households]]". The $1000 [[usd]] Shock Insurance Certificate is [[sweetie]] Fred Olen Ray's tricky way of making you [[expended]] 14 [[usd]] on a [[shot]] dump churned out by a [[big]] 70's cheese legend. [[Gleam]] being the front man at RetroMedia. Ray by the way makes Charles Band look hotter than stucco [[ceiling]] on a Ford Falcon. [[Jen]] plain [[unfavourable]] now, the both of them- and [[dull]] besides. It's great that Ray is digging up this [[former]] stuff and in some cases it's public domain like the rest of the [[greenback]] video hucksters but in the case of Zombie Death House- (the word "Zombie" sloppily superimposed to add ownership and interest on the part of F.O.R.) THE [[JEN]] [[CAMINO]] TO DO SERVICE TO THIS [[GUT]] IS TO [[LIBERATED]] IT ON THE DOLLAR [[MERCADO]] FOR THE CURIOUS COLLECTOR AND FANS OF SAXON!!! If you wanna see real Saxon, pick up Black [[Navidad]], Nightmare on Elm [[Thoroughfare]] or The [[Gant]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Prix]] de Beauté was [[made]] on the cusp of the [[changeover]] from [[silence]] to [[sound]], which came a little later in Europe than in Hollywood. Originally [[conceived]] as a [[silent]], it was [[released]] with a [[dubbed]] soundtrack in France, with a French actress [[speaking]] Louise Brooks' lines, but was [[released]] as a [[silent]] in Italy and other parts of [[Europe]]. I was [[lucky]] [[enough]] to see the Cineteca di Bologna's [[flawless]] [[new]] [[restoration]] of an Italian silent [[print]] at the Tribeca [[Film]] [[Festival]]. I haven't [[seen]] the talkie version yet, but I [[think]] it's safe to [[assume]] the silent version is much more [[satisfying]], since by all reports the dubbing is poorly [[done]] ([[Louise]] [[Brooks]] is [[clearly]] [[speaking]] English, so there's no [[way]] her lips could be matched.) [[Also]], the [[film]] is made entirely in the [[silent]] style, with few titles and little [[need]] for [[dialogue]]. [[Prix]] [[de]] Beauté [[tells]] its [[story]] visually, with exciting, imaginative camera-work. The [[opening]] is instantly kinetic, with rapidly-cut scenes of urban life and swimmers [[splashing]] at a public beach. [[Throughout]] the [[film]] there is an [[emphasis]] on visual [[detail]], on [[clothing]], [[machinery]], [[decoration]], and symbolic [[images]] such as a caged bird, a heap of [[torn]] [[photographs]], a diamond [[bracelet]]. This is [[silent]] [[film]] [[technique]] at its pinnacle.

[[Louise]] Brooks, of course, is [[responsible]] for [[saving]] the [[film]] from obscurity. Seeing this makes it only more [[heartbreaking]] to reflect that this was her last starring role. Lustrously [[beautiful]], she [[dominates]] the [[film]] with her charisma and [[also]] [[gives]] a [[perfectly]] natural [[yet]] [[highly]] [[charged]] performance. [[Her]] role here, more than in the Pabst [[films]] for which she's best known, is a [[woman]] we can fully [[understand]] and sympathize with. She plays Lucienne Garnier, a [[typist]] with a possessive [[fiancé]], who [[yearns]] to [[get]] more out of [[life]] and secretly enters a beauty [[contest]], with immediate [[success]]. She is then torn between the excitement of her [[glamorous]] [[new]] [[life]] and her [[love]] for the [[man]] who insists she [[give]] it all up or [[lose]] him. All of the [[characters]] are drawn with [[nuance]]. The [[fiancé]] [[inspires]] pity and is not merely a brute: he [[loves]] Lucienne, but is a limited man who can't cope with her having a life [[apart]] from him or attracting the attentions of other [[men]]. Even the "other [[man]]" in the [[story]] is not the [[simple]] slimeball we first take him for, though his intentions may be just as possessive as the fiancé's.

*************************WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*****************

The film has many fine set pieces, including Lucienne's triumph in the "Miss Europe" contest, shown through the comic reactions of assorted audience members, who wind up pelting the heroine with flowers; her misery as a housewife, peeling potatoes while the pendulum of the cuckoo clock marks time behind her; a nightmarish trip to a fun-fair (in the silent version, this occurs late in the film, after her marriage) at which Lucienne, crushed among the low-lifes and depressed by her husband's macho antics, decides that she can't go on with her present existence; and especially the final scene in the projection room where she views her talkie screen test. Louise Brooks may never have looked more beautiful than she does here, with the projector's beam flickering on her alabaster profile, her shoulders swathed in white fur, her face incandescent under the black helmet of hair as she watches herself singing on screen. The double shot of her exquisite corpse and her still-living image on the screen is particularly poignant: Louise Brooks' image, like Lucienne's, remains immortal despite her frustratingly aborted film career. [[Price]] de Beauté was [[introduced]] on the cusp of the [[transition]] from [[silencer]] to [[audible]], which came a little later in Europe than in Hollywood. Originally [[destined]] as a [[silencer]], it was [[liberated]] with a [[nicknamed]] soundtrack in France, with a French actress [[talking]] Louise Brooks' lines, but was [[liberated]] as a [[speechless]] in Italy and other parts of [[Europa]]. I was [[fortunate]] [[adequately]] to see the Cineteca di Bologna's [[faultless]] [[nouveau]] [[renovations]] of an Italian silent [[printouts]] at the Tribeca [[Movie]] [[Fest]]. I haven't [[noticed]] the talkie version yet, but I [[thought]] it's safe to [[assumes]] the silent version is much more [[satisfactory]], since by all reports the dubbing is poorly [[accomplished]] ([[Lewis]] [[Creeks]] is [[plainly]] [[talking]] English, so there's no [[ways]] her lips could be matched.) [[Additionally]], the [[movies]] is made entirely in the [[speechless]] style, with few titles and little [[gotta]] for [[dialogues]]. [[Prices]] [[of]] Beauté [[told]] its [[narratives]] visually, with exciting, imaginative camera-work. The [[commencement]] is instantly kinetic, with rapidly-cut scenes of urban life and swimmers [[splash]] at a public beach. [[Across]] the [[movie]] there is an [[concentrate]] on visual [[details]], on [[dresses]], [[machines]], [[decorations]], and symbolic [[photographing]] such as a caged bird, a heap of [[ripped]] [[visuals]], a diamond [[wrist]]. This is [[mute]] [[movies]] [[tech]] at its pinnacle.

[[Lewis]] Brooks, of course, is [[liable]] for [[save]] the [[cinematography]] from obscurity. Seeing this makes it only more [[upsetting]] to reflect that this was her last starring role. Lustrously [[handsome]], she [[dominate]] the [[movies]] with her charisma and [[additionally]] [[donne]] a [[fully]] natural [[however]] [[incredibly]] [[blamed]] performance. [[His]] role here, more than in the Pabst [[movie]] for which she's best known, is a [[women]] we can fully [[understood]] and sympathize with. She plays Lucienne Garnier, a [[typewritten]] with a possessive [[fiancée]], who [[longs]] to [[obtain]] more out of [[vie]] and secretly enters a beauty [[competitions]], with immediate [[accomplishments]]. She is then torn between the excitement of her [[admirable]] [[novel]] [[vie]] and her [[loves]] for the [[hombre]] who insists she [[lend]] it all up or [[wasting]] him. All of the [[features]] are drawn with [[undertone]]. The [[fiancée]] [[inspiring]] pity and is not merely a brute: he [[likes]] Lucienne, but is a limited man who can't cope with her having a life [[additionally]] from him or attracting the attentions of other [[males]]. Even the "other [[guy]]" in the [[storytelling]] is not the [[easy]] slimeball we first take him for, though his intentions may be just as possessive as the fiancé's.

*************************WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*****************

The film has many fine set pieces, including Lucienne's triumph in the "Miss Europe" contest, shown through the comic reactions of assorted audience members, who wind up pelting the heroine with flowers; her misery as a housewife, peeling potatoes while the pendulum of the cuckoo clock marks time behind her; a nightmarish trip to a fun-fair (in the silent version, this occurs late in the film, after her marriage) at which Lucienne, crushed among the low-lifes and depressed by her husband's macho antics, decides that she can't go on with her present existence; and especially the final scene in the projection room where she views her talkie screen test. Louise Brooks may never have looked more beautiful than she does here, with the projector's beam flickering on her alabaster profile, her shoulders swathed in white fur, her face incandescent under the black helmet of hair as she watches herself singing on screen. The double shot of her exquisite corpse and her still-living image on the screen is particularly poignant: Louise Brooks' image, like Lucienne's, remains immortal despite her frustratingly aborted film career. --------------------------------------------- Result 1250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Even though this was a disaster in the box office, It is my favorite film. It gives a powerful message of family. It has a lot of violence and has one song with a bunch of girls in bikinis. Compared to other bollywood films, the action scenes in this movie are more realistic. It is an incredible combination of Akshay Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan. If you want to see the Indian Godfather, Amitabh portrays that in this film. Don't read reviews by critic, they're just ignorant. This movie has good mix of comedy, romance, drama, and especially action. So if you want to see action more realistic than Main Hoon Na(still good movie), this is the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I have [[absolutely]] no [[knowledge]] of [[author]] Phillipa [[Pearce]] or any of her novels and if TOM`S MIDNIGHT [[GARDEN]] is [[typical]] of her work I probably would have had little interest in her [[books]] as a [[child]] . When I was a child I wasn`t [[really]] interested in litreture unless it had [[soldiers]] fighting [[monsters]] complete with a [[high]] [[body]] count

Judging by this film version of TOM`S MIDNIGHT GARDEN I guess Pearce writes for lower middle [[class]] kids since much of the [[story]] of revolves around protagonist Tom [[Long]] moving to a [[house]] with no garden then suddenly [[finding]] a metaphysical one . Having a [[garden]] of your own was no doubt something that [[working]] [[class]] people didn`t have in the 1950s so I guess there`s some political class ridden [[subtext]] there [[somewhere]] . There`s also a romance [[involving]] a [[young]] [[girl]] called [[Hattie]] but again are cynical kids amoured by [[love]] [[stories]] ? [[Perhaps]] the [[worst]] [[criticism]] is that very [[little]] in the [[way]] of excitement or adventure happens within the [[narrative]]

This is a childrens film that seems dated by its [[source]] . It`s [[inoffensive]] but I`m surprised by its high [[rating]] by the IMDB [[voters]] . I wonder how many of them would have given it so [[many]] high marks if they were 10 [[year]] [[olds]] who`d just [[seen]] the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy ? I have [[wholly]] no [[acquaintances]] of [[auteur]] Phillipa [[Pierce]] or any of her novels and if TOM`S MIDNIGHT [[GARDENS]] is [[classic]] of her work I probably would have had little interest in her [[ledger]] as a [[kid]] . When I was a child I wasn`t [[truly]] interested in litreture unless it had [[servicemen]] fighting [[monster]] complete with a [[highest]] [[agencies]] count

Judging by this film version of TOM`S MIDNIGHT GARDEN I guess Pearce writes for lower middle [[kinds]] kids since much of the [[histories]] of revolves around protagonist Tom [[Protracted]] moving to a [[homes]] with no garden then suddenly [[conclusion]] a metaphysical one . Having a [[gardens]] of your own was no doubt something that [[work]] [[sorts]] people didn`t have in the 1950s so I guess there`s some political class ridden [[connotation]] there [[somehow]] . There`s also a romance [[encompassing]] a [[youthful]] [[daughters]] called [[Bessie]] but again are cynical kids amoured by [[amore]] [[storytelling]] ? [[Presumably]] the [[meanest]] [[critic]] is that very [[small]] in the [[routing]] of excitement or adventure happens within the [[descriptive]]

This is a childrens film that seems dated by its [[origin]] . It`s [[benign]] but I`m surprised by its high [[scoring]] by the IMDB [[constituents]] . I wonder how many of them would have given it so [[countless]] high marks if they were 10 [[annum]] [[years]] who`d just [[noticed]] the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy ? --------------------------------------------- Result 1252 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surely one of the best British films ever made, if not one of the best films ever made anywhere. Script, cinematography, direction and acting in a class on their own. This film works on so many levels. So why is it completely unavailable on tape, DVD. Never shown on TV? Why is it hidden away when it is regularly shown at the National Film Theatre in London to packed houses? --------------------------------------------- Result 1253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Shock Corridor (1963)' was my first film from Samuel Fuller, and there I was impressed with the director's astute blending of B-movie and big-budget aesthetics, even if the story itself was pure schlock. 'Pickup on South Street (1953)' was released a decade earlier in Fuller's career, obviously produced on a larger budget from a big-name studio, Twentieth Century-Fox. Nevertheless, the visuals are still notable in that there's a somewhat raw, naturalistic element to the photography, not unlike Dassin's 'The Night and the City (1950)' and Kazan's 'Panic in the Streets (1950)' {the latter was also shot by cinematographer Joe McDonald}. In some scenes, Fuller shoves the camera so close to his actors' faces that they're out of focus, bluntly registering the intimate thoughts, emotions and brief inflections that are communicated through that most revealing of facial features, the eye. Though (unexpectedly) prone to melodrama, and with just a hint of anti-Communist propaganda, 'Pickup on South Street' is a strong film noir that succeeds most outstandingly in its evocation of setting – the underground of New York City.

When just-out-of-prison pickpocket Skip McCoy (Richard Widmark) snags the purse of a woman on the subway (Jean Peters), he pockets more than he'd originally bargained for. The woman, Candy, and her cowardly ex-boyfriend Joey (Richard Kiley) had been smuggling top-secret information to the Communists, and McKoy has unexpectedly retrieved an important roll of micro-film. Will he turn in the MacGuffin to the proper authorities, or sell it to the highest bidder? If 'Pickup on South Street' has a flaw, it's that the story seems designed solely to bolster an anti-Communist agenda, reeking of propaganda like nothing since WWII {Dwight Taylor, who supplied the story, also notably wrote 'The Thin Man Goes Home (1944),' the only propagandistic movie of the series}. For no apparent reason, every identifiable character – even the smugly self-serving Skip McCoy – eventually becomes a self-sacrificing patriot, the transformation predictable from the outset. In traditional film noir, the unapologetic criminal always gets his comeuppance, the rational punishment for his sins, but apparently not when they've served their country; patriotism wipes the slate clean.

Richard Widmark, an actor who I'm really beginning to like, plays the haughty pickpocket with composure, though always with that hint of ill-ease that suggests he's biting off more than he can chew. The opening scene on the train is the film's finest, as McCoy breathlessly and silently fishes around in his victim's hand bag, recalling Bresson's 'Pickpocket (1959).' Thelma Ritter is terrific as a tired street-woman who'll peddle information to anybody willing to pay for it (though, of course, she draws the line at Commies). Jean Peters is well-cast as the trashy dame passing information to the other side, playing the role almost completely devoid of glamour; Fuller reportedly cast the actress on the observation that she had the slightly bow-legged strut of a prostitute. Nevertheless, Peters must suffer a contrived love affair with Widmark that really brings down the film's attempts at realism. Fascinatingly, upon its release, 'Pickup on South Street' was promptly condemned as Communist propaganda by the FBI, and the Communist Party condemned it for being the exact opposite. Go figure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very entertaining flick, considering the budget and its length. The storyline is hardly ever touched on in the movie world so it also brought a sense of novelty. The acting was great (P'z to Dom) and the cinematography was also very well done. I recommend this movie for anyone who's into thrillers, it will not disappoint you! --------------------------------------------- Result 1255 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Actress]] [[Ruth]] Roman's real-life [[philanthropic]] gesture to help entertain troops arriving from and leaving for the Korean [[War]] at an air [[base]] near [[San]] [[Francisco]] jump-started this all-star [[Warner]] Bros. [[salute]] to patriotism and song. Many celebrities [[make]] [[guest]] appearances while a love-hate romance develops between a budding starlet and a painfully green and [[skinny]] Air Force Corporal (Ron Hagerthy, who [[looks]] like he should be delivering newspapers from his bicycle). Seems the [[Corporal]] has [[fooled]] the actress into thinking he's off to battle when [[actually]] he's part of a airplane carrier crew, flying to and from Honolulu (you'd think she'd be happy he was staying out of harm's way, but instead she acts just like most childish females in 1950s movies). Doris Day is around for the first thirty minutes or so, and her distinct laugh and [[plucky]] song numbers are most pleasant. [[Roman]] is also here, [[looking]] glamorous, while James Cagney pokes [[fun]] at his screen persona and Gordon MacRae [[sings]] in his handsome baritone. Jane Wyman sings, too, in a [[hospital]] bedside reprise following Doris Day's lead, [[causing]] one to wonder, "Did they [[run]] out of sets?" [[For]] undemanding [[viewers]], an interesting flashback to another time and place. [[Still]], the low-rent production and just-adequate technical [[aspects]] [[render]] "Starlift" strictly a second-biller. *1/2 from **** [[Actor]] [[Roth]] Roman's real-life [[charities]] gesture to help entertain troops arriving from and leaving for the Korean [[Warfare]] at an air [[foundations]] near [[Saint]] [[Francesco]] jump-started this all-star [[Werner]] Bros. [[applaud]] to patriotism and song. Many celebrities [[deliver]] [[invited]] appearances while a love-hate romance develops between a budding starlet and a painfully green and [[delgado]] Air Force Corporal (Ron Hagerthy, who [[seems]] like he should be delivering newspapers from his bicycle). Seems the [[Physical]] has [[tricked]] the actress into thinking he's off to battle when [[genuinely]] he's part of a airplane carrier crew, flying to and from Honolulu (you'd think she'd be happy he was staying out of harm's way, but instead she acts just like most childish females in 1950s movies). Doris Day is around for the first thirty minutes or so, and her distinct laugh and [[gallant]] song numbers are most pleasant. [[Romans]] is also here, [[researching]] glamorous, while James Cagney pokes [[funny]] at his screen persona and Gordon MacRae [[sung]] in his handsome baritone. Jane Wyman sings, too, in a [[hospitals]] bedside reprise following Doris Day's lead, [[provoking]] one to wonder, "Did they [[execute]] out of sets?" [[During]] undemanding [[spectators]], an interesting flashback to another time and place. [[However]], the low-rent production and just-adequate technical [[things]] [[rendered]] "Starlift" strictly a second-biller. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I have seen the freebird movie and [[think]] its great! its laid back fun, about time the British film industry came through with something entertaining!! its good how the guy who met them at the service station gets mentioned way into the film in the news agents, nice touch. The acting was convincing (i am a biker) they [[reminded]] me of some good times i have had in the bike scene. It was good to see the film director getting in on the acting, well [[done]] [[jon]] ! [[At]] the [[end]] a new [[crop]] gets [[mentioned]], in [[Ireland]] is this the [[foundation]] for a 2nd film? [[hope]] so keep them coming. Great film , well written, realistic characters ! I have seen the freebird movie and [[thinking]] its great! its laid back fun, about time the British film industry came through with something entertaining!! its good how the guy who met them at the service station gets mentioned way into the film in the news agents, nice touch. The acting was convincing (i am a biker) they [[recalled]] me of some good times i have had in the bike scene. It was good to see the film director getting in on the acting, well [[played]] [[john]] ! [[In]] the [[termination]] a new [[cultivation]] gets [[talked]], in [[Norte]] is this the [[groundwork]] for a 2nd film? [[amal]] so keep them coming. Great film , well written, realistic characters ! --------------------------------------------- Result 1257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] With these people faking so many shots, using old footage, and gassing animals to get them out, not to mention that some of the scenes were filmed on a created set with actors, what's to believe? Old film of countries is nice, but the animal abuse and degradation of natives is painful to watch in these films. I know, racism is OK in these old films, but there is more to that to make this couple lose credibility. Portrayed as fliers, they never flew their planes, Martin Johnson was an ex-vaudevillian, used friends like Jack London for financial gain while stiffing them of royalties, denying his wife's apparent depression, using her as a cute prop, all this makes these films unbearable. They were by no means the first to travel to these lands, or the first to write about them. He was OK as a filmmaker and photographer, but that's about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the most excellent movies ever produced in Russia and certainly the best one made during the decline of the USSR. Incredibly clever, hilarious and dramatic at the same time. Superb acting. Overall a masterpiece. Score it 10/10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1259 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Banned]] as a 'Video Nasty' in the UK, Unhinged has [[naturally]] gained [[quite]] a bit of [[notoriety]]. However, the most [[shocking]] [[thing]] I [[found]] about the [[film]] was its amateurishness in all departments. The bloodletting I [[could]] handle: the [[terrible]] acting, shoddy editing, [[awful]] direction, lousy [[script]] and [[abysmal]] soundtrack were much harder to take.

Three [[girls]] on their [[way]] to a [[music]] [[festival]] [[crash]] into a [[ravine]] during a [[storm]]. They are rescued by a [[friendly]] stranger who [[takes]] them to a [[nearby]] [[house]]. The owner of the [[house]], a batty [[old]] [[lady]], and her spinster [[daughter]], welcome the girls in, [[allowing]] them to stay for a few days in [[order]] to recuperate. However, [[someone]] doesn't [[want]] the [[girls]] to [[leave]]—ever! One by one they [[fall]] victim to an [[unseen]] assailant.

Taking a long [[time]] to get going and [[featuring]] some of the [[worst]] performances ever in a horror [[film]] (and that takes some doing), Unhinged is a [[truly]] [[awful]] film. The [[music]] is a [[total]] [[mess]] (it [[sounds]] like a three year [[old]] has been [[let]] [[loose]] on a synthesiser) and as such, it complements the movie [[perfectly]]. [[Only]] a [[couple]] of [[bloody]] scenes [[towards]] the [[end]] and a [[bit]] of gratuitous nudity save Unhinged from getting the lowest [[possible]] score.

[[If]] you are a horror completist (and [[unfortunately]], I am), you will want to [[see]] this in [[order]] to tick it off the [[Video]] Nasty watch-list. But be [[warned]]—it is really, [[really]] [[bad]]. [[Banished]] as a 'Video Nasty' in the UK, Unhinged has [[understandably]] gained [[pretty]] a bit of [[reputation]]. However, the most [[outrageous]] [[stuff]] I [[unearthed]] about the [[filmmaking]] was its amateurishness in all departments. The bloodletting I [[did]] handle: the [[scary]] acting, shoddy editing, [[terrible]] direction, lousy [[hyphen]] and [[gruesome]] soundtrack were much harder to take.

Three [[dame]] on their [[routing]] to a [[musicians]] [[feast]] [[crashes]] into a [[cliff]] during a [[tempest]]. They are rescued by a [[friendship]] stranger who [[pick]] them to a [[neighbour]] [[maison]]. The owner of the [[household]], a batty [[former]] [[ladies]], and her spinster [[girl]], welcome the girls in, [[let]] them to stay for a few days in [[edict]] to recuperate. However, [[anybody]] doesn't [[wanna]] the [[girl]] to [[walkout]]—ever! One by one they [[fell]] victim to an [[invisible]] assailant.

Taking a long [[times]] to get going and [[starring]] some of the [[hardest]] performances ever in a horror [[filmmaking]] (and that takes some doing), Unhinged is a [[honestly]] [[shocking]] film. The [[musica]] is a [[unmitigated]] [[disarray]] (it [[noises]] like a three year [[former]] has been [[leave]] [[slack]] on a synthesiser) and as such, it complements the movie [[fully]]. [[Purely]] a [[coupling]] of [[homicidal]] scenes [[into]] the [[terminate]] and a [[bitten]] of gratuitous nudity save Unhinged from getting the lowest [[probable]] score.

[[Though]] you are a horror completist (and [[regretfully]], I am), you will want to [[consults]] this in [[edict]] to tick it off the [[Videos]] Nasty watch-list. But be [[alerted]]—it is really, [[truly]] [[wicked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's really unfortunate that most people outside of Canada think that the only things that Canada produces are snow, mounties and hockey players. This film is the second superlative Canadian film I have seen within the past few weeks (the first was "The Red Violin"), far better than all but the best Hollywood efforts.

Gustad Noble is anything but that; he is a middle-aged Parsi bank employee in Bombay in the 1970s. This film sensitively explores various things that happen to him concerning his family, his friends and his work, and their effect on him. At the same time, it is a fascinating, and, I would assume, accurate, portrayal of middle-class, urban life in India at the time.

However, I was somewhat prepared for this, having read Rohinton Mistry's book a few years ago. The film, as might be expected, cannot capture all the complexities of the book, but, if you want to read a really good book, and see a really good film, read and see "Such a Long Journey". --------------------------------------------- Result 1261 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A so common horror story about a luxury building at Brooklyn which [[hides]] the [[gates]] to [[hell]]. It is reminiscent of Polanski's "The Tenant" (released a year before "The sentinel"), but is too far from the [[movie]] of the polish filmmaker in any aspect [[possible]]. "The tenant" was so disturbing, whereas "The sentinel" is not at all.

What it's more [[surprising]] from this film is the cast: it is full of [[great]] [[names]] of American [[cinema]] (Burguess, Gardner, Wallach), veteran actors acting for food (I guess).

Verdict: barely [[entertaining]].

*My rate: 4/10 A so common horror story about a luxury building at Brooklyn which [[concealment]] the [[floodgates]] to [[bordello]]. It is reminiscent of Polanski's "The Tenant" (released a year before "The sentinel"), but is too far from the [[cinematographic]] of the polish filmmaker in any aspect [[conceivable]]. "The tenant" was so disturbing, whereas "The sentinel" is not at all.

What it's more [[staggering]] from this film is the cast: it is full of [[resplendent]] [[naming]] of American [[filmmaking]] (Burguess, Gardner, Wallach), veteran actors acting for food (I guess).

Verdict: barely [[droll]].

*My rate: 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1262 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm one of those people who usually watch programs and keep my feelings about a show private. However, Pushing Daisies is my exception. I became curious about the program from the commercials that aired which gave glimpses of the premise of the show. I was skeptical about it at first, especially after the finale of Six Feet Under was still in my head. Here we go again, I thought. I watched the first, second, third and all the other episodes. Wow! First of all, I thought it took the subject of death and presented in a way that was palatable without being morbid. The characters were engaging and I like the thought of Ned the main character not being able to literally touch the love of his life, Chuck without the consequences of her dying.

Most of the characters have a longing for things they can't have. Besides Ned and Chuck, Olive longs for Ned. Lily and Vivian longs for their niece Chuck and Emerson is always longing for the monetary rewards from the mysterious deaths they solve. I think the characters are picture perfect and believable. I like how Emerson who is black plays off of the rest of the characters since as an African American; I like the subtle cultural humor that sometimes comes from him.

All in all, this visual fairytale is one of the most valuable pieces of entertainment that I've seen out of the 2007 season. I think the show has enough romance for the romantics and enough who-done-it for the mystery buffs. I just wish the writers would get back to work, so that the show can continue to evolve. --------------------------------------------- Result 1263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I even watched this was because I found it at my local library (and will berate them mercilessly for having wasted public monies on it), and despite the plethora of tits and ass, it didn't take long to realize that the fast-forward button was my friend. Terrible direction, pedestrian camera work, sporadically bad-to-nearly-passable acting, chintzy effects, and one of the worst screenplays I've had the displeasure of seeing brought to life (such as it was, horribly crippled and mutilated) in a long, long time. Best laughs actually come from the "Making of..." featurette, in which the poor saps involved with this HDV mess attempt to justify their lame efforts as if they had been working on something special, instead of something that won't be utterly forgotten next week. Wait! Except for the fact that somehow someone lured Tippi "The Birds" Hedren, of all people, into doing a bit part, along with Kane "Friday the 13th" Hodder! How this came to pass, I'll never know, and to be honest, I don't really care. Watch at your own risk, and don't say you haven't been warned. This is film-making at its pretentious, craven worst. It only gets a 2 from me for having some good-looking naked women, and even then, just barely. --------------------------------------------- Result 1264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Wow this was a [[great]] [[Italian]] "[[ZOMBIE]]" movie by two great director's Luci Fulci ("ZOMBIE") and Bruno Mattie ("HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD") Lucio started this movie and was [[ill]] so the great Bruno [[took]] over and it turned out [[surprisingly]] better than I expected it to turn out so if you have [[seen]] "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD" directed by Bruno Mattie and if you saw "ZOMBIE" directed by Lucio Fulci and liked both or one of theme then this is a movie you [[must]] watch it has great "ZOMBIE" make-up witch equals great looking "ZOMBIES" has a funny "ZOMBIE" flying head!And "ZOMBIE" birds that spit acid at you and turns you into a "ZOMBIE" (That Only Happed To Two People) but they are mainly just the great toxic "ZOMBIES" like in Bruno Matties "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD".So if you like Italian "ZOMBIE" movies or just "ZOMBIE" movie's in general than check this one out its a [[great]] Italian "ZOMBIE" movie! Wow this was a [[wondrous]] [[Ltalian]] "[[GHOUL]]" movie by two great director's Luci Fulci ("ZOMBIE") and Bruno Mattie ("HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD") Lucio started this movie and was [[indisposed]] so the great Bruno [[taken]] over and it turned out [[unbelievably]] better than I expected it to turn out so if you have [[watched]] "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD" directed by Bruno Mattie and if you saw "ZOMBIE" directed by Lucio Fulci and liked both or one of theme then this is a movie you [[ought]] watch it has great "ZOMBIE" make-up witch equals great looking "ZOMBIES" has a funny "ZOMBIE" flying head!And "ZOMBIE" birds that spit acid at you and turns you into a "ZOMBIE" (That Only Happed To Two People) but they are mainly just the great toxic "ZOMBIES" like in Bruno Matties "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD".So if you like Italian "ZOMBIE" movies or just "ZOMBIE" movie's in general than check this one out its a [[wondrous]] Italian "ZOMBIE" movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1265 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I've watched a bunch of episodes of Cold [[Case]] since its premiered ([[especially]] now that it [[immediately]] follows The [[Amazing]] [[Race]], but this was one of the [[best]] [[instances]] of writing and acting I've [[seen]] from the [[house]] of Bruckheimer. The casting, [[especially]] of the [[younger]] [[officers]], was [[spot]] on, and the script and [[editing]], the soundtrack, and the acting made this episode a [[tour]] d'force. [[If]] I were the [[producers]] I would submit this episode for Emmy consideration. It amazing how [[complete]] a [[portrait]] was made of Coop and [[Jimmy]] [[within]] the confines of s 48 minute episode; that takes a lot of talented people doing their [[best]]. I [[hope]] there's is [[advance]] [[warning]] of when this episode is repeated, because I'm sure I'll [[notice]] a [[lot]] that I did not [[notice]] the [[first]] [[time]] [[around]]. I've watched a bunch of episodes of Cold [[Lawsuit]] since its premiered ([[specially]] now that it [[directly]] follows The [[Wondrous]] [[Racing]], but this was one of the [[bestest]] [[situations]] of writing and acting I've [[watched]] from the [[housing]] of Bruckheimer. The casting, [[mostly]] of the [[youngest]] [[officer]], was [[staining]] on, and the script and [[edited]], the soundtrack, and the acting made this episode a [[trip]] d'force. [[Unless]] I were the [[manufacturers]] I would submit this episode for Emmy consideration. It amazing how [[finish]] a [[depiction]] was made of Coop and [[Jimbo]] [[inside]] the confines of s 48 minute episode; that takes a lot of talented people doing their [[bestest]]. I [[hopes]] there's is [[advancement]] [[warnings]] of when this episode is repeated, because I'm sure I'll [[notification]] a [[batch]] that I did not [[avis]] the [[fiirst]] [[moment]] [[about]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1266 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This [[movie]] [[features]] a [[gorgeous]] [[brunette]] named [[Danielle]] [[Petty]]. She has [[stunning]] green [[eyes]], and is in the first few scenes and the [[last]] scene. She is the only thing about this [[movie]] that is not repulsive. She may not have a [[future]] as an [[actress]], because this [[kind]] of [[movie]] is the kind of [[offensive]] [[disaster]] that kills [[careers]].

The [[movie]] itself has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] to [[recommend]] it. It is not a good horror [[film]], or a good [[fake]] journalistic [[report]], or remotely well done. There is no [[skill]] [[apparent]] in it's production. It is like a [[bad]] student film. The story's horrific elements do not make you [[sick]], it is the fact that it is so poorly done that makes you sick. I would [[give]] this [[movie]] [[ZERO]] stars if I [[could]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[idiosyncrasies]] a [[sumptuous]] [[chestnut]] named [[Daniel]] [[Inconsequential]]. She has [[astounding]] green [[eye]], and is in the first few scenes and the [[final]] scene. She is the only thing about this [[film]] that is not repulsive. She may not have a [[futur]] as an [[actor]], because this [[genre]] of [[filmmaking]] is the kind of [[insulting]] [[disasters]] that kills [[carrera]].

The [[film]] itself has [[fully]] [[anything]] to [[recommendations]] it. It is not a good horror [[filmmaking]], or a good [[fakes]] journalistic [[reports]], or remotely well done. There is no [[aptitude]] [[blatant]] in it's production. It is like a [[negative]] student film. The story's horrific elements do not make you [[unwell]], it is the fact that it is so poorly done that makes you sick. I would [[confer]] this [[film]] [[ZILCH]] stars if I [[would]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Hal Hartley's Henry [[Fool]] was an independent [[film]] masterpiece and [[certainly]] his [[best]] [[work]]. It has [[immense]] [[character]] depth, subtle, complicated [[dialogue]], and an [[excellent]], emotional ending which captivates. I [[remember]] pausing it [[several]] [[times]] during my [[first]] [[viewing]] to absorb what I was [[seeing]] and feeling. Henry [[Fool]] was a [[complete]] [[movie]] from [[start]] to [[finish]], and [[needed]] no sequel.

[[Thus]] I was [[surprised]] when I heard about Fay Grim. Fay was not one of the main characters of the first [[film]] and seemed to exist more as the troubling imposition of real-world [[vanity]] and [[ignorance]] for her brother [[Simon]] to be forced to [[deal]] with as he [[matures]]. In her own [[movie]], Fay matures herself, though her maturity takes a very [[different]] road. Simon went from near autistic isolation to a merely somewhat-introverted genius. Fay starts her adult [[journey]] as an immature, utterly normal, spoiled child and responds to the onslaught of ridiculous circumstances by becoming a mature, utterly normal, experienced adult who holds no advantages. She deals with problems the way any human does, with determination, a little thought, and weary disdain. While Simon learned to control his mind, Fay learns to control her emotion.

The movie [[contains]] several [[fondly]] remembered elements of its prequel, but differs vastly in tone for most of the film. Henry fool showed you a [[harsh]], boring, ignorant world which contrasted with Simon's inner passion and creativity. In Fay Grim, the world is a lively, crazy, emotional place which shows the silliness of her young life, and through [[contrast]] unearths the [[inner]] wise woman which had not been [[previously]] developed or [[nurtured]] by her similarly weak mother.

The movie is in two parts, the first dealing with the beginning of Fay's struggle and subsequent hardening due to authoritarian hostility, and the second dealing with her battle to soften only just enough to regain Henry. At [[first]], fans of [[Henry]] [[Fool]] may [[find]] themselves [[wondering]] how the [[movie]] can [[even]] be considered a sequel, and thinking it is profane to follow such an [[intense]] [[film]] with spy game antics and [[physical]] [[comedy]]. But this is where the subtlety of Fay [[Grim]] lies. The sequel is about Fay's journey, and as I said before, hers is one of finding the life-giving sanity in chaos, not the creative [[chaos]] in staid order. Parker Posey is an [[excellent]] actress who [[captures]] Hal Hartley's tongue in cheek humor perfectly. Elina Löwensohn perhaps eclipses her in emotional commitment to the role, allowing Parker to play both straight man and comic against the lively, stage-like comedy happening around her.

With the entrance of Henry into the picture, the movie begins to take a sobering turn. Hal Hartley's movies are all plays, and every play must come full circle. By the end, you are shown Fay's newly developed character and integrity are the offspring of her time with the fatally intense Henry, whose piercing honesty and unique passion lights a spark in anyone he meets.

Fay Grim is an excellent movie which does not surpass Henry Fool, but shows through Hal's range that the nuances of his art are the proof of his genius.

Honestly, I think anyone who bashes this movie not only missed the point by a mile (and especially the subtlety in Parker Posey's acting), but could not have been much interested the movie Henry Fool. Hal Hartley's Henry [[Schmuck]] was an independent [[cinematography]] masterpiece and [[surely]] his [[better]] [[collaborate]]. It has [[considerable]] [[traits]] depth, subtle, complicated [[discussions]], and an [[brilliant]], emotional ending which captivates. I [[recalling]] pausing it [[diverse]] [[moments]] during my [[frst]] [[opinion]] to absorb what I was [[witnessing]] and feeling. Henry [[Butthead]] was a [[finished]] [[cinematography]] from [[begin]] to [[conclude]], and [[needs]] no sequel.

[[Thereby]] I was [[horrified]] when I heard about Fay Grim. Fay was not one of the main characters of the first [[movie]] and seemed to exist more as the troubling imposition of real-world [[courtesy]] and [[ignorant]] for her brother [[Simeon]] to be forced to [[address]] with as he [[evolves]]. In her own [[cinema]], Fay matures herself, though her maturity takes a very [[multiple]] road. Simon went from near autistic isolation to a merely somewhat-introverted genius. Fay starts her adult [[voyages]] as an immature, utterly normal, spoiled child and responds to the onslaught of ridiculous circumstances by becoming a mature, utterly normal, experienced adult who holds no advantages. She deals with problems the way any human does, with determination, a little thought, and weary disdain. While Simon learned to control his mind, Fay learns to control her emotion.

The movie [[therein]] several [[affectionately]] remembered elements of its prequel, but differs vastly in tone for most of the film. Henry fool showed you a [[stiff]], boring, ignorant world which contrasted with Simon's inner passion and creativity. In Fay Grim, the world is a lively, crazy, emotional place which shows the silliness of her young life, and through [[rematch]] unearths the [[interior]] wise woman which had not been [[beforehand]] developed or [[cultivating]] by her similarly weak mother.

The movie is in two parts, the first dealing with the beginning of Fay's struggle and subsequent hardening due to authoritarian hostility, and the second dealing with her battle to soften only just enough to regain Henry. At [[outset]], fans of [[Gregg]] [[Butthead]] may [[unearthed]] themselves [[demand]] how the [[cinematic]] can [[yet]] be considered a sequel, and thinking it is profane to follow such an [[intensive]] [[cinematography]] with spy game antics and [[bodily]] [[charade]]. But this is where the subtlety of Fay [[Dismal]] lies. The sequel is about Fay's journey, and as I said before, hers is one of finding the life-giving sanity in chaos, not the creative [[disarray]] in staid order. Parker Posey is an [[magnifique]] actress who [[apprehended]] Hal Hartley's tongue in cheek humor perfectly. Elina Löwensohn perhaps eclipses her in emotional commitment to the role, allowing Parker to play both straight man and comic against the lively, stage-like comedy happening around her.

With the entrance of Henry into the picture, the movie begins to take a sobering turn. Hal Hartley's movies are all plays, and every play must come full circle. By the end, you are shown Fay's newly developed character and integrity are the offspring of her time with the fatally intense Henry, whose piercing honesty and unique passion lights a spark in anyone he meets.

Fay Grim is an excellent movie which does not surpass Henry Fool, but shows through Hal's range that the nuances of his art are the proof of his genius.

Honestly, I think anyone who bashes this movie not only missed the point by a mile (and especially the subtlety in Parker Posey's acting), but could not have been much interested the movie Henry Fool. --------------------------------------------- Result 1268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I should preface this by stating that I am a Dolph Lundgren fan. The man turns out some of the funniest action clichés imaginable and Detention is probably my personal favorite. *Spoiler* even though there is no such thing as a Dolph spoiler since the scripts are so absurd to begin with: a chase scene with a handicapped kid carrying a pistol versus a guy on a Harley with a sub-machine gun, through a high school hallway and the kid wins? Good game, the Oscar goes to Detention. Dolph, if you're reading this, thanks for the laughs, old friend.

In summary: Terrific movie that is a guaranteed laugh. I recommend inviting some friends over for this and forcing them to sit through it. Hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 1269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film has great acting, great photography and a very strong story line that really makes you think about who you are, how you define yourself, how you fit in, whether you accept to play a role or break free... There already are excellent comments dealing with these aspects. I want to comment on the formal setting of the film. Basically, it's two people on a roof. There is unity of place and time, with 2 protagonists, and the radio acting as the choir. Many directors have turned Greek tragedies into film, many directors have filmed contemporary stories as if they were a Greek tragedy, but no director, in my opinion, has succeeded as admirably as Ettore Scola in approaching the purity and force of the great Greek tragedies both in story line and formal setting. A masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 1270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Slow]] and nice [[images]] changed one another, with sometimes [[annoying]] [[music]] (you know Bjork) in background, for the first 75% of the movie. [[If]] you did not have enough sleep, that's a good [[time]].

But, in the [[last]] 20% of the movie director decides to [[bring]] idea of re-birth, re-incarnation or else, through S&M [[images]]: "[[spiritual]] lovers" are cutting each others bodies with knives. For me it was very much [[disturbing]] and actually changed general impression of blend of [[abstract]] [[art]] and images of [[modern]] Japanese [[mystery]].

Operator and [[director]] are [[great]], but weird.

[[Did]] not [[enjoy]] it at all. [[Lento]] and nice [[picture]] changed one another, with sometimes [[vexing]] [[musicians]] (you know Bjork) in background, for the first 75% of the movie. [[Though]] you did not have enough sleep, that's a good [[times]].

But, in the [[latter]] 20% of the movie director decides to [[brings]] idea of re-birth, re-incarnation or else, through S&M [[photograph]]: "[[mental]] lovers" are cutting each others bodies with knives. For me it was very much [[disconcerting]] and actually changed general impression of blend of [[succinct]] [[artistry]] and images of [[contemporary]] Japanese [[conundrum]].

Operator and [[headmaster]] are [[resplendent]], but weird.

[[Ai]] not [[enjoys]] it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] the gong [[show]] [[TV]] series then you won't like this [[movie]] much at all, not that [[knowing]] the [[series]] makes this a [[great]] [[movie]].

I [[give]] it a 5 out of 10 because a few [[things]] make it kind of amusing that help make up for its [[obvious]] [[problems]].

1) It's a funny [[snapshot]] of the era it was made in, the late 1970's and early 1980's. 2) You [[get]] a lot of funny cameos of people you've seen on the show. 3) It's interesting to see Chuck (the host) when he isn't doing his on air TV personality. 4) You get to see a lot of bizarre people doing all sorts of weirdness just like you see on the TV show.

I won't list all the bad things because there's a lot of them, but here's a few of the most prominent.

1) The Gong Show Movie has a lot of the actual TV show clips which gets tired at movie length. 2) The movie's story line outside of the clip segments is very weak and basically is made up of just one plot point. 3) Chuck is actually halfway decent as an actor, but most of the rest of the actors are doing typical way over the top 1970's flatness.

It's a good movie to watch when you don't have an hour and a half you want to watch all at once. Watch 20 minutes at a time and it's not so bad. But even then it's not so good either. ;) [[Though]] you haven't [[noticed]] the gong [[exhibitions]] [[TELEVISION]] series then you won't like this [[filmmaking]] much at all, not that [[mindful]] the [[serials]] makes this a [[super]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[confer]] it a 5 out of 10 because a few [[matters]] make it kind of amusing that help make up for its [[noticeable]] [[difficulty]].

1) It's a funny [[instantaneous]] of the era it was made in, the late 1970's and early 1980's. 2) You [[gets]] a lot of funny cameos of people you've seen on the show. 3) It's interesting to see Chuck (the host) when he isn't doing his on air TV personality. 4) You get to see a lot of bizarre people doing all sorts of weirdness just like you see on the TV show.

I won't list all the bad things because there's a lot of them, but here's a few of the most prominent.

1) The Gong Show Movie has a lot of the actual TV show clips which gets tired at movie length. 2) The movie's story line outside of the clip segments is very weak and basically is made up of just one plot point. 3) Chuck is actually halfway decent as an actor, but most of the rest of the actors are doing typical way over the top 1970's flatness.

It's a good movie to watch when you don't have an hour and a half you want to watch all at once. Watch 20 minutes at a time and it's not so bad. But even then it's not so good either. ;) --------------------------------------------- Result 1272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, "[[wow]], finally, some [[entertainment]]." It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to [[face]] it, these news [[reporters]] (if one can [[even]] [[call]] them that) have WAY TOO MUCH "[[playing]] around" [[time]].

[[At]] first, I [[thought]] Jillian was a [[breathe]] of fresh air. But [[seriously]], this woman has got not the least [[bit]] of [[journalist]] in her. She is very unprofessional. She keeps on [[interrupting]] [[Steve]] when he [[starts]] [[informing]] the viewers about a certain news [[report]]. It's just really [[become]] [[annoying]] to the point that I can't watch it [[anymore]].

[[Jillian]] is [[NOT]] a good [[journalist]]. [[Hell]], she's more of a [[celebrity]] who [[loves]] being a celebrity. [[Hence]], she instantly [[transforms]] into a [[celebrity]] [[around]] celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and [[quite]] [[possibly]] [[perceives]] her [[relationship]] with celebrities more [[important]] than being a [[rightfully]] insatiable journalist- and that's all I can [[say]] about her.

[[Also]] (disappointingly), this [[show]] has more entertainment news than [[necessary]] news reports about the [[world]], the [[government]], the [[US]], or [[something]] that will benefit and/or [[serve]] the public's [[best]] interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they [[talk]] about comes off as a [[commercial]] [[product]]. On the other hand, their [[field]] [[reporters]] are [[interestingly]] tolerable...

I [[believe]] "Good Day [[LA]]" is for [[young]] [[teenagers]] and [[celebrities]], and it is [[definitely]] not for people who actually [[CARE]] about the news.

SIDE [[NOTE]]: (I'd [[really]] [[rather]] watch KTLA. [[However]], they [[try]] so hard to be [[entertaining]] sometimes. They're [[still]] a bit [[dull]] [[though]]. Oh well, I'll [[stick]] to NBC's "[[Today]]." ABC's "Good Morning [[America]]" is [[also]] [[okay]]... as [[long]] as Diane Sawyer doesn't [[become]] [[way]] too [[serious]].) When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, "[[whoa]], finally, some [[amusement]]." It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to [[encounter]] it, these news [[journalists]] (if one can [[yet]] [[calls]] them that) have WAY TOO MUCH "[[play]] around" [[times]].

[[In]] first, I [[think]] Jillian was a [[breathing]] of fresh air. But [[conscientiously]], this woman has got not the least [[bitten]] of [[newspaperman]] in her. She is very unprofessional. She keeps on [[disrupting]] [[Steph]] when he [[initiated]] [[enlighten]] the viewers about a certain news [[reports]]. It's just really [[gotten]] [[exasperating]] to the point that I can't watch it [[longer]].

[[Gillian]] is [[NOPE]] a good [[journalists]]. [[Brothel]], she's more of a [[celebrities]] who [[likes]] being a celebrity. [[Thus]], she instantly [[transformed]] into a [[celebrities]] [[throughout]] celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and [[rather]] [[maybe]] [[receives]] her [[relationships]] with celebrities more [[significant]] than being a [[deservedly]] insatiable journalist- and that's all I can [[told]] about her.

[[Moreover]] (disappointingly), this [[exhibit]] has more entertainment news than [[necessity]] news reports about the [[monde]], the [[council]], the [[AMERICANS]], or [[anything]] that will benefit and/or [[serves]] the public's [[nicest]] interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they [[discussion]] about comes off as a [[mercantile]] [[commodity]]. On the other hand, their [[campo]] [[reporter]] are [[amazingly]] tolerable...

I [[believing]] "Good Day [[LAS]]" is for [[youthful]] [[adolescence]] and [[celebrity]], and it is [[decidedly]] not for people who actually [[HEALTHCARE]] about the news.

SIDE [[NOTING]]: (I'd [[truly]] [[quite]] watch KTLA. [[Still]], they [[strive]] so hard to be [[amusing]] sometimes. They're [[however]] a bit [[boring]] [[while]]. Oh well, I'll [[wand]] to NBC's "[[Nowadays]]." ABC's "Good Morning [[American]]" is [[additionally]] [[alright]]... as [[longer]] as Diane Sawyer doesn't [[gotten]] [[pathways]] too [[weighty]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 1273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I'm a fan of arty [[movies]], but regretfully I have to [[report]] this [[movie]] to be [[pretentious]] drivel. Agonisingly [[slow]] to [[develop]] a non-existent plot based on a promising premise, the experience is, shall we say, trying. [[Even]] after [[bad]] [[movies]] I feel that I [[learn]] [[something]], or [[enjoyed]] some [[aspect]], but there there was [[nothing]] to [[appreciate]]. The [[premise]] was not uninteresting, but the [[movie]] [[starts]] and ends there. The acting was OK, [[though]] the characters were [[utterly]] boring. For the protagonist to [[aim]] at such an audacious [[goal]], she is [[mightily]] [[empty]]. [[Pity]]. I [[usually]] enjoy [[movies]] that are unformulaic, but [[lack]] of formula should not be [[confused]] with zero content. I'm a fan of arty [[filmmaking]], but regretfully I have to [[reporting]] this [[filmmaking]] to be [[presumptuous]] drivel. Agonisingly [[slower]] to [[developing]] a non-existent plot based on a promising premise, the experience is, shall we say, trying. [[Yet]] after [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] I feel that I [[learning]] [[somethings]], or [[adored]] some [[element]], but there there was [[nada]] to [[appreciative]]. The [[prerequisite]] was not uninteresting, but the [[filmmaking]] [[commenced]] and ends there. The acting was OK, [[despite]] the characters were [[quite]] boring. For the protagonist to [[targeted]] at such an audacious [[objective]], she is [[powerfully]] [[emptiness]]. [[Compassion]]. I [[habitually]] enjoy [[movie]] that are unformulaic, but [[shortages]] of formula should not be [[perplexed]] with zero content. --------------------------------------------- Result 1274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Raggedy Ann & Andy is the first movie I ever saw in the theaters. My dad took my sister and I, and the funny thing is - when we got home, dad asked us "what do you want to do now?" and we said we want to watch Raggedy Ann & Andy again! lol, and my dad actually took us back to the theatre to watch it again -- at least that's how I remember it. I was five years old at the time.

This movie was pretty scary for a five year old. The scene with the giant ocean of sweets, and the hypnotic camel scene.. i don't remember a lot from this film, naturally, the beginning was magical, and a few scenes -- I wish I could find it again, and will likely seek it out now.

I remember I loved Raggedy Ann & Andy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As a community [[theater]] actor who [[works]] hard at it but doesn't take acting too seriously, I'm [[always]] amused by those who treat it as Great Art. This [[movie]] skewers the "Actor's Craft" mercilessly while dishing up a lot of good [[laughs]].

A ham actor on location for a movie [[bears]] a resemblance to the dictator. [[When]] the dictator dies of a [[heart]] attack from too much drink and food, the [[actor]] is [[kidnapped]] and forced to play "the part of a [[lifetime]]" by the neo-Nazi head of the [[secret]] service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to [[fall]] in love with him and vice [[versa]], and turns the tables on his [[captors]] [[beautifully]].

Lots of [[great]] shtick by the [[leads]], lots of good [[work]] by some [[unknown]] [[supporting]] actors, particularly the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan [[Winters]] plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are [[exceptional]].

This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of [[beautiful]] locations (in [[Brazil]]), a [[humorous]] [[script]], and good actors doing their [[thing]] and looking like they're [[actually]] having fun and not [[going]] through the usual existential [[angst]] about what is only play-acting! As a community [[theaters]] actor who [[worked]] hard at it but doesn't take acting too seriously, I'm [[consistently]] amused by those who treat it as Great Art. This [[kino]] skewers the "Actor's Craft" mercilessly while dishing up a lot of good [[giggling]].

A ham actor on location for a movie [[carry]] a resemblance to the dictator. [[Whenever]] the dictator dies of a [[heartland]] attack from too much drink and food, the [[actress]] is [[abducted]] and forced to play "the part of a [[life]]" by the neo-Nazi head of the [[concealed]] service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to [[falls]] in love with him and vice [[reversal]], and turns the tables on his [[kidnappers]] [[strikingly]].

Lots of [[huge]] shtick by the [[leeds]], lots of good [[jobs]] by some [[unidentified]] [[helps]] actors, particularly the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan [[Winter]] plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are [[wondrous]].

This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of [[wondrous]] locations (in [[Brasilia]]), a [[amusing]] [[hyphen]], and good actors doing their [[stuff]] and looking like they're [[genuinely]] having fun and not [[go]] through the usual existential [[trepidation]] about what is only play-acting! --------------------------------------------- Result 1276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] You believe in God or you don't. You believe in Jesus or you don't. You believe He is the Son of God or you don't. The choice is up to you.

[[Director]] Denys Arcand has really [[done]] everything he could to bring back Jesus to a mere historic figure, social worker, son of two humans, [[instead]] of the Son of God the Holy Spirit and Mary, Who opened Heaven again for us. Encouraging the Big Bang, a world come from evolution, [[instead]] of seeing the beauty of creation. The [[film]] [[depicts]] a theologian bringing some "modern findings" to the actor who plays Jesus in the Passion Play, who happily incorporates them in his play.

The depicted priest who runs the sanctuary where the Passion Play is performed in Montreal has a sexual relation with one of the female players of the Passion Play instead of showing his love for God through celibacy. More often than not the director's abhorrence of the Church is clearly visible.

The director has tried to make a parallel between Jesus' life and the Passion Play actor's life. This is an admirable attempt, but depicting the Resurrection with the transplantation of the Passion Play actor's organs in other bodies signifies how the director thinks about Jesus.

My opinion is not important, God's opinion is, but I wouldn't want to stand in the shoes of the director and actors when standing before Jesus' throne. You believe in God or you don't. You believe in Jesus or you don't. You believe He is the Son of God or you don't. The choice is up to you.

[[Superintendent]] Denys Arcand has really [[effected]] everything he could to bring back Jesus to a mere historic figure, social worker, son of two humans, [[conversely]] of the Son of God the Holy Spirit and Mary, Who opened Heaven again for us. Encouraging the Big Bang, a world come from evolution, [[conversely]] of seeing the beauty of creation. The [[filmmaking]] [[describe]] a theologian bringing some "modern findings" to the actor who plays Jesus in the Passion Play, who happily incorporates them in his play.

The depicted priest who runs the sanctuary where the Passion Play is performed in Montreal has a sexual relation with one of the female players of the Passion Play instead of showing his love for God through celibacy. More often than not the director's abhorrence of the Church is clearly visible.

The director has tried to make a parallel between Jesus' life and the Passion Play actor's life. This is an admirable attempt, but depicting the Resurrection with the transplantation of the Passion Play actor's organs in other bodies signifies how the director thinks about Jesus.

My opinion is not important, God's opinion is, but I wouldn't want to stand in the shoes of the director and actors when standing before Jesus' throne. --------------------------------------------- Result 1277 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] **** Includes [[Spoilers]] ****

I've been a horror film fan now for many decades. Just when I think I've [[seen]] all the great ones another pops up to [[surprise]] me. I had never seen this film before. It was a [[treat]], off the [[beaten]] path too...not just the [[path]] to the swamp ferry boat either. Here was a horror [[film]] [[made]] in the 1940s that dared to [[try]] [[something]] VERY different. The pretty girl is (gulp) [[fearless]] for a change and saves the [[men]], [[including]] the man she loves, from the monster ! How is that for a twist. This [[girl]] was the [[complete]] [[opposite]] of most [[women]] in [[films]] of that [[time]], no [[screaming]] at her own [[shadow]], no fainting from [[fright]], no tripping over a [[leaf]] as she runs. This gal wasn't [[afraid]] to [[live]] [[alone]] in a secluded [[hut]] far away from the [[rest]] of the [[villagers]]. Not only that but the [[place]] was on a [[foggy]] [[swamp]] rumored to be [[haunted]]. Heck she [[even]] [[takes]] [[naps]] on the swamp [[grass]] [[outdoors]]...like a [[regular]] 1940s version of Ripley. [[No]] snake, gator or ghostly strangler [[would]] dare bother this gal. Books on early [[feminist]] [[films]] should be sure to include this [[overlooked]] [[work]].

See this if you are a fan, like me, of those [[wonderfully]] [[atmospheric]] classic B/W [[horror]] [[films]] they made only in the 30s and 40s. And be sure to [[wear]] your cast [[iron]] turtle [[neck]] for [[protection]]. **** Includes [[Vandals]] ****

I've been a horror film fan now for many decades. Just when I think I've [[noticed]] all the great ones another pops up to [[surprises]] me. I had never seen this film before. It was a [[processing]], off the [[bested]] path too...not just the [[route]] to the swamp ferry boat either. Here was a horror [[cinematography]] [[brought]] in the 1940s that dared to [[endeavour]] [[anything]] VERY different. The pretty girl is (gulp) [[gutsy]] for a change and saves the [[male]], [[containing]] the man she loves, from the monster ! How is that for a twist. This [[chick]] was the [[finalise]] [[contrary]] of most [[wife]] in [[cinematography]] of that [[period]], no [[shout]] at her own [[shade]], no fainting from [[fearful]], no tripping over a [[sheet]] as she runs. This gal wasn't [[affraid]] to [[viva]] [[mere]] in a secluded [[shack]] far away from the [[remainder]] of the [[dwellers]]. Not only that but the [[placing]] was on a [[hazy]] [[wetlands]] rumored to be [[obsessed]]. Heck she [[yet]] [[pick]] [[nap]] on the swamp [[herb]] [[exterior]]...like a [[routine]] 1940s version of Ripley. [[Nope]] snake, gator or ghostly strangler [[should]] dare bother this gal. Books on early [[feminism]] [[kino]] should be sure to include this [[neglected]] [[jobs]].

See this if you are a fan, like me, of those [[admirably]] [[barometric]] classic B/W [[terror]] [[movies]] they made only in the 30s and 40s. And be sure to [[worn]] your cast [[railroad]] turtle [[collier]] for [[defensive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Deliverance is the fascinating, haunting and sometimes even disturbing tale by James Dickey, turned into a brilliant movie by John Boorman. It's about four businessmen, driven by manhood and macho-behavior, who're spending a canoeing weekend high up in the mountains. Up there, they're faced with every darkest side of man and every worst form of human misery...poverty, buggery and even physical harassment! These four men intended to travel down the river for adventure and excitement but their trip soon changes into an odyssey through a violent and lurking mountain-land, completely estranged from all forms of civilisation. All these elements actually make Deliverance one of the most nightmarish films I've ever seen. Just about everything that happens to these men, you pray that you'll never find yourself to be in a similar situation. Pure talking cinema, Deliverance is a very important movie as well. John Boorman's best (closely followed by Zardoz and Excalibur) was - and still is - a very influential film and it contains several memorable scenes that already featured in numberless other movies. Just think about the terrific "Duelling banjos" musical score and, of course, the unforgettable homosexual "squeal like a pig" rape scene. All the actors deliver (haha) perfect acting performances. Especially Jon Voight. A must see motion picture!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1279 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is such a great movie to watch with young children. I'm always looking for an excuse to watch it over & over. Gena was good, Cheech was fun,the Russian was good, Maria was adorable & of course Paulie was the best! --------------------------------------------- Result 1280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Race car drivers [[say]] that 100 mph [[seems]] fast till you've driven 150, and 150 mph seems fast till you've driven 250.

OK.

Andalusian [[Dog]] seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Eraserhead, and Eraserhead seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Begotten.

And Begotten seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've [[seen]] the works of C. [[Frederic]] Hobbs. [[Race]] fans, there is NOTHING in all the world of film like the works of C. [[Frederic]] Hobbs.

Alabama's [[Ghost]] [[comes]] as close as any of his [[films]] to having a [[coherent]] plot, and it only involves hippies, rock [[concerts]], voodoo, ghosts, [[vampires]], robots, magicians, corrupt multinational [[corporations]], elephants and [[Mystery]] [[Gas]]. And the [[Fabulous]] Woodmobile, [[cruising]] the Sunset [[District]] in [[San]] Francisco, of course.

What's really [[startling]] is that somebody gave him a [[LOT]] of [[money]] to [[make]] Alabama's Ghost. There's sets, [[lighting]], hundreds of extras, costumes, [[lots]] and [[lots]] of [[effects]]. [[Somehow]] that makes Alabama's Ghost SO WRONG. You watch some [[awful]] cheeseball like [[Night]] of Horror or Plutonium Baby, and at [[least]] some [[part]] of the weirdness is excusable on the basis that they were obviously [[making]] the film off the headroom on their Discover cards. But Alabama's Ghost was made with an actual budget, and that's EVIL. I mean, I've got a script about a tribe of cannibals living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, building a secret temple in the woods out of Twizzlers, and nobody's beating down MY door waving a checkbook - how did this guy get the funds for FOUR of the flakiest movies ever made? Race car drivers [[said]] that 100 mph [[seem]] fast till you've driven 150, and 150 mph seems fast till you've driven 250.

OK.

Andalusian [[Puppy]] seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Eraserhead, and Eraserhead seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Begotten.

And Begotten seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've [[saw]] the works of C. [[Frederick]] Hobbs. [[Carrera]] fans, there is NOTHING in all the world of film like the works of C. [[Frederik]] Hobbs.

Alabama's [[Phantoms]] [[happens]] as close as any of his [[filmmaking]] to having a [[cohesion]] plot, and it only involves hippies, rock [[gigs]], voodoo, ghosts, [[bloodsuckers]], robots, magicians, corrupt multinational [[undertakings]], elephants and [[Puzzle]] [[Gases]]. And the [[Sumptuous]] Woodmobile, [[cruise]] the Sunset [[Borough]] in [[Saint]] Francisco, of course.

What's really [[dazzling]] is that somebody gave him a [[LOTS]] of [[cash]] to [[deliver]] Alabama's Ghost. There's sets, [[light]], hundreds of extras, costumes, [[batches]] and [[lot]] of [[effect]]. [[Somewhere]] that makes Alabama's Ghost SO WRONG. You watch some [[scary]] cheeseball like [[Nuit]] of Horror or Plutonium Baby, and at [[lowest]] some [[parties]] of the weirdness is excusable on the basis that they were obviously [[doing]] the film off the headroom on their Discover cards. But Alabama's Ghost was made with an actual budget, and that's EVIL. I mean, I've got a script about a tribe of cannibals living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, building a secret temple in the woods out of Twizzlers, and nobody's beating down MY door waving a checkbook - how did this guy get the funds for FOUR of the flakiest movies ever made? --------------------------------------------- Result 1281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Don't waste 90 minutes of your time on "Fast Food, Fast Women." It's annoyingly episodic script with three story lines patched together is laughably bad due to predictable writing, horrific acting, and even bad music. I found the anorexic main character upsetting to watch every time she was on screen. SHE needs the fast food.

Spend the 90 minutes you'd devote to this turkey doing something more exciting...like trimming your toenails. You'd have more entertainment value.

The only redeeming thing about this film is Louise Lasser, but she deserves much better than this tired script. It's as impotent as the elder guy she courts in the movie.

VIEWER BEWARE! --------------------------------------------- Result 1282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From around the time Europe began fighting World War II, until the war's end, Hollywood (with significant prodding from the government) made tons of movies which were designed to try and get young men to enlist in the Army, by making the life of a serviceman appear "cool." This is by far the sloppiest, implying that the life of a soldier is devoid of work, you get the best food, and you get to lie around all day listening to Ann Miller on the radio. I am far too young to have participated in WWII, but I think that there was more to it than that. There is the barest cat's whisker of a plot, and a bunch of musical numbers featuring some of the day's leading acts.

I think that by 1943, even the most naive of civvies knew that there was more going on overseas than the wacky hijinks portrayed in this movie. While I am sure that it was meant to be viewed as escapist entertainment, I can't help but wonder if the family and loved ones of men fighting in the war, were amused or repulsed by this trivialization of their loved ones' sacrifice. --------------------------------------------- Result 1283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[rented]] this film in DVD form without knowing [[anything]] at all about it, part of a [[winter]] marathon of [[watching]] a [[film]] [[every]] night. [[After]] [[several]] [[awful]] American action adventure [[films]] (Ballistic, Daredevil, Cradle of [[Life]]) [[Zhu]] Warriors [[struck]] me as [[brilliantly]] [[original]] [[filmmaking]]. The story is complete [[nonsense]], but I found the film's sincerity, good- heartedness and complete lack of irony refreshing, and the film looks spectacular. Sure, the special effects are not technically as flawless as those produced by Hollywood, but the filmmakers wisely are more interested in color, composition and movement than realism and so many of the shots are breathtaking. In one shot, two of the superhuman characters stand on craggy spires of rock, a huge moon rising before them, the image perfectly balanced by the three elements. In another, a princess-warrior spires through the heavens behind her glowing sword like a heat-seeking missile. And the colors explode from shot to shot, used to express emotion rather than to represent reality.

The characters have the same simplicity and [[directness]] of comic book characters, offering no great depth in themselves but referring to archtypes that resonate more deeply. Physically, several of the actors are [[astonishingly]] [[beautiful]]. They play their roles straight up, without irony or guile, and so are [[believable]].

Most strange of all, despite the clumsiness of plot and thin characterizations, I found myself very near tears at the end, moved by the [[beautiful]] simplicity of the actors and the wildly original, good-hearted vision of the director.

I [[leasing]] this film in DVD form without knowing [[something]] at all about it, part of a [[winters]] marathon of [[staring]] a [[cinematography]] [[all]] night. [[Upon]] [[numerous]] [[heinous]] American action adventure [[movies]] (Ballistic, Daredevil, Cradle of [[Living]]) [[Joo]] Warriors [[knocked]] me as [[brightly]] [[initial]] [[cinematographic]]. The story is complete [[grotesque]], but I found the film's sincerity, good- heartedness and complete lack of irony refreshing, and the film looks spectacular. Sure, the special effects are not technically as flawless as those produced by Hollywood, but the filmmakers wisely are more interested in color, composition and movement than realism and so many of the shots are breathtaking. In one shot, two of the superhuman characters stand on craggy spires of rock, a huge moon rising before them, the image perfectly balanced by the three elements. In another, a princess-warrior spires through the heavens behind her glowing sword like a heat-seeking missile. And the colors explode from shot to shot, used to express emotion rather than to represent reality.

The characters have the same simplicity and [[bluntness]] of comic book characters, offering no great depth in themselves but referring to archtypes that resonate more deeply. Physically, several of the actors are [[unbelievably]] [[wondrous]]. They play their roles straight up, without irony or guile, and so are [[reliable]].

Most strange of all, despite the clumsiness of plot and thin characterizations, I found myself very near tears at the end, moved by the [[leggy]] simplicity of the actors and the wildly original, good-hearted vision of the director.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am and was very entertained by the movie. It was my all time favorite movie of 1976. Being raised in the 70's , I was so in love with Kris Kristoffersons look and demeanor,of course I am no movie critic,but for the time era,I think it was very good. I very much like the combo of Streisand and Kristofferson. I thought they worked very well together. I have seen the movie many times and still love the two of them as Esther and John Norman. I am a very huge fan of Kris and see him in concert when I can. What a talented singer song writer,not to mention,actor. I have seen him in many movies,but still think back to A star is Born. --------------------------------------------- Result 1285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MacArthur is a great movie with a great story about a great man…General Douglas MacArthur. This is of course, the story of one of America's great military figures, and a figure made familiar to me from the earliest moments of my memory. Though there is a continuity issue (there may be others) e.g. MacArthur's speech portrayed in the film as his 1962 address to the U.S. Military Academy on accepting the Thayer award did not contain the phrase "old soldiers never die; they just fade away." (That was in his speech to Congress upon his dismissal by President Truman) in 1951 for his alleged insubordination (these two did not see eye to eye!) Gregory Peck is im-Peck-able as the general who vowed he would return to the Philippines in World War II. The film moves quickly and easily with the General, his family and his staff from the beginning of the Second World War to the end of his service career. This film would be of much greater significance to one familiar with both WW II and the Korean War. Nevertheless, Peck's portrayal of this great man who fought the twin evils of fascism and communism and who hated war as only a soldier can is a memorable one indeed. "In war there is no substitute for victory." --------------------------------------------- Result 1286 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] House of Games is a wonderful [[movie]] at [[multiple]] [[levels]]. It is a [[fine]] mystery and a [[shocking]] thriller. It is blessed with [[marvelous]] performances by [[Lindsay]] Crouse and Joe Montegna, and a strong, strong cast of [[supporting]] [[players]], and it introduces Ricky [[Jay]], [[card]] sharp extraordinaire, prestidigitator and [[historian]] of [[magic]]. Its dialogue, [[written]] by David Mamet, is [[spoken]] as if in a play of manners and gives the movie (in which [[reality]] is [[often]] in [[question]]) an [[extra]] dimension of unrealness.

On the face of it, House of Games is a convincing glimpse into the [[unknown]] [[world]] of [[cheats]] and con [[men]], diametrically [[different]] from The Sting, which was played merely for [[glamour]] and yuks. [[At]] this level it does succeed admirably.

[[However]], you cannot [[escape]] the [[examination]] at a [[deeper]] [[level]] of the odyssey of a [[woman]] from complacent [[professional]] [[competence]] to [[incredible]] strength and self [[realization]]. The only [[movie]] I know of which [[treats]] the [[theme]] of [[emergence]] of personal strength in a [[woman]] in as worthy a [[way]] is the underrated Private Benjamin. That thoroughly enjoyable [[movie]] unfortunately diffuses its focus, hopping [[among]] several themes and exploiting the [[fine]] performance of Goldie Hawn to chase after some [[easy]] laughs. [[House]] of [[Games]] sticks to its [[business]]. As Poe once [[said]] of a good short [[story]], it [[drives]] [[relentlessly]] to its [[conclusion]].

There is another strain of movies-about-women, epitomized by Thelma and [[Louise]], a [[big]] [[budget]] commercial money [[maker]] with the [[despicable]] [[theme]] that women are doomed, whether or not they [[realize]] their [[inner]] strengths. What tripe.

As [[usual]] you [[really]] ought to see this [[film]] in a [[movie]] [[theater]]. It should be a natural for film [[festivals]]. [[Nominate]] it for one near you if you [[get]] the [[chance]].

I [[bought]] the original version of [[House]] of [[Games]] and [[gave]] it to my 23 year old [[daughter]]. Better she should see it on a TV than not at all. House of Games is a wonderful [[flick]] at [[several]] [[grades]]. It is a [[fined]] mystery and a [[terrifying]] thriller. It is blessed with [[glorious]] performances by [[Lindsey]] Crouse and Joe Montegna, and a strong, strong cast of [[helping]] [[actors]], and it introduces Ricky [[Jae]], [[cards]] sharp extraordinaire, prestidigitator and [[history]] of [[witchcraft]]. Its dialogue, [[wrote]] by David Mamet, is [[talked]] as if in a play of manners and gives the movie (in which [[realities]] is [[commonly]] in [[issue]]) an [[additional]] dimension of unrealness.

On the face of it, House of Games is a convincing glimpse into the [[unnamed]] [[globe]] of [[crooks]] and con [[males]], diametrically [[various]] from The Sting, which was played merely for [[fascination]] and yuks. [[In]] this level it does succeed admirably.

[[Still]], you cannot [[fleeing]] the [[exams]] at a [[closer]] [[grades]] of the odyssey of a [[girls]] from complacent [[occupational]] [[jurisdiction]] to [[fantastic]] strength and self [[fulfillment]]. The only [[films]] I know of which [[addresses]] the [[topics]] of [[onset]] of personal strength in a [[girls]] in as worthy a [[paths]] is the underrated Private Benjamin. That thoroughly enjoyable [[film]] unfortunately diffuses its focus, hopping [[in]] several themes and exploiting the [[fined]] performance of Goldie Hawn to chase after some [[simple]] laughs. [[Households]] of [[Game]] sticks to its [[corporations]]. As Poe once [[asserted]] of a good short [[narratives]], it [[drive]] [[ceaselessly]] to its [[conclusions]].

There is another strain of movies-about-women, epitomized by Thelma and [[Lewis]], a [[massive]] [[budgets]] commercial money [[producers]] with the [[obnoxious]] [[themes]] that women are doomed, whether or not they [[attain]] their [[internally]] strengths. What tripe.

As [[habitual]] you [[genuinely]] ought to see this [[cinema]] in a [[cinematography]] [[drama]]. It should be a natural for film [[holidays]]. [[Appointing]] it for one near you if you [[obtain]] the [[luck]].

I [[buys]] the original version of [[Homes]] of [[Game]] and [[supplied]] it to my 23 year old [[maid]]. Better she should see it on a TV than not at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't see how anyone who even likes Van Damne [[could]] like this movie.

The movie actually [[starts]] out with some promise. I would say the [[action]] scenes at the beginning of the movie is excellent. The actions scenes with the family ward trying to save the twins is a great start and is good lead in to the main story. [[However]], the [[film]] is all down hill from there.

It would have been nice if the [[director]] could have stayed with the original premise. That is the brothers are born in different parts of the world and thus learn different skills. One brother is supposed to be skilled in Martial Arts, but the other brother is supposed to be skilled in firearms. How convenient when the time arises that the brother who has never picked up a gun before all of the sudden is a great marksman, and the brother who has not been taught any martial arts is all of the sudden doing the splits and high kicks.

The plot, action, etc. are just plain [[ridiculous]]. My favorite scenes? How about when Van Damne is confronting an armed soldier with an AK-47. The soldier is about 100 yards away. Instead of aiming and shooting at Van Damne he is doing a war cry like he is wielding a battle axe and running at him. Van Damne proceeds to pick up a pistol from a fallen soldier and shoots him,...while he is still about 75 to 80 yards away.

This movie has one of the most [[disappointing]] endings. Bolo Yeung is a skilled martial artist. However, instead of choreographing a decent fight. Bolo is throwing barrels at Van Damne like Donkey Kong. Absolutely aggravating movie that had so much promise. If your a Van Damne fan, save your time and see Hard Target or one of his earlier films. I don't see how anyone who even likes Van Damne [[wo]] like this movie.

The movie actually [[induction]] out with some promise. I would say the [[efforts]] scenes at the beginning of the movie is excellent. The actions scenes with the family ward trying to save the twins is a great start and is good lead in to the main story. [[Conversely]], the [[filmmaking]] is all down hill from there.

It would have been nice if the [[headmaster]] could have stayed with the original premise. That is the brothers are born in different parts of the world and thus learn different skills. One brother is supposed to be skilled in Martial Arts, but the other brother is supposed to be skilled in firearms. How convenient when the time arises that the brother who has never picked up a gun before all of the sudden is a great marksman, and the brother who has not been taught any martial arts is all of the sudden doing the splits and high kicks.

The plot, action, etc. are just plain [[farcical]]. My favorite scenes? How about when Van Damne is confronting an armed soldier with an AK-47. The soldier is about 100 yards away. Instead of aiming and shooting at Van Damne he is doing a war cry like he is wielding a battle axe and running at him. Van Damne proceeds to pick up a pistol from a fallen soldier and shoots him,...while he is still about 75 to 80 yards away.

This movie has one of the most [[discouraging]] endings. Bolo Yeung is a skilled martial artist. However, instead of choreographing a decent fight. Bolo is throwing barrels at Van Damne like Donkey Kong. Absolutely aggravating movie that had so much promise. If your a Van Damne fan, save your time and see Hard Target or one of his earlier films. --------------------------------------------- Result 1288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] (spoilers)Wow, this is a [[bad]] one. I did a double take when watching an old Star Trek episode the other day-it was the one where everyone gets infected with that space sickness and then go a bit nuts-and there was Stewart Moss, a.k.a the unlikable 'hero' of It Lives by Night! He [[played]] the first crewmember infected, who dies from terminal depression. All I could think was that he'd watched his own movie too many times, that's what [[caused]] the depression. This [[movie]] is full of truly unlikable people. There is no redeeming character in the film, not one. It's very hard to feel bad about Dr. Beck's turning into a bat(or whatever he actually turned into), because you just don't like him. And you don't like his shrill, bony wife, or the nasty sleazy Sgt. Ward, or Dr. Mustache Love...So why would you invest any time or energy in this movie? Where there is no empathy with the characters, there is no reason to bother caring about it. Not to mention the horrible [[cinematography]], which made it look like they'd filmed the movie through urine, and the five cent bat special effects, many of which appeared to be pieces of paper thrown into a fan to simulate hordes of bats flying. Not the worst film I've ever seen on MST3K, but down there in the bottom ranks, definitely. (spoilers)Wow, this is a [[rotten]] one. I did a double take when watching an old Star Trek episode the other day-it was the one where everyone gets infected with that space sickness and then go a bit nuts-and there was Stewart Moss, a.k.a the unlikable 'hero' of It Lives by Night! He [[effected]] the first crewmember infected, who dies from terminal depression. All I could think was that he'd watched his own movie too many times, that's what [[wreaked]] the depression. This [[filmmaking]] is full of truly unlikable people. There is no redeeming character in the film, not one. It's very hard to feel bad about Dr. Beck's turning into a bat(or whatever he actually turned into), because you just don't like him. And you don't like his shrill, bony wife, or the nasty sleazy Sgt. Ward, or Dr. Mustache Love...So why would you invest any time or energy in this movie? Where there is no empathy with the characters, there is no reason to bother caring about it. Not to mention the horrible [[films]], which made it look like they'd filmed the movie through urine, and the five cent bat special effects, many of which appeared to be pieces of paper thrown into a fan to simulate hordes of bats flying. Not the worst film I've ever seen on MST3K, but down there in the bottom ranks, definitely. --------------------------------------------- Result 1289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] End of the World is an uneventful [[movie]], which is odd [[since]] it is supposed to be about the total [[destruction]] of the [[earth]]. The main character is some kind of scientist, I'm not exactly sure what kind. He has two jobs at a government(?) facility guarded by four security men. His first job is monitoring transmissions to and from space (although this actually seems more like a hobby he does when not working on job #2). Job #2 requires him to put on a protective suit and go into a dark room...at least that's the best I can figure. Apparently the "plant" is not exactly top-secret, as the scientist brings his wife there. She hangs out (they're on their way to a dinner) while he discovers a message from space: Major Earth Disruption, repeated over and over. He says something about it being the first message from space he's ever been able to [[decipher]]; his wife tells him they're going to be late for the dinner party. So they leave and go to the party (!?!). Moments later he finds out that China has suffered a major earthquake. From there, the [[movie]] goes... nowhere! Yes, Christopher [[Lee]] is in it, but that really doesn't help much. Besides, Lee gives a [[lackluster]] performance along the lines of his [[appearance]] in [[Howling]] II. This [[movie]] is boring, but it has enough stupid [[elements]] that you [[might]] want to [[suffer]] through it once if you [[like]] [[Christopher]] Lee or Z-grade sci-fi. Plus, there's lots of [[stock]] footage of the earth being destroyed. End of the World is an uneventful [[filmmaking]], which is odd [[because]] it is supposed to be about the total [[obliterating]] of the [[tierra]]. The main character is some kind of scientist, I'm not exactly sure what kind. He has two jobs at a government(?) facility guarded by four security men. His first job is monitoring transmissions to and from space (although this actually seems more like a hobby he does when not working on job #2). Job #2 requires him to put on a protective suit and go into a dark room...at least that's the best I can figure. Apparently the "plant" is not exactly top-secret, as the scientist brings his wife there. She hangs out (they're on their way to a dinner) while he discovers a message from space: Major Earth Disruption, repeated over and over. He says something about it being the first message from space he's ever been able to [[unravel]]; his wife tells him they're going to be late for the dinner party. So they leave and go to the party (!?!). Moments later he finds out that China has suffered a major earthquake. From there, the [[filmmaking]] goes... nowhere! Yes, Christopher [[Rhee]] is in it, but that really doesn't help much. Besides, Lee gives a [[mediocre]] performance along the lines of his [[apparition]] in [[Holler]] II. This [[filmmaking]] is boring, but it has enough stupid [[ingredient]] that you [[probability]] want to [[undergo]] through it once if you [[iike]] [[Christophe]] Lee or Z-grade sci-fi. Plus, there's lots of [[inventories]] footage of the earth being destroyed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1290 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I loved watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in [[grammar]] [[school]] and would [[get]] [[home]] do my homework and by 4:30 would be ready to watch ''Sea [[Hunt]] '' and Mike Nelson in his underwater adventures .I [[loved]] it ! He took to you a place not very [[accessible]] at that [[time]] , under the [[great]] [[blue]] sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or [[even]] before [[Cousteau]] [[became]] common , there was Mike Nelson sparking the imagination of [[kids]] .I'd be willing to [[wager]] that more than a few kids [[developed]] their [[passion]] for oceanography or biology or one of the sciences from watching this [[show]] .Underwater photography [[also]] progressed , the fascination for [[exploration]] is [[easily]] [[stimulated]] thru watching this [[show]] . Watch and [[enjoy]] !!! I loved watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in [[grammatical]] [[teaching]] and would [[got]] [[households]] do my homework and by 4:30 would be ready to watch ''Sea [[Hunts]] '' and Mike Nelson in his underwater adventures .I [[enjoyed]] it ! He took to you a place not very [[affordable]] at that [[moment]] , under the [[wondrous]] [[azul]] sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or [[yet]] before [[Smith]] [[came]] common , there was Mike Nelson sparking the imagination of [[brats]] .I'd be willing to [[wagering]] that more than a few kids [[devised]] their [[enthusiasm]] for oceanography or biology or one of the sciences from watching this [[spectacle]] .Underwater photography [[similarly]] progressed , the fascination for [[browsing]] is [[conveniently]] [[encouraged]] thru watching this [[spectacle]] . Watch and [[enjoying]] !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[During]] the [[Civil]] War, there were [[many]] [[cases]] of [[divided]] loyalties; [[obviously]], [[many]] occurred "[[In]] the Border States", where North met South by happenstance of geography. From the border, young [[father]] [[Owen]] Moore goes off to join the Union Army. Shortly, Confederate soldier Henry B. Walthall, separated from his regimen, wanders onto the enemy's property, desperate for water; he finds a supply where the Unionist's young daughter [[Gladys]] Egan sits. When the Yankee soldiers track him down, Little Gladys innocently helps the Confederate hide. Later, when he returns to kill her father, the little girl's kindness is remembered. A sweet, small story from director D.W. Griffith. Location footage and humanity are lovingly displayed.

**** In the Border States (6/13/10) D.W. Griffith ~ Henry B. Walthall, Owen Moore, Gladys Egan [[Across]] the [[Civilians]] War, there were [[multiple]] [[example]] of [[divides]] loyalties; [[patently]], [[innumerable]] occurred "[[Throughout]] the Border States", where North met South by happenstance of geography. From the border, young [[fathers]] [[Owens]] Moore goes off to join the Union Army. Shortly, Confederate soldier Henry B. Walthall, separated from his regimen, wanders onto the enemy's property, desperate for water; he finds a supply where the Unionist's young daughter [[Bessie]] Egan sits. When the Yankee soldiers track him down, Little Gladys innocently helps the Confederate hide. Later, when he returns to kill her father, the little girl's kindness is remembered. A sweet, small story from director D.W. Griffith. Location footage and humanity are lovingly displayed.

**** In the Border States (6/13/10) D.W. Griffith ~ Henry B. Walthall, Owen Moore, Gladys Egan --------------------------------------------- Result 1292 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A dreary, hopelessly predictable film set in a most unpleasant setting (lower Coachella Valley). Acting is as amateurish as any I've seen. Looks like a screenwriting 101 script. However, it does function as a great sedative. --------------------------------------------- Result 1293 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'The Curse of Frankenstein' sticks faithfully to Mary Shelley's story for one word of the title, which wouldn't be so bad if the changes were any good at all. The tragedy of the creature destroying Frankenstein's family has been completely excised and replaced with... nothing. The heart and moral centre of the story is gone. It doesn't help that this Frankenstein is a conniving, devious murderer; he deserves everything he gets. The plot is basically a shallow checklist of Frankenstein clichés. Even taken on its own terms, this is rubbish: a bland, rambling film featuring a shite-looking creature with a pudding bowl haircut. As it's the first of Hammer's horror films, directed by Terence Fisher and starring Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee, its place in horror history is secure. But it's crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 1294 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The plot is plausible but banal, i.e., beautiful and neglected wife of wealthy and powerful man has a fling with a psychotic hunk, then tries to cover it up as the psycho stalks and blackmails her. But, what develops from there is stupefyingly illogical. Despite the resources that are available to the usual couple who has money and influence, our privileged hero and heroine appear to have only one domestic, their attorney and local police (who say they can do nothing) at their disposal while they grapple with suspense and terror. They have no private security staff (only a fancy security system that they mishandle), household or grounds staff, chauffeurs, etc. Not even, apparently, the funds to hire private round-the-clock nurses to care for the hero when he suffers life-threatening injuries, leaving man and wife alone and vulnerable in their mansion. Our heroine is portrayed as having the brains of a doorknob and our hero, a tycoon, behaves in the most unlikely and irrational manner. The production is an insult to viewers who wasted their time with this drivel and a crime for having wasted the talents of veteran actors Oliva Hussey and Don Murray (what were they thinking?). And, shame on Lifetime TV for insulting the intelligence of its audience for this insipid offering. --------------------------------------------- Result 1295 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] "The Godfather", "Citizen Kane", "Star Wars", "Goodfellas" [[None]] of the above compare to the complex brilliance of "The Sopranos". Each and every [[character]] has [[layers]] upon layers of [[absolute]] verity, [[completely]] and utterly three dimensional. We [[care]] about Tony Soprano [[wholeheartedly]], despite the fact that in the simplest [[model]] of good [[vs]]. [[evil]], he is evil. Soprano is the most [[provocative]], [[intricate]], and fascinating protagonist ever [[created]] to this point in history. If you're in the mood to be overtly challenged as a viewer, and to be [[forever]] altered on your feelings toward entertainment, watch "The Sopranos". I [[defy]] [[anybody]] to sit down and watch the very [[first]] episode of Season 1, and not want to continue with the [[series]]. Each season is [[completely]] [[brilliant]] in its own [[way]]. DVDs are [[essential]] to anybody's [[collection]] **** of out 4 "The Godfather", "Citizen Kane", "Star Wars", "Goodfellas" [[Nos]] of the above compare to the complex brilliance of "The Sopranos". Each and every [[characteristics]] has [[nappies]] upon layers of [[utter]] verity, [[utterly]] and utterly three dimensional. We [[healthcare]] about Tony Soprano [[fervently]], despite the fact that in the simplest [[paragon]] of good [[versus]]. [[satanic]], he is evil. Soprano is the most [[inflammatory]], [[complicate]], and fascinating protagonist ever [[established]] to this point in history. If you're in the mood to be overtly challenged as a viewer, and to be [[indefinitely]] altered on your feelings toward entertainment, watch "The Sopranos". I [[defiance]] [[person]] to sit down and watch the very [[fiirst]] episode of Season 1, and not want to continue with the [[serials]]. Each season is [[altogether]] [[wondrous]] in its own [[manner]]. DVDs are [[critical]] to anybody's [[collections]] **** of out 4 --------------------------------------------- Result 1296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I haven't seen all of Jess Franco's movies, I have seen 5, I think, and there are more than 180 of them. So maybe it's a bit early to say so but "Necronomicon Geträumte Sünden" (better known as 'Succubus', but that is the cut version) is according to me if not the best, certainly on of Franco's best. Franco is best known (although 'known' might be slightly exaggerated) for "Vampiros Lesbos", a weird cultish movie that got more acclaim in the mid 90's when people found out Jess Franco was also an interesting composer. Through the soundtrack a happy few discovered the man and found out what was to be expected after seeing the video clip of 'The lion and the cucumber' ('Vampyros Lesbos OST'): Jess Franco is an overwhelming director. When the phone rang during 'Vampiros', I let it ring. I just wanted to see more of the movie. Since that moment Franco never could grip me that much. But then I stumbled on this movie. It is even better than "Vampiros Lesbos", I think. Franco is looking for what he can do with a story and a camera. We find out he can do a lot. I certainly didn't expect to find "Necronomicon" that great: its beginning didn't impress me at all. Remember, I had seen "Vampiros Lesbos" before (although chronologically that came only three years later) and both movies kinda start the same. But then the story went on, puzzling and gripping, beautiful camera work and the stuff you would like to see Godard do if he weren't so occupied with spreading his political messages. Later on in the movie I heard a dialogue about which art was or wasn't old-fashioned. The man says that all movies have to be old-fashioned because it takes weeks before the audience sees what got filmed. But the girl replies that "Bunuel, Fritz Lang and Godard yesterday made movies for tomorrow". Janine Reynaud is an interesting lead actress and of course Howard Vernon, a Franco regular, is also there. Luckily the acting is good (something that can spoil a lot of Franco movies for you, but not this one). But certainly watch out for the dummy scene. The erotic tension, the wild directing and the fact that it's a yesterday's movie for tomorrow make it a movie a lot of people should see. The fact that it is a bit more accessible than "Vampiros Lesbos" certainly helps. --------------------------------------------- Result 1297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Although I'm [[grateful]] this obscure gem of 70's Italian exploitation cinema features in the [[recently]] released "Grindhouse Experience" box set, and [[although]] it's [[also]] [[available]] on disc under the [[misleading]] and [[stupid]] [[alternate]] title "Escape from Death Row", I [[honestly]] think it deserves a [[proper]] and [[luxurious]] DVD [[edition]], [[completely]] in its originally spoken languages with [[subtitle]] options (the [[dubbing]] is truly horrible), restored picture quality and a truckload of special [[bonus]] features! [[Heck]], I don't even need the [[restored]] picture quality and bonus features if only we [[could]] watch the film in its [[original]] [[language]]. "Mean Frank and Crazy Tony" is a cheerfully fast-paced [[mafia]]/crime flick with a lot of violence, [[comedy]] (which, [[admittedly]], doesn't [[always]] work), feminine beauty and two [[witty]] [[main]] [[characters]]. Tony Lo [[Bianco]] is [[terrific]] as the [[small]] thug pretending to be the city's biggest [[Don]]. When the real crime lord Frankie Dio (Lee Van Cleef) arrives in [[town]], he sees an opportunity to climb up the ladder by offering his services. Frankie initially ignores the little crook, but they do eventually form an unlikely team when Frankie's entire criminal empire turns against him and a new French criminal mastermind even assassinates Frankie's innocent brother. Tony [[helps]] Frankie to escape from prison and together they head for Marseille to extract Frankie's revenge. The script of this sadly neglected [[crime]] gem funnily alters [[gritty]] action & suspense with light-headed bits of comedy, like the grotesque car chase through the narrow French mountain roads for example. The build up towards the typical mafia execution sequences (guided by an excellent Riz Ortolani score) are extremely tense and the actual [[killings]] are sadistic and [[merciless]], which is probably why the film is considered to be somewhat of a grindhouse classic. The film lacks a strong female lead, as the lovely and amazingly voluptuous beauty Edwige Fenech sadly just [[appears]] in a couple of scenes, and then still in the background. On of the [[men]] [[behind]] the [[camera]], responsible for the [[superb]] cinematography, was no less then [[Joe]] D'Amato. [[Great]] [[film]], [[highly]] [[recommended]] to fans of Italian exploitation, and I hope to watch it again soon in its original version. Although I'm [[thankful]] this obscure gem of 70's Italian exploitation cinema features in the [[newly]] released "Grindhouse Experience" box set, and [[while]] it's [[similarly]] [[accessible]] on disc under the [[fraudulent]] and [[idiot]] [[substitute]] title "Escape from Death Row", I [[plainly]] think it deserves a [[suitable]] and [[deluxe]] DVD [[publishing]], [[entirely]] in its originally spoken languages with [[subtitles]] options (the [[copying]] is truly horrible), restored picture quality and a truckload of special [[freebie]] features! [[Devil]], I don't even need the [[rehabilitated]] picture quality and bonus features if only we [[wo]] watch the film in its [[preliminary]] [[linguistics]]. "Mean Frank and Crazy Tony" is a cheerfully fast-paced [[shay]]/crime flick with a lot of violence, [[comedian]] (which, [[assuredly]], doesn't [[permanently]] work), feminine beauty and two [[spiritual]] [[principal]] [[traits]]. Tony Lo [[Bianca]] is [[super]] as the [[minor]] thug pretending to be the city's biggest [[Donation]]. When the real crime lord Frankie Dio (Lee Van Cleef) arrives in [[towns]], he sees an opportunity to climb up the ladder by offering his services. Frankie initially ignores the little crook, but they do eventually form an unlikely team when Frankie's entire criminal empire turns against him and a new French criminal mastermind even assassinates Frankie's innocent brother. Tony [[supporting]] Frankie to escape from prison and together they head for Marseille to extract Frankie's revenge. The script of this sadly neglected [[misdemeanour]] gem funnily alters [[sandstone]] action & suspense with light-headed bits of comedy, like the grotesque car chase through the narrow French mountain roads for example. The build up towards the typical mafia execution sequences (guided by an excellent Riz Ortolani score) are extremely tense and the actual [[kills]] are sadistic and [[pitiless]], which is probably why the film is considered to be somewhat of a grindhouse classic. The film lacks a strong female lead, as the lovely and amazingly voluptuous beauty Edwige Fenech sadly just [[seems]] in a couple of scenes, and then still in the background. On of the [[males]] [[backside]] the [[cameras]], responsible for the [[magnifique]] cinematography, was no less then [[Kawa]] D'Amato. [[Wondrous]] [[cinematography]], [[inordinately]] [[suggested]] to fans of Italian exploitation, and I hope to watch it again soon in its original version. --------------------------------------------- Result 1298 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is not a [[bad]] [[film]]. It is not wildly funny, but it is interesting and

[[entertaining]]. It has a few funny [[moments]]. [[Cher]] gives a good

performance in a role that is very opposite her real-life self. Her

performance [[alone]] is worth the watch. [[If]] this [[movie]] had [[come]] out

[[today]] it [[would]] not have been [[nominated]], but by '80s standards it

was [[excellent]]. This is not a [[horrid]] [[movie]]. It is not wildly funny, but it is interesting and

[[amusing]]. It has a few funny [[times]]. [[Sher]] gives a good

performance in a role that is very opposite her real-life self. Her

performance [[only]] is worth the watch. [[Unless]] this [[flick]] had [[coming]] out

[[hoy]] it [[could]] not have been [[appointing]], but by '80s standards it

was [[wondrous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not to mention easily Pierce Brosnon's best performance. Of course Greg Kinnear is always great. Really, when has he really been bad? I think this film is incredibly underrated! The use of colors in this movie is something very different in today's film world where every other movie has the Payback blue filter. I also love the way they used the song by Asia. Proving that even what was once thought of as kinda cheesy can be really cool placed correctly.

I was making my first feature when this came out. Being that my film was a hit-man movie, I had to check out anything in the genre that was released. After seeing it, I'm sure it had some effect on me through the process. It was pretty cool when my film got on the IMDb that it would recommend this film if you liked mine. How any of the others relate I have no idea, making an even more interesting coincidence.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337580/ --------------------------------------------- Result 1300 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Wow]]. I read about this movie and it [[sounded]] so [[awful]] that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can smell it in St Louis. Where do I [[start]]? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the success of [[Animal]] [[House]], but they completely missed the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.

Short Film #1

Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said "hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?" Peter was like "well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't [[carry]] this sorry short flop for 5 minutes.

POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York bimbos (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The [[idea]] was actually [[somewhat]] clever, but the director stunk. The [[characters]] all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry [[Boon]], your [[legacy]] was [[tarnished]] with this [[flop]].

Short Film #2

[[MORE]] [[SPOILERS]]

Enter [[Dominique]] Corsaire. Pretty [[girl]], recently [[finished]] college, not sure what to do with her [[life]]. So she becomes a [[slut]], starts sleeping around with some [[mega]] rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she [[beds]] the most [[powerful]] man in the [[world]], Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the [[president]] of the United States). Once again, it [[could]] have been funny, and [[though]] I was [[happy]] that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.

Short Film #3

I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does [[anything]]. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!

Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.

The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating "Going to the Movies" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading "what you should NEVER do in film-making." This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad. [[Ruff]]. I read about this movie and it [[seemed]] so [[appalling]] that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can smell it in St Louis. Where do I [[embark]]? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the success of [[Zoo]] [[Housing]], but they completely missed the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.

Short Film #1

Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said "hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?" Peter was like "well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't [[transporting]] this sorry short flop for 5 minutes.

POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York bimbos (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The [[notions]] was actually [[rather]] clever, but the director stunk. The [[attribute]] all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry [[Boone]], your [[inheritance]] was [[tinted]] with this [[collapse]].

Short Film #2

[[GREATER]] [[TROUBLEMAKERS]]

Enter [[Dominic]] Corsaire. Pretty [[giri]], recently [[finis]] college, not sure what to do with her [[iife]]. So she becomes a [[tramp]], starts sleeping around with some [[super]] rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she [[cots]] the most [[emphatic]] man in the [[worldwide]], Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the [[chairing]] of the United States). Once again, it [[did]] have been funny, and [[although]] I was [[joyous]] that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.

Short Film #3

I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does [[nothing]]. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!

Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.

The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating "Going to the Movies" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading "what you should NEVER do in film-making." This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film is pretty poor. The acting is [[abysmal]] and completely [[forced]]. Furthermore, by [[shooting]] the film as a docudrama doesn't [[necessarily]] make it more [[believable]], you can't get out of it that easily Mr Dir. Don't let my comments mislead you [[however]], as i [[would]] [[recommend]] you watch this [[film]], as it does [[shed]] some light on the [[psychology]] or non existent [[psychology]] behind the [[perpetrators]] of such crimes. However, the [[climax]] of the film is absolutely [[rubbish]]! There is no other way to put it! It pure and [[simply]] [[fails]] to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not [[translate]] to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No [[instead]] it leaves you with jaw [[dropping]] "[[Was]] that it?!" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for [[yet]] another [[film]] that started with [[potential]], but ended up falling flat on its [[face]] at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz This film is pretty poor. The acting is [[horrific]] and completely [[obliged]]. Furthermore, by [[gunshot]] the film as a docudrama doesn't [[invariably]] make it more [[dependable]], you can't get out of it that easily Mr Dir. Don't let my comments mislead you [[instead]], as i [[could]] [[recommendations]] you watch this [[filmmaking]], as it does [[boathouse]] some light on the [[psyche]] or non existent [[psyche]] behind the [[violators]] of such crimes. However, the [[orgasm]] of the film is absolutely [[litter]]! There is no other way to put it! It pure and [[merely]] [[fail]] to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not [[converting]] to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No [[alternatively]] it leaves you with jaw [[downing]] "[[Were]] that it?!" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for [[however]] another [[filmmaking]] that started with [[prospective]], but ended up falling flat on its [[encounter]] at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz --------------------------------------------- Result 1302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Oh my [[GOD]]. I [[bought]] this movie and...I...[[watched]]...the...[[whole]]...[[thing]]. . . [[Okay]], it's going to be alright... I'l know I'll be okay in a month or two. Some time soon I [[hope]] to be rid of the flash backs. I was [[going]] to eat something after the [[movie]] but I just can't [[seem]] to get up the [[courage]] to [[try]] and hold any food down at the moment. Bad? Yes bad. [[Very]] BAD. BAD [[BAD]] BAD BAD [[BAD]]. Wait, bad doesn't seem to [[get]] the message [[across]] in [[quite]] the right [[way]]. [[Hmm]]... There isn't a word to [[describe]] just how [[awful]].... not awful... [[Hmm]] disgustingly [[horribly]] casted/acted/[[filmed]]/[[directed]]/[[written]]. Now I don't know what to do but throw it out. [[Possibly]] burn it I wouldn't [[want]] it to [[end]] up at the bottom of an architectural dig a thousand [[years]] from now. The [[worst]] [[movie]] ever [[since]] "[[Hey]] [[Happy]]" Oh my [[DEUS]]. I [[acquiring]] this movie and...I...[[seen]]...the...[[overall]]...[[stuff]]. . . [[Ok]], it's going to be alright... I'l know I'll be okay in a month or two. Some time soon I [[hopes]] to be rid of the flash backs. I was [[go]] to eat something after the [[filmmaking]] but I just can't [[appears]] to get up the [[gallantry]] to [[trying]] and hold any food down at the moment. Bad? Yes bad. [[Extremely]] BAD. BAD [[ROTTEN]] BAD BAD [[ROTTEN]]. Wait, bad doesn't seem to [[gets]] the message [[throughout]] in [[utterly]] the right [[camino]]. [[Ahem]]... There isn't a word to [[describing]] just how [[horrific]].... not awful... [[Hum]] disgustingly [[unimaginably]] casted/acted/[[shot]]/[[geared]]/[[typed]]. Now I don't know what to do but throw it out. [[Conceivably]] burn it I wouldn't [[wanna]] it to [[ending]] up at the bottom of an architectural dig a thousand [[yr]] from now. The [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[because]] "[[Bye]] [[Joyous]]" --------------------------------------------- Result 1303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Throughly enjoy all the musical numbers each time I see this movie. Never seem to tire of it. Fred and Ginger are always a pleasure to watch. Seeing "Lucy" and Betty Grable before they hit the big time, is fun to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Phantasm ....[[Class]]. Phantasm II.....[[awesome]]. Phantasm III.....erm.....[[terrible]].

Even [[though]] i [[would]] [[love]] to stick up for this [[film]], i [[quite]] [[simply]] can't. The movie seems to have "sold out". First bad signs come when the video has trailers for other [[films]] at the [[start]] (something the others did not). Also too [[many]] [[pointless]] characters, prime examples the kid (who is a crack shot, funny initially but soon you want him dead), the woman who uses karate to fight off the balls (erm not gonna work, or rather shouldn't) and the blooming zombies (what the hell are they doing there, there no link to them in the other Phatasms). Also there is a severe lack of midgets running about.

The only good bits are the cracking [[start]] and, of course, Reggie B.

(Possible SPOILER coming Up)

To me this film seems like a filler between II and IV as extra characters just leave at the end so can [[continue]] with main 4 in IV.

[[Overall]] very, [[VERY]] [[disappointing]]. 3 / 10 Phantasm ....[[Category]]. Phantasm II.....[[sumptuous]]. Phantasm III.....erm.....[[scary]].

Even [[if]] i [[ought]] [[amour]] to stick up for this [[filmmaking]], i [[rather]] [[solely]] can't. The movie seems to have "sold out". First bad signs come when the video has trailers for other [[cinematographic]] at the [[startup]] (something the others did not). Also too [[myriad]] [[superfluous]] characters, prime examples the kid (who is a crack shot, funny initially but soon you want him dead), the woman who uses karate to fight off the balls (erm not gonna work, or rather shouldn't) and the blooming zombies (what the hell are they doing there, there no link to them in the other Phatasms). Also there is a severe lack of midgets running about.

The only good bits are the cracking [[starter]] and, of course, Reggie B.

(Possible SPOILER coming Up)

To me this film seems like a filler between II and IV as extra characters just leave at the end so can [[continuing]] with main 4 in IV.

[[Total]] very, [[QUITE]] [[frustrating]]. 3 / 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very rarely does Denzil Washington make a bad movie and come to think of it that goes for Kevin Kline and in this case , this must count as one of their best films. It is more about of film about how strong friendship can more than the story of Steve Biko although we do get an insight into what the man was like and how far the reporter and friend Donald Woods went to preserve the mans name and let the world know what a corrupt , putrid society South Africa was. The Direction is outstanding from David Attenborough as it was for Gandhi although if there is any critisism to be aimed it could be at the length of the film. Two and a half hours is a long time to sit through a historic movie .What is amazing is how he manages to control all the extras. Thousands of people in both films. This film really does open your eyes to what happened before the break up of Aparthiet and you cannot fail to moved by it. 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Some [[guy]] gets [[whacked]]. Right out in [[plain]] sight this other guy [[shoots]] him. He's got some bodyguards and they whack the [[killer]], but a [[reporter]] gets interested. She goes to the [[hospital]] where they [[took]] the [[guy]] who [[got]] whacked. She [[walks]] in, and corners one [[bodyguard]], but he doesn't feel [[like]] talking. I can't figure out why. It's not like anyone else is interested. She's the only [[reporter]] there. Anyway, her [[editor]] discourages her from [[working]] on this lame [[story]]. But hey, she does anyway. She goes to see the killer's sister & mom. A few minutes after she leaves they get whacked big time-- somebody blows up their trailer-- huge ball of fire. Then she searches out the bodyguard from the hospital. She finds him hungover on his boat, but a minute later they're both underwater sucking on a scuba tank 'cause three guys are trying to whack them (and have blown up the boat big time-- huge ball of fire). The reporter and the bodyguard whack two of the guys who are trying to whack them.

In the course of the next hour another guy gets whacked crossing the street, there's a shootout with several stiffs in a warehouse, some car chases with wreckage & death, a fake suicide, etc. etc. Lotsa stiffs, all kindsa carnage.

Great stuff, but what the [[reporter]] and the bodyguard can't [[figure]] is: why in hell the original [[guy]] [[got]] whacked. What's the motivation? Of course, it [[might]] [[help]] us to [[figure]] out why the reporter's even interested. Through almost all of this she's the only [[reporter]] on the [[story]]. Nobody else in the media cares. Not even with all the big fireballs and dead [[bodies]]. [[True]], the original guy who [[got]] whacked wasn't exactly a [[celebrity]]. His [[job]] was a [[little]] bit dull. He was just the [[President]]. [[Yeah]], the one who lives in the White [[House]]. [[Oh]], and the bodyguard is a Secret [[Service]] [[agent]].

Is that the spoiler?

It should be. [[After]] all there are no TV cameras, no other [[print]] [[reporters]], no bloggers... just another one of those police blotter [[crimes]]...

So what's the spoiler?

Lemme think...

No! Wait! The spoiler is that his wife did it! Yeah... the First Lady. She was p---ed because the President was fooling around. And she gets away with it. She's really sharp, huh? But how the hell could anybody ever figure that out? Why would anyone bother? After all, only one reporter is even interested.

I give this move a "1". It was so dumb I just had to keep watching. And it only got dumber! That's the real spoiler! But even though I've told you, you've got to see it to believe it! Some [[blokes]] gets [[jacked]]. Right out in [[plains]] sight this other guy [[twigs]] him. He's got some bodyguards and they whack the [[callin]], but a [[reporters]] gets interested. She goes to the [[clinic]] where they [[taken]] the [[blokes]] who [[ai]] whacked. She [[strolls]] in, and corners one [[goon]], but he doesn't feel [[iike]] talking. I can't figure out why. It's not like anyone else is interested. She's the only [[reporters]] there. Anyway, her [[editorial]] discourages her from [[cooperated]] on this lame [[fairytales]]. But hey, she does anyway. She goes to see the killer's sister & mom. A few minutes after she leaves they get whacked big time-- somebody blows up their trailer-- huge ball of fire. Then she searches out the bodyguard from the hospital. She finds him hungover on his boat, but a minute later they're both underwater sucking on a scuba tank 'cause three guys are trying to whack them (and have blown up the boat big time-- huge ball of fire). The reporter and the bodyguard whack two of the guys who are trying to whack them.

In the course of the next hour another guy gets whacked crossing the street, there's a shootout with several stiffs in a warehouse, some car chases with wreckage & death, a fake suicide, etc. etc. Lotsa stiffs, all kindsa carnage.

Great stuff, but what the [[journalist]] and the bodyguard can't [[silhouette]] is: why in hell the original [[guys]] [[gets]] whacked. What's the motivation? Of course, it [[apt]] [[assists]] us to [[silhouette]] out why the reporter's even interested. Through almost all of this she's the only [[journalist]] on the [[conte]]. Nobody else in the media cares. Not even with all the big fireballs and dead [[institutions]]. [[Veritable]], the original guy who [[get]] whacked wasn't exactly a [[stars]]. His [[labor]] was a [[small]] bit dull. He was just the [[Preside]]. [[Yup]], the one who lives in the White [[Home]]. [[Ohhh]], and the bodyguard is a Secret [[Servicing]] [[patrolman]].

Is that the spoiler?

It should be. [[Upon]] all there are no TV cameras, no other [[fingerprints]] [[correspondents]], no bloggers... just another one of those police blotter [[infractions]]...

So what's the spoiler?

Lemme think...

No! Wait! The spoiler is that his wife did it! Yeah... the First Lady. She was p---ed because the President was fooling around. And she gets away with it. She's really sharp, huh? But how the hell could anybody ever figure that out? Why would anyone bother? After all, only one reporter is even interested.

I give this move a "1". It was so dumb I just had to keep watching. And it only got dumber! That's the real spoiler! But even though I've told you, you've got to see it to believe it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen many, many films from China - and Hong Kong. This is the worst. No, the worst one was 'Unknown Pleasures'. I watched 'Platform' yesterday evening and thought that Jia Zhang Ke's other two films must be better. This evening I was disappointed again. I will not be watching 'Xiao Wu' tomorrow evening because I have just placed all three films in the bin! Whoever gave this film, 'Platform' ten out of ten, needs to watch more cinema! The photography was very poor: it was very difficult to differentiate between some of the characters because of the lack of close-up work. The storyline was so disjointed that I fast-forwarded it towards the end out of pure frustration. I would not recommend this film to anyone. Give me Zhang Yimou or Chen Kage any day. These are true masters of Chinese cinema, not pretentious con men! --------------------------------------------- Result 1308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This su*k! Why do they have to make movies that they must know su*k from the beginning? I mean, look at Alien from 1977. If the movie you´r about to make is not better than anything made billions of years before, why make it? I had problems with the plot and who the main character was. That's not good either. --------------------------------------------- Result 1309 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best films I have seen in years! I am not a Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but she is excellent as Emma Woodhouse. Alan Cumming is superb as Reverand Elton, and Emma Thompson's sister, Sophie, is hysterical as Miss Bates. And check out the gorgeous Jeremy Northam as Mr. Knightley; what a gentleman! Whoever said you need sex and violence in a movie to make it good has never seen Emma. I think that is what separates it from so many others--it's classy.

If you're looking for a film that you can watch with the whole family, or looking for a romance for yourself, look no further. Emma is that movie. With a beautiful setting, wonderful costumes, and an outstanding cast (have I mentioned the gorgeous Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a perfect ten! --------------------------------------------- Result 1310 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When this movie was first shown on television I had high hopes that we would finally have a decent movie about World War I as experienced by American soldiers. Unfortunately this is not it.

It should have been a good movie about WWI. Even though it was made for television it is obvious that a real effort was made to use appropriate equipment and props. But the writing and directing are badly lacking, even though the makers of this movie obviously borrowed freely from quite a few well made war movies. War movie clichés abound such as the arrogant general who apparently does not care a flip about the lives of his men. When will Hollywood realize that, even though there have been plenty of bad generals, most combat unit generals have seen plenty of combat themselves and are not naive about what the average grunt experiences? The first part of this movie appeared to be "Paths of Glory" with American uniforms. Except that "Paths of Glory" was emotionally gripping. Later on there was Chamberlain's charge (except uphill) from "Gettysburg" and even the capture of the American soldier by a ring of enemy soldiers from "The Thin Red Line". But in "The Thin Red Line" the soldier was alone when captured. In this movie a ring forms around the new prisoner in the middle of a battle.

If this movie used a military adviser they ignored him. Even though the actors (and I never could forget they were actors while watching) mouthed military tactics I didn't see very much of it. The American soldiers would stand up to be shot while the Germans attacked. And the infamous Storm Troopers, who were apparently blind, appeared to use no tactics whatsoever in their attack. In the real war, the tactics were what made storm troopers so effective. But the silliest scene was the attack of the German Flamethrowers. In this scene the German flamethrower operators walked in a broad line towards the defending Americans. If that had been real they would never have gotten close enough to use their flamethrowers before they had all been dropped by the defender's bullets.

Okay, so most war movies are unrealistic when it comes to the tactics shown. But it is still disappointing. But what really turned me off to this flick was the typical anti-war anti-military angle that movie makers seem to think is important. True, war is hell. But most American soldiers, even though they grumble and gripe, tend to believe in what they are doing and can be rather gung-ho about it. My Grandfather served in World War I. And even though he died four years before I was born I have been told how proud he was of his service. --------------------------------------------- Result 1311 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is a well directed film from [[John]] Cromwell who was not a [[great]] [[director]] but who did [[make]] some fine [[films]] including the 1937 version of 'The Prsoner of Zenda'. Set in a London that only Hollywood [[could]] [[manage]], atmospheric but nothing [[like]] the [[real]] thing, it is a story of [[obsession]] and [[thwarted]] [[love]], from the novel by Somerset Maughan.

I was looking forward to seeing it on [[DVD]] as I had never seen it before and being a [[great]] admirer of [[Bette]] [[Davis]] [[wanted]] to see her in a role [[considered]] one of her early [[great]] ones. So I [[bought]] it. Well she looked fine but I'm [[sorry]] to say her London cockney [[accent]] just made me laugh. [[Bette]] [[Davis]] was one of the [[greatest]] [[film]] [[actors]], make no mistake, but here she did [[make]] one. It was impossible to [[take]] her [[character]] seriously. It wasn't as [[gruesome]] as the Dick Van Dyke 'Mary Poppins' cockney accent but [[close]].

[[In]] the other [[major]] role was [[Leslie]] Howard and he did it [[superbly]]. He was a [[subtle]] and [[intelligent]] [[actor]] The [[supporting]] [[actors]] acquit themselves well. Worth [[watching]] despite [[Ms]] Davis' vocal gymnastics. This is a well directed film from [[Johannes]] Cromwell who was not a [[large]] [[headmaster]] but who did [[deliver]] some fine [[kino]] including the 1937 version of 'The Prsoner of Zenda'. Set in a London that only Hollywood [[would]] [[managing]], atmospheric but nothing [[iike]] the [[actual]] thing, it is a story of [[mania]] and [[frustrated]] [[loves]], from the novel by Somerset Maughan.

I was looking forward to seeing it on [[DVDS]] as I had never seen it before and being a [[fantastic]] admirer of [[Midler]] [[Davies]] [[wished]] to see her in a role [[regarded]] one of her early [[remarkable]] ones. So I [[buying]] it. Well she looked fine but I'm [[desolated]] to say her London cockney [[emphasis]] just made me laugh. [[Midler]] [[Davies]] was one of the [[larger]] [[kino]] [[players]], make no mistake, but here she did [[deliver]] one. It was impossible to [[taking]] her [[characters]] seriously. It wasn't as [[terrible]] as the Dick Van Dyke 'Mary Poppins' cockney accent but [[shut]].

[[Throughout]] the other [[principal]] role was [[Lesley]] Howard and he did it [[remarkably]]. He was a [[perceptive]] and [[termite]] [[protagonist]] The [[assisting]] [[players]] acquit themselves well. Worth [[staring]] despite [[Mrs]] Davis' vocal gymnastics. --------------------------------------------- Result 1312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I couldn't tell if "The Screaming Skull" was [[trying]] to be a Hitchcock rip off or a [[modernized]] Edgar Allen Poe [[tribute]]. These days, [[someone]] [[would]] have chopped it up a bit and [[presented]] it as one of those [[TV]] anthology episodes from the old "Tales From The Dark Side"...but only after an [[extensive]] rewrite.

The [[sad]] thing is, there seems to be a nice, nasty little story trying to get out from under the [[rubble]] of this [[movie]], and the actors are [[obviously]] doing the best they can with both their [[talent]] and the material they have to [[work]] with. But the director just didn't know how to stage or pace a [[dramatic]] scene; the special effects [[simply]] didn't [[work]]; the screenplay telegraphed its threadbare plot points so [[plainly]] that a bivalve could have seen them coming; and the soundtrack kept playing German "oompah band" music when it was supposed to be trying to scare the audience.

They tried; they tried really hard. But this is of interest only as a period piece.I [[suppose]] someone very young who hadn't seen a lot of suspense or horror might get a charge out "The Screaming Skull", but someone that young probably wouldn't get most of the subtext or plot motivation. ("Mommy, why is that nice man trying to scare the twisty faced scaredy-cat lady??") I couldn't tell if "The Screaming Skull" was [[try]] to be a Hitchcock rip off or a [[updates]] Edgar Allen Poe [[accolades]]. These days, [[anybody]] [[could]] have chopped it up a bit and [[lodged]] it as one of those [[TVS]] anthology episodes from the old "Tales From The Dark Side"...but only after an [[wide]] rewrite.

The [[unfortunate]] thing is, there seems to be a nice, nasty little story trying to get out from under the [[vandalize]] of this [[filmmaking]], and the actors are [[definitely]] doing the best they can with both their [[talents]] and the material they have to [[working]] with. But the director just didn't know how to stage or pace a [[whopping]] scene; the special effects [[exclusively]] didn't [[collaborated]]; the screenplay telegraphed its threadbare plot points so [[frankly]] that a bivalve could have seen them coming; and the soundtrack kept playing German "oompah band" music when it was supposed to be trying to scare the audience.

They tried; they tried really hard. But this is of interest only as a period piece.I [[imagining]] someone very young who hadn't seen a lot of suspense or horror might get a charge out "The Screaming Skull", but someone that young probably wouldn't get most of the subtext or plot motivation. ("Mommy, why is that nice man trying to scare the twisty faced scaredy-cat lady??") --------------------------------------------- Result 1313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[sat]] through this [[movie]] [[expecting]] a thought-provoking, fact-based [[film]]. But instead was given some of the [[least]] thought out [[arguments]] against the Christian faith [[imaginable]]. [[For]] instance, in an effort to prove that Christianity is inherently violent, the narrator constantly quotes the bible without giving context, and thus altering the meaning of the text. Jesus is quoted as commanding the execution of those who disobey him, when in fact, the quote is from a parable Jesus told, involving a king who is then quoted. Thus the narrator makes it appear as if Jesus says one thing when he is actually telling a story where one of his characters says it. This is dishonesty in a very obvious form. Is this really what Atheism has to offer the world? This [[film]] also [[attempts]] to [[use]] the success of the Passion of the Christ over Jesus Christ: Superstar and The Last Temptation of the Christ as evidence that Christians are bloodthirsty. He makes no mention of the fact that the Passion was the most historically accurate Bible-film to date. He makes no mention of the fact that it was actually the best liked by critics of the bunch. He then edits in a series of violent images from the Passion as if to hammer home his point. Ironically, he makes no mention of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre which came out a few months later and plays violence for entertainment, versus dramatic effect.

One thing that really bothered me was his [[mockery]] of people who actually knew more about the subject matter than he did. All the Christians he interviewed were average schmoes in the parking lot of Billy Graham's New York Crusade. Atheists he interviewed for the [[film]] were notable authors and scholars. He asked the Christians how the Christian movement started, and of course, they [[said]] it started with the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples at Pentecost. Which is correct (Acts 2). He then [[gives]] the commentary, "isn't it funny how so few Christians seem to know the [[origins]] of their own faith?" and [[proceeds]] to explain that the apostle [[Paul]] [[started]] Christianity after being [[stopped]] on the [[road]] to Damascus. The [[poor]] [[chap]] seems convinced that Acts 9 happens before [[Acts]] 2. [[More]] [[deception]]? Or is this [[simply]] ignorance? He also [[throws]] around [[nonsense]] that Paul didn't [[believe]] [[Jesus]] was a [[real]] [[person]]. Are you [[kidding]] me? 1 Corinthians 15 [[describes]] [[Jesus]] [[death]] and [[resurrection]] being [[witnessed]] by people (whom [[Paul]] names in the passage) for the Corinthians to question if they are in doubt!

There are many many other [[examples]] of how [[full]] of crap this 'documentary' is. But because I don't have time or patience to go into them all, I'll skip straight to the end. It's obvious throughout the whole movie that the narrator has an emotional vendetta against his [[upbringing]] in the church. And the climax interview is HIS CHILDHOOD PRINCIPLE! In a last-ditch attempt to disprove the Christian faith, the narrator tries to make a fool out of someone who gave him a detention as a child. Is this what passes as an intellectual documentary for the Atheist community? Surely there are intelligent Atheist filmmakers out there who can make a documentary that isn't a load of made-up crap passed off as 'facts'. I [[oin]] through this [[filmmaking]] [[wait]] a thought-provoking, fact-based [[cinematographic]]. But instead was given some of the [[less]] thought out [[controversies]] against the Christian faith [[unimaginable]]. [[At]] instance, in an effort to prove that Christianity is inherently violent, the narrator constantly quotes the bible without giving context, and thus altering the meaning of the text. Jesus is quoted as commanding the execution of those who disobey him, when in fact, the quote is from a parable Jesus told, involving a king who is then quoted. Thus the narrator makes it appear as if Jesus says one thing when he is actually telling a story where one of his characters says it. This is dishonesty in a very obvious form. Is this really what Atheism has to offer the world? This [[filmmaking]] also [[strives]] to [[utilizing]] the success of the Passion of the Christ over Jesus Christ: Superstar and The Last Temptation of the Christ as evidence that Christians are bloodthirsty. He makes no mention of the fact that the Passion was the most historically accurate Bible-film to date. He makes no mention of the fact that it was actually the best liked by critics of the bunch. He then edits in a series of violent images from the Passion as if to hammer home his point. Ironically, he makes no mention of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre which came out a few months later and plays violence for entertainment, versus dramatic effect.

One thing that really bothered me was his [[parody]] of people who actually knew more about the subject matter than he did. All the Christians he interviewed were average schmoes in the parking lot of Billy Graham's New York Crusade. Atheists he interviewed for the [[filmmaking]] were notable authors and scholars. He asked the Christians how the Christian movement started, and of course, they [[says]] it started with the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples at Pentecost. Which is correct (Acts 2). He then [[provides]] the commentary, "isn't it funny how so few Christians seem to know the [[root]] of their own faith?" and [[revenues]] to explain that the apostle [[Paolo]] [[launches]] Christianity after being [[stopping]] on the [[estrada]] to Damascus. The [[poorest]] [[lad]] seems convinced that Acts 9 happens before [[Act]] 2. [[Most]] [[cheating]]? Or is this [[purely]] ignorance? He also [[sheds]] around [[farcical]] that Paul didn't [[believing]] [[Christ]] was a [[veritable]] [[anybody]]. Are you [[mocking]] me? 1 Corinthians 15 [[portray]] [[Damn]] [[killings]] and [[reanimation]] being [[saw]] by people (whom [[Paulo]] names in the passage) for the Corinthians to question if they are in doubt!

There are many many other [[case]] of how [[fullest]] of crap this 'documentary' is. But because I don't have time or patience to go into them all, I'll skip straight to the end. It's obvious throughout the whole movie that the narrator has an emotional vendetta against his [[education]] in the church. And the climax interview is HIS CHILDHOOD PRINCIPLE! In a last-ditch attempt to disprove the Christian faith, the narrator tries to make a fool out of someone who gave him a detention as a child. Is this what passes as an intellectual documentary for the Atheist community? Surely there are intelligent Atheist filmmakers out there who can make a documentary that isn't a load of made-up crap passed off as 'facts'. --------------------------------------------- Result 1314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my fourth Joe McDoakes short that I've seen and so far the funniest one. In this one, Joe takes voice lessons from a record impersonating Charles Boyer and Ronald Colman. When he goes to Warner Bros. Studio (the company behind this series, incidentally), he asks Jack Carson for directions which gets both confused. Then he encounters actor George O'Hanlon (who's also McDoakes) who speaks in his more normal voice that's not too far from his later Geroge Jetson and gets to the set where he automatically upsets the director. I'll stop there and just say how funny I found the whole thing and was fascinated by the movie star cameos provided near the end. The final scene was especially a hoot so on that note, go to YouTube if you want to watch So You Want to Be in Picutres! --------------------------------------------- Result 1315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently purchased the complete American Gothic series on DVD and it lived up to my memories of it. I was very grateful to be able to view for the first time episodes that were never televised. I loved "Ring of Fire" in particular of the stories I hadn't seen the first time around.

Gary Cole is fantastic as "evil, sexy" Lucas Buck. Lucas Black as Caleb is also a superb player. I thought Brenda Bakke as Selena Coombs was also superb in her portrayal. In fact, the whole cast was fantastically talented and had great chemistry with each other.

It's a shame the series was screwed by the network (in collusion with a burgeoning group of censors) because it was truly designed for adult viewing. A mixture of comedy, tragedy, farce, satire, Gothic romance and horror genres, it offered brilliant characterizations supported by acting at the genius level.

I had the most tremendous lust for the devil for once in my life. Long live Gary Cole (Sheriff Lucas Buck), the most luscious "fallen angel" ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 1316 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Personally, this is one of my favorites of all time! no, i'm not 10.. i'm 30! i own an old, original VHS of this that i bought from a rental store. i've watched it countless times..

while it's an amusing movie for kids, it's an intriguing movie for adults. i once saw this movie whiile i was.. not sober. my eyes were opened to things i had never noticed before. i saw morals being strongly encouraged, both overtly and somewhat subliminally.. i wish i could remember all the things i noticed in particular, but it's been a very long time since then. rest assured, there are TONS of things that are alluded to throughout the movie. if you get the chance to view it.. not sober.. do so, you won't be disappointed.. as a matter of fact, you will probably feel rather happy and warm.

unique and wonderful! --------------------------------------------- Result 1317 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Outside of the fact that [[George]] Lopez is a [[pretentious]] [[jerk]], his [[show]] is [[terrible]].

Nothing about Lopez has ever been [[funny]]. I have [[watched]] his stand-up and have never uttered any [[resemblance]] to a [[laugh]].

His stuff comes [[across]] as [[vindictive]] and his [[animosity]] towards white people [[oozes]] out of [[every]] [[single]] [[pore]] of his [[body]].

I have [[laughed]] at [[white]] people jokes from [[many]] a [[comedian]] and [[love]] [[many]] of them.

This [[guy]] has a [[grudge]] that won't [[end]].

I feel [[bad]] for Hispanics who have only this show to represent themselves.

The shows plots are [[always]] cookie cutter with an Hispanic [[accent]].

Canned [[laugh]] at the [[dumbest]] [[comments]] and scenes.

[[Might]] be why this show is always on at 2AM in [[replay]]. Outside of the fact that [[Giorgi]] Lopez is a [[cocky]] [[idiot]], his [[demonstrating]] is [[horrible]].

Nothing about Lopez has ever been [[hilarious]]. I have [[observed]] his stand-up and have never uttered any [[analogy]] to a [[chuckles]].

His stuff comes [[during]] as [[spiteful]] and his [[hostility]] towards white people [[oozing]] out of [[all]] [[exclusive]] [[pores]] of his [[agencies]].

I have [[laughs]] at [[blanca]] people jokes from [[innumerable]] a [[comic]] and [[adores]] [[various]] of them.

This [[guys]] has a [[dent]] that won't [[terminate]].

I feel [[negative]] for Hispanics who have only this show to represent themselves.

The shows plots are [[invariably]] cookie cutter with an Hispanic [[focusing]].

Canned [[chuckles]] at the [[stupidest]] [[sightings]] and scenes.

[[Apt]] be why this show is always on at 2AM in [[playback]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Over the [[past]] year, Uwe Boll has shown [[marginal]] improvement as a filmmaker, [[cranking]] out the [[competent]] "[[In]] the [[Name]] of the [[King]]" (a "[[Lord]] of the Rings" [[clone]]) and the proudly [[vulgar]], post-9/11 satire "Postal." But then [[came]] "Seed," and the counter was [[reset]] to [[Zero]], keeping his [[bid]] for legitimacy and respect that much further out of [[reach]]. And I'm a [[fan]] of the [[guy]]–his [[films]] [[exhibit]] a uniquely [[screwball]] vision, and are never dull.

Spawned from his frustration over the savage notices his early films received, "Seed" is a colossally misguided attempt at social commentary, and an even worse jab at creating an iconic slasher mythology (Boll often seems to be taking a page from Rob Zombie's successful reboot of "Halloween"). The antagonist is Maxwell Seed (Will Sanderson), a mute, hulking brute who's slain 666 people and sits on death row, awaiting execution; after unsuccessfully frying the beast, he rises from the grave to seek revenge on those who put him there...and so begins a string of wholly gratuitous mayhem.

Trying to create a new-millennium slasher in the vein of Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, Max Seed is too nondescript and boring to leave an impression, ultimately resembling a washed-up pro wrestler doing "The Toolbox Murders" on a succession of equally [[boring]] victims. Furthermore, Seed's character and Boll's "message" run contrary to one another: the death penalty is wrong, sure, but are we really expected to sympathize with a soulless killer who's left a couple hundred corpses in his wake? I think not.

Meanwhile, Michael Pare acts like a listless, long-lost brother to James Remar's character on "Dexter": a cop who sits at his desk a lot, thumbing through newspaper clippings, and watching [[pointless]] stop-motion scenes of decomposing animals and people trapped in Seed's lair. By the time he and a bunch of cardboard cops storm Seed's hideout, the sequence is so drawn-out, ill-conceived (the lighting is almost non-existent), and unexciting (despite a healthy dose of gore) that it almost put me to sleep.

The shoddy film-making isn't limited to just that sequence: "Seed" appears to have been shot by a drunken cinematographer, since the camera bobs and weaves endlessly, a technique that's more stomach-turning than the gore itself; these protracted takes of very little happening only draw attention to the meandering, almost non-existent narrative. At 90 minutes, the film is distended enough to be considered a form of torture, which might have been Boll's intent all along.

Pure genius...I guess the joke's on me. Over the [[preceding]] year, Uwe Boll has shown [[minor]] improvement as a filmmaker, [[starting]] out the [[proficient]] "[[At]] the [[Designation]] of the [[Emperor]]" (a "[[Gods]] of the Rings" [[clooney]]) and the proudly [[uncivilised]], post-9/11 satire "Postal." But then [[became]] "Seed," and the counter was [[resumed]] to [[Null]], keeping his [[tender]] for legitimacy and respect that much further out of [[attain]]. And I'm a [[breather]] of the [[man]]–his [[movie]] [[exposition]] a uniquely [[wacky]] vision, and are never dull.

Spawned from his frustration over the savage notices his early films received, "Seed" is a colossally misguided attempt at social commentary, and an even worse jab at creating an iconic slasher mythology (Boll often seems to be taking a page from Rob Zombie's successful reboot of "Halloween"). The antagonist is Maxwell Seed (Will Sanderson), a mute, hulking brute who's slain 666 people and sits on death row, awaiting execution; after unsuccessfully frying the beast, he rises from the grave to seek revenge on those who put him there...and so begins a string of wholly gratuitous mayhem.

Trying to create a new-millennium slasher in the vein of Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, Max Seed is too nondescript and boring to leave an impression, ultimately resembling a washed-up pro wrestler doing "The Toolbox Murders" on a succession of equally [[bored]] victims. Furthermore, Seed's character and Boll's "message" run contrary to one another: the death penalty is wrong, sure, but are we really expected to sympathize with a soulless killer who's left a couple hundred corpses in his wake? I think not.

Meanwhile, Michael Pare acts like a listless, long-lost brother to James Remar's character on "Dexter": a cop who sits at his desk a lot, thumbing through newspaper clippings, and watching [[dispensable]] stop-motion scenes of decomposing animals and people trapped in Seed's lair. By the time he and a bunch of cardboard cops storm Seed's hideout, the sequence is so drawn-out, ill-conceived (the lighting is almost non-existent), and unexciting (despite a healthy dose of gore) that it almost put me to sleep.

The shoddy film-making isn't limited to just that sequence: "Seed" appears to have been shot by a drunken cinematographer, since the camera bobs and weaves endlessly, a technique that's more stomach-turning than the gore itself; these protracted takes of very little happening only draw attention to the meandering, almost non-existent narrative. At 90 minutes, the film is distended enough to be considered a form of torture, which might have been Boll's intent all along.

Pure genius...I guess the joke's on me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is a [[candidate]] for the single most [[disappointing]] movie [[experience]] of my [[lifetime]]. Cool title, excellent [[director]] (I [[saw]] "To [[Die]] For" and "[[Drugstore]] Cowboy" before this), and [[hey]] - [[Uma]] Thurman in the cast. How can you [[go]] wrong? Well, that is a question that throbbed in my [[temples]] for [[hours]] after I [[watched]] this [[turkey]].

[[Disjointed]] and unfunny in an [[attempt]] to be offbeat, this is a dead-zone of a movie that should be [[avoided]] at all [[costs]]. Its [[critical]] lambasting was well [[deserved]]. You have here one of those rare [[films]] that does not contain a single [[redeeming]] quality. [[Zero]] out of ****. This is a [[nominee]] for the single most [[discouraging]] movie [[enjoying]] of my [[vie]]. Cool title, excellent [[headmaster]] (I [[seen]] "To [[Deaths]] For" and "[[Pharmacy]] Cowboy" before this), and [[salut]] - [[Amu]] Thurman in the cast. How can you [[going]] wrong? Well, that is a question that throbbed in my [[synagogues]] for [[hour]] after I [[saw]] this [[turk]].

[[Unconnected]] and unfunny in an [[strives]] to be offbeat, this is a dead-zone of a movie that should be [[shunned]] at all [[pricing]]. Its [[indispensable]] lambasting was well [[merited]]. You have here one of those rare [[kino]] that does not contain a single [[redeem]] quality. [[Zeroed]] out of ****. --------------------------------------------- Result 1320 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well well well. As good as John Carpenter's season 1 outing in "Masters of Horror" was, this is the complete opposite. He certainly proved he was still a master of horror with "Cigarette Burns" but "Pro-Life" is perhaps the worst I have seen from him.

It's stupid, totally devoid of creepy atmosphere and tension and it overstays it's welcome, despite the less-than-an-hour running time. The script is nonsense, the characters are irritable and un-appealing and the conclusion is beyond absurd.

And for those suckers who actually bought the DVD (one of them being me); did you see how Carpenter describes the film? He's actually proud of it and he talks about it as his best work for a long time, and he praises the script. And in the commentary track, where he notices an obvious screw up that made it to the final cut, he just says he didn't feel it essential to rectify the mistake and he just let it be there. I fear the old master has completely lost his touch. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong.

I want to leave on a positive note and mention that the creature effects are awesome, though. Technically speaking, this film is top notch, with effective lighting schemes and make up effects. --------------------------------------------- Result 1321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Imagine]] the plight of [[Richard]], a painter, [[whose]] real [[passion]] is flying. When we first meet him, he is seen atop a building in London wearing his [[home]] made wings. He has ripped his [[canvases]] and other works, at the height of his despair, and fashions a flying device for his jump. When he falls into the protective police [[contraption]], he doesn't suffer a scratch, but it lands him in front of a [[judge]] who orders him to do [[community]] service. [[Richard]], whose [[relationship]] with Anne apparently ended badly, decides to relocate to a rural area where he finds a place in the country with a large barn he plans to use to construct his own plane.

Richard ends up trying to help Jane Harchard reluctantly. She is a young woman suffering from A.L.S., or Lou Gehrig's disease and is confined to a motorized wheel chair. Jane is extremely intelligent, but has a dark side and a salty vocabulary. She uses a hand held device to speak sometimes, as her speech is not clear. What Jane loves to do is to lose her virginity, at any cost. Jane and Richard clash as they meet, but a mutual tolerance soon makes them comfortable with one another.

Jane, who watches porn on her computer, has a notion for finding someone like Richard Gere in "American Gigolo", who will, for a fee, have sex with her. When Richard takes her to London, they find the right man for the job. His fee is exorbitant, but they agree. Since they have no money, Richard decides to rob a big bank. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan when Jane realizes that she can't go through with what she had wanted. At the end, Richard takes Jane for a ride in his crudely built [[plane]] for the thrill of her life, [[something]] that [[brings]] them closer, as they find an affinity with one another.

Peter Greengrass [[directed]] this [[quirky]] [[film]] which [[presents]] an [[unusual]] situation. [[Jane]] is [[clearly]] not the [[romantic]] heroine in mainstream [[films]], and [[yet]], she has such a sweet aura about her that is [[hard]] not to feel for her and what she is [[trying]] to accomplish. [[Mr]]. Greengrass [[shows]] an affinity Richar Hawkins' material he [[wrote]] for the [[film]]. The [[movie]] doesn't [[try]] to be [[cute]] or [[give]] a rosy [[picture]] of a young [[woman]] afflicted with an incurable disease.

Helena Bonham Carter is the main reason for watching the film. She makes a wonderful Jane. On the other hand, Kenneth Branagh doesn't seem too well suited for this type of comedy. Somehow, he has problems of his own in the way he interprets Richard. Gemma Jones has some good moments as Anne, Richard's former love.

"The Theory of Flight" shows a good director. No doubt Peter Greengrass will go to bigger and better things. [[Suppose]] the plight of [[Richards]], a painter, [[who]] real [[fervour]] is flying. When we first meet him, he is seen atop a building in London wearing his [[dwelling]] made wings. He has ripped his [[canvasses]] and other works, at the height of his despair, and fashions a flying device for his jump. When he falls into the protective police [[gizmo]], he doesn't suffer a scratch, but it lands him in front of a [[richter]] who orders him to do [[communities]] service. [[Ritchie]], whose [[relation]] with Anne apparently ended badly, decides to relocate to a rural area where he finds a place in the country with a large barn he plans to use to construct his own plane.

Richard ends up trying to help Jane Harchard reluctantly. She is a young woman suffering from A.L.S., or Lou Gehrig's disease and is confined to a motorized wheel chair. Jane is extremely intelligent, but has a dark side and a salty vocabulary. She uses a hand held device to speak sometimes, as her speech is not clear. What Jane loves to do is to lose her virginity, at any cost. Jane and Richard clash as they meet, but a mutual tolerance soon makes them comfortable with one another.

Jane, who watches porn on her computer, has a notion for finding someone like Richard Gere in "American Gigolo", who will, for a fee, have sex with her. When Richard takes her to London, they find the right man for the job. His fee is exorbitant, but they agree. Since they have no money, Richard decides to rob a big bank. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan when Jane realizes that she can't go through with what she had wanted. At the end, Richard takes Jane for a ride in his crudely built [[airline]] for the thrill of her life, [[anything]] that [[bring]] them closer, as they find an affinity with one another.

Peter Greengrass [[aimed]] this [[fickle]] [[kino]] which [[presented]] an [[odd]] situation. [[Jin]] is [[blatantly]] not the [[sentimental]] heroine in mainstream [[kino]], and [[even]], she has such a sweet aura about her that is [[stiff]] not to feel for her and what she is [[tempting]] to accomplish. [[Hannes]]. Greengrass [[showing]] an affinity Richar Hawkins' material he [[written]] for the [[kino]]. The [[kino]] doesn't [[endeavour]] to be [[adorable]] or [[lend]] a rosy [[pictures]] of a young [[femmes]] afflicted with an incurable disease.

Helena Bonham Carter is the main reason for watching the film. She makes a wonderful Jane. On the other hand, Kenneth Branagh doesn't seem too well suited for this type of comedy. Somehow, he has problems of his own in the way he interprets Richard. Gemma Jones has some good moments as Anne, Richard's former love.

"The Theory of Flight" shows a good director. No doubt Peter Greengrass will go to bigger and better things. --------------------------------------------- Result 1322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this on cable back in the early 90's and loved it. Never saw it again until it showed up on cable again recently. Still find it a great Vietnam movie. Not sure why its not higher rated. I found everything about this film compelling. As a vet (not from Vietnam) I can relate to the situations brought by both Harris and De Niro. I can only imagine this film being more poignant now with our situation in Iraq. I wish this would be offered on cable more often for people to see. The human toll on our soldiers isn't left on the battlefield. Its brought home for the rest of there lives. And this film is one of many that brings that home in a very hard way. Excellent film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Now]], it would be some [[sort]] of cliché if i [[began]] with the [[bit]] about the title, so i'll [[wait]] on that. First, this movie [[made]] me wonder why [[kids]] do stupid [[things]] like wander [[around]] in [[labs]] and [[break]] [[bottles]]. [[Then]] i realized it, this is a [[movie]] with a message, that message is [[beat]] [[kids]] and [[things]] like this won't happen. Things like what you [[ask]]? Things like a giant insectish monster growing up and causing a bit of [[mayhem]] before [[dying]] in the typical "kill the monster indirectly" fashion. Now, as promised... Blue [[Monkey]]... has [[nothing]] Blue in it nor any Simian of any kind. Now it snot like i was cheated or anything. The picture on the cover had a giant bug/crab/[[idiot]]/thing on the front chasing some screaming [[nurses]]. That kinda happened but i wanted apes! having just enjoyed MOST EXTREME PRIMATE a few nights before(half [[drunk]] on Cask and Creame's brandy mind you) i was in the [[mood]] for more monkey hijacks 80's style. Not so much. If you [[like]] snow boarding apes or blue [[things]] this movie is not for you. If you [[like]] bugs and [[good]] [[reasons]] to hit [[kids]], rent this. [[Currently]], it would be some [[genre]] of cliché if i [[starts]] with the [[bite]] about the title, so i'll [[expectation]] on that. First, this movie [[accomplished]] me wonder why [[juvenile]] do stupid [[aspects]] like wander [[throughout]] in [[lab]] and [[breaks]] [[jars]]. [[Subsequently]] i realized it, this is a [[films]] with a message, that message is [[overpowered]] [[juvenile]] and [[aspects]] like this won't happen. Things like what you [[wondering]]? Things like a giant insectish monster growing up and causing a bit of [[havoc]] before [[died]] in the typical "kill the monster indirectly" fashion. Now, as promised... Blue [[Silvana]]... has [[none]] Blue in it nor any Simian of any kind. Now it snot like i was cheated or anything. The picture on the cover had a giant bug/crab/[[silly]]/thing on the front chasing some screaming [[nursing]]. That kinda happened but i wanted apes! having just enjoyed MOST EXTREME PRIMATE a few nights before(half [[drunken]] on Cask and Creame's brandy mind you) i was in the [[ambiance]] for more monkey hijacks 80's style. Not so much. If you [[likes]] snow boarding apes or blue [[matters]] this movie is not for you. If you [[likes]] bugs and [[alright]] [[motivations]] to hit [[kiddies]], rent this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[Hong]] [[Kong]] filmed potboiler [[packs]] in more melodrama than week's worth of 'The [[Young]] & The Restless'. This one is more of a throwback to the original 'Emmanuelle' [[trilogy]]([[especially]] '[[Goodbye]] Emmanuelle') than a D'Amato sleazefest. [[Chai]] Lee(Emy [[Wong]])undergoes a [[stunning]] [[transformation]] from dour nurse to hot-to-trot streetwalker. [[Future]] [[Italian]] [[porn]] [[star]]/politician, Illona Staller, who [[would]] [[later]] [[go]] by the name Ciccolina(and have sex with an HIV [[positive]] [[John]] Holmes) plays Emy's competition. [[Exotic]] locales and some decent soft-core scenes round this one out. [[Recommended]] for [[fans]] of the original 'Emmanuelle', of which I am one! This [[Hk]] [[Hk]] filmed potboiler [[packages]] in more melodrama than week's worth of 'The [[Youngsters]] & The Restless'. This one is more of a throwback to the original 'Emmanuelle' [[triad]]([[concretely]] '[[Cheerio]] Emmanuelle') than a D'Amato sleazefest. [[Takao]] Lee(Emy [[Hwang]])undergoes a [[breathless]] [[transformed]] from dour nurse to hot-to-trot streetwalker. [[Next]] [[Italy]] [[pornographic]] [[stars]]/politician, Illona Staller, who [[should]] [[then]] [[going]] by the name Ciccolina(and have sex with an HIV [[beneficial]] [[Johannes]] Holmes) plays Emy's competition. [[Extraterrestrials]] locales and some decent soft-core scenes round this one out. [[Suggested]] for [[stalkers]] of the original 'Emmanuelle', of which I am one! --------------------------------------------- Result 1325 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After Chicago, I was beginning to lose all respect for Richard Gere and then along came The Flock. There's just so far a nice smile and a couple of stock facial gestures can get you, but he proved to me that he's finally gotten hold of his craft and can act with the best of them. Clare Danes was also super as his "trainee/replacement". Some have suggested there was too much unnecessary violence, but I don't see it that way. Nothing I saw detracted from the power of this film. I was really shocked I hadn't heard of it being released in theaters and came across it at Blockbuster instead. Really an exceptional film with just the right blend of action, suspense, thrills, and social consciousness. As good as 7even? Well, maybe. And you'll see better acting out of Gere than anyone's ever gotten out of Pitt. --------------------------------------------- Result 1326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely the very first film that scared me to death. I happened catch it when my older brother(r.i.p.) was watching it. It was on a black and white TV and not really a good picture but it got me interested. Shortly after, my folks bought a color set and, as luck would have it, The Million Dollar Movie was showing it one Sunday.

I had forgotten most of the plot, but it did not take long to catch up...and I got so scared I had a hard time sleeping that night! I mean sure it was just a movie but it involved a creature that not only came from space, but you could not hear it, or see it...and once it got hold of you it was too late. Even now, after all this time it still sends a shiver up my spine. A true classic, and even better a classic that I have seen scare the pants off a new generation!

Long live The Blob! --------------------------------------------- Result 1327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[First]] let me say that I am not a Dukes fan, but after this [[movie]] the series looked like Law and Order. The [[worst]] thing was the casting of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even [[worse]] was [[M]].C. Gainey as Roscoe, If they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a [[hard]] [[ass]] cop. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he played in this movie.

The [[movie]] is [[loaded]] with the [[usual]] errors, cars getting [[torn]] up, and [[continues]] like [[nothing]] happened. The worst [[example]] of this is when the the General gets [[together]] with [[Billy]] Prickett, and the [[General]] is ran into a dirt [[hill]] [[obviously]] [[slowing]] to a [[near]] [[stop]], but goes on to [[win]] the race. [[Outset]] let me say that I am not a Dukes fan, but after this [[movies]] the series looked like Law and Order. The [[hardest]] thing was the casting of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even [[worst]] was [[meters]].C. Gainey as Roscoe, If they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a [[harsh]] [[butt]] cop. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he played in this movie.

The [[filmmaking]] is [[onus]] with the [[normal]] errors, cars getting [[ripped]] up, and [[persisted]] like [[nothin]] happened. The worst [[cases]] of this is when the the General gets [[jointly]] with [[Billie]] Prickett, and the [[Generals]] is ran into a dirt [[hil]] [[naturally]] [[slows]] to a [[close]] [[stops]], but goes on to [[triomphe]] the race. --------------------------------------------- Result 1328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The movie was gripping from start to finish and its b/w photography of the American heartland is stunning. We feel we are right there with them as they cross the big sky country and then into Mexico and back to America again. Near the end of the movie, the reflection of the rain on Robert Blake looks like small rivers of sweat and tears rolling down his face. In the end, we follow them up the stairway to their final moment.

The two criminals, performed by Robert Blake and Scott Wilson, as Perry Smith and Dick Hickock could be seen on any street in any town. Hickock is a smiling boy next door and Smith, the guy with stars in his eyes from the wrong side of town. This point is made in the movie and it always surprises us that criminals are no different in appearance than anyone else. Evil, even the most vile, is part of the human condition. These two delusional men kill an entire family, looking for a safe that isn't there. Once on the run, they start writing bad cheques, carving out a trail for the authorities.

There are many fine supporting actors. I like John Forsyth as the detective on the case, Alvin Dewey. Also, Will Geer shines in a brief but excellent scene as the prosecuting attorney.

I have often wanted to see this movie all the way through, having only caught it in short snatches; I did finally get to it after buying the DVD. The result is the finest classic crime movie I have ever seen.

Don't miss this brilliant movie. To me, this is what great film-making is all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Spanish films are into a, if not [[Golden]], definitely a Silver [[Age]]. Piédras is another example of a movie that takes people and their [[conflicts]] seriously. Although the [[feelings]] are strong or [[nearly]] at life or death-level, they still aren't really melodramatic. This could [[happen]].

There are [[different]] [[stories]] here, which [[become]] [[connected]]. One is about the retarded [[girl]], who doesn't dare to pass the street to the next [[block]]. One is about the middle-aged woman who [[finds]] the lover of her life in a [[foot]] fetischist. Another is about the girl with [[drug]] [[problems]] who's lover [[leaves]] her. [[Still]] another one is about the [[madame]] of a brothel who (almost) [[finds]] true [[love]].

[[Definitely]] worth seeing. It's in [[Spain]] the moviemakers take [[women]] [[seriously]]. Spanish films are into a, if not [[Dore]], definitely a Silver [[Ageing]]. Piédras is another example of a movie that takes people and their [[squabbles]] seriously. Although the [[affections]] are strong or [[approximately]] at life or death-level, they still aren't really melodramatic. This could [[emerge]].

There are [[assorted]] [[story]] here, which [[gotten]] [[tied]]. One is about the retarded [[girls]], who doesn't dare to pass the street to the next [[obstruct]]. One is about the middle-aged woman who [[found]] the lover of her life in a [[feet]] fetischist. Another is about the girl with [[narcotics]] [[trouble]] who's lover [[sheets]] her. [[However]] another one is about the [[mme]] of a brothel who (almost) [[found]] true [[loves]].

[[Unmistakably]] worth seeing. It's in [[Spanish]] the moviemakers take [[wife]] [[conscientiously]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bar some of the questionable acting (there musicians at the end of the day), this in the words of Quentin Tarrinno is "The best rock movie ever made...period"

Think 8 Mile, but without the rapping - a young musician, trying to prove himself to the local community, whilst struggling to cope with a broken home and a rival band. Throw in the sex interest and the truly exceptional performances, this is the real 8 mile.

Prince provides a solid performance, as does Morris Day and Jerome Benton. Decent script, good direction, great plot, and spectacular performances. Not forgetting the some of the best rock/pop/funk music you will ever hear. --------------------------------------------- Result 1331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've tried to watch this so-called comedy, but it's very hard to bear. This is a bad, narrow-minded, cliché-ridden movie. Definitively not funny, but very much boring and annoying, indeed. Bad script, bad acting. It's a complete waste of time - and there remains nothing more to say, I'm afraid.

1 out of 10 points. --------------------------------------------- Result 1332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I first saw this at a [[foreign]] film [[festival]]. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to [[relieve]] the Estonian [[treasury]] of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it [[captures]] the [[atmosphere]] of the [[newly]] emancipated Baltic states [[beautifully]] (note: Tallin was actually looking a [[lot]] [[less]] grim in 2003 when I was there).

There's a [[lot]] of [[humor]] and some romance, too. I don't want to [[spoil]] a number of [[startling]] [[yet]] [[logical]] [[surprises]], so I'll just say this heist [[film]] [[starts]] from a [[great]] script, and the directing and performances are [[top]] notch. DARKNESS [[IN]] TALLIN is simply the fastest and most nerve-racking [[example]] of its [[genre]] --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, [[though]] (deliberately) not as [[glossy]]. [[RENT]] OR [[BUY]] IT NOW. I first saw this at a [[exterior]] film [[celebratory]]. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to [[easing]] the Estonian [[exchequer]] of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it [[capture]] the [[ambiance]] of the [[lately]] emancipated Baltic states [[strikingly]] (note: Tallin was actually looking a [[batch]] [[lowest]] grim in 2003 when I was there).

There's a [[batches]] of [[comedy]] and some romance, too. I don't want to [[ruin]] a number of [[striking]] [[even]] [[reasonable]] [[astonishment]], so I'll just say this heist [[movies]] [[commencing]] from a [[wondrous]] script, and the directing and performances are [[superior]] notch. DARKNESS [[AT]] TALLIN is simply the fastest and most nerve-racking [[instances]] of its [[genera]] --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, [[despite]] (deliberately) not as [[shiny]]. [[LEASES]] OR [[PROCURING]] IT NOW. --------------------------------------------- Result 1333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had my doubts about another love story wherein disabled individuals find meaning and redemption through honest communication. And it's still not at the top of my list. But the performances from Helena Bonham Carter and Kenneth Branagh and exemplary, almost stunning, and rescue this from being just another tear-jerker. Carter's depiction of an ALS victim is strong, perhaps even overdone at times (sometimes her dialog dissolves into undistinguishable mutterings). But the overall effect is commendable and rewarding. Branagh may be the perfect compliment to her performance.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] has successfully [[proved]] what we all already know, that professional basket-ball [[players]] suck at everything besides playing basket-ball. Especially rapping and acting. I can not even [[begin]] to [[describe]] how [[bad]] this movie truly is. [[First]] of all, is it just me, or is that the [[ugliest]] kid you have ever [[seen]]? I mean, his [[teeth]] [[could]] be [[used]] as a can-opener. Secondly, why would a [[genie]] want to [[pursue]] a career in the [[music]] [[industry]] when, even [[though]] he has magical powers, he sucks horribly at [[making]] music? [[Third]], I have read the [[Bible]]. [[In]] no [[way]] shape or [[form]] did it say that [[Jesus]] made [[genies]]. Fourth, what was the [[deal]] with all the [[crappy]] special effects? I [[assure]] you that any acne-addled nerdy [[teenager]] with a [[computer]] [[could]] make [[better]] [[effects]] than that. Fifth, why did the [[ending]] suck so badly? And what the hell is a djin? And finally, [[whoever]] [[created]] the nightmare known as Kazaam needs to be [[thrown]] off of a plane and onto the Eiffel Tower, because this movie take the word "suck" to an entirely [[new]] level. This [[cinematographic]] has successfully [[revealed]] what we all already know, that professional basket-ball [[actors]] suck at everything besides playing basket-ball. Especially rapping and acting. I can not even [[starts]] to [[depicts]] how [[unfavourable]] this movie truly is. [[Outset]] of all, is it just me, or is that the [[meanest]] kid you have ever [[noticed]]? I mean, his [[dental]] [[wo]] be [[using]] as a can-opener. Secondly, why would a [[genius]] want to [[pursuing]] a career in the [[musicians]] [[industries]] when, even [[despite]] he has magical powers, he sucks horribly at [[doing]] music? [[Thirds]], I have read the [[Biblical]]. [[During]] no [[ways]] shape or [[forms]] did it say that [[Damn]] made [[geniuses]]. Fourth, what was the [[deals]] with all the [[shitty]] special effects? I [[ensuring]] you that any acne-addled nerdy [[schoolgirl]] with a [[computers]] [[did]] make [[optimum]] [[impact]] than that. Fifth, why did the [[ended]] suck so badly? And what the hell is a djin? And finally, [[whosoever]] [[engendered]] the nightmare known as Kazaam needs to be [[threw]] off of a plane and onto the Eiffel Tower, because this movie take the word "suck" to an entirely [[nuevo]] level. --------------------------------------------- Result 1335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's very funny. It has a great cast who each give great performances. Especially Sally Field and Kevin Kline. It's a well written screenplay by Andrew Bergman (Honeymoon In Vegas). I don't like soap operas, even though I never watch them. But I do love this film because it's so crazy and off the wall, that it beats the hell out of any stupid soap that they have on daytime television. In my opinion, it's the best film of 1991. --------------------------------------------- Result 1336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] It's not the most well [[made]] slasher movies of all time, but for what it is, it's pretty [[amusing]]. The plot is lame but the kills are not too bad. I have to be honest, if you don't follow the [[bands]] that are featured in this film, you wont find this film as funny as those who do. I [[knew]] someone who saw this film and was really disappointed because of the poor quality of the film but you have to understand that it was made in the spare time of being on tour, in between playing to moshing kids and drinkin' with friends backstage...it's not made to be taken seriously. It's ubber cheese at it's punk best and with over 100 kills,most of which are ultra gory, it's a fun movie to have friends over to watch, drink and be merry! It's not the most well [[effected]] slasher movies of all time, but for what it is, it's pretty [[droll]]. The plot is lame but the kills are not too bad. I have to be honest, if you don't follow the [[strips]] that are featured in this film, you wont find this film as funny as those who do. I [[knowed]] someone who saw this film and was really disappointed because of the poor quality of the film but you have to understand that it was made in the spare time of being on tour, in between playing to moshing kids and drinkin' with friends backstage...it's not made to be taken seriously. It's ubber cheese at it's punk best and with over 100 kills,most of which are ultra gory, it's a fun movie to have friends over to watch, drink and be merry! --------------------------------------------- Result 1337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[saw]] this when it premiered and just re-watched it on IFC again. This is a [[great]] [[telling]] of the [[many]] [[possible]] stories about the immigrant farmworker population that came to Hawai'i to work the sugar plantations in the early 1900's. My grandparents were part of that migration; my parents were born on a Kohala [[plantation]] (Big Island) at the time setting of the movie. I moved to the Big [[Island]] over a year ago after living in California for over 30 years. I was [[surprised]] to see that many of the former cane growing lands are still undeveloped, with wild cane still growing, years after the plantations closed. I've heard many stories from my aunts and uncles who were kids growing up on the plantation. This movie [[helps]] to image those kinds of stories and memories. This story is more of an historical document than a romantic plot-driven movie. It leaves me shaking my head to read a [[review]] like ccthemovieman's. Some people just don't get it.

I didn't recall that Youki Kudoh had the starring role, with which she did an [[incredible]] job. I recall her great performances in Jim Jarmusch's "Mystery Train" and in an Australian film, co- starring with Russell Crowe, "Heaven's Burning". Tamlyn Tomita did a great job with her pidgin English, especially for someone who didn't grow up in the Islands. I had forgotten that Toshiro Mifune had a cameo role as the moving picture show narrator. And I missed the fact that Jason Scott Lee had an uncredited, non-speaking part as one of the plantation workers during the payday scene.

I was saddened to find out that the director and co-writer, Kayo Hatta, died in an accidental drowning in 2005.

There are two other excellent foreign films that mirror this cane plantation experience: "Gaijin" about the immigrant cane workers in Brazil (many of them Japanese) in the same time period; and "Sugar Cane Alley" about the cane plantation experience in Africa. The latter is still available, but "Gaijin", sadly, doesn't appear to have been shown in quite a while. Another [[great]] [[film]] about the early Asian in America experience when immigrants were more like slaves is "A Thousand Pieces of Gold". This was set over the Chinese workers' involvement in the building of the railroad, starred Rosalind Chao, Chris Cooper, Michael Paul Chan, and Dennis Dun. I [[sawthe]] this when it premiered and just re-watched it on IFC again. This is a [[huge]] [[saying]] of the [[several]] [[doable]] stories about the immigrant farmworker population that came to Hawai'i to work the sugar plantations in the early 1900's. My grandparents were part of that migration; my parents were born on a Kohala [[plantations]] (Big Island) at the time setting of the movie. I moved to the Big [[Isla]] over a year ago after living in California for over 30 years. I was [[horrified]] to see that many of the former cane growing lands are still undeveloped, with wild cane still growing, years after the plantations closed. I've heard many stories from my aunts and uncles who were kids growing up on the plantation. This movie [[supporting]] to image those kinds of stories and memories. This story is more of an historical document than a romantic plot-driven movie. It leaves me shaking my head to read a [[exam]] like ccthemovieman's. Some people just don't get it.

I didn't recall that Youki Kudoh had the starring role, with which she did an [[striking]] job. I recall her great performances in Jim Jarmusch's "Mystery Train" and in an Australian film, co- starring with Russell Crowe, "Heaven's Burning". Tamlyn Tomita did a great job with her pidgin English, especially for someone who didn't grow up in the Islands. I had forgotten that Toshiro Mifune had a cameo role as the moving picture show narrator. And I missed the fact that Jason Scott Lee had an uncredited, non-speaking part as one of the plantation workers during the payday scene.

I was saddened to find out that the director and co-writer, Kayo Hatta, died in an accidental drowning in 2005.

There are two other excellent foreign films that mirror this cane plantation experience: "Gaijin" about the immigrant cane workers in Brazil (many of them Japanese) in the same time period; and "Sugar Cane Alley" about the cane plantation experience in Africa. The latter is still available, but "Gaijin", sadly, doesn't appear to have been shown in quite a while. Another [[wondrous]] [[movie]] about the early Asian in America experience when immigrants were more like slaves is "A Thousand Pieces of Gold". This was set over the Chinese workers' involvement in the building of the railroad, starred Rosalind Chao, Chris Cooper, Michael Paul Chan, and Dennis Dun. --------------------------------------------- Result 1338 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Road Rovers was a great show about canine superheroes chosen by the Master to fight crime around the world. The show was hilarious to say the least. Simple and complex jokes that could appeal to all ages. Running jokes throughout the series that could spawn a drinking game. The action was mesmerizing, and cleverly set up. The characters were very original, each with a very different personality. But what made me enjoy the show the most was the depth of the characters. Each of them have struggles and emotional difficulties that are never expressed, but implied in subtext. Hopefully, one day, there'll be some way to watch the Rovers in action again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's a bit easy. That's about it.

The graphics are clean and realistic, except for the fact that some of the fences are 2d, but that's forgiveable. The rest of the graphics are cleaner than GoldenEye and many other N64 games. The sounds are magnificant. Everything from the speaking to the SFX are pleasant and realistic.

The camera angle is a bit frustrating at times, but it's the same for every platform game, like Banjo-Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64.

I got this game as a Christmas present in 1997, and since then, I have dutifully gotten 120 stars over 10 times. --------------------------------------------- Result 1340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shot on an impossible schedule and no budget to speak of, the movie turned out a lot better than you would expect, certainly much more true to the Peter O'Donnell books and comic strip than the previous two films. You can read the strip currently in the reprints from Titan Books, or in Comics Revue monthly. It is one of the greatest adventure comic strips of all time. The movie isn't great, but unlike most low budget films it makes the most of what its got, and it holds your interest. On the DVD extras, the interview with Quentin Tarentino, who is obviously stoned, is a gas. Some people have faulted Tarentino for associating his name with the film, but without him it would never have been made. He is a Modesty Blaise fan, and picked a good writer and director. All things considered, worth 8 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1341 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[usually]] [[enjoy]] [[films]] like this. It's shot documentary [[style]], but the acting and writing are just awful. The acting is [[wooden]] and [[stiff]] and the writing is just so cliché, but not at all in a [[good]] way. As of typing this, I'm surprised it's at a 5.2/10 on IMDb. I'm certain that most of these votes must have come from [[relatives]] of people in the movie. I suppose if that's the case, you [[might]] [[manage]] a couple of [[laughs]], as it's [[always]] [[funny]] [[seeing]] your [[relatives]]/friends make a [[movie]]. [[Well]], in a way, I [[guess]] this gives hope to all up and [[coming]] writers, directors, actors, etc., 'cause if they can do it, you can do it. Although, maybe you shouldn't. I [[generally]] [[enjoying]] [[film]] like this. It's shot documentary [[styles]], but the acting and writing are just awful. The acting is [[timber]] and [[stringent]] and the writing is just so cliché, but not at all in a [[well]] way. As of typing this, I'm surprised it's at a 5.2/10 on IMDb. I'm certain that most of these votes must have come from [[parents]] of people in the movie. I suppose if that's the case, you [[apt]] [[administer]] a couple of [[giggles]], as it's [[incessantly]] [[hilarious]] [[see]] your [[parents]]/friends make a [[filmmaking]]. [[Good]], in a way, I [[imagine]] this gives hope to all up and [[forthcoming]] writers, directors, actors, etc., 'cause if they can do it, you can do it. Although, maybe you shouldn't. --------------------------------------------- Result 1342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The scene where Sally Field and Whoopi Goldberg go to the mall to revive Sally's flagging spirits is enough reason alone to enjoy this movie, but wait! There's more! This is a crackling good sendup of daytime TV, movie stars on the way down, (and up) and the horrors of love. Robert Downey Jr shows the lighter side of his genius, and Cathy Moriarty is splendid. The dialogue is witty, and the physical humor done with consummate skill. This is a movie that will appeal to those who really enjoy the arts of acting, directing, and writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]]

It's a generic coming-of-age [[story]] -- [[think]] "The Member of the Wedding," "Summer of '42," "A Summer Place," [[even]] "Little [[Women]]" -- and there are [[moments]] where Mulligan might have [[omitted]] the soupy music, not used slow-motion, or [[played]] down the golden-lit [[prettiness]] of the setting. Otherwise, it's done with [[rare]] [[emotional]] perfect-pitch. Nothing's [[forced]], [[every]] line has [[feeling]], and the pacing is just right. [[Even]] the below-A-list casting [[helps]]: Bigger movie [[stars]] with more recognizable personalities might have overwhelmed the material. In [[particular]], Witherspoon is [[excellent]]: Her line readings are fresh and original, and her body language is just right for a gawky, hoydenish 14-year-old on the eve of womanhood. Waterston is [[also]] very fine, [[even]] if he has to [[spend]] much of the movie climbing in and out of the family truck.

One senses that the film's makers were [[aware]] of its unpromising commercial [[prospects]] -- no [[big]] stars, no [[big]] [[car]] crashes, no [[special]] [[effects]] -- and [[consciously]] decided to make the [[best]] [[possible]] movie, [[box]] office be [[damned]]. It's intimate and [[honest]], and it sticks to the ribs. If you [[find]] yourself misting up at the [[end]], you don't have to feel you've been [[duped]].

It's a generic coming-of-age [[stories]] -- [[thinking]] "The Member of the Wedding," "Summer of '42," "A Summer Place," [[yet]] "Little [[Wife]]" -- and there are [[times]] where Mulligan might have [[overlooked]] the soupy music, not used slow-motion, or [[accomplished]] down the golden-lit [[loveliness]] of the setting. Otherwise, it's done with [[few]] [[affective]] perfect-pitch. Nothing's [[compelled]], [[any]] line has [[sentiment]], and the pacing is just right. [[Yet]] the below-A-list casting [[assisting]]: Bigger movie [[star]] with more recognizable personalities might have overwhelmed the material. In [[peculiar]], Witherspoon is [[handsome]]: Her line readings are fresh and original, and her body language is just right for a gawky, hoydenish 14-year-old on the eve of womanhood. Waterston is [[apart]] very fine, [[yet]] if he has to [[expenditures]] much of the movie climbing in and out of the family truck.

One senses that the film's makers were [[conscious]] of its unpromising commercial [[prospect]] -- no [[overwhelming]] stars, no [[huge]] [[vehicle]] crashes, no [[particular]] [[impact]] -- and [[purposely]] decided to make the [[better]] [[feasible]] movie, [[shoebox]] office be [[motherfucking]]. It's intimate and [[truthful]], and it sticks to the ribs. If you [[finds]] yourself misting up at the [[ceases]], you don't have to feel you've been [[tricked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] What I [[expected]]: A [[rather]] lame overly-stereotypical portrayal of a sports-mad guy and an equally lame stereotypical portrayal of the gal who likes him yet suffers while being second banana to his overly zealous support for his favorite sports team.

What I [[got]]: An even-handed [[story]] where both guy and gal end up admitting -- to themselves and each other -- that they each have passions in their lives yet each can forgive the other to save the love they share.

[[Sounds]] sappy but with the nonstop humor and [[terrific]] performances this story [[works]]! Barrymore is classic Barrymore: that [[perfect]] [[blend]] of sweet, [[strong]], and adorable. We expect that from her and she delivered.

But Fallon is the nice [[surprise]] in this film. He brings to the role the [[perfect]] blend of sports nut combined with the appreciation for the normal things in life, like caring about kids and his girlfriend. Fallon delivers his lines with subtle perfection. He can be caring ("You just ran across the field for me!") and in the same breath be obliviously blinded by his love for the Red Sox ("How did the [[grass]] feel? Kinda spongy?") at the same time. Fallon's portrayal "made" the movie. Hopefully, this movie marks the beginning of a better film career for Fallon, something beyond the over-the-top [[sophomoric]] humor typical of SNL alums (i.e. Will Ferrell).

In short, a movie that [[could]] have fallen victim to stereotypical male vs. female characters rose above that limitation and provided nonstop spot-on humorous lines, most delivered with brilliant subtlety by Fallon.

Hey, I saw this with my wife -- not a baseball fan -- and she loved it as much as I did. It's neither a "[[Guy]] Flick" nor a "Chick Flick". It's a [[terrific]] make-you-laugh flick. Go [[see]] it! What I [[waited]]: A [[quite]] lame overly-stereotypical portrayal of a sports-mad guy and an equally lame stereotypical portrayal of the gal who likes him yet suffers while being second banana to his overly zealous support for his favorite sports team.

What I [[did]]: An even-handed [[saga]] where both guy and gal end up admitting -- to themselves and each other -- that they each have passions in their lives yet each can forgive the other to save the love they share.

[[Sound]] sappy but with the nonstop humor and [[wondrous]] performances this story [[worked]]! Barrymore is classic Barrymore: that [[faultless]] [[amalgam]] of sweet, [[vigorous]], and adorable. We expect that from her and she delivered.

But Fallon is the nice [[surprises]] in this film. He brings to the role the [[flawless]] blend of sports nut combined with the appreciation for the normal things in life, like caring about kids and his girlfriend. Fallon delivers his lines with subtle perfection. He can be caring ("You just ran across the field for me!") and in the same breath be obliviously blinded by his love for the Red Sox ("How did the [[sod]] feel? Kinda spongy?") at the same time. Fallon's portrayal "made" the movie. Hopefully, this movie marks the beginning of a better film career for Fallon, something beyond the over-the-top [[fatuous]] humor typical of SNL alums (i.e. Will Ferrell).

In short, a movie that [[would]] have fallen victim to stereotypical male vs. female characters rose above that limitation and provided nonstop spot-on humorous lines, most delivered with brilliant subtlety by Fallon.

Hey, I saw this with my wife -- not a baseball fan -- and she loved it as much as I did. It's neither a "[[Mec]] Flick" nor a "Chick Flick". It's a [[magnifique]] make-you-laugh flick. Go [[seeing]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1345 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This, for lack of a better term, movie is lousy. Where do I start......

Cinemaphotography - This was, perhaps, the worst I've seen this year. It looked like the camera was being tossed from camera man to camera man. Maybe they only had one camera. It gives you the sensation of being a volleyball.

There are a bunch of scenes, haphazardly, thrown in with no continuity at all. When they did the 'split screen', it was absurd. Everything was squished flat, it looked ridiculous.

The color tones were way off. These people need to learn how to balance a camera. This 'movie' is poorly made, and poorly done.

The plot - You got to be kidding. If I was an SS agent, I'd sue the producers. looked like the Marks Brothers with radios and guns. Sutherland was in his '24' mode - I can see this for free. Eva Longoria would have been better with a little less on, and a lot more showing. As an action bimbo she wasn't much.

I couldn't see a real plot, other than Douglas boinking the Presidents wife. Never did say why the mercenaries were trying to kill the pres. I just don't see the President of the United States running for his life in the utility tunnels of a building, like a rat in a maze. p-l-e-a-s-e.

Hollywood is dead. This movie is the proof. I like 'the big screen'. Have since I was a kid. Many more 'movies' like this and I'll quit going. Whats the matter Hollywood, made so many chick flicks, forget how to make a real movie? If I owned a theater, I'd start running the old movies. The one with real actors, good story lines - and good Cinemaphotography.

This 'movie' is a dog. Don't waste your time or money on it. I rate this 'movie' a zero! Douglas isn't suited for this role. I can over look his age, but his just is to much of a wimp to carry this off. --------------------------------------------- Result 1346 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I saw Insomniac's [[Nightmare]] not to long ago for the first [[time]] and I have to say, I really [[found]] it to be [[quite]] good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place [[inside]] his [[mind]] -or does it? The acting from everyone else is a little rushed and shaky and some of the scenes [[could]] be cut down but it [[works]] out in the [[end]]. The extras on the DVD are just as [[great]] as the [[film]], if not [[greater]] for those [[Dom]] fans. It has tons of [[candid]] [[moments]] from the set, outtakes and a [[great]] interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an [[independent]] film will love to watch [[Tess]] (the director), Dom and [[everyone]] else on the very small [[close]] personal set try to bang out this little trippy [[creepy]] film. It was pretty [[enjoyable]] and I'm [[glad]] to have it in my [[collection]]. I saw Insomniac's [[Cabos]] not to long ago for the first [[moment]] and I have to say, I really [[find]] it to be [[rather]] good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place [[within]] his [[esprit]] -or does it? The acting from everyone else is a little rushed and shaky and some of the scenes [[did]] be cut down but it [[collaborated]] out in the [[ends]]. The extras on the DVD are just as [[wondrous]] as the [[movies]], if not [[most]] for those [[Stupidly]] fans. It has tons of [[frank]] [[times]] from the set, outtakes and a [[wondrous]] interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an [[independant]] film will love to watch [[Benedict]] (the director), Dom and [[someone]] else on the very small [[nearing]] personal set try to bang out this little trippy [[frightening]] film. It was pretty [[nice]] and I'm [[grateful]] to have it in my [[collating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] so, being a fairly [[deep]] [[fan]] of horror [[movies]], it's been a while since i've [[seen]] one that [[really]] made me jump (or fidget [[nervously]].)

[[definitely]] [[going]] to get this on DVD when it [[comes]] out... a [[hell]] of a lot [[better]] than the [[ring]]. the [[thing]] that i don't get is that so [[many]] people that we talkd with after the [[movie]] [[thought]] that it was horrible, well, if that's what you [[think]], then so be it... i [[know]] what i liked and it takes a fair amount to get me to actually feel scared, so i have to say that this one is worth [[watching]].

now, you might be disappointed in the story if you need everything in a neat and tidy line, because the plot goes back an forth a little bit to help build the story (i think that if it was shown in chronological order, it would have ruined the whole thing.)

i'm actually glad that this movie had very [[little]] bloody messes in it... maybe the rest of you studio writers and whathaveyous will [[realize]] that you don't have to splash the red stuff all over the set to make people afraid. so, being a fairly [[profound]] [[ventilator]] of horror [[kino]], it's been a while since i've [[noticed]] one that [[truthfully]] made me jump (or fidget [[awkwardly]].)

[[clearly]] [[gonna]] to get this on DVD when it [[arrives]] out... a [[dammit]] of a lot [[best]] than the [[ringing]]. the [[stuff]] that i don't get is that so [[multiple]] people that we talkd with after the [[film]] [[thinks]] that it was horrible, well, if that's what you [[ideas]], then so be it... i [[savoir]] what i liked and it takes a fair amount to get me to actually feel scared, so i have to say that this one is worth [[staring]].

now, you might be disappointed in the story if you need everything in a neat and tidy line, because the plot goes back an forth a little bit to help build the story (i think that if it was shown in chronological order, it would have ruined the whole thing.)

i'm actually glad that this movie had very [[petite]] bloody messes in it... maybe the rest of you studio writers and whathaveyous will [[reaching]] that you don't have to splash the red stuff all over the set to make people afraid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It has been 16 [[years]] [[since]] it's [[original]] [[run]], I [[would]] have [[hoped]] by now some "marketing [[wizard]]" [[would]] have [[promoted]] a [[live]] [[actor]] version of this [[classic]] by now, or at [[least]] [[sought]] to re-release the [[original]] 65 [[episodes]]. I can't fathom why the sci-fi or cartoon [[network]] haven't [[snapped]] this up. Galaxy Rangers [[actually]] had well [[thought]] out plots, and [[even]] better scripts.The [[animation]] was above average quality for it's [[time]], and excellent when compared to the [[talking]] slide show Japanese [[animation]] of [[today]]. It predated the heavy toon-toy tie in market, this may have sealed it's doom too. I would willingly spend cash on a DVD of GR if [[available]]. It has been 16 [[olds]] [[because]] it's [[preliminary]] [[executes]], I [[could]] have [[desired]] by now some "marketing [[sorcerer]]" [[should]] have [[emboldened]] a [[iive]] [[actress]] version of this [[conventional]] by now, or at [[lowest]] [[striven]] to re-release the [[preliminary]] 65 [[spells]]. I can't fathom why the sci-fi or cartoon [[grids]] haven't [[caved]] this up. Galaxy Rangers [[genuinely]] had well [[brainchild]] out plots, and [[yet]] better scripts.The [[animate]] was above average quality for it's [[moment]], and excellent when compared to the [[speaking]] slide show Japanese [[animate]] of [[hoy]]. It predated the heavy toon-toy tie in market, this may have sealed it's doom too. I would willingly spend cash on a DVD of GR if [[approachable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Farrah Fawcett is superb in this powerful 1986 drama, where she plays Marjorie, a woman who manages to escape the clutches of a would-be rapist. Well done to Farrah for being a Golden Globe 'Best Actress' nominee.

When her rapist Joe (terrifically played by James Russo) comes into her home, which she shares with her two roommates (who are conveniently out!), Marjorie has to play along with Joe's frightening demands. It does make for some disturbing and shocking images!

When her roommates come home, they are astounded (to say the least) by Marjorie's actions, and a great performance by Alfre Woodard who desperately tries to convince Marjorie to do the right thing and turn him into the police, makes the film even more nail-biting.

I do find Diana Scarwid quite irritating, but when Joe finally admits that he came there to kill them all, it makes the film a very emotional piece of drama indeed.

Overall, Extremities is a brilliantly thought-out and well-acted movie and I must have watched it hundreds of time by now! Well done to everybody involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 1350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Tripping Over. I [[must]] [[say]] at first I was a little [[disappointed]] in the first few [[episodes]], but having [[faith]] in the [[show]], and Abe Forsythe's [[unquestionable]] [[talent]], I [[continued]] to watch. I can [[safely]] [[say]] I'm now [[glad]] that I did. The story did develop [[quite]] well, and all the [[characters]] have a strong [[base]], and most don't have any information [[missing]].

The only thing I can fault in this [[production]] is the [[somewhat]] [[annoying]] [[voice]] and pronunciation [[possessed]] by the character Lizzie.

Some good acting [[coupled]] with a stellar [[plot]] really [[gets]] this [[show]] over the line. Here's to hoping for another season! Tripping Over. I [[owes]] [[says]] at first I was a little [[frustrated]] in the first few [[spells]], but having [[fe]] in the [[displayed]], and Abe Forsythe's [[undeniable]] [[talents]], I [[perpetual]] to watch. I can [[securely]] [[says]] I'm now [[thrilled]] that I did. The story did develop [[rather]] well, and all the [[features]] have a strong [[basis]], and most don't have any information [[gone]].

The only thing I can fault in this [[productivity]] is the [[rather]] [[tiresome]] [[voices]] and pronunciation [[owned]] by the character Lizzie.

Some good acting [[matched]] with a stellar [[intrigue]] really [[got]] this [[showing]] over the line. Here's to hoping for another season! --------------------------------------------- Result 1351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i think the team behind this film did a very good job with the limitations they had. only £300,000 and 7 weeks to write, film and edit the whole thing which i think is an achievement in itself. although this film is not for the masses (as a young innocent teenage girl is killed and there is homo-eroticism involved in the story) i think that this film is a heart wrenching tragedy and the more deeply involved you get in the story, the more sadness you feel. more so towards Heaton because of the love he feels but is not returned.

this is one of my favourite British films that i enjoyed very much and would watch again. i think that it's a shame that is film is not very well heard of at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] No artful writeup here because it doesn't deserve one. Not an art film. Not even one of those 'hidden' gems. You know, like those movies you hear about through a friend who saw this amazing movie downtown where they show all the good independents and art films.

Just pack it into the christmas boxes, and dispose of quickly. --------------------------------------------- Result 1353 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[IN]] COLD BLOOD is [[masterfully]] directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's [[also]] so bent on being [[realistic]], it's sometimes more [[clinical]] than entertaining. Recounting the brutal killing of a Midwest family, author Truman [[Capote]] focused on minutia, wrapping himself and the reader up in the subject [[AND]] subjects! Brooks departs [[wildly]] from that approach in favor of something closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved [[imbeciles]], which surely they were. They're not [[seen]] as misunderstood souls (as in the [[Capote]] book) and the [[savagery]] of their act is horrifyingly blunt. Scott Wilson and Robert Blake are [[excellent]] as the killers as is the [[supporting]] cast, including John Forsythe and Paul Stewart as the reporter (the [[Capote]] "character?") The landmark [[photography]] is by the [[great]] [[Conrad]] Hall. [[THROUGHOUT]] COLD BLOOD is [[skilfully]] directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's [[apart]] so bent on being [[practical]], it's sometimes more [[clinique]] than entertaining. Recounting the brutal killing of a Midwest family, author Truman [[Condom]] focused on minutia, wrapping himself and the reader up in the subject [[UND]] subjects! Brooks departs [[savagely]] from that approach in favor of something closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved [[geeks]], which surely they were. They're not [[noticed]] as misunderstood souls (as in the [[Condom]] book) and the [[inhumanity]] of their act is horrifyingly blunt. Scott Wilson and Robert Blake are [[wondrous]] as the killers as is the [[assisting]] cast, including John Forsythe and Paul Stewart as the reporter (the [[Condom]] "character?") The landmark [[photographer]] is by the [[grand]] [[Konrad]] Hall. --------------------------------------------- Result 1354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] **SPOILERS** Redicules slasher film that makes no sense at all with a killer running around dressed in a black robe and wearing what looks like a pull-over Peter Lorre rubber mask. Were told early in the movie, almost the very first scene, that young Beth Morgan was in rehab due to heavy drug use after her boyfriend was murdered in Tennyson Collage about a year ago.

It's also brought out that FBI Agent Sacker's (Jeff Conaway), who's obsessed in catching the killer,daughter was also murdered in Tennyson around the same time. By the time the movie "Do You Wanna Know A Secret" is over it's never explained just what those two killings back in Connecticute has to do with the slaughter in Florida of some half dozen collage students a year later? other that the killer, at least in the murder of Beth's boyfriend, wore the same silly Halloween outfit.

At spring break in the Sunshine State the six students spend their vacation at a beach house and before you know it they start getting knocked off one at a time. Starting with computer geek Brad Clyton, Chad Allen, the killing even spill over into town with a number of people who have nothing to do with the targeted student including the police chief Gavin, Jack McGee, getting sliced open.

The masked killer saves Beth for last in this weird ceremony at a deserted church, in what looks like the Florida Everglades. He then finally reveals who his is and what he intentions are which make as much sense as the movie does, none. Trying to scare it's audience all the movie does is confuse and bewilder it with a number of not-too convincing slasher scenes. The most effective ones having the victim Oz Washington, Tom Jay Jones, survive at least three attempts on his life and ending up, together with Agent Sacker, the hero in the film.

Oz also had a vicious cut on is foot from a large splinter of glass that almost cut it in half and crippled him but later he miraculously recovered, after getting arrested for a murder he didn't commit, in fact he had it out two more time with the killer with him not as much as having a slight limp in his walk! It also made no sense at all why Oz and Beth went on their own to tack down and catch the killer instead of calling the police, with a cellphone that Oz had, instead?

Beth's boyfriend, who loses his head over her, in the movie Hank Ford, Joseph Lawrence, is also very unconvincing as well as the two girls at the beach house.They together with with Beth Oz end up being the killers victims and then somehow disappearing from sight! for a moment you didn't know if they were really killed at all or if it was some kind of hallucination on Oz's or the local police part. Until the off-the-wall final scene where they popped up in the church.

We also get an insight on a previous relationship between Tina and Hank with her, drunk and acting obnoxious, trying to get it on with Hank as Beth walks in without Hank and Tina even noticing her. That seemed to have upset Beth even more then her boyfriend being murdered at the beginning of the movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Lion King 1 1/2 is a very cute story to go along with The Lion King. It basically follows the original story of The Lion King but with a couple of twists. In the movie,e vents are explained by a different characters point of view. This story is still an original plot.

As far as sequels go, Disney isn't all that great at making worthwhile ones. This one, being the third part to The Lion King (Simba's Pride is the second.) actually has an original idea to it while still involving the fun of the first. Timon and Pumbaa travel along looking for the ideal place to live. After searching far and wide, they find the place of "Hakuna Matata". They then meet a small lion named Simba, and go through many things that parents today go through.

I think this is a very good movie, and I'm happy to add it to my collection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have read over 100 of the Nancy Drew books, and if you are not bright enough to catch on yet, Nancy Drew the movie was of a YOUNGER Nancy Drew, not the 18-year-old that doesn't go to school that all of the books are about. This was when she was sixteen. So naturally, she would of not as been as smart as the one in the book considering she is only in the 10th grade. Other than that, I thought the movie was very cute. It was clean and appropriate for everyone. It was funny at times. I thought Emma Roberts did a great job. She was articulate, in character, and cute. I liked the awkwardness that Nancy and Ned had around each other because they obviously were not old enough to be in a serious relationship like they have in the books. It was a cute, PG movie that I throughly enjoyed because I, unlike most people my age, enjoy movies without sex, drugs, or profanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Hanson brothers - Andy (apparently has his act together) and Hank (clearly doesn't have his act together) need money. Andy comes up with a scheme to get some dough that will have consequences for the whole Hanson family.

This film delivers. This is a layered, full-blooded roller coaster ride that knows exactly what it is doing. As a crime drama / thriller I would happily compare it to 'No Country For Old Men.' While both films have have an ample supply of character drama and thrills, 'Devil' is more on the thriller side because of its fast pace. 'No Country' is a colder and bleaker film that you can really admire, while 'Devil' is a bit more enjoyable. There is definitely less violence in 'Devil' than 'No Country.' The acting delivers as well. Ethan Hawke, sometimes wooden in the past, brings the jitters, sweating and the deer-in-the-headlights-look to the besieged Hank. Philip Seymour Hoffman, as Andy, has the film's hardest scenes and is fast becoming the actor, who you believe can do anything.

There's really not much wrong with this film. It jumps back and forth without being confusing. Events spiral out of control, but the film never does - the writing (from first timer Kelly Masterson), directing (veteran Sidney Lumet) and the editing stay as tight as a drum. In many categories, this is award caliber stuff, though maybe films like 'The Departed' and 'No Country' squeezed this one out of the limelight. If you liked those, you'll like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] BABY [[FACE]] is a [[fast]] paced, wise cracking, knowing [[smirk]] of a [[film]] that

[[lasts]] only an hour and 15 minutes, but oh what a [[smart]] 75 minutes they

are! That a story that [[covers]] so much ground [[could]] be told in such a

short time puts most of today's [[movie]] makers to shame. Screenwriters of

[[today]] should study the economy of BABY [[FACE]] and cut the bloat that

overwhelms so many of their [[films]].

The [[story]] is no [[nonsense]]. An [[amoral]] woman rises to wealth first under,

and then over the bodies of the men who fall madly in love with her.

Sure the production [[code]] loused it up with a redeeming, happy [[ending]],

but it isn't hard to see in which the [[direction]] the writers [[wanted]] to

go, so [[enjoy]] what's there and use your imagination for the [[rest]]. Stanwyck is [[terrific]] as is George Brent and Douglass Dumbvrille as a

hapless [[suitor]]. Not a [[great]] film but [[certainly]] an [[enjoyable]] one. If

you've never seen BABY FACE catch it the next time it's shown on cable

or rent the cassette. It's worth the effort.. BABY [[CONFRONTS]] is a [[expeditiously]] paced, wise cracking, knowing [[grins]] of a [[kino]] that

[[extends]] only an hour and 15 minutes, but oh what a [[artful]] 75 minutes they

are! That a story that [[covered]] so much ground [[would]] be told in such a

short time puts most of today's [[film]] makers to shame. Screenwriters of

[[hoy]] should study the economy of BABY [[CONFRONTS]] and cut the bloat that

overwhelms so many of their [[film]].

The [[tale]] is no [[senseless]]. An [[immoral]] woman rises to wealth first under,

and then over the bodies of the men who fall madly in love with her.

Sure the production [[cipher]] loused it up with a redeeming, happy [[ended]],

but it isn't hard to see in which the [[orientation]] the writers [[wanting]] to

go, so [[enjoys]] what's there and use your imagination for the [[resting]]. Stanwyck is [[beautiful]] as is George Brent and Douglass Dumbvrille as a

hapless [[beau]]. Not a [[excellent]] film but [[obviously]] an [[nice]] one. If

you've never seen BABY FACE catch it the next time it's shown on cable

or rent the cassette. It's worth the effort.. --------------------------------------------- Result 1359 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a bad, bad movie! I tried watching without fast forwarding...That failed. After about 30 minutes I stopped the movie, went on-line to see how many minutes this disaster was. (Only 84 minutes, Whew!) It was a confusing, boring movie. I don't think anyone can get knocked down by getting hit with a fluorescent bulb much less gutted by one!! The one funny thing is that I watched "The Killer Cut" version of the movie. The box boldly states "More Blood!" "More Sex!" "More Terror than the theatrical release!" Yikes! If this movie was horrible with all those claims I wonder just how lame the "UN-Killer Cut" was??? If you want to see a great movie about the world of the living & the world of the dead watch any of The Night of the Living Dead series!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Fabulous film! Rented the DVD recently and was floored by this stunning piece of work. Douglas Sirk was a filmmaking genius and he gets performances out of Rock Hudson, Dorothy Malone (Oscar winner), Robert Stack (Oscar nominated), and Lauren Bacall that words cannot describe. Paul Verhoeven brilliantly payed homage to this film by having Dorothy Malone play Sharon Stone's murdering inspirational guru in his Basic Instinct. What a great joke!

By turns the film is hilarious, riveting, campy, biting, trashy, compelling, and eye rolling! It's definately the grandaddy of every tawdry big-and-little screen soap opera but none have had the dazzling style like you'll see here: the camera work is smooth and polished, the use of color is breathtaking, the opening montage set to the title song is beyond memorable, the one dimensional characters are unforgettable, and the final image will have you scratching your head as to how the censors back then let it make the final cut!

While most older, highly regarded films can sometimes be a boring chore to sit through, Written on the Wind contains so much and goes by so fast that it's actually a shame when it ends. Thank you to Mr. Sirk for crafting -and Todd Haynes for drawing attention to- what has now become one of my favorite films of all time! SEE THIS MOVIE!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well...i was going to [[wait]] till this came out on video to see it, and i [[wish]] i had, I actually [[caught]] [[scary]] [[movie]] 2 on cable the other day, and it made me yearn for more of the same, what i [[got]] was [[AIRPLANE]] on [[CRACK]]... i mean if you [[like]] Airplane or any other Leslie nielsen vehicles, then you'll probably be in heaven, but if your used to the [[usually]] WAYANS COMEDY, then you will be dissapointed, there was [[alot]] more Eye candy in this one which will keep young [[hormone]] raged teenage boys happy, which is probably why it was a box office hit the first week it came out. I enjoyed scary movie 2 ten times more then this [[fodder]], and part one 5 times as much. Odd that the better of the 3 is part 2, but then again i always liked Halloween 2 better then the original as well..maybe its just me. The funniest part of the movie has to be the way the Aliens Say Goodbye. But that wasnt worth the 11 dollars i spent to catch a matinee of this with my fiance. Save yourself cash and catch part 2 again on cable till this is released on Video tape, and then Rent it, dont buy it. Well...i was going to [[awaits]] till this came out on video to see it, and i [[desire]] i had, I actually [[apprehended]] [[appalling]] [[films]] 2 on cable the other day, and it made me yearn for more of the same, what i [[ai]] was [[AIRPLANES]] on [[CREVASSE]]... i mean if you [[iike]] Airplane or any other Leslie nielsen vehicles, then you'll probably be in heaven, but if your used to the [[often]] WAYANS COMEDY, then you will be dissapointed, there was [[lots]] more Eye candy in this one which will keep young [[hormones]] raged teenage boys happy, which is probably why it was a box office hit the first week it came out. I enjoyed scary movie 2 ten times more then this [[foraging]], and part one 5 times as much. Odd that the better of the 3 is part 2, but then again i always liked Halloween 2 better then the original as well..maybe its just me. The funniest part of the movie has to be the way the Aliens Say Goodbye. But that wasnt worth the 11 dollars i spent to catch a matinee of this with my fiance. Save yourself cash and catch part 2 again on cable till this is released on Video tape, and then Rent it, dont buy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Some movies you just know you're going to [[love]] from the first few seconds. This is one of those movies. [[Tracing]] it's [[roots]] back to "[[Double]] Indemnity," and "The Postman [[Always]] [[Rings]] [[Twice]]" in the 40's - this was a [[great]] example of Modern Film [[Noir]] in the 90's. [[Nick]] Cage plays the "down on his luck" main [[character]] who [[gets]] [[entangled]] in a husband-wife [[murder]] plot - and his [[luck]] goes from [[bad]] to worse to even worse as he [[tries]] and tries to get away from the people, town, violence and [[threat]] of [[Red]] Rock [[West]]. Lots of twists and turns, great performances by Cage, Hopper and [[Walsh]], an hypnotic slide-guitar musical backdrop, and seamless directing make this a real [[joy]]. [[Favorite]] Line: When Cage [[looks]] at the empty [[gas]] gauge in the get-away [[car]], shakes his head and [[says]]: "F***in' [[story]] of my [[life]]." Some movies you just know you're going to [[iove]] from the first few seconds. This is one of those movies. [[Trace]] it's [[origin]] back to "[[Twin]] Indemnity," and "The Postman [[Continuously]] [[Ring]] [[Double]]" in the 40's - this was a [[huge]] example of Modern Film [[Negro]] in the 90's. [[Nicky]] Cage plays the "down on his luck" main [[traits]] who [[got]] [[involved]] in a husband-wife [[kills]] plot - and his [[likelihood]] goes from [[amiss]] to worse to even worse as he [[endeavour]] and tries to get away from the people, town, violence and [[menacing]] of [[Reid]] Rock [[Western]]. Lots of twists and turns, great performances by Cage, Hopper and [[Welch]], an hypnotic slide-guitar musical backdrop, and seamless directing make this a real [[gladness]]. [[Preferred]] Line: When Cage [[seem]] at the empty [[petrol]] gauge in the get-away [[vehicles]], shakes his head and [[contends]]: "F***in' [[stories]] of my [[living]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 1363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I never much liked the Myra [[movie]], tho I appreciate how it pushed the Hollywood envelope at the time. [[Certainly]] [[Miss]] Welch's costume became an [[iconic]] [[image]], [[though]] I have to wonder if [[many]] people who [[recognize]] the image [[really]] [[saw]] the film and know what it was all about -

I rewatched Myra on FMC a couple of years ago and didn't [[think]] it had aged any better thru the [[years]]. There's a segment about it in the Sexploitation Cinema Cartoon [[History]] comic books, where it's given [[proper]] [[credit]] for putting such [[big]] stars in what was then an outrageous [[production]]. However, IMHO, the [[movie]] is too bitter to be charming, too silly to be a turn-on, and so busy [[trying]] to shock that it fails to inform, engage, OR entertain --- I never much liked the Myra [[filmmaking]], tho I appreciate how it pushed the Hollywood envelope at the time. [[Doubtless]] [[Mademoiselle]] Welch's costume became an [[symbolic]] [[images]], [[while]] I have to wonder if [[multiple]] people who [[acknowledges]] the image [[truly]] [[sawthe]] the film and know what it was all about -

I rewatched Myra on FMC a couple of years ago and didn't [[thinking]] it had aged any better thru the [[olds]]. There's a segment about it in the Sexploitation Cinema Cartoon [[Tale]] comic books, where it's given [[appropriate]] [[credence]] for putting such [[grande]] stars in what was then an outrageous [[productivity]]. However, IMHO, the [[filmmaking]] is too bitter to be charming, too silly to be a turn-on, and so busy [[striving]] to shock that it fails to inform, engage, OR entertain --- --------------------------------------------- Result 1364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Oh [[man]]. If you want to give your internal [[Crow]] [[T]]. Robot a real workout, this is the [[movie]] to pop into the ol' VCR. The potential for cut-up lines in this film is just [[endless]].

([[Minor]] spoilers ahead. Hey, do you really care if a film of this quality is "spoiled?") Traci is a [[girl]] with a problem. Psychology has developed [[names]] for it when a [[child]] [[develops]] a sexual crush on the opposite-sex [[parent]]. But this [[girl]] seems to have one for her same-sex one, and I don't think there's a term for that. It might be because her mother [[Dana]] is played by Rosanna Arquette, whose [[cute]] overbite, neo-flowerchild sexuality and luscious figure makes me forgive her any number of [[bad]] [[movies]] or [[unsympathetic]] [[characters]]. Here [[Dana]] is not only clueless to her daughter's conduct; she seems to be competing for the gold [[medal]] in the [[Olympic]] Indulgent [[Mother]] [[competition]].

It's [[possible]] that [[Dana]] misses Traci's [[murderous]] streak because truth be [[told]], Traci [[seems]] to have the criminal [[skills]] of a hamster. It's only because the script dictates so that she manages to [[pull]] off any [[kind]] of a [[body]] count.

A particularly hilarious note in this [[movie]] is the [[character]] of Carmen, a [[Mexican]] maid who is [[described]] by [[Dana]] as [[around]] so [[long]] she's like one of the family [[although]] she [[dresses]] in what the director thought [[would]] [[say]], "I just [[fell]] off the tomato truck from Guadalajara." Carmen is so wise to Traci's scheming, she might also [[wear]] a sign [[saying]], "[[Hey]], I'm the [[Next]] Victim!" [[Sure]] [[enough]], Traci confronts Carmen as Carmen is making her [[way]] back from Mass, and bops her with one of those slightly angled lug wrenches that [[car]] [[manufacturers]] put next to your spare as a [[bad]] [[joke]]. I rather suspect than in [[real]] [[life]] those [[things]] are as [[useless]] as a murder [[weapon]] as they are for changing a tire.

[[In]] another [[sequence]], Arquette wears a [[flimsy]] [[dress]] to a vineyard, under cloudy [[skies]], [[talking]] to the [[owner]]. [[Cut]] to her in another [[flimsy]] dress under sunny skies, [[talking]] to the owner's [[brother]]. Then [[cut]] to her wearing the first dress, in the first location, under cloudy skies - but it's supposed to be later. You get the picture. We're talking really bad directing.

As for skin, don't expect much, although Traci does own a nice couple of bikinis.

For those looking for a trash wallow, 8. For anybody else, 1/2. Oh [[dude]]. If you want to give your internal [[Corneille]] [[ton]]. Robot a real workout, this is the [[filmmaking]] to pop into the ol' VCR. The potential for cut-up lines in this film is just [[limitless]].

([[Lesser]] spoilers ahead. Hey, do you really care if a film of this quality is "spoiled?") Traci is a [[fille]] with a problem. Psychology has developed [[surnames]] for it when a [[infantile]] [[develop]] a sexual crush on the opposite-sex [[parents]]. But this [[daughter]] seems to have one for her same-sex one, and I don't think there's a term for that. It might be because her mother [[Dan]] is played by Rosanna Arquette, whose [[adorable]] overbite, neo-flowerchild sexuality and luscious figure makes me forgive her any number of [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] or [[unmoved]] [[nature]]. Here [[Dan]] is not only clueless to her daughter's conduct; she seems to be competing for the gold [[ornaments]] in the [[Olympiad]] Indulgent [[Momma]] [[contest]].

It's [[probable]] that [[Dan]] misses Traci's [[lethal]] streak because truth be [[say]], Traci [[seem]] to have the criminal [[jurisdiction]] of a hamster. It's only because the script dictates so that she manages to [[pulled]] off any [[sorting]] of a [[agency]] count.

A particularly hilarious note in this [[filmmaking]] is the [[characters]] of Carmen, a [[Mexico]] maid who is [[outline]] by [[Dan]] as [[throughout]] so [[lengthy]] she's like one of the family [[despite]] she [[robes]] in what the director thought [[could]] [[tell]], "I just [[slipped]] off the tomato truck from Guadalajara." Carmen is so wise to Traci's scheming, she might also [[worn]] a sign [[arguing]], "[[Bye]], I'm the [[Future]] Victim!" [[Convinced]] [[adequate]], Traci confronts Carmen as Carmen is making her [[pathways]] back from Mass, and bops her with one of those slightly angled lug wrenches that [[motor]] [[maker]] put next to your spare as a [[negative]] [[travesty]]. I rather suspect than in [[veritable]] [[lives]] those [[aspects]] are as [[unnecessary]] as a murder [[gun]] as they are for changing a tire.

[[Throughout]] another [[sequences]], Arquette wears a [[fragile]] [[garb]] to a vineyard, under cloudy [[sky]], [[debates]] to the [[holders]]. [[Slice]] to her in another [[frail]] dress under sunny skies, [[chat]] to the owner's [[brah]]. Then [[cutting]] to her wearing the first dress, in the first location, under cloudy skies - but it's supposed to be later. You get the picture. We're talking really bad directing.

As for skin, don't expect much, although Traci does own a nice couple of bikinis.

For those looking for a trash wallow, 8. For anybody else, 1/2. --------------------------------------------- Result 1365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Gingerbread Man is the first thriller I've ever done!" – Robert Altman

In 1955 Charles Laughton directed "The Night of the Hunter", a spooky slice of Southern Gothic in which Robert Mitchum plays a scary serial killer. One of the film's more famous sequences consists of two kids escaping from Mitchum on a rowboat, the kids frantically paddling whilst Mitchum wades after them like a monster.

Seven years later Mitchum played an equally spooky killer in "Cape Fear", another film set in the American South. That film featured a local attorney trying to protect his family and likewise ended with Mitchum terrorising folks on a boat. In 1991 Martin Scorsese, trying to branch out and tackle something more mainstream, remade "Cape Fear", boat scene and all.

Now we have Robert Altman's "The Gingerbread Man", another slice of small town Southern Gothic. Altman says he consulted "The Night of the Hunter" for inspiration and tackled such a mainstream film purely because he wanted to "spread his wings and try a popcorn picture", but what he's secretly attempting to do here is deconstruct the canonical films of the Southern Gothic genre.

So instead of a showdown on small boat, we get a showdown on a giant ship. Instead of two kids being kidnapped, we get two kids being safely returned to the police. Instead of money being hidden, we have money being readily given via a last will and testament. Instead of the righteous attorney of the 1961 film and the deplorable attorney of the 1991 remake, we get a rather three-dimensional lawyer in Kenneth Branagh. Instead of the monster chasing the family we get the hero chasing the bad guys. Instead of the monster breaking into the family's house boat, we have the hero hunting the monster on board the monster's "house ship". Similarly, instead of a murderous serial killer we get an innocent weirdo played by Robert Duvall. . .etc etc etc.

Altman goes on and on, reversing everything just a little slightly, pulling at the edges and doing his own thing. His touch is most apparent during the film's first half-hour, the film existing in an uneasy space between conventional plot-driven movie storytelling and Altman's fondness for overlapping dialogue, casual narratives, prowling camera movement and the way that characters aren't so much introduced as they are simply part of what's going on.

Still, despite Altman's best intentions, the film never rises above mediocrity. Altman's too bound to the conventions of the "thriller format" to do much damage, his style is too lethargic to generate tension and the film is simply not radical enough to counterpoint other canonical films in the genre. "Gingerbread Man" is thus too mainstream to work as a more pure Altman film and too Altman to work as a mainstream thriller.

The film's not a complete waste, though. Robert Downey Junior, Kenneth Branagh and the usually intolerable Daryl Hannah, all turn in juicy performances. The film also has a nice atmosphere, set against a approaching hurricane, and the final act contains some interesting twists and turns. While it's not the complete disaster that Scorsese's "Cape Fear" was, the film still never amounts to anything special.

7/10 – In the late 90s Altman made 3 successive films set in the American South: "Kansas City", "Gingerbread Man" and "Cookie's Fortune". Unlike "Gingerbread Man", both "Kansas City" and "Cookie's Fortune" tackle the genre on the broader, more looser canvases that Altman was most comfortable with.

"Kansas City" is the more important of these two films, its hierarchies of class, politics and crime, and its desire to break radically away from typical gangster genre frameworks, would prove influential on all serious 21st century film crime writers (see, for example, "The Wire"). That said, "Cookie's Fortune", while a much slighter tale, is perhaps the better picture.

Note: Altman claims that this is his first thriller, but he directed "Images", an art house thriller, in 1972.

Worth one viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] MY BROTHER TOM

[[Aspect]] ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Following an episode of sexual abuse at the hands of a trusted neighbor, young Jessica (Jenna Harrison) [[forms]] a relationship with a strange boy (Ben Whishaw) she meets in the woods. [[Unfortunately]], Whishaw has secrets of his own, no less troubling and far more [[dangerous]]...

Dour drama, [[sparked]] by brave performances by Harrison and Whishaw, in which two kindred spirits immerse themselves in a mutual love of [[nature]] after being [[traumatized]] by their experiences in the 'real world'. [[Unfortunately]], their friendship unravels as harsh reality begins to intrude, leading to an [[inevitable]] [[tragedy]]. Directed by Dom Rotheroe and photographed in digital video format, the movie looks ragged in places (too many awkward close-ups and [[sloppy]] hand-held camera moves) and takes a while to find its feet, but the dramatic pay-off is quietly rewarding. MY BROTHER TOM

[[Facet]] ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Following an episode of sexual abuse at the hands of a trusted neighbor, young Jessica (Jenna Harrison) [[formulas]] a relationship with a strange boy (Ben Whishaw) she meets in the woods. [[Sadly]], Whishaw has secrets of his own, no less troubling and far more [[dicey]]...

Dour drama, [[unleashed]] by brave performances by Harrison and Whishaw, in which two kindred spirits immerse themselves in a mutual love of [[characters]] after being [[scarred]] by their experiences in the 'real world'. [[Sadly]], their friendship unravels as harsh reality begins to intrude, leading to an [[inescapable]] [[drama]]. Directed by Dom Rotheroe and photographed in digital video format, the movie looks ragged in places (too many awkward close-ups and [[neglectful]] hand-held camera moves) and takes a while to find its feet, but the dramatic pay-off is quietly rewarding. --------------------------------------------- Result 1367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] 12 year [[old]] Arnald Hillerman [[accidentally]] [[kills]] his [[older]] [[brother]] [[Eugene]]. His [[feelings]] are arrested by the [[fact]] that his [[family]] can not [[interact]] with him (or feel it is not the right [[thing]] to do). His [[ONLY]] [[refuge]] is his [[grandfather]], who is the ONLY one who [[seems]] to have [[compassion]] on him. The [[Realism]] will [[captivate]] "true-2-life" [[movie]] lovers, but will not [[satisfy]] those that [[desire]] [[action]] & thrills. 12 year [[former]] Arnald Hillerman [[mistakenly]] [[assassinating]] his [[elders]] [[hermano]] [[Horvath]]. His [[sentiments]] are arrested by the [[facto]] that his [[familial]] can not [[imparting]] with him (or feel it is not the right [[stuff]] to do). His [[MERE]] [[sanctuary]] is his [[grandad]], who is the ONLY one who [[looks]] to have [[sympathies]] on him. The [[Reality]] will [[fascinate]] "true-2-life" [[cinema]] lovers, but will not [[comply]] those that [[desired]] [[efforts]] & thrills. --------------------------------------------- Result 1368 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale and great humor, however other then that it's nothing special. All the characters are pretty cool, and the film is entertaining throughout, plus Jackie Chan is simply amazing in this!. Jackie and Wai-Man Chan had fantastic chemistry together, and are both very funny!, and i thought the main opponent looked really menacing!, however the dubbing was simply terrible!. The character development is above average for this sort of thing!, and the main fight is simply fantastic!, plus some of the bumps Jackie takes in this one are harsh!. There is a lot of really silly and goofy humor in this, but it amused me, and the ending is hilarious!, plus all the characters are quite likable. It's pretty cheap looking but generally very well made, and while it does not have the amount of fighting you would expect from a Jackie Chan flick, it does enough to keep you watching, plus one of my favorite moments in this film is when Jackie (Dragon) and Wai-Man Chan(Tiger), are playing around with a rifle and it goes off!. This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale, and great humor, however other then that it's nothing great, still it's well worth the watch!. The Direction is good. Jackie Chan does a good job here with solid camera work, fantastic angles and keeping the film at a fast pace for the most part. The Acting is very good!. Jackie Chan is amazing as always, and is amazing here, he is extremely likable, hilarious, as usual does some crazy stunts, had fantastic chemistry with Wai-Man Chan, kicked that ass, and played this wonderful cocky character, he was amazing!, i just wished they would stop dubbing him!. (Jackie Rules!!!!!). Wai-Man Chan is funny as Jackie's best friend, i really liked him, he is also a very good martial artist. Rest of the cast do OK i guess. Overall well worth the watch!. *** out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 1369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[If]] you still remember that summer when you had your first kiss, first [[boy]]/girlfriend, or first puppy love fling...this [[film]] is for you! OK so this movie would and will never win an [[Oscar]] [[BUT]] as a [[Dominican]] I [[loved]] it...there are some things in the movie that might just [[go]] right over your [[head]] if you are not part of the [[culture]]...the [[kids]] being [[raised]] by a [[grandma]] who's both mother and father, the [[youngest]] [[son]] being babied and bathed with a [[Cafe]] Bustelo tin (sooo Dominican!), Judy being [[harassed]] by the [[neighborhood]] [[men]], going to church and [[lighting]] a prayer candle...the film's brilliance was in those small details. Granted, it was not a [[pull]] out all the [[works]] cinematic extravaganza but it wasn't [[meant]] to be [[NOR]] was it [[meant]] to be an [[educational]] tool for those wanting to [[learn]] about Latin [[culture]] ( tip: make [[new]] [[friends]] instead). [[More]] of a bitter-sweet, faux-cumentery, this film kept it [[real]] without [[taking]] itself too [[seriously]]. As in the tradition of "Y Tu [[Mama]] Tambien" this was [[simply]] one boy's coming of age [[tale]]. I [[recommend]] it (especialmente si eres Dominicano!) =o) [[Unless]] you still remember that summer when you had your first kiss, first [[guys]]/girlfriend, or first puppy love fling...this [[cinematography]] is for you! OK so this movie would and will never win an [[Oskar]] [[ALTHOUGH]] as a [[Dominicans]] I [[cared]] it...there are some things in the movie that might just [[going]] right over your [[leader]] if you are not part of the [[civilisations]]...the [[brats]] being [[risen]] by a [[granny]] who's both mother and father, the [[younger]] [[sons]] being babied and bathed with a [[Coffee]] Bustelo tin (sooo Dominican!), Judy being [[stalked]] by the [[vicinity]] [[males]], going to church and [[illumination]] a prayer candle...the film's brilliance was in those small details. Granted, it was not a [[pulls]] out all the [[work]] cinematic extravaganza but it wasn't [[intend]] to be [[EITHER]] was it [[intended]] to be an [[schooling]] tool for those wanting to [[learning]] about Latin [[cultures]] ( tip: make [[novel]] [[buddies]] instead). [[Most]] of a bitter-sweet, faux-cumentery, this film kept it [[true]] without [[adopting]] itself too [[conscientiously]]. As in the tradition of "Y Tu [[Mum]] Tambien" this was [[merely]] one boy's coming of age [[saga]]. I [[recommending]] it (especialmente si eres Dominicano!) =o) --------------------------------------------- Result 1370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Since I [[first]] saw Anchors Aweigh in 1945, [[viewing]] it on videotape holds a lot of nostalgia for me. At age 15, it was [[easy]] for me to be drawn into the first of the great MGM Technicolor musicals. [[Now]] I am perhaps most interested in thinking about the future careers of the leading players. [[Though]] Sinatra had done a couple of [[negligible]] films soon after his emergence after his Dorsey days, as a solo singer, this was his first major film appearance. As another viewer [[noted]], this seems almost to be a warm-up for On the Town. Sinatra may have had to work hard at it, but his dance with Kelly is credible, and he would do better in their next pairings. However, [[observing]] his physique, it's easy to see why he was caricatured as a string bean. Who would have imagined that within a decade he would win an academy award for acting, and [[go]] on to play [[many]] roles as a tough detective or leader in combat. [[Though]] Gene Kelly's personality and dancing dominated this [[film]], his winsome performance did not suggest that he [[would]] [[become]] a major creative force, [[almost]] the [[iconic]] figure, for MGM musicals, where he [[developed]] a style of [[dance]] [[complementary]] to that of Fred [[Astaire]]. Finally, it was [[strange]] to [[see]] the fresh-faced Dean Stockwell and [[remember]] that he would [[later]] [[play]] a "thrill" [[killer]] in [[Compulsion]], based on the Leopold-Loeb [[murder]] from the 1920s. An [[additional]] [[note]]: One reviewer [[praised]] the performance of [[Betty]] Garrett as Sinatra's [[love]] interest. She [[later]] [[played]] [[opposite]] him in On the [[Town]], but Pamela Britton was featured in this film. Since I [[firstly]] saw Anchors Aweigh in 1945, [[visualizing]] it on videotape holds a lot of nostalgia for me. At age 15, it was [[easier]] for me to be drawn into the first of the great MGM Technicolor musicals. [[Presently]] I am perhaps most interested in thinking about the future careers of the leading players. [[Nonetheless]] Sinatra had done a couple of [[trivial]] films soon after his emergence after his Dorsey days, as a solo singer, this was his first major film appearance. As another viewer [[pointed]], this seems almost to be a warm-up for On the Town. Sinatra may have had to work hard at it, but his dance with Kelly is credible, and he would do better in their next pairings. However, [[observation]] his physique, it's easy to see why he was caricatured as a string bean. Who would have imagined that within a decade he would win an academy award for acting, and [[going]] on to play [[innumerable]] roles as a tough detective or leader in combat. [[Notwithstanding]] Gene Kelly's personality and dancing dominated this [[cinema]], his winsome performance did not suggest that he [[could]] [[becoming]] a major creative force, [[hardly]] the [[symbolic]] figure, for MGM musicals, where he [[worded]] a style of [[dancers]] [[supplementary]] to that of Fred [[Esther]]. Finally, it was [[bizarre]] to [[consults]] the fresh-faced Dean Stockwell and [[remembering]] that he would [[then]] [[gaming]] a "thrill" [[shooter]] in [[Constraint]], based on the Leopold-Loeb [[assassinations]] from the 1920s. An [[extras]] [[notes]]: One reviewer [[commended]] the performance of [[Beatty]] Garrett as Sinatra's [[amour]] interest. She [[then]] [[done]] [[opus]] him in On the [[Urban]], but Pamela Britton was featured in this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First ever viewing: July 21, 2008

Very impressive screenplay and comedic acting and timing in this film. Now 40 years old, it has lost none of it's power. Neil Simon displays excellent insight into human nature and relationships as well as how to create genuine comedy from unusual situations. Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau give great comedic performances. Neil Simon was inspired by actual events in his own life to write the play this film is based on.

One of the best written and acted Hollywood comedies of all time!

Surprisingly, only nominated for 2 Academy Awards: "Best Adapted Screenplay" and "Best Film Editing". Hollywood rarely awards comedies, no matter how well they are made. --------------------------------------------- Result 1372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] One of the most [[disgusting]] films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an [[incite]] on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie. One of the most [[abhorrent]] films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an [[instigate]] on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1373 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I used to watch this show when I was a little [[girl]]. Although I don't [[remember]] much about it, I [[must]] say that it was a [[pretty]] good [[show]]. [[Also]], I don't think I've [[seen]] every episode. However, if you [[ask]] me, it was still a good [[show]]. I vaguely [[remember]] the theme song. [[Everyone]] was ideally [[cast]], the [[costume]] design was [[great]]. The performances were top-grade, too. I just hope some network [[brings]] this series back one day so that I'll be [[able]] to see [[every]] episode. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that I'll always remember this [[show]] in my memory forever, [[even]] though I don't think I've seen every episode. Now, in [[conclusion]], when and if this show is ever [[brought]] back on the air, I [[hope]] that you [[catch]] it one day before it goes off the [[air]] for good. I used to watch this show when I was a little [[chick]]. Although I don't [[remind]] much about it, I [[needs]] say that it was a [[quite]] good [[showing]]. [[Similarly]], I don't think I've [[watched]] every episode. However, if you [[poser]] me, it was still a good [[showings]]. I vaguely [[reminisce]] the theme song. [[Somebody]] was ideally [[casting]], the [[getup]] design was [[wondrous]]. The performances were top-grade, too. I just hope some network [[poses]] this series back one day so that I'll be [[capable]] to see [[any]] episode. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that I'll always remember this [[demonstrating]] in my memory forever, [[yet]] though I don't think I've seen every episode. Now, in [[conclusions]], when and if this show is ever [[tabled]] back on the air, I [[expectancy]] that you [[catches]] it one day before it goes off the [[airline]] for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1374 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I have this movie on DVD and must have watched it thirty [[times]] by now. I must really [[love]] it, right? Well, not really.

I was a surfer earlier in my life, and I loved the sport. To this day, I am fascinated by good surfing. Riding Giants has plenty of that, and [[thus]] I am a sucker for the thing. But I [[definitely]] have some bones to [[pick]] with it. (Peralta, you [[listening]]?).

[[First]], the movie has too [[little]] faith in its [[subject]] matter. The cutting and editing of the waves is such that the majority of them are [[sort]] of ruined. Very, very few waves are actually shown ridden from start to finish. Peralta seems addicted to a hyper kinetic, cut-and-pace method. It gets especially bad in the middle section on the spot Mavericks in Northern California. Not a single wave is ridden start to finish. Almost the entire section on Mavericks (one third of the movie) is a [[jarring]] montage of clips with an equally [[jarring]] soundtrack. I can understand the [[effect]] Peralta was trying to achieve with Mavericks, as the place is a truly frightening mix of bone crushing waves in [[frigid]] open ocean chop, but he goes way too far. Mavericks is not just a bad acid trip. Waves are actually ridden there, even with great performances. It would have been good to see some of them. If Peralta thinks this is a grand sport (and I am sure he does), then why does he insist on messing with the subject matter so much? At [[times]], the editing reduces the movie to the inscrutable. There is one fast clip in the section on Peahi in Hawaii, which I still cannot understand. Even if I run it on slow motion on DVD, the image is too fast to be decipherable. It must be a couple of frames in length at the max.

[[Second]], have the guys who made this thing ever learned about understatement? It is particularly galling to watch the narrated directors' version on DVD. These guys sound like two over-the-top valley girls. The same sentiment shows up in the main production. Every thing is always so goddamn "amazing" etc. One character in particular is just plain obnoxious -- Sam George, the editor of Surfer Magazine, who is practically peeing in his pants every time he has anything to say. He is a super drag on the movie.

There is a tremendous amount of effort that went into this movie. I mean, just to get the old movie shots they have, and also, all of the interviews. The movie is a great story, and I think it is generally captivating entertainment. Thematically it is well laid out, with the three parts centering around Greg Noll, Jeff Clark, and Laird Hamilton respectively. There are some uses of still photography that are phenomenal. In the directors' narration, they say it is a new type of 3D technology, and it really works. The three principle characters shine, both in their interviews and in the water. As an athlete, Laird Hamilton is a revelation. He rises to the pinnacle of his sport in a way that I have only seen Michael Jordan do in basketball. And too, the story of his meeting his father is a gem. It really touched me.

It is just that the movie could have been so much more. The very last part of the movie, when the credits roll, gives a hint of what it could have been. There are some beautiful panoramic shots of waves with a magnificent soundtrack. (The soundtrack in the rest of the movie is rubbish, though you may like it if you are fan of the modern, frenetic school of rock.) Anyway there's my two cents... I have this movie on DVD and must have watched it thirty [[dates]] by now. I must really [[amour]] it, right? Well, not really.

I was a surfer earlier in my life, and I loved the sport. To this day, I am fascinated by good surfing. Riding Giants has plenty of that, and [[then]] I am a sucker for the thing. But I [[undoubtedly]] have some bones to [[opted]] with it. (Peralta, you [[listen]]?).

[[Fiirst]], the movie has too [[petit]] faith in its [[subjected]] matter. The cutting and editing of the waves is such that the majority of them are [[sorts]] of ruined. Very, very few waves are actually shown ridden from start to finish. Peralta seems addicted to a hyper kinetic, cut-and-pace method. It gets especially bad in the middle section on the spot Mavericks in Northern California. Not a single wave is ridden start to finish. Almost the entire section on Mavericks (one third of the movie) is a [[dissenting]] montage of clips with an equally [[mismatched]] soundtrack. I can understand the [[impacts]] Peralta was trying to achieve with Mavericks, as the place is a truly frightening mix of bone crushing waves in [[glacial]] open ocean chop, but he goes way too far. Mavericks is not just a bad acid trip. Waves are actually ridden there, even with great performances. It would have been good to see some of them. If Peralta thinks this is a grand sport (and I am sure he does), then why does he insist on messing with the subject matter so much? At [[time]], the editing reduces the movie to the inscrutable. There is one fast clip in the section on Peahi in Hawaii, which I still cannot understand. Even if I run it on slow motion on DVD, the image is too fast to be decipherable. It must be a couple of frames in length at the max.

[[Seconds]], have the guys who made this thing ever learned about understatement? It is particularly galling to watch the narrated directors' version on DVD. These guys sound like two over-the-top valley girls. The same sentiment shows up in the main production. Every thing is always so goddamn "amazing" etc. One character in particular is just plain obnoxious -- Sam George, the editor of Surfer Magazine, who is practically peeing in his pants every time he has anything to say. He is a super drag on the movie.

There is a tremendous amount of effort that went into this movie. I mean, just to get the old movie shots they have, and also, all of the interviews. The movie is a great story, and I think it is generally captivating entertainment. Thematically it is well laid out, with the three parts centering around Greg Noll, Jeff Clark, and Laird Hamilton respectively. There are some uses of still photography that are phenomenal. In the directors' narration, they say it is a new type of 3D technology, and it really works. The three principle characters shine, both in their interviews and in the water. As an athlete, Laird Hamilton is a revelation. He rises to the pinnacle of his sport in a way that I have only seen Michael Jordan do in basketball. And too, the story of his meeting his father is a gem. It really touched me.

It is just that the movie could have been so much more. The very last part of the movie, when the credits roll, gives a hint of what it could have been. There are some beautiful panoramic shots of waves with a magnificent soundtrack. (The soundtrack in the rest of the movie is rubbish, though you may like it if you are fan of the modern, frenetic school of rock.) Anyway there's my two cents... --------------------------------------------- Result 1375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I had read many [[good]] things about this adaptation of my [[favorite]] [[novel]]...so invariably my [[expectations]] were crushed. But they were crushed more than should be expected. The [[movie]] [[would]] have been a [[decent]] [[movie]] if I had not read the novel beforehand, which perhaps ruined it for me.

In any event, for some reason they [[changed]] the [[labor]] camp at Toulon to a [[ship]] full of [[galley]] [[slaves]]. The scene at [[Bishop]] Myriel's was fine. [[In]] [[fact]], other than the galleys, things [[survived]] up until the dismissal of Fantine. Because we do not want to have bad things happen to a good woman, she does not cut her hair, [[sell]] her [[teeth]], or [[become]] a prostitute. The [[worst]] she does is [[run]] into the mayor's office and spit on his [[face]]. Bamatabois is [[entirely]] eliminated. Because having [[children]] out of wedlock should also not be [[talked]] about, Tholomyes is Fantine's [[dead]] [[husband]], rather than an irresponsible dandy. Valjean is able to fetch Cosette for Fantine before the Champmathieu affair, so they reunite happily, yet another [[change]]. [[Then]] comes the convent, which is a pretty difficult scene to screw up. Thankfully, it was [[saved]]. After this three minutes of accuracy, however, the [[movie]] again begins to hurtle towards Classic Novel Butchering.

As Cosette and Valjean are riding through the park, they come across Marius giving a speech at a meeting. About prison reform. When he comes to hand out fliers to Valjean and Cosette, he says the one line in the movie that set me [[screaming]] at the [[TV]] set. "We aren't revolutionaries." I could hear Victor Hugo thrashing in his [[grave]]. [[OF]] COURSE THEY ARE REVOLUTIONARIES! They want to revolt against the pseudo-monarchy that is in place in favor of another republic, you [[dumb]] [[screenwriters]]! It's a [[historical]] FACT that there was an [[insurrection]] against the [[government]] in 1832.

[[At]] one point Cosette goes to give [[Marius]] a [[donation]] from her [[father]] for the [[reform]] [[movement]] and [[meets]] Eponine. Except...not Eponine. [[Or]] at [[least]] not the Eponine of the book. This Eponine appears to be a well-to-do secretary [[girl]] working for the [[prison]] [[reformers]] (who are [[working]] out of the Cafe Universal as opposed to the [[Cafe]] Musain). Not to mention the audience is already made to dislike her thanks to her not-period, low-cut, tight-fitting dress and her snooty mannerisms.

The prison reformers (Lead by the most poorly cast Enjolras that I have EVER seen) decide that handing out pamphlets isn't good enough anymore. So they're going to build barricades. I don't know about you, but I have never heard of reform movements tearing up the streets and building barricades and attacking government troops. About three hundred people (it was not supposed to be so many) start attacking the National Guard and building a bunch of barricades, etc. Eponine does die for Marius, thankfully.

The rest of the movie is sort of accurate, except that Javert's suicide again seems hard to understand thanks to his minuscule screen time and odd character interpretation. The movie ends with Valjean watching Javert jump into the river. This is again inaccurate because Valjean would never have let Javert drown. He saved the man's life earlier, why let him die now? Then there's the whole skipping of Valjean's confession to Marius, his deterioration, and his redemption on his deathbed with Marius and Cosette by his side.

Overall, I can blame the script mostly for the problems. While I am glad Enjolras and Eponine were at least present in the film, they were terribly misinterpreted, as was the entire barricade scene. The elimination of Fantine's suffering prevents us from feeling too much pity for her. That Cosette knows Valjean's past from the start messes with the plot a good deal. I did not even see Thenardier, and Mme. Thenardier only had a few seconds of screen time. The same with Gavroche. I did like Frederich March's interpretation of Valjean a lot, however, which was one of the redeeming features of the movie. On the other hand, Charles Laughton, for all his great acting in other movies, seems to have missed the mark with Javert. The lip tremble, the unnecessary shouting, and his acting in general all just felt very wrong. He also, like many Javerts I have seen, did not appear at all menacing, something required of the character.

Again, this film would probably feel much better if I had not read the book. I would not recommend it to book purists, though. I would also say that the movie would have been a good adaptation for the time had not the infamously accurate French version come out the year before. I had read many [[alright]] things about this adaptation of my [[preferential]] [[newer]]...so invariably my [[predictions]] were crushed. But they were crushed more than should be expected. The [[filmmaking]] [[should]] have been a [[dignified]] [[filmmaking]] if I had not read the novel beforehand, which perhaps ruined it for me.

In any event, for some reason they [[shifted]] the [[manpower]] camp at Toulon to a [[boats]] full of [[kitchen]] [[slav]]. The scene at [[Monsignor]] Myriel's was fine. [[During]] [[facto]], other than the galleys, things [[outlived]] up until the dismissal of Fantine. Because we do not want to have bad things happen to a good woman, she does not cut her hair, [[sells]] her [[dental]], or [[becoming]] a prostitute. The [[hardest]] she does is [[executing]] into the mayor's office and spit on his [[confronts]]. Bamatabois is [[fully]] eliminated. Because having [[enfants]] out of wedlock should also not be [[mentioned]] about, Tholomyes is Fantine's [[die]] [[hubby]], rather than an irresponsible dandy. Valjean is able to fetch Cosette for Fantine before the Champmathieu affair, so they reunite happily, yet another [[alter]]. [[Subsequently]] comes the convent, which is a pretty difficult scene to screw up. Thankfully, it was [[rescuing]]. After this three minutes of accuracy, however, the [[filmmaking]] again begins to hurtle towards Classic Novel Butchering.

As Cosette and Valjean are riding through the park, they come across Marius giving a speech at a meeting. About prison reform. When he comes to hand out fliers to Valjean and Cosette, he says the one line in the movie that set me [[shouts]] at the [[TELEVISION]] set. "We aren't revolutionaries." I could hear Victor Hugo thrashing in his [[graves]]. [[DE]] COURSE THEY ARE REVOLUTIONARIES! They want to revolt against the pseudo-monarchy that is in place in favor of another republic, you [[twit]] [[writers]]! It's a [[historic]] FACT that there was an [[uprising]] against the [[goverment]] in 1832.

[[During]] one point Cosette goes to give [[Constantin]] a [[knack]] from her [[pere]] for the [[reforming]] [[movements]] and [[satisfies]] Eponine. Except...not Eponine. [[Oder]] at [[fewer]] not the Eponine of the book. This Eponine appears to be a well-to-do secretary [[girls]] working for the [[incarceration]] [[reformer]] (who are [[cooperated]] out of the Cafe Universal as opposed to the [[Coffee]] Musain). Not to mention the audience is already made to dislike her thanks to her not-period, low-cut, tight-fitting dress and her snooty mannerisms.

The prison reformers (Lead by the most poorly cast Enjolras that I have EVER seen) decide that handing out pamphlets isn't good enough anymore. So they're going to build barricades. I don't know about you, but I have never heard of reform movements tearing up the streets and building barricades and attacking government troops. About three hundred people (it was not supposed to be so many) start attacking the National Guard and building a bunch of barricades, etc. Eponine does die for Marius, thankfully.

The rest of the movie is sort of accurate, except that Javert's suicide again seems hard to understand thanks to his minuscule screen time and odd character interpretation. The movie ends with Valjean watching Javert jump into the river. This is again inaccurate because Valjean would never have let Javert drown. He saved the man's life earlier, why let him die now? Then there's the whole skipping of Valjean's confession to Marius, his deterioration, and his redemption on his deathbed with Marius and Cosette by his side.

Overall, I can blame the script mostly for the problems. While I am glad Enjolras and Eponine were at least present in the film, they were terribly misinterpreted, as was the entire barricade scene. The elimination of Fantine's suffering prevents us from feeling too much pity for her. That Cosette knows Valjean's past from the start messes with the plot a good deal. I did not even see Thenardier, and Mme. Thenardier only had a few seconds of screen time. The same with Gavroche. I did like Frederich March's interpretation of Valjean a lot, however, which was one of the redeeming features of the movie. On the other hand, Charles Laughton, for all his great acting in other movies, seems to have missed the mark with Javert. The lip tremble, the unnecessary shouting, and his acting in general all just felt very wrong. He also, like many Javerts I have seen, did not appear at all menacing, something required of the character.

Again, this film would probably feel much better if I had not read the book. I would not recommend it to book purists, though. I would also say that the movie would have been a good adaptation for the time had not the infamously accurate French version come out the year before. --------------------------------------------- Result 1376 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Brando plays the ace jet pilot, just back from shooting MiGs down in the Korean War. On leave, he discovers his Madame Butterfly, falls in love. The lovers both see the folly of racism and the cruelty which conservative cultural norms can bring to human relations.

This film is an excellent romance with a nice twist which rejects the racist, conservative standards, dominant at the time it was made in 1957. "Sayonara" will make you laugh and cry. Beware though, sometimes the musical background will make you wish it was not there, although, Irving Berlin's title song will entice your memory for a very long time after your theatre lights come on again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1377 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Such a Long Journey" is a well crafted film, a good shoot, and a showcase for some good performances. However, the story is such a jumble of subplots and peculiar characters that it becomes a sort of Jack of all plots and master of none. Also, Western audiences will likely find the esoterics of the rather obscure Parsee culture a little much to get their arms around in 1.7 hours. Recommended for those with an interest in India. --------------------------------------------- Result 1378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I agree that Capital [[City]] should be on [[DVD]]. I watched this [[show]] only by [[accident]] in 1994 and [[fell]] in [[love]] with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to [[see]] [[Americans]] who [[work]] [[abroad]] in London in the financial industry for a [[change]]. I [[loved]] [[Rolf]] in this role and [[loved]] [[every]] other role that he has been in. I can't believe the [[show]] only lasted 13 episodes. I [[liked]] William Armstrong as Hudson's [[flamboyant]] charming [[friend]] in the series. When they [[aired]] this [[show]] in the [[New]] [[York]] [[City]] area, it was [[always]] [[late]] at night or at off times. The [[show]] is [[less]] than an [[hour]] long. I [[felt]] this show should have gone on [[longer]] but the [[casting]] [[changes]] in the second season [[really]] made the [[show]] a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but [[missed]] the actress, [[Julia]] Phillips-Lane in the [[previous]] season. I felt this [[show]] [[took]] [[chances]] and [[often]] it [[worked]]. It [[showed]] [[Americans]] who [[loved]] and [[chose]] to [[live]] in London. The American [[characters]] were not [[arrogant]] or tried to [[outdo]] their British counterparts. I [[also]] [[liked]] the fact that they had [[tried]] to internationalize the cast [[rather]] than [[make]] them all British. I [[liked]] watching [[Julia]] Ormond in an [[early]] role. I [[felt]] this show should have lasted longer. I [[felt]] at [[times]] that the previews lasted as long as the [[show]] in [[less]] than an hour. They could have [[transferred]] the cast to [[New]] [[York]] [[City]] and it [[would]] have been a [[hit]] in [[America]]. I agree that Capital [[Town]] should be on [[DVDS]]. I watched this [[displays]] only by [[incident]] in 1994 and [[fallen]] in [[amore]] with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to [[behold]] [[America]] who [[worked]] [[overseas]] in London in the financial industry for a [[alterations]]. I [[love]] [[Rolfe]] in this role and [[cared]] [[any]] other role that he has been in. I can't believe the [[demonstrate]] only lasted 13 episodes. I [[loved]] William Armstrong as Hudson's [[excessive]] charming [[boyfriend]] in the series. When they [[distributed]] this [[demonstrate]] in the [[Novo]] [[Yorke]] [[Town]] area, it was [[continuously]] [[tard]] at night or at off times. The [[illustrating]] is [[lesser]] than an [[hours]] long. I [[believed]] this show should have gone on [[most]] but the [[cast]] [[adjustments]] in the second season [[genuinely]] made the [[demonstrate]] a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but [[flunked]] the actress, [[Yulia]] Phillips-Lane in the [[past]] season. I felt this [[shows]] [[taken]] [[probabilities]] and [[routinely]] it [[acted]]. It [[evidenced]] [[Us]] who [[worshipped]] and [[opted]] to [[vive]] in London. The American [[hallmarks]] were not [[presumptuous]] or tried to [[surpass]] their British counterparts. I [[apart]] [[enjoyed]] the fact that they had [[strived]] to internationalize the cast [[quite]] than [[deliver]] them all British. I [[loved]] watching [[Yulia]] Ormond in an [[precocious]] role. I [[deemed]] this show should have lasted longer. I [[deemed]] at [[time]] that the previews lasted as long as the [[exhibitions]] in [[fewest]] than an hour. They could have [[transfered]] the cast to [[Nuevo]] [[Yorke]] [[Town]] and it [[could]] have been a [[hitting]] in [[Latina]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] you have a [[strong]] [[stomach]]. Holden was [[actually]] 55 years [[old]] at [[filming]] but [[looked]] near 70 and he only lived another 8 [[years]]. [[At]] one point Holden said, "I am over [[twice]] your age." [[Okay]], [[try]] triple [[grandpa]]! The "[[old]] enough to be your father" [[theme]] they were [[shooting]] for didn't [[work]]. [[Granted]] [[senior]] [[citizens]] [[sometimes]] wind up with legal [[teens]]. More power to them, but that doesn't [[mean]] I [[want]] to watch it. It's not a [[matter]] of [[judgment]] but the [[digestive]] track. I like my [[food]] where it [[belongs]]. Lenz is [[fun]] to watch and the 70s [[cars]], [[clothes]], furniture, etc. make it worth it if it [[comes]] on [[cable]] late at [[night]] and you [[want]] to watch [[something]] to wind down for bed. It would have been [[nice]] to see the blonde friend of Lenz, the one who hocked her [[guitar]], [[get]] more scenes. Pleasingly spacey... Who was this chick? I'm [[going]] to try and find out. you have a [[vigorous]] [[tummy]]. Holden was [[genuinely]] 55 years [[ancient]] at [[photographing]] but [[seemed]] near 70 and he only lived another 8 [[yr]]. [[For]] one point Holden said, "I am over [[doubly]] your age." [[Allright]], [[attempt]] triple [[grandfather]]! The "[[former]] enough to be your father" [[topic]] they were [[gunshot]] for didn't [[cooperates]]. [[Given]] [[eldest]] [[citizen]] [[intermittently]] wind up with legal [[teen]]. More power to them, but that doesn't [[meaning]] I [[desiring]] to watch it. It's not a [[topic]] of [[stoppage]] but the [[gut]] track. I like my [[eating]] where it [[belonging]]. Lenz is [[hilarious]] to watch and the 70s [[wagon]], [[outfits]], furniture, etc. make it worth it if it [[arrives]] on [[telegram]] late at [[nighttime]] and you [[desiring]] to watch [[anything]] to wind down for bed. It would have been [[delightful]] to see the blonde friend of Lenz, the one who hocked her [[guitarist]], [[gets]] more scenes. Pleasingly spacey... Who was this chick? I'm [[go]] to try and find out. --------------------------------------------- Result 1380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very good except for the ending which was a huge disappointment.

The script was very good as was the acting. The visuals were often very grainy but this in a way added to the film as the snowy features were in good places that helped create a mood towards the film. This affect was ruined by the extremely unbelievable ending.

I was going to give this film an 8 out of ten but the ending knocked it down a point to 7 because it seemed to depart radically from the first 75 minutes of the movie and seemed quite forced at the end to make the film makers look clever.

This movie though was much better than films with quite a lot larger budgets and seemed to be filmed like a home movie with some extra equipment. Not much in the way of special effects as these go but for suspense it was very good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once big action star who fell off the face of the earth ends up in a small town with a problem with drug dealers and a dead body of a federal agent. Reuniting with some former co-stars to clean up the town.

Low key, often to the point of blandness, "action" comedy mostly just doesn't work. Part of the problem is the casting Chris Klien as a former action hero. he's not bad, but he's really not believable as some one who was taken to be a tough guy. As I said he's not bad, he's just just miscast for what his back story is. The real problem here is the combination of the script, which really isn't funny and seems artificial at times, and the direction which is pedestrian to the port of dullness. There is no life in the way things are set up. Its as if the director had a list of shots and went by that list. It makes for an un-engaging film. And yet the film occasionally springs to life, such as the in the final show down that ends the film. That sequence works, but because the earlier parts of the film floundered its drained of much of its power.

I can't really recommend the film. Its worth a shot if you're a fan of the actors or are a huge fan of independent cinema in all its forms, but otherwise this is just a disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 1382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm sure deep in the recesses of Jack Blacks mind the character of Nacho Libre is absolutely hilarious but no it isn't. You can tell ol Jacks having a whale of a time hammin it up playing a smarmy, slimy Mexican friar with dreams of becoming a wrestler but this movie is a total misfire in just about every single department.

I just sat there through most of the movie thinking "Is this supposed to be funny" and "This is the guy from Tenacious D right?". The truth is this film has NOTHING to offer. AT ALL! It's a lousy script with crappy characters and really naff acting and direction. You'll watch endless moments where you think something funny is surely about to happen but it just doesn't. I was bored stupid about 10 minutes in but though it would surely pick up. It didn't. 90 minutes later I'd barely managed to stave off an aneurism it was that painful.

It's like, remember years ago when you'd see anything with your fave actor in it, even some of their really early pap from before they were famous, and you'd be really embarrassed that said actor was actually in such a load of plop. Yeah it's like that.

I've enjoyed some of Jack Black's earlier movies like Shallow Hall and I'm really looking forward to seeing Pick of Destiny but come on man. If you do this to us again Jack I'm gonna have to come round there and hammer your kneecaps or something. At the least give you a serious talking to.

I know it's a cliché but this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen and for so many reasons.... --------------------------------------------- Result 1383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A film I expected very little from, and only watched to pass a quiet hour - but what an hour it turned out to be. Roll is an excellent if none-too-serious little story of 'country-boy-lost-in-the-big-city-makes-good', it is funny throughout, the characters are endearing and the pace is just right.

Toby Malone is the true star of the film with his endearing portrayal of Matt, said country boy and local Aussie Rules football hero come to the big city to try out for one of the big teams. He is supported superbly by John Batchelor as local gangster Tiny. Watch out for these two.

Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] It's a [[really]] [[cheesy]] [[parody]] of [[Tomb]] [[Raider]] and some Indiana Jones, the humor's cheesy, and so is the acting. But after all it is a [[soft]] [[core]] movie, which is [[expected]] and doesn't [[matter]] because what you really [[want]] is the [[sex]]. Which [[gets]] me to the [[biggest]] problem of all, there barely is any of it. Which makes you feel like you're watching [[TV]] at 3 am and the independent [[movies]] are playing and the one that is on was made by some [[college]] kid that's [[going]] nowhere in that [[industry]]. You're left a very long time waiting for an [[actual]] [[sex]] scene, a [[lot]] of [[times]] you are thinking [[something]] is [[going]] to happen, then just [[left]] hanging. The one(maybe two, or one with two parts)that actually goes somewhere is very pleasing [[though]]. I personally can't [[recommend]] this [[unless]] you found it in a clear out bin for a dollar or two. If you lucking for a good movie with a plot and good acting, you don't want this. If you looking for a [[good]] soft core lesbian film, you don't want this either. It's a [[truly]] [[dorky]] [[comedy]] of [[Graveyard]] [[Ryder]] and some Indiana Jones, the humor's cheesy, and so is the acting. But after all it is a [[gentle]] [[crux]] movie, which is [[awaited]] and doesn't [[question]] because what you really [[desiring]] is the [[sexuality]]. Which [[get]] me to the [[strongest]] problem of all, there barely is any of it. Which makes you feel like you're watching [[TELEVISION]] at 3 am and the independent [[filmmaking]] are playing and the one that is on was made by some [[academies]] kid that's [[go]] nowhere in that [[industries]]. You're left a very long time waiting for an [[real]] [[sexuality]] scene, a [[batch]] of [[time]] you are thinking [[algo]] is [[gonna]] to happen, then just [[exited]] hanging. The one(maybe two, or one with two parts)that actually goes somewhere is very pleasing [[despite]]. I personally can't [[recommends]] this [[if]] you found it in a clear out bin for a dollar or two. If you lucking for a good movie with a plot and good acting, you don't want this. If you looking for a [[buena]] soft core lesbian film, you don't want this either. --------------------------------------------- Result 1385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i really liked the first 2 seasons. because a lot of good characters disappeared later on. like most shows are kinda slow at first then get better in later seasons, but this is the absolute reverse. jenny from the 1st season and Valarie from the 2nd season were Sabrina's friends, i really didn't care for the others, jenny and Valarie were her coolest friends. i think for some reason, the producers wanted us to not like her college friends for some reason, they were so cruel to Sabrina. but my favorite episode from season 1 is cat showdown and my favorite episode from season 2 is witch trash, that is the funniest episode. i also thought it was funny how Libby was popular but she was always jealous of Sabrina, and never seemed to have a real boyfriend but was always wanting to be with Harvey. i just wished they could have made more better ones. i also liked how the first 2 seasons, during the opening credits Sabrina would say a few words while wearing a costume, like in the pilot episode where she's in the witch costume, i liked how she said "this is so not me" and later on she kept trying to change herself to something else is what i think, but this is a really cool show. it is kinda like the andy griffith show in a way because it good at first but once it turned color and barney fife left, it was longer good. but i still like to watch it, but the only reason i watch later seasons is because of sabrina. what i meant about the opening sequence is: the opening titles of seasons 1-3 shows Sabrina in front of a mirror posing with several different costumes and outfits as the cast members' names quickly flash on the bottom of the screen. At the end, Sabrina would say some sort of pun that related to the outfit she is wearing, then disappear. the opening sequence of season four includes the characters in bubbles. the opening credits of seasons 5-7 features Sabrina at various locations around Boston --------------------------------------------- Result 1386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is mostly chase scenes and special effects. It is very weak on plot. Most of the computer talk was just mumbo-jumbo. I watched this because I was a big fan of the original War Games movie which was based mostly on computer fact and real computer terminology. This movie had none of that. Most of the computer scenes were not only impossible and highly unrealistic of real computers and networks, but just lame. It is like it was written by somebody who has no comprehension of real computers.

The ripley game was lame and was essentially just an arcade game. No real hacking, so what was the point? Movie was boring. Lame sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 1387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Peter]] Fonda is so [[intentionally]] enervated as an actor that his lachrymose line-readings [[cancel]] out any [[irony]] or [[humor]] in the [[dialogue]]. He [[trades]] sassy barbs and non-witty repartee with [[Brooke]] [[Shields]] as if he were a [[wooden]] [[block]] with receding hair; even his smaller [[touches]] (like fingering a non-existent mustache on his grizzled [[face]]) don't [[reveal]] a character so much as an [[unsure]] [[actor]] being [[directed]] by himself, an [[unsure]] filmmaker. In the [[Southwest]] circa 1950, a poor [[gambler]] (not above a [[little]] [[cheating]]) [[wins]] an orphaned, would-be [[teen]] [[Lolita]] in a botched poker [[game]]; after [[getting]] [[hold]] of a [[treasure]] map promising gold in the [[Grand]] Canyon, the [[bickering]] twosome [[become]] [[prospectors]]. Some lovely [[vistas]], and an [[odd]] but interesting cameo by [[Henry]] Fonda as a grizzled canyon man, are the [[sole]] compensations in [[fatigued]] comedy-drama, with the two [[leads]] being trailed by cartoonish [[killers]] who will [[stop]] at nothing until they [[get]] their hands on that [[map]]. Shields is very pretty, but--although the [[camera]] [[loves]] her pouty, [[glossy]] beauty--she has no screen [[presence]] (and her tinny [[voice]] has no [[range]] whatsoever); [[every]] [[time]] she [[opens]] her mouth, one is inclined to [[either]] [[cringe]] or [[duck]]. *1/2 from **** [[Petr]] Fonda is so [[consciously]] enervated as an actor that his lachrymose line-readings [[countermand]] out any [[paradox]] or [[comedy]] in the [[conversation]]. He [[crafts]] sassy barbs and non-witty repartee with [[Brook]] [[Shield]] as if he were a [[lumber]] [[bloc]] with receding hair; even his smaller [[affects]] (like fingering a non-existent mustache on his grizzled [[confronts]]) don't [[divulge]] a character so much as an [[insecure]] [[protagonist]] being [[aimed]] by himself, an [[unsafe]] filmmaker. In the [[Northwestern]] circa 1950, a poor [[gamblers]] (not above a [[petite]] [[cheat]]) [[won]] an orphaned, would-be [[youths]] [[Loli]] in a botched poker [[gaming]]; after [[obtain]] [[held]] of a [[treasury]] map promising gold in the [[Tremendous]] Canyon, the [[wrangle]] twosome [[gotten]] [[prospector]]. Some lovely [[perspective]], and an [[unusual]] but interesting cameo by [[Henrik]] Fonda as a grizzled canyon man, are the [[unique]] compensations in [[jaded]] comedy-drama, with the two [[leeds]] being trailed by cartoonish [[cutthroats]] who will [[cease]] at nothing until they [[gets]] their hands on that [[maps]]. Shields is very pretty, but--although the [[cameras]] [[adores]] her pouty, [[lustrous]] beauty--she has no screen [[attendance]] (and her tinny [[vowel]] has no [[ranges]] whatsoever); [[all]] [[moment]] she [[open]] her mouth, one is inclined to [[neither]] [[shudder]] or [[duckling]]. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1388 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best made-for-TV movie of all-time! Am I saying this because I'm a huge Silverstone fan? Partially, but even without her, I'd still see it. I'm a fan of serial killer genre films, and believe this to be a great entry in that category. Also, Mary Giordano easily ranks among Alicia's top five character creations. Totally memorable - like she really exists. I'd have her on my side, too, if there was a mystery to be solved. She plays the character, like she does with her real life, with complete confidence in everything she does. Seems sweet, honest, nice...just like she is in real life. So is that acting? Yes, indeed, she's sort of a rebel once again. This time she's not bad, she's too good and a bit afraid to do things that seem above the law. But she doesn't do things the normal teenager would do. Instead, she spends her time reading detective mags and solves crimes. A cliche abounds: she's sort of avenging her father's death, in a different way than vigilante-style. At the time, Alicia seemed to be playing the same characters: rebellious, seductive, without a parent, a loner. This happens here, too, but she's a bit nerdy this time around. That doesn't matter; she's still cool as a nerd. Check this out soon, or else Giordano will be investigating why you haven't... --------------------------------------------- Result 1389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm surprised at the comments from posters stating that [[Jane]] Powell made the same type of [[films]] Deanna Durbin did. [[Although]] they were both young sopranos [[whose]] film images were crafted by Joe Pasternak, if this [[film]] is any indication, they were almost polar opposites.

While, in THREE SMART [[GIRLS]], Durbin plays an impulsive "[[Little]] Miss Fixit," who, after some setbacks, manages to [[reunite]] her divorced [[parents]], in its' semi-remake, THREE [[DARING]] [[DAUGHTERS]], [[Jane]] Powell [[almost]] destroys the [[marriage]] between her screen [[Mom]] Jeanette MacDonald and new stepfather [[Jose]] Iturbi when she [[refuses]] to accept him and strong arms her [[younger]] siblings into rejecting him, too. From the Durbin and Powell films I've [[seen]], I'd say these disparate qualities permeate the early films of both of these talented young performers.

As for Durbin's performance in [[THREE]] [[SMART]] [[GIRLS]], I find it [[completely]] [[winning]], and most [[impressive]]. Although it's [[clear]] from her occasionally shrill and over-emphatic line readings in some of the more energetic scenes that this is an early [[film]] for Deanna, [[watching]] the self-confident, [[knowing]] and [[naturally]] effervescent [[manner]] in which she [[delivers]] her lines and [[performs]] [[overall]], and the subdued and [[tender]] [[manner]] she projects the more [[serious]] scenes, you'd never guess that this was the [[FIRST]] [[film]] role of a 14 year-old [[girl]] [[whose]] [[prior]] professional experience [[consisted]] [[almost]] [[exclusively]] of two [[years]] of [[vocal]] instruction.

[[Given]] that this [[film]], and Durbin herself, were [[much]] [[publicized]] at the [[time]] as "Universal's last [[chance]]," the production [[must]] have been an impossibly stressful situation for a [[film]] novice of any age, but you'd never know it from the [[ease]] and [[assurance]] Durbin [[displays]] on screen. Although she's [[clearly]] still developing her acting [[style]] and [[demeanor]] before the camera (this was [[equally]] true of the [[early]] performances of much more experienced contemporaries [[like]] [[Garland]], [[Rooney]], O'Connor and [[Jane]] Powell), Durbin projects an [[extraordinary]] [[presence]] and warmth on [[camera]] that is [[absolutely]] [[unique]] to her, and, [[even]] here, in her first [[film]], she [[manages]] to remain [[immensely]] likable despite the [[often]] quick-tempered impulsiveness of her [[character]], and [[though]] she's occasionally shrill, she never for a [[second]] projects the coy and [[arch]] qualities that afflicted many child stars, including Jane Powell and some of the other young sopranos who followed in the wake of her [[success]].

In short, like all great singing stars, Durbin was much more than just a "beautiful voice." On the other hand, while Durbin's pure lyric soprano is a truly remarkable and glorious [[instrument]], the most remarkable thing about it, to me, was the way she is able to project her songs, without the slightest bit of affectation or "grandnes" that afflict the singing of adult opera singers like Lily Pons, Grace Moore and Jeanette MacDonald in films of the period

The film is also delightful, heavily influenced by screwball comedy, it backs Durbin up with a creme-de-la-creme of first-class screwball pros such as Charles Winninger, Binnie Barnes, Alice Brady, Ray Milland and Mischa Auer. The story is light and entertaining. True, it's hardly "realistic," but why would anyone expect it to be? If you want :"realistic" rent THE GRAPES OF WRATH or TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. On the other hand, if you're looking for a genuine, sweet, funny and entertaining family comedy with a wonderfully, charismatic and gifted adolescent "lead," and terrific supporting players, this film won't let you down. I'm surprised at the comments from posters stating that [[Jin]] Powell made the same type of [[cinematography]] Deanna Durbin did. [[Though]] they were both young sopranos [[who]] film images were crafted by Joe Pasternak, if this [[movie]] is any indication, they were almost polar opposites.

While, in THREE SMART [[FEMALE]], Durbin plays an impulsive "[[Tiny]] Miss Fixit," who, after some setbacks, manages to [[reunion]] her divorced [[parenting]], in its' semi-remake, THREE [[BOLD]] [[FEMALES]], [[Janie]] Powell [[practically]] destroys the [[marrying]] between her screen [[Momma]] Jeanette MacDonald and new stepfather [[Sanchez]] Iturbi when she [[denies]] to accept him and strong arms her [[cadet]] siblings into rejecting him, too. From the Durbin and Powell films I've [[noticed]], I'd say these disparate qualities permeate the early films of both of these talented young performers.

As for Durbin's performance in [[TRE]] [[CUNNING]] [[WOMAN]], I find it [[entirely]] [[wins]], and most [[wondrous]]. Although it's [[unmistakable]] from her occasionally shrill and over-emphatic line readings in some of the more energetic scenes that this is an early [[movie]] for Deanna, [[staring]] the self-confident, [[realise]] and [[evidently]] effervescent [[fashion]] in which she [[offerings]] her lines and [[conducts]] [[entire]], and the subdued and [[offerings]] [[fashion]] she projects the more [[grave]] scenes, you'd never guess that this was the [[FIRSTLY]] [[cinema]] role of a 14 year-old [[female]] [[who]] [[formerly]] professional experience [[composed]] [[approximately]] [[solely]] of two [[aged]] of [[loud]] instruction.

[[Gave]] that this [[movies]], and Durbin herself, were [[very]] [[advertised]] at the [[moment]] as "Universal's last [[possibilities]]," the production [[ought]] have been an impossibly stressful situation for a [[movies]] novice of any age, but you'd never know it from the [[easing]] and [[security]] Durbin [[exposition]] on screen. Although she's [[apparently]] still developing her acting [[elegance]] and [[behaviour]] before the camera (this was [[similarly]] true of the [[prematurely]] performances of much more experienced contemporaries [[iike]] [[Coronet]], [[Ronnie]], O'Connor and [[Jin]] Powell), Durbin projects an [[excellent]] [[attendance]] and warmth on [[cameras]] that is [[totally]] [[unequalled]] to her, and, [[yet]] here, in her first [[movie]], she [[runs]] to remain [[unbelievably]] likable despite the [[normally]] quick-tempered impulsiveness of her [[characters]], and [[if]] she's occasionally shrill, she never for a [[seconds]] projects the coy and [[archie]] qualities that afflicted many child stars, including Jane Powell and some of the other young sopranos who followed in the wake of her [[accomplishments]].

In short, like all great singing stars, Durbin was much more than just a "beautiful voice." On the other hand, while Durbin's pure lyric soprano is a truly remarkable and glorious [[devices]], the most remarkable thing about it, to me, was the way she is able to project her songs, without the slightest bit of affectation or "grandnes" that afflict the singing of adult opera singers like Lily Pons, Grace Moore and Jeanette MacDonald in films of the period

The film is also delightful, heavily influenced by screwball comedy, it backs Durbin up with a creme-de-la-creme of first-class screwball pros such as Charles Winninger, Binnie Barnes, Alice Brady, Ray Milland and Mischa Auer. The story is light and entertaining. True, it's hardly "realistic," but why would anyone expect it to be? If you want :"realistic" rent THE GRAPES OF WRATH or TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. On the other hand, if you're looking for a genuine, sweet, funny and entertaining family comedy with a wonderfully, charismatic and gifted adolescent "lead," and terrific supporting players, this film won't let you down. --------------------------------------------- Result 1390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Underground Comedy movie is perhaps one of the worst comedies I've ever seen. I should have known it was going to be bad when the box had the phrase "guaranteed to offend" written on it... meaning that the filmmakers were going to focus more on grossing you out than making you laugh.

This movie is an amateurish jumble of childish skits, bad characters, and worse jokes... from the pathetic Bat-Man sketch to the painfully unfunny Arnold Shvollenpecker skit, they just aren't funny. The few skits that are a little funny are few and far between - watching Micheal Clark Duncan play a gay virgin, for example - but even they go on too long and get ruined from Vince Offer's ineptness at comedy.

Keep The Underground Comedy Movie underground... bury it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A stuttering plot, uninteresting characters and sub-par (to say the least) dialogue plagues this TV production that could hardly have been interesting even with a billion dollar production budget.

The characters aren't believable, in their motives, actions or their professed occupations. The plot reads like a bad Dungeons and Dragons(TM) hack but with plasma rifles and force fields. There are severe continuity issues and the degree of pointless interaction between the characters has this author, at least, wincing.

Avoid it like the plague. Watch any episode of Dark Angel and you will have better acting, dialogue and plot. Yuck. --------------------------------------------- Result 1392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Williams family live on a ranch located in the middle of the remote desert. They find themselves in considerable peril when the place is suddenly thrust into a time vortex where the past, present and future collide in a wildly chaotic and unpredictable manner. Director John "Bud" Cardos begins the film on a compellingly mysterious note and gradually allows things to get stranger, crazier and more exciting as the loopy story unfolds. Moreover, Cardos fills the screen with plenty of dazzling visuals and does a nice job of creating a genuine sense of awe and wonder. The admirably sincere acting from a game cast qualifies as another major plus: Jim Davis as hearty patriarch Grant Williams, Dorothy Malone as his cheery wife Ana, Christopher Mitchum as the concerned Richard, Marcy Lafferty as his lovely wife Beth, Natasha Ryan as sweet little girl Jenny, and Scott C. Kolden as the gutsy Steve. The funky special effects offer an inspired combo of gnarly miniatures, neat stop-motion animation monsters (said creatures include a tiny spindly hairless guy, a big, lumpy, fanged beast, and a scrawny lizard dude), and nifty matte paintings. Richard Band's rousing full-bore orchestral score really hits the stirring spot. John Arthur Morrill's crisp, sunny cinematography likewise does the trick. A fun flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 1393 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Hey HULU.com is playing the Elvira late night [[horror]] show on their site and this movie is their under the [[Name]] Monsteroid, good fun to watch Elvira comment on this Crappy movie ....Have Fun with bad movies. Anyways this movie really has very [[little]] value other than to see how bad the 70's were for horror flicks Bad Effects, Bad Dialog, just [[bad]] movie [[making]]. [[Avoid]] this unless you want to laugh at it. While you are at HULU check out the other movies that are their right now there is 10 episodes and some are pretty decent movies with good plots and production and you can watch a lot of them in 480p as long as you have a decent speed connection. Hey HULU.com is playing the Elvira late night [[terror]] show on their site and this movie is their under the [[Denomination]] Monsteroid, good fun to watch Elvira comment on this Crappy movie ....Have Fun with bad movies. Anyways this movie really has very [[scant]] value other than to see how bad the 70's were for horror flicks Bad Effects, Bad Dialog, just [[unfavourable]] movie [[doing]]. [[Shirk]] this unless you want to laugh at it. While you are at HULU check out the other movies that are their right now there is 10 episodes and some are pretty decent movies with good plots and production and you can watch a lot of them in 480p as long as you have a decent speed connection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1394 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Our Song is a marvelous example of passionate, movie making at its aesthetic best. It is, in fact, a genuine wonder of a movie; a penetrating and insightful work of art that chronicles the lives of three young inner city (Crown Heights, Brooklyn) girls during a particular summer in their lives when the perplexities of their approaching adulthood will compel each of them to make a number of difficult, life altering choices that will likely re-define who each of them is, as well as how they will continue to relate to one another in years to come.

Jim McKay's writing/direction is graceful and uncluttered. There is no sappy, gratuitous sentimentality nor are there cliché ridden solutions in this film. What we see here seems, at times, to be heart breakingly real. There is a naturalism - a credibility, if you will - in Our Song that surpasses that of other giants in this genre, including American Graffiti and Cooley High.

Much of the credit for the film's spirit goes to its principle actors. The combined presence of Melisa Martinez (Maria), Kerry Washington (Lanisha), and Anna Simpson (Joycelyn) is dazzlingly powerful. It would be easy - and, of course, blatantly obtuse - to dismiss, as some apparently have, the performances of these three as apathetic or unemotional. In fact, their quiet charm, their instinctive sense of dignity and their raw, sometimes unconventional intelligence, throughout the film, are absolutely riveting. One would have to be completely "out of touch" with, or completely indifferent to, the behavior of teenagers to miss the resounding authenticity in what these three young ladies bring to the screen. Likewise, the supporting cast, particularly Marlene Forte as Lanisha's mother, compliments the work of the three girls as well as the overall tone of the film.

Our Song is a film not to be missed - by anyone of any age. --------------------------------------------- Result 1395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I spied this short on a [[DVD]] of [[best]] [[new]] Zealand [[shorts]], all great but The french Doors was amazing. It [[starts]] off [[slow]] and you wonder if there is [[anything]] going to [[happen]]. Just as you [[relax]] into the hum [[drum]] of [[home]] renovation, the most spookiest thing [[happens]].

EEEEkkk, I wanted to [[stop]] watching, but I was [[glued]].

The films [[dips]] into the [[primal]] fear of the dark and with little, if not any, special effects. It [[chills]] you right to the bone. A simple yet brilliant concept opened up all those memories of when I was young and dream't up the most improbably but spooky situations.

The film makers visual style are bang on and the lead character takes you convincingly through the story. It is a quality short that I haven't [[seen]] in quite some time.

The French Doors has all the hallmarks of a [[great]] feature, alas it [[finishes]] after ten minutes or so. Never the less a [[great]] ending that begs you to [[want]] to know more.

[[Loved]] it and well [[done]] and thanks for the ride. These [[New]] [[Zealanders]] are [[really]] turning out the [[talent]].

A [[new]] fan. I spied this short on a [[DVDS]] of [[better]] [[nuevo]] Zealand [[britches]], all great but The french Doors was amazing. It [[commences]] off [[sluggish]] and you wonder if there is [[something]] going to [[arise]]. Just as you [[relaxing]] into the hum [[drummers]] of [[household]] renovation, the most spookiest thing [[comes]].

EEEEkkk, I wanted to [[ceasing]] watching, but I was [[pasted]].

The films [[slumps]] into the [[primitive]] fear of the dark and with little, if not any, special effects. It [[willies]] you right to the bone. A simple yet brilliant concept opened up all those memories of when I was young and dream't up the most improbably but spooky situations.

The film makers visual style are bang on and the lead character takes you convincingly through the story. It is a quality short that I haven't [[watched]] in quite some time.

The French Doors has all the hallmarks of a [[huge]] feature, alas it [[finishing]] after ten minutes or so. Never the less a [[huge]] ending that begs you to [[wants]] to know more.

[[Loves]] it and well [[played]] and thanks for the ride. These [[Novel]] [[Kiwis]] are [[genuinely]] turning out the [[talents]].

A [[newer]] fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very good drama about a young girl who attempts to unravel a series of horrible crimes. She enlists the aid of a police cadet, and they begin running down a series of clues which lead to a traveling carny worker with a long police record. An ending which is guaranteed to keep you on the edge of your seat. --------------------------------------------- Result 1397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[If]] you want to [[remember]] MJ, this is a good place to start. This movie features sweet [[tunes]], MJ as robot, and a [[crazy]], messed-up plot. I recall, [[many]] a [[night]], [[passing]] out to this [[fine]] feature [[film]] in college, and pondering the sheer awesomenes of whoever decided to [[green]] light this ridiculous piece of .

There is lots of singing. Lots of dancing. There is lots of singing while dancing. MJ slays it as you would expect when it comes to this stuff. But there is [[much]] more to this movie. There is claymation. There are fat children (clay). There is an anthropomorphic rabbit that michael jackson has to battle in a dance off (obviously clay too). There is Joe Pesci as well (not made of clay).

RIP- we love you Michael! It is a sad day for all of us. [[Unless]] you want to [[reminisce]] MJ, this is a good place to start. This movie features sweet [[anthems]], MJ as robot, and a [[lunatic]], messed-up plot. I recall, [[various]] a [[nuit]], [[passerby]] out to this [[alright]] feature [[kino]] in college, and pondering the sheer awesomenes of whoever decided to [[archer]] light this ridiculous piece of .

There is lots of singing. Lots of dancing. There is lots of singing while dancing. MJ slays it as you would expect when it comes to this stuff. But there is [[very]] more to this movie. There is claymation. There are fat children (clay). There is an anthropomorphic rabbit that michael jackson has to battle in a dance off (obviously clay too). There is Joe Pesci as well (not made of clay).

RIP- we love you Michael! It is a sad day for all of us. --------------------------------------------- Result 1398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] A new creative team emerged in 1950 when [[brilliant]] actor [[James]] Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant [[director]] [[Anthony]] Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that [[genre]] for the [[future]]. Until that [[time]] [[Stewart]] was [[mainly]] noted for an aw..aw..aw [[approach]] to [[family]] [[oriented]] comedies, [[dramas]], and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his [[best]] screen performances ever and one of the [[best]] for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a [[sarcastic]] [[writer]] for a scandal rag in "The [[Philadelphia]] [[Story]]." He had even done westerns before. His [[portrayal]] of [[gun]] shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western "Destry Rides Again" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played.

Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. "Raw Deal," "Side Street," and "T-Men" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men [[combined]] their resources to produce some of the [[greatest]] Hollywood westerns ever made. "Winchester '73" and "The Man from Laramie" were the [[best]] but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful [[director]] of A films as a [[result]] going on to direct what some critics believe to be the [[greatest]] western of them all Gary Cooper's "Man of the West." [[Stewart]] became [[fabulously]] wealthy as a [[result]] of the partnership because he [[signed]] for [[part]] of the royalties in return for a [[fraction]] of the [[salary]] he was [[usually]] paid, a wise [[move]] [[indeed]] followed by [[many]] other [[actors]] from then on.

Winchester '73 was [[also]] one of the first [[films]], [[maybe]] the [[first]], to [[tell]] a story from the [[standpoint]] of a [[traveling]] [[gun]]. Each [[owner]] is part of the [[tale]] being [[told]] and it all comes [[together]] in the [[exciting]] showdown at the end of the movie, which [[also]] [[holds]] a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the "Dukes of Hazzard"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.

Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.

The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.

As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of "Bonanza" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson). A new creative team emerged in 1950 when [[wondrous]] actor [[Jacques]] Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant [[superintendent]] [[Antony]] Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that [[genus]] for the [[forthcoming]]. Until that [[moment]] [[Stuart]] was [[mostly]] noted for an aw..aw..aw [[approaches]] to [[families]] [[aimed]] comedies, [[drama]], and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his [[better]] screen performances ever and one of the [[better]] for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a [[satirical]] [[screenwriter]] for a scandal rag in "The [[Philly]] [[Fairytales]]." He had even done westerns before. His [[portrait]] of [[handgun]] shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western "Destry Rides Again" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played.

Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. "Raw Deal," "Side Street," and "T-Men" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men [[combo]] their resources to produce some of the [[largest]] Hollywood westerns ever made. "Winchester '73" and "The Man from Laramie" were the [[better]] but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful [[superintendent]] of A films as a [[findings]] going on to direct what some critics believe to be the [[largest]] western of them all Gary Cooper's "Man of the West." [[Stuart]] became [[fantastically]] wealthy as a [[findings]] of the partnership because he [[signing]] for [[parties]] of the royalties in return for a [[proportion]] of the [[pay]] he was [[popularly]] paid, a wise [[budge]] [[actually]] followed by [[several]] other [[actresses]] from then on.

Winchester '73 was [[similarly]] one of the first [[movie]], [[presumably]] the [[firstly]], to [[say]] a story from the [[viewpoints]] of a [[travelling]] [[handgun]]. Each [[landowner]] is part of the [[narratives]] being [[say]] and it all comes [[jointly]] in the [[excite]] showdown at the end of the movie, which [[apart]] [[held]] a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the "Dukes of Hazzard"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.

Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.

The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.

As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of "Bonanza" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson). --------------------------------------------- Result 1399 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] [[Corny]]! I [[love]] it! [[Corny]] - just as the [[TV]] [[show]] was about 40 years [[ago]]! Adam and Burt [[rekindle]] the same on-screen [[chemistry]] that never seems to have left! They re-live old [[memories]], plus the [[actors]] that play them from the 1960s [[show]] some behind-the-scenes [[things]] which are [[quite]] interesting to know. 1960s [[TV]] was [[corny]] escapism for so [[many]] of us back then, and this DVD is no [[exception]], if you are [[familiar]] with the original [[TV]] [[show]]. The [[fight]] scene with the written Boofs and Bams or whatever is [[fantastic]]!! The [[movie]] theater scene [[shows]] clips of the [[villains]] who passed away. At the [[end]] Frank Gorshin makes an [[appearance]]. He passed away not too long after this DVD was [[made]], I [[believe]], so it is to his [[great]] [[credit]] that he [[came]] back to again play a villain to Adam and Burt, just as he did to Batman & [[Robin]] so [[many]] [[years]] ago. He didn't [[lose]] his touch! [[Thanks]] to Julie Newmar to re-living a villain role, [[also]]. In [[conclusion]] I [[think]] that this DVD is for [[great]] [[memories]], and I [[wish]] to [[thank]] both [[Adam]] and Burt for [[coming]] back and recreating these [[memories]] for those of us who [[remember]] the original-!!! [[Thanks]], [[Guys]]!!! [[Trite]]! I [[amour]] it! [[Mundane]] - just as the [[TELEVISION]] [[demonstrate]] was about 40 years [[earlier]]! Adam and Burt [[reanimate]] the same on-screen [[chemicals]] that never seems to have left! They re-live old [[memorabilia]], plus the [[players]] that play them from the 1960s [[display]] some behind-the-scenes [[items]] which are [[rather]] interesting to know. 1960s [[TELEVISION]] was [[banal]] escapism for so [[numerous]] of us back then, and this DVD is no [[exemption]], if you are [[familiarize]] with the original [[TELEVISION]] [[demonstrating]]. The [[wrestling]] scene with the written Boofs and Bams or whatever is [[noteworthy]]!! The [[films]] theater scene [[demonstrates]] clips of the [[thugs]] who passed away. At the [[termination]] Frank Gorshin makes an [[semblance]]. He passed away not too long after this DVD was [[effected]], I [[believing]], so it is to his [[huge]] [[credence]] that he [[arrived]] back to again play a villain to Adam and Burt, just as he did to Batman & [[Robyn]] so [[countless]] [[yrs]] ago. He didn't [[wasting]] his touch! [[Appreciation]] to Julie Newmar to re-living a villain role, [[apart]]. In [[conclusions]] I [[ideas]] that this DVD is for [[wondrous]] [[memorabilia]], and I [[desiring]] to [[thanking]] both [[Adem]] and Burt for [[forthcoming]] back and recreating these [[remembrances]] for those of us who [[recall]] the original-!!! [[Thanking]], [[Fellers]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Overall]], I [[enjoyed]] this [[film]] and [[would]] recommend it to indie [[film]] [[lovers]].

[[However]], I really [[want]] to [[note]] the [[similarities]] between parts of this [[film]] and Nichols' [[Closer]]. One scene [[especially]] where Adrian Grenier's [[character]] is [[questioning]] Rosario Dawson's about her sex [[life]] while he was away is [[remarkably]] similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's [[character]] is [[questioning]] Julia Roberts, [[although]] it is acted with [[less]] [[harshness]] and intensity in "[[Love]]." [[Also]] [[note]] that "Anna" is the [[name]] of both Dawson's and Roberts' [[character]]. Can't be coincidence. Now [[Closer]] is [[based]] on [[Patrick]] Marber's [[play]] and supposedly this [[film]] is [[loosely]] [[based]] on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this [[connection]] [[formed]].

[[Anyone]] have an [[idea]]? [[Whole]], I [[liked]] this [[kino]] and [[ought]] recommend it to indie [[films]] [[enthusiasts]].

[[Still]], I really [[wanting]] to [[memo]] the [[parallels]] between parts of this [[cinematography]] and Nichols' [[Tighter]]. One scene [[mainly]] where Adrian Grenier's [[traits]] is [[doubting]] Rosario Dawson's about her sex [[lifetime]] while he was away is [[unbelievably]] similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's [[nature]] is [[interviewed]] Julia Roberts, [[nevertheless]] it is acted with [[least]] [[cruelty]] and intensity in "[[Likes]]." [[Moreover]] [[memo]] that "Anna" is the [[naming]] of both Dawson's and Roberts' [[nature]]. Can't be coincidence. Now [[Tighter]] is [[groundwork]] on [[Patricio]] Marber's [[playing]] and supposedly this [[films]] is [[vaguely]] [[founded]] on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this [[connecting]] [[trained]].

[[Nobody]] have an [[ideas]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 1401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Charles McDougall's resume [[includes]] directing episodes on 'Sex and the City', 'Desperate Housewives', Queer as Folk', 'Big Love', 'The Office', etc. so he [[comes]] with all the credentials to make the TV film version of Meg Wolitzer's novel SURRENDER, DOROTHY a success. And for the most part he [[manages]] to keep this [[potentially]] sappy story about sudden death of a [[loved]] one and than [[manner]] in which the people in her life [[react]] afloat.

Sara (Alexa Davalos) a [[beautiful]] unmarried young woman is accompanying her best friends - gay playwright Adam (Tom Everett Scott), Adam's current squeeze Shawn (Chris Pine), and married couple Maddy (Lauren German) and Peter (Josh Hopkins) with their infant son - to a house in the Hamptons for a summer [[vacation]]. The [[group]] seems jolly until a trip to the local ice creamery by Adam and Sara) results in an auto accident which kills Sara. Meanwhile Sara's mother Natalie Swedlow (Diane Keaton) who has an active [[social]] life but intrusively calls here daughter [[constantly]] with the [[mutual]] [[greeting]] 'Surrender, Dorothy', is [[playing]] it up elsewhere: when she [[receives]] the [[phone]] call that [[Sara]] is [[dead]] she [[immediately]] comes to the Hamptons where her overbearing personality and [[grief]] create friction among Sara's friends. Slowly but [[surely]] Natalie uncovers secrets about each of them, [[thriving]] on talking about Sara as though doing so would bring her to life. Natalie's thirst for truth at any cost results in major changes among the group and it is only through the binding love of the departed Sara that they all eventually come together.

Diane Keaton is at her [[best]] in these [[roles]] that [[walk]] the thread between drama and comedy and her presence holds the story together. The screenplay has its moments for good lines, but it also has a lot of filler that becomes a bit [[heavy]] and morose making the actors obviously uncomfortable with the lines they are given. Yes, this story has been told many times - the impact of sudden death on the lives of those whose privacy is altered by disclosures - but the film moves along with a cast pace and has enough genuine entertainment to make it worth watching. Grady Harp Charles McDougall's resume [[encompasses]] directing episodes on 'Sex and the City', 'Desperate Housewives', Queer as Folk', 'Big Love', 'The Office', etc. so he [[occurs]] with all the credentials to make the TV film version of Meg Wolitzer's novel SURRENDER, DOROTHY a success. And for the most part he [[runs]] to keep this [[probably]] sappy story about sudden death of a [[adored]] one and than [[method]] in which the people in her life [[behaves]] afloat.

Sara (Alexa Davalos) a [[wondrous]] unmarried young woman is accompanying her best friends - gay playwright Adam (Tom Everett Scott), Adam's current squeeze Shawn (Chris Pine), and married couple Maddy (Lauren German) and Peter (Josh Hopkins) with their infant son - to a house in the Hamptons for a summer [[holiday]]. The [[panel]] seems jolly until a trip to the local ice creamery by Adam and Sara) results in an auto accident which kills Sara. Meanwhile Sara's mother Natalie Swedlow (Diane Keaton) who has an active [[societal]] life but intrusively calls here daughter [[unceasingly]] with the [[bilateral]] [[salute]] 'Surrender, Dorothy', is [[play]] it up elsewhere: when she [[recieve]] the [[tel]] call that [[Sarah]] is [[decedent]] she [[immediatly]] comes to the Hamptons where her overbearing personality and [[bereavement]] create friction among Sara's friends. Slowly but [[indubitably]] Natalie uncovers secrets about each of them, [[prospering]] on talking about Sara as though doing so would bring her to life. Natalie's thirst for truth at any cost results in major changes among the group and it is only through the binding love of the departed Sara that they all eventually come together.

Diane Keaton is at her [[nicest]] in these [[duties]] that [[marche]] the thread between drama and comedy and her presence holds the story together. The screenplay has its moments for good lines, but it also has a lot of filler that becomes a bit [[onerous]] and morose making the actors obviously uncomfortable with the lines they are given. Yes, this story has been told many times - the impact of sudden death on the lives of those whose privacy is altered by disclosures - but the film moves along with a cast pace and has enough genuine entertainment to make it worth watching. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 1402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As [[many]] others have stated, this is a [[terrible]] [[movie]], from [[every]] aspect of [[movie]] making. How they ever [[got]] some known [[name]] [[actors]] to [[take]] on this project is [[amazing]].

Many people have complained that it was shot on 'cheap' [[video]] cameras. [[Yes]], it was shot on video, but not 'cheap' video. What made it bad was the [[lighting]], white balancing, [[shooting]] [[technique]] and [[editing]].

There were so [[many]] [[different]] [[shooting]] and [[editing]] techniques [[used]] that it was a production [[mess]]. [[Harsh]], inconsistent lighting, over [[use]] of hand [[held]] shooting (ala Woody Allen), choppy [[editing]] (another Allen technique), but poorly [[done]], without [[real]] purpose.

The [[lack]] of white [[balance]] in the [[restaurant]] kitchen scenes is embarrassing; very amateurish.

The simulated sex scenes had no acting [[value]] at any [[level]].

How this [[video]] ever [[made]] it to print is [[beyond]] me. It is worth watching if only to be [[amazed]] at how [[bad]] it is. As [[several]] others have stated, this is a [[scary]] [[filmmaking]], from [[each]] aspect of [[flick]] making. How they ever [[gets]] some known [[behalf]] [[players]] to [[taking]] on this project is [[marvellous]].

Many people have complained that it was shot on 'cheap' [[videos]] cameras. [[Yeah]], it was shot on video, but not 'cheap' video. What made it bad was the [[lit]], white balancing, [[gunshot]] [[tech]] and [[edited]].

There were so [[countless]] [[several]] [[shootout]] and [[edited]] techniques [[usage]] that it was a production [[chaos]]. [[Tough]], inconsistent lighting, over [[usage]] of hand [[holds]] shooting (ala Woody Allen), choppy [[edited]] (another Allen technique), but poorly [[played]], without [[actual]] purpose.

The [[failure]] of white [[balancing]] in the [[dining]] kitchen scenes is embarrassing; very amateurish.

The simulated sex scenes had no acting [[valuing]] at any [[grades]].

How this [[videos]] ever [[brought]] it to print is [[afterlife]] me. It is worth watching if only to be [[surprised]] at how [[rotten]] it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1403 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] David Lynch's [[crude]] and crudely drawn [[take]] on South Park [[presents]] us with a [[nightmare]] of [[disturbing]] [[clichés]] about suburban middle [[class]] families. The father is a hideous [[monster]] with three teeth and a disproportionately [[large]] circular mouth-hole from which are [[uttered]] the most [[horrendous]] guttural noises, the son and mother are [[permanently]] horrified, [[incoherent]] [[creatures]] for whom terror is a [[way]] of [[life]]. A number of equally [[absurd]] [[characters]] are [[introduced]] throughout the series.

Lynch is not [[famous]] for his comedies (i.e. On the Air, [[aspects]] of Wild at Heart), and I am not [[particularly]] fond of comedies in [[general]]. However, there were a [[couple]] of scenes in Dumbland which made me laugh out loud. There are some [[clever]] bits of animated [[cinematography]] - where [[Lynch]] conveys wide [[ranges]] of [[reaction]] in his [[characters]] through a syntactical [[arrangement]] of [[shots]] as [[opposed]] to facial expressions (which never really vary in Dumbland).

I believe Lynch was really trying to give his [[audience]] a straight-forward, if disturbing, animated [[comedy]] here. Interestingly, he chose to follow in the [[footsteps]] of the [[recent]] wave of ultra-low-brow [[humor]] (i.[[e]]. most Will Farrell films) while [[adding]] [[elements]] of [[vicious]] [[social]] [[critique]] and [[classic]] [[cartoon]] violence and gross-out [[humor]]. While the [[blend]] doesn't really [[work]] very well here, it is [[nothing]] if not Lynchian.

Worth seeing by Lynch [[fans]]. David Lynch's [[rough]] and crudely drawn [[taking]] on South Park [[introduces]] us with a [[cabos]] of [[disconcerting]] [[clichéd]] about suburban middle [[classes]] families. The father is a hideous [[monsters]] with three teeth and a disproportionately [[sizable]] circular mouth-hole from which are [[pronounced]] the most [[disgusting]] guttural noises, the son and mother are [[invariably]] horrified, [[inconsistent]] [[creature]] for whom terror is a [[routing]] of [[vida]]. A number of equally [[grotesque]] [[traits]] are [[instituted]] throughout the series.

Lynch is not [[illustrious]] for his comedies (i.e. On the Air, [[facets]] of Wild at Heart), and I am not [[specially]] fond of comedies in [[overall]]. However, there were a [[pair]] of scenes in Dumbland which made me laugh out loud. There are some [[skilful]] bits of animated [[filmmaking]] - where [[Bastien]] conveys wide [[fluctuates]] of [[reactions]] in his [[nature]] through a syntactical [[arrangements]] of [[punches]] as [[opposing]] to facial expressions (which never really vary in Dumbland).

I believe Lynch was really trying to give his [[spectators]] a straight-forward, if disturbing, animated [[humor]] here. Interestingly, he chose to follow in the [[traces]] of the [[newer]] wave of ultra-low-brow [[mood]] (i.[[f]]. most Will Farrell films) while [[summing]] [[component]] of [[sadistic]] [[societal]] [[criticize]] and [[typical]] [[caricatures]] violence and gross-out [[mood]]. While the [[amalgam]] doesn't really [[cooperating]] very well here, it is [[anything]] if not Lynchian.

Worth seeing by Lynch [[enthusiasts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Enjoyable in spite of [[Leslie]] Howard's performance. Mr. Howard plays [[Philip]] as a flat, uninteresting [[character]]. One is [[supposed]] to feel sorry for this [[man]]; [[however]], I find myself [[cheering]] Bette Davis' [[Mildred]]. [[Ms]]. [[Davis]] gives one her [[finest]] performances (she received an [[Academy]] Award [[nomination]]). [[Thanks]] to her performance she [[brings]] this rather dull [[movie]] to [[life]]. **Be sure not to [[miss]] when [[Mildred]] tells [[Philip]] [[exactly]] how she [[feels]] about him. Enjoyable in spite of [[Lesley]] Howard's performance. Mr. Howard plays [[Philipp]] as a flat, uninteresting [[personages]]. One is [[suspected]] to feel sorry for this [[bloke]]; [[still]], I find myself [[chanting]] Bette Davis' [[Mabel]]. [[Mme]]. [[Davies]] gives one her [[meanest]] performances (she received an [[Oscars]] Award [[nominations]]). [[Merci]] to her performance she [[puts]] this rather dull [[films]] to [[lives]]. **Be sure not to [[mademoiselle]] when [[Hattie]] tells [[Filipe]] [[accurately]] how she [[deems]] about him. --------------------------------------------- Result 1405 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This doesn't quite plumb the [[depths]] of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.

It also rather irritating rips off The [[Twilight]] [[Zone]] (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would [[build]] up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. [[None]] of the characters are [[particularly]] [[sympathetic]] or interesting until the [[last]] segment.

[[Framing]] story: [[Adam]] West is... well, himself. He doesn't [[go]] the [[Bruce]] Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he [[rarely]] does. He [[simply]] plays the not-particularly-enigmatic "[[Jay]]" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. [[Terror]], Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy [[statements]].

Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's "A Stop in Willoughby"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso [[wife]] is introduced to no [[purpose]], but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but [[basically]] [[incoherent]].

Nex's [[Diner]]: Reminiscent of [[various]] Serling [[time]] [[travel]] [[stories]], [[mixed]] with [[Steve]] Allen's "A Meeting of [[Minds]]." [[Most]] of the [[actors]] aren't too bad (except for [[Josh]] Astin as Cassius, who [[manages]] to [[walk]], [[talk]] and [[even]] [[breathe]] [[awkwardly]]), and the [[idea]] is [[mildly]] interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go [[anywhere]]. The main character raises some relatively [[reasonable]] [[questions]], bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear [[wasteland]].

Life Replay: Not a bad [[little]] piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it [[says]] something that people are fascinated by the [[magical]] properties of [[remote]] [[controls]]. The main [[character]] is [[mildly]] sympathetic. Nothing substantially [[innovative]] here, but it's okay.

[[Fighting]] Spirit: You [[see]] the twist coming a [[mile]] away but like the main [[character]], it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.

Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...

Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or [[Monsters]]. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here. This doesn't quite plumb the [[depth]] of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.

It also rather irritating rips off The [[Dusk]] [[Zones]] (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would [[constructions]] up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. [[Nos]] of the characters are [[specially]] [[empathy]] or interesting until the [[latter]] segment.

[[Frames]] story: [[Adams]] West is... well, himself. He doesn't [[going]] the [[Bros]] Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he [[seldom]] does. He [[exclusively]] plays the not-particularly-enigmatic "[[Jae]]" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. [[Panic]], Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy [[statement]].

Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's "A Stop in Willoughby"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso [[femme]] is introduced to no [[intent]], but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but [[mostly]] [[counterintuitive]].

Nex's [[Restaurant]]: Reminiscent of [[varied]] Serling [[moment]] [[journey]] [[story]], [[blended]] with [[Steven]] Allen's "A Meeting of [[Spirits]]." [[Greatest]] of the [[protagonists]] aren't too bad (except for [[Joshi]] Astin as Cassius, who [[administered]] to [[stroll]], [[discussions]] and [[yet]] [[breath]] [[nervously]]), and the [[ideas]] is [[gently]] interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go [[nowhere]]. The main character raises some relatively [[sensible]] [[issues]], bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear [[sandlot]].

Life Replay: Not a bad [[petite]] piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it [[tells]] something that people are fascinated by the [[magic]] properties of [[distant]] [[controlling]]. The main [[trait]] is [[gently]] sympathetic. Nothing substantially [[pioneering]] here, but it's okay.

[[Struggling]] Spirit: You [[seeing]] the twist coming a [[miles]] away but like the main [[characters]], it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.

Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...

Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or [[Freaks]]. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here. --------------------------------------------- Result 1406 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven's predecessor to his breakout hit 'Basic Instinct' is a stylish and [[shocking]] neo-noir thriller. Verhoeven has become known for making [[somewhat]] sleazy [[trash]] [[films]], both in his native [[Holland]] and in [[America]] and this [[film]] is one of the reasons why. The Fourth [[Man]] follows the [[strange]] [[story]] of Gerard Reve ([[played]] by Jeroen Krabbé); a gay, [[alcoholic]] and [[slightly]] [[mad]] [[writer]] who goes to Vlissingen to give a [[talk]] on the [[stories]] he [[writes]]. [[While]] there, he meets the [[seductive]] [[Christine]] Halsslag (Renée Soutendijk) who takes him back to her [[house]] where he [[discovers]] a [[handsome]] [[picture]] of one of her [[lovers]] and proclaims that he will [[meet]] him, [[even]] if it [[kills]] him.

[[Paul]] Verhoeven twists the truth [[many]] [[times]] in this [[film]], and that [[ensures]] that you never [[quite]] know where you are with it. [[Many]] of the [[occurrences]] in The Fourth [[Man]] [[could]] be what they [[appear]] to be, but they could [[easily]] be interpreted as [[something]] [[else]] [[entirely]] and this [[keeps]] the audience on the edge of their [[seats]] for the duration, and [[also]] makes the [[film]] [[work]] as this [[narrative]] is what it [[thrives]] on. [[Paul]] Verhoeven is not a filmmaker that [[feels]] he has to [[restrain]] himself, and that is one of [[things]] I [[like]] [[best]] about him. This [[film]] [[features]] a very [[shocking]] scene that made me feel ill for [[hours]] afterwards (and that doesn't [[happen]] very [[often]]!). I [[wont]] [[spoil]] it because it [[needs]] the [[surprise]] [[element]] to [[work]]...but you'll see what I mean when you see the [[film]] (make sure you get the uncut version!). There is [[also]] a number of other macabre scenes that are [[less]] [[shocking]] than the one I've mentioned, but are lovely [[nonetheless]]; a man gets eaten by lions, another one has a [[pipe]] [[sent]] through his skull, a [[boat]] is smashed in half...[[lovely]].

The acting in The Fourth [[Man]] isn't anything to write [[home]] about, but it's solid [[throughout]]. Jeroen Krabbé [[holds]] the audience's attention and [[looks]] the [[part]] as the drunken [[writer]]. It is Renée Soutendijk that impresses the most, though, as the femme fatale at the centre of the tale. Her performance is what [[Sharon]] Stone [[would]] [[imitate]] [[nine]] years [[later]] with Basic [[Instinct]], but the [[original]] fatale did it best. Paul Verhoeven's direction is solid throughout as he directs our attention through numerous points of view, all of which help to create the mystery of the story. Verhoeven has gone on to make some rubbish, but he obviously has talent and it's a shame that he doesn't put it to better use. Of all the Verhoeven films I've seen, this is the best and although it might be difficult to come across; trust me, it's worth the effort. [[Paolo]] Verhoeven's predecessor to his breakout hit 'Basic Instinct' is a stylish and [[frightening]] neo-noir thriller. Verhoeven has become known for making [[rather]] sleazy [[garbage]] [[film]], both in his native [[Dutch]] and in [[Americans]] and this [[movies]] is one of the reasons why. The Fourth [[Mec]] follows the [[bizarre]] [[storytelling]] of Gerard Reve ([[served]] by Jeroen Krabbé); a gay, [[beverages]] and [[mildly]] [[pissed]] [[screenwriter]] who goes to Vlissingen to give a [[chatter]] on the [[storytelling]] he [[written]]. [[Whereas]] there, he meets the [[attractive]] [[Kristin]] Halsslag (Renée Soutendijk) who takes him back to her [[dwelling]] where he [[discoveries]] a [[excellent]] [[visuals]] of one of her [[enthusiasts]] and proclaims that he will [[satisfy]] him, [[yet]] if it [[mata]] him.

[[Paulo]] Verhoeven twists the truth [[several]] [[moments]] in this [[cinematography]], and that [[ensure]] that you never [[pretty]] know where you are with it. [[Several]] of the [[phenomena]] in The Fourth [[Guy]] [[would]] be what they [[arise]] to be, but they could [[readily]] be interpreted as [[anything]] [[further]] [[altogether]] and this [[retains]] the audience on the edge of their [[seat]] for the duration, and [[apart]] makes the [[movie]] [[jobs]] as this [[narration]] is what it [[flourishes]] on. [[Pablo]] Verhoeven is not a filmmaker that [[thinks]] he has to [[restraining]] himself, and that is one of [[matters]] I [[fond]] [[finest]] about him. This [[films]] [[trait]] a very [[horrible]] scene that made me feel ill for [[hour]] afterwards (and that doesn't [[arise]] very [[typically]]!). I [[habit]] [[ruin]] it because it [[require]] the [[astonishment]] [[components]] to [[worked]]...but you'll see what I mean when you see the [[cinematography]] (make sure you get the uncut version!). There is [[apart]] a number of other macabre scenes that are [[least]] [[terrifying]] than the one I've mentioned, but are lovely [[however]]; a man gets eaten by lions, another one has a [[pipeline]] [[conveyed]] through his skull, a [[vessels]] is smashed in half...[[nice]].

The acting in The Fourth [[Mec]] isn't anything to write [[house]] about, but it's solid [[around]]. Jeroen Krabbé [[held]] the audience's attention and [[seems]] the [[party]] as the drunken [[screenwriter]]. It is Renée Soutendijk that impresses the most, though, as the femme fatale at the centre of the tale. Her performance is what [[Charon]] Stone [[should]] [[emulate]] [[ix]] years [[then]] with Basic [[Gut]], but the [[initial]] fatale did it best. Paul Verhoeven's direction is solid throughout as he directs our attention through numerous points of view, all of which help to create the mystery of the story. Verhoeven has gone on to make some rubbish, but he obviously has talent and it's a shame that he doesn't put it to better use. Of all the Verhoeven films I've seen, this is the best and although it might be difficult to come across; trust me, it's worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 1407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Would that more romantic comedies were as deftly executed as this one? I never thought anything as mundane as the simple sale of a music box could leave me catching my breath with excitement. Margaret Sullavan makes a marvellous saleswoman, and she and James Stewart always brought out the best in each other. This movie sports what I think is Frank Morgan's most winning performance, and with "The Wizard of Oz" and "Tortilla Flat" under his belt, that is saying a lot. The way he finds a Christmas dinner partner left me giddy with joy. Director Ernst Lubitsch might have thought "Trouble In Paradise" his favorite, but this one he must surely consider a triumph. With some of the wittiest dialogue American movies of the 30's has to offer. --------------------------------------------- Result 1408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Intelligent]], wry, and [[thrilling]], "The Invisible [[Man]]" stood out in 2000 [[among]] Sci-Fi's [[usual]] lineup, balancing out "Farscape"'s fantastical art direction and [[sometimes]] [[melodramatic]] [[script]] with [[gritty]], [[cynical]] plots and [[modern]] [[noir]] dialogue. The show sat between "Law and Order" and "Doctor Who" on the believability meter, but there was no denying the fact that "I-Man"'s characters went beyond caricature. Even characters that verged on predictability like the Keeper, the Official, and Eberts were given reprieves from the formulaic. Paul Ben-Victor and Vincent Ventresca had a chemistry that evolved and shifted [[elegantly]], made [[even]] more remarkable by the revolving door team of writers and directors. The effects are never allowed to overwhelm the plot, and the science only sometimes verged on the totally unbelievable. The show's low points are still entertaining, and I've never seen such [[taut]] pilot episodes. Matt Greenberg and Sci-Fi should be commended, and fans have the right to demand a comprehensive DVD edition of the show. Every time I come across a marathon of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" on Sci-Fi, I roll my eyes and sigh, mourning the excitement and possibility of science fiction television that "Invisible Man" and its ilk represented. [[Smarter]], wry, and [[excite]], "The Invisible [[Guy]]" stood out in 2000 [[in]] Sci-Fi's [[ordinary]] lineup, balancing out "Farscape"'s fantastical art direction and [[sometime]] [[operatic]] [[scripts]] with [[sandstone]], [[cynic]] plots and [[trendy]] [[negro]] dialogue. The show sat between "Law and Order" and "Doctor Who" on the believability meter, but there was no denying the fact that "I-Man"'s characters went beyond caricature. Even characters that verged on predictability like the Keeper, the Official, and Eberts were given reprieves from the formulaic. Paul Ben-Victor and Vincent Ventresca had a chemistry that evolved and shifted [[stylishly]], made [[yet]] more remarkable by the revolving door team of writers and directors. The effects are never allowed to overwhelm the plot, and the science only sometimes verged on the totally unbelievable. The show's low points are still entertaining, and I've never seen such [[strained]] pilot episodes. Matt Greenberg and Sci-Fi should be commended, and fans have the right to demand a comprehensive DVD edition of the show. Every time I come across a marathon of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" on Sci-Fi, I roll my eyes and sigh, mourning the excitement and possibility of science fiction television that "Invisible Man" and its ilk represented. --------------------------------------------- Result 1409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Otto Preminger's Dana Andrews cycle of films noirs are among the (largely) unsung jewels of the genre. Because they lack paranoia, misogyny or hysteria, they may have seemed out of place at the time, but the clear-eyed imagery, the complex play with identity, masculinity and representation, the subversion of traditional psychological tenets, the austere, geometrical style all seem startlingly modern today, and very similar to Melville. The lucid ironies of this film are so loaded, brutal and ironic that the 'happy' ending is one of the cruellest in Hollywood history. Brilliant on the level of entertaining thriller as well, tense, and packed with double-edged dialogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 1410 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] In director Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry. Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita [[Rao]] seems equally floored by her charming suitor. The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding. But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage. And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise. But sadly, the plot of this [[new]] film comes off looking way too [[outdated]], even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps. And the problem is clear – you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies. There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor. Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just [[seems]] like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp. Perhaps the film's only saving [[grace]] is the fact that it [[oozes]] sincerity from [[start]] to [[finish]], you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive. Judging both by Barjatya's [[previous]] films and by closely examining this [[new]] one you can [[safely]] [[declare]] that Barjatya [[believes]] in a perfect world, he [[believes]] in his good-as-gold characters, he [[believes]] that large [[families]] can live together happily under the same roof without the [[slightest]] bumps.But alas, he's [[unable]] to translate his [[vision]] to the screen. It's [[difficult]] to [[overlook]] how one-dimensional his protagonists are – Shahid and Amrita, both [[virtuous]] and virginal – I mean, [[think]] about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film. Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry. Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti. Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace. But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story. To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere. But I'm a little cynical I guess. So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain. But save me from these dullards. You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven. This one's Vivah! In director Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry. Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita [[Rua]] seems equally floored by her charming suitor. The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding. But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage. And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise. But sadly, the plot of this [[nuevo]] film comes off looking way too [[outmoded]], even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps. And the problem is clear – you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies. There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor. Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just [[looks]] like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp. Perhaps the film's only saving [[gracia]] is the fact that it [[exudes]] sincerity from [[starter]] to [[finis]], you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive. Judging both by Barjatya's [[anterior]] films and by closely examining this [[nuevo]] one you can [[securely]] [[proclaim]] that Barjatya [[sees]] in a perfect world, he [[deems]] in his good-as-gold characters, he [[deems]] that large [[family]] can live together happily under the same roof without the [[tiniest]] bumps.But alas, he's [[impossible]] to translate his [[eyesight]] to the screen. It's [[tough]] to [[ignoring]] how one-dimensional his protagonists are – Shahid and Amrita, both [[righteous]] and virginal – I mean, [[reckon]] about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film. Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry. Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti. Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace. But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story. To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere. But I'm a little cynical I guess. So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain. But save me from these dullards. You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven. This one's Vivah! --------------------------------------------- Result 1411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I find I [[enjoy]] this show, but the [[format]] needs some work. First off, the good attributes. I [[like]] how this [[show]] will take us through the day-to-day [[life]] of an addict because the producers have a knack at getting the [[addict]] to [[show]] us how bad they've [[allowed]] their [[lives]] to [[become]]. This is followed by an [[intervention]] which is then followed by an [[outcome]]. Intervention doesn't candy-coat [[things]] and sometimes the outcome ([[often]] short term due to the [[constraints]] of time between filming and airing) is a [[negative]] [[outcome]]. This makes the positive outcomes all the [[better]].

Another [[thing]] I [[like]] about the [[show]] is the quality of the camera work. Given the reality that these cameramen have to squeeze [[anywhere]] and don't have the benefit of re shooting scenes the photography is [[surprisingly]] good and [[stable]]. It's [[actually]] [[superior]] to scripted [[shows]] like "The [[Shield]]" where the [[photography]] is so [[bad]] it can induce nausea.

Now for the [[bad]]. An episode will [[sometimes]] [[contain]] two [[completely]] [[different]] and unrelated [[cases]] that will be mixed together during the [[show]]. You'll get caught up in the [[story]] of one addict then suddenly you're thrown into the [[story]] of another. [[Get]] [[caught]] up in that [[story]] then suddenly you're back to the first addict...or are you? By now you may have [[forgotten]] which [[case]] the [[individual]] currently on screen belong to. This [[constant]] flip-flopping between [[addicts]] really gets disruptive during the [[intervention]] scenes because the [[show]] will [[even]] [[mix]] together the two completely unrelated [[interventions]]! I once [[heard]] the marketing B.S. [[reason]] for this [[poor]] design: "The show can [[get]] so [[intense]] that switching to another addict [[allows]] the viewer time to absorb what they're [[watching]]." [[Oh]] please. Clearly the [[reason]] this is [[done]] is because they have two [[cases]] that aren't [[big]] enough for an [[hour]] show so they mix two [[together]]. By mixing them [[instead]] of giving each a half hour [[block]], like they should, it forces the [[viewer]] to watch the [[entire]] thing (and the [[commercials]]) if they are interested in one case but not the other.

I [[used]] to find these "blender" episodes so [[annoying]] that I'd only tell my TiVo to [[record]] [[episodes]] [[containing]] one [[addict]], but then it [[became]] [[easier]] just to [[record]] all of them. I find I [[enjoys]] this show, but the [[layout]] needs some work. First off, the good attributes. I [[adores]] how this [[showing]] will take us through the day-to-day [[lifetime]] of an addict because the producers have a knack at getting the [[junkie]] to [[demonstrating]] us how bad they've [[authorized]] their [[life]] to [[becoming]]. This is followed by an [[interfering]] which is then followed by an [[findings]]. Intervention doesn't candy-coat [[items]] and sometimes the outcome ([[generally]] short term due to the [[barrier]] of time between filming and airing) is a [[inclement]] [[result]]. This makes the positive outcomes all the [[improved]].

Another [[stuff]] I [[iike]] about the [[illustrates]] is the quality of the camera work. Given the reality that these cameramen have to squeeze [[somewhere]] and don't have the benefit of re shooting scenes the photography is [[unexpectedly]] good and [[stabilized]]. It's [[genuinely]] [[superiors]] to scripted [[displayed]] like "The [[Shielding]]" where the [[photographs]] is so [[wicked]] it can induce nausea.

Now for the [[amiss]]. An episode will [[occasionally]] [[contained]] two [[totally]] [[varied]] and unrelated [[examples]] that will be mixed together during the [[exhibitions]]. You'll get caught up in the [[tales]] of one addict then suddenly you're thrown into the [[tales]] of another. [[Gets]] [[catch]] up in that [[history]] then suddenly you're back to the first addict...or are you? By now you may have [[ignored]] which [[lawsuits]] the [[person]] currently on screen belong to. This [[continual]] flip-flopping between [[zealots]] really gets disruptive during the [[interfering]] scenes because the [[demonstrating]] will [[yet]] [[mingling]] together the two completely unrelated [[intervention]]! I once [[listened]] the marketing B.S. [[motive]] for this [[poorest]] design: "The show can [[obtains]] so [[vehement]] that switching to another addict [[authorizes]] the viewer time to absorb what they're [[staring]]." [[Aw]] please. Clearly the [[justification]] this is [[completed]] is because they have two [[examples]] that aren't [[massive]] enough for an [[hours]] show so they mix two [[jointly]]. By mixing them [[alternatively]] of giving each a half hour [[obstruct]], like they should, it forces the [[bystander]] to watch the [[whole]] thing (and the [[spots]]) if they are interested in one case but not the other.

I [[using]] to find these "blender" episodes so [[galling]] that I'd only tell my TiVo to [[registering]] [[spells]] [[consisting]] one [[junkie]], but then it [[came]] [[effortless]] just to [[docket]] all of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1412 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So this was an HBO "Made for TV Movie" eh? Is that an excuse for such a pathetic plot and terrible acting? Such a shame to see Jim Belushi reduced to a role so repetitive (shot at, survived, lies, beaten up, survives, shot at, lies and so ad infinitum. Call that a script? As for the Brits, embarrassing to see Timothy Dalton's pathetic (or was he just taking the p***, depends how much he was paid I guess?) attempt at a Southern Sheriff). As for that other Brit, the bleached blond one, what a w***er! There is a trend towards glorifying these "English speaking" (sic) super-violent thugs lately, perhaps thanks to Mr. Madonna's two movies succeed in entertaining and justify the violence by skillful use of irony and humour, like Pulp Fiction does. However, this movie discredits and devalues the genre. definately one to miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 1413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Kareena Kapoor in a bikini hmmmmmmmm.

Akshay Kumar...

Anil Kapoor....

[[Maybe]] Saif....

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Good Banner..

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Not one good reason not to [[see]] this movie....

[[Or]] so i [[thought]] ........[[Didnt]] these people make JBJ...

Why o Why did i forget that.

[[For]] all the [[criticism]] the first half of the [[movie]] isn't that bad...

There is some intrigue and YOU FEEL A [[SORT]] [[OF]] IRRITATION MIXED WITH EXCITEMENT THAT I FELT WHEN [[SEEING]] [[GUY]] [[RITCHIE]] [[MOVIES]] LIKE LOCK [[STOCK]] AND SNATCH.

Kareena Kapoor is sizzling in a very [[skinny]] [[model]] sort of way.

Akshay Kumar is Akshay Kumar as only he can be.

Anil Kapoor is [[annoying]] but [[kind]] of [[funny]], YOU [[ALMOST]] FORGET THAT [[MOST]] OF THE [[TIME]] YOU CANNOT [[UNDERSTAND]] [[HIM]].

Saif is sidey ala Main Khiladi.. once again.

There is the [[occasional]] [[laugh]] and a few chuckles, and a few [[goosebumps]] during the kareena-saif [[love]] [[story]] (kareena in the [[rain]], behind me on my [[bike]] hmmmmmmm).

BUT MOSTLY THIS HALF [[PROMISES]] MORE THAN IT [[DELIVERS]].....

[[WHICH]] MAKES THE [[SECOND]] HALF [[ALL]] THE MORE [[UNBEARABLE]]....

There was almost a cheer when the interval came not only because because of the [[wet]] kareena because of what people [[thought]] were the [[things]] to come.

INSTEAD [[WE]] WERE [[TREATED]] [[TO]] [[MIND]] NUMBING [[TORTURE]] WHICH IS [[DIFFICULT]] TO PUT [[IN]] [[WORDS]].

Saif suddenly seam like a comic sidekick...

SUDDENLY THE SEXY KAREENA LOOKS ANOREXIC, YOU REALISE THAT THE SECOND LAST FLOOR IS NOW EMPTY AND HER FACE LOOKS TO BIG FOR HER BODY ( only girls can notice this and make other guys notice the second last floor was my observation).

ANIL KAPOOR AND HIS SIDEKICKS GET ON YOUR NERVES.

Akshay Kumar is the only one who carries off the madness to some extent but even he become intolerable after a while.

ALL THE WHILE YOU ARE SUBJECTED TO ONE ABSURDITY AFTER THE OTHER.

WHY??!! WHAT??!!! WHEN?!!! WHERE?!!! WHAT HAVE I DONE TO DESERVE THIS...

A collective gasp went trough the audience before every song in the second half, which were ordinary even without the movie around it.

Cannot relieve the trauma anymore....

CONCLUSION.

THIS MOVIE STARTS OF AS A BUZZ WHICH YOU FEEL COULD EVEN TURN OUT TO A HIGH BUT ENDS UP SLOWLY MOVING TOWARDS A HEADACHE AND THEN RAPIDLY TURNS INTO A FULL BLOWN MIGRAINE ATTACK.

Please don't watch this movie for any reason other than academic interest.

+s Cast, Akshay Kumar, first half.

+/-s what, when, how, who to much confusion.(need a book to fill this).

+s cast, the whole second half (need many pages to fill this).

total 3/10 (im trying to avoid the 1s and 2s too not seem to extreme but make no mistake this movie is unwatchable no matter how decent the first half is). Kareena Kapoor in a bikini hmmmmmmmm.

Akshay Kumar...

Anil Kapoor....

[[Potentially]] Saif....

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Good Banner..

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Not one good reason not to [[consults]] this movie....

[[Oder]] so i [[think]] ........[[Wouldnt]] these people make JBJ...

Why o Why did i forget that.

[[In]] all the [[criticisms]] the first half of the [[filmmaking]] isn't that bad...

There is some intrigue and YOU FEEL A [[SORTS]] [[TO]] IRRITATION MIXED WITH EXCITEMENT THAT I FELT WHEN [[WITNESSING]] [[BUDDY]] [[RICHIE]] [[FILMMAKING]] LIKE LOCK [[STOCKS]] AND SNATCH.

Kareena Kapoor is sizzling in a very [[scrawny]] [[models]] sort of way.

Akshay Kumar is Akshay Kumar as only he can be.

Anil Kapoor is [[vexing]] but [[kinds]] of [[fun]], YOU [[HARDLY]] FORGET THAT [[ANYMORE]] OF THE [[MOMENT]] YOU CANNOT [[UNDERSTANDING]] [[HE]].

Saif is sidey ala Main Khiladi.. once again.

There is the [[casual]] [[chuckles]] and a few chuckles, and a few [[shivers]] during the kareena-saif [[amore]] [[saga]] (kareena in the [[acids]], behind me on my [[motorcycle]] hmmmmmmm).

BUT MOSTLY THIS HALF [[VOWED]] MORE THAN IT [[FURNISHES]].....

[[WHOM]] MAKES THE [[SECONDLY]] HALF [[EVERY]] THE MORE [[UNSUSTAINABLE]]....

There was almost a cheer when the interval came not only because because of the [[moist]] kareena because of what people [[brainchild]] were the [[items]] to come.

INSTEAD [[OURS]] WERE [[ADDRESSED]] [[POUR]] [[ESPRIT]] NUMBING [[TORTURED]] WHICH IS [[TRICKY]] TO PUT [[ONTO]] [[MOTS]].

Saif suddenly seam like a comic sidekick...

SUDDENLY THE SEXY KAREENA LOOKS ANOREXIC, YOU REALISE THAT THE SECOND LAST FLOOR IS NOW EMPTY AND HER FACE LOOKS TO BIG FOR HER BODY ( only girls can notice this and make other guys notice the second last floor was my observation).

ANIL KAPOOR AND HIS SIDEKICKS GET ON YOUR NERVES.

Akshay Kumar is the only one who carries off the madness to some extent but even he become intolerable after a while.

ALL THE WHILE YOU ARE SUBJECTED TO ONE ABSURDITY AFTER THE OTHER.

WHY??!! WHAT??!!! WHEN?!!! WHERE?!!! WHAT HAVE I DONE TO DESERVE THIS...

A collective gasp went trough the audience before every song in the second half, which were ordinary even without the movie around it.

Cannot relieve the trauma anymore....

CONCLUSION.

THIS MOVIE STARTS OF AS A BUZZ WHICH YOU FEEL COULD EVEN TURN OUT TO A HIGH BUT ENDS UP SLOWLY MOVING TOWARDS A HEADACHE AND THEN RAPIDLY TURNS INTO A FULL BLOWN MIGRAINE ATTACK.

Please don't watch this movie for any reason other than academic interest.

+s Cast, Akshay Kumar, first half.

+/-s what, when, how, who to much confusion.(need a book to fill this).

+s cast, the whole second half (need many pages to fill this).

total 3/10 (im trying to avoid the 1s and 2s too not seem to extreme but make no mistake this movie is unwatchable no matter how decent the first half is). --------------------------------------------- Result 1414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] when discussing a movie titled 'snakes on a plane', we should point out early that the snakes are pretty darn important to the plot.

what we have here are very bad cgi snakes that neither look nor move like real snakes. snakes are scary because they appear to be slimy, they crawl they slither. these snakes do nothing of the sort. they glide along like they would in a video game. they are cartoon snakes. i would go as far to say that even someone that had a major phobia against real snakes would not find these ones scary

why on earth then would you want to include extreme close ups of these cgi failures? why not rely on suspense.. the whole 'less is more' ethic. or better still, why not just make them look good in the first place? and then maybe still use them sparingly

take one look at john carpenters 'the thing'. here we have real slime, and gore of eerie proportions. 20 years go by and we get this pile of stinking sfx crap 'snakes on a plane'. when are these people going to wake up and smell the coffee? special effects are going backwards!

sure you could say.. but the movie is a joke, get it? sure i'm with that idea, but do it well! in addition to the above, this movie has crap dialogue. and the music and sound effects are not creepy or memorable in any way.

i could handle every other actor being part of this movie, except for jackson. what was he doing there? the man who starred in pulp fiction 10 years ago. is this career progression? are you offering people value for money? no. i'd like to know what Tarantino thought when he was half way through this stinker of a movie

the current generation seem to have very low expectations. and Hollywood seems to be offering them just what they want. on leaving the cinema i saw a number of advertisements for some truly horrendous looking future releases including... DOA: dead or alive, (another) cgi animal film called 'flushed away', and another crap looking comedy named 'click'. in addition to that i saw some awful trailers, including one for (another) crap British horror/comedy. i've truly not seen the movie industry in a mess like this for a long time

expect to see this movie for sale in the DVD bargain section for £1 in 6 months time. and if you're expecting to see a black comedy with tonnes of great looking snakes, and some bad ass cool dialogue coming from samuel l jacksons lips. forget it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] The Good Earth is not a great film by any [[means]], it is way to [[ordinary]]. [[Maybe]] it was [[different]] in the 1930's but who [[would]] want to [[see]] the life of a farmer. It is not very interesting to me. [[Yes]], Luis Rainer and [[Paul]] Muni do an [[excellent]] job acting but the [[film]] dragged on way too long. I [[could]] have [[told]] you the [[ending]] of this [[movie]] by the [[first]] [[act]]. In short Wang Lung (Muni) a small time farmer who does not [[want]] to be like his own father turns out [[exactly]] like him. Both falling in love with their [[wives]] just as they are on their [[death]] beds. The film does a complete 360 going from one generation to the next. Also this film did not have any [[good]] [[character]] actors or [[funny]] moments, it just was [[depressing]] stuff about lasting as a farmer during a [[time]] of [[crisis]]. The Good Earth is not a great film by any [[modes]], it is way to [[normal]]. [[Conceivably]] it was [[dissimilar]] in the 1930's but who [[could]] want to [[consults]] the life of a farmer. It is not very interesting to me. [[Oui]], Luis Rainer and [[Pablo]] Muni do an [[sumptuous]] job acting but the [[filmmaking]] dragged on way too long. I [[did]] have [[said]] you the [[terminated]] of this [[filmmaking]] by the [[fiirst]] [[legislation]]. In short Wang Lung (Muni) a small time farmer who does not [[wanting]] to be like his own father turns out [[precisely]] like him. Both falling in love with their [[handcuffs]] just as they are on their [[muerte]] beds. The film does a complete 360 going from one generation to the next. Also this film did not have any [[alright]] [[characteristics]] actors or [[humorous]] moments, it just was [[demoralizing]] stuff about lasting as a farmer during a [[times]] of [[crises]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1416 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Enter the Fat Dragon" is one of the funniest martial art movies I had the opportunity to see. Sammo Hung portrays a Chinese farm boy that comes to visit a city friend. Just like Tang Lung of "Way of the Dragon." Wherever Sammo goes, trouble starts, therefore he has to rely on his martial art skills to solve the differences. Luckily, Sammo's character learns martial arts by imitating and mimicking his idol, Bruce Lee. He even strokes his nose with his thumb exactly the way Bruce Lee does and also releases his screeching yell. He also uses nunchucks in a scene. It was like watching a fat Bruce Lee. There's a great showdown near the end of the movie which consists of foreign fighters. Sammo has to encounter each opponent one by one. Sort of like "The Game of Death", where each fighter possesses a different martial art discipline from one another.

This is one of the films I really enjoyed watching and also the very first Sammo Hung movies I've seen. Excellent fight scenes and a lot of laughs. A rare classic Sammo Hung film I highly recommend for all you martial art fans out there. 8.5/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Quote: theurgist: Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have [[seen]] this film what it is, an intelligent well [[acted]] prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge [[budget]] BUT it is still very well [[done]] and had me hooked for the full [[duration]].

An I.Q. over 50 you say.. that most mean you have an I.Q. lower than 50.. its name is CARLITOS WAY: Rise to power !!! meaning it should have something whit the first one to do..

all and all its a OK movie if.. YOU CHANGE THE TITLE AND NO CHARACTERS NAMED CARLITO BRIGANTE!!!

P.s don't comment on a movie if you don't know anything about movies. but i guess an I.Q. under 50,, you wont know what the hell i am yelling about...

Peace out!! Quote: theurgist: Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have [[noticed]] this film what it is, an intelligent well [[behaved]] prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge [[budgets]] BUT it is still very well [[effected]] and had me hooked for the full [[lifespan]].

An I.Q. over 50 you say.. that most mean you have an I.Q. lower than 50.. its name is CARLITOS WAY: Rise to power !!! meaning it should have something whit the first one to do..

all and all its a OK movie if.. YOU CHANGE THE TITLE AND NO CHARACTERS NAMED CARLITO BRIGANTE!!!

P.s don't comment on a movie if you don't know anything about movies. but i guess an I.Q. under 50,, you wont know what the hell i am yelling about...

Peace out!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I am always wary of taking too instant a dislike to a film. [[Look]] at it a month later and you [[might]] see it differently, or dig it up after 50 years in a different continent and some cult followers find something stylistically [[remarkable]] that went unnoticed at first. After [[sitting]] through The Great Ecstasy of [[Robert]] Carmichael at its [[UK]] premiere, it came as no surprise to me that I [[found]] the question and answer session afterwards more interesting than the [[film]] itself. Shane Danielsen (Artistic Director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival), aided by the film's director and producer, gave a spirited [[defence]] of a movie than received an overall negative response from the audience. Edinburgh Festival audiences are not easily shocked. Only one person walked out in disgust. The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors. This was not an overly 'shocking' film. There was a degree of uninterrupted sexual violence, but far less extreme than many movies (most actual weapon contact was obscured, as were aroused genitals). The audience disliked it because they had sat through two hours that were quite boring, where the acting standards were not high, where the [[plot]] was poor, predictable and drawn out, and where they had been subjected to clumsy and [[pretentious]] film-making on the promise of a controversial movie. Metaphors to the war in Iraq are contrived, over-emphasised and [[sloppy]] (apart from a general allusion to violence, any deeper meaning is unclear); and the 'fig-leaf' reference Marquis de Sade, as one audience member put it, seems a mere tokenistic excuse for lack of plot development towards the finale.

We have the story of an adolescent who has a certain amount going for him (he stands out at school for his musical ability) but takes drugs and hangs out with youths who have little or nothing going for them and whose criminal activities extend to rape and violence. When pushed, Robert seems to have a lot of violence locked inside him.

The film is not [[entirely]] without [[merit]]. The audience is left to [[decide]] how [[Robert]] [[got]] that [[way]]: was it the [[influence]] of his peers? Why did all the [[good]] influences and [[concern]] from [[parents]] and [[teachers]] not [[manage]] to [[include]] him in a [[better]] approach to [[life]]? Cinematically, there is a carefully-montaged scene where he hangs back (whether through too much drugs, shyness, a latent sense of morality or just waiting his turn?). Several of his friends are raping a woman in a back room, partly glimpsed and framed in the centre of the screen. In the foreground of the bare bones flat, a DJ is more concerned that the girl's screams interrupt his happy house music than with any thought for the woman. Ultimately he is a bit annoyed if their activities attract police attention. The stark juxtaposition of serious headphones enjoyment of his music even when he knows a rape is going on points up his utter disdain in a deeply unsettling way. Robert slumps with his back to us in the foreground.

But the rest of the film, including its supposedly controversial climax involving considerable (if not overly realistic) sexual violence, is not up to this standard. Some people have had a strong reaction to it (the filmmakers' stated intention: "If they vomit, we have succeeded in producing a reaction") but mostly - and as far as I can tell the Edinburgh reaction [[seems]] to mirror reports from Cannes - they feel, "Why have programmers subjected us to such inferior quality film-making?" Director Clay Hugh can talk the talk but has not developed artistic vision. His replies about holding up a mirror to life to tell the truth about things that are swept under the carpet, even his defence that there is little plot development because he didn't want to do a standard Hollywood movie - all are good answers to criticisms, but unfortunately they do not apply to his film, any more than they do to holding up a mirror while someone defecates, or wastes film while playing ineptly with symbols. Wanting to try and give him the benefit of any lingering doubt, I spoke to him for a few minutes after the screening, but I found him as distasteful as his movie and soon moved to the bar to wash my mouth out with something more substantial. There are many truths. One aspect of art is to educate, another to entertain, another to inspire. I had asked him if he had any social or political agenda and he mentions Ken Loach (one of the many great names he takes in vain) without going so far as to admit any agenda himself. He then falls back on his mantra about his job being to tell the truth. I am left with the feeling that this was an overambitious project for a new director, or else a disingenuous attempt to put himself on the map by courting publicity for second rate work

Andy Warhol could paint a tin of soup and it was art. Clay Hugh would like to emulate the great directors that have made controversial cinema and pushed boundaries. Sadly, his ability at the moment only extends to making high-sounding excuses for a publicity-seeking film. I am always wary of taking too instant a dislike to a film. [[Glance]] at it a month later and you [[apt]] see it differently, or dig it up after 50 years in a different continent and some cult followers find something stylistically [[sumptuous]] that went unnoticed at first. After [[seated]] through The Great Ecstasy of [[Roberta]] Carmichael at its [[BRITONS]] premiere, it came as no surprise to me that I [[discoveries]] the question and answer session afterwards more interesting than the [[movies]] itself. Shane Danielsen (Artistic Director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival), aided by the film's director and producer, gave a spirited [[defending]] of a movie than received an overall negative response from the audience. Edinburgh Festival audiences are not easily shocked. Only one person walked out in disgust. The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors. This was not an overly 'shocking' film. There was a degree of uninterrupted sexual violence, but far less extreme than many movies (most actual weapon contact was obscured, as were aroused genitals). The audience disliked it because they had sat through two hours that were quite boring, where the acting standards were not high, where the [[intrigue]] was poor, predictable and drawn out, and where they had been subjected to clumsy and [[presumptuous]] film-making on the promise of a controversial movie. Metaphors to the war in Iraq are contrived, over-emphasised and [[remiss]] (apart from a general allusion to violence, any deeper meaning is unclear); and the 'fig-leaf' reference Marquis de Sade, as one audience member put it, seems a mere tokenistic excuse for lack of plot development towards the finale.

We have the story of an adolescent who has a certain amount going for him (he stands out at school for his musical ability) but takes drugs and hangs out with youths who have little or nothing going for them and whose criminal activities extend to rape and violence. When pushed, Robert seems to have a lot of violence locked inside him.

The film is not [[downright]] without [[merits]]. The audience is left to [[decided]] how [[Roberta]] [[gets]] that [[pathways]]: was it the [[affecting]] of his peers? Why did all the [[alright]] influences and [[preoccupation]] from [[relatives]] and [[schoolteachers]] not [[administering]] to [[encompass]] him in a [[optimum]] approach to [[lives]]? Cinematically, there is a carefully-montaged scene where he hangs back (whether through too much drugs, shyness, a latent sense of morality or just waiting his turn?). Several of his friends are raping a woman in a back room, partly glimpsed and framed in the centre of the screen. In the foreground of the bare bones flat, a DJ is more concerned that the girl's screams interrupt his happy house music than with any thought for the woman. Ultimately he is a bit annoyed if their activities attract police attention. The stark juxtaposition of serious headphones enjoyment of his music even when he knows a rape is going on points up his utter disdain in a deeply unsettling way. Robert slumps with his back to us in the foreground.

But the rest of the film, including its supposedly controversial climax involving considerable (if not overly realistic) sexual violence, is not up to this standard. Some people have had a strong reaction to it (the filmmakers' stated intention: "If they vomit, we have succeeded in producing a reaction") but mostly - and as far as I can tell the Edinburgh reaction [[appears]] to mirror reports from Cannes - they feel, "Why have programmers subjected us to such inferior quality film-making?" Director Clay Hugh can talk the talk but has not developed artistic vision. His replies about holding up a mirror to life to tell the truth about things that are swept under the carpet, even his defence that there is little plot development because he didn't want to do a standard Hollywood movie - all are good answers to criticisms, but unfortunately they do not apply to his film, any more than they do to holding up a mirror while someone defecates, or wastes film while playing ineptly with symbols. Wanting to try and give him the benefit of any lingering doubt, I spoke to him for a few minutes after the screening, but I found him as distasteful as his movie and soon moved to the bar to wash my mouth out with something more substantial. There are many truths. One aspect of art is to educate, another to entertain, another to inspire. I had asked him if he had any social or political agenda and he mentions Ken Loach (one of the many great names he takes in vain) without going so far as to admit any agenda himself. He then falls back on his mantra about his job being to tell the truth. I am left with the feeling that this was an overambitious project for a new director, or else a disingenuous attempt to put himself on the map by courting publicity for second rate work

Andy Warhol could paint a tin of soup and it was art. Clay Hugh would like to emulate the great directors that have made controversial cinema and pushed boundaries. Sadly, his ability at the moment only extends to making high-sounding excuses for a publicity-seeking film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] IF you are planning to see this movie, please reconsider. I don't usually post my comments about something I've seen on television, but this one was such a waste of my life that I needed to do something productive to get that bad taste out of my mouth. Critiquing this movie would take far too long as there are so many things wrong with it. I will just simply say, please do not ever see this movie. It was a complete waste of my time and it WILL be a waste of yours. Anyone that wrote a positive review of this movie is one of two things; utterly inept, or working for the company that produced it. Again, I guarantee that you will indeed regret seeing this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In ten words or less to describe this film, Barbara Stanwyck is too appealing and it is great! The film is wonderful, except for the perhaps tacked-on ending, but I love happy endings anyway. Barbara Stanwyck, however, as the platinum-blonde gold-digger is amazing. She knows what she wants and goes after it! This film is sexy and excellent! --------------------------------------------- Result 1421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] BABY FACE is one of the better of the "forgotten" films before the code. It was shown last night after the 1931 version of WATERLOO BRIDGE on the TURNER CLASSIC NETWORK, so I was able to watch the film as it is now with four plus minutes of it restored.

Stanwyck is living in East St. Louis (where she may have known the drunken parents of "Myra" - Mae Clarke - in WATERLOO BRIDGE). Her father is Robert Barrett. She has lived with him since the death of her mother, and (in the restored dialog) he has been pimping her since she was 14 years old. Now she is resident waitress and part-time whore in his speakeasy, her closest friend being Chico (Theresa Harris), the African-American servant who Barrett keeps bullying. It is one of the two good points of Stanwyck's personality that she keeps standing up to her father about Harris, threatening to leave if Harris is fired (and since it is the grubby workers like Nat Pendleton, who enjoy seeing Stanwyck serve them, rather than the flavor of the hooch he serves that brings them in, Barrett has to obey her).

The one guy who comes to the speakeasy regularly whom Stanwyck likes is the shoemaker and intellectual Adolf Cragg (Alphonse Ethier), who sees great potential in the spirited girl if she will just leave her forsaken home. He is also pushing the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzche, and the idea of the will to power. More about this later.

After she knocks out the local political bigwig (Arthur Hohl), and has an argument with Barrett about this, a still explosion kills Barrett, and enables Stanwyck to leave her home town. She and Harris head to New York City, managing to get free transport by a railroad freight car by sleeping with a brakeman (James Murray). They reach New York, and after walking about they see the Gotham Trust Company (established 1873), and the friendly guard tells her where the personnel office is.

We slowly watch Stanwyck ascend the corporate ladder to the top, similar (but sleazier) than Robert Morse dared in HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUSINESS WITHOUT REALLY TRYING. But Morse was a man in a man dominated company. Stanwyck knows her sexual allure is her weapon. She goes through John Wayne, Douglas Dumbrille (a section of the film that I always felt was the most shocking - curiously enough - when I watched it), Douglas Wood, Henry Kolker, and finally George Brent. Each ends up falling for her, and either being pushed aside when no longer useful, or destroyed by her. Brent, the new President of the Bank his grandfather founded, eventually marries her - and the crisis of the film is when the bank's economic situation is shaken (especially after Brent buys her a fortune in jewels and gives her valuable bonds). Brent is indicted. Will she stick up for him?

SPOILER COMING UP:

The one thing about these films that is not admitted is that the theatrical and moral conventions of the time still dictated endings. The original ending had Stanwyck boarding a ship for Europe abandoning Brent to his fate, but realizing she can't do it to him, returning to their apartment house, and finding he's shot himself. She is riding with him to the hospital as it ends. Now before the rediscovered footage was found, the film ended with them apparently giving up all their money to the bank to save it, and retiring back to East St. Louis, to live happily if poor.

Neither of these are good endings. Stanwyck should continue on her destructive course, with Brent the last of her victims. But even without the Breen office the script writers (one is Darryl Zanuck, by the way) saw fit to have her find a moral center. She has none - at least none for powerful men (whom she hates). I don't think that a depression audience would have tolerated that type of conclusion.

There are other problems, due to the changing styles of public opinion and changes in society. It was a man's world in the corporate world in 1933, so Stanwyck has her work cut out for her. Wood (when she is going to be fired for an indiscretion with him) admits that he did not want her to work.

But in 2006, Stanwyck would have been finding woman all over the place. In the film there are nasty, catty remarks (obviously some based on jealousy) towards Stanwyck from other secretaries and female employees at her rapid rise. In 2006, she'd be frequently confronting women superiors, and she would find them cutting her off at the legs very quickly. Of course, if she finds one or two are lesbians she might try that road but it is doubtful. And she also never seems to meet any men who are gay. They do have gay male executives in business, who wouldn't give a damn about her legs or breasts.

Then there is her mentor, Mr Cragg. Cragg is remade in the "bowdlerized" version into trying to make her seek a moral center. In reality he pushes Nieztsche, but the way (in a broader sense) the Nazis pushed Nieztsche - find your way to power and push it. While Nieztsche did stress power sometimes, it wasn't the be-all and end-all of his theories. Otherwise nobody would read him today in college courses. Cragg is obviously self-educated, but only half-educated. In short if somebody who thoroughly studied Nieztsche confronted Cragg he'd make him look like a half-educated fool. And this is Stanwyck's mentor! A good film, and for it's day worth a 10...but seriously flawed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1422 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I am not sure why I like Dolph Lundgren. I guess seeing him on screen makes me feel that [[anyone]] who [[works]] [[hard]] can succeed [[regardless]] of talent. That is a [[good]] [[feeling]] for all of us who [[lack]] talent. Some of the other reviews point out how [[dumb]] [[Detention]] is, but many [[neglect]] to point out the positives.

Any movie where at least one annoying [[teenager]] [[gets]] [[killed]] can't be all bad. Why do so many movies that have a cast of teens always [[need]] to [[include]] the stereotypical [[teens]]? Aren't there any other [[kind]] of [[teens]]? Does every [[group]] of [[teens]] have one angry black [[guy]]? One [[genius]] [[nerd]] that nobody [[likes]]? One [[slutty]] girl who is very [[friendly]] and (in this [[movie]]) pregnant? One [[disturbed]] anti-social white [[kid]] from a broken [[home]] who [[everyone]] agrees is [[talented]] (but what is the talent?). And one laid-back black [[kid]] who is in [[tune]] with the [[Universe]] and so cool that all the other neurotic [[kids]] trust him. [[Then]] [[add]] a [[couple]] of generic expendable [[teens]] of any [[color]]. They don't [[say]] [[much]] but [[get]] shot at some point.

[[Detention]] would have been [[better]] if the [[bad]] [[guys]] had [[gotten]] to blow up the school. Preferably with the [[writers]] inside. The [[dialogue]] is [[bad]], and the plot is [[worse]]. When the bad guys (and girl) [[finally]] hijack a van full of drugs, then they [[sit]] inside the van making out. They [[drive]] the van to the [[school]] because they [[want]] to re-paint the van at the school's [[paint]] [[shop]], but they never [[get]] [[around]] to re-painting the van. By the [[way]], it [[would]] have been [[easier]] to just put all the [[drugs]] in another car or two [[cars]] or another van or a truck and drive away without repainting the Police Van. They [[also]] never move the [[drugs]] or [[sell]] them or do [[anything]] [[else]] with the [[big]] [[score]].

[[For]] some [[reason]], they [[decide]] they have to [[kill]] the [[kids]] and the [[teacher]] (Dolph Lundgren) [[even]] [[though]] when the villains take over the [[school]] nobody is remotely [[aware]] of it because it is after school hours. The handful of people [[still]] in the [[school]] have nothing to do with [[painting]] [[vehicles]], so why [[go]] after them?

Anyhow, the [[best]] [[part]] of this [[movie]] is that the villains are all armed with [[numerous]] [[machine]] [[guns]], and they keep finding the teens (including a guy in a wheel chair) and they keep shooting hundreds of bullets at the teens and usually miss. Towards the end of the movie there is some bloodshed. For every time someone gets shot, there must be at least three hundred bullets fired that miss. The stunts are pretty bad.

I read one of the reviews that says that this movie had a budget of $10 Million, and I am amazed. When I saw the movie I figured maybe Lundgren had done it as some kind of charity work for some film school where he is the teacher. Like maybe this movie was their end of the year exam. It was a test to watch it, but I passed. I am not sure why I like Dolph Lundgren. I guess seeing him on screen makes me feel that [[everyone]] who [[collaborated]] [[difficult]] can succeed [[independently]] of talent. That is a [[alright]] [[impression]] for all of us who [[imperfection]] talent. Some of the other reviews point out how [[silly]] [[Imprisonment]] is, but many [[overlook]] to point out the positives.

Any movie where at least one annoying [[teen]] [[got]] [[assassinated]] can't be all bad. Why do so many movies that have a cast of teens always [[gotta]] to [[encompass]] the stereotypical [[teen]]? Aren't there any other [[genre]] of [[adolescence]]? Does every [[groups]] of [[adolescence]] have one angry black [[boy]]? One [[genie]] [[geek]] that nobody [[love]]? One [[vixen]] girl who is very [[friendship]] and (in this [[filmmaking]]) pregnant? One [[troubled]] anti-social white [[petit]] from a broken [[house]] who [[anybody]] agrees is [[gifted]] (but what is the talent?). And one laid-back black [[petit]] who is in [[melody]] with the [[Cosmos]] and so cool that all the other neurotic [[juvenile]] trust him. [[Later]] [[adding]] a [[match]] of generic expendable [[adolescence]] of any [[hue]]. They don't [[told]] [[very]] but [[gets]] shot at some point.

[[Arrests]] would have been [[best]] if the [[negative]] [[boy]] had [[become]] to blow up the school. Preferably with the [[authors]] inside. The [[talks]] is [[naughty]], and the plot is [[lousiest]]. When the bad guys (and girl) [[eventually]] hijack a van full of drugs, then they [[sitting]] inside the van making out. They [[drives]] the van to the [[teaching]] because they [[wanted]] to re-paint the van at the school's [[paintings]] [[storage]], but they never [[gets]] [[throughout]] to re-painting the van. By the [[ways]], it [[could]] have been [[easy]] to just put all the [[drug]] in another car or two [[car]] or another van or a truck and drive away without repainting the Police Van. They [[similarly]] never move the [[medicine]] or [[sells]] them or do [[nothing]] [[elsewhere]] with the [[enormous]] [[scoring]].

[[In]] some [[reasons]], they [[decides]] they have to [[killings]] the [[children]] and the [[professor]] (Dolph Lundgren) [[yet]] [[while]] when the villains take over the [[teaching]] nobody is remotely [[conscious]] of it because it is after school hours. The handful of people [[again]] in the [[teaching]] have nothing to do with [[paintings]] [[autos]], so why [[going]] after them?

Anyhow, the [[optimum]] [[portions]] of this [[filmmaking]] is that the villains are all armed with [[assorted]] [[appliance]] [[pistols]], and they keep finding the teens (including a guy in a wheel chair) and they keep shooting hundreds of bullets at the teens and usually miss. Towards the end of the movie there is some bloodshed. For every time someone gets shot, there must be at least three hundred bullets fired that miss. The stunts are pretty bad.

I read one of the reviews that says that this movie had a budget of $10 Million, and I am amazed. When I saw the movie I figured maybe Lundgren had done it as some kind of charity work for some film school where he is the teacher. Like maybe this movie was their end of the year exam. It was a test to watch it, but I passed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to say this is one of the worst films I've ever seen. They had a pretty good storyline to go on, but than the messed it up so badly. First of all the cast is all wrong, where did that van peeble(crap actor btw) and puff daddy come from??? It looks like Carlito has come from the hood, and used to hang about with some real idiots. This film doesn't do "Carlitos Way" any justice. Im so happy that the sequel "Carlito's Way" came out first, if I had seen this rubbish first, I would have never given the pacino version a chance. And anyway, pacino is supposed to have read this story, thought it's crap and did the sequel instead. Carlito's Way: Rise to Power - 1 out of 10. Carlito's Way - 9 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I just viewed Detention last [[night]] and i liked what i [[saw]]. It was a cool fun [[movie]].Dolph [[looked]] superbly cool on the [[Bike]].He [[also]] looked good in this [[movie]] as [[compared]] to his other [[recent]] [[movies]].He is now in a pretty good shape.The story was [[ok]] and the other actors were [[also]] passable.I wouldn't call this [[movie]] his [[best]] but its [[still]] a good movie.

But it [[also]] had its [[share]] of Problems. The first one was the way bullets were flying everywhere and [[even]] when they were being [[fired]] at point blank [[range]] they [[missed]] the [[target]].They should've had [[shown]] the ppl [[escaping]] the bullets in a better way. Another [[problem]] which i had was the way the students were swearing. I dont know in which school the students can [[swear]] in [[front]] of their [[teacher]] and even in the [[classroom]]. The third problem was that the [[bad]] [[guys]] were very few in numbers. There should've been more [[bad]] guys. Last problem was definately the fact that the set looked cheesy , but that was due to the [[small]] budget. [[Overall]] the movie was a [[good]] Movie.I [[enjoyed]] it.I would recommend others to watch it. P.S. Now u [[r]] a [[DEAD]] beat [[cop]]. (Some One-liners were [[also]] [[cool]])

I just viewed Detention last [[nighttime]] and i liked what i [[watched]]. It was a cool fun [[films]].Dolph [[seemed]] superbly cool on the [[Biking]].He [[apart]] looked good in this [[flick]] as [[likened]] to his other [[latest]] [[theater]].He is now in a pretty good shape.The story was [[okay]] and the other actors were [[moreover]] passable.I wouldn't call this [[film]] his [[better]] but its [[however]] a good movie.

But it [[further]] had its [[exchanged]] of Problems. The first one was the way bullets were flying everywhere and [[yet]] when they were being [[sacked]] at point blank [[assortment]] they [[miss]] the [[goal]].They should've had [[displayed]] the ppl [[fleeing]] the bullets in a better way. Another [[difficulties]] which i had was the way the students were swearing. I dont know in which school the students can [[swearing]] in [[newsweek]] of their [[educators]] and even in the [[classrooms]]. The third problem was that the [[wicked]] [[guy]] were very few in numbers. There should've been more [[horrid]] guys. Last problem was definately the fact that the set looked cheesy , but that was due to the [[tiny]] budget. [[Entire]] the movie was a [[well]] Movie.I [[appreciated]] it.I would recommend others to watch it. P.S. Now u [[rs]] a [[DYING]] beat [[cops]]. (Some One-liners were [[apart]] [[groovy]])

--------------------------------------------- Result 1425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This thing is really awfull. There´s no charachter with weight, they´re all floating around in the BG´s. The Motion Capture is a fine toy, but this movie demostrates that you really need people who knows animation to do an animated film. THE MACHINE CAN´T DO ANYTHING WELL BY ITSELF. If you see it as a bizarre film, you´ll have fun finding mistakes of continuity... IN A 3D MOVIE!!! It´s funny to watch the princess dress move around like a thing with diferent phisics. You need animators and 3D animators, not data-entries whom know 3D programs. Note the junctions, like the elbows, how they lost volume and get deformed. The person who made the charachter design (a very good one) sufered for sure when he/she watched them move, ´cos you can´t say they come to life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow! I loved this movie and LOVE Judy Marte!! This girl isn't just an awesome pretty face, she's funny and really really talented!! She made me laugh many times just by being very naturally rough with Victor who was desperately hitting on her! We'll be seeing her a lot in the next coming years... and probably also from director Peter Sollett and co-star Victor Rasuk!

Raising Victor Vargas is one of the best film I saw in a long time! Very refreshing! It's true, nice, funny, well filmed, it got it all : good story, good actors, good film direction!

If you like simple, slow paced, real life, urban movies, like maybe Jersey Girl from Kevin Smith, you'll love Victor Vargas! It's better! --------------------------------------------- Result 1427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I don't [[know]] what it is with this movies. But movies about [[history]] or religion are always [[criticised]] by their [[accuracy]]. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's difficult to make 100% accurate films [[nowadays]] when even the "experts" disagree with each other. Therefore I [[rather]] like to [[judge]] a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.

So I start by saying that I liked this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The [[series]] should have been a three [[part]] [[story]], his [[childhood]] being the [[first]] [[part]]. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???

There's only one real [[problem]] I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a [[history]] book [[way]]. Especially the second part which is just a [[sum]] of events that [[happened]]. I [[rather]] [[would]] have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I [[think]]. [[Nevertheless]] I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. [[Just]] to [[remember]] more [[vividly]] what happened and see Carlyle [[giving]] his [[best]]. 7.5/10 I don't [[savoir]] what it is with this movies. But movies about [[stories]] or religion are always [[denounced]] by their [[accurate]]. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's difficult to make 100% accurate films [[today]] when even the "experts" disagree with each other. Therefore I [[fairly]] like to [[magistrates]] a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.

So I start by saying that I liked this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The [[serials]] should have been a three [[parties]] [[history]], his [[children]] being the [[outset]] [[party]]. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???

There's only one real [[trouble]] I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a [[histories]] book [[pathway]]. Especially the second part which is just a [[somme]] of events that [[arrived]]. I [[fairly]] [[ought]] have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I [[reckon]]. [[However]] I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. [[Mere]] to [[remind]] more [[strikingly]] what happened and see Carlyle [[conferring]] his [[nicest]]. 7.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film has a powerful [[philosophical]] ending. But that [[ending]] has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

[[Youth]] alienation in the [[late]] 1960's, from the viewpoint of a [[young]] man and a young [[woman]], is the obvious [[theme]] of "Zabriskie Point". [[Neither]] Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a [[fact]] that actually [[enhances]] the film's message. Having [[untrained]] actors [[conveys]] a [[sense]] of [[realism]], as both [[players]] seem [[emotionally]] detached from the [[turmoil]] [[around]] them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with [[stunning]] [[cinematography]]. The [[beautiful]] naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and [[perfectly]] in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I [[would]] have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this [[film]]. It's different; it's [[unique]]; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the [[years]] go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a [[bohemian]] sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically [[mesmerizing]]. This film has a powerful [[philosophic]] ending. But that [[ceases]] has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

[[Jugend]] alienation in the [[tardy]] 1960's, from the viewpoint of a [[youths]] man and a young [[daughters]], is the obvious [[subject]] of "Zabriskie Point". [[Ni]] Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a [[facto]] that actually [[reinforces]] the film's message. Having [[unskilled]] actors [[airs]] a [[feeling]] of [[pragmatism]], as both [[gamers]] seem [[excitedly]] detached from the [[restlessness]] [[roundabout]] them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with [[unbelievable]] [[films]]. The [[fantastic]] naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and [[quite]] in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I [[should]] have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this [[kino]]. It's different; it's [[sole]]; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the [[olds]] go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a [[boheme]] sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically [[beguiling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1429 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Read My Lips" tells of a strange symbiosis which develops between a plain, socially maladroit female office worker (Devos) and her workplace trainee, a crude excon (Casel). As the film fleshes out this unlikely duo down to their ids they become embroiled in a chilling merging of the minds, each using the other for their own selfish reasons with an extraordinary outcome. Good stuff for anyone into character-driven films with strong psychodramatic undercurrents. In French with easy to read subtitles and good translation. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 1430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] A truly [[frightening]] [[film]]. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who wanted to show that gays are good, [[normal]], mainstream-aspiring people. [[Retrograde]] to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. [[Wow]]! [[Who]] [[knew]]? The supporting [[characters]] are [[caricatures]] of [[gay]] [[stereotypes]] (the effeminate [[buffoon]], the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main [[characters]] are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow [[clones]], of [[little]] interest.

As far as the [[romantic]] & ideological struggles of the main [[couple]] are concerned, there's not much to say: we've [[seen]] it all before, and [[done]] [[much]] better. A truly [[scary]] [[movies]]. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who wanted to show that gays are good, [[usual]], mainstream-aspiring people. [[Aft]] to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. [[Ruff]]! [[Whose]] [[knowed]]? The supporting [[characteristic]] are [[cartoons]] of [[gays]] [[stereotype]] (the effeminate [[butthead]], the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main [[traits]] are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow [[clooney]], of [[scant]] interest.

As far as the [[sentimental]] & ideological struggles of the main [[matching]] are concerned, there's not much to say: we've [[watched]] it all before, and [[effected]] [[very]] better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1431 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are really two sections of this film. Firstly there's the laughable prologue to the film which is so hysterical and cornball that it would almost feel appropriate that the 'The Simpsons' Troy McClure should be doing the narration.

Then the rest of the film begins (starting off with a title song which really doesn't fit in with the rest of the film) which, while technically OK, is killed by a vague, inconsistent and unconvincing plot and not just uninteresting characters, but characters that make no sense.

This is especially so with Mickey Rooney's Spiventa, who was supposedly in on the plot and part of the 'organisation' the whole time yet what would have happened had Hackman made the seemingly arbitrary decision to take him along when breaking out? In that case he would've been a totally superfluous and unnecessary character, which in the end he still is.

The overall problem of the film is that it's totally unwilling to put any detail on who or what is behind this conspiracy. It's as if the filmmakers didn't have the courage to imply that a particular section of society would be capable of creating such an organisation and instead settled on the hope that a lack of explanation would suffice and the audience would form their own conclusions.

Put simply, the film fails on all levels. --------------------------------------------- Result 1432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Enchanted April is a tone poem, an impressionist painting, a masterpiece of conveying a message with few words. It has been one of my 10 favorite films since it came out. I continue to wait, albeit less patiently, for the film to come out in DVD format. Apparently, I am not alone.

If parent company Amazon's listings are correct, there are many people who want this title in DVD format. Many people want to go to Italy with this cast and this script. Many people want to keep a permanent copy of this film in their libraries. The cast is spectacular, the cinematography and direction impeccable. The film is a definite keeper. Many have already asked. Please add our names to the list. --------------------------------------------- Result 1433 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How has this piece of crap stayed on TV this long? It's terrible. It makes me want to shoot someone. It's so fake that it is actually worse than a 1940s sci-fi movie. I'd rather have a stroke than watch this nonsense. I remember watching it when it first came out. I thought, hey this could be interesting, then I found out how absolutely, insanely, ridiculously stupid it really was. It was so bad that I actually took out my pocket knife and stuck my hand to the table.

Please people, stop watching this and all other reality shows, they're the trash that is jamming the networks and canceling quality programming that requires some thought to create. --------------------------------------------- Result 1434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Deathstalker is [[directed]] by [[John]] Watson and it [[stars]] Rick [[Hill]], who is some [[kind]] of body builder and [[famous]] of that, if I have [[understood]] right? The plot follows as Deathstalker ([[Hill]]) [[tries]] to [[get]] [[something]] back from the [[evil]] lord, and he has to [[travel]] to the lord's cave. He meets [[many]] [[dwarfs]] and [[monsters]] during his [[journey]], and the [[settings]] are very [[close]] to Tolkien, and of course Conan the [[Barbarian]]. This is a rip off of [[huge]] [[success]] of Conan, and even [[though]] this is very [[stupid]] [[film]], it has [[many]] [[nice]] [[trash]] merits and is recommended for [[trash]] fans and tolerating [[film]] [[junkies]]!

There are no [[many]] cinematic [[merits]] in this film. [[Couple]] of scenes are [[almost]] atmospheric and [[fascinating]], but what Deathstalker concentrates to [[show]], are [[nude]] females and [[huge]] muscles of Hill. [[Females]] are [[usually]] helpless [[victims]] and very [[stupid]], too, so this is very [[macho]] [[film]] and thus may not [[please]] many [[feminists]]! The fight scenes are nothing [[special]] and [[pretty]] dull, and the [[monsters]] are not either [[anything]] [[special]]. And all the other aspects of the [[film]] are [[also]] very amateurish and badly [[done]], but what did you [[expect]] from low budget [[effort]] like this? This [[tries]] to be as [[great]] as Conan but fails [[pretty]] miserably. As I [[said]], this can please fans of [[turkey]] [[cinema]] but no one [[else]]. This [[belongs]] to the [[category]] it's so bad it's great!

Deathstalker is [[still]] not as near as bad as it [[could]] be, and as a [[turkey]] [[film]], I [[appreciate]] this [[almost]] as much as other turkeys, [[enjoyable]] ones of course! If bad [[films]] are your cup of [[tea]], then try this and have [[fun]], but if you don't [[understand]] "enjoyably [[bad]] [[films]]" then [[stay]] away. And if [[somebody]] can't [[stand]] [[large]] amount of nudity, then [[stay]] away as well. There is more nudity here than violence, and due to these scenes, the [[film]] has an [[R]] [[rating]]. Otherwise this could be some safe PG family film!

4/10 Deathstalker is [[geared]] by [[Jon]] Watson and it [[superstar]] Rick [[Shan]], who is some [[kinds]] of body builder and [[illustrious]] of that, if I have [[understanding]] right? The plot follows as Deathstalker ([[Shan]]) [[attempting]] to [[obtain]] [[somethings]] back from the [[demonic]] lord, and he has to [[voyager]] to the lord's cave. He meets [[various]] [[dwarves]] and [[freaks]] during his [[voyager]], and the [[setting]] are very [[shut]] to Tolkien, and of course Conan the [[Brutality]]. This is a rip off of [[mammoth]] [[successes]] of Conan, and even [[while]] this is very [[dumb]] [[movies]], it has [[various]] [[pleasurable]] [[junk]] merits and is recommended for [[junk]] fans and tolerating [[films]] [[addicts]]!

There are no [[several]] cinematic [[deserves]] in this film. [[Matching]] of scenes are [[approximately]] atmospheric and [[mesmerizing]], but what Deathstalker concentrates to [[illustrating]], are [[bare]] females and [[prodigious]] muscles of Hill. [[Female]] are [[typically]] helpless [[fatalities]] and very [[dumb]], too, so this is very [[virile]] [[flick]] and thus may not [[invites]] many [[feminism]]! The fight scenes are nothing [[peculiar]] and [[belle]] dull, and the [[monster]] are not either [[nothing]] [[particular]]. And all the other aspects of the [[filmmaking]] are [[furthermore]] very amateurish and badly [[played]], but what did you [[expecting]] from low budget [[efforts]] like this? This [[attempted]] to be as [[super]] as Conan but fails [[quite]] miserably. As I [[stated]], this can please fans of [[turk]] [[film]] but no one [[further]]. This [[owns]] to the [[categories]] it's so bad it's great!

Deathstalker is [[however]] not as near as bad as it [[did]] be, and as a [[ankara]] [[movie]], I [[appreciative]] this [[nearly]] as much as other turkeys, [[pleasurable]] ones of course! If bad [[filmmaking]] are your cup of [[shai]], then try this and have [[droll]], but if you don't [[understanding]] "enjoyably [[negative]] [[film]]" then [[staying]] away. And if [[person]] can't [[standing]] [[grande]] amount of nudity, then [[staying]] away as well. There is more nudity here than violence, and due to these scenes, the [[filmmaking]] has an [[rs]] [[assessment]]. Otherwise this could be some safe PG family film!

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1435 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was [[intrigued]] to see how this adaptation measured up. Unfortunately, the [[movie]] didn't even come close to creating the [[ambiance]] or developing the characters that Orwell so [[masterfully]] did in his book. The [[director]] seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the [[book]], because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. [[John]] [[Hurt]], the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the [[end]]. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the [[fact]] that those are [[missing]] is the [[greatest]] [[shortcoming]] of this [[film]]. Besides that, [[John]] Hurt was a [[terrible]] casting choice, looking about 15 years [[older]] than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the [[cast]] was well [[chosen]]. It's just too bad they were put in such a [[horribly]] [[adapted]] [[film]] with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O. A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was [[puzzled]] to see how this adaptation measured up. Unfortunately, the [[filmmaking]] didn't even come close to creating the [[vibe]] or developing the characters that Orwell so [[artfully]] did in his book. The [[superintendent]] seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the [[ledger]], because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. [[Jon]] [[Harmed]], the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the [[terminate]]. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the [[facto]] that those are [[lacking]] is the [[finest]] [[weakness]] of this [[flick]]. Besides that, [[Giovanni]] Hurt was a [[abysmal]] casting choice, looking about 15 years [[elder]] than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the [[casting]] was well [[selecting]]. It's just too bad they were put in such a [[unimaginably]] [[adjusting]] [[filmmaking]] with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O. --------------------------------------------- Result 1436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] Two qualifiers right up front: I actually think [[Joe]] [[Don]] Baker can be good or [[even]] [[great]] with the right material and the right [[director]] (the "[[Cape]] [[Fear]]" [[remake]], a [[small]] role in "Goldeneye", "[[Walking]] Tall"). And I even liked [[Baker]] in "Mitchell", because he was [[playing]] an anti-hero who was SUPPOSED to be unlikeable. [[Yes]], MST3K's [[coverage]] was hilarious, but they took a lot of cheap shots at Baker - that he didn't [[deserve]] - to keep [[things]] lively and entertaining - he was appropriate to the level and tone of the movie, and he was the best part of the movie.

"Final Justice" seems to be more of the same, but in spite of the exotic locations and the "cowboy frontier justice" theme, it is [[quite]] a bit [[weaker]] than "Mitchell". And the main reason is that Baker's [[character]], as written, is an [[idiot]]. The movie has the conceit that because Baker embodies old style frontier machismo, he challenges his opponents to old style mano-a-mano quick-draw contests. And because he's so tough and macho, he always wins, even when he's hurt, wounded, outnumbered, etc.

That's a conceit with a lot of potential (it worked for Gary Cooper), even if it condemns the film to "B" movie status. But Baker is so frigging stupid and obsessive that he needlessly challenges three of the bad guy's henchman to a showdown in a public market, with civilians all over the place. He COULD have simply shadowed them to the chief bad guy's headquarters (which was why he was following them in the first place) and they never would have noticed. Or he could have [[gotten]] the drop on them and [[forced]] them to surrender, and gotten one of the henchmen to take him to headquarters at gun point. But no, he has to be a [[bush]] league hot [[dog]] and a macho blockhead, and so he gets a child taken as a hostage in the ensuing shootout!

This is a guy we are [[supposed]] to admire?

The whole [[movie]] is [[basically]] like this. Most of the supporting actors are somewhere between OK (the henchmen) to pretty good (the chief bad guy and his father, who are two well known European actors - they just go through the motions, but they are pros and even hamming it up they are decent). But through it all, Baker's character pulls silly , unproductive stunts and mistakes that get at least two relatively innocent people killed, plus a couple of bad guys who might have been taken alive without the use of deadly force.

On the positive side, since 90% of the movie is set on Malta or in the Mediterranean, you get to see lots of pretty scenery and lots of nice and exotic looking extras. And really, Baker himself may be on the heavy side and slightly dyspeptic, but he isn't that bad...certainly not the tub o' lard that this films critics (including Mike and the Bots in their hilarious coverage) seem to think.

In short, this movie is good for video wallpaper, but the viewer should not pay any attention to it. Two qualifiers right up front: I actually think [[Evel]] [[Donated]] Baker can be good or [[yet]] [[sublime]] with the right material and the right [[superintendent]] (the "[[Cabo]] [[Affraid]]" [[redo]], a [[minor]] role in "Goldeneye", "[[Walk]] Tall"). And I even liked [[Becker]] in "Mitchell", because he was [[playback]] an anti-hero who was SUPPOSED to be unlikeable. [[Yeah]], MST3K's [[blanket]] was hilarious, but they took a lot of cheap shots at Baker - that he didn't [[deserved]] - to keep [[matters]] lively and entertaining - he was appropriate to the level and tone of the movie, and he was the best part of the movie.

"Final Justice" seems to be more of the same, but in spite of the exotic locations and the "cowboy frontier justice" theme, it is [[rather]] a bit [[lowest]] than "Mitchell". And the main reason is that Baker's [[trait]], as written, is an [[asinine]]. The movie has the conceit that because Baker embodies old style frontier machismo, he challenges his opponents to old style mano-a-mano quick-draw contests. And because he's so tough and macho, he always wins, even when he's hurt, wounded, outnumbered, etc.

That's a conceit with a lot of potential (it worked for Gary Cooper), even if it condemns the film to "B" movie status. But Baker is so frigging stupid and obsessive that he needlessly challenges three of the bad guy's henchman to a showdown in a public market, with civilians all over the place. He COULD have simply shadowed them to the chief bad guy's headquarters (which was why he was following them in the first place) and they never would have noticed. Or he could have [[become]] the drop on them and [[compelled]] them to surrender, and gotten one of the henchmen to take him to headquarters at gun point. But no, he has to be a [[busch]] league hot [[doggie]] and a macho blockhead, and so he gets a child taken as a hostage in the ensuing shootout!

This is a guy we are [[presumed]] to admire?

The whole [[filmmaking]] is [[broadly]] like this. Most of the supporting actors are somewhere between OK (the henchmen) to pretty good (the chief bad guy and his father, who are two well known European actors - they just go through the motions, but they are pros and even hamming it up they are decent). But through it all, Baker's character pulls silly , unproductive stunts and mistakes that get at least two relatively innocent people killed, plus a couple of bad guys who might have been taken alive without the use of deadly force.

On the positive side, since 90% of the movie is set on Malta or in the Mediterranean, you get to see lots of pretty scenery and lots of nice and exotic looking extras. And really, Baker himself may be on the heavy side and slightly dyspeptic, but he isn't that bad...certainly not the tub o' lard that this films critics (including Mike and the Bots in their hilarious coverage) seem to think.

In short, this movie is good for video wallpaper, but the viewer should not pay any attention to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1437 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the worst movies I've ever seen. Acting was terrible, both for the kids and the adults. Most to all characters showed no, little or not enough emotion. The lighting was terrible, and there were too many mess ups about the time of the day the film was shot (In the river scene where they just get their boat destroyed, there's 4 shots; The sheriff and Dad in the evening on their boat, Jillian and Molly in the evening swimming, the rest of the kids in the daytime *when it's supposed to in the evening* at the river bank, and the doctor, Beatrice, and Simonton at night but not in the evening getting off their boat.) The best acting in the movie was probably from the sheriff, Cappy (Although, there's a slip of character when the pulse detector *Whatever that thing is when people die, it beeps* shows Cappy has died, he still moves while it can still be heard beeping, and while the nurse extra checks his pulse manually, then it shows the pulse again, and THEN he finally dies.) I guess it's not going to be perfect, since it's an independent movie, but it still could be better. Not worth watching, honestly, even for kids. Might as well watch something good, like The Lion King or Toy Story if you're going to see anything you'll remember. --------------------------------------------- Result 1438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like Star Wars/Trek, come see where they got all their ideas and cinematic devices. It's my top 2 favorite movies of all times, other-worldly-futuristic and psycho-thriller. The intensity of the root material (Shakespeare's "The Tempest") is not overshadowed by whizbang gimmickry (a la later Lucas). And just because it was made in 1956, don't assume you can 'see the strings' holding the flying saucer up. This was the first movie where you COULDN'T. Miracle it was made at "A-movie" scale, economics and tastes at the time were stacked heavily against it. And director Wilcox's previous 'hit' was "Lassie Come Home". Until I looked him up, I assumed 'Fred Wilcox' was a pseudonym for a director who was already or later became famous, but at the time didn't want to be associated with sci-fi, which was strictly a "B" genre back then. This was either a very VERY visionary production, or a very fortuitous 'mistake' on the part of the folks who bankroll Hollywood.

There are the massive-scale mattes with live action almost microscopically inserted that Lucas used extensively. There are intelligent machines that transcend the stereotypical 'user interface'; "computers", as they've come to be portrayed much less futuristically in later works. Star Trek's 'transporter' is there, visually, almost unaltered by Roddenberry 10 years later. And if the Trek/Wars technobabble turns you off, FP's scientific references are not overdone and are all accurate, even today. The "ship" set is comprehensive, sparklingly realistic, as good as anything you've seen since, and more convincing than anything 'Trek' has done, for TV or film. We didn't get to spend as much time there as I would have liked.

If you ever wondered how movies got into space so competently, watching FP will explain all that. It's definitely not 'Wagontrain to the Stars'. --------------------------------------------- Result 1439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[Come]] Undone" appears to elicit a [[lot]] of [[opinions]] [[among]] the contributors to this [[forum]]. Granted, it's a [[film]] that promises a take on gay life, as most [[viewers]] [[expect]] and [[somehow]], it [[gets]] away from that promise into an introspective [[view]] at a young man's soul. The [[film]] has a [[way]] of staying with us even when it has [[ended]]. It is a [[character]] study about how a [[young]] [[man]] [[gets]] [[involved]] into a love affair with someone so much [[different]] than him that, in the end, will leave [[Mathieu]] confused, [[hurt]] and depressed when [[things]] don't go [[according]] to what he [[hoped]] the [[relationship]] would be.

If you haven't [[seen]] the [[film]], [[perhaps]] you would like to stop reading.

Sebastien Lifshitz, the [[director]] of the [[film]], has told his [[story]] from Mathieu's [[viewpoint]]. Most [[viewers]] [[appear]] to be disoriented by the [[different]] times [[within]] the [[film]], but there are [[hints]] that are not [[obvious]], as one can [[see]], in retrospect. The [[story]] is told in flashbacks that might add to the [[way]] some people will [[view]] the [[film]]. This is a story about the doomed the love Mathieu [[felt]] for [[Cedric]] and the [[ultimate]] [[breakdown]] of their [[life]] [[together]].

[[First]] of all, Cedric, the [[handsome]] young local, pursues Mathieu until he succeeds in convincing him he likes him. Mathieu [[feels]] the [[attraction]] for [[Cedric]] too. We [[realize]] how [[different]] both young [[men]] are by the [[way]] [[Cedric]] tells Mathieu's [[family]] how he [[feels]] [[school]] is not for him. On the other hand, Mathieu, who wants to be an architect, [[finds]] beauty in the [[abandoned]] place where [[Cedric]] has [[taken]] him. We watch as Mathieu, reading from the [[guide]] [[book]], [[wants]] Cedric's attention.

When Mathieu comes out to his mother, she [[wisely]] tells him about the importance of continuing his [[career]]. She [[also]] [[points]] out about what future both of them [[would]] have [[together]], which proves to be true. [[Mathieu]] appears to have [[learned]] his lesson, the [[hard]] way. He goes on to an [[uncertain]] [[life]] with Cedric and attempts to take his own [[life]]. We watch him in the hospital speaking to a [[psychiatrist]] that has [[treated]] his [[wounded]] [[soul]].

The [[ending]] might be [[confusing]] for most [[viewers]], but there is a [[moment]] in the film when Mathieu goes to [[work]] in a bar where we see him washing glasses and looking intently to Pierre, the young man who frequents the bar. That is why when Mathieu goes looking for Pierre at his house, appears to be hard to imagine. [[Yet]], we have seen the [[way]] Mathieu is obviously interested in Pierre. The last scene at the beach, when Pierre and Mathieu are seen strolling in the sand, has a hopeful sign that things will be better between them as they watch a young boy, apparently lost, but then realizing the father is nearby.

Jeremie Elkaim makes Mathieu one of the most complex characters in recent films. This is a young man who is hard to understand on a simple level. Mathieu has suffered a lot, first with the separation of his parents, then with his depressed mother and with losing Cedric. Stephan Rideau, who has been seen on other important French films, is equally good, as the shallow Cedric.

While "Come Undone" will divide opinions, the film deserves a viewing because of the complexity and the care Sebastien Lifshitz gives to the story. "[[Arrive]] Undone" appears to elicit a [[batches]] of [[views]] [[in]] the contributors to this [[fora]]. Granted, it's a [[movie]] that promises a take on gay life, as most [[onlookers]] [[expects]] and [[someplace]], it [[got]] away from that promise into an introspective [[opinion]] at a young man's soul. The [[kino]] has a [[route]] of staying with us even when it has [[finalised]]. It is a [[nature]] study about how a [[youths]] [[dude]] [[got]] [[engaged]] into a love affair with someone so much [[multiple]] than him that, in the end, will leave [[Mads]] confused, [[injure]] and depressed when [[aspects]] don't go [[depending]] to what he [[desired]] the [[nexus]] would be.

If you haven't [[watched]] the [[movie]], [[presumably]] you would like to stop reading.

Sebastien Lifshitz, the [[headmaster]] of the [[movie]], has told his [[saga]] from Mathieu's [[perspective]]. Most [[audiences]] [[arise]] to be disoriented by the [[several]] times [[inside]] the [[movie]], but there are [[suggestions]] that are not [[conspicuous]], as one can [[behold]], in retrospect. The [[saga]] is told in flashbacks that might add to the [[route]] some people will [[vista]] the [[cinematography]]. This is a story about the doomed the love Mathieu [[deemed]] for [[Jerome]] and the [[final]] [[breakup]] of their [[living]] [[jointly]].

[[Firstly]] of all, Cedric, the [[nice]] young local, pursues Mathieu until he succeeds in convincing him he likes him. Mathieu [[thinks]] the [[attract]] for [[Jerome]] too. We [[attaining]] how [[several]] both young [[males]] are by the [[routes]] [[Jerome]] tells Mathieu's [[families]] how he [[believes]] [[tuition]] is not for him. On the other hand, Mathieu, who wants to be an architect, [[find]] beauty in the [[waived]] place where [[Jerome]] has [[took]] him. We watch as Mathieu, reading from the [[handbook]] [[books]], [[wanted]] Cedric's attention.

When Mathieu comes out to his mother, she [[shrewdly]] tells him about the importance of continuing his [[professions]]. She [[apart]] [[dotted]] out about what future both of them [[should]] have [[jointly]], which proves to be true. [[Matthew]] appears to have [[learnt]] his lesson, the [[dur]] way. He goes on to an [[unsure]] [[iife]] with Cedric and attempts to take his own [[iife]]. We watch him in the hospital speaking to a [[psychologist]] that has [[addressed]] his [[injured]] [[alma]].

The [[terminated]] might be [[bewildering]] for most [[onlookers]], but there is a [[time]] in the film when Mathieu goes to [[collaborate]] in a bar where we see him washing glasses and looking intently to Pierre, the young man who frequents the bar. That is why when Mathieu goes looking for Pierre at his house, appears to be hard to imagine. [[Even]], we have seen the [[camino]] Mathieu is obviously interested in Pierre. The last scene at the beach, when Pierre and Mathieu are seen strolling in the sand, has a hopeful sign that things will be better between them as they watch a young boy, apparently lost, but then realizing the father is nearby.

Jeremie Elkaim makes Mathieu one of the most complex characters in recent films. This is a young man who is hard to understand on a simple level. Mathieu has suffered a lot, first with the separation of his parents, then with his depressed mother and with losing Cedric. Stephan Rideau, who has been seen on other important French films, is equally good, as the shallow Cedric.

While "Come Undone" will divide opinions, the film deserves a viewing because of the complexity and the care Sebastien Lifshitz gives to the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 1440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[ROLL]] is a [[wonderful]] little [[film]]. Toby Malone plays an 18 year [[old]] [[kid]] (very well [[acted]], by the way) who is into soccer. Malone's cousin takes him out the night before his [[big]] game on an [[adventure]] with [[many]] [[twists]] and turns involving two gym bags, a drug [[lord]], some [[tough]] [[bikers]], some [[cops]], and some prostitutes ... and the movie [[keeps]] us guessing as to which characters are on which side of the law, what the contents of either gym bag is, and even what gender a key biker is. Parts of it reminded me of [[LOCK]] STOCK AND TWO SMOKING Barrels.

For me, [[ROLL]] [[reinforced]] three opinions that I already [[held]] before seeing [[ROLL]]. Those opinions are: 1. I [[really]] [[want]] to [[visit]] Australia one day. The [[country]] and cities are [[beautiful]] and it [[looks]] like such a cool [[place]] for a [[vacation]].

2. Some of the [[best]] filmmakers in the are Australian. The cinematography in ROLL was [[especially]] [[impressive]]. I loved the [[stylized]] [[colors]] and lighting in [[many]] of the scenes.

3. Australian [[women]] are [[HOT]]! [[ROLLING]] is a [[wondrous]] little [[movie]]. Toby Malone plays an 18 year [[longtime]] [[children]] (very well [[served]], by the way) who is into soccer. Malone's cousin takes him out the night before his [[large]] game on an [[adventurer]] with [[several]] [[spins]] and turns involving two gym bags, a drug [[gods]], some [[difficult]] [[cyclists]], some [[police]], and some prostitutes ... and the movie [[retains]] us guessing as to which characters are on which side of the law, what the contents of either gym bag is, and even what gender a key biker is. Parts of it reminded me of [[BLOCKADE]] STOCK AND TWO SMOKING Barrels.

For me, [[ROLLING]] [[reinforcement]] three opinions that I already [[hold]] before seeing [[ROLLING]]. Those opinions are: 1. I [[genuinely]] [[wanna]] to [[visited]] Australia one day. The [[countries]] and cities are [[awesome]] and it [[seem]] like such a cool [[placing]] for a [[holiday]].

2. Some of the [[better]] filmmakers in the are Australian. The cinematography in ROLL was [[predominantly]] [[dramatic]]. I loved the [[stylish]] [[dye]] and lighting in [[several]] of the scenes.

3. Australian [[wife]] are [[SEXIER]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Return To The 3th Chamber is the comedic sequel to the epic 36th Chamber Of Shaolin, in which Gordon Liu played Shan Te, a young man who became a monk and awesome fighter. In this sequel Liu plays a hapless loser who has to learn kung fu after causing his friends to be beaten. He imitates the original Shan Te, tries all manner of tricks to get into Shaolin Temple to learn and eventually gets some unique skills to fight some bullying bosses. Its a classic light hearted martial arts tale, with the ace production values of the Shaw Brothers and the sure footed direction of Lui Chia Liang. The choreography is fantastic throughout, whether for fighting or slapstick comedy and Gordon Liu's performance, as are the others, particularly the sympathetic monk work perfectly for the material. The film is less epic or profound than some of the stars other work and there are certainly grander, more violent and sweeping Shaw Brothers films. But few have such a magical blend of slapstick, unique training and fighting, with a subtle yet warming tale of a useless guy making good. Full of light hearted joy, its impossible not to give this the highest score. --------------------------------------------- Result 1442 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I'm not to [[keen]] on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very [[slow]] at the times. As the [[movie]] goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but [[nothing]] [[brilliant]]. I really like [[David]] Schwimmer and I [[think]] he's good here. I'm not a [[massive]] Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but I don't mind her sometimes and she's [[okay]] here. The Pallbearer is not a highly [[recommended]] [[movie]], but if you [[like]] the [[leads]] then you [[might]] enjoy it. I'm not to [[fervent]] on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very [[sluggish]] at the times. As the [[filmmaking]] goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but [[none]] [[sublime]]. I really like [[Davids]] Schwimmer and I [[thought]] he's good here. I'm not a [[tremendous]] Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but I don't mind her sometimes and she's [[aight]] here. The Pallbearer is not a highly [[suggested]] [[filmmaking]], but if you [[iike]] the [[leeds]] then you [[apt]] enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Neil Simon has quite a body of work, but it is the Odd Couple that carried him to fame. This film really works. Jack Lemmon & Walter Matthaw have a great chemistry. The supporting cast for this film is stellar as well.

It is about 2 men living together who are from opposite planets. The script bristles with humor from this situation. This had been done in some forms previously. This is the one that brings it all together in a very good package.

Simon has done some other decent work, but this one is really his best work which made the rest of his work possible. It is hard to imagine Simon ever topping this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] How is it [[possible]] that no [[journalist]] or [[critic]] [[reminded]] us of the [[resemblance]] with that other [[better]] Flemish [[movie]] "[[Congo]] [[Express]] (1986)"? There are [[also]] some [[characters]] in [[congo]] Express put [[together]] without having [[really]] a [[relation]] to each other: Jean, ([[de]] Congolees), the [[workman]], the two taxi-drivers, the street-singer, [[Roger]], [[Guy]], Lucienne and Gilbert. Of [[course]], Tom Barman is a [[star]] and Luc Gubbels wasn't. That should not be a [[reason]] to [[pardon]] the [[flaws]] in the [[script]] (if there is a [[script]]) of Anyway the wind blows. The [[joke]] (the only one!) at the party about the ice in the refrigerator is taken from that great Flemish movie "De Witte (1934)" where De Witte is putting too much salt on the potatoes. Some accidents happen in the movie but there comes no explanation after. Tom Barman delivers us here a [[movie]] that is more like an experiment to watch at the television than a movie for the theatres. Another missed [[chance]] for Flemish Cinema. How is it [[conceivable]] that no [[reporters]] or [[critiques]] [[remembered]] us of the [[likeness]] with that other [[improved]] Flemish [[filmmaking]] "[[Democratic]] [[Expressing]] (1986)"? There are [[similarly]] some [[traits]] in [[democracy]] Express put [[jointly]] without having [[truthfully]] a [[relationship]] to each other: Jean, ([[of]] Congolees), the [[carver]], the two taxi-drivers, the street-singer, [[Roget]], [[Fella]], Lucienne and Gilbert. Of [[cours]], Tom Barman is a [[superstar]] and Luc Gubbels wasn't. That should not be a [[cause]] to [[amnesty]] the [[gaps]] in the [[screenplay]] (if there is a [[hyphen]]) of Anyway the wind blows. The [[travesty]] (the only one!) at the party about the ice in the refrigerator is taken from that great Flemish movie "De Witte (1934)" where De Witte is putting too much salt on the potatoes. Some accidents happen in the movie but there comes no explanation after. Tom Barman delivers us here a [[filmmaking]] that is more like an experiment to watch at the television than a movie for the theatres. Another missed [[possibility]] for Flemish Cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Excellent movie, a realistic picture of contemporary Finland, touching and profound. One of the best Finnish films ever made. Captures marvelously the everyday life in a Central Finland small town, people's desires and weaknesses, joys and sorrows. The bright early fall sunshine creates a cool atmosphere to this lucid examination of people in a welfare society. Lampela is indeed one of the most promising Finnish filmmakers. He shows that it is possible to make gripping movies without machine guns and bloodshed. His next film Eila is also worth seeing although the story of cleaning women fighting for their jobs is not quite as universally appealing as the destinies in Joki. --------------------------------------------- Result 1446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Lets]] put it this [[way]]. I actually [[get]] this [[movie]]. I get what the [[writer]]/directer was [[trying]] to do. I [[understand]] that the [[dialog]] was meant to be dry and emotionless. I [[understand]] that the plot was supposed to be non-climactic and [[stale]]. That was what the [[writer]]/director was [[going]] for. A very very very [[dry]] [[humor]]/[[comedy]]. With all that understanding, I still think the [[movie]] sucked. It seemed like the writer/director was trying to recreate Napolean Dynamite with this movie. It had all of the same [[features]]. Even the main character behaved similar to Napolean. But Napolean Dynamite was actually funny. Its script worked. This movie is not. It has no purpose. Well, [[let]] me rephrase that. Its only [[purpose]] is to rip off Napolean Dynamite and try to capture that look and feel. Too bad it didn't [[work]]. [[Allows]] put it this [[ways]]. I actually [[obtain]] this [[film]]. I get what the [[screenwriter]]/directer was [[seeking]] to do. I [[realise]] that the [[dialogue]] was meant to be dry and emotionless. I [[realise]] that the plot was supposed to be non-climactic and [[obsolete]]. That was what the [[scriptwriter]]/director was [[go]] for. A very very very [[driest]] [[humour]]/[[humour]]. With all that understanding, I still think the [[filmmaking]] sucked. It seemed like the writer/director was trying to recreate Napolean Dynamite with this movie. It had all of the same [[trait]]. Even the main character behaved similar to Napolean. But Napolean Dynamite was actually funny. Its script worked. This movie is not. It has no purpose. Well, [[leaving]] me rephrase that. Its only [[targets]] is to rip off Napolean Dynamite and try to capture that look and feel. Too bad it didn't [[collaborate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1447 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Picture]] the scene: a [[mountainous]] [[alien]] [[landscape]]. [[Twin]] moons illuminate the blood red [[sky]]. The Tardis [[lands]], and out steps the [[Doctor]], a middle-aged [[man]] in a Victorian frock coat, and [[Rose]], his [[companion]] from [[Earth]]. A flicker of [[recognition]] crosses his [[face]]. "Well, I never! Its the [[planet]] Saurious-7. [[Where]] I [[fought]] the [[warlike]] Kraggartians. They [[tried]] to [[use]] [[giant]] Skinkons to take over the [[planet]].". The girl sniffs the [[air]]. "Can't we go, Doctor. I don't like the look of this [[place]]. I [[keep]] thinking we're being [[watched]].". The [[Doctor]] wags a disapproving finger. "Don't be silly, [[girl]]. I wonder if the King and [[Queen]] of Cordaraby [[City]] remember me from my last visit. Come along, Rose, come along!". He [[strides]] off, the girl struggles to keep up. High on a hill, sinister red eyes regard them with hatred...

That was not how 'Rose' began back in 2005, and thank heavens for that say I. [[Unfairly]] derided at the [[time]] of its original U.K. [[broadcast]], 'Rose' can now safely be [[regarded]] as a landmark episode, putting 'Dr.Who' back where it [[belonged]], as one of the B.B.C.'s [[flagship]] [[programmes]]. The [[mistakes]] [[made]] by the McGann [[T]].V. [[movie]] were well [[learnt]]. [[Instead]] of [[trying]] to shoehorn the [[new]] 'Who' into existing chronology, it represented a fresh [[start]] for the series, [[beginning]] with [[shop]] [[girl]] Rose Tyler ( [[Billie]] Piper ) going about her daily [[routine]]. One day she goes to the basement to [[find]] a [[man]] named Wilson, and then the [[trouble]] begins. [[Mannequins]] [[come]] to life and [[attack]] her. It is only through the intervention of a [[mysterious]] [[stranger]] ( Christopher Eccleston ) that she is saved.

The [[story]], slight [[though]] it may be, is more than [[adequate]] as a starting-point for the series. The Autons are, of course, an old villain ( this was their first appearance since 1971 ), but no references are made to their past appearances - another wise move. The finale effectively recreated the [[famous]] scene in 'Spearhead From Space' when [[shop]] [[window]] dummies sprang to [[life]]. As the Doctor, Christopher Eccleston lacked the eccentricity of his predecessors, preferring a modern leather jacket to the Doctor's traditional period clothes, but this made him more accessible to the show's hoped-for new audience. Billie Piper confounded her critics by making a big impression as 'Rose'. Also good was Noel Clarke as her boyfriend 'Mickey'.

Yes, there was an [[added]] emphasis on special effects, but then there needed to be - the wobbly sets and unconvincing monsters of the past have no place on 21st century television. What is more important is how good a script this is. Ten million people tuned in to see the new Doctor.

'Dr.Who' was back - and back with a bang! [[Photography]] the scene: a [[undulating]] [[aliens]] [[scenery]]. [[Double]] moons illuminate the blood red [[skye]]. The Tardis [[tierra]], and out steps the [[Medical]], a middle-aged [[dude]] in a Victorian frock coat, and [[Soared]], his [[comrade]] from [[Land]]. A flicker of [[recognise]] crosses his [[confront]]. "Well, I never! Its the [[globe]] Saurious-7. [[Wherein]] I [[fight]] the [[belligerent]] Kraggartians. They [[attempts]] to [[utilise]] [[colossal]] Skinkons to take over the [[globe]].". The girl sniffs the [[airplane]]. "Can't we go, Doctor. I don't like the look of this [[placing]]. I [[sustain]] thinking we're being [[seen]].". The [[Medical]] wags a disapproving finger. "Don't be silly, [[chick]]. I wonder if the King and [[Reine]] of Cordaraby [[Town]] remember me from my last visit. Come along, Rose, come along!". He [[advances]] off, the girl struggles to keep up. High on a hill, sinister red eyes regard them with hatred...

That was not how 'Rose' began back in 2005, and thank heavens for that say I. [[Improperly]] derided at the [[moment]] of its original U.K. [[telecast]], 'Rose' can now safely be [[considered]] as a landmark episode, putting 'Dr.Who' back where it [[owned]], as one of the B.B.C.'s [[lighthouse]] [[programmed]]. The [[error]] [[accomplished]] by the McGann [[ton]].V. [[movies]] were well [[learn]]. [[However]] of [[tempting]] to shoehorn the [[novel]] 'Who' into existing chronology, it represented a fresh [[lancer]] for the series, [[begins]] with [[storage]] [[daughter]] Rose Tyler ( [[Billy]] Piper ) going about her daily [[regular]]. One day she goes to the basement to [[unearth]] a [[dude]] named Wilson, and then the [[problem]] begins. [[Dummies]] [[arriving]] to life and [[assault]] her. It is only through the intervention of a [[cryptic]] [[alien]] ( Christopher Eccleston ) that she is saved.

The [[saga]], slight [[if]] it may be, is more than [[proper]] as a starting-point for the series. The Autons are, of course, an old villain ( this was their first appearance since 1971 ), but no references are made to their past appearances - another wise move. The finale effectively recreated the [[notorious]] scene in 'Spearhead From Space' when [[boutique]] [[luna]] dummies sprang to [[living]]. As the Doctor, Christopher Eccleston lacked the eccentricity of his predecessors, preferring a modern leather jacket to the Doctor's traditional period clothes, but this made him more accessible to the show's hoped-for new audience. Billie Piper confounded her critics by making a big impression as 'Rose'. Also good was Noel Clarke as her boyfriend 'Mickey'.

Yes, there was an [[add]] emphasis on special effects, but then there needed to be - the wobbly sets and unconvincing monsters of the past have no place on 21st century television. What is more important is how good a script this is. Ten million people tuned in to see the new Doctor.

'Dr.Who' was back - and back with a bang! --------------------------------------------- Result 1448 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I loved this [[movie]], I'll [[admit]] it. This has to be the best (straight to?) [[video]] [[movie]] I've seen. Well... me and my friend decided just for shits n' giggles that we'd rent this movie. We knew what to expect and we got exactly what we expected, plus more. [[When]] that [[red]] neck gets [[slammed]] up against the tree by the Sasquatch, we literally watched that part about three to four times, it was that amazing (hysterically, of course). And why? Oh why does the main character have to roll that much? Like honestly, we know that you're in danger, rolling that much isn't gonna help all that much. But really, if this movie is in you're local video store RENT IT. It is worth the money and it's not even that bad, like it's bad, but not incredibly bad. Overall, complete amazing will be in store for you if you rent this movie. I loved this [[filmmaking]], I'll [[recognise]] it. This has to be the best (straight to?) [[videos]] [[kino]] I've seen. Well... me and my friend decided just for shits n' giggles that we'd rent this movie. We knew what to expect and we got exactly what we expected, plus more. [[Whenever]] that [[rojas]] neck gets [[criticized]] up against the tree by the Sasquatch, we literally watched that part about three to four times, it was that amazing (hysterically, of course). And why? Oh why does the main character have to roll that much? Like honestly, we know that you're in danger, rolling that much isn't gonna help all that much. But really, if this movie is in you're local video store RENT IT. It is worth the money and it's not even that bad, like it's bad, but not incredibly bad. Overall, complete amazing will be in store for you if you rent this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1449 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is the [[best]] movie I`ve ever [[seen]] !!! [[Thomas]] [[Beckett]] & Richard Miller -two mankinds who [[want]] to [[survive]] in the "jungle" of violence and madnes, one shot - one [[killed]] !!? You must [[kill]], if you [[getting]] doubt about [[something]], YOU MUST [[SURVIVE]] !!

P.P.- I appologise of my [[bad]] / worst/ English !!! This is the [[nicest]] movie I`ve ever [[noticed]] !!! [[Passaic]] [[Becket]] & Richard Miller -two mankinds who [[wants]] to [[outlive]] in the "jungle" of violence and madnes, one shot - one [[kills]] !!? You must [[assassinated]], if you [[obtain]] doubt about [[anything]], YOU MUST [[OUTLIVE]] !!

P.P.- I appologise of my [[amiss]] / worst/ English !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] At the end of this episode Holmes asks Watson not to record the case for posterity.For a good reason! The super sleuth left his little grey cells(sorry Agatha)at home for this tale. There is no deductive reasoning,no acute analysis of signs at crime scenes. Holmes bumbles along fifty yards behind the plot. The dastardly CAM is finally dealt to by an old frail-in a manner that would have made Charles Bronson's heart swell with pride-six bullets in the breadbasket.In an ensuing chase a pursuer gets hold of one of Watson's shoes.Mercifully the writer didn't decide to tack on the story of Cinderella to lengthen the film.The murderess,Holmes and Watson,escape scot free. Oh well,it is a bit of a change of pace in late Victorian London.A bit of sixgun law:-) --------------------------------------------- Result 1451 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[In]] 1914, [[Charlie]] [[Chaplin]] began making pictures. These were made for Mack Sennett (also known as "[[Keystone]] Studios") and were literally churned out in very rapid succession. The short comedies had very [[little]] structure and were [[completely]] ad libbed. As a result, the [[films]], [[though]] popular in their day, were just [[awful]] by today's [[standards]]. [[Many]] of them [[bear]] a strong [[similarity]] to home movies [[featuring]] [[obnoxious]] relatives [[mugging]] for the camera. Many others show the characters wander in front of the camera and do pretty much nothing. And, regardless of the outcome, Keystone sent them straight to theaters. My assumption is that all movies at this time must have been pretty bad, as the Keystone films with Chaplin were very successful.

The Charlie Chaplin we know and love today only began to evolve later in Chaplin's career with Keystone. By 1915, he signed a new lucrative contract with Essenay Studios and the films improved dramatically with Chaplin as director. However, at times these films were still very rough and not especially memorable. No, Chaplin as the cute Little Tramp was still evolving. In 1916, when he switched to Mutual Studios, his films once again improved and he became the more recognizable nice guy--in many of the previous films he was just a jerk (either getting drunk a lot, beating up women, provoking fights with innocent people, etc.). The final evolution of his Little Tramp to classic status occurred in the 1920s as a result of his full-length films.

It's interesting that this film is called TWENTY MINUTES OF LOVE since the film only lasts about 10 minutes! Oh well. The plot, what little there is, involves the Little Tramp in the park. A couple wants to neck but [[inexplicably]], Charlie insists on practically sitting on the couple's lap and really annoying them. I can't understand why and the short consists of Charlie wandering about the park annoying these people and some others later in the film. Perhaps he was looking for a threesome, I don't know. But the [[film]] [[lacks]] coherence and just isn't [[particularly]] funny--even when people start slapping each other and pushing each other in the lake. A typical poor effort before Chaplin began to give his character a plot and personality. [[Into]] 1914, [[Vietcong]] [[Chapin]] began making pictures. These were made for Mack Sennett (also known as "[[Geometry]] Studios") and were literally churned out in very rapid succession. The short comedies had very [[scant]] structure and were [[totally]] ad libbed. As a result, the [[filmmaking]], [[if]] popular in their day, were just [[scary]] by today's [[norms]]. [[Innumerable]] of them [[bears]] a strong [[resemblance]] to home movies [[feature]] [[despicable]] relatives [[storming]] for the camera. Many others show the characters wander in front of the camera and do pretty much nothing. And, regardless of the outcome, Keystone sent them straight to theaters. My assumption is that all movies at this time must have been pretty bad, as the Keystone films with Chaplin were very successful.

The Charlie Chaplin we know and love today only began to evolve later in Chaplin's career with Keystone. By 1915, he signed a new lucrative contract with Essenay Studios and the films improved dramatically with Chaplin as director. However, at times these films were still very rough and not especially memorable. No, Chaplin as the cute Little Tramp was still evolving. In 1916, when he switched to Mutual Studios, his films once again improved and he became the more recognizable nice guy--in many of the previous films he was just a jerk (either getting drunk a lot, beating up women, provoking fights with innocent people, etc.). The final evolution of his Little Tramp to classic status occurred in the 1920s as a result of his full-length films.

It's interesting that this film is called TWENTY MINUTES OF LOVE since the film only lasts about 10 minutes! Oh well. The plot, what little there is, involves the Little Tramp in the park. A couple wants to neck but [[inextricably]], Charlie insists on practically sitting on the couple's lap and really annoying them. I can't understand why and the short consists of Charlie wandering about the park annoying these people and some others later in the film. Perhaps he was looking for a threesome, I don't know. But the [[filmmaking]] [[missing]] coherence and just isn't [[principally]] funny--even when people start slapping each other and pushing each other in the lake. A typical poor effort before Chaplin began to give his character a plot and personality. --------------------------------------------- Result 1452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This should be required viewing for all young people. This is documentary at its best, from the haunting music and terrific narration by Olivier to its unflinching and penetrating analyses, The World at War is unforgettable and irreplaceable for anyone who wants to know about humanity's sorry experience at the nadir of the 20th century. --------------------------------------------- Result 1453 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This Academy Award [[winning]] short film can [[rank]] among the [[greatest]] of the [[genre]]. Told [[completely]] without dialogue, it is a visual [[treat]] about a [[young]] boy who [[buys]] a gold fish, lovingly [[places]] him in a bowl then goes off to school, [[leaving]] the gold fish unprotected and a [[window]] carelessly open. After a while, a [[neighboring]] orange tabby [[comes]] poking around, comes in through the [[window]] and [[heads]] slowly for the bowl. The fish [[apparently]] knows something is [[going]] on and becomes very [[excited]]. As the cat comes very near to the bowl, the [[fish]] [[jumps]] out. The cat catches the fish, drops him back in the bowl and exits through the [[window]] he [[came]] in just as the [[boy]], not knowing what has [[happened]], [[gets]] back. This was [[amazingly]] filmed with [[real]] [[animals]]; how [[Cousteau]] [[got]] these [[animals]] to behave in this manner is [[remarkable]]. I only [[wish]] this [[film]] were [[available]] now for people to [[see]]; I only [[saw]] it once, in 1959 when it was [[originally]] [[released]], but it has [[remained]] [[unforgettable]]. This Academy Award [[wins]] short film can [[grades]] among the [[most]] of the [[genus]]. Told [[entirely]] without dialogue, it is a visual [[dealing]] about a [[youths]] boy who [[purchased]] a gold fish, lovingly [[locations]] him in a bowl then goes off to school, [[departing]] the gold fish unprotected and a [[luna]] carelessly open. After a while, a [[contiguous]] orange tabby [[occurs]] poking around, comes in through the [[luna]] and [[leiter]] slowly for the bowl. The fish [[allegedly]] knows something is [[go]] on and becomes very [[agitated]]. As the cat comes very near to the bowl, the [[fishes]] [[rises]] out. The cat catches the fish, drops him back in the bowl and exits through the [[luna]] he [[arrived]] in just as the [[guys]], not knowing what has [[arrived]], [[got]] back. This was [[terribly]] filmed with [[actual]] [[beasts]]; how [[Smith]] [[did]] these [[animal]] to behave in this manner is [[wondrous]]. I only [[wants]] this [[cinematography]] were [[approachable]] now for people to [[behold]]; I only [[watched]] it once, in 1959 when it was [[initially]] [[release]], but it has [[persisted]] [[memorable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1454 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] David Mamet wrote the screenplay and made his directorial debut with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a [[psychiatrist]] is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is [[somewhat]] [[discontented]] with her own personal [[life]]; there's an emptiness she can neither define nor resolve, and it [[primes]] her [[vulnerability]]. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before [[enticing]] her into his [[world]]. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy [[claimed]] he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred [[dollars]]. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card [[game]] he has going on in the back [[room]]. In the middle of a [[big]] hand, Mike is going to [[leave]] the room for a few minutes; while he is [[gone]], her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the [[audience]], as well, is hooked. The [[dialogue]], and Mamet's [[unique]] style and the precise cadence with which his [[actors]] [[deliver]] their lines, is [[mesmerizing]]. As Mike leads Margaret through his [[compelling]], surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the [[intricacies]] of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the [[stunning]] climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10. David Mamet wrote the screenplay and made his directorial debut with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a [[psychoanalyst]] is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is [[rather]] [[disgruntled]] with her own personal [[iife]]; there's an emptiness she can neither define nor resolve, and it [[premiums]] her [[frailty]]. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before [[alluring]] her into his [[monde]]. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy [[asserted]] he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred [[bucks]]. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card [[gaming]] he has going on in the back [[chamber]]. In the middle of a [[enormous]] hand, Mike is going to [[letting]] the room for a few minutes; while he is [[vanished]], her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the [[spectators]], as well, is hooked. The [[conversations]], and Mamet's [[sole]] style and the precise cadence with which his [[protagonists]] [[delivering]] their lines, is [[intriguing]]. As Mike leads Margaret through his [[conclusive]], surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the [[niceties]] of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the [[spectacular]] climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] American movies about war and Nazis simply cannot be good. They can not refrain from becoming idiot and following an agenda. All Nazis are bad, crazy, too proud, and Americans are so modest yet so capable and sensible and human. Come on, stop this bullshit. The main character says something like "by this trial, we have to make aggressive war a crime". Is America a peaceful nation with its world #1 $420 billion "defense" budget (#2 China with just $51b)? Is it simply spent in this without any... ROI? Why portray America as a peaceful nation when it isn't? I deeply dislike movies with an agenda - they throw art to hell and try to persuade us into believing something. Hollywood should put a label on movies, just as record companies have that "parental advisory" label. We should have a "bullshit advisory", "propaganda advisory" or a "politically correct advisory" label on some movies. This is one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1456 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This [[movie]] for what it is, may be one of the most [[amazing]] indie films of recent day. [[Made]] on a super small budget, the film has special effects that blow away alot of the [[current]] films! IF you have a [[chance]] watch it! This [[cinematography]] for what it is, may be one of the most [[wondrous]] indie films of recent day. [[Effected]] on a super small budget, the film has special effects that blow away alot of the [[ongoing]] films! IF you have a [[chances]] watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Considering 'A Star is Born' had been made twice already by the time the 1976 film came into production, the latest remake has a freshness about it that can be attributed to the fantastic chemistry between the entire acting ensemble. A viewer could be forgiven for believing that Kris Kristofferson & Barbara Streisand were a couple off screen as well as on, with their incredible displays of pure affection towards one another.

The film has been described in the past as a 'Barbara Streisand concert on film, set to a soap opera storyline' however for anyone that enjoys watching a film that takes you beyond the living room into a world where the characters seem truly alive - A Star is Born is well worth the hiring price.

With its incredible soundtrack, flawless acting and touching reality in regards to human emotions and the true frailty of life; A Star is Born is a film that draws you into the world of Esther Hoffman & the love of her life John Norman Howard.

A film for anyone that sees the beauty in real love - the kind that keeps you devoted to a person even as they break your heart... --------------------------------------------- Result 1458 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Follows the [[usual]] [[formula]] in putting a [[new]] [[recruit]] -- this [[time]] the first African-American ([[Cuba]] Gooding) after [[President]] Truman desegregates the Armed Forces -- through the U. S. Navy's deep-sea diver training [[program]] that is [[run]] by a [[racist]] [[zealot]] ([[Robert]] [[DeNiro]]). [[If]] the program weren't [[bad]] enough, it's got to be located in Bayonne, [[New]] Jersey.

There's nothing wrong with the performances. [[Robert]] De Niro [[activates]] his Southern accent and shouts gibberish [[effectively]]. Cuba Gooding, [[raised]] by a stern [[father]] as a poor [[black]] [[farm]] [[boy]] in the [[South]], is the expectable [[paragon]] of rectitude. The [[girls]] -- one [[could]] [[hardly]] [[call]] them [[women]] -- are Charleze Theron and Lonette McKee. They have [[minor]] [[roles]] and are [[mostly]] there to [[argue]] that their [[men]] should [[exercise]] common sense. Other decent [[performers]] -- Powers Boothe and Hal Holbrook -- have [[even]] more perfunctory [[roles]].

That's about it. [[Almost]] everything [[else]] [[could]] have been assembled by a [[computer]]. A [[ship]] is [[called]] a [[boat]]. [[Robert]] De Niro [[salutes]] [[indoors]], [[uncovered]]. [[After]] a [[brutal]] [[assault]] on [[hospital]] [[personnel]], he's transferred out of his outfit [[instead]] of being busted. [[Somebody]] [[shouts]] "I'm outta here" in the early 1950s. (Maybe it was a common [[expression]] at the [[time]]. If so, "my [[bad]].") People [[address]] each other by [[rank]] -- "Lieutenant", "Boatswain's [[Mate]]," "[[Commander]]," as they do in the Army, [[whereas]] in the [[Navy]] they are [[simple]] "[[Mister]]" (if an [[officer]]) or [[addressed]] by their [[last]] [[name]] (if enlisted). I didn't bother to [[check]] if there was a [[rank]] [[called]] "Senior [[Master]] Chief" in 1950.

[[Cuba]] Gooding has a [[tough]] row to hoe. [[Everyone]] in the Navy, it seems, [[hates]] [[Negroes]] except for one [[guy]] from Wisconsin. He stutters and is [[held]] in [[contempt]] by the others in his [[class]]. It's [[like]] the scene in "[[Animal]] [[House]]", in which the applicant to a [[tony]] [[fraternity]] is asked to [[wait]] in a [[room]] with a Sikh, a [[black]] [[man]], and a [[blind]] [[kid]].

Gooding is an enlisted [[man]], a [[second]] [[class]] [[petty]] [[officer]]. He manages to marry a beautiful woman who has just graduated from medical school. In one of their arguments she pleads with him. She just wants to be a doctor and he should join her, quit the Navy, and lead a quiet life. "And just let life pass you by?", he retorts. Yes. Yes, just be a doctor's spouse and let life pass you by. You can wave to it from the golf course in Boca Raton.

These kinds of flicks were common enough in World War II. "Bombardier," "Airial Gunner," that sort of thing. Cheap as they often were, they had some educational features. You learned something about becoming a bombardier or a gunner. Here, the technical [[details]] are skipped over, perhaps because the writer knew nothing about them (except Boyle's law, which we learned in high-school chemistry).

I couldn't follow what was happening during some of the emergencies without which a movie like this wouldn't exist. If I got the mechanical problems right, it was because I guessed correctly. The direction is no help either. The movie abounds in close ups, so many that they lose any dramatic impact they might have had. And the emergencies are confusing because they're ill focused.

Why go on? Want to see a better example of this kind of movie? Almost any will do -- except maybe "G. I. Jane", in which the abused hero is a heroin. Try the training camp scenes in "The Young Lions." There the victim is a Jew. Or try "From Here to Eternity," in which no easy sympathy buttons are pushed and the victim is a grown man who refuses to bend and who is active in bringing the conflict on, just like "Cool Hand Luke." No easy excuses are offered, because easy excuses are too easy.

Thoroughly formulaic, and not well done. Follows the [[normal]] [[formulas]] in putting a [[nouveau]] [[conscription]] -- this [[moment]] the first African-American ([[Cuban]] Gooding) after [[Chairs]] Truman desegregates the Armed Forces -- through the U. S. Navy's deep-sea diver training [[agenda]] that is [[execute]] by a [[racism]] [[fanaticism]] ([[Roberto]] [[pacino]]). [[Unless]] the program weren't [[negative]] enough, it's got to be located in Bayonne, [[Novo]] Jersey.

There's nothing wrong with the performances. [[Roberta]] De Niro [[activist]] his Southern accent and shouts gibberish [[efficiently]]. Cuba Gooding, [[risen]] by a stern [[fathers]] as a poor [[negro]] [[farmhouse]] [[dude]] in the [[Southern]], is the expectable [[model]] of rectitude. The [[females]] -- one [[did]] [[almost]] [[calling]] them [[females]] -- are Charleze Theron and Lonette McKee. They have [[marginal]] [[duties]] and are [[especially]] there to [[plead]] that their [[males]] should [[practicing]] common sense. Other decent [[artists]] -- Powers Boothe and Hal Holbrook -- have [[yet]] more perfunctory [[duties]].

That's about it. [[Virtually]] everything [[otherwise]] [[would]] have been assembled by a [[computers]]. A [[battleship]] is [[termed]] a [[freighter]]. [[Roberto]] De Niro [[applauds]] [[interiors]], [[revealed]]. [[Upon]] a [[ferocious]] [[onslaught]] on [[hospitals]] [[employee]], he's transferred out of his outfit [[conversely]] of being busted. [[Everyone]] [[screaming]] "I'm outta here" in the early 1950s. (Maybe it was a common [[phrases]] at the [[times]]. If so, "my [[negative]].") People [[treat]] each other by [[classifications]] -- "Lieutenant", "Boatswain's [[Mating]]," "[[Commandant]]," as they do in the Army, [[albeit]] in the [[Armada]] they are [[mere]] "[[Gentleman]]" (if an [[agents]]) or [[treated]] by their [[final]] [[behalf]] (if enlisted). I didn't bother to [[checking]] if there was a [[categorized]] [[drew]] "Senior [[Masters]] Chief" in 1950.

[[Cuban]] Gooding has a [[challenging]] row to hoe. [[Everybody]] in the Navy, it seems, [[hated]] [[Blacks]] except for one [[pal]] from Wisconsin. He stutters and is [[holds]] in [[defiance]] by the others in his [[kinds]]. It's [[iike]] the scene in "[[Beasts]] [[Maison]]", in which the applicant to a [[toni]] [[brotherhood]] is asked to [[suspense]] in a [[bedroom]] with a Sikh, a [[negro]] [[dude]], and a [[blinded]] [[petit]].

Gooding is an enlisted [[dude]], a [[secondly]] [[kinds]] [[trite]] [[agent]]. He manages to marry a beautiful woman who has just graduated from medical school. In one of their arguments she pleads with him. She just wants to be a doctor and he should join her, quit the Navy, and lead a quiet life. "And just let life pass you by?", he retorts. Yes. Yes, just be a doctor's spouse and let life pass you by. You can wave to it from the golf course in Boca Raton.

These kinds of flicks were common enough in World War II. "Bombardier," "Airial Gunner," that sort of thing. Cheap as they often were, they had some educational features. You learned something about becoming a bombardier or a gunner. Here, the technical [[clarification]] are skipped over, perhaps because the writer knew nothing about them (except Boyle's law, which we learned in high-school chemistry).

I couldn't follow what was happening during some of the emergencies without which a movie like this wouldn't exist. If I got the mechanical problems right, it was because I guessed correctly. The direction is no help either. The movie abounds in close ups, so many that they lose any dramatic impact they might have had. And the emergencies are confusing because they're ill focused.

Why go on? Want to see a better example of this kind of movie? Almost any will do -- except maybe "G. I. Jane", in which the abused hero is a heroin. Try the training camp scenes in "The Young Lions." There the victim is a Jew. Or try "From Here to Eternity," in which no easy sympathy buttons are pushed and the victim is a grown man who refuses to bend and who is active in bringing the conflict on, just like "Cool Hand Luke." No easy excuses are offered, because easy excuses are too easy.

Thoroughly formulaic, and not well done. --------------------------------------------- Result 1459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Forbidden Siren is based upon the Siren 2 Playstation 2 (so many 2s) game. Like most video game turned movies, I would say the majority don't translate into a different medium really well. And that goes for this one too, painfully.

There's a pretty long prologue which explains and sets the premise for the story, and the mysterious island on which a writer (Leo Morimoto) and his children, daughter Yuki (Yui Ichikawa) and son Hideo (Jun Nishiyama) come to move into. The villagers don't look all too friendly, and soon enough, sound advice is given about the siren on the island, to stay indoors once the siren starts wailing.

Naturally and slowly, things start to go bump, and our siblings go on a mission beating around the bush to discover exactly what is happening on this unfriendly island with its strange inhabitants. But in truth, you will not bother with what's going on, as folklore and fairy tales get thrown in to convolute the plot even more. What was really pushing it into the realm of bad comedy are its unwittingly ill-placed-out-of-the-norm moments which just drew pitiful giggles at its sheer stupidity, until it's explained much later. It's one thing trying to come up and present something smart, but another thing doing it convincingly and with loopholes covered.

Despite it clocking in under 90 minutes - I think it's a horror movie phenomenon to have that as a runtime benchmark - it gives that almost two hour feel with its slow buildup to tell what it wants to. Things begin to pick up toward the last 20 minutes, but it's a classic case of too little too late.

What saves the movie is how it changes tack and its revelation at the end. Again this is a common device used to try and elevate a seemingly simple horror movie into something a little bit extra in the hope of wowing an audience. It turned out rather satisfactorily, but leaves a bad aftertaste as you'll feel cheated somewhat. There are two ways a twist will make you feel - it either elevates the movie to a memorable level, or provides you with that hokey feeling. Unfortunately Forbidden Siren belonged more to the latter.

The saving grace will be its cinematography with its use of light, shadows and mirrors, but I will be that explicit - it's still not worth the time, so better to avoid this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Scott Henderson, the engineer that employs Carol Richman, as his assistant, makes a point to call her "Kansas", whenever he speaks to her. It shows us that Carol, effectively played by Ella Raines, is supposed to be a babe in the woods, as far as the Manhattan of the 40s was concerned. Only a woman, from out of town, would follow the shady bartender to a solitary elevated subway. Even then, only a naive girl could undertake such an adventure.

Robert Siodmak directed this film noir very well. He shows a flair for infusing the story with a lot of raw sex that was surprising for those days. How else could we justify the way the drummer in the orchestra of the musical, where Scott takes the mysterious woman with an unusual hat, makes such an overt pass at a lady on a date? The drummer played with high voltage by Elisha Cook Jr. doesn't hide his desires for any of the ladies who sat in the front row of the hit musical where he plays. It was a real explicit invitation, first to the "phantom woman" of the story, Fay Helm; afterward, Cliff the drummer, insinuates himself very openly to Ella Raines who goes to the theater disguised as the mystery dame her boss had taken originally.

This is a film that will hook any viewer from the beginning. There are things not explained in it, but it holds the one's interest throughout. The killer is not revealed until the end.

Ella Raines with her expressive eyes was an under estimated actress. She holds her own against much more experienced actors. Franchot Tone, a New York stage actor, working in Hollywood, never found in this medium the fame he deserved. He is effective as the accused man's best friend. On the other hand, Alan Curtis, comes across as a man, who when framed, accepts his fate and is saved only by the tenacity of the woman who secretly loved him. Thomas Gomez, as the inspector Burgess, is an asset to the film as a detective who has his doubts the police had caught the man who committed the crime.

This movie will not disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 1461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] The [[question]] is, can a [[movie]] this entertaining really be [[considered]] a "[[bad]]" [[movie]]? My husband and I [[picked]] this up at a used video store for 99 cents simply because of the title and the fact that the box had the words "Vestron Pictures" on it (Vestron has been highly regarded as a mark of quality ever since I first acquired the legendary films "Suburbia" and "Class of 1984"). We were not expecting a movie as full of win as this one was. Your basic plot as is follows: [[Grange]], this goombaesque thug from planet Earth, robs "the bank of the Moon" and is sentenced to a penal colony on a remote planet (I don't even remember the planet's name) to mine for bauxite and other minerals. The "governor" of said colony and the owner of the mine are exploiting the prisoners for labor. Walker, a bounty hunter (apparently one of only three on the whole planet) reminds the prisoners that there is no escape, because there's only one shuttle out of the whole planet and they'd have him to deal with. Then there's the nameless "Colonel", a retired bounty hunter who suffers from a haunting reoccurring nightmare. Much of the movie centers around "futuristic" car chases (dunebuggies with plywood slapped to the sides) with explosions galore. The planet itself looks suspiciously like Hemet, CA or one of those other dusty Inland Empire outposts. But what makes the movie truly shine is a [[surprisingly]] [[awesome]] soundtrack featuring several LA punk bands of the mid-80s. I seriously doubt that this soundtrack was ever pressed to vinyl, but it's [[definitely]] worth buying the movie just for the soundtrack. I can't even remember the names of the bands (they're listed in the credits) other than Exploding White Mice, because that was the only one I'd heard of before I saw this movie, but I'm definitely looking into them.

Basically, the movie is definitely not a waste of your time and would be best enjoyed with a 12 pack of beer and a few of your closest friends. The [[matter]] is, can a [[kino]] this entertaining really be [[judged]] a "[[inclement]]" [[kino]]? My husband and I [[opted]] this up at a used video store for 99 cents simply because of the title and the fact that the box had the words "Vestron Pictures" on it (Vestron has been highly regarded as a mark of quality ever since I first acquired the legendary films "Suburbia" and "Class of 1984"). We were not expecting a movie as full of win as this one was. Your basic plot as is follows: [[Barn]], this goombaesque thug from planet Earth, robs "the bank of the Moon" and is sentenced to a penal colony on a remote planet (I don't even remember the planet's name) to mine for bauxite and other minerals. The "governor" of said colony and the owner of the mine are exploiting the prisoners for labor. Walker, a bounty hunter (apparently one of only three on the whole planet) reminds the prisoners that there is no escape, because there's only one shuttle out of the whole planet and they'd have him to deal with. Then there's the nameless "Colonel", a retired bounty hunter who suffers from a haunting reoccurring nightmare. Much of the movie centers around "futuristic" car chases (dunebuggies with plywood slapped to the sides) with explosions galore. The planet itself looks suspiciously like Hemet, CA or one of those other dusty Inland Empire outposts. But what makes the movie truly shine is a [[terribly]] [[wondrous]] soundtrack featuring several LA punk bands of the mid-80s. I seriously doubt that this soundtrack was ever pressed to vinyl, but it's [[surely]] worth buying the movie just for the soundtrack. I can't even remember the names of the bands (they're listed in the credits) other than Exploding White Mice, because that was the only one I'd heard of before I saw this movie, but I'm definitely looking into them.

Basically, the movie is definitely not a waste of your time and would be best enjoyed with a 12 pack of beer and a few of your closest friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 1462 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it. That movie succeeded on every level by delivering an intimate, and [[unbiased]] portrait of the horrors of the characters lives and the vices that destroyed them. "Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters [[living]] sad lives, but it [[hardly]] does them the same justice Aronofsky did.

The film seems laughably anti-gay at times. Especially when in the film homosexuality equals death. One gay character gets stoned, is launched skyward by a speeding car, and lands dead on the pavement. Another is crucified and still more are simply beat up. Another exaggerated piece of shock value, that might actually have been compelling if it were done well, are scenes of the union workers literally doing battle with the strike-breakers. Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?

The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies. The film is clunky that can't even seem to settle on a genre. Lake is given a [[useless]] role that any mannequin could have filled and Baldwin only seems to know how to look stupid in his equally meager part. And then comes Jennifer Jason Leigh as our lead, a loathsome hooker named Tralala (believe it or not, I'm not joking). Her performance is nothing great and the fate of her character is dirty to say the least. Poor use of color and composition make it look cheaper than it is, and also takes the "real" edge off the more provocative bits. A [[failure]]. Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it. That movie succeeded on every level by delivering an intimate, and [[dispassionate]] portrait of the horrors of the characters lives and the vices that destroyed them. "Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters [[vida]] sad lives, but it [[nigh]] does them the same justice Aronofsky did.

The film seems laughably anti-gay at times. Especially when in the film homosexuality equals death. One gay character gets stoned, is launched skyward by a speeding car, and lands dead on the pavement. Another is crucified and still more are simply beat up. Another exaggerated piece of shock value, that might actually have been compelling if it were done well, are scenes of the union workers literally doing battle with the strike-breakers. Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?

The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies. The film is clunky that can't even seem to settle on a genre. Lake is given a [[superfluous]] role that any mannequin could have filled and Baldwin only seems to know how to look stupid in his equally meager part. And then comes Jennifer Jason Leigh as our lead, a loathsome hooker named Tralala (believe it or not, I'm not joking). Her performance is nothing great and the fate of her character is dirty to say the least. Poor use of color and composition make it look cheaper than it is, and also takes the "real" edge off the more provocative bits. A [[defect]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1463 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] in this [[movie]], joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...

and being consistent, the [[rest]] of the [[script]] is [[equally]] not believable.

pesci is a [[funny]] guy, which [[saves]] this film from [[sinking]] int the absolute back of the cellar, but the other roles were pretty [[bad]]. the father was a greedy [[businessman]] who [[valued]] money more than people, which wasn't even well-played. instead of the man being an archetypal villain, he [[seemed]] more like an amoral [[android]] programmed to make money at all [[costs]]. then there's the token piece that is [[assigned]] to pesci as a girlfriend or something...i don't even [[remember]]...she was that forgettable.

[[anyone]] who rates this [[movie]] above a 5 or 6 is a [[paid]] [[member]] of some [[sort]] of film studio trying to up the [[reputation]] of this sunken [[film]], or at [[least]] one of those millions of media [[minions]] who can't [[critique]] [[efficiently]] (you know, the people who feel [[bad]] if they [[give]] [[anything]] a [[mark]] below 6).

stay away...far away. and [[shame]] on [[comedy]] central, where i [[saw]] this [[film]]. they [[usually]] [[pick]] [[better]]. in this [[filmmaking]], joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...

and being consistent, the [[stays]] of the [[screenplay]] is [[similarly]] not believable.

pesci is a [[comical]] guy, which [[rescue]] this film from [[drowning]] int the absolute back of the cellar, but the other roles were pretty [[negative]]. the father was a greedy [[trader]] who [[valuing]] money more than people, which wasn't even well-played. instead of the man being an archetypal villain, he [[looked]] more like an amoral [[droid]] programmed to make money at all [[prices]]. then there's the token piece that is [[attributed]] to pesci as a girlfriend or something...i don't even [[recalling]]...she was that forgettable.

[[everybody]] who rates this [[filmmaking]] above a 5 or 6 is a [[salary]] [[lawmakers]] of some [[kinds]] of film studio trying to up the [[notoriety]] of this sunken [[filmmaking]], or at [[slightest]] one of those millions of media [[devils]] who can't [[criticised]] [[effectively]] (you know, the people who feel [[negative]] if they [[confer]] [[nothing]] a [[markup]] below 6).

stay away...far away. and [[dishonour]] on [[parody]] central, where i [[noticed]] this [[cinema]]. they [[often]] [[picks]] [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] I must [[admit]], when I read the description of the genre on Netflix as "Steamy Romance" I was a little bit skeptical. "Steamy"? [[In]] a movie from 1968?? I was [[prepared]] for [[disappointment]]. And when I realized it was shot entirely in black & white, I [[knew]] my erotic hopes were dashed.

Boy, was I [[wrong]]! Not only does this film have all of the elements of a steamy romance -- the discovery of first love, fear of the secret being found out, a sudden unexpected end -- but at times this movie was downright erotic. You will soon forget that it is shot in black & white. The cinematography deserves every accolade it has received over the years. And the performances from the two stars (Essy Persson and Anna Gael) are intense and memorable. OK, so they're both in their mid twenties trying to play school girls. It's 1968. Do you really expect teenagers from the '60s to be able to effectively explore a lesbian love story like this? Many adult women were still trying to come to grips with their sexuality back then. Anyone looking for real teens here is expecting too much.

I think this movie was way ahead of its [[time]]. The level of eroticism was an unexpected pleasure; yet it still managed to leave a lot to the imagination, opting instead to give us poetic descriptions to add to what we were shown.

I have no doubt lesbians will identify with the characters here. As for you straight guys who love watching lesbians in action: Although it won't be all you expect, I don't think you'll be too, too disappointed. I must [[concede]], when I read the description of the genre on Netflix as "Steamy Romance" I was a little bit skeptical. "Steamy"? [[For]] a movie from 1968?? I was [[devised]] for [[disillusionment]]. And when I realized it was shot entirely in black & white, I [[overheard]] my erotic hopes were dashed.

Boy, was I [[amiss]]! Not only does this film have all of the elements of a steamy romance -- the discovery of first love, fear of the secret being found out, a sudden unexpected end -- but at times this movie was downright erotic. You will soon forget that it is shot in black & white. The cinematography deserves every accolade it has received over the years. And the performances from the two stars (Essy Persson and Anna Gael) are intense and memorable. OK, so they're both in their mid twenties trying to play school girls. It's 1968. Do you really expect teenagers from the '60s to be able to effectively explore a lesbian love story like this? Many adult women were still trying to come to grips with their sexuality back then. Anyone looking for real teens here is expecting too much.

I think this movie was way ahead of its [[moment]]. The level of eroticism was an unexpected pleasure; yet it still managed to leave a lot to the imagination, opting instead to give us poetic descriptions to add to what we were shown.

I have no doubt lesbians will identify with the characters here. As for you straight guys who love watching lesbians in action: Although it won't be all you expect, I don't think you'll be too, too disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1465 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this movie in my plays & playwrights course at Tulane. I was awed at how beautiful and raw this documentary was. It is a sincere look into the unedited reality of a life of solitude. The family is fascinating and I thought it really showed Little Edie at her core. **As a side note My professor even told me that throughout the filming, Little Edie became infatuated with one of the camera men.** The beauty, I find, comes from the naturalness of the family's dysfunction. It is evident in the relationship between mother and daughter that neither could function in society alone and you begin to wish for Little Edie's rehabilitation to society. In all, the film is gripping in its aesthetic quality and it's portrayal of surprising beauty. Two thumbs way up! --------------------------------------------- Result 1466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] In what appears an attempt to mix drama and [[comedy]], [[Manuel]] [[Gomez]] Pereira made this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. "It is not an original [[discovery]], by [[many]] [[voice]] you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs somewhat from the [[norm]] in the Spanish cinema. The [[downside]] is that the elements forming the film are poorly [[combined]], and while some points are not well developed, others are out of place. A day in the [[lives]] of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge ([[Eduard]] Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, [[despite]] load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things [[change]]. Only this explains his commitment to a [[minor]] [[could]] mean a [[turning]] point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge [[says]] [[things]] like this to herself: "if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to [[change]] my [[luck]]. " Of course it [[finds]] it, [[begins]] to play '[[Today]] could be a [[great]] day' (Hoy puede ser un [[gran]] dia)by Joan [[Manuel]] Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another [[woman]] [[entry]] [[age]], divorced and a little [[lonely]]. Take valeriana for sleeping, [[organizes]] birthday parties as an exemplary [[mother]], said her [[belief]] in [[God]] and leads to a [[speed]] of homicidal [[mother]]. Hortensia is a [[woman]] of [[many]] contradictions in his [[behavior]], [[life]] was going in his [[head]] driving data as "70% of people [[fall]] in [[love]] only once in a lifetime" and [[said]] although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not [[preclude]] the [[possibility]] that it is a "sadistic" [[sleeping]] in his shoulder in the [[cinema]] at the [[earliest]] opportunity. [[Later]] [[came]] a communion, a [[dance]] in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a [[car]] and other [[things]] that [[players]] [[seem]] to [[live]] [[unique]] [[experiences]] like that but [[end]] up doing [[quite]] heavy for the viewer. 'Things that [[make]] [[life]] worthwhile' debate between us is the [[drama]] of two adult [[persons]] who have no other that leads them to see where their [[strange]] [[relationship]] and, conversely, [[make]] us [[take]] the [[case]] as a comedy, focusing on [[things]] like a Chinese [[singing]] at a [[wedding]] (which [[seem]] to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the "accident" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase "must be screwed over," and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better. In what appears an attempt to mix drama and [[farce]], [[Textbook]] [[Fernandez]] Pereira made this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. "It is not an original [[detecting]], by [[myriad]] [[vowel]] you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs somewhat from the [[norma]] in the Spanish cinema. The [[disadvantage]] is that the elements forming the film are poorly [[combining]], and while some points are not well developed, others are out of place. A day in the [[iife]] of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge ([[Edwards]] Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, [[while]] load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things [[amendments]]. Only this explains his commitment to a [[minors]] [[did]] mean a [[turn]] point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge [[said]] [[items]] like this to herself: "if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to [[amend]] my [[opportunity]]. " Of course it [[found]] it, [[launch]] to play '[[Thursday]] could be a [[wonderful]] day' (Hoy puede ser un [[grandma]] dia)by Joan [[Textbook]] Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another [[wife]] [[entrance]] [[older]], divorced and a little [[single]]. Take valeriana for sleeping, [[organise]] birthday parties as an exemplary [[mom]], said her [[faith]] in [[Christ]] and leads to a [[speeding]] of homicidal [[mothers]]. Hortensia is a [[female]] of [[numerous]] contradictions in his [[behaviour]], [[vida]] was going in his [[chief]] driving data as "70% of people [[declining]] in [[loves]] only once in a lifetime" and [[stated]] although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not [[excludes]] the [[potential]] that it is a "sadistic" [[sleeper]] in his shoulder in the [[movie]] at the [[nearest]] opportunity. [[Then]] [[arrived]] a communion, a [[dancer]] in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a [[automobile]] and other [[items]] that [[actors]] [[seems]] to [[viva]] [[peculiar]] [[experiments]] like that but [[terminate]] up doing [[pretty]] heavy for the viewer. 'Things that [[deliver]] [[lives]] worthwhile' debate between us is the [[tragedy]] of two adult [[person]] who have no other that leads them to see where their [[odd]] [[relation]] and, conversely, [[deliver]] us [[taking]] the [[lawsuit]] as a comedy, focusing on [[aspects]] like a Chinese [[singer]] at a [[marry]] (which [[appears]] to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the "accident" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase "must be screwed over," and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Relative to other Columbo movies, this can only be rated a 1 (awful). I seriously do not understand what the other reviewers have [[seen]] in this [[appalling]] train-crash of a [[film]]. It was only through [[morbid]] fascination that I continued to watch it - to [[see]] what [[bizarre]] or inept decision the director would make [[next]].

Another reviewer suggested that it was Falk's only directorial outing because it interfered with his acting role. [[In]] [[fact]], I [[think]] the [[real]] [[reason]] lies with the studio bosses, who [[must]] have been [[horrified]] when they saw what he had [[done]] with their money. It's a wonder they didn't murder HIM. Relative to other Columbo movies, this can only be rated a 1 (awful). I seriously do not understand what the other reviewers have [[saw]] in this [[horrific]] train-crash of a [[films]]. It was only through [[disease]] fascination that I continued to watch it - to [[seeing]] what [[outlandish]] or inept decision the director would make [[imminent]].

Another reviewer suggested that it was Falk's only directorial outing because it interfered with his acting role. [[Throughout]] [[facto]], I [[thinks]] the [[veritable]] [[motif]] lies with the studio bosses, who [[owes]] have been [[dismayed]] when they saw what he had [[effected]] with their money. It's a wonder they didn't murder HIM. --------------------------------------------- Result 1468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] A [[kid]] with [[ideals]] who [[tries]] to [[change]] [[things]] [[around]] him. A [[boy]] who is [[forced]] to become a [[man]], because of the system. A system who [[hides]] the truth, and who is violating the rights of existence. A [[boy]] who, inspired by Martin [[Luther]] [[King]], stands up, and [[tells]] the truth. A family who is [[falling]] [[apart]], and [[fighting]] against it. A movie you can't [[hide]] from. You see things, and you [[hear]] things, and you feel things, that you till the day you [[die]] will hope have never happened for [[real]]. Violence, [[frustration]], abuse of power, [[parents]] who can't do anything, and a [[boy]] with, I am sorry, balls, a [[boy]] who will not [[accept]] [[things]], who will not [[let]] [[anything]] [[happen]] to him, a [[kid]] with power, and a kid who acts like a pro, like he has never [[done]] [[anything]] [[else]], he caries this [[movie]] to the [[end]], and [[anyone]] who [[wants]] to [[see]] how [[abuse]] [[found]] place back in the 60'ies. A [[children]] with [[idea]] who [[endeavour]] to [[modify]] [[aspects]] [[about]] him. A [[boys]] who is [[compelled]] to become a [[guy]], because of the system. A system who [[disguised]] the truth, and who is violating the rights of existence. A [[bloke]] who, inspired by Martin [[Lutheran]] [[Emperor]], stands up, and [[says]] the truth. A family who is [[tumbling]] [[moreover]], and [[struggles]] against it. A movie you can't [[masked]] from. You see things, and you [[listened]] things, and you feel things, that you till the day you [[killed]] will hope have never happened for [[authentic]]. Violence, [[disappointment]], abuse of power, [[parent]] who can't do anything, and a [[boys]] with, I am sorry, balls, a [[guy]] who will not [[agreeing]] [[aspects]], who will not [[leave]] [[nothing]] [[arise]] to him, a [[children]] with power, and a kid who acts like a pro, like he has never [[doing]] [[something]] [[further]], he caries this [[film]] to the [[ceases]], and [[whoever]] who [[wanted]] to [[consults]] how [[misuse]] [[discovered]] place back in the 60'ies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I didn't really expect much from "The Night Listener" and I actually never heard of it until I saw the cover in the videostore. However, the movie is very effective when it comes to building up [[suspension]] and tension. On occasion it drags a little, but it actually helps to keep you wondering what's going to happen and more importantly: when. As the movie progresses, the character played by Robin Williams gets dragged into some kind of "cat and mouse" spiel to the point where he becomes obsessed with finding out the truth and existence about a 14 year old abused kid that no-one seemed to have ever seen in person. The Night Listener is an interesting story, which is great in building up the suspense throughout the movie and you're pretty much kept in the dark of who is lying and what's real. However, in the end it kind of disappoints and doesn't live up to the potential it could have had. It doesn't really give you a detailed or plausible explanation about the other main character, which would have been helpful and interesting. I didn't really expect much from "The Night Listener" and I actually never heard of it until I saw the cover in the videostore. However, the movie is very effective when it comes to building up [[suspend]] and tension. On occasion it drags a little, but it actually helps to keep you wondering what's going to happen and more importantly: when. As the movie progresses, the character played by Robin Williams gets dragged into some kind of "cat and mouse" spiel to the point where he becomes obsessed with finding out the truth and existence about a 14 year old abused kid that no-one seemed to have ever seen in person. The Night Listener is an interesting story, which is great in building up the suspense throughout the movie and you're pretty much kept in the dark of who is lying and what's real. However, in the end it kind of disappoints and doesn't live up to the potential it could have had. It doesn't really give you a detailed or plausible explanation about the other main character, which would have been helpful and interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 1470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] A pale [[shadow]] of a great musical, this movie suffers from the [[fact]] that the [[director]], Richard Attenborough, [[completely]] [[misses]] the point of the musical, needlessly "[[opens]]" it up, and muddies the thrust of the play. The [[show]] is about a [[group]] of dancers [[auditioning]] for a [[job]] in a B'way musical and examines their [[drive]] & desire to [[work]] in this [[demanding]] and not-always-rewarding line of work. Attenborough gives us a fresh-faced cast of [[hopefuls]], assuming that they are [[trying]] to get their "[[big]] break" in show business, rather than presenting the grittier mix of characters created on stage as a group of working "gypsies" living show to show, along with a couple of newcomers. The film has one advantage over the play and that is the opening scene, showing the [[size]] of the original [[audition]] and the [[true]] [[scale]] of [[shrinkage]] down to the 16/17 on the line (depending on how you count Cassie, who is stupidly kept out of the line in the movie). Anyone who can catch a local civic light opera production of the play will have a much richer experience than seeing this poorly-conceived [[film]]. A pale [[shade]] of a great musical, this movie suffers from the [[facto]] that the [[headmaster]], Richard Attenborough, [[wholly]] [[lack]] the point of the musical, needlessly "[[opening]]" it up, and muddies the thrust of the play. The [[exhibition]] is about a [[grouping]] of dancers [[auditioned]] for a [[jobs]] in a B'way musical and examines their [[drives]] & desire to [[works]] in this [[demands]] and not-always-rewarding line of work. Attenborough gives us a fresh-faced cast of [[contestants]], assuming that they are [[striving]] to get their "[[gargantuan]] break" in show business, rather than presenting the grittier mix of characters created on stage as a group of working "gypsies" living show to show, along with a couple of newcomers. The film has one advantage over the play and that is the opening scene, showing the [[calibre]] of the original [[auditions]] and the [[veritable]] [[greatness]] of [[reductions]] down to the 16/17 on the line (depending on how you count Cassie, who is stupidly kept out of the line in the movie). Anyone who can catch a local civic light opera production of the play will have a much richer experience than seeing this poorly-conceived [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1471 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wouldn't say this is a *bad* movie. Unfortunately for me, I get the feeling that the more you know about fencing, the worse it gets simply due to the fact that it becomes totally unrealistic. I've been fencing since i was 14 years old, and this movie portrays it very poorly. F. Murray Abraham is good (and appears to have some fencing background), but most of the other actors--especially the students--just seem to be lost. --------------------------------------------- Result 1472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The third and last part of the Bourne trilogy (duh), is lacking a bit in the story department, but covers it with extensive action scenes! Twi in particular take up quite some of the running time and make this movie better.

The director and star (Damon) themselves agreed that it was difficult to find a story for the last part, because the end of the second movie was quite ... advanced story-wise. How they got around that? The action scenes, for once, but they did another thing too, which I can't reveal, because that would be a spoiler. But if you watch the movie, than you'll notice it! Funnily enough I read, that this adaptation of the Bourne books is the least accurate of all three films .. if that means anything to you :o) --------------------------------------------- Result 1473 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] This [[film]] has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the [[worst]] movies ever [[made]]. [[True]], most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond [[bad]] into the realm of [[horrible]]. There is not one scary moment in it [[unless]] you consider stupidity scary. It is typical King [[garbage]] -- [[myths]] twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "[[scares]]" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at [[least]], is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie. This [[filmmaking]] has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the [[meanest]] movies ever [[introduced]]. [[Real]], most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond [[negative]] into the realm of [[scary]]. There is not one scary moment in it [[if]] you consider stupidity scary. It is typical King [[trash]] -- [[myth]] twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "[[terrifies]]" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at [[lowest]], is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1474 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[sat]] through this film and i have to [[say]] it only just [[managed]] to [[keep]] my attention. The [[film]] [[would]] have been a [[bit]] more bearable if i did not have to watch the [[awful]] CGI, for [[future]] reference to the [[industry]] if your going to [[use]] CGI watch this so you know what to [[avoid]].

Apparently this is [[supposed]] to be a graphic [[novel]] for the screen but all i [[saw]] was a [[bad]] [[movie]] which bears no [[resemblance]] to a graphic novel whatsoever.

All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss. I [[oin]] through this film and i have to [[says]] it only just [[administered]] to [[maintain]] my attention. The [[filmmaking]] [[ought]] have been a [[bitten]] more bearable if i did not have to watch the [[abysmal]] CGI, for [[futuristic]] reference to the [[industries]] if your going to [[usage]] CGI watch this so you know what to [[preventing]].

Apparently this is [[presumed]] to be a graphic [[newer]] for the screen but all i [[sawthe]] was a [[unfavourable]] [[flick]] which bears no [[analogy]] to a graphic novel whatsoever.

All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 1475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Why, oh, why won't they [[learn]]? [[When]] you've [[got]] a [[nice]], juicy [[exploitation]] gimmick, use it! Don't [[go]] messing around [[trying]] to get all [[deep]] and thoughtful; you're only gonna wind up looking [[foolish]].

Christmas Evil is the story of [[Harry]] Stadling, who [[saw]] a little bit too much of Mommy kissing (Daddy-dressed-as-)Santa Claus back when he was a [[kid]]. [[So]], of course, Harry grows up [[obsessed]] with Christmas, and finally, when his disillusionment becomes too great, he flips out, dresses as Santa, and wanders the city giving out toys to good little children, and viciously killing anyone he deems naughty.

Simple [[enough]], and not a bad place to start. (After all, how many other holiday-themed horror flicks use the same schtick?) Unfortunately, this film wants to be more "Santa, Portrait of a Serial Killer" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Two-thirds of the film are spent documenting Harry's slow but inevitable breakdown, when I would have been willing to buy the premise by the time the opening titles were rolling. You know a slasher film is in trouble when you find yourself urging the killer to just get on with it already.

Perhaps Harry's descent into madness could have been compelling in the hands of a competent director, but alas, we've got some guy named Lewis Jackson. Apparently, this is his only film, and it shows. The action jumps giddily from scene to scene, without establishing shots or clear views of the actors to let us know where we are and who we are seeing.

Even once the film gets rolling, we're still treated to heaping helpings of Harry's self-pity, insecurity, and neurotic behavior. More depressing than frightening, Christmas Evil is one to avoid. Why, oh, why won't they [[learning]]? [[Whenever]] you've [[get]] a [[lovely]], juicy [[operate]] gimmick, use it! Don't [[going]] messing around [[try]] to get all [[deepest]] and thoughtful; you're only gonna wind up looking [[asinine]].

Christmas Evil is the story of [[Hare]] Stadling, who [[noticed]] a little bit too much of Mommy kissing (Daddy-dressed-as-)Santa Claus back when he was a [[petit]]. [[Accordingly]], of course, Harry grows up [[haunted]] with Christmas, and finally, when his disillusionment becomes too great, he flips out, dresses as Santa, and wanders the city giving out toys to good little children, and viciously killing anyone he deems naughty.

Simple [[satisfactorily]], and not a bad place to start. (After all, how many other holiday-themed horror flicks use the same schtick?) Unfortunately, this film wants to be more "Santa, Portrait of a Serial Killer" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Two-thirds of the film are spent documenting Harry's slow but inevitable breakdown, when I would have been willing to buy the premise by the time the opening titles were rolling. You know a slasher film is in trouble when you find yourself urging the killer to just get on with it already.

Perhaps Harry's descent into madness could have been compelling in the hands of a competent director, but alas, we've got some guy named Lewis Jackson. Apparently, this is his only film, and it shows. The action jumps giddily from scene to scene, without establishing shots or clear views of the actors to let us know where we are and who we are seeing.

Even once the film gets rolling, we're still treated to heaping helpings of Harry's self-pity, insecurity, and neurotic behavior. More depressing than frightening, Christmas Evil is one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[loved]] the Batman [[tv]] [[series]] and was really [[looking]] forward to this. But they tried to do too much.

Why they had the [[story]] of [[Adam]] West and Burt Ward [[trying]] to [[recover]] the batmobile was [[beyond]] me. I don't [[want]] to [[knock]] Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 [[years]] since they [[appeared]] at Batman and [[Robin]], but to see them [[dressed]] in [[dress]] [[suits]] and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I [[would]] [[rather]] of just seen the ex-stars do [[commentary]]. The batmobile side [[story]] was stupid.

As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my [[opinion]]. I'd like more [[background]]. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to [[tell]] the same stuff I already [[knew]]. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.

I'd love to read the [[book]]. I am sure it has more in it that this [[showed]]. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 [[Mister]] Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister [[Freeze]], King Tut, etc. the [[List]] goes on. Like I [[said]] even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.

Very disappointing. And really corny. I [[enjoyed]] the Batman [[televisions]] [[serial]] and was really [[researching]] forward to this. But they tried to do too much.

Why they had the [[saga]] of [[Adama]] West and Burt Ward [[attempts]] to [[recoup]] the batmobile was [[afterlife]] me. I don't [[desiring]] to [[patting]] Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 [[yr]] since they [[emerged]] at Batman and [[Rubin]], but to see them [[clothed]] in [[garb]] [[outfits]] and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I [[could]] [[somewhat]] of just seen the ex-stars do [[feedback]]. The batmobile side [[stories]] was stupid.

As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my [[opinions]]. I'd like more [[backgrounds]]. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to [[say]] the same stuff I already [[overheard]]. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.

I'd love to read the [[workbook]]. I am sure it has more in it that this [[shown]]. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 [[Mr]] Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister [[Frost]], King Tut, etc. the [[Listed]] goes on. Like I [[told]] even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.

Very disappointing. And really corny. --------------------------------------------- Result 1477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] Mary Poppins is [[definitely]] much better, but this is a [[lovely]] film [[nonetheless]]. Angela Lansbury is [[splendidly]] dotty as Engletine [[Price]], and David Tomlinson has [[great]] fun as Mr. Brown. Their [[chemistry]] was just [[brilliant]] as well. The [[children]], [[however]] just lacked the same sparkle, [[though]] Paul is very [[funny]] and cute. The songs were [[actually]] not as [[bad]] as some people [[say]], "[[Beautiful]] Briny [[Sea]]" is the [[best]], in fact all the [[songs]] are [[outstanding]]. The special effects were [[wonderful]], that had plenty of [[magic]], and the story is [[original]] enough. The [[highlights]], though, like Mary Poppins, were the animated sequences. The underwater sequence was [[beautiful]], but my [[favourite]] was the football [[match]], which was [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]]. The only other [[criticism]] was that I didn't [[quite]] [[get]] the [[ending]] when I [[first]] [[saw]] it. [[All]] in all, a [[lovely]] [[film]], that is [[hardly]] ever on. 8/10 Bethany Cox Mary Poppins is [[certainly]] much better, but this is a [[wondrous]] film [[however]]. Angela Lansbury is [[brilliantly]] dotty as Engletine [[Pricing]], and David Tomlinson has [[wonderful]] fun as Mr. Brown. Their [[chemist]] was just [[beautiful]] as well. The [[infant]], [[nevertheless]] just lacked the same sparkle, [[despite]] Paul is very [[fun]] and cute. The songs were [[genuinely]] not as [[amiss]] as some people [[told]], "[[Wondrous]] Briny [[Hai]]" is the [[finest]], in fact all the [[hymns]] are [[unpaid]]. The special effects were [[extraordinary]], that had plenty of [[quadrant]], and the story is [[initial]] enough. The [[illustrates]], though, like Mary Poppins, were the animated sequences. The underwater sequence was [[awesome]], but my [[favorite]] was the football [[equalize]], which was [[downright]] [[comical]]. The only other [[critique]] was that I didn't [[perfectly]] [[obtain]] the [[ended]] when I [[firstly]] [[watched]] it. [[Everything]] in all, a [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]], that is [[barely]] ever on. 8/10 Bethany Cox --------------------------------------------- Result 1478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Okay, I [[seriously]] CAN'T think of [[anything]] worse than the PR [[series]]. There are many [[bad]] things in [[life]]...[[traitors]], liars, etc. But seriously, Power [[Rangers]] has GOT to be at the bottom of this [[list]]. Can you [[think]] of [[anything]] more [[stupid]] than five-six [[teenagers]] (who don't even [[act]] like a [[normal]] teen) dancing [[around]] in [[identical]] suits WITH [[DIFFERENT]] COLORS [[SO]] THAT [[YOU]] CAN [[TELL]] THEM [[APART]]? Fans, have you ever come [[across]] a [[real]] person who [[gets]] flung against a [[mental]] wall and gets up [[almost]] immediately and [[continues]] to fight without getting [[injured]]? Power [[Rangers]] are for five-year [[old]] [[boys]], and [[believe]] me, I never liked this show [[even]] when I was five.

I [[guess]] you can [[say]] Dino Thunder is an exception. The teens [[actually]] [[ACT]] like teens, and [[Tommy]] Oliver actually [[acts]] like a mentor, or no, a teacher. It's got teen-humor, [[though]] the [[fighting]] is lame, I don't hate Dino Thunder.

[[Many]] people say Power Rangers are [[crap]], but I wouldn't. It [[would]] be an [[insult]] to [[crap]]. [[So]] face it, five year old boys, Power Rangers is [[rubbish]]. Okay, I [[profoundly]] CAN'T think of [[algo]] worse than the PR [[serials]]. There are many [[mala]] things in [[lives]]...[[renegades]], liars, etc. But seriously, Power [[Ringers]] has GOT to be at the bottom of this [[listings]]. Can you [[thinking]] of [[somethings]] more [[dumb]] than five-six [[teens]] (who don't even [[ley]] like a [[ordinary]] teen) dancing [[almost]] in [[same]] suits WITH [[DISSIMILAR]] COLORS [[THEREBY]] THAT [[DOYOU]] CAN [[SAY]] THEM [[ALSO]]? Fans, have you ever come [[throughout]] a [[veritable]] person who [[attains]] flung against a [[psychological]] wall and gets up [[virtually]] immediately and [[continue]] to fight without getting [[wound]]? Power [[Ringers]] are for five-year [[longtime]] [[guy]], and [[think]] me, I never liked this show [[yet]] when I was five.

I [[imagine]] you can [[says]] Dino Thunder is an exception. The teens [[genuinely]] [[LEGISLATION]] like teens, and [[Izzi]] Oliver actually [[act]] like a mentor, or no, a teacher. It's got teen-humor, [[if]] the [[hostilities]] is lame, I don't hate Dino Thunder.

[[Multiple]] people say Power Rangers are [[shitty]], but I wouldn't. It [[could]] be an [[affront]] to [[shitty]]. [[Consequently]] face it, five year old boys, Power Rangers is [[trash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Having Just "Welcomed Home" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt compelled to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets [[feelings]] in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a great start for all Americans to begin the [[healing]] of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is "Take Action" on the problem . [[Incredibly]] emotional movie. I would [[highly]] recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.

Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . "We changed some hearts and minds back there" [[Great]] DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides Having Just "Welcomed Home" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt compelled to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets [[affections]] in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a great start for all Americans to begin the [[curative]] of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is "Take Action" on the problem . [[Unbelievably]] emotional movie. I would [[inordinately]] recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.

Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . "We changed some hearts and minds back there" [[Grand]] DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides --------------------------------------------- Result 1480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] If ever there were an inspiring story that [[could]] [[move]] [[anyone]], disabled or not, to persevere [[despite]] the odds and make it (even when "[[make]] it" as an [[expression]], proper, can have a [[wide]] berth which is an ultimately personal truth), MY [[LEFT]] FOOT is it. It's a hard [[film]] to watch at times: seeing the less [[placid]] aspects of [[Christy]] Brown's [[personality]] [[emerge]] in two [[key]] scenes -- one when his sister declares she is pregnant and about to get [[married]] while his [[father]] has a bad reaction, and at a dinner [[table]] when the woman who's reached out to him, [[made]] him [[able]] to [[communicate]] [[effectively]], now has announced at a [[key]] moment (the inauguration of Brown's art) she is about to [[marry]] another [[man]] -- is tough. Very, very [[tough]]. More so because this is a man who cannot react accordingly to these [[events]] and can only [[express]] himself in the only [[way]] he knows how: via [[screams]], shrieks, and profanities [[aimed]] at hurting himself. [[However]], this is not a [[story]] of heartache and family dysfunction [[even]] when there is quite a [[bit]] of it furnishing the autobiographical [[account]], but that of a [[man]] overcoming his [[severe]] [[disability]], becoming a [[functioning]] human being and a force of be reckoned with in the art [[world]]. [[Daniel]] Day [[Lewis]] won an Oscar for his [[powerful]], [[unforgettable]] performance as the [[flawed]] but [[tenacious]] [[Christy]] Brown, and [[Brenda]] Fricker did so as well for her supporting role as Brown's [[solid]] [[mother]]. If ever there were an inspiring story that [[would]] [[budge]] [[somebody]], disabled or not, to persevere [[although]] the odds and make it (even when "[[deliver]] it" as an [[words]], proper, can have a [[big]] berth which is an ultimately personal truth), MY [[EXITED]] FOOT is it. It's a hard [[cinematography]] to watch at times: seeing the less [[peaceable]] aspects of [[Kristy]] Brown's [[persona]] [[happen]] in two [[important]] scenes -- one when his sister declares she is pregnant and about to get [[wedding]] while his [[pere]] has a bad reaction, and at a dinner [[tables]] when the woman who's reached out to him, [[brought]] him [[capable]] to [[communicating]] [[efficiently]], now has announced at a [[important]] moment (the inauguration of Brown's art) she is about to [[wedding]] another [[males]] -- is tough. Very, very [[stiff]]. More so because this is a man who cannot react accordingly to these [[phenomena]] and can only [[expressed]] himself in the only [[manner]] he knows how: via [[cree]], shrieks, and profanities [[geared]] at hurting himself. [[Still]], this is not a [[history]] of heartache and family dysfunction [[yet]] when there is quite a [[bite]] of it furnishing the autobiographical [[accounting]], but that of a [[males]] overcoming his [[extreme]] [[disabilities]], becoming a [[operative]] human being and a force of be reckoned with in the art [[globe]]. [[Danielle]] Day [[Luis]] won an Oscar for his [[influential]], [[landmark]] performance as the [[incorrect]] but [[stubborn]] [[Christie]] Brown, and [[Cindy]] Fricker did so as well for her supporting role as Brown's [[robust]] [[mum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1481 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Wow... 5 more hours of Riget. Lars continues the [[great]] [[combination]] of occult, dark horror and soap-opera drama. [[Picking]] up [[exactly]] where the last episode of the previous series left off(complete with the same high intensity and suspense, [[though]] that doesn't last; for better or worse), this installation in the franchise [[seems]] somewhat more bent on haste... in the last series, there seemed to pass a day or a week between each episode, whereas in this, it clearly is one long stretch... where one episode ends, the next begins. A lot can be said about Lars von Trier... but he is very [[diverse]] and pretty eccentric. [[Both]] qualities [[show]] in this. The plot [[continues]] its [[excellence]], now giving a few [[regular]] [[characters]] that were [[minor]] [[players]] in the [[previous]] four [[episodes]] more attention. Basically [[every]] [[character]] from the first [[returns]], at [[least]] as far as the main [[roles]] go. The pacing isn't as [[sharp]] as in the [[first]] [[part]], and I found myself less gripped by this one. That is not in any [[kind]] of [[way]] to [[say]] that this didn't involve me, [[though]]... I [[still]] [[found]] myself [[constantly]] [[watching]], and at [[several]] points [[reacting]] [[strongly]], [[often]] out loud, to what was going on([[extremely]] [[unusual]] [[behavior]] for me, as I am an incredibly silent [[person]]), as I [[also]] was during the first. Like the first, this [[also]] [[brings]] up some loaded [[ethical]] [[questions]]. [[Building]] on the [[foundation]] from the first, this [[brings]] the [[story]] further... and being a sequel, the scope is [[also]] bigger. [[Grander]]. More [[spirits]], more bizarre occurrences, more subplots. The strong [[graphic]] material of the first also returns, and it's been [[kicked]] up a notch. The [[characters]] are [[developed]] further. The acting is [[amazing]], as that of the first. Udo Kier solidifies his [[immense]] talent, to [[anyone]] who doubted it. [[Playing]] a very [[difficult]] [[character]]([[anyone]] who has [[seen]] the first [[series]] can most likely figure out what I mean) *and* acting in a [[language]] he didn't [[speak]](he was [[later]] [[dubbed]])... and [[still]] handing in such a [[strong]] performance. The cinematography remains [[great]], and is [[still]] very hand-held, with [[rapid]] zooms and the [[occasional]] long [[take]]. The editing is [[sharp]], with a few direct cuts in [[sound]]([[though]] these were more [[prominent]] in the first). Now, with all that [[said]], I would [[really]] like to be able to rate this a [[perfect]] 10... or at least just under, like the first four episodes. I truly enjoyed watching, and I don't [[regret]] it in the least. But this does have shortcomings... the ones the first [[part]] had and more. As the first, the humor just takes up too much space... and this time around, it's even worse. There are several new regular characters that are there for no other reason than to provide comic relief... three of them, no less. Scenes are set up and executed for no other reason than to make the audience laugh. Fine for a comedy, but what is it doing in such a dark and unpleasant, yes, nothing short of sadistic at times, horror piece? Helmer's solitary secret hiding place of solitude is changed from the hospital roof... from which he could see his beloved Sweden... to a bathroom. With an angle from inside the bowl. No, you read that right. In general, the humor seems more low-brow... more sex and bodily function jokes, which, again, begs the question "Why?". Whilst most of the writing is excellent, some of it is downright dire. Several scenes are [[basically]] copied from the first mini-series(one would guess due to their popularity when it aired). At times, the drama seems a bit more bombastic than that of the first, and it jumps too much at times. Fortunately seldom, but still noticeably, plot points and items are explained away too easily(a certain character living in Denmark for no apparent reason, for example... anyone who's seen it knows who I'm speaking of). The two dishwashers, while still mysterious and insightful, become too much of a gimmick... too overexposed, in the end, I guess. Most of the scenes with them are still enjoyable, though. In addition to that, I want to reassure any reader of this that in spite of all the negative things I have just written that this is still mostly good... [[definitely]] enjoyable, [[compelling]], powerful... and in my humble opinion, it should definitely be seen by anyone who liked the first(though if belong in that group; do not expect to feel that the story is finished after watching this any more than you did after the first). I recommend this to any fan of Lars von Trier and anyone who enjoyed the first Riget and wants more where that came from. I urge anyone who's even considering watching this to make sure you've seen all of the first before you do... I bought this before I bought the first, but I held out on watching until I had bought the first and watched that, and I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. Though this features a brief summary of the events in the first, there are an immense amount of details and aspects that you would miss out on if you didn't see it before watching this. Slightly lesser sequel, but definitely still one to watch if you liked the first. 8/10 Wow... 5 more hours of Riget. Lars continues the [[wondrous]] [[jumpsuit]] of occult, dark horror and soap-opera drama. [[Selecting]] up [[accurately]] where the last episode of the previous series left off(complete with the same high intensity and suspense, [[if]] that doesn't last; for better or worse), this installation in the franchise [[looks]] somewhat more bent on haste... in the last series, there seemed to pass a day or a week between each episode, whereas in this, it clearly is one long stretch... where one episode ends, the next begins. A lot can be said about Lars von Trier... but he is very [[several]] and pretty eccentric. [[Whether]] qualities [[demonstrate]] in this. The plot [[persisted]] its [[excellencies]], now giving a few [[routine]] [[features]] that were [[smaller]] [[actors]] in the [[former]] four [[spells]] more attention. Basically [[each]] [[nature]] from the first [[return]], at [[fewer]] as far as the main [[duties]] go. The pacing isn't as [[steep]] as in the [[fiirst]] [[portion]], and I found myself less gripped by this one. That is not in any [[sorts]] of [[pathway]] to [[told]] that this didn't involve me, [[despite]]... I [[again]] [[discovered]] myself [[continually]] [[staring]], and at [[dissimilar]] points [[responding]] [[flatly]], [[normally]] out loud, to what was going on([[inordinately]] [[odd]] [[behaviour]] for me, as I am an incredibly silent [[persons]]), as I [[similarly]] was during the first. Like the first, this [[similarly]] [[puts]] up some loaded [[moral]] [[issues]]. [[Constructing]] on the [[bases]] from the first, this [[puts]] the [[fairytales]] further... and being a sequel, the scope is [[apart]] bigger. [[Fatter]]. More [[wits]], more bizarre occurrences, more subplots. The strong [[diagram]] material of the first also returns, and it's been [[knocked]] up a notch. The [[characteristic]] are [[devised]] further. The acting is [[wondrous]], as that of the first. Udo Kier solidifies his [[sizable]] talent, to [[someone]] who doubted it. [[Play]] a very [[problematic]] [[characters]]([[someone]] who has [[watched]] the first [[serial]] can most likely figure out what I mean) *and* acting in a [[linguistics]] he didn't [[talk]](he was [[subsequently]] [[nicknamed]])... and [[however]] handing in such a [[vigorous]] performance. The cinematography remains [[wondrous]], and is [[again]] very hand-held, with [[fast]] zooms and the [[sporadic]] long [[taking]]. The editing is [[steep]], with a few direct cuts in [[audible]]([[whilst]] these were more [[conspicuous]] in the first). Now, with all that [[indicated]], I would [[genuinely]] like to be able to rate this a [[faultless]] 10... or at least just under, like the first four episodes. I truly enjoyed watching, and I don't [[deplore]] it in the least. But this does have shortcomings... the ones the first [[parte]] had and more. As the first, the humor just takes up too much space... and this time around, it's even worse. There are several new regular characters that are there for no other reason than to provide comic relief... three of them, no less. Scenes are set up and executed for no other reason than to make the audience laugh. Fine for a comedy, but what is it doing in such a dark and unpleasant, yes, nothing short of sadistic at times, horror piece? Helmer's solitary secret hiding place of solitude is changed from the hospital roof... from which he could see his beloved Sweden... to a bathroom. With an angle from inside the bowl. No, you read that right. In general, the humor seems more low-brow... more sex and bodily function jokes, which, again, begs the question "Why?". Whilst most of the writing is excellent, some of it is downright dire. Several scenes are [[broadly]] copied from the first mini-series(one would guess due to their popularity when it aired). At times, the drama seems a bit more bombastic than that of the first, and it jumps too much at times. Fortunately seldom, but still noticeably, plot points and items are explained away too easily(a certain character living in Denmark for no apparent reason, for example... anyone who's seen it knows who I'm speaking of). The two dishwashers, while still mysterious and insightful, become too much of a gimmick... too overexposed, in the end, I guess. Most of the scenes with them are still enjoyable, though. In addition to that, I want to reassure any reader of this that in spite of all the negative things I have just written that this is still mostly good... [[admittedly]] enjoyable, [[convincing]], powerful... and in my humble opinion, it should definitely be seen by anyone who liked the first(though if belong in that group; do not expect to feel that the story is finished after watching this any more than you did after the first). I recommend this to any fan of Lars von Trier and anyone who enjoyed the first Riget and wants more where that came from. I urge anyone who's even considering watching this to make sure you've seen all of the first before you do... I bought this before I bought the first, but I held out on watching until I had bought the first and watched that, and I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. Though this features a brief summary of the events in the first, there are an immense amount of details and aspects that you would miss out on if you didn't see it before watching this. Slightly lesser sequel, but definitely still one to watch if you liked the first. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I can't come up with [[appropriate]] enough [[words]] to describe the horror I felt [[sitting]] in that [[cinema]] watching Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, the director's half-hearted [[attempt]] to [[pay]] [[tribute]] to that classic Bollywood [[western]], Sholay. The biggest problem with Varma's [[remake]] is that he doesn't even [[try]] to make a [[credible]] [[film]]. It's [[evident]] in every [[single]] [[frame]] of this [[movie]] that Varma's heart is just not in it. What you see on screen is a bad joke at best, a [[gimmick]] on the [[part]] of the filmmaker, and it pains you to [[see]] what little regard he actually [[shows]] for a [[film]] he claims he's been a fan of all his [[life]].I've [[seen]] [[several]] [[bad]] [[films]] over the [[years]], but I can't remember one that's been as much of a torture to [[sit]] through as this one. Consider yourself very brave if you're able to survive the [[entire]] [[film]], because it tests your patience like few [[films]] have before.Varma may borrow his plot and [[characters]] from the [[original]] [[film]], but his version is [[trite]] and [[hollow]] and doesn't have any of the [[spirit]] and energy of Sholay. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is [[actually]] a [[mockery]] of that timeless gem because it [[turns]] out to be everything that the original [[film]] was not - way-over-the-top, too-long-too-boring, and [[entirely]] mindless. Much-loved moments from Sholay are parodied by Varma and for that you [[want]] to wring his neck. One of the most memorable scenes in Sholay in which Dharmendra as Veeru [[climbs]] up the watertank and [[threatens]] to jump down to his death is turned [[around]] in this [[film]] with Ajay Devgan [[playing]] Hero, [[pulling]] a pistol to his [[head]] threatening to shoot himself. How you wish he'd [[pulled]] the trigger and spared us all the [[agony]].Not only does Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag fail as a remake of Sholay, it's a pretty [[bad]] effort [[even]] as a stand-alone film. The eardrum-damaging [[background]] score sounds more like someone clanging vessels in the kitchen, and the camera-work alternates between dramatic and head-spinning. Partners in this [[terrible]] crime of bringing this [[ridiculous]] film to screen are the film's mostly dead-as-wood actors. Sushmita Sen as Devi the widow takes both her role and the film too seriously, punctuating her lines with pauses, staring into camera for effect, and generally performing like her life depends upon it. Mohanlal as Narsimha, struggles with his Hindi dialogue and looks embarrassed to be delivering some of the stupidest lines in his illustrious career. Newcomer Prashant Raj playing Jai-equivalent Raj has no acting chops to speak of and can't strum up any of the brooding intensity Amitabh Bachchan brought to the part in the original film.As Hero, the new-age Veeru, Ajay Devgan is entirely hopeless, failing miserably in his attempts at comedy. But the film's weakest link, easily the most shocking casting decision is Nisha Kothari as Ghunghroo, who steps into the shoes of Hema Malini as Basanti, the endearing airhead from Sholay. Nisha Kothari is not only the worst actress in this country, but possibly the worst actress in this whole wide world, she gives the word annoying a whole new meaning, and she makes you want to slit your wrists every time she's on screen. And then, there is Amitabh Bachchan playing Babban Singh, Ramgopal Varma's version of Hindi cinema's most popular villain Gabbar Singh. The only actor in this ensemble who recognises the film's over-the-top tone and plays along accordingly, Bachchan constructs a menacing character who is a treat to watch. He's meant to be a comic book villain who snarls and sneers and hisses and hams, and he does all of that to good effect. But because he's trapped in such a doomed enterprise, his performance doesn't really help elevate the film in any way.No surprises here, I'm going with zero out of ten and two thumbs down for Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, it one's of those painful movie-watching experiences you wouldn't subject even an enemy to. It's not like Varma hasn't handled a remake before. With Sarkar he gave us a smart, gripping take on The Godfather, and it's a pity he's made this Sholay bhature out of such a much-loved classic. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is his worst career decision ever, it's also a dark spot on his resume he'll be embarrassed of forever. I suspect this film will go down in movie history as Ramgopal Varma Ka Daag. I can't come up with [[opportune]] enough [[phrase]] to describe the horror I felt [[seated]] in that [[theaters]] watching Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, the director's half-hearted [[endeavours]] to [[salary]] [[compliments]] to that classic Bollywood [[west]], Sholay. The biggest problem with Varma's [[redo]] is that he doesn't even [[attempted]] to make a [[plausible]] [[flick]]. It's [[glaring]] in every [[exclusive]] [[fabric]] of this [[filmmaking]] that Varma's heart is just not in it. What you see on screen is a bad joke at best, a [[stratagem]] on the [[party]] of the filmmaker, and it pains you to [[consults]] what little regard he actually [[showcase]] for a [[filmmaking]] he claims he's been a fan of all his [[lives]].I've [[noticed]] [[multiple]] [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] over the [[olds]], but I can't remember one that's been as much of a torture to [[seated]] through as this one. Consider yourself very brave if you're able to survive the [[overall]] [[movie]], because it tests your patience like few [[kino]] have before.Varma may borrow his plot and [[attribute]] from the [[initial]] [[movie]], but his version is [[corny]] and [[empty]] and doesn't have any of the [[geist]] and energy of Sholay. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is [[genuinely]] a [[travesty]] of that timeless gem because it [[revolves]] out to be everything that the original [[filmmaking]] was not - way-over-the-top, too-long-too-boring, and [[fully]] mindless. Much-loved moments from Sholay are parodied by Varma and for that you [[wish]] to wring his neck. One of the most memorable scenes in Sholay in which Dharmendra as Veeru [[climbing]] up the watertank and [[endangering]] to jump down to his death is turned [[approximately]] in this [[filmmaking]] with Ajay Devgan [[gaming]] Hero, [[pulls]] a pistol to his [[chief]] threatening to shoot himself. How you wish he'd [[pulls]] the trigger and spared us all the [[heartbreak]].Not only does Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag fail as a remake of Sholay, it's a pretty [[unfavourable]] effort [[yet]] as a stand-alone film. The eardrum-damaging [[context]] score sounds more like someone clanging vessels in the kitchen, and the camera-work alternates between dramatic and head-spinning. Partners in this [[scary]] crime of bringing this [[farcical]] film to screen are the film's mostly dead-as-wood actors. Sushmita Sen as Devi the widow takes both her role and the film too seriously, punctuating her lines with pauses, staring into camera for effect, and generally performing like her life depends upon it. Mohanlal as Narsimha, struggles with his Hindi dialogue and looks embarrassed to be delivering some of the stupidest lines in his illustrious career. Newcomer Prashant Raj playing Jai-equivalent Raj has no acting chops to speak of and can't strum up any of the brooding intensity Amitabh Bachchan brought to the part in the original film.As Hero, the new-age Veeru, Ajay Devgan is entirely hopeless, failing miserably in his attempts at comedy. But the film's weakest link, easily the most shocking casting decision is Nisha Kothari as Ghunghroo, who steps into the shoes of Hema Malini as Basanti, the endearing airhead from Sholay. Nisha Kothari is not only the worst actress in this country, but possibly the worst actress in this whole wide world, she gives the word annoying a whole new meaning, and she makes you want to slit your wrists every time she's on screen. And then, there is Amitabh Bachchan playing Babban Singh, Ramgopal Varma's version of Hindi cinema's most popular villain Gabbar Singh. The only actor in this ensemble who recognises the film's over-the-top tone and plays along accordingly, Bachchan constructs a menacing character who is a treat to watch. He's meant to be a comic book villain who snarls and sneers and hisses and hams, and he does all of that to good effect. But because he's trapped in such a doomed enterprise, his performance doesn't really help elevate the film in any way.No surprises here, I'm going with zero out of ten and two thumbs down for Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, it one's of those painful movie-watching experiences you wouldn't subject even an enemy to. It's not like Varma hasn't handled a remake before. With Sarkar he gave us a smart, gripping take on The Godfather, and it's a pity he's made this Sholay bhature out of such a much-loved classic. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is his worst career decision ever, it's also a dark spot on his resume he'll be embarrassed of forever. I suspect this film will go down in movie history as Ramgopal Varma Ka Daag. --------------------------------------------- Result 1483 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is an [[almost]] action-less film following Jack, an insomniac, as he goes through hallucinations, is visited by dead friends, throws himself off a building, and, for a lot of the time, can't tell reality from hallucination.

[[Dominic]] Monaghan, as [[Jack]], is [[truly]] [[believable]]. Confused, and [[scared]] but [[lethargic]] and, at times blankly accepting of what he sees, we follow him trying to sort out what he's seeing and find a way to sleep.

Introduce a talking dog (another hallucination) and children that suddenly appear in Jack's bathroom and bedroom without any explanation as to how they got there (more hallucination) and you have an interesting, [[mind]] boggling, 43 minutes And the shower scene is enough to get any Dom fan coming back for more. This is an [[approximately]] action-less film following Jack, an insomniac, as he goes through hallucinations, is visited by dead friends, throws himself off a building, and, for a lot of the time, can't tell reality from hallucination.

[[Dominique]] Monaghan, as [[Jacques]], is [[honestly]] [[reliable]]. Confused, and [[shitless]] but [[listless]] and, at times blankly accepting of what he sees, we follow him trying to sort out what he's seeing and find a way to sleep.

Introduce a talking dog (another hallucination) and children that suddenly appear in Jack's bathroom and bedroom without any explanation as to how they got there (more hallucination) and you have an interesting, [[esprit]] boggling, 43 minutes And the shower scene is enough to get any Dom fan coming back for more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Arg. The shuffling dinosaurs are back to take another bite out of our sanity in this all-awful third film. This time, European terrorists(Irish I'd say) hi-jack an army convoy supposed to be transporting uranium. They pull into a shipyard, open the truck and discover our old friends the carnosaurs. Pandemonium comes visiting then when the rubber dinos chomp the terrorists, the cops and some marines. The whole film seems to be (again) largely inspired from Alien(as Carnosaur 2 was) with the pathetic marines going through the "claustrophobic" shipyard? guns at the ready. This third opus is probably the driest and ungoriest film of the lot, with only one spurt of blood when a rubber dino rips a marine's head off. The dinos are stiff, shuffling creatures as usual and the T-Rex sounds like an enraged elephant when it roars(it also appears to have no eyes). One of the goofiest scenes of the film is when the coppers arrive on the scene: they enter the building where the hijacked truck is kept and hear some weird noise coming from another truck. On opening it, surprise! The Rubber Reptile Gang burst out and devour them. Why were the dinos locked up in the second truck after escaping from the first? How did they get locked in as the truck door could only be locked from the outside? What was the point of filming this scene???? Oh bother, who cares? Both thumbs down for the Over-sized Rubber Iguanas. --------------------------------------------- Result 1485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Psychotic transsexual Bobbi murders the [[patient]] (Angie Dickinson) of a [[prominent]] [[doctor]] ([[Michael]] Caine) and then pursues the high-priced [[prostitute]] ([[Nancy]] Allen) who [[caught]] a glimpse of Bobbi in the [[elevator]]. Liz (Allen) [[comes]] under [[suspicion]] of the [[crime]] and teams up with the patient's [[son]] (Keith Gordon) to [[catch]] the [[killer]].

It can be summed up in a couple of [[words]]: it's very [[sexy]] (Dickinson and Allen look great), it's very [[bloody]] - with the [[kind]] of gore [[usually]] [[reserved]] for splatter [[movies]], and [[boy]] is it well [[crafted]]. [[Writer]] / [[director]] De Palma's script is OK but it [[really]] takes a backseat to the man's film-making abilities. It is [[highly]] successful on a visceral [[level]] and I [[actually]] [[get]] [[involved]] / interested with these [[characters]]. I can notice the standard De [[Palma]] homages to / ripoffs of Hitchcock - at [[least]] from one of the Master's [[pictures]].

And to top it all off, it has a professional and believable cast.

This was De Palma's third movie with ex-wife [[Nancy]] Allen (after "Carrie" and "[[Home]] [[Movies]]".)

By the [[way]], dancer-turned-actress Rachel Ticotin was one of the production [[assistants]]. There's a [[bit]] of trivia for you.

I wouldn't think a thriller [[could]] be classy and bloody at the same time but this [[picture]] [[pulls]] it off.

One of the [[best]] [[things]] about it is a [[typically]] [[striking]] Pino Donaggio [[music]] [[score]].

8/10 Psychotic transsexual Bobbi murders the [[patients]] (Angie Dickinson) of a [[eminent]] [[physician]] ([[Michel]] Caine) and then pursues the high-priced [[hooker]] ([[Juventus]] Allen) who [[grabbed]] a glimpse of Bobbi in the [[elevators]]. Liz (Allen) [[arises]] under [[mistrust]] of the [[offence]] and teams up with the patient's [[sons]] (Keith Gordon) to [[captured]] the [[callin]].

It can be summed up in a couple of [[phrase]]: it's very [[hot]] (Dickinson and Allen look great), it's very [[murderous]] - with the [[genera]] of gore [[popularly]] [[reserve]] for splatter [[cinematography]], and [[guy]] is it well [[drafted]]. [[Novelist]] / [[superintendent]] De Palma's script is OK but it [[truly]] takes a backseat to the man's film-making abilities. It is [[heavily]] successful on a visceral [[grades]] and I [[genuinely]] [[got]] [[implicated]] / interested with these [[nature]]. I can notice the standard De [[Parma]] homages to / ripoffs of Hitchcock - at [[fewer]] from one of the Master's [[photographed]].

And to top it all off, it has a professional and believable cast.

This was De Palma's third movie with ex-wife [[Juventus]] Allen (after "Carrie" and "[[Dwellings]] [[Theater]]".)

By the [[pathway]], dancer-turned-actress Rachel Ticotin was one of the production [[assistant]]. There's a [[bitten]] of trivia for you.

I wouldn't think a thriller [[would]] be classy and bloody at the same time but this [[photo]] [[pulled]] it off.

One of the [[nicest]] [[matters]] about it is a [[traditionally]] [[dramatic]] Pino Donaggio [[musicians]] [[notation]].

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Yes it was a [[little]] low budget, but this [[movie]] [[shows]] [[love]]! The only [[bad]] things about it was that you can tell the budget on this [[film]] [[would]] not [[compare]] to "Waterworld" and [[though]] the plot was good, the film never really tapped into it's full potential! Strong performances from [[everyone]] and the [[suspense]] makes it [[worthwhile]] to watch on a rainy [[night]]. Yes it was a [[scant]] low budget, but this [[film]] [[illustrates]] [[likes]]! The only [[naughty]] things about it was that you can tell the budget on this [[cinematic]] [[ought]] not [[comparison]] to "Waterworld" and [[despite]] the plot was good, the film never really tapped into it's full potential! Strong performances from [[someone]] and the [[wait]] makes it [[useful]] to watch on a rainy [[nocturne]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1487 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was a fairly creepy [[movie]]; I found the music to be effective for this. The photographs Mario took of the village were also unnerving. However, I had three [[problems]] with this film. One is that the lighting was very dark so some of the time it was hard to tell what was going on, but this may have just been my copy. The second is that the very beginning is not explained very well and I'm still not sure what was going on there. The third problem is that I didn't understand the ending, but apparently some people do. Of course there are also the usual problems of people doing stupid things, and the male lead is very 70s. [[All]] in all, watchable but not even close to being a favorite. This was a fairly creepy [[filmmaking]]; I found the music to be effective for this. The photographs Mario took of the village were also unnerving. However, I had three [[disorders]] with this film. One is that the lighting was very dark so some of the time it was hard to tell what was going on, but this may have just been my copy. The second is that the very beginning is not explained very well and I'm still not sure what was going on there. The third problem is that I didn't understand the ending, but apparently some people do. Of course there are also the usual problems of people doing stupid things, and the male lead is very 70s. [[Entire]] in all, watchable but not even close to being a favorite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When an actor has to play the role of an actor, fictional or factual, the task becomes much more difficult than playing a role. In A Double Life,Ronald Coleman surpassed himself as Anthony John, the tortured double personality. He put into that character all his talent and sincerity. The facial expressions, mannerisms,gait and stance spoke eloquently of what Anthony John was going through while playing Othello on stage. Coleman also did extremely well as a Shakespearean actor in those short scenes as Othello that were part of this gem of a movie. Closups of Coleman's face as Othello tortured by doubts about the fidelity of Desdemona were in themselves scenes worth watching.Add to that, his character's off stage desperation and only someone with Coleman's depth of acting perception can achieve. It was like watching Spenser Tracy as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, except this double role was much more profound and poignant. Shelly Winters looked so sweet, vulnerable and gorgeous at the same time and added her talent to the movie. It is believed that Ronald Coleman liked his role in this film above all others he played and went on to win the Oscar for Best Actor in 1947. I would see this movie repeatedly and never feel bored. --------------------------------------------- Result 1489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Panic In The Streets opens in high noir style, a view along a dark street followed by a camera tilt upwards to a window, behind which is playing out a sleazy card game - an opening flourish which, along with some of the location shooting, anticipates some of the atmosphere Welles brought a decade later in Touch Of Evil. One of the players throws open the window; it's an appropriate action, serving as an introduction to the events within as well as literally opening up our first view of the underworld.

Shot in high contrast black and white, Panic In The Streets benefits immensely from a strong cast as well as some fine location shooting in New Orleans. Scenes set in such places as the mortuary, the crowded shipping office or amidst the peeling paint of 'Frank's Place' offer a unique, and sometimes claustrophobic atmosphere, impossible to recreate in the studio. With these elements, Kazan's film shows the influence of Dassin's groundbreaking Naked City of two years earlier, which established the gritty, almost documentary style within the noir cycle. In fact, Widmark's previous role had been in Dassin's even finer Night And The City, a film in which a sense of rising panic was even more prevalent. Joe MacDonald, a favourite with the director, photographed Panic In The Streets' detailed environment. MacDonald also worked on Kazan's Pinky and Viva Zapata!, and went on to shoot Widmark again three years later in Fuller's masterpiece Pick Up On South Street.

As others have noticed, in a manner typical of some noir films, Kazan's work offers a contrast between the confusion, sickness and immorality of the streets with the modest, calm home life of the Reeds. But whereas (for instance) in Lang's The Big Heat (1953) the home life of the hero is destroyed by elements of vice surrounding the embattled central character - ultimately sending him back to work with an increased vigilance and sense of vengeance - Panic In The Streets places Reed's rising anxiousness within the confines of what amounts to just another working 'day'. Despite all the danger, ultimately he returns back to the bosom of his family justified and satisfied. The implication being that social balance has been restored, at least for the moment by his professionalism and curative skills.

That imbalance of course, has been created by crime and disease. The two are closely associated in this film. It reminds one of the tagline from the much cruder Cobra (1986) - where "Crime is the disease. Meet the cure," a neat analogy in context, if one which rings too uncomfortably of social reductionism. At its climax, as Blackie attempts to flee aboard ship, the visuals specifically allude to rats as being similar to criminals, both posing a menace to society's health. As (the presumably infected) Blackie prowls round the cheap rooms and the docks with his cronies, in search of something he suspects everyone is after, if without knowing exactly what it is, 'plague' and 'Blackie' resonate together in the audiences mind, adding further to connected associations. Ironically Blackie's hunch about Poldi's unfortunate cousin, that "he brought something in" of note is correct - even if, finally, its nothing he can sell or steal. Blackie's logical assumption that the police would not normally bother with the murder of some anonymous illegal immigrant has a ring of truth about it, and his so confusion is understandable.

Dr Reed, although home-loving, and on the side of society, is a true noir hero. Familiar to the genre is the chief protagonist as a man who walks alone, forced to travel beyond the limits of the law. In his way, Reed is forced to take morality into his own hands for the sake of society at large - a dimension of the film that is particularly apposite, given director Kazan's controversial personal history. The director testified before the infamous HUAC, naming suspected communists and fellow travellers. His film depicts suspects being hauled in for questioning, and the manhandling of the press, on the grounds that the overriding public good justified the means. These actions perhaps echo the director's sentiments at the time, presumably accepting the McCarthyite witch hunt and the suppression of civil rights it entailed in the light of presumed communist infiltration of the entertainment industry. In these times of terrorist threats and state response, such issues as they appear in the film are strikingly modern.

Standout scenes in the film include a notable scene where Blackie interrogates the dying Poldi as to the precise nature of his cousin's presumed contraband. Cat like, Blackie stalks his victim across the room, eventually preying over the doomed man's sick bed, holding Poldi's feverish head in his hands - a striking, evil cradling. It's a gesture emphasising the intimate nature of corruption, whether moral or physical. Apparently, the actors did many or all of their own stunts, which leads to some other, very dramatic scenes at the end, as the police and health authorities close in on the villains under the wharfs. Half crawling, half scrambling over the slippery timbers at the edge of the dock pool must have been an experience very uncomfortable for Palance, but it is sequence that adds immensely to the immediacy of it all.

Occasionally less convincing elements distract the viewer. Apparently Dr Reed is left to fight a potential national emergency little government backup. Perhaps just as astonishingly, he never inoculates himself - inviting a dramatic turn which never materialises. At the end of the film, too, the potential epidemic has been halted, all contactees located, a little too neatly. But these weaknesses are more than outweighed by the other satisfactions of a film that still makes for compulsive and relevant viewing today. --------------------------------------------- Result 1490 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I watched half of this movie and I didn't like it.

First reason: Boring. Barely anything happens, the women sit around and discuss how terrible their lives are and how they have no hope, they smoke weed, read magazines, care for their sick friend, and cut up the occasional dead body. BORING!!!!

Second reason: There are too many things left unexplained. Many scenes are dedicated to a zombie hunter who kidnaps random men, restrains them in a chair and interrogates them. Who are these men? How do they know anything about illegal activity concerning the diseased flesh eaters? Why does he kill one and let another one go?

Also there is this dude who at first I thought also had the flesh eating disease but he puts his fist through a wall with superhuman strength suggesting he's not quite what we originally thought-never explained! How frustrating is that?

Conclusion: I found the women annoying, the story uninteresting, the duologue tedious, and the action non-existent. Also the cover art is misleading since it makes you believe this movie is going to be cool when it clearly isn't. I rented this movie based on some of the reviews made by other people on this website, and although I respect the fact that some people might have enjoyed this flick, I will from now on make sure I read more than two reviews deep into a movie so as to avoid renting another movie I regret seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I was a kid I watched this many times over, and I remember whistling the "Happy Cat" song quite often. All the songs are great, and actually memorable, unlike many children's musicals, where the songs are just stuck in for no real reason. The scenes and costumes are lavish, and the acting is very well-done, which isn't surprising, considering the cast. Christopher Walken is very catlike, and doesn't need stupid make-up, or a cat costume for the viewer to believe he's a cat transformed to a human. And Jason Connery's so cute, as the shy and awkward miller's son, Corin, who falls in love with beautiful and the bold Princess Vera. This is a really fun, enjoyable, feature-length movie, where unlike most fairytales, the characters are given personalities. Some of my favourite parts are when Puss makes Corin pretend he's drowning; at the ball when everybody starts dancing a country dance, as it's "all the rage abroad"; when Walken is in the kitchen, dancing on the table (he's a pretty good dancer, too!); and when Vera tells Corin all the things she used to do when she was young, like pretending she was a miller's daughter. I'd recommend this film to children and parents alike, who love magic and fairytales. And it actually IS a movie you can watch together, as it won't drive adults up the wall. --------------------------------------------- Result 1492 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a [[movie]]: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a [[broken]] fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. [[Imagine]] stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the [[idea]] of [[Broken]], though there's no detectives in this [[movie]], I'm just using it as a [[visual]] [[example]]. But, the intense looking [[woman]] is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect [[choice]] for this role.

I consider myself a very open minded [[individual]] who can find enjoyment out of all [[kinds]] of [[artistic]] [[expressions]] and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It [[would]] be really cool if I can [[frame]] one of the scene from this [[movie]] and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.

Now onto the [[problem]] of this [[movie]]. Beyond the [[mood]], there's not much [[anything]] [[else]] here. The director basically took an obsession of an [[idea]] and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't [[consider]] it to be a spoiler if I [[say]] the obsession is "mirror". Let's face it, this [[singular]] idea is all over the [[bloody]] place and that's all the [[director]] got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.

Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art [[since]] I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a [[piece]] of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good [[story]] and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making [[cheating]]. It is [[irresponsible]] and [[cheap]] and a [[waste]] of the [[medium]]. We [[gave]] [[movies]] 2 hours running film [[time]] for a [[good]] [[reason]]. [[Therefore]], we should [[judge]] it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.

This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.

Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.

In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows. Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a [[filmmaking]]: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a [[broke]] fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. [[Guess]] stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the [[brainchild]] of [[Ruptured]], though there's no detectives in this [[film]], I'm just using it as a [[optic]] [[instance]]. But, the intense looking [[mujer]] is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect [[selection]] for this role.

I consider myself a very open minded [[person]] who can find enjoyment out of all [[class]] of [[artsy]] [[phrase]] and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It [[could]] be really cool if I can [[fabric]] one of the scene from this [[filmmaking]] and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.

Now onto the [[difficulty]] of this [[kino]]. Beyond the [[ambiance]], there's not much [[nada]] [[elsewhere]] here. The director basically took an obsession of an [[inkling]] and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't [[considering]] it to be a spoiler if I [[said]] the obsession is "mirror". Let's face it, this [[exclusive]] idea is all over the [[bloodstained]] place and that's all the [[superintendent]] got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.

Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art [[because]] I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a [[slice]] of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good [[storytelling]] and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making [[swindling]]. It is [[feckless]] and [[inexpensive]] and a [[wastes]] of the [[milieu]]. We [[delivered]] [[cinematography]] 2 hours running film [[times]] for a [[alright]] [[reasons]]. [[So]], we should [[magistrate]] it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.

This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.

Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.

In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows. --------------------------------------------- Result 1493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked it but then I think I might have been ironing at the same time. This reworking of Cyrano de Bergerac/Roxanne is an utterly undemanding, formulaic romcom rescued from straight-to-video ignominy on its release by the sharp turn of Janeane Garofalo. Playing the Frasier of Pets, she finds herself caught in a love trap when insecurity leads her to pass her best friend (Uma Thurman) off as herself when a caller comes a-courtin'.

This is an interesting film in the fascinating career of Ben Chaplin. An average British actor, he gave the Hollywood treadmill a shot with this film. He is unremarkable and his anonymity in studio productions is unsurprising on the basis of it, although he has appeared in substantial cameos in both the later Terence Malick films. Uma Thurman does a ditzy turn on autopilot and Michael Lehmann packages it all together competently. Icky phone sex though. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] SYNOPSIS The [[future]] as [[seen]] from 1939 England. As war loomed over [[Europe]], the salvation of mankind will not be [[found]] in the [[politics]] of the [[past]]. It is up to the [[brave]] [[new]] world of science to overcome man's past [[mistakes]].

CONCEPT [[IN]] [[RELATION]] [[TO]] THE VIEWER Beware your leaders and what you are told. [[Thinking]] [[outside]] the box can lead to a brighter tomorrow. There will [[always]] be [[descent]] and [[fear]], and [[learning]] to [[overcome]] it is our only hope.

PROS AND [[CONS]] I had seen this [[film]] long ago and [[recently]] [[downloaded]] it off of the internet (it is in the public [[domain]]). This is a [[fascinating]] [[work]] on [[numerous]] [[levels]]. Since it is a [[story]] about the [[future]] as [[seen]] from 1939, it has [[obvious]] flaws. This vision of the future is both terrifying and [[whimsical]]. This film was cutting edge for its day. The special effects are very good as is the story line. The acting suffers a bit in the British theatrical sense, in that it can lean a bit toward Shakespeare.

One of the underlying themes of the film is that science and technology can solve all our problems, which we now know is not always true. The films other plot line is that charismatic leaders are a curse of human existence and will probably always be with us.

The underpinnings of almost all later science fiction movies can be seen in this film. The set design and wardrobe of "Forbidden Planet", the failings of technology in "2001: A Space Odessy", even the [[lush]] landscapes / cityscapes of "Star Wars" owe some amount of inspiration to this film.

The ending of the film leaves the viewer a bit perplexed. While it is optimistic in its ending sequence of reaching for the stars, we are left to wonder if mankind will ever be able to make it. Even as we reach, there are those that are trying to hold us back. This films vision of the future while interesting is [[also]] a bit humorous by todays standards. Huge flying machines and guns that could shoot people into space never materialized in the real world, but in 1939 they were considered the next logical step.

Many great British actors are in this film as young men. Cedric Hardwicke and Ralph Richardson are the most recognized and their oratory skills are evident here. Raymond Massey is a curious choice to play the lead character, Cabel. His character almost comes across as the new Christ sent to save the world from its own destruction with the new religion of science.

This is a good piece of cinema history whose themes are still relevant today even if its vision of the future missed the mark. SYNOPSIS The [[upcoming]] as [[noticed]] from 1939 England. As war loomed over [[Eu]], the salvation of mankind will not be [[find]] in the [[politically]] of the [[former]]. It is up to the [[adventurous]] [[novel]] world of science to overcome man's past [[error]].

CONCEPT [[AT]] [[RELATING]] [[AUX]] THE VIEWER Beware your leaders and what you are told. [[Think]] [[outdoor]] the box can lead to a brighter tomorrow. There will [[incessantly]] be [[progeny]] and [[scare]], and [[taught]] to [[overcoming]] it is our only hope.

PROS AND [[SCHMUCKS]] I had seen this [[movie]] long ago and [[freshly]] [[offload]] it off of the internet (it is in the public [[realm]]). This is a [[exciting]] [[collaboration]] on [[many]] [[grades]]. Since it is a [[history]] about the [[forthcoming]] as [[watched]] from 1939, it has [[unmistakable]] flaws. This vision of the future is both terrifying and [[temperamental]]. This film was cutting edge for its day. The special effects are very good as is the story line. The acting suffers a bit in the British theatrical sense, in that it can lean a bit toward Shakespeare.

One of the underlying themes of the film is that science and technology can solve all our problems, which we now know is not always true. The films other plot line is that charismatic leaders are a curse of human existence and will probably always be with us.

The underpinnings of almost all later science fiction movies can be seen in this film. The set design and wardrobe of "Forbidden Planet", the failings of technology in "2001: A Space Odessy", even the [[opulent]] landscapes / cityscapes of "Star Wars" owe some amount of inspiration to this film.

The ending of the film leaves the viewer a bit perplexed. While it is optimistic in its ending sequence of reaching for the stars, we are left to wonder if mankind will ever be able to make it. Even as we reach, there are those that are trying to hold us back. This films vision of the future while interesting is [[apart]] a bit humorous by todays standards. Huge flying machines and guns that could shoot people into space never materialized in the real world, but in 1939 they were considered the next logical step.

Many great British actors are in this film as young men. Cedric Hardwicke and Ralph Richardson are the most recognized and their oratory skills are evident here. Raymond Massey is a curious choice to play the lead character, Cabel. His character almost comes across as the new Christ sent to save the world from its own destruction with the new religion of science.

This is a good piece of cinema history whose themes are still relevant today even if its vision of the future missed the mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 1495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Making a [[book]] into a movie by following the story page-by-page is NEVER a good idea. When people read the book, they automatically start making their own "mental movie" of who the characters look like, the places they exist in, how the situations progress. And everybody's mind's-eye [[opus]] is [[different]], which is why when the 'REAL' movie finally comes out, you're [[always]] [[going]] to have a ticked-off segment of the movie-going audience who are disappointed that it just doesn't measure up.

All a screenwriter and a director can hope to accomplish is whatever their own vision of the movie is, and hope that it comes as close as possible to what their audience is expecting to see.

There is no better case for this situation than the movies based on the novels of Stephen King. When filmmakers capture at least the essence of his stories, the results can be breathtaking and truly terrifying (CARRIE, 'SALEM'S LOT, THE DEAD ZONE), or they can be what fans consider to be a gawd-awful mess (Kubrick's version of THE SHINING; the miniseries for IT and THE TOMMYKNOCKERS).

[[Although]] it's not even close to being the perfect King adaptation, PET SEMATARY has so many [[moments]] of just skin-and-bone-deep unease that seemed to have bled [[onto]] the screen directly from the book, that you can pretty much forgive its shortcomings. For that, we have [[music]] video-turned-film director Mary Lambert to thank, (she also directed SIESTA, not exactly a [[horror]] movie, but another freaky-as-hell must-see you should put on your list), [[working]] from a screenplay by the 'Man-ster' Himself, and [[probably]] one of his [[better]] ones.

Since the majority of you know the story, I won't put you to sleep with too many of the details. Dr. Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff) has moved his family out to the perfect house in the country. Well, almost [[perfect]], except for two nasty little details: the dangerously busy stretch of interstate highway out in front, and the large pet cemetery in the woods out back. Since Louis is a veterinarian and has a young toddler for a son...well, even if you haven't read the book, do the frickin' math. It IS a King story, after all, so no mystery where this is headed.

It's not so much the destination that counts here, but the spooky stops along the way. Certain scenes that are so familiar from the book are brought to shivery, scream-inducing life here: Rachel Creed's (STAR TREK'S Denise Crosby) horrific memory of her terminally ill, crippled sister; Louis's encounters with the mortally injured jogger Victor Pascow (Brad Greenquist), both before and after his death; the trip into the "other" cemetery beyond the pet cemetery. And that third act...if it doesn't give you a few nightmares, maybe you should check your pulse.

Good performances by all here, especially the late Fred Gwynne as the well-intentioned neighbor, Jud Crandall, who gets the best line in the story that sums it all up: "Sometimes, dead is better."

About the only problem with the movie version is the casting of Louis's son, Gage (Miko Hughes). Knowing that it would be damn near impossible to get the kind of performance needed from a kid that age to seal the deal on this, Lambert and crew still did the best they could, and unfortunately, Hughes at the time was just too damn CUTE to "sell" his intended role as an evil, demon-possessed zombie. This takes you out of the movie whenever he shows up, though the scenes where he's featured are still masterfully staged, (especially Gwynne's death scene.)

Other than that, everything else is still about as good as it gets. CARRIE still holds the title for best King adaptation as far as I'm concerned; but SEMATARY is right up there in the Top Five.

Still, will anything adapted for the screen based on a King book be as terrifying as reading the story? Not BLOODY likely...for now. Making a [[ledger]] into a movie by following the story page-by-page is NEVER a good idea. When people read the book, they automatically start making their own "mental movie" of who the characters look like, the places they exist in, how the situations progress. And everybody's mind's-eye [[contrary]] is [[multiple]], which is why when the 'REAL' movie finally comes out, you're [[permanently]] [[go]] to have a ticked-off segment of the movie-going audience who are disappointed that it just doesn't measure up.

All a screenwriter and a director can hope to accomplish is whatever their own vision of the movie is, and hope that it comes as close as possible to what their audience is expecting to see.

There is no better case for this situation than the movies based on the novels of Stephen King. When filmmakers capture at least the essence of his stories, the results can be breathtaking and truly terrifying (CARRIE, 'SALEM'S LOT, THE DEAD ZONE), or they can be what fans consider to be a gawd-awful mess (Kubrick's version of THE SHINING; the miniseries for IT and THE TOMMYKNOCKERS).

[[While]] it's not even close to being the perfect King adaptation, PET SEMATARY has so many [[times]] of just skin-and-bone-deep unease that seemed to have bled [[for]] the screen directly from the book, that you can pretty much forgive its shortcomings. For that, we have [[musicians]] video-turned-film director Mary Lambert to thank, (she also directed SIESTA, not exactly a [[abomination]] movie, but another freaky-as-hell must-see you should put on your list), [[collaborating]] from a screenplay by the 'Man-ster' Himself, and [[presumably]] one of his [[improved]] ones.

Since the majority of you know the story, I won't put you to sleep with too many of the details. Dr. Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff) has moved his family out to the perfect house in the country. Well, almost [[perfecting]], except for two nasty little details: the dangerously busy stretch of interstate highway out in front, and the large pet cemetery in the woods out back. Since Louis is a veterinarian and has a young toddler for a son...well, even if you haven't read the book, do the frickin' math. It IS a King story, after all, so no mystery where this is headed.

It's not so much the destination that counts here, but the spooky stops along the way. Certain scenes that are so familiar from the book are brought to shivery, scream-inducing life here: Rachel Creed's (STAR TREK'S Denise Crosby) horrific memory of her terminally ill, crippled sister; Louis's encounters with the mortally injured jogger Victor Pascow (Brad Greenquist), both before and after his death; the trip into the "other" cemetery beyond the pet cemetery. And that third act...if it doesn't give you a few nightmares, maybe you should check your pulse.

Good performances by all here, especially the late Fred Gwynne as the well-intentioned neighbor, Jud Crandall, who gets the best line in the story that sums it all up: "Sometimes, dead is better."

About the only problem with the movie version is the casting of Louis's son, Gage (Miko Hughes). Knowing that it would be damn near impossible to get the kind of performance needed from a kid that age to seal the deal on this, Lambert and crew still did the best they could, and unfortunately, Hughes at the time was just too damn CUTE to "sell" his intended role as an evil, demon-possessed zombie. This takes you out of the movie whenever he shows up, though the scenes where he's featured are still masterfully staged, (especially Gwynne's death scene.)

Other than that, everything else is still about as good as it gets. CARRIE still holds the title for best King adaptation as far as I'm concerned; but SEMATARY is right up there in the Top Five.

Still, will anything adapted for the screen based on a King book be as terrifying as reading the story? Not BLOODY likely...for now. --------------------------------------------- Result 1496 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] How can a movie that features the singing of [[Curtis]] Mayfield be [[bad]]? It can't! The Groove [[Tube]] is a series of scatological black-out sketches that makes fun of [[anything]] from 2001 to the olympics. The [[highs]], (Koko the [[clown]], the [[easy]] lube [[recipe]]) outnumber the lows (an all too long "The [[Dealers]]"), but [[even]] the lows are funny. [[Best]] of all is [[Ken]] Shapiro's [[manic]] [[dance]] down a busy Manhattan sidewalk.(That is Shapiro, not Nat [[King]] [[Cole]] [[singing]] [[Just]] You, Just Me). Definitely [[dated]] now, but at the [[time]] The [[Groove]] Tube was irreverent, bold, shameless and hysterically funny. [[Ken]] Shapiro made this [[minor]] [[cult]] hit, then 7 years [[later]] [[made]] the [[Christmas]] day opening [[bomb]], [[Modern]] [[Problems]] ([[though]] I [[enjoyed]] it} and since then, [[unfortunately]], nothing.(He [[could]] [[possibly]] be playing drums in a [[jazz]] [[group]]) The [[Groove]] [[Tube]] remains to me an [[unending]] [[burst]] of [[positive]] [[energy]], a movie that 26 [[years]] after my [[initial]] [[viewing]], still [[brings]] me [[real]] [[joy]]! How can a movie that features the singing of [[Curtiss]] Mayfield be [[horrid]]? It can't! The Groove [[Tubing]] is a series of scatological black-out sketches that makes fun of [[nada]] from 2001 to the olympics. The [[altitudes]], (Koko the [[jester]], the [[uncomplicated]] lube [[recipes]]) outnumber the lows (an all too long "The [[Vendors]]"), but [[yet]] the lows are funny. [[Better]] of all is [[Keene]] Shapiro's [[fussy]] [[dancers]] down a busy Manhattan sidewalk.(That is Shapiro, not Nat [[Emperor]] [[Uss]] [[sing]] [[Jen]] You, Just Me). Definitely [[dating]] now, but at the [[times]] The [[Slit]] Tube was irreverent, bold, shameless and hysterically funny. [[Kent]] Shapiro made this [[smaller]] [[worship]] hit, then 7 years [[then]] [[accomplished]] the [[Kringle]] day opening [[explodes]], [[Contemporary]] [[Problem]] ([[if]] I [[liked]] it} and since then, [[regrettably]], nothing.(He [[would]] [[potentially]] be playing drums in a [[jaz]] [[cluster]]) The [[Slot]] [[Duct]] remains to me an [[endless]] [[blasting]] of [[supportive]] [[energies]], a movie that 26 [[olds]] after my [[preliminary]] [[opinion]], still [[bring]] me [[actual]] [[gladness]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] David Duchovny plays the lead role in this [[film]].Now a [[lot]] of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't [[even]] [[bother]] [[watching]] it.Very [[unfair]] to [[say]] the [[least]].[[David]] [[made]] his name on the x-files and is a decent [[actor]]. Dr [[Eugene]] Sands(Duchovny)is a drug addicted [[doctor]] [[struck]] off for malpractice.By sheer [[accident]] he becomes a [[private]] doctor for criminal [[millionaire]] Raymond [[Blossom]].[[However]] the FBI [[take]] an interest in [[using]] Eugene to snare [[Blossom]]. Angelina Jolie is cast in the supporting role of clare-the gangsters moll.She puts in a solid performance. Timothy Hutton [[playing]] Blossom is [[superb]] and [[immersed]] himself [[deeply]] into his character. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as [[many]] people [[would]] [[think]] and in the [[end]] i would [[rate]] his performance his [[credible]].[[His]] familiar [[monotonous]] tone and [[straight]] [[face]] is present but dosen't [[detract]] too much from the [[film]] David Duchovny plays the lead role in this [[cinematography]].Now a [[batch]] of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't [[yet]] [[irritate]] [[staring]] it.Very [[unjust]] to [[says]] the [[fewer]].[[Davids]] [[introduced]] his name on the x-files and is a decent [[protagonist]]. Dr [[Kessler]] Sands(Duchovny)is a drug addicted [[physicians]] [[knocked]] off for malpractice.By sheer [[incident]] he becomes a [[privy]] doctor for criminal [[billionaire]] Raymond [[Flowering]].[[Still]] the FBI [[taking]] an interest in [[utilizing]] Eugene to snare [[Lotus]]. Angelina Jolie is cast in the supporting role of clare-the gangsters moll.She puts in a solid performance. Timothy Hutton [[gaming]] Blossom is [[handsome]] and [[inundated]] himself [[crucially]] into his character. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as [[several]] people [[could]] [[believing]] and in the [[termination]] i would [[rates]] his performance his [[plausible]].[[Her]] familiar [[tedious]] tone and [[successive]] [[confront]] is present but dosen't [[divert]] too much from the [[cinematography]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] ... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?

Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.

And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...

This is a [[wonderful]] film.

I have often thought that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do. ... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?

Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.

And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...

This is a [[wondrous]] film.

I have often thought that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 1499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I just [[thought]] it was [[excellent]] and I [[still]] do. I'm [[grateful]] we're [[still]] [[able]] to [[see]] [[different]] [[stuff]] from what Hollywood [[almost]] floods us with. Saving Grace is [[smart]] and [[enjoyable]] - those who feel offended by the marijuana [[thing]] better go [[see]] the America's [[bride]] [[sort]] of [[movie]].

[[Saving]] Grace also [[shows]] that a funny [[movie]] doesn't have to be [[stupid]]. I was laughing my [[ass]] off during most of it but [[also]] pondering questions about what was the female lead [[character]] [[supposed]] to do to pay her deceased husband's debts.

[[In]] a nutshell - a [[witty]] storyline with typical [[English]] [[humour]] and good acting and directing. You couldn't [[ask]] for more.

7/10. I just [[ideology]] it was [[remarkable]] and I [[however]] do. I'm [[thankful]] we're [[however]] [[capable]] to [[behold]] [[diversified]] [[thing]] from what Hollywood [[approximately]] floods us with. Saving Grace is [[artful]] and [[nice]] - those who feel offended by the marijuana [[stuff]] better go [[behold]] the America's [[fiance]] [[kinds]] of [[cinematography]].

[[Rescuing]] Grace also [[exhibition]] that a funny [[movies]] doesn't have to be [[dolt]]. I was laughing my [[backside]] off during most of it but [[further]] pondering questions about what was the female lead [[nature]] [[alleged]] to do to pay her deceased husband's debts.

[[During]] a nutshell - a [[spiritual]] storyline with typical [[Francais]] [[comedy]] and good acting and directing. You couldn't [[asked]] for more.

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] Until now, the [[worst]] movie I had ever seen was Ben & Arthur. You really should [[check]] the reviews for that [[movie]] instead of this one. The review statistics for this [[movie]] have been skewed [[positive]] through a relentless and unscrupulous push by some of the people [[involved]] in [[making]] it, evidence for which is fairly easy to [[uncover]] online. At least the people who made Ben & [[Arthur]] were [[honorable]] enough to let it stand on its own [[shaky]] legs, instead of unscrupulously [[promoting]] it so suckers like me would buy it.

Everything about this movie is [[terrible]], the [[script]], the [[story]], the [[casting]], the acting, the [[direction]], the [[photography]], the editing, the music... what else goes into a [[movie]]? [[Whatever]] it is, here it's as [[bad]] as it gets. If it weren't so [[unpleasant]] it [[would]] be [[ridiculous]]. I [[kept]] watching it [[thinking]] it must get better, because I hadn't [[yet]] [[discovered]] that [[none]] of the [[positive]] [[reviews]] for it are [[reliable]].

It does not [[take]] a [[lot]] of [[money]] to [[make]] a [[great]] [[movie]], nor does a low budget [[mean]] a [[movie]] has to be [[bad]]. My favorite example of a shoestring-budget [[masterpiece]] is Gus Van Sant's [[amazing]] Mala Noche, but there are [[many]] others. Sideline Secrets—Director's [[Cut]] or [[original]]—is [[bad]] not because the people who [[made]] it had no [[money]], but because they had [[gigantic]] egos and no talent for [[anything]] at all except self-promotion. Until now, the [[meanest]] movie I had ever seen was Ben & Arthur. You really should [[cheques]] the reviews for that [[movies]] instead of this one. The review statistics for this [[filmmaking]] have been skewed [[affirmative]] through a relentless and unscrupulous push by some of the people [[implicated]] in [[doing]] it, evidence for which is fairly easy to [[unmask]] online. At least the people who made Ben & [[Arturo]] were [[honourable]] enough to let it stand on its own [[volatile]] legs, instead of unscrupulously [[boosting]] it so suckers like me would buy it.

Everything about this movie is [[scary]], the [[screenplay]], the [[tales]], the [[pouring]], the acting, the [[directions]], the [[pictures]], the editing, the music... what else goes into a [[filmmaking]]? [[Whichever]] it is, here it's as [[unfavourable]] as it gets. If it weren't so [[nasty]] it [[could]] be [[grotesque]]. I [[maintained]] watching it [[think]] it must get better, because I hadn't [[again]] [[detected]] that [[nothingness]] of the [[conducive]] [[exams]] for it are [[trustworthy]].

It does not [[taking]] a [[lots]] of [[cash]] to [[deliver]] a [[prodigious]] [[film]], nor does a low budget [[imply]] a [[filmmaking]] has to be [[inclement]]. My favorite example of a shoestring-budget [[centerpiece]] is Gus Van Sant's [[startling]] Mala Noche, but there are [[countless]] others. Sideline Secrets—Director's [[Chopped]] or [[initial]]—is [[unfavourable]] not because the people who [[introduced]] it had no [[cash]], but because they had [[prodigious]] egos and no talent for [[somethings]] at all except self-promotion. --------------------------------------------- Result 1501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called "Gloria." "All In The Family" was a brilliant [[show]] for its first four or five years and I [[bet]] I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named "Gloria" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a [[young]] adult rather than watching television.

On the other hand, it is [[pathetic]] that the "All In The Family" franchise had [[deteriorated]] so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.

I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.

Shalom, ZWrite Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called "Gloria." "All In The Family" was a brilliant [[exhibition]] for its first four or five years and I [[wagered]] I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named "Gloria" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a [[youthful]] adult rather than watching television.

On the other hand, it is [[deplorable]] that the "All In The Family" franchise had [[worsening]] so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.

I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.

Shalom, ZWrite --------------------------------------------- Result 1502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This movie commits what I [[would]] call an emotional [[rape]] on the viewer. The [[movie]] [[supposedly]] [[caused]] quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a [[pathetic]] [[attempt]] for a newbie [[director]] to get himself [[noticed]]. [[Hardly]] a [[voice]] in the [[discussion]] on the issue of violence, [[drug]] abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).

The main character's metamorphosis from good, but [[troubled]] boy to the [[vicious]] rapist is [[virtually]] nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated [[version]] of the rape scene from "A clockwork orange") is unbearable and I [[refuse]] to comment on its [[aesthetic]] values. There are some things an [[artist]] should not do to [[try]] and [[achieve]] his/her [[goal]]. [[At]] [[least]] in my [[opinion]].

To [[wrap]] it up: [[shockingly]] brutal, [[revolting]] and [[NOT]] WORTH YOUR TIME. See "A clockwork orange" or "Le pianiste" [[instead]]. This movie commits what I [[could]] call an emotional [[violating]] on the viewer. The [[filmmaking]] [[reportedly]] [[provoked]] quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a [[unfortunate]] [[try]] for a newbie [[superintendent]] to get himself [[observed]]. [[Practically]] a [[vocal]] in the [[debate]] on the issue of violence, [[medications]] abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).

The main character's metamorphosis from good, but [[restless]] boy to the [[cruel]] rapist is [[almost]] nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated [[stepping]] of the rape scene from "A clockwork orange") is unbearable and I [[dismiss]] to comment on its [[cosmetic]] values. There are some things an [[painters]] should not do to [[tries]] and [[attain]] his/her [[intention]]. [[During]] [[lowest]] in my [[viewing]].

To [[adjusting]] it up: [[marvellously]] brutal, [[abhorrent]] and [[NOPE]] WORTH YOUR TIME. See "A clockwork orange" or "Le pianiste" [[conversely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1503 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[saw]] this recently and I [[must]] [[say]], I was moved by the factual [[basis]] of the [[story]]. [[However]], "[[Holly]]" as a [[movie]] did not quite [[work]]. I am however, [[looking]] forward to watching the documentary which the producers who [[organised]] this project had [[made]] because I think that would be a [[much]] more [[compelling]] [[work]] than this film.

The international [[cast]] was [[composed]] of B-class [[actors]] but their acting was appropriate, and I must give a special [[mention]] for the young [[actress]] who played Holly. This was her first movie role and she did a very nice job, considering hers is the most [[challenging]] part.

Ron Livingston was adequate but bland as Patrick, the American whose quest is to "save" Holly, but Chris Penn was good in this, his final role. Unfortunately, despite my mostly favourable opinion of Virginie Ledoyen and Udo Kier, both of these actors were very much forgettable and did not do their best work in this film.

I believe in the film's message and [[intention]], but I have to be fair, so I rate "Holly" 3 stars based on its shortcomings as a movie. But I think the subject matter deserves serious consideration and I am pleased that the people behind this movie have made a documentary as well which I hope will have its debut on BBC and other TV networks. I [[noticed]] this recently and I [[gotta]] [[tell]], I was moved by the factual [[fundamentals]] of the [[conte]]. [[Instead]], "[[Hol]]" as a [[filmmaking]] did not quite [[jobs]]. I am however, [[researching]] forward to watching the documentary which the producers who [[arrange]] this project had [[effected]] because I think that would be a [[very]] more [[cogent]] [[jobs]] than this film.

The international [[casting]] was [[encompassing]] of B-class [[protagonists]] but their acting was appropriate, and I must give a special [[referenced]] for the young [[actor]] who played Holly. This was her first movie role and she did a very nice job, considering hers is the most [[tough]] part.

Ron Livingston was adequate but bland as Patrick, the American whose quest is to "save" Holly, but Chris Penn was good in this, his final role. Unfortunately, despite my mostly favourable opinion of Virginie Ledoyen and Udo Kier, both of these actors were very much forgettable and did not do their best work in this film.

I believe in the film's message and [[ambition]], but I have to be fair, so I rate "Holly" 3 stars based on its shortcomings as a movie. But I think the subject matter deserves serious consideration and I am pleased that the people behind this movie have made a documentary as well which I hope will have its debut on BBC and other TV networks. --------------------------------------------- Result 1504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This foolish, implausible tale is redeemed only by the opening scene in which a hard-boiled police detective delivers some nearly-audible lines confirming our greatest fears: He is dead. Perhaps the film would have been saved had the director forgone the dazzling star power of A. Martinez in favor of this sadly-anonymous actor who filled the screen for a brief moment. That a no-name hack-tor off the street could salvage such a dishwater film is no less likely than a villain committing murder by dropping stones into a quarry for an unsuspecting diver. His moment is brief; his promise is immense. Perhaps we will be treated to more screen time by this obscure thespian if there is ever a sequel to this ill-advised film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Unless]] you are already familiar with the pop stars who star in this [[film]], [[save]] yourself the [[time]] and stop reading this review after you've [[reached]] the end of the next [[sentence]].

[[FORGET]] [[YOU]] EVER STUMBLED [[UPON]] THIS [[FILM]] AND GO WATCH [[SOMETHING]] [[ELSE]].

But if you insist on reading, consider:

Lame [[vehicle]] for Japanese teen [[idol]] pretty-boys featuring [[nonsensical]], convoluted "plot" that drags out for an insufferable [[amount]] of time until you're ready to [[scream]].

[[Nothing]] in this [[film]] makes sense. It's an [[endless]] series of people expressing [[various]] emotions, from [[joy]] to anger, from happiness to tragedy, [[FOR]] [[NO]] [[GOOD]] [[REASON]]. We can [[obviously]] [[see]] something incredibly "[[dramatic]]" is happening, but we just don't GIVE A [[CRAP]] WHY 'cause there's no backstory.

By the time this [[film]] is over, you will be sick and tired of these stupid, lanky, girly stars' [[faces]]. You'll be [[revolted]] at having [[spent]] all this [[time]] watching them [[smile]], sneer, cry, look [[mysterious]], be "[[serious]]," and any other [[pointless]] [[expression]] they slap on their faces.

That some [[moron]] [[would]] ever [[go]] so far as to refer to this [[piece]] of [[insipid]] trash as being the "soul" of any of its "[[actors]]" should [[prove]] to you beyond the [[shadow]] of a doubt what the [[trailer]] and countless adoring [[comments]] on this site will not [[tell]] you:

[[Only]] the "[[converted]]," mindless [[minions]] will [[like]] this [[film]], the majority of them [[teenage]] [[girls]] with a pathological adoration for [[anything]] androgynous. [[Freud]] [[would]] have a field day.

Unless you're one of these [[mindless]] "[[fans]]," [[stay]] the hell away from this [[abomination]]. [[If]] you are already familiar with the pop stars who star in this [[filmmaking]], [[rescuing]] yourself the [[moment]] and stop reading this review after you've [[attained]] the end of the next [[condemnation]].

[[FORGOTTEN]] [[TOI]] EVER STUMBLED [[AFTERWARD]] THIS [[FILMMAKING]] AND GO WATCH [[ANYTHING]] [[OTHERWISE]].

But if you insist on reading, consider:

Lame [[autos]] for Japanese teen [[heroine]] pretty-boys featuring [[farcical]], convoluted "plot" that drags out for an insufferable [[somme]] of time until you're ready to [[cris]].

[[Nada]] in this [[filmmaking]] makes sense. It's an [[infinite]] series of people expressing [[different]] emotions, from [[delight]] to anger, from happiness to tragedy, [[ONTO]] [[NONE]] [[WELL]] [[REASONS]]. We can [[definitely]] [[seeing]] something incredibly "[[tremendous]]" is happening, but we just don't GIVE A [[BULLSHIT]] WHY 'cause there's no backstory.

By the time this [[filmmaking]] is over, you will be sick and tired of these stupid, lanky, girly stars' [[facing]]. You'll be [[rebelled]] at having [[spending]] all this [[times]] watching them [[grin]], sneer, cry, look [[opaque]], be "[[severe]]," and any other [[vain]] [[phrase]] they slap on their faces.

That some [[witless]] [[should]] ever [[going]] so far as to refer to this [[slice]] of [[tacky]] trash as being the "soul" of any of its "[[players]]" should [[proves]] to you beyond the [[shade]] of a doubt what the [[trailers]] and countless adoring [[commentaries]] on this site will not [[told]] you:

[[Exclusively]] the "[[transformed]]," mindless [[daemons]] will [[adores]] this [[flick]], the majority of them [[schoolgirl]] [[females]] with a pathological adoration for [[something]] androgynous. [[Floyd]] [[should]] have a field day.

Unless you're one of these [[reckless]] "[[amateurs]]," [[staying]] the hell away from this [[monstrosity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first "Home Alone" was one of the funniest movies of the 90's. The second was just as funny with the same cast and jokes! Now comes "Home Alone 3". I was curious how they could continue with the same story considering Kevin would've been 17 by 1997. He could take care of himself, right? So, what does the director decide to do? He takes a child just as annoying and makes him sick. The kid is like 6 years old and the mother leaves him alone in the house? What kind of team of burgerlers are these idiots? I don't really want to get too into detail if you want to sadly see this movie. But please, I'd recommend that you'd stay away from it. It's not worth your precious time. Go fold a piece of paper, do chores, balance a pencil on your nose, or take a nap! It's better to do then to watch "Home Alone 3"!

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1507 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] A typical 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good [[music]], but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, poor and at [[times]] [[confused]] storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with poor [[dialogue]], nice ambiance.

The reason it is still ([[relatively]]) well-known and sought after is probably the [[nude]] scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy ([[Eva]] Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.

The story [[revolves]] round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her [[discovery]] of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not [[evolve]] to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no "coming of age" for her: she is a very vain [[young]] girl who is already [[aware]] of her sexual [[charms]], but [[ultimately]] is just used and [[ends]] the [[film]] [[crying]] like the [[little]] girl she really still is. The [[boy]] is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and [[weak]] victim. A typical 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good [[musica]], but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, poor and at [[period]] [[disconcerted]] storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with poor [[conversation]], nice ambiance.

The reason it is still ([[comparatively]]) well-known and sought after is probably the [[naked]] scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy ([[Evy]] Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.

The story [[turns]] round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her [[uncovering]] of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not [[evolving]] to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no "coming of age" for her: she is a very vain [[youthful]] girl who is already [[mindful]] of her sexual [[psalms]], but [[eventually]] is just used and [[end]] the [[films]] [[mourning]] like the [[petite]] girl she really still is. The [[dude]] is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and [[vulnerable]] victim. --------------------------------------------- Result 1508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Some of the filmmakers who are participating in this series have made some really great films but they sure as heck are not showing much skill with this series. Particularly the writing. OK, the first season was somewhat better but these new episodes they are creating just stink. I'm a huge fan of horror and in my opinion the vast majority of these episodes are total garbage. Nothing new or genuinely interesting. Few of them are visually creative. It's just typical fabricated Hollywood crap, uninteresting, childish, poorly conceived and in some cases, flat out laughable. Much like Tales from the Crypt the only good thing this series has been offering is great nudity! Other then that this series blows hard. I get the impression sometimes that they hired a bunch of eighth-graders to write the episodes. Maybe they did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "GEORGE LOPEZ," in my opinion, is an absolute ABC classic! I haven't seen every episode, but I still enjoy it. There are many episodes that I enjoyed. One of them was where Amy (Sandra Bullock) walked into a moving piece of machinery. If you want to know why, you'll have to have seen it for yourself. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though new episodes can currently be seen, I strongly recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1510 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Hilarious]] [[film]]. I saw this film at the 2002 [[Sydney]] [[Gay]] and Lesbian Mardi [[Gras]] Film Festival, and laughed from [[start]] to [[finish]]. The acting was [[subtle]] but very [[funny]]. I'm not [[entirely]] certain about "The [[Real]] [[World]]" influence, we don't get that here, but the [[film]] [[holds]] up without the understanding of that show. Heather B [[steals]] [[every]] scene she appears in, most [[notably]] when acting with her seldom talkative red co-star. Highly [[recommended]]. I'd love to [[see]] this released on Video/DVD some time in the [[future]]. [[Comical]] [[cinematography]]. I saw this film at the 2002 [[Sidney]] [[Homo]] and Lesbian Mardi [[Fats]] Film Festival, and laughed from [[launches]] to [[conclude]]. The acting was [[perceptive]] but very [[amusing]]. I'm not [[utterly]] certain about "The [[Reales]] [[Global]]" influence, we don't get that here, but the [[kino]] [[hold]] up without the understanding of that show. Heather B [[itches]] [[each]] scene she appears in, most [[principally]] when acting with her seldom talkative red co-star. Highly [[suggested]]. I'd love to [[seeing]] this released on Video/DVD some time in the [[futur]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Keanu Reeves stars as a friend of a popular high school student who suddenly commits suicide...he and his friends go through emotional turmoil and share their reactions to this horrible incident...Good acting by Reeves and a young Jennifer Rubin..but on the whole is a little too much.. 4 of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've [[seen]] this film more than once now, and there's [[always]] someone [[complaining]] about the "[[obvious]] construction" of the plot afterwards. But then - this is part of Petzold's game: he plays along with the [[rules]] of [[genre]].

It's very nice, how the [[highly]] [[improbable]] [[story]] of how the two [[girls]] (Timoteo/[[Hummer]]) [[meet]], is again mirrored in another, [[even]] more improbable [[story]], that the [[girls]] make up for a casting. This [[film]] is a [[journey]] between [[fact]] and fiction, it's more about potentials, [[things]] that [[might]] have [[happened]] in the past or might be happening in the [[future]], than it is about actual ongoings. It's a reverie, [[sorts]] of - so [[apt]] enough there are a lot of [[motives]], Freud might have [[found]] interesting for his [[dream]] [[analysis]], like all the "doppelganger"-constellations.

Also, I [[think]], "Gespenster" might be interesting to be [[watched]] in comparison to [[current]] Asian [[cinema]] of the [[uncanny]]: Petzold's [[everyday]] urban [[architecture]] [[also]] feels [[haunted]] in an unobtrusive, [[strangely]] [[familiar]] [[way]]. This [[film]] is not about the [[obvious]]. To [[describe]] it as the [[story]] of two girls who [[meet]] and [[eventually]] [[become]] [[friends]] and [[lovers]], or as the story of an orphaned [[mother]], who [[searches]] [[Europe]] for her lost daughter, [[clearly]] doesn't [[say]] much about the [[nature]] of "Gespenster" at all. I've [[watched]] this film more than once now, and there's [[permanently]] someone [[mooning]] about the "[[flagrant]] construction" of the plot afterwards. But then - this is part of Petzold's game: he plays along with the [[regs]] of [[genera]].

It's very nice, how the [[exceptionally]] [[implausible]] [[tale]] of how the two [[daughter]] (Timoteo/[[Suv]]) [[cater]], is again mirrored in another, [[yet]] more improbable [[tale]], that the [[dame]] make up for a casting. This [[cinematography]] is a [[tour]] between [[facto]] and fiction, it's more about potentials, [[items]] that [[probable]] have [[arrived]] in the past or might be happening in the [[forthcoming]], than it is about actual ongoings. It's a reverie, [[kind]] of - so [[probability]] enough there are a lot of [[motivation]], Freud might have [[unearthed]] interesting for his [[nightmares]] [[analyze]], like all the "doppelganger"-constellations.

Also, I [[believe]], "Gespenster" might be interesting to be [[observed]] in comparison to [[underway]] Asian [[films]] of the [[supernatural]]: Petzold's [[daily]] urban [[structure]] [[further]] feels [[tormented]] in an unobtrusive, [[bizarrely]] [[colloquial]] [[camino]]. This [[kino]] is not about the [[observable]]. To [[outline]] it as the [[narratives]] of two girls who [[cater]] and [[ultimately]] [[gotten]] [[boyfriends]] and [[fans]], or as the story of an orphaned [[mothers]], who [[search]] [[Eu]] for her lost daughter, [[patently]] doesn't [[told]] much about the [[characters]] of "Gespenster" at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1513 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is an extremely funny and heartwarming story about an orphanage that is in financial trouble. When the director goes on vacation, his dad agrees to step in temporarily to run things.

This is positively the best work that Leslie Nielson has ever done. His idea in the film to rent out children is immediately innovative, and his sales techniques will definitely make you laugh.

The little girl in this movie is so sweet and charming that I know I will never forget her. Just make sure that you don't miss the first five minutes of the movie!

Such great family entertainment is so rare these days. If you go for slightly corny pictures with happy endings,go for this one! I could watch this over and over, and I often do! My only complaint about this movie is that it is so difficult to find a copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1514 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I disagree with much that has been [[written]] and [[said]] about this [[supposed]] "masterpiece" of the German [[New]] [[Wave]]:

1) There are major flaws in simple [[exposition]], in the [[basic]] [[communication]] of [[critical]] plot points, as [[relating]] to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many [[viewers]] [[understood]] that the husband [[agreed]], in [[exchange]] for [[substantial]] financial [[remuneration]], not to [[return]] to and [[reclaim]] his wife until Oswald was [[dead]]?

2) The ending is [[highly]] unsatisfying because arbitrary and [[accidental]]. The original [[screenplay]] [[called]] for [[Maria]] to [[commit]] suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in [[effect]] sold their [[marriage]] to Oswald. [[In]] the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet [[across]] her [[wrist]] in a [[gesture]] of suicide. Maria is then summarily [[blown]] up, [[rather]] than having to [[confront]] and [[live]] with the [[consequences]] of her self-delusion and [[moral]] compromise.

3) Fassbinder seeks to [[forcibly]] superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and "[[experts]]" [[assert]], I don't [[think]] it [[works]]. [[Merely]] [[intruding]] historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German [[reconstruction]] in the soundtrack on the dramatic [[events]] of the movie does not make those [[historical]] [[events]] [[integral]] to the [[drama]].

The [[selfish]] [[ambition]] of Maria's [[rise]] from [[poverty]] to [[prosperity]] is [[meant]] to [[parallel]] the so-called economic miracle of postwar [[Germany]]. [[Maria]] is [[thus]] [[intended]] to be a [[woman]] [[specific]] to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages.

4) Lastly, there are several instances of [[inexcusable]] sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. [[Unknown]] people talk off screen without ever being [[seen]]; [[music]] is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically [[substitutes]] for acting.

[[Strangely]], for a [[movie]] [[condemning]] a [[country]] for [[willful]] collective amnesia of the [[holocaust]], it itself never mentions it once. I disagree with much that has been [[wrote]] and [[says]] about this [[presumed]] "masterpiece" of the German [[Newer]] [[Waves]]:

1) There are major flaws in simple [[exhibitions]], in the [[fundamental]] [[interact]] of [[imperative]] plot points, as [[regarding]] to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many [[spectators]] [[comprehend]] that the husband [[accepted]], in [[exchanges]] for [[massive]] financial [[salary]], not to [[comeback]] to and [[reclaiming]] his wife until Oswald was [[deaths]]?

2) The ending is [[heavily]] unsatisfying because arbitrary and [[coincidental]]. The original [[scenarios]] [[termed]] for [[Mario]] to [[committed]] suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in [[effects]] sold their [[matrimony]] to Oswald. [[At]] the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet [[during]] her [[bracelet]] in a [[flick]] of suicide. Maria is then summarily [[melted]] up, [[quite]] than having to [[faces]] and [[vivo]] with the [[implications]] of her self-delusion and [[ethical]] compromise.

3) Fassbinder seeks to [[forcefully]] superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and "[[specialists]]" [[argue]], I don't [[thought]] it [[collaborated]]. [[Only]] [[intrude]] historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German [[rebuild]] in the soundtrack on the dramatic [[event]] of the movie does not make those [[historic]] [[event]] [[inalienable]] to the [[opera]].

The [[egocentric]] [[aspiration]] of Maria's [[surge]] from [[destitution]] to [[affluence]] is [[signified]] to [[randomness]] the so-called economic miracle of postwar [[Deutschland]]. [[Mario]] is [[thereby]] [[designed]] to be a [[mujer]] [[concrete]] to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages.

4) Lastly, there are several instances of [[unforgivable]] sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. [[Unbeknownst]] people talk off screen without ever being [[watched]]; [[musica]] is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically [[alternating]] for acting.

[[Surprisingly]], for a [[filmmaking]] [[denounced]] a [[nation]] for [[wilful]] collective amnesia of the [[shoah]], it itself never mentions it once. --------------------------------------------- Result 1515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Dear me... Peter [[Sellers]] was one of the most oddly [[talented]] actors there has been. But his [[choice]] of films, say, after 1964, was very [[unfortunate]]. He didn't [[seem]] to realize how to use his talents. He would have been better off working with more of the Kubricks of the film world than the people he did. Of his later films, only "The Optimists of Nine Elms" and "Being There" have impressed me of those I have [[seen]].

That said, the Boultings and Sellers had made a few films prior to this that hardly sound that bad - I have yet to see "Carlton Browne" and "Heavens Above!" - at least in the sense of using Sellers well to a degree. But, "There's a Girl in My Soup" really is a poor [[film]] and a [[dire]] choice on Sellers' part in terms of character. In his films from 1955-64, you can usually expect at least some very inventive twist and always an enigmatic conviction in his roles. Here, you have Peter [[Sellers]] [[trying]] to play a typical romantic lead. It's almost Sellers playing a Niven cad without the joviality. He certainly does not [[convince]], [[try]] as he might, or create an interesting character. He should have left such parts to masters of suavity such as Cary Grant, and concentrated on those intriguing dramatic and comic roles that he was famed for.

Hawn and Sellers really do not establish any genuine chemistry; this is no easy, genial romance of the like perfected by William Powell and Myrna Loy. It is very [[artificial]] seeming, all the way through - I know that it is part of Danvers' character that he is a dry procurer of ladies, but he doesn't really change from that in a way that convinces. [[Sellers]] has a very [[grating]] [[way]] of playing "charm" as well... this character really has no [[depth]], and really does not gain the viewer's sympathy or interest. Sellers goes through the motions in a way one would not think possible when remembering the [[magnificence]] of his shifty, iconoclastic performance in "Lolita".

There really is nothing to say about the plot, direction or characters, as frankly they [[leave]] little or no impression. This is truly one of the most anaemic, complacent, [[misguided]] and lightly dull films I have ever [[seen]]. A nonentity of a "[[vehicle]]" for Sellers' [[undisputed]] talents.

Rating:- * 1/2/***** Dear me... Peter [[Distributor]] was one of the most oddly [[prodigy]] actors there has been. But his [[opt]] of films, say, after 1964, was very [[hapless]]. He didn't [[looks]] to realize how to use his talents. He would have been better off working with more of the Kubricks of the film world than the people he did. Of his later films, only "The Optimists of Nine Elms" and "Being There" have impressed me of those I have [[noticed]].

That said, the Boultings and Sellers had made a few films prior to this that hardly sound that bad - I have yet to see "Carlton Browne" and "Heavens Above!" - at least in the sense of using Sellers well to a degree. But, "There's a Girl in My Soup" really is a poor [[filmmaking]] and a [[tragic]] choice on Sellers' part in terms of character. In his films from 1955-64, you can usually expect at least some very inventive twist and always an enigmatic conviction in his roles. Here, you have Peter [[Dealer]] [[seek]] to play a typical romantic lead. It's almost Sellers playing a Niven cad without the joviality. He certainly does not [[persuade]], [[seek]] as he might, or create an interesting character. He should have left such parts to masters of suavity such as Cary Grant, and concentrated on those intriguing dramatic and comic roles that he was famed for.

Hawn and Sellers really do not establish any genuine chemistry; this is no easy, genial romance of the like perfected by William Powell and Myrna Loy. It is very [[manmade]] seeming, all the way through - I know that it is part of Danvers' character that he is a dry procurer of ladies, but he doesn't really change from that in a way that convinces. [[Dealer]] has a very [[grill]] [[manner]] of playing "charm" as well... this character really has no [[depths]], and really does not gain the viewer's sympathy or interest. Sellers goes through the motions in a way one would not think possible when remembering the [[grandeur]] of his shifty, iconoclastic performance in "Lolita".

There really is nothing to say about the plot, direction or characters, as frankly they [[let]] little or no impression. This is truly one of the most anaemic, complacent, [[misspelled]] and lightly dull films I have ever [[noticed]]. A nonentity of a "[[auto]]" for Sellers' [[incontrovertible]] talents.

Rating:- * 1/2/***** --------------------------------------------- Result 1516 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[watched]] this film not [[really]] expecting much, I got it in a pack of 5 films, all of which were [[pretty]] [[terrible]] in their own way for under a fiver so what could I [[expect]]? and you know what I was right, they were all terrible, this [[movie]] has a few (and a few is stretching it) interesting points, the occasional camcorder view is a [[nice]] [[touch]], the drummer is very like a drummer, i.e [[damned]] annoying and, well thats about it [[actually]], the [[problem]] is that its just so boring, in what I can only assume was an attempt to build tension, a whole lot of [[nothing]] happens and when it does its utterly [[tedious]] (I had my thumb on the [[fast]] forward button, ready to [[press]] for most of the movie, but [[gave]] it a go) and seriously is the lead [[singer]] of the band that great looking, coz they don't half mention how beautiful he is a hell of a lot, I thought he looked a bit like a meercat, all this and I haven't even mentioned the killer, I'm not even gonna go into it, its just not worth explaining. Anyway as far as I'm concerned Star and London are just about the only [[reason]] to watch this and with the [[exception]] of London (who was actually [[quite]] [[funny]]) it wasn't because of their acting talent, I've [[certainly]] seen a lot worse, but I've also [[seen]] a lot better. Best [[avoid]] unless your bored of watching paint [[dry]]. I [[saw]] this film not [[genuinely]] expecting much, I got it in a pack of 5 films, all of which were [[belle]] [[scary]] in their own way for under a fiver so what could I [[awaited]]? and you know what I was right, they were all terrible, this [[filmmaking]] has a few (and a few is stretching it) interesting points, the occasional camcorder view is a [[enjoyable]] [[toque]], the drummer is very like a drummer, i.e [[cursed]] annoying and, well thats about it [[indeed]], the [[trouble]] is that its just so boring, in what I can only assume was an attempt to build tension, a whole lot of [[none]] happens and when it does its utterly [[monotonous]] (I had my thumb on the [[faster]] forward button, ready to [[pressing]] for most of the movie, but [[given]] it a go) and seriously is the lead [[singing]] of the band that great looking, coz they don't half mention how beautiful he is a hell of a lot, I thought he looked a bit like a meercat, all this and I haven't even mentioned the killer, I'm not even gonna go into it, its just not worth explaining. Anyway as far as I'm concerned Star and London are just about the only [[motif]] to watch this and with the [[exemptions]] of London (who was actually [[altogether]] [[hilarious]]) it wasn't because of their acting talent, I've [[definitely]] seen a lot worse, but I've also [[watched]] a lot better. Best [[avert]] unless your bored of watching paint [[driest]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite the mysteriously positive reviews and high rating, this is an awful movie. Awful enough, that l feel obligated to warn you how bad it is.

The movie is set in the final period of the Raj, during the time of India's fight for independence. What follows in the ridiculous plot just fills me with disbelief. What the characters do and how they behave just does not persuade me that the characters exist in that era.

For instance, would the young married Hindu housemaid from the local village have an affair with her married Englishman Master, knowing full well that discovery of the affair would likely mean utter social ostracization and shame if not mortal punishment? Unlikely, but still maybe. However, would the same young Hindu housemaid, in the conservative society of India of that era carry on like a half naked Britney Spears in heat, partake in hot outdoor sex during daylight in open view where they might be discovered at any moment? That is not only bloody unlikely, that is a retarded plot line.

Such idiocies combined with the poor acting, drove me to leave the cinema an hour into the movie, so i did not watch the second half of the movie. One could only hope the ending is of more intelligence than what i saw in the first half. --------------------------------------------- Result 1518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is all about subtlety and the difficulty of navigating the ever-shifting limits of mores, race relations and desire. Granted, it is not a movie for everyone. There are no car chases, no buildings exploding, no murders. The drama lies in the tension suggested by glances, minimal gestures, spatial boundaries, lighting and things left -- sometimes very ostensibly -- unsaid. It's about identity, memory, community, belonging. The different parts of the movie work together to reinforce the leitmotifs of self and other, identity, desire, limits and loss. It will reward the attentive and sensitive viewer. It will displease those whose palates require explosive, massive, spicy action. It is a beautifully filmed human story. That is all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1519 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] William Powell is Philo Vance in "The Kennel Murder Case," a 1933 film also starring Mary Astor, Paul Cavanagh, Eugene Palette, Helen Vinson and Ralph Morgan. A dog show in which Philo has entered his Scottish terrier Captain serves as the background for a locked room mystery with too many suspects. The mystery is very clever and the denouement both complicated and interesting. Since the talkies are still quite young, the camera work is a little static, but Michael Curtiz does a good job directing the action.

The supporting cast is excellent; the entire cast brings the film up a notch. Lots of actors have played Philo Vance, including Paul Lukas, Basil Rathbone, Wilford Hyde-White, Edmund Lowe, James Stephenson, Alan Curtis, Warren William and others. Powell played it the most (five times) and is the best fit for the role - very relaxed but serious at the same time. This was made before "The Thin Man" catapulted him to big stardom - he had spent about 12 years in film by then, beginning his career on stage in 1912 at the age of 20. A remarkable man, a remarkable screen presence and a remarkable actor who lived to be nearly 92. We're so lucky to have his films available on DVD and on TCM today. "The Kennel Murder Case" is a great story and a fun film - don't miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1520 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely one of the worst movies I have ever seen! The acting, the dialog, the manuscript, the sound, the lighting, the plot line. I actually can't say anything positive about this, although I enjoy Swedish movies. The fighting scenes are so ridiculous that it's impossible to take it seriously. And when the lead character just happens to loose his shirt, while dodging bullets in a strip bar, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a joke, or if someone really thinks these are ingredients in a good film?! Regina Lund is the only half descent actor, but she disappears in a flood of laughable pronunciations and unbelievable reactions. It leaves you horrified that someone actually spent time and money on something like this... --------------------------------------------- Result 1521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Definitely]] at the top five of best [[John]] Garfield movies has to be Pride of the Marines. It's the [[true]] [[story]] of Marine private Al Schmid who at the [[cost]] of his own sight, while wounded [[held]] off a horde of [[storming]] Japanese on Guadalcanal.

The story [[nicely]] [[segments]] in three parts, Al Schmid's [[home]] [[life]] where he's a [[simple]] working [[stiff]] who's just getting serious with a woman and who likes [[nothing]] better than his [[bowling]] night. Pearl [[Harbor]] is bombed and he's off to [[war]] as [[millions]] of others were.

The second [[part]] is at Guadalcanal and we see part of the action where he's in an [[isolated]] machine [[gun]] nest, holding off Japanese [[troops]]. [[His]] [[action]] prevented [[Marine]] positions from being overrun, but a [[grenade]] does in his eyesight.

And of course the third part is his painful [[adjustment]] to civilian [[life]] and to [[reassure]] himself that people aren't just [[caring]] for him out of [[pity]], most of all that girl he was seeing Eleanor Parker.

This film was broadcast on TCM on [[John]] Garfield's 95th birthday and there was a documentary on Garfield [[hosted]] by his daughter. One of the people interviewed said that Garfield was the actor most [[believable]] in working class roles in having and holding a union card.

In that respect he was lucky in that he did land with Warner Brothers in Hollywood. [[Though]] he kept getting typecast in [[gangster]] roles in the tradition of that studio, Garfield was [[terrific]] in these parts because of his [[background]], because he [[came]] from the [[kind]] of life Al Schmid had, with the [[exception]] of Garfield's Jewish [[background]].

[[In]] that [[respect]] he was [[perfect]] to [[play]] the part of a working [[class]] hero like Al Schmid who [[accepted]] the [[responsibility]] of defending his [[country]]. [[No]] [[super]] heroics here, just a [[guy]] who'd rather have been back in [[Philadelphia]], but doing a [[job]] that had to be done.

It's a great [[part]] for Garfield. It's a [[film]] one shouldn't miss. I do wonder [[though]] whatever happened to the [[real]] Al Schmid. [[Indubitably]] at the top five of best [[Johannes]] Garfield movies has to be Pride of the Marines. It's the [[real]] [[fairytales]] of Marine private Al Schmid who at the [[fees]] of his own sight, while wounded [[holds]] off a horde of [[raiding]] Japanese on Guadalcanal.

The story [[politely]] [[slices]] in three parts, Al Schmid's [[houses]] [[vida]] where he's a [[mere]] working [[tough]] who's just getting serious with a woman and who likes [[anything]] better than his [[snooker]] night. Pearl [[Harbours]] is bombed and he's off to [[wars]] as [[billions]] of others were.

The second [[parties]] is at Guadalcanal and we see part of the action where he's in an [[segregated]] machine [[guns]] nest, holding off Japanese [[soldiers]]. [[Her]] [[efforts]] prevented [[Marina]] positions from being overrun, but a [[grenada]] does in his eyesight.

And of course the third part is his painful [[adaptation]] to civilian [[lifetime]] and to [[soothe]] himself that people aren't just [[care]] for him out of [[shame]], most of all that girl he was seeing Eleanor Parker.

This film was broadcast on TCM on [[Johannes]] Garfield's 95th birthday and there was a documentary on Garfield [[greeted]] by his daughter. One of the people interviewed said that Garfield was the actor most [[credible]] in working class roles in having and holding a union card.

In that respect he was lucky in that he did land with Warner Brothers in Hollywood. [[If]] he kept getting typecast in [[mobster]] roles in the tradition of that studio, Garfield was [[handsome]] in these parts because of his [[backdrop]], because he [[became]] from the [[sort]] of life Al Schmid had, with the [[exceptions]] of Garfield's Jewish [[backdrop]].

[[Across]] that [[respecting]] he was [[irreproachable]] to [[gaming]] the part of a working [[category]] hero like Al Schmid who [[consented]] the [[liability]] of defending his [[countries]]. [[Nope]] [[peachy]] heroics here, just a [[fella]] who'd rather have been back in [[Philly]], but doing a [[labour]] that had to be done.

It's a great [[portion]] for Garfield. It's a [[cinematography]] one shouldn't miss. I do wonder [[if]] whatever happened to the [[actual]] Al Schmid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Being a slasher film [[aficionado]], I typically will settle in to watch every slash movie that passes over my retinas, which sometimes does more harm than good to my brain, I will say. While channel surfing the other night, Sleepaway Camp [[II]] [[happened]] to cross paths with me. Of course, I [[wanted]] to check it out, as I had heard of the Sleepaway Camp franchise, but have never actually seen any of them (for shame, I know). I will note that since I have not [[seen]] the original, my [[criticism]] should [[probably]] not be taken too seriously, because perhaps what I think is [[wrong]] with it is totally intentional by the franchise's own design.

Now I'm [[assuming]] that the [[franchise]] of Sleepaway Camp is, in itself, a [[joke]] on itself. [[Hell]], even the [[name]] comes off as an intentional joke. Sleep away camp? It's good fun. I can appreciate the film for [[wanting]] to just put [[together]] [[something]] for pure camp [[horror]] [[value]], but that's about as far as I can go. The acting in this movie made the cast of the original [[Friday]] the 13th look like thespians doing a rendition of Macbeth. Campy requires [[bad]] acting, but [[come]] on. Pamela Springsteen as the [[evil]] out-of-touch-with-reality [[killer]] did a [[better]] job of killing off my interest than she did [[killing]] off the entire cast. As far as comedy goes, there were a few times where I chuckled, but it was few and far between.

Ultimately, SAC [[II]] is pretty boring, and I [[really]] did want to sleep away the camp. The deaths are so obviously staged and fake that you can [[barely]] [[appreciate]] them. If you're [[looking]] for a slasher film comedy with good camp, I recommend Club Dread. If your [[channel]] surfing takes you [[across]] this one, check and see what else is on. Being a slasher film [[connoisseur]], I typically will settle in to watch every slash movie that passes over my retinas, which sometimes does more harm than good to my brain, I will say. While channel surfing the other night, Sleepaway Camp [[SECONDLY]] [[arrived]] to cross paths with me. Of course, I [[want]] to check it out, as I had heard of the Sleepaway Camp franchise, but have never actually seen any of them (for shame, I know). I will note that since I have not [[saw]] the original, my [[criticisms]] should [[arguably]] not be taken too seriously, because perhaps what I think is [[improper]] with it is totally intentional by the franchise's own design.

Now I'm [[presuming]] that the [[franchises]] of Sleepaway Camp is, in itself, a [[giggle]] on itself. [[Whorehouse]], even the [[behalf]] comes off as an intentional joke. Sleep away camp? It's good fun. I can appreciate the film for [[wants]] to just put [[whole]] [[somethin]] for pure camp [[terror]] [[values]], but that's about as far as I can go. The acting in this movie made the cast of the original [[Wednesday]] the 13th look like thespians doing a rendition of Macbeth. Campy requires [[unfavorable]] acting, but [[coming]] on. Pamela Springsteen as the [[demonic]] out-of-touch-with-reality [[slayer]] did a [[optimum]] job of killing off my interest than she did [[homicide]] off the entire cast. As far as comedy goes, there were a few times where I chuckled, but it was few and far between.

Ultimately, SAC [[SECONDLY]] is pretty boring, and I [[genuinely]] did want to sleep away the camp. The deaths are so obviously staged and fake that you can [[hardly]] [[thankful]] them. If you're [[researching]] for a slasher film comedy with good camp, I recommend Club Dread. If your [[chanel]] surfing takes you [[in]] this one, check and see what else is on. --------------------------------------------- Result 1523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Cliffhanger is what [[appears]] to be Slyvester Stallone's [[last]] [[action]] [[movie]] before he [[became]] such an underrated [[actor]]. It's about a mountain [[climber]] that [[must]] [[help]] his [[friend]] after being held hostage by [[mercenaries]] that [[want]] them to [[find]] three [[suitcases]] [[carrying]] money over 100 [[million]] [[dollars]]. It has great action sequence's, edge of your [[seat]] [[fun]] and a [[great]] [[time]] at the [[movies]]. Cliffhanger is what [[emerges]] to be Slyvester Stallone's [[latter]] [[measures]] [[kino]] before he [[came]] such an underrated [[protagonist]]. It's about a mountain [[mountaineer]] that [[gotta]] [[helping]] his [[boyfriend]] after being held hostage by [[mercs]] that [[wants]] them to [[found]] three [[luggage]] [[carries]] money over 100 [[billion]] [[dollar]]. It has great action sequence's, edge of your [[seats]] [[amusing]] and a [[wondrous]] [[period]] at the [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1524 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Actually, the [[movie]] is neither horror nor Sci-Fi. With a very [[strong]] [[Christian]] [[religious]] [[theme]], this movie delivers [[minimal]] content and no [[suspense]]. Second-tier [[actors]] do half-decent [[jobs]] of reading their [[boring]] roles. The only good performance is by Sydney Penny who plays a role of a [[mother]] of ... I won't [[spoil]] the [[movie]], it's [[either]] [[Christ]] or Anti-Christ. [[Avoid]] watching this [[movie]] [[unless]] you a [[Christian]] religious [[fanatic]] obsessed with apocalypse.

[[Being]] a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this [[movie]] just because I wanted to [[write]] this [[review]]. It's a [[pity]] that Sci-Fi [[channel]] had to [[air]] this [[movie]] at the peak [[evening]] [[time]]. Actually, the [[filmmaking]] is neither horror nor Sci-Fi. With a very [[forceful]] [[Kristen]] [[ecclesiastical]] [[thematic]], this movie delivers [[small]] content and no [[wait]]. Second-tier [[actresses]] do half-decent [[workplace]] of reading their [[dull]] roles. The only good performance is by Sydney Penny who plays a role of a [[mommy]] of ... I won't [[ruin]] the [[flick]], it's [[neither]] [[God]] or Anti-Christ. [[Shirk]] watching this [[filmmaking]] [[if]] you a [[Cristian]] religious [[fanaticism]] obsessed with apocalypse.

[[Ongoing]] a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this [[filmmaking]] just because I wanted to [[writing]] this [[scrutinize]]. It's a [[compassion]] that Sci-Fi [[canals]] had to [[airforce]] this [[filmmaking]] at the peak [[tonight]] [[moment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did [[like]] this movie.

I work at a video store and when I saw this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that bad, it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty [[impressive]] group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I [[found]] it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.

Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott [[gave]] the [[best]] performance as a [[homicidal]] [[cop]]. [[Truly]] believable and [[really]] in [[character]], he [[freaked]] me out a [[couple]] of [[times]].

I was really [[expecting]] a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified [[action]] sequences, stuff like that, but it was [[surprisingly]] well [[done]] and I didn't find any of that. [[Every]] shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty [[solid]] [[really]].

[[overall]], [[amazing]] cast, decent [[story]] that [[kept]] me interested and just [[enough]] [[action]] to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't [[appear]] in [[theatres]], it was [[better]] than some [[garbage]] I've [[seen]] on the [[big]] screen. I [[would]] [[say]] it's worth seeing. First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did [[loves]] this movie.

I work at a video store and when I saw this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that bad, it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty [[wondrous]] group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I [[uncovered]] it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.

Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott [[given]] the [[better]] performance as a [[manslaughter]] [[policeman]]. [[Truthfully]] believable and [[truly]] in [[characters]], he [[affraid]] me out a [[pair]] of [[period]].

I was really [[waiting]] a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified [[actions]] sequences, stuff like that, but it was [[unbelievably]] well [[completed]] and I didn't find any of that. [[Everything]] shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty [[robust]] [[truly]].

[[total]], [[wondrous]] cast, decent [[conte]] that [[preserved]] me interested and just [[adequate]] [[efforts]] to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't [[appearing]] in [[theatre]], it was [[best]] than some [[junk]] I've [[watched]] on the [[gargantuan]] screen. I [[should]] [[told]] it's worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1526 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This show is totally worth watching. It has the best cast of talent I have seen in a very long time. The premise of the show is unique and fresh ( I guess the executives at ABC are not used too that, as it was not another reality show). However this show was believable with likable characters and marvelous story lines. I am probably not in the age group they expect to like the show, as I am in my forty's, but a lot of my friends also loved it (Late 30's - mid 40's) and are dying for quality shows with talented cast members. I do not think this show was given enough time to gain an audience. I believe that given more time this show would have done very well. Once again ABC is not giving a show with real potential a real chance. With so many shows given chance after chance and not nearly worth it! They need to give quality shows a real chance and the time to really click and gain an audience. I really loved the characters and looked forward to watching each episode. I have been watching the episodes on ABC videos and the show keeps getting better and better. Although I think they owe us one more episode (Number 13?). We want to watch what we can! Bombard ABC with emails and letters and see if its possible to save this show from extinction. It certainly worked for Jerico. Some things are just worth saving and this show is definitely one of them. SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION TO ABC AT: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gh1215/petition.html --------------------------------------------- Result 1527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This is the [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. I was going to [[get]] up and [[leave]] at [[Tape]] 4 but I [[stuck]] it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! [[Afghanistan]]? [[Come]] on [[guys]]! Who's the [[idiot]] who [[forgot]] to [[hide]] the Sanskrit [[billboards]]? I [[thought]] the lead actor([[George]] Calil) was [[particularly]] [[inept]]. Apart from the [[bad]] acting and over [[zealous]] camera shake, I thought [[using]] the events of 9/11 as a reason to make "[[Larson]] the [[Lunatic]] Implodes, all over a screen near you" [[disgraceful]] and irreverent to the [[victims]] of 9/11. [[Using]] a [[phone]] [[call]] from Larson's [[wife]], [[Sarah]], [[supposedly]] from one of the terrorist [[held]] [[planes]] on that day, was [[appalling]]. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that cold hearted [[stunt]] did. This is the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I have ever [[noticed]]. I was going to [[obtain]] up and [[let]] at [[Cassettes]] 4 but I [[prude]] it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! [[Afghans]]? [[Coming]] on [[buddies]]! Who's the [[dumb]] who [[forget]] to [[hides]] the Sanskrit [[billboard]]? I [[ideology]] the lead actor([[Georgy]] Calil) was [[peculiarly]] [[incompetent]]. Apart from the [[negative]] acting and over [[officious]] camera shake, I thought [[utilize]] the events of 9/11 as a reason to make "[[Larsen]] the [[Quirky]] Implodes, all over a screen near you" [[shameful]] and irreverent to the [[victim]] of 9/11. [[Utilizing]] a [[phones]] [[invitation]] from Larson's [[femme]], [[Sara]], [[seemingly]] from one of the terrorist [[hold]] [[airplane]] on that day, was [[shocking]]. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that cold hearted [[understudy]] did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1528 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[STAR]] [[RATING]]: ***** The Works **** [[Just]] Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** [[Lagging]] Behind * The Pits

[[In]] this [[debut]] effort for [[Nick]] Park's beloved man and [[dog]], they are forced to fly to the [[moon]] when good old Wallace [[runs]] out of cheese.

As well as being the shortest feature at just 22 [[minutes]], this W/G adventure is [[also]] the earliest and it kinda shows. The plasticine animation is a little creaky and funny here, sort of reminiscent of the Mork animation about the little man in the box.

Admirable though the craftsmanship behind it is, I've never actually been [[hugely]] into Wallace & Gromit (maybe a bit too clean and traditional for someone of my generation.) The only one I've really [[enjoyed]] is The Wrong Trousers (and that was more from when I was younger and less aware of, shall we say, the seedier pleasures of life.) I was driven to actively seek out this early effort due to the resurgence in popularity as a result of the [[hugely]] successful [[recent]] [[film]] adaptation.

As [[technically]] impressive as the first two (all [[things]] [[considered]]!) this one [[lacks]] the emotional angle it's successors were to possess. That being said, it's [[fairly]] good fun as a first try and [[certainly]] set the [[standard]] for [[greater]] [[things]] to come. Two stars, but a good two stars. ** [[SUPERSTAR]] [[RATINGS]]: ***** The Works **** [[Righteous]] Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** [[Backwards]] Behind * The Pits

[[During]] this [[infancy]] effort for [[Nicky]] Park's beloved man and [[canine]], they are forced to fly to the [[lune]] when good old Wallace [[manages]] out of cheese.

As well as being the shortest feature at just 22 [[mins]], this W/G adventure is [[additionally]] the earliest and it kinda shows. The plasticine animation is a little creaky and funny here, sort of reminiscent of the Mork animation about the little man in the box.

Admirable though the craftsmanship behind it is, I've never actually been [[unimaginably]] into Wallace & Gromit (maybe a bit too clean and traditional for someone of my generation.) The only one I've really [[loved]] is The Wrong Trousers (and that was more from when I was younger and less aware of, shall we say, the seedier pleasures of life.) I was driven to actively seek out this early effort due to the resurgence in popularity as a result of the [[supremely]] successful [[latest]] [[flick]] adaptation.

As [[technologically]] impressive as the first two (all [[aspects]] [[judged]]!) this one [[lacked]] the emotional angle it's successors were to possess. That being said, it's [[rather]] good fun as a first try and [[definitely]] set the [[standards]] for [[enhanced]] [[items]] to come. Two stars, but a good two stars. ** --------------------------------------------- Result 1529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've just finished listening to the director's commentary for this film, and I think the one big thing I got from it that I agree with is that this film, like Mann's The Insider, is completely subjective. It's from Howard's POV. So, any review or attempt at contemplating a set of comments about it, as Ebert did, is really about Nolte's character actually. If you feel, as he did, that the film "does not work", then you're saying, I think, that Howard does not work. And, to be frank, you might be right. Howard's reasoning and personality really wouldn't stand up to professional mental treatments and analysis.

But, hey, that's the nature of people.

Andrew. --------------------------------------------- Result 1530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Before I [[begin]], you [[need]] to know that I am a [[huge]] [[fan]] of [[many]] of Sonny Chiba's films. His [[biographical]] [[series]] of the [[life]] of his master, Mas Oyama, were amazing and [[among]] the best martial [[arts]] [[films]] ever made, as were most of his Street Fighter films. The action was [[practically]] non-stop and with the [[possible]] exception of Bruce Lee (depending on who you ask), he was the greatest martial arts [[practitioner]] on [[film]] during the 1970s. [[Because]] they are so [[good]], I've [[seen]] at least 15 of his films and recently [[bought]] some more (which I am in the process of watching).

Unfortunately, despite my love of these films, I am [[NOT]] a mind-numbed zombie who worships the man to such a degree that I rate EVERY film a 10. There are a few reviews like this here on IMDb and I truly think that anyone giving this film a 10 should be ignored because this is such a bad film from a technical standpoint and isn't even close to the being Chiba's best work. A score of 10 isn't a real rating--it's some zombie fan trying to make a statement about Chiba, not this film! As I said, technically this film is awful. Some of this was the result of my seeing the American dubbed version, with its irrelevant prologue and bad dubbing. But most of the problem would still exist with the original Japanese print. The camera-work is simply atrocious--like it was done by chimps (smart chimps, but still chimps nonetheless). Often, much of the fast martial arts action is missed because the camera is so slow or the tops of the actors heads are clipped off due to the shoddiness of production. And, again and again, the camera pans in and out like it is a new toy being used by an idiot plus the [[editing]] is beyond wretched--with cuts being done haphazardly and confusingly.

I don't know whether the musical score is original or not--but it was also very, very [[bad]]. Sort of like acid rock of 1970 blended poorly with Ennio Morricone's "Spaghetti Western" music--it was [[annoying]], distracting and just plain silly.

As for the martial arts action, I think that having chimps do the choreography would have improved things a bit. Instead of the great fight scenes you'd look forward to in a Chiba film, the fights are too brief and often missed by the camera!! So what you are left with is the story...and this MIGHT just be the worst part of the film! It's supposed to be an anti-drug film starring Sonny Chiba as....Sonny Chiba! And when the film begins, he vows to destroy the drug trade in Japan. But, the Mafia (complete with not a single member who looks Italian, but who are ALL Japanese) vows to stop Chiba. And, when a lady comes to Chiba with promises to give him information about how to destroy the drug trade, he agrees to help her and risk his life with no conditions--even though she's NEVER forthright about telling him what she knows! In fact, later it turns out she is just trying to use Chiba to protect her while she herself sells a huge briefcase full of cocaine--and he CONTINUES trying to protect her!! This makes no sense at all and throughout much of the film it looks as if they just shot the film without a script--such as when they went into the bars and brothels and had Chiba walking about as if he was drunk.

So if it was THAT bad, why still does it merit a 3? Well, first, there are many more horrid marital arts films (such as many of those from Hong Kong in the 1970s)--including one with guys dressed up in gorilla suits doing kung fu and their handlers with 3 foot long tongues they used for fighting (now THAT'S bad). Second, while the action is very bad compared to other Sonny Chiba films, compared to its contemporaries, it's not that bad. Still, you could easily do a lot better than this horrid little film.

By the way, if you are wondering if this is the worst Sonny Chiba film, it certainly is not! In one of his first films, INVASION OF THE NEPTUNE MEN, Chiba plays a leotard-wearing super-hero who battles pointy-headed invaders from the planet Neptune. It's so bad that it rivals PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN for awfulness.

A final note to parents--Like most of Sonny Chiba's films, this one is very violent and has its share of boobies. DON'T let little kids watch this no matter how much they beg! Make them wait until they are older before you let them watch wretched rated-R martial arts films! Before I [[commencement]], you [[required]] to know that I am a [[monumental]] [[breather]] of [[various]] of Sonny Chiba's films. His [[sketch]] [[serials]] of the [[lives]] of his master, Mas Oyama, were amazing and [[in]] the best martial [[humanities]] [[cinema]] ever made, as were most of his Street Fighter films. The action was [[hardly]] non-stop and with the [[feasible]] exception of Bruce Lee (depending on who you ask), he was the greatest martial arts [[practitioners]] on [[movies]] during the 1970s. [[Since]] they are so [[buena]], I've [[noticed]] at least 15 of his films and recently [[acquiring]] some more (which I am in the process of watching).

Unfortunately, despite my love of these films, I am [[NAH]] a mind-numbed zombie who worships the man to such a degree that I rate EVERY film a 10. There are a few reviews like this here on IMDb and I truly think that anyone giving this film a 10 should be ignored because this is such a bad film from a technical standpoint and isn't even close to the being Chiba's best work. A score of 10 isn't a real rating--it's some zombie fan trying to make a statement about Chiba, not this film! As I said, technically this film is awful. Some of this was the result of my seeing the American dubbed version, with its irrelevant prologue and bad dubbing. But most of the problem would still exist with the original Japanese print. The camera-work is simply atrocious--like it was done by chimps (smart chimps, but still chimps nonetheless). Often, much of the fast martial arts action is missed because the camera is so slow or the tops of the actors heads are clipped off due to the shoddiness of production. And, again and again, the camera pans in and out like it is a new toy being used by an idiot plus the [[edition]] is beyond wretched--with cuts being done haphazardly and confusingly.

I don't know whether the musical score is original or not--but it was also very, very [[unfavourable]]. Sort of like acid rock of 1970 blended poorly with Ennio Morricone's "Spaghetti Western" music--it was [[exasperating]], distracting and just plain silly.

As for the martial arts action, I think that having chimps do the choreography would have improved things a bit. Instead of the great fight scenes you'd look forward to in a Chiba film, the fights are too brief and often missed by the camera!! So what you are left with is the story...and this MIGHT just be the worst part of the film! It's supposed to be an anti-drug film starring Sonny Chiba as....Sonny Chiba! And when the film begins, he vows to destroy the drug trade in Japan. But, the Mafia (complete with not a single member who looks Italian, but who are ALL Japanese) vows to stop Chiba. And, when a lady comes to Chiba with promises to give him information about how to destroy the drug trade, he agrees to help her and risk his life with no conditions--even though she's NEVER forthright about telling him what she knows! In fact, later it turns out she is just trying to use Chiba to protect her while she herself sells a huge briefcase full of cocaine--and he CONTINUES trying to protect her!! This makes no sense at all and throughout much of the film it looks as if they just shot the film without a script--such as when they went into the bars and brothels and had Chiba walking about as if he was drunk.

So if it was THAT bad, why still does it merit a 3? Well, first, there are many more horrid marital arts films (such as many of those from Hong Kong in the 1970s)--including one with guys dressed up in gorilla suits doing kung fu and their handlers with 3 foot long tongues they used for fighting (now THAT'S bad). Second, while the action is very bad compared to other Sonny Chiba films, compared to its contemporaries, it's not that bad. Still, you could easily do a lot better than this horrid little film.

By the way, if you are wondering if this is the worst Sonny Chiba film, it certainly is not! In one of his first films, INVASION OF THE NEPTUNE MEN, Chiba plays a leotard-wearing super-hero who battles pointy-headed invaders from the planet Neptune. It's so bad that it rivals PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN for awfulness.

A final note to parents--Like most of Sonny Chiba's films, this one is very violent and has its share of boobies. DON'T let little kids watch this no matter how much they beg! Make them wait until they are older before you let them watch wretched rated-R martial arts films! --------------------------------------------- Result 1531 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] First than anything, I'm not going to [[praise]] Iñarritu's short film, even I'm Mexican and [[proud]] of his success in mainstream Hollywood.

[[In]] another hand, I see most of the [[reviews]] [[focuses]] on their favorite (and not so) short films; but we are forgetting that there is a subtle bottom line that circles the whole compilation, and maybe it will not be so pleasant for American people. (Even if that was not the main purpose of the producers)

What i'm [[talking]] about is that most of the short films does not show the suffering that WASP people went through because the terrorist attack on [[September]] 11th, but the suffering of the Other people.

Do you need proofs about what i'm saying? Look, in the Bosnia short film, the message is: "You cry because of the people who died in the Towers, but we (The Others = East Europeans) are crying long ago for the crimes committed against our women and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Even though the Burkina Fasso story is more in comedy, there is a the same thought: "You are angry because Osama Bin Laden punched you in an evil way, but we (The Others = Africans) should be more angry, because our people is dying of hunger, poverty and AIDS long time ago, and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Look now at the Sean Penn short: The fall of the Twin Towers makes happy to a lonely (and alienated) man. So the message is that the Power and the Greed (symbolized by the Towers) must fall for letting the people see the sun rise and the flowers blossom? It is [[remarkable]] that this terrible bottom line has been proposed by an American. There is so much [[irony]] in this short film that it is close to be subversive.

Well, the [[Ken]] Loach (very know because his anti-capitalism ideology) is much more [[clearly]] and shameless in going straight to the point: "You are angry because your country has been attacked by evil forces, but we (The Others = Latin [[Americans]]) suffered at a similar date something worst, and [[nobody]] remembers our [[grief]] as the whole world has [[done]] to you".

It is like if the creative of this project wanted to say to Americans: "You see now, America? You are not the only that have [[become]] victim of the world violence, you are not alone in your pain and by the way, we (the Others = the Non Americans) have been suffering a lot more than you from long time [[ago]]; so, we are in solidarity with you in your pain... and by the way, we are sorry because you have had some taste of your own medicine" Only the Mexican and the French short films showed some compassion and sympathy for American people; the others are like a slap on the face for the American State, that is not equal to American People. First than anything, I'm not going to [[commend]] Iñarritu's short film, even I'm Mexican and [[prideful]] of his success in mainstream Hollywood.

[[Among]] another hand, I see most of the [[scrutinize]] [[spotlight]] on their favorite (and not so) short films; but we are forgetting that there is a subtle bottom line that circles the whole compilation, and maybe it will not be so pleasant for American people. (Even if that was not the main purpose of the producers)

What i'm [[debating]] about is that most of the short films does not show the suffering that WASP people went through because the terrorist attack on [[Janvier]] 11th, but the suffering of the Other people.

Do you need proofs about what i'm saying? Look, in the Bosnia short film, the message is: "You cry because of the people who died in the Towers, but we (The Others = East Europeans) are crying long ago for the crimes committed against our women and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Even though the Burkina Fasso story is more in comedy, there is a the same thought: "You are angry because Osama Bin Laden punched you in an evil way, but we (The Others = Africans) should be more angry, because our people is dying of hunger, poverty and AIDS long time ago, and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Look now at the Sean Penn short: The fall of the Twin Towers makes happy to a lonely (and alienated) man. So the message is that the Power and the Greed (symbolized by the Towers) must fall for letting the people see the sun rise and the flowers blossom? It is [[wondrous]] that this terrible bottom line has been proposed by an American. There is so much [[mockery]] in this short film that it is close to be subversive.

Well, the [[Keane]] Loach (very know because his anti-capitalism ideology) is much more [[overtly]] and shameless in going straight to the point: "You are angry because your country has been attacked by evil forces, but we (The Others = Latin [[Us]]) suffered at a similar date something worst, and [[anyone]] remembers our [[woe]] as the whole world has [[doing]] to you".

It is like if the creative of this project wanted to say to Americans: "You see now, America? You are not the only that have [[becomes]] victim of the world violence, you are not alone in your pain and by the way, we (the Others = the Non Americans) have been suffering a lot more than you from long time [[beforehand]]; so, we are in solidarity with you in your pain... and by the way, we are sorry because you have had some taste of your own medicine" Only the Mexican and the French short films showed some compassion and sympathy for American people; the others are like a slap on the face for the American State, that is not equal to American People. --------------------------------------------- Result 1532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is not as good as all the movies of Christ I've ever [[seen]]. And I'm [[quite]] [[amazed]] that in this story Pilate [[wants]] to finish [[Jesus]], when the Scriptures (as well the other [[movies]]) state differently. It [[lacks]] also a very [[important]] issue: The Resurrection.. None of the other movies skip this very important part: the faith of all of us Christians [[lies]] in this very [[event]]. As Paul says in one of his letters "[[If]] [[Christ]] did not rise from the [[dead]], our [[faith]] is vain". A very impressive scene for me in this [[movie]] was [[seeing]] on the streets the [[remains]] of the palms that were [[used]] when [[Jesus]] entered Jerusalem.

Finally, and in opposition to my Jewish co-commentator, [[Jesus]] WAS NOT a myth. And as a matter of fact, he was also a JEW. There are plenty of documents (relgious and secular) that prove the existence of this extraordinary man(or should I said, God become a man) that indeed changed mankind. I strongly advise him(given he is a historian) to read about Flavius Josephus, the most brilliant Jewish commentator of the 1st. Century. This [[cinematographic]] is not as good as all the movies of Christ I've ever [[noticed]]. And I'm [[rather]] [[surprised]] that in this story Pilate [[wanted]] to finish [[Goddammit]], when the Scriptures (as well the other [[cinema]]) state differently. It [[shortage]] also a very [[essential]] issue: The Resurrection.. None of the other movies skip this very important part: the faith of all of us Christians [[lurks]] in this very [[events]]. As Paul says in one of his letters "[[Though]] [[Goodness]] did not rise from the [[died]], our [[fe]] is vain". A very impressive scene for me in this [[filmmaking]] was [[see]] on the streets the [[leftovers]] of the palms that were [[utilizing]] when [[Jeez]] entered Jerusalem.

Finally, and in opposition to my Jewish co-commentator, [[Christ]] WAS NOT a myth. And as a matter of fact, he was also a JEW. There are plenty of documents (relgious and secular) that prove the existence of this extraordinary man(or should I said, God become a man) that indeed changed mankind. I strongly advise him(given he is a historian) to read about Flavius Josephus, the most brilliant Jewish commentator of the 1st. Century. --------------------------------------------- Result 1533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I'm sorry, I had [[high]] [[hopes]] for this [[movie]]. Unfortunately, it was too long, too thin and too [[weak]] to hold my attention. When I realized the [[whole]] [[movie]] was indeed only about an [[older]] [[guy]] reliving his [[dream]], I [[felt]] [[cheated]]. [[Surely]] it [[could]] have been a device to bring us into something deeper, something more [[meaningful]].

So, don't buy a large drink or you'll be running to the rest [[room]]. My kids didn't enjoy it either. Ah well. I'm sorry, I had [[alto]] [[waits]] for this [[filmmaking]]. Unfortunately, it was too long, too thin and too [[feeble]] to hold my attention. When I realized the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]] was indeed only about an [[aged]] [[man]] reliving his [[dreamed]], I [[believed]] [[hoodwinked]]. [[Admittedly]] it [[did]] have been a device to bring us into something deeper, something more [[valid]].

So, don't buy a large drink or you'll be running to the rest [[sala]]. My kids didn't enjoy it either. Ah well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am a big movie fan. I like movies of all types. This is arguably the worst movie I've ever seen.

I get that it follows the book closely, which raises the point that not everything should be made into a movie. Especially since the authenticity of the experiences in the book have been called into question more than once.

These characters are not quirky, they are mentally ill. The things that happen are not funny, they are disturbing; especially considering they are supposed to be true.

This movie had the feel of The Royal Tenenbaums, another movie I hated, only Running With Scissors was even more dysfunctional and less funny.

I will never get those hours back. I wanted to wash my brain after watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 1535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[If]] you're going to [[look]] after a [[child]], [[make]] sure they don't [[live]] anywhere near a graveyard. Especially if said [[kid]] has a habit of drawing gory [[pictures]] and [[disappears]] at [[night]] [[among]] the [[tombstones]] to [[see]] her 'friends'. But, our long [[haired]] heroine, oblivious to all the [[signs]], shacks up with her family the Nortons, which include a strict father and a [[dullard]] older brother who becomes a love interest for our [[budding]] babysitter. Even more [[spooky]] than the zombie gang outside is the cast's tendency to [[talk]] even when their lips aren't moving, and for the words to not [[match]] the [[movement]] of their mouths. But [[enough]] of that.. domestic [[animals]] are being sacrificed, [[old]] ladies are having [[eyeballs]] torn out and the [[orchestra]] won't [[shut]] up during any scene, [[even]] the quiet ones. Oh, and the [[editor]] is having a day off going by the [[way]] the [[film]] drones on.

[[In]] fact, it would been [[better]] if [[everybody]] [[involved]] had [[taken]] a [[breather]], smelt what they'd signed up for and [[gone]] AWOL. [[Yes]], I know it's hard to [[get]] into movies these days, but this sort of starter point is not one on your CV you'd [[want]]. If [[would]] be [[like]] a [[trainee]] [[farm]] [[labourer]] having a [[conviction]] for chicken molesting. Featuring one of the [[worst]] lead performances ever by the [[shrill]] Laurel [[Barnett]], and another [[almost]] [[equally]] as [[bad]] by the charisma-free [[child]] actress Rosalie [[Cole]] (The [[next]] Dakota Fanning she ain't) the [[film]] meanders on and on with nothing but padding until we get what passes for a [[climax]].

This involves five or six members of the undead barricading our utterly [[useless]] heroine in a shed, while her [[bit]] of [[rough]] fends off these [[ghouls]] with a plank of [[wood]], a one shell [[shotgun]] and whatever he can lay his hands on. But back up a minute.. earlier on they were in the [[car]], and they [[accidentally]] [[discovered]] that the [[creatures]] found the [[noise]] of the [[horn]] so [[repellent]] they [[shuffled]] off at the [[sound]] of it. [[So]] do they [[stay]] where they are [[safe]]? [[No]] of course not, they [[run]] off to this [[abandoned]] [[building]] in the [[middle]] of [[nowhere]], so the [[bloke]] can [[prove]] what a hardnut he is the [[girl]] can [[act]] like she's having a [[nervous]] breakdown.

Finally, the film closes. It doesn't end, it just goes to a grinding halt. The main character wanders back to her vehicle covered in fake blood, as if nothing horrible had happened. But, my dear viewer, something horrible has [[happened]]. You have just sat through one of the most lamebrained, [[boring]] horror films you're ever likely to see, and lost 82 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Just think.. years from now on your deathbed, what you'd trade an hour and 22 minutes for just to [[spend]] a bit of extra time with your family. Sadly, it's already too late for me. Don't you make the same mistake :( 2/10 [[Though]] you're going to [[peek]] after a [[enfant]], [[deliver]] sure they don't [[iive]] anywhere near a graveyard. Especially if said [[petit]] has a habit of drawing gory [[photographing]] and [[fades]] at [[nighttime]] [[between]] the [[tombs]] to [[seeing]] her 'friends'. But, our long [[redhead]] heroine, oblivious to all the [[signalling]], shacks up with her family the Nortons, which include a strict father and a [[halfwit]] older brother who becomes a love interest for our [[emergent]] babysitter. Even more [[frightful]] than the zombie gang outside is the cast's tendency to [[chat]] even when their lips aren't moving, and for the words to not [[matches]] the [[movements]] of their mouths. But [[adequate]] of that.. domestic [[beasts]] are being sacrificed, [[former]] ladies are having [[globes]] torn out and the [[philharmonic]] won't [[close]] up during any scene, [[yet]] the quiet ones. Oh, and the [[editorial]] is having a day off going by the [[manner]] the [[filmmaking]] drones on.

[[Among]] fact, it would been [[best]] if [[everyone]] [[implicated]] had [[took]] a [[suction]], smelt what they'd signed up for and [[faded]] AWOL. [[Yep]], I know it's hard to [[obtain]] into movies these days, but this sort of starter point is not one on your CV you'd [[wish]]. If [[could]] be [[iike]] a [[apprentice]] [[farmhouse]] [[laborer]] having a [[convictions]] for chicken molesting. Featuring one of the [[meanest]] lead performances ever by the [[strident]] Laurel [[Barnet]], and another [[hardly]] [[alike]] as [[negative]] by the charisma-free [[kid]] actress Rosalie [[Uss]] (The [[forthcoming]] Dakota Fanning she ain't) the [[filmmaking]] meanders on and on with nothing but padding until we get what passes for a [[pinnacle]].

This involves five or six members of the undead barricading our utterly [[superfluous]] heroine in a shed, while her [[bite]] of [[rugged]] fends off these [[vultures]] with a plank of [[bois]], a one shell [[pistol]] and whatever he can lay his hands on. But back up a minute.. earlier on they were in the [[automobiles]], and they [[coincidentally]] [[discover]] that the [[creature]] found the [[sonora]] of the [[trumpet]] so [[repulsive]] they [[switched]] off at the [[sounds]] of it. [[Thus]] do they [[stays]] where they are [[safest]]? [[Nos]] of course not, they [[execute]] off to this [[relinquished]] [[build]] in the [[medium]] of [[everywhere]], so the [[boy]] can [[proven]] what a hardnut he is the [[women]] can [[acts]] like she's having a [[twitchy]] breakdown.

Finally, the film closes. It doesn't end, it just goes to a grinding halt. The main character wanders back to her vehicle covered in fake blood, as if nothing horrible had happened. But, my dear viewer, something horrible has [[arrived]]. You have just sat through one of the most lamebrained, [[bored]] horror films you're ever likely to see, and lost 82 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Just think.. years from now on your deathbed, what you'd trade an hour and 22 minutes for just to [[dedicate]] a bit of extra time with your family. Sadly, it's already too late for me. Don't you make the same mistake :( 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this trailer and thought to myself my god is this movie for real, who would want to see this movie and at the same time i thought that, my girl friend turned to me and said "we have to go see this movie"...enough said so i saw this about 5 minutes go and I tried to put on a brave face and enjoy the cheap scares but there weren't even any of those. It has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen the director has no influence no perspective the same shots were used again and again he did not build up suspense the cast probably were simply told scream cry run fall. I would love to see the script as the first 40 mins was mostly annoying girly giggles and bad music, there was absolutely no character development.

The plot is just...well there was no plot it was basically I know we will terrorize a high school group on their prom night with a stalker serial killer, That's brilliant! hmmm The acting was what you expect in a Australian soap opera hopeless, that main character the Blondie god dam she annoyed me. her longest line must have been half a sentence, and every time she was on camera she was just pulling another rude facial expression.

Please listen to me if you have any taste in movies don't go see this, and if your like me and don't have a choice well then I wish you good luck, maybe smuggle in an ipod or magazine. Can't believe this film got made! --------------------------------------------- Result 1537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WOW, finally Jim Carrey has returned from the died. This movie had me laughing and crying. It also sends a message that we should all know and learn from. Jeniffer Aniston was great, she will finally have a hit movie under her belt. If you liked liar liar you will love this movie. I give it 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I never seem to write a review on IMDb unless I am extremely surprised at how good, or how bad, a movie is. This film falls into the first category. [[Every]] [[year]], I [[try]] to see all the nominees for Best Foreign Film at the [[Oscars]], even those that I know I won't like. "As It Is In Heaven" seems to fit the bill. The plot [[sounds]] [[sugary]] and [[sentimental]] and slow....[[For]] my tastes, which run more towards original, dark and/or daring foreign cinema (Michael Haneke, Francois Ozon, A lot of modern Japanese/Korean cinema) "As It Is In Heaven" does not sound particularly interesting....It didn't get released in the USA, so I sat down to watch a VCD I found in Singapore, preparing to "cross it off the list". [[After]] a dull beginning, "As It Is In Heaven" becomes that rare [[film]] where you really become inspired by what is happening on screen. Weak points: The [[characters]] in the film are pure "stock" characters- the Wounded Dreamer, the Town Bully, the Battered Wife, the Loose Woman Yearning for Love, the Repressed Minister....Thankfully, they're largely a [[likable]] bunch, as well as being well-written and well-acted. Ingela [[Olsson]], as the minister's wife Inger, would have been nominated for an Oscar had her performance been in English. Strong points: the music is [[beautiful]], and the main song, sung by [[Gabriella]], is truly dramatic and memorable. And keep an eye out for the [[feisty]] 87-year old actress playing Olga, who is keeping up with the dancing steps as well as the younger ladies! I won't discuss the ending, but I will say that it makes sense. They're are a lot of emotional things happening in the last hour of the film, and you're not quite sure why they're happening. Although nothing is explained in [[words]], it all makes [[sense]] as the movies comes to a fitting [[crescendo]]. **** out of *****. [[Probably]] the [[strongest]] Swedish [[movie]] I've ever seen. I never seem to write a review on IMDb unless I am extremely surprised at how good, or how bad, a movie is. This film falls into the first category. [[Everything]] [[annum]], I [[attempted]] to see all the nominees for Best Foreign Film at the [[Academy]], even those that I know I won't like. "As It Is In Heaven" seems to fit the bill. The plot [[noises]] [[sugared]] and [[emotional]] and slow....[[During]] my tastes, which run more towards original, dark and/or daring foreign cinema (Michael Haneke, Francois Ozon, A lot of modern Japanese/Korean cinema) "As It Is In Heaven" does not sound particularly interesting....It didn't get released in the USA, so I sat down to watch a VCD I found in Singapore, preparing to "cross it off the list". [[Upon]] a dull beginning, "As It Is In Heaven" becomes that rare [[films]] where you really become inspired by what is happening on screen. Weak points: The [[attribute]] in the film are pure "stock" characters- the Wounded Dreamer, the Town Bully, the Battered Wife, the Loose Woman Yearning for Love, the Repressed Minister....Thankfully, they're largely a [[sympathetic]] bunch, as well as being well-written and well-acted. Ingela [[Olson]], as the minister's wife Inger, would have been nominated for an Oscar had her performance been in English. Strong points: the music is [[leggy]], and the main song, sung by [[Gabriel]], is truly dramatic and memorable. And keep an eye out for the [[brash]] 87-year old actress playing Olga, who is keeping up with the dancing steps as well as the younger ladies! I won't discuss the ending, but I will say that it makes sense. They're are a lot of emotional things happening in the last hour of the film, and you're not quite sure why they're happening. Although nothing is explained in [[expression]], it all makes [[feeling]] as the movies comes to a fitting [[crescendos]]. **** out of *****. [[Maybe]] the [[strictest]] Swedish [[cinematography]] I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1539 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There may be [[spoilers]]!

[[Charlie]] Fineman ([[Adam]] Sandler), who [[lost]] his family in a tragedy, (the terrorist attacks of [[Sept]]. 11), [[still]] grieves over their [[deaths]]. He runs into his [[former]] [[college]] [[roommate]], [[Alan]] [[Johnson]] ([[Don]] Cheadle), and the two rekindle their friendship. Alan vows to help his [[old]] [[friend]] come to terms with the terrible loss. This is a simplification of the [[basic]] [[story]] of Reign Over Me.

This [[movie]] is, however, a [[story]] of how fate intercedes in our lives when we ourselves may be [[powerless]] do any [[thing]] about our own states of being. Alan is stuck in a life that he knows is no longer fulfilling. He [[feels]] friendless and out of touch with his own [[reality]]. He is unable to [[communicate]] with his wife and his associates at [[work]]. He can't [[express]] his [[feelings]] and as a [[result]] [[feels]] lost and distant from his own world. He chances upon Charlie on the streets of Manhattan while driving from his [[job]]. Eventually he meets and [[discovers]] that Charlie, (who [[originally]] does not remember [[Alan]]), is [[living]] in a [[false]] [[reality]] of his own. Charlie has [[gone]] back to a time in his [[life]] when he had no family. He lives as if he were [[still]] a student [[playing]] in a [[rock]] band, collecting vinyl [[records]] of the 60s and 70s [[bands]], and playing video games. He has [[escaped]] to a better and safer time in his [[life]] where there are no [[bad]] [[guys]] and he has a [[lot]] [[less]] to [[lose]]. [[Everyone]] in this [[movie]] is [[affected]] in some [[way]] by the tragedy that has affected [[Charlie]] and his remission to a [[formerly]] different and [[better]] (?) place. His landlady is his protector and [[great]] enabler. His in-laws are [[subtracted]] from his [[life]] because they [[would]] [[take]] him back to the reality that his [[family]] is now gone from his [[life]]. And [[Alan]] is most [[affected]] by him because Alan wants to, (in at first a [[selfish]] [[desire]] to [[escape]] from his own reality) to be with [[Charlie]] as a [[means]] to subtract himself from his own [[stifled]] reality and then he wants to [[find]] a [[way]] to [[help]] Charlie [[begin]] to [[recover]] from his self-induced guilt and [[denial]] of loss. It is through this relationship that not only is [[Charlie]] able to [[begin]] to [[heal]] himself but that Alan, in fact, [[learns]] to [[communicate]] and sate his [[true]] [[desires]] with his associates at work and, [[eventually]], is able to admit to his wife he has not been able to communicate his real feelings to her but that he strongly wants to because he does love her. It is in fact a poignant moment in the film when the stuff has hit the fan and Charlie is being confronted with the reality of being put away that he and Alan are talking about the situation together over "Chinese" that Charlie states that he is in fact worried about Alan and not himself.

This movie will, if you let it, take you through a river of emotions and leave you thinking. It will have you laughing at how Charlie uses his words, like people really do in everyday life, to make a comical statement of fact about a real situation. It will leave you on the verge of tears, (in my case actual tears), when Charlie confronts his grief and begins to come to grips with his tremendous loss. And that in fact the tragic reality is his guilt and loss has really never left him and he dealt with it in the only way he knew: denial. It will make you curse at the cold, unthinking actions of a young prosecutor trying to win his "case", (as I actually did at Charlie's hearing!) And it will make you smile at the commonsense of a old and wise, stern [[judge]], (Donald Sutherland who is great at his short distinct role and gives the best performance of a wise, stern person in the legal profession since Wilford Brimley played an Assistant Attorney General in Absence of Malice.)

This movie was also amazing to me for a few other reasons: (1) I never looked at my watch once during the showing of the film. Which means it had me from the beginning to the end, (2) Although the cast was interracial, this fact was not important to the playing out of the roles of the characters in the film. Race was a non-factor to the performance of the roles in this movie. Amazing people can actually interact with out this fact being brought out! and (3) the only real reference to 9/11 is when Charlie's financial attorney refers to the tragedy of Charlie's loss as "…what Charlie had become on 9/12". Time will be the true test of how this movie will stand out in the future but if the purpose of a movie is not to just entertain but to make one think and have that movie stay with you long after you leave the theatre then Reign Over Me succeeded phenomenally as far as I am concerned. I have not yet forgotten this wonderful thought provoking film and I will wait impatiently for the day I can purchase it as a DVD. There may be [[vandals]]!

[[Vietcong]] Fineman ([[Adams]] Sandler), who [[forfeited]] his family in a tragedy, (the terrorist attacks of [[Sep]]. 11), [[yet]] grieves over their [[fatality]]. He runs into his [[antigua]] [[university]] [[roomie]], [[Alana]] [[Johnston]] ([[Donate]] Cheadle), and the two rekindle their friendship. Alan vows to help his [[longtime]] [[boyfriend]] come to terms with the terrible loss. This is a simplification of the [[baseline]] [[saga]] of Reign Over Me.

This [[film]] is, however, a [[histories]] of how fate intercedes in our lives when we ourselves may be [[defenceless]] do any [[stuff]] about our own states of being. Alan is stuck in a life that he knows is no longer fulfilling. He [[thinks]] friendless and out of touch with his own [[realistic]]. He is unable to [[communicating]] with his wife and his associates at [[jobs]]. He can't [[expresses]] his [[passions]] and as a [[conclusions]] [[believes]] lost and distant from his own world. He chances upon Charlie on the streets of Manhattan while driving from his [[labour]]. Eventually he meets and [[discoveries]] that Charlie, (who [[initially]] does not remember [[Allan]]), is [[vida]] in a [[fraudulent]] [[realistic]] of his own. Charlie has [[extinct]] back to a time in his [[vida]] when he had no family. He lives as if he were [[nonetheless]] a student [[gaming]] in a [[boulder]] band, collecting vinyl [[registering]] of the 60s and 70s [[band]], and playing video games. He has [[fled]] to a better and safer time in his [[living]] where there are no [[wicked]] [[lads]] and he has a [[batch]] [[lesser]] to [[wasting]]. [[Someone]] in this [[movies]] is [[stricken]] in some [[routing]] by the tragedy that has affected [[Charley]] and his remission to a [[before]] different and [[improved]] (?) place. His landlady is his protector and [[grand]] enabler. His in-laws are [[deduced]] from his [[lives]] because they [[could]] [[taking]] him back to the reality that his [[familia]] is now gone from his [[iife]]. And [[Allan]] is most [[stricken]] by him because Alan wants to, (in at first a [[ungenerous]] [[wanting]] to [[elope]] from his own reality) to be with [[Chas]] as a [[method]] to subtract himself from his own [[strangled]] reality and then he wants to [[unearthed]] a [[routing]] to [[assist]] Charlie [[launches]] to [[retrieving]] from his self-induced guilt and [[deniability]] of loss. It is through this relationship that not only is [[Charley]] able to [[starts]] to [[cure]] himself but that Alan, in fact, [[learnt]] to [[imparting]] and sate his [[real]] [[wishes]] with his associates at work and, [[finally]], is able to admit to his wife he has not been able to communicate his real feelings to her but that he strongly wants to because he does love her. It is in fact a poignant moment in the film when the stuff has hit the fan and Charlie is being confronted with the reality of being put away that he and Alan are talking about the situation together over "Chinese" that Charlie states that he is in fact worried about Alan and not himself.

This movie will, if you let it, take you through a river of emotions and leave you thinking. It will have you laughing at how Charlie uses his words, like people really do in everyday life, to make a comical statement of fact about a real situation. It will leave you on the verge of tears, (in my case actual tears), when Charlie confronts his grief and begins to come to grips with his tremendous loss. And that in fact the tragic reality is his guilt and loss has really never left him and he dealt with it in the only way he knew: denial. It will make you curse at the cold, unthinking actions of a young prosecutor trying to win his "case", (as I actually did at Charlie's hearing!) And it will make you smile at the commonsense of a old and wise, stern [[judges]], (Donald Sutherland who is great at his short distinct role and gives the best performance of a wise, stern person in the legal profession since Wilford Brimley played an Assistant Attorney General in Absence of Malice.)

This movie was also amazing to me for a few other reasons: (1) I never looked at my watch once during the showing of the film. Which means it had me from the beginning to the end, (2) Although the cast was interracial, this fact was not important to the playing out of the roles of the characters in the film. Race was a non-factor to the performance of the roles in this movie. Amazing people can actually interact with out this fact being brought out! and (3) the only real reference to 9/11 is when Charlie's financial attorney refers to the tragedy of Charlie's loss as "…what Charlie had become on 9/12". Time will be the true test of how this movie will stand out in the future but if the purpose of a movie is not to just entertain but to make one think and have that movie stay with you long after you leave the theatre then Reign Over Me succeeded phenomenally as far as I am concerned. I have not yet forgotten this wonderful thought provoking film and I will wait impatiently for the day I can purchase it as a DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 1540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This may or may not be the worst movie that Steve Martin has ever made, but it certainly was far from his best. Obviously, he did this crap for the pay check. Dreck like this certainly does nothing to enhance his reputation as a funny man. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that when people go to see a Steve Martin movie, they expect to be entertained, not bored to tears. It's sad that he dragged Dan Aykroyd and Phil Hartman down with him. I don't understand why talented people can't get a grip on the fact that people don't want to see them in lousy movies. If you're going to call a movie a comedy, then it should be funny. This wasn't. Shame on the US military for allowing itself to be associated with this pabulum, too. Full Metal Jacket had more laughs than this miserable excuse for a "service comedy." Surely, Phil Silvers is rolling over in his grave. --------------------------------------------- Result 1541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[saw]] the [[original]] "[[Chorus]] Line" on Broadway [[God]] knows how [[many]] times and [[felt]] the passion, [[despair]] and [[joy]] [[come]] from this [[live]] [[experience]] in the [[theater]]. [[Michael]] [[Bennett]] knew he [[would]] have to re-imagine "Chorus" for the screen but [[could]] never [[figure]] out how to do it. [[If]] the [[man]] who [[came]] up with the [[show]] is stumped - that should [[answer]] your question. There are some [[shows]] that are simply [[made]] to be seen live - with an [[audience]]. [[However]], Richard Attenborough fresh of the musical [[work]] of "[[Ghandi]]" and dancing with animals in "[[Doctor]] Doolittle" [[ended]] up directing this [[film]] which bore [[little]] to no [[resemblance]] to the [[stage]] [[show]]. [[Horrible]] songs were [[added]] (Surprise! Surprise!), great [[songs]] were [[dropped]] or given to other [[characters]] (which didn't make [[sense]]). [[Michael]] Douglas was mis-cast. People that couldn't [[dance]] tried to [[act]] and there was the [[sexy]] "Landers" [[woman]] who couldn't [[sing]], [[act]], or [[dance]] - I guess she had just [[finished]] being Ghandi's [[wife]]. The [[dances]] by [[Jeffrey]] Hornaday [[look]] like [[nothing]] more than schlock from "Flashdance" [[rejects]] and nothing [[works]]. I sat there stunned at how something so riveting and emotional could be drained to nothing. [[If]] you truly love this show and it is coming back to Broadway in 2006 - [[see]] it but don't think that the long running musical event that was "A Chorus Line" has any thing at all to do with this film. I [[witnessed]] the [[initial]] "[[Verse]] Line" on Broadway [[Lord]] knows how [[several]] times and [[smelled]] the passion, [[desperation]] and [[pleasure]] [[coming]] from this [[vivo]] [[enjoying]] in the [[drama]]. [[Michel]] [[Bennet]] knew he [[could]] have to re-imagine "Chorus" for the screen but [[wo]] never [[silhouette]] out how to do it. [[Though]] the [[guy]] who [[became]] up with the [[exposition]] is stumped - that should [[replied]] your question. There are some [[exposition]] that are simply [[brought]] to be seen live - with an [[audiences]]. [[Still]], Richard Attenborough fresh of the musical [[cooperation]] of "[[Gandhi]]" and dancing with animals in "[[Doktor]] Doolittle" [[finalized]] up directing this [[filmmaking]] which bore [[small]] to no [[analogy]] to the [[phases]] [[exhibition]]. [[Scary]] songs were [[adding]] (Surprise! Surprise!), great [[ballads]] were [[fell]] or given to other [[nature]] (which didn't make [[feeling]]). [[Michele]] Douglas was mis-cast. People that couldn't [[danced]] tried to [[ley]] and there was the [[hot]] "Landers" [[femmes]] who couldn't [[singing]], [[law]], or [[dancers]] - I guess she had just [[finalized]] being Ghandi's [[woman]]. The [[dancing]] by [[Jeff]] Hornaday [[gaze]] like [[none]] more than schlock from "Flashdance" [[deny]] and nothing [[cooperate]]. I sat there stunned at how something so riveting and emotional could be drained to nothing. [[Though]] you truly love this show and it is coming back to Broadway in 2006 - [[seeing]] it but don't think that the long running musical event that was "A Chorus Line" has any thing at all to do with this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] First off, this is an [[excellent]] series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the [[first]] adventure of 007, Dr. [[No]] (1962) being the second, while in Golden [[Eye]], the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male "[[M]]" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before [[Bond]] became a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a "poetic" [[license]] to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a bit if we wish to be entertained. No, the new Star Trek movie does not have any of the [[primitive]] electronics of the original [[series]] from nearly half a century ago. [[In]] the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we call them cell phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you think 400 years from now, they would have perfected Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's give the producers some leeway.

But to try and make things a bit consistent, [[let]] us just ponder about the Cylons [[creation]] just 60 years prior to the [[end]] of Battlestar Galactica. If that is the [[case]], where did all the Cylons that populated the original earth [[come]] from? We know that the technology [[exists]] for spontaneous [[jumps]] through space. Well, what happened if one of the Cyclon [[ships]] at [[war]] with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one [[ship]], [[loaded]] with human-looking Cylons, [[wound]] up not only [[jumping]] through space, but through [[time]], back a thousand or ten thousand [[years]] with a crippled [[ship]] near Earth One. They colonized it, [[found]] out they could repopulate it and [[eventually]] [[destroyed]] themselves, but not before they themselves [[sent]] out a "ragtag" fleet to [[search]] for the legendary Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to become the [[humans]], who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining! First off, this is an [[wondrous]] series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the [[fiirst]] adventure of 007, Dr. [[None]] (1962) being the second, while in Golden [[Eyes]], the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male "[[meters]]" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before [[Bonding]] became a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a "poetic" [[licenses]] to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a bit if we wish to be entertained. No, the new Star Trek movie does not have any of the [[primal]] electronics of the original [[serials]] from nearly half a century ago. [[Among]] the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we call them cell phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you think 400 years from now, they would have perfected Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's give the producers some leeway.

But to try and make things a bit consistent, [[leaving]] us just ponder about the Cylons [[inception]] just 60 years prior to the [[terminating]] of Battlestar Galactica. If that is the [[example]], where did all the Cylons that populated the original earth [[arriving]] from? We know that the technology [[existed]] for spontaneous [[rises]] through space. Well, what happened if one of the Cyclon [[vessel]] at [[warfare]] with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one [[ships]], [[loads]] with human-looking Cylons, [[wounded]] up not only [[skipping]] through space, but through [[times]], back a thousand or ten thousand [[ages]] with a crippled [[vessels]] near Earth One. They colonized it, [[find]] out they could repopulate it and [[ultimately]] [[demolition]] themselves, but not before they themselves [[sending]] out a "ragtag" fleet to [[researching]] for the legendary Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to become the [[mankind]], who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining! --------------------------------------------- Result 1543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] i [[actually]] thought this is a comedy and sat [[watching]] it expecting to laugh my ass off. pretty soon in became [[clear]] this is no [[comedy]], or at least not a 'Jim [[Carrey]] type' one. what kept we watching was the characters - the movie starts with some pretty grim, troubled people, gathered together to try and fight one of their basic fears - fear of water, fear of swimming. we start to get bit by bit into their lives, witness their troubles, guess of their thoughts.

actually i made it look much darker than it actually is, and besides the chain of events soon brings some light and hope to their lives.

i probably wouldn't have watched the movie had i known its not a comedy but rather a drama, but i had good time, [[enjoyed]] the story and don't [[mind]] i spent about 90 minutes with it.

many films treat the alienation between people in the western world, this movie [[shows]] how people can get together and help each other

"and if in the light of dying day you meet her, don't let her pass you by and leave, don't loose her, she is your gift from the sun..."

9/10

peace and love i [[genuinely]] thought this is a comedy and sat [[staring]] it expecting to laugh my ass off. pretty soon in became [[unequivocal]] this is no [[humour]], or at least not a 'Jim [[Cary]] type' one. what kept we watching was the characters - the movie starts with some pretty grim, troubled people, gathered together to try and fight one of their basic fears - fear of water, fear of swimming. we start to get bit by bit into their lives, witness their troubles, guess of their thoughts.

actually i made it look much darker than it actually is, and besides the chain of events soon brings some light and hope to their lives.

i probably wouldn't have watched the movie had i known its not a comedy but rather a drama, but i had good time, [[liked]] the story and don't [[esprit]] i spent about 90 minutes with it.

many films treat the alienation between people in the western world, this movie [[demonstrating]] how people can get together and help each other

"and if in the light of dying day you meet her, don't let her pass you by and leave, don't loose her, she is your gift from the sun..."

9/10

peace and love --------------------------------------------- Result 1544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] [[Sidney]] [[Young]] (Pegg) moves from [[England]] to [[New]] York to [[work]] for the popular [[magazine]] Sharpe's in a hope to [[live]] his dream lifestyle but struggles to [[make]] a [[lasting]] [[impression]].

[[Based]] on Toby Young's book about survival in American [[business]], this comedy [[drama]] received [[mixed]] [[views]] from [[critiques]]. [[Labelled]] as inconsistently [[funny]] but with charm by the actors, how to [[lose]] [[friends]] [[seemed]] as a [[run]] of the [[mill]] fish out of the pond make fun at another [[culture]] comedy, but it isn't.

This 2008 picture [[works]] on account of its actors and the simple [[yet]] [[sharp]] story. We start off in the past, then in the present and are working our way forwards to see how Young made his mark at one of America's top magazines.

Pegg (Hot Fuzz) is too [[likable]] for [[words]]. Whether it's hitting zombies with a cricket bat or showing his sidekick the nature of the law the English actor [[brings]] a charm and light heartedness to every scene. Here, when the scripting is good but far from his own standards, he brings a great deal of energy to the picture and he alone is worth watching for. His antics with "Babe 3" are [[unforgivable]], [[simply]] [[breathtaking]] stuff as is his over exuberant dancing, but he [[pulls]] it off [[splendidly]].

Bridges and Anderson do well at portraying the [[stereotypical]] magazine bosses where Dunst fits in [[nicely]] to the confused love interest. Megan Fox, who stole Transformers, reminds everyone she can act here with a funny [[hyperbole]] of a [[stereotype]] film star. The [[fact]] that her character Sophie Myles is starring in a picture about Mother Teresa is as laughable as her character's antics in the pool. To emphasize the point there is a [[dog]], and Pegg rounds that off in [[true]] Brit style comedy, with a great little twist.

Though a British film there is an adaptation of American lifestyle for Young as he tries to fit in and we can see the different approaches to story telling. Young wants the down right dirty contrasted with the American professionalism. The inclusion of modern day tabloid stars will soon make this film dated but the concept of exploitation of film star's gives this edge.

Weide's first picture is not perfect. There are lapses in concentration as the plot becomes too soapy with an awkward obvious twist and there are too many characters to be necessary. The physical comedy can also be overdone. As a side note, the bloopers on the DVD are some of the finest you will ever see, which are almost half an hour long.

This comedy drama has Simon Pegg on shining form again and with the collective approach to story telling and sharp comedy, it is worth watching. [[Sid]] [[Youngsters]] (Pegg) moves from [[Uk]] to [[Nuevo]] York to [[collaborated]] for the popular [[revue]] Sharpe's in a hope to [[viva]] his dream lifestyle but struggles to [[deliver]] a [[enduring]] [[feeling]].

[[Founded]] on Toby Young's book about survival in American [[companies]], this comedy [[teatro]] received [[blended]] [[visualise]] from [[critique]]. [[Tagged]] as inconsistently [[humorous]] but with charm by the actors, how to [[wasting]] [[friend]] [[appeared]] as a [[executing]] of the [[moulins]] fish out of the pond make fun at another [[cultivation]] comedy, but it isn't.

This 2008 picture [[collaborating]] on account of its actors and the simple [[however]] [[abrupt]] story. We start off in the past, then in the present and are working our way forwards to see how Young made his mark at one of America's top magazines.

Pegg (Hot Fuzz) is too [[sympathetic]] for [[expression]]. Whether it's hitting zombies with a cricket bat or showing his sidekick the nature of the law the English actor [[bring]] a charm and light heartedness to every scene. Here, when the scripting is good but far from his own standards, he brings a great deal of energy to the picture and he alone is worth watching for. His antics with "Babe 3" are [[unpardonable]], [[merely]] [[astounding]] stuff as is his over exuberant dancing, but he [[pulling]] it off [[amazingly]].

Bridges and Anderson do well at portraying the [[stereotyped]] magazine bosses where Dunst fits in [[politely]] to the confused love interest. Megan Fox, who stole Transformers, reminds everyone she can act here with a funny [[overstatement]] of a [[stereotypes]] film star. The [[facto]] that her character Sophie Myles is starring in a picture about Mother Teresa is as laughable as her character's antics in the pool. To emphasize the point there is a [[hound]], and Pegg rounds that off in [[authentic]] Brit style comedy, with a great little twist.

Though a British film there is an adaptation of American lifestyle for Young as he tries to fit in and we can see the different approaches to story telling. Young wants the down right dirty contrasted with the American professionalism. The inclusion of modern day tabloid stars will soon make this film dated but the concept of exploitation of film star's gives this edge.

Weide's first picture is not perfect. There are lapses in concentration as the plot becomes too soapy with an awkward obvious twist and there are too many characters to be necessary. The physical comedy can also be overdone. As a side note, the bloopers on the DVD are some of the finest you will ever see, which are almost half an hour long.

This comedy drama has Simon Pegg on shining form again and with the collective approach to story telling and sharp comedy, it is worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 1545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] What a great word "re-imagining" is. Isn't that what they call Dawn of the Dead MMIV (2004)? A [[clever]] word indeed - it disguises the term that everyone has grown to hate, "remake" that is, and makes it almost sound as if the process of making one was creative and involved the [[imagination]]. Well, [[damn]], was I [[misled]]. At [[least]] I was seduced more by the thought of countless gore and unbridled violence than by the idea of "re-imagining," though it played a role.

Still, why make a remake? Directors do it for only a few reasons really: to update a movie for a modern audience, or because they personally love the original and want to make a tribute to it. An homage, if you will. Nonetheless, it all generally (I do admit exceptions) boils down to one thing: stealing someone's idea and reshaping it (or "re-imagining" it) so that those who would never see it or understand it would pay money to see it. It's like Coles'/Cliffs' notes; dump everything in a blender, [[purify]] all that is more puzzling and curious and throw in a few artificial flavors. In other words, a great marketing scheme.

So what's wrong with this one? Well, I'll [[start]] with what I liked. I [[liked]] the [[opening]] scenes. Thanks to CGI and a bigger budget we [[could]] actually get a grasp of the chaos of the zombie holocaust Romero tried to communicate in the original through minimalist means. We see the city in ruins, thousands of zombies: chaos and death. Two words that look beautiful on screen. Then it all [[falls]] apart.

This set-up leads [[nowhere]]. The movie does what almost every remake does. It [[adds]] more of everything except [[character]], atmosphere, and [[story]]. It's noisier, (in some [[sense]]) bloodier, and more [[full]] of main [[characters]] who appear only to die in [[nonsensical]] subplots. The [[setting]], the mall which played a crucial role in the original film's story and theme, is purely coincidental. The idea communicated in Romero's film, the pure ecstatic joy of having "a mall all to yourself as a fortress," is [[gone]] here. Further, this "re-imagining" has no moxie, no spirit, no balls. It assumes (probably quite rightly) that the audience has no attention span and doesn't bother to get us interested in the characters or the story. The film is rushed and misses the quieter interactions of the four characters of the original. You actually grew to care about those people in Romero's version because there was a certain realism to their existence despite the insanity outside the mall. Here, you don't care when or who goes: what matters is how they go.

What else is their to say? The film is not scary. It has one or two "jump" scenes and it tries to make up for the rest with gore and loud special effects. As a story it's really too choppy to be followed and the conflicts between the characters are too underdeveloped to save it. The humor is also reduced to a few one-liners (and one really good character: Andy). After that, what remains? An ending that is plainly ridiculous and far inferior to the subdued, inevitable ambiguity of the original film. But, despite it being a pretty bad film (though not quite as bad as some other remakes), it should be remembered for one thing: it kicked The Passion of Christ from it's number one spot in the box office. Well done zombies. What a great word "re-imagining" is. Isn't that what they call Dawn of the Dead MMIV (2004)? A [[shrewd]] word indeed - it disguises the term that everyone has grown to hate, "remake" that is, and makes it almost sound as if the process of making one was creative and involved the [[creativity]]. Well, [[fuck]], was I [[deluded]]. At [[less]] I was seduced more by the thought of countless gore and unbridled violence than by the idea of "re-imagining," though it played a role.

Still, why make a remake? Directors do it for only a few reasons really: to update a movie for a modern audience, or because they personally love the original and want to make a tribute to it. An homage, if you will. Nonetheless, it all generally (I do admit exceptions) boils down to one thing: stealing someone's idea and reshaping it (or "re-imagining" it) so that those who would never see it or understand it would pay money to see it. It's like Coles'/Cliffs' notes; dump everything in a blender, [[purification]] all that is more puzzling and curious and throw in a few artificial flavors. In other words, a great marketing scheme.

So what's wrong with this one? Well, I'll [[launch]] with what I liked. I [[wished]] the [[initiation]] scenes. Thanks to CGI and a bigger budget we [[did]] actually get a grasp of the chaos of the zombie holocaust Romero tried to communicate in the original through minimalist means. We see the city in ruins, thousands of zombies: chaos and death. Two words that look beautiful on screen. Then it all [[fall]] apart.

This set-up leads [[everywhere]]. The movie does what almost every remake does. It [[summing]] more of everything except [[personage]], atmosphere, and [[saga]]. It's noisier, (in some [[sensing]]) bloodier, and more [[fullest]] of main [[traits]] who appear only to die in [[mindless]] subplots. The [[configured]], the mall which played a crucial role in the original film's story and theme, is purely coincidental. The idea communicated in Romero's film, the pure ecstatic joy of having "a mall all to yourself as a fortress," is [[missing]] here. Further, this "re-imagining" has no moxie, no spirit, no balls. It assumes (probably quite rightly) that the audience has no attention span and doesn't bother to get us interested in the characters or the story. The film is rushed and misses the quieter interactions of the four characters of the original. You actually grew to care about those people in Romero's version because there was a certain realism to their existence despite the insanity outside the mall. Here, you don't care when or who goes: what matters is how they go.

What else is their to say? The film is not scary. It has one or two "jump" scenes and it tries to make up for the rest with gore and loud special effects. As a story it's really too choppy to be followed and the conflicts between the characters are too underdeveloped to save it. The humor is also reduced to a few one-liners (and one really good character: Andy). After that, what remains? An ending that is plainly ridiculous and far inferior to the subdued, inevitable ambiguity of the original film. But, despite it being a pretty bad film (though not quite as bad as some other remakes), it should be remembered for one thing: it kicked The Passion of Christ from it's number one spot in the box office. Well done zombies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Think Pierce Brosnan and you think suave, dapper, intelligent James Bond. In this movie, Brosnan plays against type - and has lots of fun doing so (as does the audience). This is a film about a hired assassin who befriends a harried businessman... and it works!

This is a fun movie, with very good scenes (a riveting, on-the-edge Brosnan and a good, compliant "off"-the-edge Kinnear have some good lines). My only cavil is that Hope Davis, playing the oh-so-tolerant wife ("Can I see your gun?") doesn't appear more often: she could have been a marvellous foil to these men.

This movie is like a matador: it plays with the audience, while "going for a kill". The ending is awesome because a storyline (with a positive moral!) emerges: this is a frenetic, frantic and fun movie, which does deserve a wide audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The horse is indeed a fine [[animal]]. [[Picturesque]] depictions of [[wild]] horses and their [[grace]] [[could]] never have been more majestic in an animation [[flick]].

The animation is [[simply]] stupendous. The [[fine]] [[animation]] forms the [[backbone]] of the [[beauty]] that the [[horses]] embolden [[across]] the flick. More so when the [[stallion]] traverses [[diverse]] [[terrain]], jumps across [[cliffs]] and braves waters.

Soundtrack too is very impressive. The [[wonderful]] instrumental music [[lures]] you to appreciate the movie.

"They [[say]] the story of the [[west]] was [[written]] from the [[saddle]] of a [[horse]] . " [[huh]]? [[Well]] ,The [[story]] of a [[fine]] [[horse]] sure was written from the [[saddle]] of the west .

[[All]] in all, this [[movie]] is [[clearly]] up there with the [[best]] .It is one of the [[best]] animation [[flicks]] i have [[watched]]. Would be a very [[fine]] [[choice]] on a [[lonely]] [[night]]. An [[easy]] 9/10. The horse is indeed a fine [[wildlife]]. [[Scenic]] depictions of [[feral]] horses and their [[gracia]] [[would]] never have been more majestic in an animation [[film]].

The animation is [[merely]] stupendous. The [[fined]] [[animate]] forms the [[pillar]] of the [[beaut]] that the [[horse]] embolden [[throughout]] the flick. More so when the [[stud]] traverses [[assorted]] [[ground]], jumps across [[bluffs]] and braves waters.

Soundtrack too is very impressive. The [[wondrous]] instrumental music [[decoys]] you to appreciate the movie.

"They [[tell]] the story of the [[western]] was [[authored]] from the [[stool]] of a [[steed]] . " [[haah]]? [[Good]] ,The [[narratives]] of a [[fined]] [[racehorse]] sure was written from the [[stool]] of the west .

[[Totality]] in all, this [[film]] is [[apparently]] up there with the [[better]] .It is one of the [[better]] animation [[gestures]] i have [[observed]]. Would be a very [[alright]] [[choices]] on a [[single]] [[nuit]]. An [[easier]] 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I give this movie 8/10 stars, and not 10, is because 1) Sinatra is awful and 2) the love interest of Kelly's character leaves much to be desired, (IMHO). Do love that Dean Stockwell, Quantum Leap - Al, is the little boy. The dance sequence with Jerry Mouse is one of the most entertaining and amazing dance sequences I have ever seen. Tom and Jerry is still a personal favorite of mine and my daughter's. I'm 28 and she's 4, so while the character is less iconic than Mickey, he is still a favorite of many children and adults today. Kelly is as always captivating, his eyes full of fun and excitement. In every movie I have ever seen him in, he always steals the show. One of the best dancers of the 20th century. It is no wonder Paula Abdul "sampled" Kelly's moves. I would also list Gene Kelly as one of the most beautiful people of the 20th century. If you were to watch only one part, don't miss Kelly's dance with Jerry Mouse. You will NOT be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] One of Cary Grant's most [[enduring]] comedies is Mr. Blandings [[Builds]] His [[Dream]] House. [[Although]] [[judging]] by the size of it the dwelling [[would]] be a dream [[mansion]] [[today]]. [[Still]] [[Cary]] was making a good [[living]] in the [[advertising]] [[field]] even though he was having a [[devil]] of a time [[trying]] to [[come]] up with a [[slogan]] for ham with the [[brand]] [[name]] of Wham.

What [[made]] this [[film]] so [[popular]] was the [[housing]] [[shortage]] of the post [[World]] War II [[years]]. Returning veterans from the [[war]] were [[claiming]] their entitlements under the GI [[Bill]] of Rights which [[included]] [[home]] [[loans]]. The problem was there literally were not enough [[houses]] to [[satisfy]] the [[demand]]. Around the time the book by Eric Hodgins and the film were so popular [[Congress]] [[passed]] and [[President]] Truman signed the Taft-Ellender- Wagner [[Housing]] law which put the [[government]] for the first time in the home building business.

I had an uncle and aunt who were around the same time building their own home which they moved into in the early Fifties. Like [[Cary]] [[Grant]] and Myrna Loy they had two [[daughters]] and were looking to get out of inner [[city]] Rochester. Their place wasn't [[quite]] as grand as a [[house]] in Connecticut with eighteen [[rooms]], still they lived there the rest of their [[lives]] the [[way]] Cary and Myrna most [[likely]] did.

Of course it was [[expensive]] and the costs just keep adding up and up, [[threatening]] to [[send]] [[Cary]] to the [[cleaners]]. [[Cary]] and Myrna [[also]] have Melvyn Douglas [[around]] to [[offer]] [[counsel]], [[usually]] too late. Truth be [[told]] he's kind of sweet on Myrna and Cary knows it.

Myrna Loy's role is [[simply]] an extension of Nora Charles. [[If]] you can [[imagine]] the Charles's moving to the country and William Powell having the headaches Cary Grant does, the film would [[still]] [[work]] just fine.

[[Mr]]. Blandings [[Builds]] His Dream House [[still]] [[works]] well as [[comedy]] because the [[situations]] are universal. And this review is [[dedicated]] to my Uncle Walter and Aunt Kate who lived in their dream house together for over 40 years. One of Cary Grant's most [[persistent]] comedies is Mr. Blandings [[Build]] His [[Daydreaming]] House. [[Despite]] [[judgement]] by the size of it the dwelling [[ought]] be a dream [[manor]] [[nowadays]]. [[However]] [[Carey]] was making a good [[life]] in the [[announcement]] [[campo]] even though he was having a [[daemon]] of a time [[attempts]] to [[coming]] up with a [[catchphrase]] for ham with the [[trademark]] [[designation]] of Wham.

What [[introduced]] this [[kino]] so [[fashionable]] was the [[homes]] [[rarity]] of the post [[Monde]] War II [[olds]]. Returning veterans from the [[wars]] were [[claim]] their entitlements under the GI [[Billing]] of Rights which [[inscribed]] [[households]] [[loan]]. The problem was there literally were not enough [[house]] to [[respond]] the [[wondering]]. Around the time the book by Eric Hodgins and the film were so popular [[Capitol]] [[voted]] and [[Presidents]] Truman signed the Taft-Ellender- Wagner [[Houses]] law which put the [[council]] for the first time in the home building business.

I had an uncle and aunt who were around the same time building their own home which they moved into in the early Fifties. Like [[Carey]] [[Grants]] and Myrna Loy they had two [[daughter]] and were looking to get out of inner [[town]] Rochester. Their place wasn't [[rather]] as grand as a [[home]] in Connecticut with eighteen [[chambers]], still they lived there the rest of their [[life]] the [[pathways]] Cary and Myrna most [[possibly]] did.

Of course it was [[costly]] and the costs just keep adding up and up, [[menacing]] to [[expedition]] [[Kari]] to the [[detergents]]. [[Kari]] and Myrna [[apart]] have Melvyn Douglas [[throughout]] to [[supplying]] [[consultant]], [[generally]] too late. Truth be [[said]] he's kind of sweet on Myrna and Cary knows it.

Myrna Loy's role is [[merely]] an extension of Nora Charles. [[Though]] you can [[guess]] the Charles's moving to the country and William Powell having the headaches Cary Grant does, the film would [[yet]] [[worked]] just fine.

[[Herr]]. Blandings [[Build]] His Dream House [[yet]] [[collaborated]] well as [[parody]] because the [[instances]] are universal. And this review is [[specialised]] to my Uncle Walter and Aunt Kate who lived in their dream house together for over 40 years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A gave it a "2" instead of a "1" (awful) because there is no denying that many of the visuals were stunning, a lot of talent went into the special effects and artwork. But that wasn't enough to save it.

The "sepia" toned, washed out colors sort of thing has been done before many times in other movies. Nothing new there. I can see there were some hat-tips to other old, classic movies. OK. No problem with that.

But a movie has got to be entertaining and interesting, not something that would put you to sleep.

The story line and the script of this movie WAS awful, the characters two dimensional. Slow moving. Some of the scenes were pretty to look at, but ultimately, as a whole, it was quite boring, I couldn't recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I found out about this [[film]] because Jewish Ben Chaplin from Game On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and star in this film. He failed thank God.

The film is a very simple romantic comedy with Janeane Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just [[bad]] for so many [[reasons]]. The plot is [[unbelievably]] predictable from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up "comedienne" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is "anti-feminist" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to note her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and "comedienne" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this travesty of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.

There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.

I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:

You will know what the ending will be;

You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;

You will be bored after ten minutes.

Watch at your own peril. I found out about this [[filmmaking]] because Jewish Ben Chaplin from Game On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and star in this film. He failed thank God.

The film is a very simple romantic comedy with Janeane Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just [[unfavourable]] for so many [[motivation]]. The plot is [[surprisingly]] predictable from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up "comedienne" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is "anti-feminist" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to note her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and "comedienne" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this travesty of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.

There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.

I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:

You will know what the ending will be;

You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;

You will be bored after ten minutes.

Watch at your own peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 1552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] The [[first]] 50 minutes of this [[movie]] were quite boring. It focused on the personal problems Doyle had, including his sick wife, death threats by fans, a pushy publisher and feelings of guilt concerning his mentally ill father. Even though these subjects had an important impact on Doyle's life, I was more curious about the birth of Sherlock Holmes. The last 40 minutes were [[excellent]]. We finally got a look inside Doyle head, how he created Holmes and why he had to 'kill' Holmes. The actors are [[excellent]]. Including the intriguing Selden played by Tim McInnerny, Arthur Conan Doyle, a compelling role played by Douglas Henshall and Brian Cox as the 'role model' for Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Bell. The locations are good, especially for a TV movie and the camera work is nice. If the first 50 minutes were as good the the last 40 minutes this would have been a small masterpiece. The [[fiirst]] 50 minutes of this [[kino]] were quite boring. It focused on the personal problems Doyle had, including his sick wife, death threats by fans, a pushy publisher and feelings of guilt concerning his mentally ill father. Even though these subjects had an important impact on Doyle's life, I was more curious about the birth of Sherlock Holmes. The last 40 minutes were [[wondrous]]. We finally got a look inside Doyle head, how he created Holmes and why he had to 'kill' Holmes. The actors are [[wondrous]]. Including the intriguing Selden played by Tim McInnerny, Arthur Conan Doyle, a compelling role played by Douglas Henshall and Brian Cox as the 'role model' for Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Bell. The locations are good, especially for a TV movie and the camera work is nice. If the first 50 minutes were as good the the last 40 minutes this would have been a small masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 1553 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Like the characters in this [[show]], I too was a teen during the 70s. The producers really [[nailed]] the whole zeitgeist, of being a suburban [[teenager]] in the 70s. The 70s fashions, [[cars]], home furnishings, foods, and [[fads]], are all very authentic in this [[show]].

The show boasts a very talented [[ensemble]] cast, who all mesh [[together]] very well on [[camera]]. I really like the [[unique]], psychedelic-style [[film]] sequences. No other [[show]] does camera tricks like this. These cutting-edge [[film]] [[sequences]], really [[help]] to convey the campy hipness, that [[characterized]] the 70s era.

[[Overall]] this is a very [[funny]] sitcom. The one [[thing]] that [[bothers]] me about this [[show]], is it's over-reliance on cruel humor, to generate [[laughs]]. [[In]] this [[way]], I think that this [[show]] tries to be too much like Married With [[Children]]. While [[Married]] with [[Children]] is a [[great]] sitcom in its own right, it's tacky that the creators of That 70s show, keep trying to [[imitate]] it.

I do [[recommend]] That 70s [[Show]], [[mainly]] due to it's nostalgia factor. It could be an even better show though, if the writers relied more on [[witty]] dialog, rather than bawdy, tasteless jokes and pranks. Like the characters in this [[display]], I too was a teen during the 70s. The producers really [[pinched]] the whole zeitgeist, of being a suburban [[teenagers]] in the 70s. The 70s fashions, [[auto]], home furnishings, foods, and [[fashions]], are all very authentic in this [[demonstrating]].

The show boasts a very talented [[whole]] cast, who all mesh [[jointly]] very well on [[cameras]]. I really like the [[exclusive]], psychedelic-style [[films]] sequences. No other [[exposition]] does camera tricks like this. These cutting-edge [[movies]] [[sequence]], really [[supporting]] to convey the campy hipness, that [[characterization]] the 70s era.

[[Entire]] this is a very [[comical]] sitcom. The one [[stuff]] that [[upsets]] me about this [[showing]], is it's over-reliance on cruel humor, to generate [[giggling]]. [[Onto]] this [[routing]], I think that this [[exhibition]] tries to be too much like Married With [[Infant]]. While [[Wedding]] with [[Infant]] is a [[huge]] sitcom in its own right, it's tacky that the creators of That 70s show, keep trying to [[simulating]] it.

I do [[recommendation]] That 70s [[Exposition]], [[essentially]] due to it's nostalgia factor. It could be an even better show though, if the writers relied more on [[spiritual]] dialog, rather than bawdy, tasteless jokes and pranks. --------------------------------------------- Result 1554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most succinct way to describe Ride With The Devil is with but one word: authenticity. I will not rehash what has already been said about this wonderous film, but I would like to say how much the historical research and painstaking attention to detail the crew no doubt went through was appreciated by this filmgoer.

As a student of history familiar with the period and setting of this film, I must say that this production is one of the most accurate fictional films regarding "bleeding Kansas". Yes there were liberties taken on the actual events, as all fiction is apt to do. But the overall feel of the film is genuine. Authentic costumes, authentic attitudes (no PC hindsight here) even the actors look authentic.Even Jewel Kilcher (who has a small part in the film) looked like she stepped form a mid 19th century photograph.

A few viewers I talked with have expressed their incredulity at the stylized dialog. They cannot believe that 19th century farmers would "talk like poets".

What they don't realize is that in this age of verbal slobbishness, the American public public of the 19th century was a surprisingly literate and eloquent bunch. These people were raised on Shakespeare and the King James version of the Bible. The screenwriters reconstructed the most likely verbal styles of these people, judging from documentation of the time. The stylized dialog just adds to the magical atmosphere of the film.

But in addition to a historical document, this film works on a visceral level as well. Beautifully photographed and performed, it harkens back to the days of the great western epics. The raid on Lawrence, Kansas, done so many times before in so many other, lesser films is portrayed with a sense of urgency that puts the viewer right in the midst of the action.

Romance, adventure, moral and ethical conflict.This film has everything a discerning moviegoer could want.

In a year that was dominated by overhyped garbage like American Beauty, this great artwork was buried by an indifferent studio system. But I am certain that Ride With The Devil will be given it's due in the coming years. Please rent this film. You will not be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an excellent documentary, packed with racing action beautiful pictures and a great story. The IMAX Cameras give you a very wide perspective, as a DVD movie it is perfect. Your hear every speaker working almost all the time, The film is not speeded up and just gives you the natural feel of 230mph. Of course there are some sound effects added but i think they are good, they give a depth to the driving scenes... --------------------------------------------- Result 1556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Aileen Gonsalves, my girlfriend, is in this film playing a secretary at the main character's bank. She has a lovely scene with Roshan Seth in a restaurant. There's more information on her website at >Having stated my personal interest in the film, I have to say that I think it is a beautiful movie - moving, funny and beautifully filmed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1557 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A friend of mine recommended this movie, citing my vocal and inflective similarities with Des Howl, the movie's main character. I guess to an extent I can see that and perhaps a bit more, I'm not very sure whether or not that's flattering portrayal.

This is a pretty unique work, the only movie to which this might have more than a glancing similarity would be True Romance, not for the content or the style of filming or for the pace of dialogue (Whale Music is just so much more, well, relaxed.) But instead that they both represent modern love stories.

In general I'm a big fan of Canadian movies about music and musicians (for example I highly recommend Hard Core Logo) and this film in particular. It has an innocent charm, Des is not always the most likeably guy, but there's something about him that draws a sterling sort of empathy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1558 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] William Powell is a doctor dealing with a murder and an ex-wife in "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford," also starring Jean Arthur, Eric Blore, and James Gleason. It seems that Powell had chemistry going with just about any woman with whom he was teamed. Though he and Myrna Loy were the perfect screen couple, the actor made a couple of other "Thin Man" type movies, one with Ginger Rogers and this one with Arthur, both to very good effect.

Somehow one never gets tired of seeing Powell as a witty, debonair professional and "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford" is no exception. The ex-Mrs. B has Mr. B served with a subpoena for back alimony and then moves back in to help him solve a mystery that she's dragged him into. And this isn't the first time she's done that! It almost seems as though there was a "Bradford" film before this one or that this was intended to be the first of a series of films - Mr. B complains that his mystery-writer ex is constantly bringing him into cases. This time, a jockey riding the favorite horse in a raise mysteriously falls off the horse and dies right before the finish line.

The solution of the case is kind of outlandish but it's beside the point. The point is the banter between the couple and the interference of the ex-Mrs. B. Jean Arthur is quite glamorous in her role and very funny. However, with an actress who comes off as brainy as Arthur does, the humor seems intentional rather than featherbrained. I suspect the writer had something else in mind - say, the wacky side of Carole Lombard. When Arthur hears that the police have arrived, she says, "Ah, it's probably about my alimony. I've been waiting for the police to take a hand in it," it's more of a rib to Powell rather than a serious statement. It still works well, and it shows how a good actress can make a part her own.

Definitely worth watching, as William Powell and Jean Arthur always were. --------------------------------------------- Result 1559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the best of Shelley Duvall's high-quality "Faerie Tale Theatre" series. The ugly stepsisters are broadway-quality comedy relief, and Eve Arden is the personification of wicked stepmotherhood. Jennifer Beals does an excellent job as a straight Cinderella, especially in the garden scene with Matthew Broderick's Prince Charming. Jean Stapleton plays the fairy godmother well, although I'm not sure I liked the "southern lady" characterization with some of the lines. Steve Martin's comedy relief as the Royal Orchestra Conductor is quintessential Martin, but a tiny bit misplaced in the show's flow.

As is customary with the series, there are several wry comments thrown in for the older children (ages 15 and up). With a couple of small bumps, the show flows well, and they live happily ever after. Children up to age 8 will continue to watch it after the parents finally get tired of it -- I found 3 times in one day to be a little too much. --------------------------------------------- Result 1560 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] One of my [[favourite]] films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most [[wonderful]] '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and [[Ozzy]] as the preacher ([[surely]] he exists in America?). Then there are the [[boys]] ([[rich]], vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?

Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My [[favourite]] scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!

If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then [[check]] this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself. One of my [[preferred]] films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most [[wondrous]] '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and [[Uzi]] as the preacher ([[undoubtedly]] he exists in America?). Then there are the [[guy]] ([[storied]], vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?

Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My [[preferable]] scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!

If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then [[inspecting]] this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 1561 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[For]] a [[movie]] that gets no respect there sure are a lot of memorable [[quotes]] listed for this gem. Imagine a [[movie]] where Joe Piscopo is actually [[funny]]! [[Maureen]] Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni [[character]] is an [[absolute]] [[scream]]. Watch for [[Alan]] "The [[Skipper]]" Hale jr. as a [[police]] [[Sgt]]. [[Per]] a [[flick]] that gets no respect there sure are a lot of memorable [[citation]] listed for this gem. Imagine a [[kino]] where Joe Piscopo is actually [[fun]]! [[Morin]] Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni [[nature]] is an [[utter]] [[holler]]. Watch for [[Alain]] "The [[Captain]]" Hale jr. as a [[policeman]] [[Sergeant]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is te cartoon that should have won instead of Country Cousin. Visually well-done and much more entertaining and memorable. Worth watching just for the music alone! Although there are elements that undoubtably will bruise the sensibilities of some these days, the cartoon has to be given a bit of perspective. It's over sixty years old and it is, after all, just a cartoon. I'm disabled and if I were as hyper-sensitive as the folks who look at things like this cartoon and take umbrage, I would have long since curled up in a fetal position and faded away. Sometimes you need to lighten up, put your head back and float! Caricatures of celebrities in cartoons were common in the 1930s and 1940s and were almost never terribly flattering. Bing Crosby reportedly hated it when he was used on more than one occasion. *SIGH* --------------------------------------------- Result 1563 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Man on Fire was hot. I love a classic tale of good ol' revenge, and what better cause for revenge than the kidnapping of an innocent little girl.

The writers did an excellent job in this movie of building the relationship between Creasy (Denzel Washington) and Pita (Dakota Fanning) so that the viewer would understand and actually feel the drive Creasy had to rescue Pita. It was also good that Creasy wasn't a choir boy type trying to rescue Pita through the "proper" channels, but instead used torture tactics and street smarts. Some may say, "Torture is wrong regardless," and you may be right, but when you see the pain Creasy goes through due to the loss of Pita and the sheer passion he has for getting her back, you can't help but side with Creasy and pull for him to be even more merciless. There would be no progress if Creasy used diplomacy to deal with the different nefarious gangsters and criminals and he knew that.

Creasy's quest ended with the return of Pita to her mother and Creasy dying in the vehicle of the bad guys. But Creasy's death did not diminish the effectiveness of the movie, it in fact enhanced it by showing that Creasy was willing to die to get Pita back. His death was noble in fact.

Denzel does an excellent job as do the writers. This movie deserves good marks because it definitely was a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The zenith of two brilliant careers. David Lynch, better known for less accessible material, crafts a delicate and exquisite story around the most unlikely premise. A man travels to see his estranged brother. Having no other means of transportation, his journey takes him over six weeks on a lawn mower. Richard Farnsworth, in his last film, delivers a stunningly layered and nuanced performance in the starring role. Achingly beautiful in its exultation of small things, Straight Story is a classic cinema experience that must not be missed. Sissy Spacek is notable as Farnsworth's daughter, an impaired middle-aged woman living with the loss of her children. --------------------------------------------- Result 1565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Mary Pickford ("Born on the Fourth of July" as Angela Moore) is "The Little American" (of French heritage); she falls in love with Jack Holt (as Karl Von Austreim), who had moved to America with his German father and American mother. French-American Raymond Hatton (as Count Jules de Destin of the "Fighting Destins") has fallen in love with Ms. Pickford. The love triangled threesome eventually wind up in France, with the Great War (World War I, in hindsight) complicating their lives considerably.

A mostly entertaining, if propagandistically flawed, Cecil B. DeMille film. The torpedoing, and sinking, of a ship carrying Pickford is "Titanic"-like. The war intrigue gets dramatic as Pickford slowly becomes an undercover spy for France, while the Germans occupy her ancestral home. Of course, German lover Holt arrives. It was difficult to believe they took so long to recognize each other as he moved in for the rape, but it was dark; and, prior events had them believe each other dead. The film goes WAY over-the-top in its symbolism. Pickford was, by the way, Canadian - though, few could deny she wasn't a "Little American", for all intents and purposes.

FUN to spot "extras" who later became major stars include Wallace Beery, Colleen Moore, and Ramon Novarro - especially, watch for Mr. Novarro exhibiting "star" quality during one of the film's more memorable sequences: Pickford and the wounded soldier saluting each other as he is taken by her on a stretcher. Novarro even gets Mary Pickford to write a letter for him; obviously, he's got a future in pictures. Also future-bound is Ben Alexander, who plays the boy "Bobby"; he becomes a dependable child actor, and grows up to become a Jack Webb partner on "Dragnet".

******* The Little American (7/12/17) Cecil B. DeMille ~ Mary Pickford, Jack Holt, Raymond Hatton --------------------------------------------- Result 1566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The cliché of the shell-shocked soldier home from the war is here given dull treatment. Pity a splendid cast, acting to the limits of their high talents, can't redeem 'The Return of the Soldier' from its stiff-collared inability to move the viewer to emotional involvement. Best moments, as another reviewer noted, come when Glenda Jackson is on screen; but even Jackson's crackling good cinematic power can't pull this film's chestnuts from its cold, never warmed hearth. Ann-Margret, she of sex-kitten repute and too often accused of lacking acting ability, finds her actual and rather profound abilities wasted here - despite her speaking with a nigh-flawless Middlesex accent. The hackneyed score, redolent of many lackluster TV miniseries' slathered-on saccharine emotionalism, is at irritating odds with the emotional remoteness of the script, blocking, and overbaked formalism of the direction; except for its score and corseted script and direction, 'The Return of the Soldier' has all the right bits but it fails to make them work together. --------------------------------------------- Result 1567 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the only time I ever walked out on a movie. Years later, I saw it in the cable listings and thought, "Maybe I should give it another try." Suffice to say that I was right the first time. This ranks second only to Godzilla 1998 as the worst movie I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1568 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[thought]] I was [[going]] to watch a [[scary]] [[movie]].. and ended up laughing all the way [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. [[In]] the scene where the [[human]] transformed to a [[werewolf]] I [[thought]] they was [[kidding]]. Todays [[computer]] games have ten [[times]] better animations. Low [[budget]], is a [[fitting]] [[comment]]. I [[would]] [[recommend]] [[Wolf]] (1994) with [[Jack]] Nicholson for a [[good]] werewolf movie. It has good special [[effects]] as they should be (human transforming to [[werewolf]]). Unless you [[wish]] to have good [[laugh]] I would not [[recommend]] you to watch this movie. This [[movie]] is a joke. I [[ideology]] I was [[go]] to watch a [[spooky]] [[movies]].. and ended up laughing all the way [[around]] the [[filmmaking]]. [[Onto]] the scene where the [[humanity]] transformed to a [[werewolves]] I [[thinks]] they was [[laughing]]. Todays [[computers]] games have ten [[time]] better animations. Low [[budgetary]], is a [[fit]] [[commentary]]. I [[ought]] [[recommendations]] [[Lair]] (1994) with [[Jacque]] Nicholson for a [[alright]] werewolf movie. It has good special [[repercussions]] as they should be (human transforming to [[werewolves]]). Unless you [[wanting]] to have good [[chuckles]] I would not [[recommendations]] you to watch this movie. This [[filmmaking]] is a joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 1569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie had to be the worst horror movie I have ever seen. The acting was terrible, Horrible and cheesy and talk about a predictable plot! I will never watch this movie again nor will I recommend this movie to anyone. What a waste of time! First, as soon as the movie began I realized what I got myself into. All they did for this movie was copy scenes from many other horror movies out there and bunched them all into this one movie. The prank phone calls, halloween night, a psycho, and one knife! Its absolutely ridiculous. I was not scared at all during the movie, which I thought horror movies were supposed to do. As for the making of the movie, its pretty hilarious how they all talk about how this movie was so great and so scary. I mean how do you not realize that the movies is a cheap rip off of "Scary Movie" for example. At least get some good actors in there and then maybe it would have been pulled off as a good horror movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll start with what I liked.

I really liked the songs, everything about them was great, the costumes, music, lyrics (as long as the translation was good :) ), choreography, everything.

I loved the crab scene and the cooking scene.

But that's about it.

I get it, arty cinema, blablabla, but too much is too much. Too much silence (it was interesting for an hour, but two hours of hearing steps and moaning from time to time, really...), too much boredom (no movie should ever be boring, no matter how deep it was to be!), too much porn-like scenes (I do get it really, I get that they were filming a porn movie there, but really, REALLY, really that is too much) I truly think, that cinema should be for watching and this one is definitely not watchable in no way.

3 stars for the songs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1571 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I only watched this film from beginning to end because I promised a friend I would. It lacks even unintentional entertainment value that many bad films have. It may be the worst film I have ever seen. I'm surprised a distributor put their name on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Another Pokemon movie has hit the theaters, and again, I'm [[hearing]] the same [[old]], "Pokemon is dead, blah blah blah." The franchise's [[detractors]] couldn't be more [[wrong]]. [[Kids]] are [[still]] playing the [[trading]] [[card]] [[game]], they're [[still]] watching the [[TV]] [[series]], they're waiting for the [[Game]] [[Boy]] [[Advance]] [[games]], and they want to [[see]] "Pokemon the 4th Movie."

That [[said]], "Pokemon The 4th [[Movie]]" [[introduces]] us to two more "[[legendary]]" Pokemon: Suicune, the "north wind" of lore, and Celebi, guardian of the forest (and star of the show). Celebi [[transports]] itself and a boy named Sam 40 years into the future, to the present day, where Pokemon trainer Ash, his faithful Pikachu, and his friends Brock and Misty are traveling through Johto. Sam and Ash become fast friends, once they discover the other's mutual love for Pokemon (Sam's vintage Pokeball with screw-on top is a [[great]] moment). Together, they decide to protect Celebi from the villain of the story, the Team Rocket agent [[aptly]] named Vicious, who is hell-bent on capturing Celebi for his own ends. Will Ash and Sam be able to protect Celebi from Vicious' Dark Balls? Where does Suicune fit into the [[picture]]? [[Will]] Jessie, [[James]], and Meowth have [[bigger]] parts in this [[movie]] than before? And just who is Sam, really?

Like with the [[first]] 3 [[movies]], if you go into the movie [[deciding]] that you're automatically [[going]] to [[hate]] it no matter what [[simply]] because it's [[Pokemon]] (or just because your [[child]]/niece/nephew/younger sibling/et [[cetera]] "dragged" you into it), then you're [[going]] to [[hate]] it because you've decided that you want to [[hate]] it. That may be, but to blindly trash "Pokemon The 4th Movie" simply because it is a Pokemon movie, and especially without having seen it, is just plain stupid. Even non-fans can enjoy this movie without having to know every last detail of the world of Pokemon. I'm not saying that you WILL become a Pokemon fan because of this movie, but you CAN indeed enjoy it, if you'll let yourself.

Unlike the first 3 Pokemon movies, "Pokemon the 4th Movie" is being distributed by Miramax, who I've heard is also working on securing the rights to the 5th Pokemon movie, which was released this past summer in Japan. Miramax claims to have some boffo-aggressive marketing strategy for "Pokemon The 4th Movie," but all I've seen so far is a feeble limited release, which doesn't include the usual Pikachu short in the beginning, which I was really looking forward to this time. I hope that Miramax will see fit to put the Pikachu short, called "Pikachu's Exciting Hide-and-Seek," onto at least the DVD/VHS release, if not with a future wider release of "Pokemon The 4th Movie." I hope that the current release is just the tip of the iceberg for this very entertaining film. Another Pokemon movie has hit the theaters, and again, I'm [[hearings]] the same [[former]], "Pokemon is dead, blah blah blah." The franchise's [[adversaries]] couldn't be more [[amiss]]. [[Brats]] are [[nonetheless]] playing the [[commerce]] [[cards]] [[games]], they're [[again]] watching the [[TELEVISIONS]] [[serials]], they're waiting for the [[Gaming]] [[Guy]] [[Advancements]] [[game]], and they want to [[behold]] "Pokemon the 4th Movie."

That [[avowed]], "Pokemon The 4th [[Cinematographic]]" [[presents]] us to two more "[[proverbial]]" Pokemon: Suicune, the "north wind" of lore, and Celebi, guardian of the forest (and star of the show). Celebi [[hauling]] itself and a boy named Sam 40 years into the future, to the present day, where Pokemon trainer Ash, his faithful Pikachu, and his friends Brock and Misty are traveling through Johto. Sam and Ash become fast friends, once they discover the other's mutual love for Pokemon (Sam's vintage Pokeball with screw-on top is a [[wondrous]] moment). Together, they decide to protect Celebi from the villain of the story, the Team Rocket agent [[justly]] named Vicious, who is hell-bent on capturing Celebi for his own ends. Will Ash and Sam be able to protect Celebi from Vicious' Dark Balls? Where does Suicune fit into the [[photographing]]? [[Willingness]] Jessie, [[Jacques]], and Meowth have [[greater]] parts in this [[movies]] than before? And just who is Sam, really?

Like with the [[fiirst]] 3 [[cinematography]], if you go into the movie [[decided]] that you're automatically [[go]] to [[hating]] it no matter what [[merely]] because it's [[Pokémon]] (or just because your [[kiddies]]/niece/nephew/younger sibling/et [[etcetera]] "dragged" you into it), then you're [[go]] to [[loathes]] it because you've decided that you want to [[loathes]] it. That may be, but to blindly trash "Pokemon The 4th Movie" simply because it is a Pokemon movie, and especially without having seen it, is just plain stupid. Even non-fans can enjoy this movie without having to know every last detail of the world of Pokemon. I'm not saying that you WILL become a Pokemon fan because of this movie, but you CAN indeed enjoy it, if you'll let yourself.

Unlike the first 3 Pokemon movies, "Pokemon the 4th Movie" is being distributed by Miramax, who I've heard is also working on securing the rights to the 5th Pokemon movie, which was released this past summer in Japan. Miramax claims to have some boffo-aggressive marketing strategy for "Pokemon The 4th Movie," but all I've seen so far is a feeble limited release, which doesn't include the usual Pikachu short in the beginning, which I was really looking forward to this time. I hope that Miramax will see fit to put the Pikachu short, called "Pikachu's Exciting Hide-and-Seek," onto at least the DVD/VHS release, if not with a future wider release of "Pokemon The 4th Movie." I hope that the current release is just the tip of the iceberg for this very entertaining film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Director Edward Montagne does in a little more than one hour what other, more expensive and hyped [[films]] fail to do. Mr. Montagne shows us a police story written by Phillip H. Reisman Jr. that while, is not one of the best of the [[genre]], it [[keeps]] the [[viewer]] involved in all that's going on.

This is [[clearly]] a B type movie. [[In]] [[fact]], the best thing going for "The Tattooed [[Stranger]]" is the opportunity to take a [[peek]] at the way New York looked in those years. The crystal clear [[cinematography]] by William O. Steiner, either has been kept that way through the years, or has been lovingly restored.

There are great views of New York in the opening sequence. Later we are taken to Brooklyn to the Dumbo section and later on the film travels to the Bronx and the Gun Hill Road area with its many monument stores in the area.

John Miles and Walter Kinsella made a [[great]] detective team. Patricia Barry is [[perfect]] as the plant expert from the Museum of Natural History. Jack Lord, who went to bigger things in his career, is seen in a non speaking role.

It was great fun to watch a city, as it was, because it doesn't exist any more. Director Edward Montagne does in a little more than one hour what other, more expensive and hyped [[movie]] fail to do. Mr. Montagne shows us a police story written by Phillip H. Reisman Jr. that while, is not one of the best of the [[genus]], it [[retains]] the [[viewfinder]] involved in all that's going on.

This is [[blatantly]] a B type movie. [[During]] [[facto]], the best thing going for "The Tattooed [[Alien]]" is the opportunity to take a [[glance]] at the way New York looked in those years. The crystal clear [[films]] by William O. Steiner, either has been kept that way through the years, or has been lovingly restored.

There are great views of New York in the opening sequence. Later we are taken to Brooklyn to the Dumbo section and later on the film travels to the Bronx and the Gun Hill Road area with its many monument stores in the area.

John Miles and Walter Kinsella made a [[super]] detective team. Patricia Barry is [[consummate]] as the plant expert from the Museum of Natural History. Jack Lord, who went to bigger things in his career, is seen in a non speaking role.

It was great fun to watch a city, as it was, because it doesn't exist any more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1574 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Go immediately and rent this movie. It will be be on a bottom shelf in your local video store and will be covered in dust. No one will have touched it in years. It may even be a $.50 special! It's worth ten bucks, I swear! Buy it! There aren't very many films than can compare with this - the celluloid version of that goo that forms at the bottom of a trash can after a few years. Yes, I gave it a '1,' but it really deserves much lower. 1-10 scales were not designed with stuff like this in mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 1575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A question for all you girls out there : [[If]] a man you`ve never met before [[accidentally]] [[phoned]] you up on [[purpose]] and continued to do so at the most indiscreet [[moments]] would you be [[intrigued]] by him or so freaked out you`d [[phone]] the police ? [[Yeah]] that`s what I thought so I couldn`t swallow the [[idea]] of [[Marti]] Gerrard putting up with the unwarrented attention of Connor Hill

***** MILD SPOILERS *****

This is a really dumb story . Connor Hill`s wife is [[murdered]] and the plot revolves around the question is [[Connor]] [[phoning]] [[Marti]] so he can have an [[alibi]] ? But there`s a [[massive]] [[gap]] in logic here , couldn`t Connor have [[employed]] a hit man ? something the prosecution seem to have ignored . And wasn`t there any [[forensics]] at the murder scene ? So why does the whole trial rest on Connor phoning [[Marti]] at the time of the murder ? Dumb . Dumb . Dumb . And it`s as [[predictable]] as it is brainless .

My abiding memory of this film is that for someone who [[made]] the winter Olympics Marti Gerrard is a [[really]] [[crap]] downhill skier A question for all you girls out there : [[Unless]] a man you`ve never met before [[unwittingly]] [[drew]] you up on [[intents]] and continued to do so at the most indiscreet [[times]] would you be [[puzzled]] by him or so freaked out you`d [[tel]] the police ? [[Yep]] that`s what I thought so I couldn`t swallow the [[inkling]] of [[Marty]] Gerrard putting up with the unwarrented attention of Connor Hill

***** MILD SPOILERS *****

This is a really dumb story . Connor Hill`s wife is [[killing]] and the plot revolves around the question is [[Conor]] [[contacting]] [[Marty]] so he can have an [[excuse]] ? But there`s a [[big]] [[variance]] in logic here , couldn`t Connor have [[employing]] a hit man ? something the prosecution seem to have ignored . And wasn`t there any [[forensic]] at the murder scene ? So why does the whole trial rest on Connor phoning [[Marty]] at the time of the murder ? Dumb . Dumb . Dumb . And it`s as [[foreseeable]] as it is brainless .

My abiding memory of this film is that for someone who [[effected]] the winter Olympics Marti Gerrard is a [[truthfully]] [[bollocks]] downhill skier --------------------------------------------- Result 1576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kusturika made it again. Another masterpiece. A coral comedy full of his own landmarks, with a frenetic rhythm and many glorious moments, we laughed and laughed, what a party! The music is everywhere, and also the shooting, the animals, the crazy bastards, sex and amazing gadgets and inventions, everything colorfully visual to entertain only. Pure cinema in essence. A wonderful experience to watch. And one is specially grateful since good comedies are so rare, and so wonderful. Well, this is one, and if you enjoyed Kusturica's previous films, you'll love this, although, as in all comedies, it is about a chemical reaction, and you have to be in the mood for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Full House is a great show. I am still today growing up on it. I started watching it when i was 8 and now i am 12 and still watching it. i fell in love with all of the characters, especially Stephanie. she is my favorite. she had such a sense of humor. in case there are people on this sight that hardly watch the show, you should because you will get hooked on it. i became hooked on it after the first show i saw, which just happened to be the first episode, in 2002. it really is a good show. i really think that this show should go down to many generations in families. and it's great too because it is an appropriate show for all ages. and for all parents, it teaches kids lessons on how to go on with their life. nothing terrible happens, like violence or swearing. it is just a really great sit-com. i give it 5 out of 5 stars. what do you think? OH and the best time to watch it is when you are home sick from school or even the old office. It will make you feel a lot better. Trust me i am hardly home sick but i still know that it will make you feel better. and to everybody that thinks the show is stupid, well that's too bad for you because you won't get as far in life even if you are happy with your life. you really should watch it and you will get hooked on it. i am just telling you what happened to me and everybody else that started watching this awesome show. well i need must go to have some lunch. remember you must start watching full house and soon! --------------------------------------------- Result 1578 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I'm [[allowed]] to [[write]] 1000 [[words]] about this [[film]], but one word [[could]] [[suffice]]: bizarre. Hubby and I didn't [[laugh]] so much as gawk at this [[truly]] [[dreadful]] [[movie]]. We kept [[looking]] at each other with our [[best]] "What the...?" [[expressions]]. There is no way to [[adequately]] [[describe]] this movie. Killer [[tomatoes]] were funny, but this is just sick. What [[kind]] of mind [[produces]] [[images]] like these and then [[puts]] them on [[film]] for others to [[see]]? What [[kind]] of [[mind]] includes innocent [[children]] in this weird, weird [[movie]] and then [[packages]] it as if it is appropriate for [[children]]? [[Parents]], whatever you do, if your [[child]] [[still]] [[believes]] in Santa, don't [[let]] him/her [[see]] this [[movie]]. Preteens can watch it -- [[probably]] with "What the...?" expressions on their faces. [[If]] you [[decide]] to [[inflict]] this [[movie]] on others, you [[might]] [[want]] to [[spike]] their eggnog.

[[Quite]] [[possibly]] the [[worst]] [[film]] ever [[made]]. I'm [[permitting]] to [[writing]] 1000 [[mots]] about this [[flick]], but one word [[wo]] [[sufficient]]: bizarre. Hubby and I didn't [[laughter]] so much as gawk at this [[genuinely]] [[scary]] [[filmmaking]]. We kept [[researching]] at each other with our [[optimum]] "What the...?" [[expression]]. There is no way to [[correctly]] [[depicts]] this movie. Killer [[tomato]] were funny, but this is just sick. What [[genre]] of mind [[generates]] [[photography]] like these and then [[brings]] them on [[movies]] for others to [[behold]]? What [[genus]] of [[intellect]] includes innocent [[childhood]] in this weird, weird [[cinematic]] and then [[packs]] it as if it is appropriate for [[childhood]]? [[Parent]], whatever you do, if your [[kids]] [[yet]] [[deems]] in Santa, don't [[leaving]] him/her [[behold]] this [[flick]]. Preteens can watch it -- [[arguably]] with "What the...?" expressions on their faces. [[Though]] you [[decides]] to [[impose]] this [[filmmaking]] on others, you [[apt]] [[wish]] to [[fortification]] their eggnog.

[[Rather]] [[potentially]] the [[meanest]] [[movie]] ever [[accomplished]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] You spend most of this two-hour [[film]] wondering "what's the story regarding the lead character?"

Will Smith, as a low-key "Ben Thomas" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you [[knew]] [[something]] [[dramatic]] was going to be revealed. Until then, [[Smith]], plays it [[mysterious]], almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.

All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins ("Emily Posa") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.

This is a two-hour film and not the [[typical]] action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a [[great]] job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.

Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits. You spend most of this two-hour [[kino]] wondering "what's the story regarding the lead character?"

Will Smith, as a low-key "Ben Thomas" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you [[overheard]] [[somethings]] [[phenomenal]] was going to be revealed. Until then, [[Tremblay]], plays it [[cryptic]], almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.

All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins ("Emily Posa") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.

This is a two-hour film and not the [[classic]] action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a [[wondrous]] job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.

Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 1580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] I always look forward to this movie when its on [[TV]]. Have to [[get]] the DVD I guess. The [[range]] of [[different]] [[types]] of people is [[great]]. It [[says]] to me that [[anyone]] can be a [[dancer]] if they [[try]] hard enough. My favorite character [[must]] be Mr.[[Aoki]]. He is so [[quirky]] but so full of [[emotions]]. It is a perfect [[movie]] with [[wonderful]] dancing. Unfortunately we never [[get]] the [[chance]] to [[see]] them go to [[Blackpool]]. [[Would]] make for the perfect sequel if they had. But I guess it [[leaves]] it to your imagination to what [[could]] of happened.

A very [[simple]] and [[innocent]] [[story]]. He [[stays]] loyal to his [[wife]] and [[daughter]].

I haven't [[seen]] the Hollywood [[remake]]. Not [[sure]] if I [[want]] to. I don't really enjoy [[Jennifer]] Lopez. I [[think]] [[Richard]] Gere more matches the [[original]] than [[Lopez]]. I have a [[feeling]] that the [[remake]] is not as [[simple]] and innocent. I always look forward to this movie when its on [[TELEVISION]]. Have to [[gets]] the DVD I guess. The [[ranging]] of [[multiple]] [[typing]] of people is [[wondrous]]. It [[contends]] to me that [[everyone]] can be a [[ballerina]] if they [[tries]] hard enough. My favorite character [[should]] be Mr.[[Oki]]. He is so [[lunatic]] but so full of [[passions]]. It is a perfect [[kino]] with [[wondrous]] dancing. Unfortunately we never [[gets]] the [[probability]] to [[behold]] them go to [[Vegas]]. [[Could]] make for the perfect sequel if they had. But I guess it [[departs]] it to your imagination to what [[would]] of happened.

A very [[mere]] and [[blameless]] [[conte]]. He [[resting]] loyal to his [[mujer]] and [[daughters]].

I haven't [[noticed]] the Hollywood [[redo]]. Not [[convinced]] if I [[wanted]] to. I don't really enjoy [[Jessica]] Lopez. I [[reckon]] [[Richards]] Gere more matches the [[initial]] than [[Lopes]]. I have a [[impression]] that the [[redo]] is not as [[mere]] and innocent. --------------------------------------------- Result 1581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] the winter of 1931, [[supposedly]] 12-year-old Tyler Hoechlin (as [[Michael]] Sullivan Jr.) wonders what his mobster father [[Tom]] Hanks ([[Michael]] "Mike" Sullivan) does for a [[living]]. [[Young]] Hoechlin follows Mr. Hanks to "[[work]]" one [[evening]], and witnesses him [[blasting]] away some rival [[gangsters]]. This leads - in a [[VERY]] roundabout [[way]] - to "Godfather"-[[type]] [[Paul]] [[Newman]] (as [[John]] Rooney) [[hiring]] [[independent]] hit-man Jude [[Law]] (as Harlen [[Maguire]]) to track down Hoechlin and Hanks, who are off to cool their heels in Chicago. Hanks [[thinks]] they will be safe with a relative, which is puzzling when you consider the characters' line of [[work]].

[[Looking]] uncannily like Paul [[Peterson]] ("The Donna [[Reed]] [[Show]]"), Hoechlin does a [[terrific]] job for director Sam [[Mendes]]; and, getting to work with this cast makes him the luckiest young [[actor]] of 2002. But, the most [[striking]] [[thing]] about "[[Road]] to Perdition" is the [[stunning]] [[cinematography]] of [[Conrad]] L. [[Hall]], which [[deservedly]] won a [[career]] capping "Academy [[Award]]" for the late photographer. Mr. Hall's [[work]] is [[truly]] superlative. This [[helps]] make up for the [[overall]] [[impression]] of a measured, [[contrived]] staginess to both the narrative and [[visuals]]. The deviating [[end]] is abruptly uplifting (the unrelated dog is an [[example]] of the [[aforementioned]] staginess).

******** [[Road]] to Perdition (7/12/02) Sam [[Mendes]] ~ [[Tom]] Hanks, Tyler Hoechlin, [[Paul]] Newman, Jude [[Law]] [[Into]] the winter of 1931, [[presumably]] 12-year-old Tyler Hoechlin (as [[Michele]] Sullivan Jr.) wonders what his mobster father [[Thom]] Hanks ([[Micheal]] "Mike" Sullivan) does for a [[vida]]. [[Youth]] Hoechlin follows Mr. Hanks to "[[cooperation]]" one [[afternoon]], and witnesses him [[blasts]] away some rival [[muggers]]. This leads - in a [[MUCH]] roundabout [[routes]] - to "Godfather"-[[genera]] [[Pablo]] [[Neumann]] (as [[Johannes]] Rooney) [[hire]] [[autonomous]] hit-man Jude [[Lois]] (as Harlen [[Mcguire]]) to track down Hoechlin and Hanks, who are off to cool their heels in Chicago. Hanks [[believes]] they will be safe with a relative, which is puzzling when you consider the characters' line of [[jobs]].

[[Researching]] uncannily like Paul [[Petersen]] ("The Donna [[Reid]] [[Displayed]]"), Hoechlin does a [[super]] job for director Sam [[Mendez]]; and, getting to work with this cast makes him the luckiest young [[protagonist]] of 2002. But, the most [[noteworthy]] [[stuff]] about "[[Route]] to Perdition" is the [[fabulous]] [[films]] of [[Konrad]] L. [[Salle]], which [[legitimately]] won a [[quarry]] capping "Academy [[Scholarship]]" for the late photographer. Mr. Hall's [[jobs]] is [[genuinely]] superlative. This [[helped]] make up for the [[total]] [[printing]] of a measured, [[artificial]] staginess to both the narrative and [[picture]]. The deviating [[termination]] is abruptly uplifting (the unrelated dog is an [[cases]] of the [[above]] staginess).

******** [[Chemin]] to Perdition (7/12/02) Sam [[Mendez]] ~ [[Thom]] Hanks, Tyler Hoechlin, [[Paulo]] Newman, Jude [[Legislation]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This 1997 film-blanc classic [[tale]] of [[smoldering]] passion has [[achieved]] its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The [[pervasive]], ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant [[screenplay]] dangles this [[embryonic]] affair-to-be in front of the [[enraptured]] audience, [[sitting]] transfixed as the [[abstract]], almost-expressionist [[cinematography]] deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can [[cut]] the sexual tension with a dull tire iron.

A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with "Jane Eyre" and "Rebecca" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever.

The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.

If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of "Runaway Car" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings [[seems]] just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.

Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern [[cinema]]? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . '[[Runaway]] Car' should have its catchword as well. [[Perhaps]] the [[film]] [[could]] have [[opened]] with an extreme closeup of [[Judge]] Reinhold saying [[something]] such as "A [[car]] is an [[extension]] of its owner!", and the rest of the storyline [[could]] then be [[dedicated]] to parsing [[every]] syllable, subtlety and nuance of that [[phrase]]. [[Had]] that plot line been done, this film could have topped "Titanic" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.

My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first. This 1997 film-blanc classic [[storytelling]] of [[burning]] passion has [[accomplished]] its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The [[generalized]], ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant [[scenarios]] dangles this [[embryos]] affair-to-be in front of the [[mesmerised]] audience, [[seated]] transfixed as the [[condensed]], almost-expressionist [[film]] deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can [[chop]] the sexual tension with a dull tire iron.

A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with "Jane Eyre" and "Rebecca" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever.

The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.

If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of "Runaway Car" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings [[seem]] just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.

Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern [[movie]]? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . '[[Runoff]] Car' should have its catchword as well. [[Maybe]] the [[filmmaking]] [[wo]] have [[opening]] with an extreme closeup of [[Justices]] Reinhold saying [[anything]] such as "A [[motorcars]] is an [[prolonging]] of its owner!", and the rest of the storyline [[did]] then be [[devoted]] to parsing [[all]] syllable, subtlety and nuance of that [[expressions]]. [[Has]] that plot line been done, this film could have topped "Titanic" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.

My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first. --------------------------------------------- Result 1583 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This low-grade Universal chiller has just been [[announced]] as an upcoming DVD release but, [[intended]] as part of a collection of similar [[movies]] that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that [[legitimate]] release. Which is just as well, since the end [[result]] was not anything particularly [[special]] (if decently [[atmospheric]] at that): for starters, the [[plot]] is pretty [[weak]] – even [[though]] in a way it anticipates the [[Vincent]] Price [[vehicle]] [[THEATRE]] [[OF]] BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see [[sharing]] his measly [[plate]] of [[cheese]] with his pet [[cat]]! – who, [[upon]] finding himself on the receiving [[end]] of [[art]] critic [[Alan]] Napier's vitriolic pen one time too [[many]], decides to [[end]] it all by [[hurling]] himself into the [[nearby]] river. [[However]], while [[contemplating]] just that action, he is [[anticipated]] by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally [[enough]], saves the poor guy's [[life]] with the [[intention]] of having the latter do all the dirty [[work]] for him in [[gratitude]]! Although it is [[supposedly]] set in the art circles of [[New]] York, all we [[really]] see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter [[Robert]] Lowery (who keeps [[painting]] the same statuesque [[blonde]] [[girl]] Joan Shawlee over and over in [[banal]] [[poses]] – how is that for art?) who, conveniently [[enough]], is [[engaged]] to a [[rival]] art critic (Virginia [[Grey]]) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is [[discovered]] with his [[spine]] broken and Lowery is suspected; but then [[investigating]] detective Bill Goodwin gets the [[bright]] [[idea]] of engaging another [[critic]] to [[publish]] a scathing [[review]] of Lowery's [[work]] (I did not know that [[publicity]] sketches [[got]] [[reviewed]]!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is [[going]] to be! [[In]] the [[meantime]], Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by [[sculpting]] Hatton's [[uniquely]] craggy – and [[recognizable]] – visage which, [[needless]] to [[say]], attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to [[believe]] that she [[lacks]] material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and [[model]]. Bafflingly, [[although]] The Creeper is [[fully]] [[aware]] of how Grey looks ([[thanks]] to her [[aforementioned]] haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"! This low-grade Universal chiller has just been [[declares]] as an upcoming DVD release but, [[conceived]] as part of a collection of similar [[filmmaking]] that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that [[defensible]] release. Which is just as well, since the end [[upshot]] was not anything particularly [[peculiar]] (if decently [[barometric]] at that): for starters, the [[intrigue]] is pretty [[feeble]] – even [[while]] in a way it anticipates the [[Tome]] Price [[vehicles]] [[THEATRES]] [[DU]] BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see [[exchanged]] his measly [[plaque]] of [[queso]] with his pet [[kitten]]! – who, [[after]] finding himself on the receiving [[ends]] of [[artistry]] critic [[Alana]] Napier's vitriolic pen one time too [[innumerable]], decides to [[ends]] it all by [[pelting]] himself into the [[neighboring]] river. [[Still]], while [[considering]] just that action, he is [[prophesied]] by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally [[adequate]], saves the poor guy's [[vida]] with the [[ambition]] of having the latter do all the dirty [[collaboration]] for him in [[acknowledgment]]! Although it is [[allegedly]] set in the art circles of [[Novo]] York, all we [[truly]] see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter [[Roberto]] Lowery (who keeps [[paintings]] the same statuesque [[blonds]] [[women]] Joan Shawlee over and over in [[ordinary]] [[brings]] – how is that for art?) who, conveniently [[satisfactorily]], is [[implicated]] to a [[adversary]] art critic (Virginia [[Greys]]) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is [[found]] with his [[linchpin]] broken and Lowery is suspected; but then [[exploring]] detective Bill Goodwin gets the [[lustrous]] [[ideals]] of engaging another [[criticisms]] to [[publications]] a scathing [[exam]] of Lowery's [[collaboration]] (I did not know that [[advocacy]] sketches [[ai]] [[revisited]]!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is [[gonna]] to be! [[During]] the [[meanwhile]], Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by [[engraving]] Hatton's [[singularly]] craggy – and [[identifiable]] – visage which, [[redundant]] to [[said]], attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to [[think]] that she [[absence]] material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and [[models]]. Bafflingly, [[despite]] The Creeper is [[abundantly]] [[cognizant]] of how Grey looks ([[appreciation]] to her [[supra]] haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"! --------------------------------------------- Result 1584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is without doubt the best documentary ever produced giving an accurate and epic depiction of World War 2 from the invasion of Poland in 1939 to the end of the war in 1945.

Honest and to the point, this documentary presents views from both sides of the conflict giving a very human face to the war. At the same time tactics and the importance of Battles are not overlooked, much work has been put into the giving a detailed picture of the war and in particularly the high, low and turning points in the allies fortunes. Being a British produced documentary this 26 part series focus is mainly on Britain, but Russia and America's contribution are not skimmed over this is but one such advantage of a series of such length.

Another worthy mention is the score, the music and the whole feel of the documentary is one of turmoil, struggle and perseverance. Like a film this series leaves the viewer in no doubt of the hardship faced by the allies and the Germans during the war, its build to a climax at the end of every episode, which serves to layer the coarse of the second world war. After watching all 26 the viewer is left with an extensive knowledge about the war and astonished at just how much we owe to the members of the previous generation. --------------------------------------------- Result 1585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] An ultra-nervous [[old]] [[man]], "Mr. Goodrich," [[terrorized]] by the news that a gang is stalking the [[city]] and [[prominent]] [[citizens]] are [[disappearing]], [[really]] panics when [[someone]] [[throws]] a [[rock]] through his [[window]] with a [[message]] [[tied]] to it, [[saying]] "You will be [[next]]!"

He [[calls]] the detective [[agency]] [[wondering]] where are the [[guys]] he [[asked]] for [[earlier]]. Of course, it's the Stooges, who couldn't [[respond]] because had [[come]] into the office, robbed them and [[tied]] them up. Some detectives! The [[moment]] poor [[Mr]]. Goodrich hangs up the [[phone]] and [[says]], "I feel safer already," a monster-type goon named "[[Nico]]" [[appears]] out of a [[secret]] [[panel]] in the [[room]] and chokes him unconscious. We [[next]] [[find]] out that his trusted [[employees]] are anything but that. Now these [[crooks]] have to [[deal]] with the "detectives" that are [[coming]] by the [[house]] for [[Mr]]. Goodrich.

Some of the [[gags]], like Moe and Larry's [[wrinkles]], are [[getting]] a bit [[old]], but some of them will [[provoke]] [[laughs]] if I [[see]] them 100 [[times]]. I [[always]] [[laugh]] at Shemp [[trying]] to be a flirt, as he does here with Mr. Goodrich's niece, in a [[classic]] [[routine]] with a [[long]], accordion-like camera lens. The [[act]] he [[puts]] on when he's poisoned is [[always]] funny, too. Shemp was so good that I didn't mind he was [[taking]] the [[great]] Curly's place.

Larry, Moe, Curly/Shemp were [[always]] [[great]] in the chase scenes, in which monsters or crooks or both are chasing them around a house. That's the last six minutes in here. At times, such as this [[film]], An ultra-nervous [[elderly]] [[males]], "Mr. Goodrich," [[frightened]] by the news that a gang is stalking the [[ville]] and [[conspicuous]] [[citizen]] are [[vanished]], [[truthfully]] panics when [[whoever]] [[casts]] a [[boulder]] through his [[luna]] with a [[messages]] [[associated]] to it, [[arguing]] "You will be [[imminent]]!"

He [[invited]] the detective [[organisations]] [[asking]] where are the [[boys]] he [[inquired]] for [[previous]]. Of course, it's the Stooges, who couldn't [[cater]] because had [[arrived]] into the office, robbed them and [[linked]] them up. Some detectives! The [[time]] poor [[Herr]]. Goodrich hangs up the [[tel]] and [[asserts]], "I feel safer already," a monster-type goon named "[[Nikko]]" [[appearing]] out of a [[covert]] [[panels]] in the [[chamber]] and chokes him unconscious. We [[imminent]] [[unearthed]] out that his trusted [[personnel]] are anything but that. Now these [[frauds]] have to [[treating]] with the "detectives" that are [[forthcoming]] by the [[residential]] for [[Herr]]. Goodrich.

Some of the [[jokes]], like Moe and Larry's [[ripples]], are [[obtain]] a bit [[longtime]], but some of them will [[induce]] [[grin]] if I [[seeing]] them 100 [[dates]]. I [[repeatedly]] [[laughing]] at Shemp [[tempting]] to be a flirt, as he does here with Mr. Goodrich's niece, in a [[conventional]] [[habitual]] with a [[lengthy]], accordion-like camera lens. The [[legislation]] he [[raises]] on when he's poisoned is [[repeatedly]] funny, too. Shemp was so good that I didn't mind he was [[pick]] the [[large]] Curly's place.

Larry, Moe, Curly/Shemp were [[continually]] [[wondrous]] in the chase scenes, in which monsters or crooks or both are chasing them around a house. That's the last six minutes in here. At times, such as this [[kino]], --------------------------------------------- Result 1586 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] My parents [[took]] me to this movie when I was nine years [[old]]. I have never [[forgotten]] it. I had never before seen [[anything]] as [[beautiful]] as [[Elizabeth]] Taylor. (She was twenty-two when she [[made]] Elephant Walk) [[Remember]], I'm nine, so the feelings aren't sexual, I just couldn't [[see]] anything else on the screen. I just wanted to sit at her feet like a puppy and stare up at her. She has [[begun]] to [[show]] her age, (She's [[almost]] seventy-four) but I still [[believe]] her to be one of the most [[beautiful]] and breathtaking women to ever have lived.

I have seen the movie several [[times]] since, and it is a sappy melodrama. What saves it is, of course, Miss Taylor's beauty, [[magnificent]] scenery, the very [[impressive]] elephant stampede, and a well-made point on human [[arrogance]] in the [[face]] of nature.

[[All]] in all, a well-spent [[couple]] of [[hours]] [[watching]] the [[movie]] channel or a rented video. My parents [[taken]] me to this movie when I was nine years [[ancient]]. I have never [[forget]] it. I had never before seen [[algo]] as [[wondrous]] as [[Elise]] Taylor. (She was twenty-two when she [[introduced]] Elephant Walk) [[Reminisce]], I'm nine, so the feelings aren't sexual, I just couldn't [[seeing]] anything else on the screen. I just wanted to sit at her feet like a puppy and stare up at her. She has [[launching]] to [[exhibitions]] her age, (She's [[roughly]] seventy-four) but I still [[believing]] her to be one of the most [[handsome]] and breathtaking women to ever have lived.

I have seen the movie several [[time]] since, and it is a sappy melodrama. What saves it is, of course, Miss Taylor's beauty, [[super]] scenery, the very [[amazing]] elephant stampede, and a well-made point on human [[swagger]] in the [[encounter]] of nature.

[[Everything]] in all, a well-spent [[pair]] of [[hour]] [[staring]] the [[film]] channel or a rented video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably the most boring, worse and useless film I have seen last year. The plot that was meant to have some philosophical aspects emerged to me as a very bad hollow copy of the matrix, with plenty of clichés: the lone wolf cop, good looking, psychologically disturbed, sleeping with his gun... + nice hard worker and shy, but good looking she-scientist, you add a 2 cent plot and you have I, Robot! I was terribly disturbed by the obvious advertising of brands like FedEx,Audi,converse etc. This movie stinks the commercialization and tend to be more a poor ad spot that unfortunately will not end after 30 sec. I wouldn't recommend this to my worse enemy, if you have some spare time, watch a good TV program instead or better read a nice book. --------------------------------------------- Result 1588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] because I [[like]] [[Nicolas]] Cage and well, I [[found]] it [[strange]] and [[completely]] [[pointless]]... so I decided to poke around a little bit and got my hands on the 70s [[copy]] of it. Wow. what a [[difference]]. The [[original]] one was way better. I'd [[like]] you all to know it did originally actually make a [[statement]], it's existence did have a purpose. It was really the [[Christian]] public [[expressing]] their fear of paganism. [[If]] you dig [[deeper]] into it it also makes [[comments]] on [[life]] but I don't want to go into [[details]], just, [[simply]] put, if you were [[disappointed]] and you'd like to know what it [[SHOULD]] look like, feel free to watch the 70s version, a [[little]] dated, but A [[lot]] better. I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] because I [[likes]] [[Nikolaus]] Cage and well, I [[discoveries]] it [[inquisitive]] and [[wholly]] [[meaningless]]... so I decided to poke around a little bit and got my hands on the 70s [[copying]] of it. Wow. what a [[divergence]]. The [[upfront]] one was way better. I'd [[iike]] you all to know it did originally actually make a [[declaration]], it's existence did have a purpose. It was really the [[Cristian]] public [[expressed]] their fear of paganism. [[Though]] you dig [[closer]] into it it also makes [[feedback]] on [[living]] but I don't want to go into [[clarification]], just, [[straightforward]] put, if you were [[frustrating]] and you'd like to know what it [[NEEDS]] look like, feel free to watch the 70s version, a [[petite]] dated, but A [[batches]] better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1589 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I [[really]] have [[problems]] rating this movie. It is [[directed]] brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of [[money]] in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), [[editing]] and [[cinematography]] are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really [[sick]] [[movies]] where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.

In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie .... I [[truthfully]] have [[disorders]] rating this movie. It is [[geared]] brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of [[cash]] in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), [[edited]] and [[movie]] are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really [[indisposed]] [[filmmaking]] where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.

In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie .... --------------------------------------------- Result 1590 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I can't for the [[life]] of me remember why--I must have had a [[free]] ticket or something--but I [[saw]] this movie in the [[theater]] when it was released. I don't remember who I went with, which theater I was in, or even which city. All I remember was how offended I was at this [[travesty]] someone dared to call a [[film]], and how half the people in the theater walked out before the movie was over. [[Unfortunately]] I stuck it out to end, which I still consider to be one of the [[worst]] mistakes of my life [[thus]] far. My [[offense]] became pure [[horror]] when just before the [[closing]] [[credits]] the smarmy [[demon]] child sticks his head out from behind a sign and [[says]] "Look for [[Problem]] [[Child]] 2, coming [[soon]]!" That was hands-down THE most [[terrifying]] [[moment]] ever [[recorded]] on [[film]].

The plot, if I [[recall]] correctly, [[involved]] [[John]] [[Ritter]] and [[perhaps]] his [[wife]] ([[Lord]], how I've tried without [[success]] to [[block]] this film out of my mind) [[adopting]] a "[[problem]] [[child]]." Maybe they [[think]] they can reform him, or something. I really don't know. If that was their [[intent]], they fail miserably because from first [[frame]] to last this child [[remains]] the brattiest, rudest, most [[horrid]] demon-spawn ever to [[hit]] the big screen. [[Forget]] Damian, forget Rosemary's [[Baby]]. This kid takes the cake. The only [[difference]] is, we are [[supposed]] to feel sorry for him because he's a "[[problem]] child." However, this is impossible since this child is [[quite]] likely the most [[unsympathetic]] [[character]] ever portrayed. You [[want]] to [[kill]] him through the entire [[film]], and when (SPOILER, like [[anyone]] cares) John Ritter decides to keep the [[vile]] hell-child you will be yelling "Send him back!" in [[shocked]] [[disgust]] (like several of the people at the [[theater]] where I saw it did).

This is only the second [[movie]] I have [[given]] a "1" to on the IMDb. The other was Superman IV, and by [[God]] I couldn't [[tell]] you which was worse. John Ritter had a [[quote]] in TV Guide about the time that Problem Child 3, which he was not in, came out. He said something like "The only way I would do another [Problem Child] sequel is if they dragged my dead body back to perform." Amen to that!

I would rather watch a 24-hour marathon of Police Academy sequels than see even twenty minutes of Problem Child again. 1/10, only because I can't give it a negative score, which is what it really deserves. Someone burn the original negatives of this film, please! I can't for the [[lives]] of me remember why--I must have had a [[libre]] ticket or something--but I [[noticed]] this movie in the [[drama]] when it was released. I don't remember who I went with, which theater I was in, or even which city. All I remember was how offended I was at this [[masquerade]] someone dared to call a [[filmmaking]], and how half the people in the theater walked out before the movie was over. [[Sadly]] I stuck it out to end, which I still consider to be one of the [[hardest]] mistakes of my life [[then]] far. My [[crimes]] became pure [[terror]] when just before the [[closure]] [[appropriations]] the smarmy [[devil]] child sticks his head out from behind a sign and [[say]] "Look for [[Problems]] [[Kids]] 2, coming [[quickly]]!" That was hands-down THE most [[creepy]] [[time]] ever [[inscribed]] on [[flick]].

The plot, if I [[remember]] correctly, [[implicated]] [[Jon]] [[Knight]] and [[possibly]] his [[femme]] ([[God]], how I've tried without [[successes]] to [[blocking]] this film out of my mind) [[taking]] a "[[problems]] [[kids]]." Maybe they [[reckon]] they can reform him, or something. I really don't know. If that was their [[intentions]], they fail miserably because from first [[framework]] to last this child [[stays]] the brattiest, rudest, most [[frightful]] demon-spawn ever to [[knocked]] the big screen. [[Forgot]] Damian, forget Rosemary's [[Honey]]. This kid takes the cake. The only [[dispute]] is, we are [[suspected]] to feel sorry for him because he's a "[[trouble]] child." However, this is impossible since this child is [[rather]] likely the most [[insensitive]] [[traits]] ever portrayed. You [[wants]] to [[murder]] him through the entire [[filmmaking]], and when (SPOILER, like [[everybody]] cares) John Ritter decides to keep the [[hateful]] hell-child you will be yelling "Send him back!" in [[surprised]] [[antipathy]] (like several of the people at the [[movies]] where I saw it did).

This is only the second [[filmmaking]] I have [[gave]] a "1" to on the IMDb. The other was Superman IV, and by [[Goodness]] I couldn't [[telling]] you which was worse. John Ritter had a [[quoting]] in TV Guide about the time that Problem Child 3, which he was not in, came out. He said something like "The only way I would do another [Problem Child] sequel is if they dragged my dead body back to perform." Amen to that!

I would rather watch a 24-hour marathon of Police Academy sequels than see even twenty minutes of Problem Child again. 1/10, only because I can't give it a negative score, which is what it really deserves. Someone burn the original negatives of this film, please! --------------------------------------------- Result 1591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This "[[film]]" is a [[travesty]]. No, wait--an [[abomination]]. NO, WAIT--this is without a doubt the absolute [[WORST]] film ever [[made]] featuring [[beloved]] characters created and [[established]] by other actors.

I thought "Inspector Clouseau" with [[Alan]] Arkin (!) instead of [[Peter]] Sellers was ludicrous and sacrilegious, but even daring to "remake" Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy is asinine and [[money]] grubbing.

Mr. Laurel and Mr. Hardy have been dead, respectively, since 1957 and 1965. Why anyone would even begin to imagine that suitable updates for L & H would be in the persona of Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain is beyond me. I tuned in fully expecting to be horrified and embarrassed and I certainly wasn't disappointed. Everyone involved in this pathetic, [[moronic]], [[disgrace]] should be blackballed from anything and everything associated with Hollywood and film-making. [[AVOID]] THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS--YOU HAVE BEEN DULY WARNED. This "[[filmmaking]]" is a [[farce]]. No, wait--an [[monstrosity]]. NO, WAIT--this is without a doubt the absolute [[PIRE]] film ever [[accomplished]] featuring [[sweetie]] characters created and [[crafted]] by other actors.

I thought "Inspector Clouseau" with [[Alain]] Arkin (!) instead of [[Pete]] Sellers was ludicrous and sacrilegious, but even daring to "remake" Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy is asinine and [[cash]] grubbing.

Mr. Laurel and Mr. Hardy have been dead, respectively, since 1957 and 1965. Why anyone would even begin to imagine that suitable updates for L & H would be in the persona of Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain is beyond me. I tuned in fully expecting to be horrified and embarrassed and I certainly wasn't disappointed. Everyone involved in this pathetic, [[dumb]], [[shaming]] should be blackballed from anything and everything associated with Hollywood and film-making. [[AVERTED]] THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS--YOU HAVE BEEN DULY WARNED. --------------------------------------------- Result 1592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] OK its not the best [[film]] I've ever seen but at the same [[time]] I've been able to [[sit]] and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the [[first]] [[part]] of the first short [[story]] i [[wondered]] what the [[hell]] i was [[watching]] but at the same time it was so [[awful]] i loved it [[cheap]] laughs all the way.

And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.

overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it. OK its not the best [[filmmaking]] I've ever seen but at the same [[times]] I've been able to [[seated]] and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the [[firstly]] [[parties]] of the first short [[histories]] i [[questioned]] what the [[inferno]] i was [[staring]] but at the same time it was so [[shocking]] i loved it [[inexpensive]] laughs all the way.

And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.

overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1593 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Presenting Lily Mars may have provided Judy Garland with one of the easier roles she had while at MGM because Lily Mars is definitely a character she could identify with. A young girl with talent enough for ten, she knows she has what it takes to make it in the theater no matter how much producer Van Heflin from her home town discourages her.

I really liked Judy in this one as the girl determined to make it in the theater. Because it is Judy Garland with the talent of Judy Garland you in the audience know she has the right stuff even if it takes Van Heflin nearly the whole movie to be convinced.

Both Judy and Heflin hail from the same small town, Heflin's dad was the town doctor who delivered her and Heflin while he may have moved away and become a big producer on Broadway, their respective moms, Fay Bainter and Spring Byington have kept in touch. That's her entrée, but Heflin's constantly barraged with stagestruck kids, but never anyone quite like Lily Mars.

No real big song hits came out of Presenting Lily Mars for Garland, though she sings all her numbers. The best in the film is a revival of that gaslight era chestnut, Every Little Movement Has A Meaning All Its Own. Judy sings it with Connie Gilchrist playing the cleaning lady in a Broadway theater where Heflin's show is being produced. Gilchrist was a star back in the days of the FloraDora Girls and she and Judy deliver the song in grand style with Connie. It's the best scene in the film as Gilchrist encourages Judy to keep at it. Composer Karl Hoschna had died a long time ago, but lyricist Otto Harbach was still alive and I'm betting he liked what he heard.

European musical star Marta Eggerth is in Presenting Lily Mars as the show's star who's at first bemused, then angry and finally, understanding of Garland and Heflin. She did a couple of films with MGM and then went back to Europe for more work on the continent. I'm betting MGM didn't quite know what to do with her and her thick Hungarian accent, though Louis B. Mayer never met a soprano he didn't like.

Van Heflin does well as the patient producer who puts up with a lot from Garland and Eggerth. Heflin was just coming off his Oscar for Johnny Eager the previous year and he and Garland wouldn't appear to be an ideal screen team, but they're not bad together.

Presenting Lily Mars is a fine showcase for the talents of Judy Garland. And she didn't have to share the screen in another backstage film with Mickey Rooney. --------------------------------------------- Result 1594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally [[killed]] a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.

It's bubble-headed [[comedy]], but it's um. [[squalid]]. The [[plot]] is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so [[petty]] and disturbed and [[conveniently]] contrived I [[ultimately]] found it depressing to watch.

Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an [[uneven]], goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.) This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally [[killings]] a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.

It's bubble-headed [[humour]], but it's um. [[filthy]]. The [[intrigue]] is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so [[inconsequential]] and disturbed and [[easily]] contrived I [[eventually]] found it depressing to watch.

Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an [[lopsided]], goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] How can [[someone]] [[NOT]] like this [[movie]]??? This [[movie]] is so good, that the first [[week]] I [[saw]] it on the shelf at the [[video]] [[store]] it was [[stolen]]....[[BEST]] [[Horror]] Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know [[HAHAHA]]..[[How]] is that [[NOT]] funny? The only [[movie]] that [[comes]] [[close]] to [[touching]] this is Bride of Chucky and that was just [[great]]!! How can [[person]] [[NOPE]] like this [[cinematography]]??? This [[cinematographic]] is so good, that the first [[chow]] I [[watched]] it on the shelf at the [[videotape]] [[boutique]] it was [[stealing]]....[[BETTER]] [[Abomination]] Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know [[HAHAHAHA]]..[[Mode]] is that [[NO]] funny? The only [[kino]] that [[arrives]] [[nearer]] to [[touches]] this is Bride of Chucky and that was just [[wondrous]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1596 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the first Tom Hanks movie I have gotten the privilege of seeing in the theater, although he is my favorite. When I heard he was going to play a hit-man, I was a little stunned thinking "can Mr. Hanks pull this one off"? And he did in high fashion. This 1930's depression era film is a about loyalty, redemption, and one path that you don't want your children stumbling down. Tom Hanks leads a stellar cast as Michael Sullivan. Being the family man, and the secret life of the contract killer for the Oscar nominated Paul Newman. This movie Tom Hanks relies more on reaction and gaze rather than dialogue, which he delivers a knockout performance.

On one night of one of his jobs, Michael's son Michael Jr., played by newcomer Tyler Hoechlin, witnesses the hit. And Michael Sr.'s partner in crime, fellow stage actor Daniel Craig can't have that information out. So he wacks out the son and wife of Michael Sr., except Michael Jr. So the two head for Chicago to get Conner Rooney(son of Paul Newman's Mr. Rooney).

The drama and intense plot really thickens from their as father trys to set things right, even though son is along for the ride. While on this deadly journey, someone has hired a hit for Michael Sr. The assassin would be the photographer of the deceased Harlen Maguire, played by a stain-teethed Jude Law.

The movie will have you feeling the old days. And with Thomas Newman's beautiful and haunting Oscar nominated score to go along with it, you can't help but appreciate this film from Oscar winning director Sam Mendes. So sit back, and enjoy the wild ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 1597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I [[give]] 3 stars only for the [[beautiful]] [[pictures]] of Africa. The [[rest]] was... well [[pretty]] boring. For about 50min we have the [[outline]] of the plot... [[In]] [[War]] of the worlds, the [[introductory]] [[part]] lasted, oh, about 10min? Then was real action! This is something like:"Let's [[take]] a walk in the [[savanna]] and gasp at the [[beautiful]] sunsets!". And maybe [[deliver]] a [[message]], like "Don't [[kill]] elephants!". Very ecological. I would have expected this out of a "[[new]]" [[Steven]] Segal [[movie]], not from this... The leading actress makes me [[think]] about artificial sun-tan, dyed hair and too much [[foundation]]! And I didn't [[see]] one scene where her hair is messed up, or she sweats, or her clothes are dusty. She just doesn't look like a 19 century [[woman]]! And in the [[bar]], where they [[seek]] up our hero, Swayze makes a [[comment]] about the commander that he [[looks]] like Dracula. [[Hmmm]], Bram Stoker [[wrote]] his [[book]] and [[published]] it in 1896, and it [[became]] [[famous]] in the [[next]] [[years]]. [[Livingstone]] and other explorers went to central Africa from 1840 to 1880. [[So]] [[unless]] the action takes place between 1896 and 1900.. Houston, we have a problem. :) Swayze makes a nice impression.. as a nutshell - hard on the outside, but soft and cuddly on the inside. Not that I [[would]] cuddle with a [[nut]], but you [[get]] the point. He really manages to have that beaten [[puppy]] look on his [[face]] on [[several]] occasions. The [[movie]] stank. Way too long and increasingly [[boring]]. don't watch it! Don't [[buy]] it! It's a [[waste]] of your [[money]]! I [[confer]] 3 stars only for the [[sumptuous]] [[picture]] of Africa. The [[roosting]] was... well [[quite]] boring. For about 50min we have the [[described]] of the plot... [[Among]] [[Wars]] of the worlds, the [[preliminary]] [[parties]] lasted, oh, about 10min? Then was real action! This is something like:"Let's [[taking]] a walk in the [[savannah]] and gasp at the [[sumptuous]] sunsets!". And maybe [[provide]] a [[messaging]], like "Don't [[mata]] elephants!". Very ecological. I would have expected this out of a "[[newer]]" [[Stephane]] Segal [[cinematography]], not from this... The leading actress makes me [[thought]] about artificial sun-tan, dyed hair and too much [[basics]]! And I didn't [[seeing]] one scene where her hair is messed up, or she sweats, or her clothes are dusty. She just doesn't look like a 19 century [[girls]]! And in the [[barrister]], where they [[trying]] up our hero, Swayze makes a [[comments]] about the commander that he [[seem]] like Dracula. [[Ahem]], Bram Stoker [[texted]] his [[books]] and [[publicized]] it in 1896, and it [[came]] [[illustrious]] in the [[imminent]] [[olds]]. [[Livingston]] and other explorers went to central Africa from 1840 to 1880. [[Accordingly]] [[if]] the action takes place between 1896 and 1900.. Houston, we have a problem. :) Swayze makes a nice impression.. as a nutshell - hard on the outside, but soft and cuddly on the inside. Not that I [[should]] cuddle with a [[nuts]], but you [[gets]] the point. He really manages to have that beaten [[terrier]] look on his [[confronts]] on [[assorted]] occasions. The [[movies]] stank. Way too long and increasingly [[monotonous]]. don't watch it! Don't [[procured]] it! It's a [[wastes]] of your [[moneys]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1598 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Don't [[even]] [[bother]] with this movie, it's bad when judged on it's own merits, but when compared to the 1972 original (which IS a [[classic]]) it's down right [[awful]]. And BTW, somebody commented that the 1972 [[movie]] is bad when compared to the [[book]]. This is [[silly]], movies should never be [[judged]] against the [[books]] they are [[taken]] from. They are 2 completely different [[art]] [[forms]] (as if this [[needed]] to be pointed out but apparently it does). [[If]] you [[used]] this [[criteria]] for all movies then "2001" would suck and so [[would]] "Forest Gump" and "Silence of the Lambs". Don't [[yet]] [[irritate]] with this movie, it's bad when judged on it's own merits, but when compared to the 1972 original (which IS a [[typical]]) it's down right [[scary]]. And BTW, somebody commented that the 1972 [[filmmaking]] is bad when compared to the [[workbook]]. This is [[brainless]], movies should never be [[deemed]] against the [[livres]] they are [[took]] from. They are 2 completely different [[artistry]] [[shapes]] (as if this [[needs]] to be pointed out but apparently it does). [[Though]] you [[using]] this [[criterion]] for all movies then "2001" would suck and so [[should]] "Forest Gump" and "Silence of the Lambs". --------------------------------------------- Result 1599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***SPOILERS*** Like some evil Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance double-play combination we have in "Omen IV" the evil seed of the deceased AntiChrist Damien Thorn come back. Terrorizing his parents his schoolmates his neighbors and finally the entire world as a she named Delia York, Asia Vieila. After being given to a "deserving" couple the Yorks Karen & Gene, Fay Grant & Michael Woods,by the Catholic Church's St. Francis orphanage.

Little Delia didn't waste any time making her peasants felt by scratching her mom at a house party. Later Delia almost get killed by a runaway truck only to have herself saved by this "Devil Dog" named Ryder. Going to school Delia takes care of the local bully by getting the big guy to wet himself in front of all his classmates. Later when his father threatens the Yorks with a law suit she has his head sliced off in a self-induced traffic accident! Delia is someone that you never mess with if you know what's good for you.

Meanwhile Dalia's dad Gene becomes a big man in town on his own, or so he thinks, by getting elected to the congress as a champion of the clean air and green trees crowd instead of letting the smog and concrete boys take over the neighborhood with his eye now on he White House itself! Did his bratty and strange daughter Delia have anything to do with Gene York's sudden good fortune?

It's only later when Jo, Ann Hearen, is hired as Delia's nanny that the truth's comes out about her strange and evil powers. Jo a New Age type realizes that Delia is a bit weird, after turning all her white crystals black, and calls her New Age Guru Noah, Jim Byrnes, to come over and check her out. Noah is so upset by what he sees in Delia Kirilian color vibrations ,all black and blue with a little pinch of red, that it flips him out so bad that he almost crashed into Delia's moms car.

Taken on a trip to a psychic festival by Jo Delia turns the entire event into an inferno setting the place, through mental telepathy, on fire and heaving everyone there run for cover including poor Noah who was at the festival and ended up with his leg broken. The and shaken and battered Guru was so shook up by the whole experience that he later checked out of the country to become a hermit in the Tibetan wilderness.

Jo herself is later thrown out, with the help of the sweet and cuddly family pet Ryder, of a second floor window to her death because she knew and talked too much. It's when Karen is again pregnant that she decides, finally, to find out the truth about the real parents of Delia. That's when she,and we in the audience, come face to face with the truth. She's not only the feared AntiChrist of Revelations she's his twin sister! Her brother the AntiChrist himself is about to come on the scene as her kid brother the sill unborn Alexander York!

Three times were more then enough for the AntiChrist coming back to earth to bring about Armageddon. The movie going public were already getting a little tired of of him and his evil adventures. With a fourth really not necessary since Daimen Thorn, the original AntiChrist, had been dead and buried for years. Were put through the usual ringer with no one believing that little Delia is "Thee" AntiChrist until it was almost too late to stop her in her deadly rounds of destroying the entire human race. The movie as bad as it is is also far too long, 97 minutes, for a horror flick that could well have told it's story is as little as 80 minutes.

Having a private eye Earl Knight, Mchael Learner,and later a former Catholic nun sister Yvonne,Megan Lehch,and now faith healer Felichy in the film only to be killed off didn't help the plot either. It only prolonged the suffering of those of us watching the movie. You could see the surprise ending coming almost as soon as the film "Omen IV" began with the bases being cleared for Delia's eventual takeover of the civilized as well as uncivilized world. What was a bit of a surprise was Delia doing it with a little help from friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 1600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Another [[demonstration]] of Kurosawa's genius, his first [[colour]] film is a darkly [[surreal]] look into the [[tragic]] [[lives]] of Tokyo [[slum]] [[dwellers]], essentially a series of interweaving vignettes [[depicting]] [[several]] groups of people eking out a [[perilous]] existence in a harsh and [[uncaring]] post-war [[shanty]] [[town]]. Swinging from [[comedy]] to tragedy and back, this [[film]] shows how people [[deal]] with the worst [[kind]] of life each in their own [[way]], [[mostly]] retreating into themselves and [[living]] in the fantasy [[worlds]] of their own [[heads]], [[withdrawing]] [[emotionally]] from those [[around]] them or drowning themselves in alcohol. [[Mixing]] kitchen-sink [[realism]] with Kabuki-esque theatrics, Kurosawa [[toys]] [[expertly]] with the [[emotions]] of his audience, drawing [[tears]] and [[laughter]] with equal deftness. A [[wonderful]], draining experience. Another [[protest]] of Kurosawa's genius, his first [[coloring]] film is a darkly [[bizarre]] look into the [[dire]] [[vie]] of Tokyo [[squatter]] [[resident]], essentially a series of interweaving vignettes [[illustrating]] [[multiple]] groups of people eking out a [[precarious]] existence in a harsh and [[unsympathetic]] post-war [[hovel]] [[ciudad]]. Swinging from [[parody]] to tragedy and back, this [[movie]] shows how people [[addresses]] with the worst [[genre]] of life each in their own [[camino]], [[basically]] retreating into themselves and [[residing]] in the fantasy [[universes]] of their own [[leiter]], [[withdrawal]] [[psychologically]] from those [[roundabout]] them or drowning themselves in alcohol. [[Amalgam]] kitchen-sink [[realist]] with Kabuki-esque theatrics, Kurosawa [[plaything]] [[ably]] with the [[passions]] of his audience, drawing [[crying]] and [[risa]] with equal deftness. A [[wondrous]], draining experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]]

Filmed just after the war, this story was made in order to highlight Anglo-American relations after the war. It ended up receiving the honour of being the [[first]] Royal [[Premiere]] after WWII.

[[Remarkably]] the film tangles together the Royal Air Force, Sigmund [[Freud]] [[Psychology]], the Founding fathers of [[America]] and [[various]] others up the [[long]] stairs (special effects in its [[infancy]]) and beyond the heavenly gates without [[losing]] any of its integrity.

[[Although]] [[sounding]] absurd, this [[clever]] script leads and [[dances]] the [[viewer]] between heaven and earth with the skill of a mountain goat and a [[presents]] a charming [[ease]] rarely matched in cinema [[since]].

[[Be]] prepared to have your heart warmed by this sweet, innocent and charming love [[story]]. Roger Livesey acts like a [[man]] possessed to steal the show!!!!

British Cinema should cry when it remembers how good it used to be in those [[early]] post war years.



Filmed just after the war, this story was made in order to highlight Anglo-American relations after the war. It ended up receiving the honour of being the [[fiirst]] Royal [[Debut]] after WWII.

[[Terribly]] the film tangles together the Royal Air Force, Sigmund [[Floyd]] [[Psychiatric]], the Founding fathers of [[Latina]] and [[several]] others up the [[longer]] stairs (special effects in its [[debut]]) and beyond the heavenly gates without [[loses]] any of its integrity.

[[Though]] [[probing]] absurd, this [[smarter]] script leads and [[dancers]] the [[bystander]] between heaven and earth with the skill of a mountain goat and a [[introduces]] a charming [[lighten]] rarely matched in cinema [[because]].

[[Are]] prepared to have your heart warmed by this sweet, innocent and charming love [[conte]]. Roger Livesey acts like a [[dawg]] possessed to steal the show!!!!

British Cinema should cry when it remembers how good it used to be in those [[prematurely]] post war years.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Need a lesson in pure, abject failure?? Look no further than "Wizards of the Lost Kingdom", an abysmal, dirt-poor, disgrace of a flick. As we all know, decent moovies tend to sprout horrible, horrible offspring: "Halloween" begat many, many bad 80's slasher flicks; "Mad Max" begat many, many bad 80's "futuristic wasteland fantasy" flicks; and "Conan the Barbarian" begat a whole slew of terrible, horrible, incredibly bad 80's sword-and-sorcery flicks. "Wizards of the Lost Kingdom" scrapes the bottom of that 80's barrel, in a way that's truly insulting to barrels. A young runt named Simon recaptured his "good kingdom" from an evil sorcerer with the help of a mangy rug, a garden gnome, a topless bimbo mermaid, and a tired-looking, pudgy Bo Svenson. Svenson("North Dallas Forty", "Inglorious Bastards", "Delta Force"), a long-time b-moovie muscleman, looks barely able to swing his aluminum foil sword. However, he manages to defeat the forces of evil, which consist of the evil sorcerer, "Shurka", and his army of badly costumed monsters, giants, and midgets. At one point, a paper mache bat on a string attacks, but is eaten by a 1/2 hidden sock puppet, pitifully presented as some sort of dragon. The beginning of the film consists of what can only politely be described as bits of scenes scooped up from the cutting-room floor of udder bad moovies, stitched together in the vain hope of setting the scene for the film, and over-earnestly narrated by some guy who never appears again. Words cannot properly convey the jaw-dropping cheapness of this film; the producers probably spent moore moolah feeding Svenson's ever expanding gullet than on the cheesy fx of this flick. And we're talkin' Brie here, folks... :=8P Director Hector Olivera("Barbarian Queen") presents this mish-mash in a hopelessly confused, confuddled, and cliched manner, destroying any possible hint of clear, linear storytelling. The acting is dreadful, the production levels below shoe-string, and the plot is one tired cliche after another paraded before our weary eyes. That they actually made a sequel(!!!) makes the MooCow's brain whirl. James Horner's("Braveheart", "Titanic","The Rock") cheesy moosic from "Battle Beyond the Stars" was lifted, screaming and kicking, and mercilessly grafted onto this turkey - bet this one doesn't pop up on his resume. Folks, you gotta see this to believe it. The MooCow says as a cheapo rent when there is NOTHING else to watch, well, it's moore fun than watching dust bunnies mate. Barely. :=8P --------------------------------------------- Result 1603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't really know where to start. The acting in this movie was really terrible, I can't remember seeing so many 'actors' in one film that weren't able to act. Not only the acting was bad, the characters were incredibly stupid as well.

Then there's the action. I believe that even children know that when someone gets shot, there's blood involved. But when someone gets shot in Snitch'd for ten (!!) times, there's no blood at all. Well, I guess that's just me.

To make a long story short (because believe me, I can go on for hours about this film), this is without a doubt the worst film I ever saw. This film should be number 1 in the bottom 100 without a doubt. --------------------------------------------- Result 1604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Uta]] Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard [[textbook]] in many college theater courses. In the [[book]], Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. [[In]] the Presentational approach, the [[actor]] [[focuses]] on [[realizing]] the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. [[In]] the Representational approach, the [[actor]] [[tries]] to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational [[approach]] to acting was still partially in vogue when this Hamlet was [[made]]. British theater has a [[long]] [[history]] of this [[style]] of acting, and Olivier [[could]] be [[said]] to be the ultimate [[king]] of the Representational [[school]].

[[Time]] has not been [[kind]] to this school of acting, or to this [[movie]]. Nearly every [[working]] actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern [[eye]], Olivier's [[highly]] enunciated, [[stylized]] delivery is stodgy, [[stiff]] and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that [[would]] have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the [[movie]] creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines [[unintentionally]] funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of [[note]] in this [[Hamlet]], putting in a [[good]] essay at the [[Queen]], despite the painfully [[obvious]] age [[differences]] (he was 41; she was 26). The other [[actors]] in this [[movie]] have no [[chance]] to get [[anything]] [[else]] of [[significance]] [[done]], given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the [[camera]]! on him! at all! times!

Sixty years later, you feel the [[insecurity]] of the Shakespearean [[stage]] actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it." [[Otta]] Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard [[manuel]] in many college theater courses. In the [[ledger]], Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. [[Across]] the Presentational approach, the [[actress]] [[spotlight]] on [[accomplishing]] the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. [[Across]] the Representational approach, the [[protagonist]] [[seeks]] to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational [[approaching]] to acting was still partially in vogue when this Hamlet was [[accomplished]]. British theater has a [[lang]] [[tale]] of this [[elegance]] of acting, and Olivier [[wo]] be [[say]] to be the ultimate [[emperor]] of the Representational [[teaching]].

[[Times]] has not been [[types]] to this school of acting, or to this [[kino]]. Nearly every [[collaboration]] actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern [[ojo]], Olivier's [[greatly]] enunciated, [[stylish]] delivery is stodgy, [[tough]] and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that [[should]] have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the [[filmmaking]] creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines [[involuntarily]] funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of [[observes]] in this [[Hamlets]], putting in a [[alright]] essay at the [[Quinn]], despite the painfully [[noticeable]] age [[variance]] (he was 41; she was 26). The other [[actresses]] in this [[filmmaking]] have no [[opportunities]] to get [[something]] [[elsewhere]] of [[importance]] [[doing]], given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the [[cameras]]! on him! at all! times!

Sixty years later, you feel the [[insecure]] of the Shakespearean [[ballpark]] actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it." --------------------------------------------- Result 1605 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] All you [[need]] to know about this [[film]] [[happens]] in the first five minutes: it looks cool, it has a [[solid]] [[original]] soundtrack reflective of the late-60s [[period]], and all but a couple of its characters are unlikeable. Once you [[get]] that message, you [[may]] as well switch to another [[film]].

Davies's [[protagonist]] [[ignores]] his [[beautiful]] girlfriend, one of the few people in his [[life]] who cares about him. [[Then]] by the [[time]] he [[takes]] her [[advice]] to [[join]] her in the [[real]] world--instead of living a fantasy [[film]] of which he's the [[imagined]] director--he does so by [[pushing]] her aside and [[pairing]] up with an [[actress]] he's idealized beyond [[reason]]. A [[couple]] [[laughs]] and some thoughtful art [[direction]] are the only things worth watching here.

The [[film]] is [[also]] interesting as [[documentation]] of Jason Schwartzman's fall from Mount Rushmore. [[In]] Rushmore, Schwartzman's annoying brattiness was something to be [[overcome]], but here it's his character's only quality. Schwartzman's family connection [[clearly]] landed him in this role; here's hoping his [[choices]] [[improve]]. All you [[gotta]] to know about this [[filmmaking]] [[comes]] in the first five minutes: it looks cool, it has a [[robust]] [[upfront]] soundtrack reflective of the late-60s [[times]], and all but a couple of its characters are unlikeable. Once you [[obtain]] that message, you [[maggio]] as well switch to another [[flick]].

Davies's [[player]] [[ignoring]] his [[sumptuous]] girlfriend, one of the few people in his [[living]] who cares about him. [[Later]] by the [[moment]] he [[pick]] her [[tips]] to [[participates]] her in the [[veritable]] world--instead of living a fantasy [[filmmaking]] of which he's the [[figured]] director--he does so by [[prompting]] her aside and [[matches]] up with an [[actor]] he's idealized beyond [[motif]]. A [[match]] [[giggles]] and some thoughtful art [[directions]] are the only things worth watching here.

The [[cinema]] is [[similarly]] interesting as [[papers]] of Jason Schwartzman's fall from Mount Rushmore. [[Among]] Rushmore, Schwartzman's annoying brattiness was something to be [[overcoming]], but here it's his character's only quality. Schwartzman's family connection [[definitely]] landed him in this role; here's hoping his [[select]] [[enhanced]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1606 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Of [[life]] in (some) colleges. Of course there were artistic [[licenses]] [[taken]], but some of what you saw in this film [[go]] on in some colleges.

I went to colleges in Southern California where the [[races]] pretty much hang around with their own. It's funny because these are [[schools]] that want racial unity, equality etc. and I can honestly say, that it's there. But the thing is when class lets out, or when they're just hanging out waiting for [[class]], they (students) [[seem]] to just [[hang]] around with people of their own race or ethnicity. Is that bad? Not [[really]]. Everyone needs a feeling of belonging. But like the school paper of one of the schools I attended once wrote about that, "we should all try to hang around with students of other ethnicities and try to know them." Otherwise you're creating your own segregation.

Racism certainly existed in one of those schools I attended. One time someone put leaflets around campus talking about the glories of the Aryan Race and had the symbols of some of those racist organizations. Fortunately, nothing happened like the incident in the movie where the young Caucasian man went off and started shooting at a multiculturalism gathering.

I can only hope and pray that nothing like that ever will happen.

So is "Higher Learning" overly dramatic? [[Exaggerated]]? [[Maybe]]. Is it way "off mark?" It depends on where you went to or go to school. The race thing where the ethnicities just [[hang]] around with their own DOES happen. [[Minus]] the Hollywood exaggerations, the race [[thing]] [[hit]] pretty close to [[home]] for me. Of [[iife]] in (some) colleges. Of course there were artistic [[authorisation]] [[picked]], but some of what you saw in this film [[going]] on in some colleges.

I went to colleges in Southern California where the [[careers]] pretty much hang around with their own. It's funny because these are [[institutes]] that want racial unity, equality etc. and I can honestly say, that it's there. But the thing is when class lets out, or when they're just hanging out waiting for [[categories]], they (students) [[appears]] to just [[heng]] around with people of their own race or ethnicity. Is that bad? Not [[truthfully]]. Everyone needs a feeling of belonging. But like the school paper of one of the schools I attended once wrote about that, "we should all try to hang around with students of other ethnicities and try to know them." Otherwise you're creating your own segregation.

Racism certainly existed in one of those schools I attended. One time someone put leaflets around campus talking about the glories of the Aryan Race and had the symbols of some of those racist organizations. Fortunately, nothing happened like the incident in the movie where the young Caucasian man went off and started shooting at a multiculturalism gathering.

I can only hope and pray that nothing like that ever will happen.

So is "Higher Learning" overly dramatic? [[Overblown]]? [[Presumably]]. Is it way "off mark?" It depends on where you went to or go to school. The race thing where the ethnicities just [[heng]] around with their own DOES happen. [[Least]] the Hollywood exaggerations, the race [[stuff]] [[knocked]] pretty close to [[lodgings]] for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1607 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a [[confused]] and [[incoherent]] mess of [[interminable]] scenes of boring [[dialogues]] and monologues. That is no exaggeration: you have to make a tremendous effort to [[even]] try to become involved with it.

I sincerely thought Fassbinder would make [[something]] interesting in [[order]] to tell why does Erwin/Elvira suicides at the end, but instead of this, in every scene [[somebody]] is trying to explain: "when he was [[young]], this happened..." and "he just came back from Casablanca and [[ordered]] to [[cut]] everything down there...", etc.

Soon in the movie, Erwin/Elvira is in a [[slaughter]] house talking with a friend prostitute ([[certainly]] a [[slaughter]] house is the [[best]] place for a [[pleasant]] little [[chat]]), and while [[telling]] her the [[story]] of Elvira's [[life]], Fassbinder shows the killing of one cow after the other. It is difficult to [[choose]] between giving attention to the [[disturbing]] images or what the transvestite is saying. Of course we come to the very forced and coarse symbolism of "I have suffered much in my life, and am about to die".

In one of the sparse moments where actually happens something, Erwin/Elvira encounters a former lover, that only after performing a extremely gay choreography with two other guys (as if going for the necessary level of homosexuality) is that he recognizes Elvira.

There are some interesting shots and ideas, I must admit (such as when the nun tells the story of the young Erwin), but everything on the movie is wasted due to Fassbinder's self- [[indulgence]]. This is a [[disconcerted]] and [[unconnected]] mess of [[infinite]] scenes of boring [[discussions]] and monologues. That is no exaggeration: you have to make a tremendous effort to [[yet]] try to become involved with it.

I sincerely thought Fassbinder would make [[somethings]] interesting in [[orders]] to tell why does Erwin/Elvira suicides at the end, but instead of this, in every scene [[everyone]] is trying to explain: "when he was [[youthful]], this happened..." and "he just came back from Casablanca and [[decreed]] to [[slice]] everything down there...", etc.

Soon in the movie, Erwin/Elvira is in a [[cull]] house talking with a friend prostitute ([[definitely]] a [[carnage]] house is the [[optimum]] place for a [[pleasurable]] little [[chatter]]), and while [[tell]] her the [[fairytales]] of Elvira's [[vie]], Fassbinder shows the killing of one cow after the other. It is difficult to [[elects]] between giving attention to the [[worrying]] images or what the transvestite is saying. Of course we come to the very forced and coarse symbolism of "I have suffered much in my life, and am about to die".

In one of the sparse moments where actually happens something, Erwin/Elvira encounters a former lover, that only after performing a extremely gay choreography with two other guys (as if going for the necessary level of homosexuality) is that he recognizes Elvira.

There are some interesting shots and ideas, I must admit (such as when the nun tells the story of the young Erwin), but everything on the movie is wasted due to Fassbinder's self- [[leniency]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] "Radiofreccia" is still a good [[surprise]] in [[Italian]] [[cinema]]. The [[film]] is [[based]] on a book of Italian songwriter Luciano Ligabue, who [[also]] directs the [[movie]] and writes the music [[score]] -of course.

The [[film]] is a [[portrait]] of [[north]] Italian province [[life]], in the Emilia Romagna [[region]]. We're in 1975, the time of the first free [[radios]] -one of the boys of the movie creates "Radioraptus". [[Youth]] wishes, [[friendship]], [[love]], sex, individual [[dramas]] and unemployment are among the [[themes]], but the film [[speaks]] [[also]] about drugs -Freccia, the main character, is a victim of heroin slavery.

Without being [[boring]] and moralist, the [[story]] flows very well; the spontaneity of [[actors]] is strong and the [[way]] of directing as well. [[Obviously]] Luciano "Liga" Ligabue is [[neither]] Fellini nor a movie [[professional]], first of all he's a [[musician]]. But he [[succeeds]] in making a [[good]] [[product]]. Unfortunately he'll not repeat the [[success]] with his [[second]] [[movie]] "Da zero a dieci" -not good at all.

[[In]] "Radiofreccia" actors are generally not very famous, the only [[star]] is Stefano Accorsi -one of the most [[popular]] young [[Italian]] [[actors]]. See in a [[small]] role another [[Italian]] songwriter -[[Francesco]] Guccini, he's the [[nice]] communist barman and football [[trainer]]! "Radiofreccia" is still a good [[amaze]] in [[Ltalian]] [[theaters]]. The [[films]] is [[founded]] on a book of Italian songwriter Luciano Ligabue, who [[apart]] directs the [[movies]] and writes the music [[scoring]] -of course.

The [[kino]] is a [[depiction]] of [[norte]] Italian province [[vida]], in the Emilia Romagna [[area]]. We're in 1975, the time of the first free [[radio]] -one of the boys of the movie creates "Radioraptus". [[Teenage]] wishes, [[friendliness]], [[adored]], sex, individual [[drama]] and unemployment are among the [[item]], but the film [[talk]] [[apart]] about drugs -Freccia, the main character, is a victim of heroin slavery.

Without being [[tiresome]] and moralist, the [[histories]] flows very well; the spontaneity of [[players]] is strong and the [[pathway]] of directing as well. [[Certainly]] Luciano "Liga" Ligabue is [[either]] Fellini nor a movie [[occupational]], first of all he's a [[music]]. But he [[succeeding]] in making a [[alright]] [[merchandise]]. Unfortunately he'll not repeat the [[avail]] with his [[secondly]] [[cinematography]] "Da zero a dieci" -not good at all.

[[At]] "Radiofreccia" actors are generally not very famous, the only [[stars]] is Stefano Accorsi -one of the most [[folk]] young [[Ltalian]] [[actresses]]. See in a [[teeny]] role another [[Ltalian]] songwriter -[[Francisco]] Guccini, he's the [[delightful]] communist barman and football [[instructors]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the first regular filmed Columbo movie episode but yet it aired as the second, after Steven Spielberg's "Columbo: Murder by the Book". It's also at the same time among one of the better ones!

Bernard L. Kowalski was one great creative director! No wonder that they later asked him to direct three more Columbo movies. The movie has some real creative and innovative shot sequences and the movie as a whole is also clearly made with style, passion and eye for detail. Every shot connects and is a reason why this movie is better and also better looking just any other average made for TV movie. It's definitely one of the better directed Columbo movies.

It's a quit original Columbo entry for a couple of reasons. The murder is more or less an accident and was an impulsive act. So the killer this time doesn't have any time to plan out the 'perfect murder' in advance and his to clean up any of the traces afterward and has to dispose the body. The killer in this movie is not only being handled as the man who committed the crime but more as the man who helps out Lieutenant Columbo to solve the murder. It makes the character a more interesting and layered one as well and also helps to make the way Columbo solves the whole crime seem way more interesting as well because of that. Of course Columbo starts to suspect him pretty early on and as always he comes to solution by making himself vulnerable and look more stupid than he of course truly is and by gaining the killer's trust. This is obviously no spoiler since this is the way every Columbo movie gets set-up. I liked the story of the movie and how it progressed.

It also helps the movie that it has such a fine cast. At the time of this movie Peter Falk had really made the Columbo character his own and the character at this was already fully developed. Robert Culp is truly great as the short tempered Brimmer. Funny thing is that he would later star in three different Columbo movies again and one "Mrs. Columbo" episode, only in totally different roles. He even played the murderer in a couple of those movies as well again. He by the way was not the only actor that did this in other later Columbo movies. Also the great Ray Milland makes an appearance in this movie, as the husband of the victim.

All in all, a real great early Columbo movie and among the better ones out of the long running series of movies.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "[[House]] Of [[Games]]" is definitely not without its flaws- plot [[holes]], stiff acting, final scenes- but they do little to [[detract]] from the [[fun]] of watching a thriller that so methodically messes with your head. "[[House]] Of Games" does almost everything a good thriller is supposed to do. Of course, this is not a [[huge]] feat given the [[fact]] that we're dealing with the the [[world]] of confidence men and the [[cons]] they perpetrate. So it [[stands]] to reason that we never really know what's going on, even [[though]] we think that we do. But that's what makes the [[film]] [[worthwhile]] for those who are game; a [[film]] for which repeated viewings are indulgences [[instead]] if necessities.

It has a [[definite]] Hitchcock [[slant]] to it. The [[film]] draws on some similar [[themes]] [[found]] his 1964 [[effort]] "Marnie", [[considered]] a misfire when [[released]] but now regarded as one of the Master's more thought-provoking [[works]]. One could [[easily]] consider the [[idea]] of [[Lindsay]] Crouse's character being the same as Tippi Hedrin's...ten [[year]] [[later]] [[perhaps]]. Both are strong-willed loners, both with compulsive [[behaviors]] which compel them to walk too close to the shark pool. As Crouse's [[repressed]], up-tight [[character]] [[says]], "What's life without adventure?" Put your Reality [[Check]] on a low [[setting]] and [[enjoy]] swimming with the sharks! "[[Domicile]] Of [[Gaming]]" is definitely not without its flaws- plot [[keyholes]], stiff acting, final scenes- but they do little to [[divert]] from the [[droll]] of watching a thriller that so methodically messes with your head. "[[Households]] Of Games" does almost everything a good thriller is supposed to do. Of course, this is not a [[sizable]] feat given the [[facto]] that we're dealing with the the [[globe]] of confidence men and the [[jerks]] they perpetrate. So it [[standing]] to reason that we never really know what's going on, even [[nonetheless]] we think that we do. But that's what makes the [[movie]] [[meaningful]] for those who are game; a [[movie]] for which repeated viewings are indulgences [[however]] if necessities.

It has a [[concrete]] Hitchcock [[sloping]] to it. The [[cinematography]] draws on some similar [[item]] [[unearthed]] his 1964 [[endeavors]] "Marnie", [[regarded]] a misfire when [[emitted]] but now regarded as one of the Master's more thought-provoking [[cooperating]]. One could [[conveniently]] consider the [[concept]] of [[Lindsey]] Crouse's character being the same as Tippi Hedrin's...ten [[annum]] [[afterward]] [[presumably]]. Both are strong-willed loners, both with compulsive [[behavior]] which compel them to walk too close to the shark pool. As Crouse's [[stifled]], up-tight [[personage]] [[said]], "What's life without adventure?" Put your Reality [[Verify]] on a low [[settings]] and [[enjoys]] swimming with the sharks! --------------------------------------------- Result 1611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Stan]] [[Laurel]] and Oliver Hardy had [[extensive]] (separate) film [[careers]] before they were [[eventually]] teamed. For many of Ollie's pre-Stan films, he was billed on screen as [[Babe]] Hardy ... and throughout his [[adult]] life, [[Hardy]] was known to his friends as 'Babe'. [[While]] touring postwar Britain with Laurel in a music-hall [[act]] for Bernard Delfont, [[Hardy]] [[gave]] an interview to [[journalist]] John McCabe in which he [[explained]] the origin of this nickname: early in his acting career, Hardy got a [[shave]] from a gay [[hairdresser]] who [[squeezed]] Hardy's plump [[cheeks]] (the ones on his face) and said 'Nice baby!' Hardy's workmates started crying him 'Babe', and the nickname stuck.

[[Although]] much of Hardy's pre-Laurel work is very interesting -- notably his comedy roles in support of Larry Semon and the Chaplin imitator Billy West -- his teamwork with Billy Ruge (who?) in a series of low-budget shorts for the Vim Comedy Film Company is very [[dire]] indeed. Hardy and Ruge were given the screen names Plump and [[Runt]]: [[names]] which are unpleasant in their own right, but made worse because Ruge (although shorter than Hardy) isn't especially a runt. [[Seen]] here, [[Hardy]] [[looks]] much as he does in his early Hal Roach [[films]] with Laurel ... but without the spit curls and the fastidious little moustache.

'One Too Many', an absolutely typical Plunt and [[Runt]] [[epic]], is direly unfunny ... and its dreichness is made even more conspicuous by the fact that this [[film]] has exactly the same premise as 'That's My Wife', one of Laurel and Hardy's most hilarious films. Plump (Hardy) is the star boarder in a rooming-house run by a tall gawky landlady. Runt (Ruge) is the porter. Plump receives a letter from his wealthy uncle John, whose dosh he expects to inherit. His uncle is coming to see him and to meet Plump's wife and baby. There's only one problem: Plump hasn't got a wife and baby. He's been lying to his uncle in order to seem a family man. Now, of course, Plump expects Runt to find him a wife and baby on short notice. Of course, the results are disastrous. It would be nice if those disastrous results were funny, but they aren't. Most of the unfunny humour here is just empty slapstick, with characters settling their arguments by shoving each other into bathtubs.

SPOILERS COMING. Vim director Will Louis (who?) shows no instinct for camera framing: the actress who plays the landlady is significantly taller than Hardy, and Louis consistently sets up his shots so that her head is out of frame. This could be funny if done on purpose, but it's merely inept. At one point in this bad comedy, an extremely tasteless gag is looming on the horizon as Runt approaches a black laundress. 'Surely they wouldn't stoop THAT low for a laugh,' I thought. But they do. Runt steals the woman's black infant and tries to fob this off as Plump's progeny.

Somehow, Plump acquires an infant's cot, but he still hasn't got a baby. With Uncle John coming up the stairs, Plump conscripts Runt for babyhood. This gag might just possibly have worked with a midget, or even with a truly runt-sized actor such as Chester Conklin, but Billy Ruge is only slightly below average height. Ruge's impersonation of a baby is neither believable nor funny, and Uncle John would have to be a complete moron to fall for it. Amazingly, he does!

The most notable aspect of 'One Too Many' is a brief appearance -- apparently her only-ever film appearance -- by Madelyn Saloshin, Oliver Hardy's first wife. The marriage was not a happy one, although Hardy's marital troubles never attained the epic proportions of Stan Laurel's.

Only one thing in this movie impressed me. There is a very brief flashback sequence, with Hardy reminiscing about his seaside romance with a bathing beauty. In 1916, there was still not yet a standard film grammar for conveying flashbacks: the one shown here is done gracefully and simply. Too bad this movie has no other merits. 'One Too Many' is definitely one film too many on Oliver Hardy's CV, and I'll rate this movie just one point out of 10. Laurel and Hardy together are definitely much funnier than either of them separately. [[Stanley]] [[Laurier]] and Oliver Hardy had [[vast]] (separate) film [[races]] before they were [[lastly]] teamed. For many of Ollie's pre-Stan films, he was billed on screen as [[Baby]] Hardy ... and throughout his [[adults]] life, [[Sturdy]] was known to his friends as 'Babe'. [[Although]] touring postwar Britain with Laurel in a music-hall [[law]] for Bernard Delfont, [[Resilient]] [[yielded]] an interview to [[columnist]] John McCabe in which he [[clarified]] the origin of this nickname: early in his acting career, Hardy got a [[beard]] from a gay [[stylist]] who [[hugged]] Hardy's plump [[cheekbones]] (the ones on his face) and said 'Nice baby!' Hardy's workmates started crying him 'Babe', and the nickname stuck.

[[Despite]] much of Hardy's pre-Laurel work is very interesting -- notably his comedy roles in support of Larry Semon and the Chaplin imitator Billy West -- his teamwork with Billy Ruge (who?) in a series of low-budget shorts for the Vim Comedy Film Company is very [[calamitous]] indeed. Hardy and Ruge were given the screen names Plump and [[Midget]]: [[name]] which are unpleasant in their own right, but made worse because Ruge (although shorter than Hardy) isn't especially a runt. [[Noticed]] here, [[Sturdy]] [[seems]] much as he does in his early Hal Roach [[movies]] with Laurel ... but without the spit curls and the fastidious little moustache.

'One Too Many', an absolutely typical Plunt and [[Midget]] [[saga]], is direly unfunny ... and its dreichness is made even more conspicuous by the fact that this [[filmmaking]] has exactly the same premise as 'That's My Wife', one of Laurel and Hardy's most hilarious films. Plump (Hardy) is the star boarder in a rooming-house run by a tall gawky landlady. Runt (Ruge) is the porter. Plump receives a letter from his wealthy uncle John, whose dosh he expects to inherit. His uncle is coming to see him and to meet Plump's wife and baby. There's only one problem: Plump hasn't got a wife and baby. He's been lying to his uncle in order to seem a family man. Now, of course, Plump expects Runt to find him a wife and baby on short notice. Of course, the results are disastrous. It would be nice if those disastrous results were funny, but they aren't. Most of the unfunny humour here is just empty slapstick, with characters settling their arguments by shoving each other into bathtubs.

SPOILERS COMING. Vim director Will Louis (who?) shows no instinct for camera framing: the actress who plays the landlady is significantly taller than Hardy, and Louis consistently sets up his shots so that her head is out of frame. This could be funny if done on purpose, but it's merely inept. At one point in this bad comedy, an extremely tasteless gag is looming on the horizon as Runt approaches a black laundress. 'Surely they wouldn't stoop THAT low for a laugh,' I thought. But they do. Runt steals the woman's black infant and tries to fob this off as Plump's progeny.

Somehow, Plump acquires an infant's cot, but he still hasn't got a baby. With Uncle John coming up the stairs, Plump conscripts Runt for babyhood. This gag might just possibly have worked with a midget, or even with a truly runt-sized actor such as Chester Conklin, but Billy Ruge is only slightly below average height. Ruge's impersonation of a baby is neither believable nor funny, and Uncle John would have to be a complete moron to fall for it. Amazingly, he does!

The most notable aspect of 'One Too Many' is a brief appearance -- apparently her only-ever film appearance -- by Madelyn Saloshin, Oliver Hardy's first wife. The marriage was not a happy one, although Hardy's marital troubles never attained the epic proportions of Stan Laurel's.

Only one thing in this movie impressed me. There is a very brief flashback sequence, with Hardy reminiscing about his seaside romance with a bathing beauty. In 1916, there was still not yet a standard film grammar for conveying flashbacks: the one shown here is done gracefully and simply. Too bad this movie has no other merits. 'One Too Many' is definitely one film too many on Oliver Hardy's CV, and I'll rate this movie just one point out of 10. Laurel and Hardy together are definitely much funnier than either of them separately. --------------------------------------------- Result 1612 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I have watched quite a few Cold [[Case]] episodes over the [[years]], [[beginning]] with Season 1 episodes back in 2003-2004. And while most have been good, this [[particular]] episode was not only the [[best]] of the [[best]], but has few [[rivals]] in the [[Emmy]] [[categories]]. [[Though]] some may not agree with the [[story]] content (i.[[e]]. the male-to-male romantic [[relationship]]), I doubt that anyone could watch this without being [[deeply]] moved within their [[spirit]].

The story is essentially about a [[case]] that was reopened, based on the testimony from a dying drug dealer. The two central actors are two police officers in the 1960's named Sean Coop (aka, the cold case victim who goes by his last name, Coop) and his partner, Jimmy Bruno.

In the story, Coop is single, a Vietnam war vet, with a deeply troubled past. Jimmy, however, is married, with children no less. Both are partners on the police force and form not only a friendship, but a secret romantic relationship that they both must hide from a deeply and obviously homophobic culture prevalent at that time.

The flashback scenes of their lives are mostly in black and white, with bits of color now and then sprinkled throughout. [[Examples]] [[include]] their red squad car, the yellow curtains gently blowing by the window in Jimmy's bedroom, where Jimmy's [[wife]] watched Coop and Jimmy drink, [[fight]], and then [[kiss]] each other while being in an alcohol-induced state. I found it interesting that only [[selected]] items were [[colored]] in the flashback scenes, with everything else in black and white. I still have not figured out the color scheme and rationale.

The clearly homophobic tension between fellow patrol officers and the two central actors only heightens the intensity of the episode. One [[key]] emotional scene was when Coop was [[confronted]] by his [[father]] after the baptism of Jimmy's baby. [[In]] this scene, Coop's father, Sarge, who was a [[respected]] fellow officer on the force, [[confronts]] [[Coop]] about the [[rumors]] [[surrounding]] Coop's [[relationship]] with [[Jimmy]]. One can feel sorry for [[Coop]], at this point, as the [[shame]] and disgrace of Coop's father was heaped [[upon]] [[Coop]] - "You are not going to [[disgrace]] our [[family]]...and you're not my [[son]], either." - [[clearly]] indicative of the [[hostile]] [[views]] of same-sex [[relationships]] of that era.

Additional tension can also be seen in the police locker room where Coop and another officer go at it after Coop and Jimmy are labeled "Batman and Robin homos".

As for the relationship between Coop and Jimmy, it's obvious that Coop wanted more of Jimmy in his life. Once can see the tension in Jimmy's face as he must choose between his commitment to his wife and kids, his church, and yet his undying devotion to Coop.

In the end, Jimmy walks away from Coop, realizing that he cannot have both Coop and his family at the same time. Sadly, Coop is killed, perhaps because of his relationship with Jimmy, but Coop may also have been killed for his knowledge of drug money and police corruption that reached higher up in the force.

The most moving scene in the whole episode was when Coop, as he sat dying from gunshot wounds in his squad car, quietly spoke his last words over his police radio to his partner: "Jimmy...we were the lucky ones. Don't forget that."

The soundtrack selection was outstanding throughout the episode. I enjoyed the final scene with the actor Chad Everett, playing the still grieving Jimmy, only much older by now, and clearly still missing his former partner, Coop.

I highly recommend this episode and consider it the best. It is without a doubt the most well-written, well-acted, and well done of all Cold Case episodes that I've ever seen. I have watched quite a few Cold [[Instances]] episodes over the [[yrs]], [[starting]] with Season 1 episodes back in 2003-2004. And while most have been good, this [[specific]] episode was not only the [[bestest]] of the [[nicest]], but has few [[contenders]] in the [[Emma]] [[class]]. [[If]] some may not agree with the [[histories]] content (i.[[f]]. the male-to-male romantic [[relation]]), I doubt that anyone could watch this without being [[critically]] moved within their [[wits]].

The story is essentially about a [[examples]] that was reopened, based on the testimony from a dying drug dealer. The two central actors are two police officers in the 1960's named Sean Coop (aka, the cold case victim who goes by his last name, Coop) and his partner, Jimmy Bruno.

In the story, Coop is single, a Vietnam war vet, with a deeply troubled past. Jimmy, however, is married, with children no less. Both are partners on the police force and form not only a friendship, but a secret romantic relationship that they both must hide from a deeply and obviously homophobic culture prevalent at that time.

The flashback scenes of their lives are mostly in black and white, with bits of color now and then sprinkled throughout. [[Case]] [[containing]] their red squad car, the yellow curtains gently blowing by the window in Jimmy's bedroom, where Jimmy's [[woman]] watched Coop and Jimmy drink, [[battles]], and then [[fucked]] each other while being in an alcohol-induced state. I found it interesting that only [[chosen]] items were [[stained]] in the flashback scenes, with everything else in black and white. I still have not figured out the color scheme and rationale.

The clearly homophobic tension between fellow patrol officers and the two central actors only heightens the intensity of the episode. One [[fundamental]] emotional scene was when Coop was [[face]] by his [[pere]] after the baptism of Jimmy's baby. [[Across]] this scene, Coop's father, Sarge, who was a [[reputable]] fellow officer on the force, [[tackle]] [[Henhouse]] about the [[rumours]] [[neighboring]] Coop's [[rapport]] with [[Jimbo]]. One can feel sorry for [[Henhouse]], at this point, as the [[dishonor]] and disgrace of Coop's father was heaped [[after]] [[Henhouse]] - "You are not going to [[shaming]] our [[familia]]...and you're not my [[yarns]], either." - [[obviously]] indicative of the [[unfriendly]] [[opinion]] of same-sex [[ties]] of that era.

Additional tension can also be seen in the police locker room where Coop and another officer go at it after Coop and Jimmy are labeled "Batman and Robin homos".

As for the relationship between Coop and Jimmy, it's obvious that Coop wanted more of Jimmy in his life. Once can see the tension in Jimmy's face as he must choose between his commitment to his wife and kids, his church, and yet his undying devotion to Coop.

In the end, Jimmy walks away from Coop, realizing that he cannot have both Coop and his family at the same time. Sadly, Coop is killed, perhaps because of his relationship with Jimmy, but Coop may also have been killed for his knowledge of drug money and police corruption that reached higher up in the force.

The most moving scene in the whole episode was when Coop, as he sat dying from gunshot wounds in his squad car, quietly spoke his last words over his police radio to his partner: "Jimmy...we were the lucky ones. Don't forget that."

The soundtrack selection was outstanding throughout the episode. I enjoyed the final scene with the actor Chad Everett, playing the still grieving Jimmy, only much older by now, and clearly still missing his former partner, Coop.

I highly recommend this episode and consider it the best. It is without a doubt the most well-written, well-acted, and well done of all Cold Case episodes that I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] It is not an [[easy]] film to watch - it is over three and a half hours long and it is composed [[entirely]] of [[conversations]]. Yet it is so [[incredibly]] [[compelling]] and [[ruthlessly]] observational of the human [[character]], that it is, in my humble [[opinion]], one of the very [[greatest]] films of all [[time]].

The [[film]] is [[depressing]], cynical and cruel. (If you [[want]] something [[uplifting]], see [[Jacques]] Rivette's [[fantastic]] Céline and [[Julie]] [[Go]] Boating, which was made [[around]] the same [[time]]). It [[shows]] the [[idealism]] of the late 1960s to be [[nothing]] different from the [[society]] that it was [[trying]] to [[change]].

It [[involves]] a [[supposedly]] [[liberated]] ménage-à-trois between [[Alexandre]] ([[played]] by Jean-Pierre Leaud), [[Marie]] ([[Bernadette]] Lafont) and Veronika (Francoise Lebrun). [[Yet]] [[Alexandre]] is [[shown]] to be as chauvinistic and [[jealous]] as any other [[man]]. The [[women]] are exposed as being willingly [[subservient]] and [[defining]] their femininity through the [[male]] gaze.

The [[film]] is an [[extremely]] [[icy]] [[end]] to the [[highly]] revolutionary French [[New]] [[Wave]]. This movement was one of the most [[significant]] movements in film [[history]] and had a [[profound]] [[effect]] on [[cinema]] as we know it. Jean-Pierre Leaud was one of the [[key]] [[actors]] of the [[New]] [[Wave]], having starred ([[among]] other [[films]]) in the [[influential]] Les Quatres [[Cent]] [[Coups]] (1959) by Francois Truffaut as a [[rebellious]] [[teenager]]. Director Jean Eustache is not as well known as other [[directors]] from the New [[Wave]], but he should be.

There is no improvisation (unlike in [[John]] Cassavetes's [[similar]] [[films]] [[made]] in the [[US]]) and the [[dialogue]] [[comes]] from real-life [[conversations]]. The [[film]] is resonant with Eustache's personal [[experiences]]. [[For]] [[example]], [[Francoise]] Lebrun was a [[former]] lover of Eustache. Eustache himself [[committed]] [[suicide]] in 1981 and the real-life person that the [[character]] [[Marie]] was based on, did too. The [[anger]] and [[bitterness]] all culminate in a [[harrowing]] [[monologue]] by [[Veronika]] [[delivered]] [[directly]] to the audience, [[breaking]] down the [[coldly]] objective [[nature]] of the rest of the [[film]]. This [[mesmerising]], personal, and [[honest]] filmic statement [[remains]] one of the most [[revealing]] [[films]] of [[human]] nature around. It is not an [[easier]] film to watch - it is over three and a half hours long and it is composed [[absolutely]] of [[dialogues]]. Yet it is so [[remarkably]] [[convincing]] and [[cruelly]] observational of the human [[nature]], that it is, in my humble [[views]], one of the very [[larger]] films of all [[period]].

The [[movie]] is [[disheartening]], cynical and cruel. (If you [[wanting]] something [[uplift]], see [[Terence]] Rivette's [[gorgeous]] Céline and [[Jolly]] [[Going]] Boating, which was made [[throughout]] the same [[period]]). It [[displayed]] the [[ideals]] of the late 1960s to be [[anything]] different from the [[societal]] that it was [[tempting]] to [[modify]].

It [[implies]] a [[allegedly]] [[freeing]] ménage-à-trois between [[Aleksandr]] ([[served]] by Jean-Pierre Leaud), [[Marries]] ([[Dominguez]] Lafont) and Veronika (Francoise Lebrun). [[Though]] [[Alexandra]] is [[indicated]] to be as chauvinistic and [[jealousy]] as any other [[males]]. The [[wife]] are exposed as being willingly [[servile]] and [[determining]] their femininity through the [[men]] gaze.

The [[movies]] is an [[terribly]] [[frozen]] [[termination]] to the [[vastly]] revolutionary French [[Novel]] [[Wavelength]]. This movement was one of the most [[cannot]] movements in film [[histories]] and had a [[deep]] [[consequences]] on [[theaters]] as we know it. Jean-Pierre Leaud was one of the [[principal]] [[players]] of the [[Newer]] [[Wavelength]], having starred ([[amongst]] other [[movie]]) in the [[forceful]] Les Quatres [[Cents]] [[Blows]] (1959) by Francois Truffaut as a [[rebels]] [[adolescents]]. Director Jean Eustache is not as well known as other [[administrators]] from the New [[Wavelength]], but he should be.

There is no improvisation (unlike in [[Johannes]] Cassavetes's [[analogous]] [[movies]] [[effected]] in the [[USA]]) and the [[dialog]] [[arises]] from real-life [[interviews]]. The [[cinematic]] is resonant with Eustache's personal [[experiment]]. [[At]] [[case]], [[Francois]] Lebrun was a [[antigua]] lover of Eustache. Eustache himself [[commited]] [[suicidal]] in 1981 and the real-life person that the [[characters]] [[Marries]] was based on, did too. The [[wrath]] and [[resentment]] all culminate in a [[spooky]] [[monologues]] by [[Veronica]] [[handed]] [[immediately]] to the audience, [[violating]] down the [[coolly]] objective [[trait]] of the rest of the [[movie]]. This [[entrancing]], personal, and [[truthful]] filmic statement [[leftovers]] one of the most [[reveal]] [[kino]] of [[mankind]] nature around. --------------------------------------------- Result 1614 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those movies you see in the video store that you just HAVE to get because it just looks so horribly bad. And indeed, we couldn't take most of it. There was a lot of fast-forwarding going on.

But then we came across a scene where Robert Englund seduces the female protagonist (her name somehow slips my mind at this time). CRIPES. I've never watched a single scene from a film so many times (I'm estimating forty or so). And I've never laughed so hard in my life. You see, Englund has this thing for showing off his loins. I last saw the film a couple months ago, but I can't stop laughing as I type. Anyway, the scene is a montage of shots-- Englund ripping off the lingerie of the girl, Englund riding a horse naked, and some mysterious woman fellating a snake's head. This is absolute genius. You've got to see it for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 1615 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I expected alot from this movie. Kinda like Lee as a Naustradamous like caracter but instead all I got was a waste of time and a boring movie. I can't even explain this movie. It had wooden acting, terrible script from pieces from the Bible like hurricanes, tidal waves and earthquakes. But that was at the end! The rest of it I had to wait and hope that something meaningfull would happen but it didn't. This movie is about a couple that tries to find out the changes going on in the world like places in China where there was an earthquake and end up at a convent run by eight nuns and a priest. The convent end up being the key to the misshappenings. The whole movie is missleading and boring. One of Lees worst. --------------------------------------------- Result 1616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the only scenes wich made me laugh where the ones with christopher walken in it(the crazy filmdirector)the rest of the movie was just boring.in the first hour or so nothing really happens.jokes which supposed to be funny aren't and zeta jones douglas is really overacting.julia roberts does a routine job of the former ugly duck (yeah right!) into the girl next door (where did i see this before?) who gets the guy.for short.i really didn't care what would happen with the main characters.if cusack really fell of the building in a suicide attempt the movie could have been more interresting to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] No doubt, when Madonna and [[Guy]] [[Ritchie]] married, it was because they both thought it would [[help]] their movie [[careers]]. If you've been through the ordeal of watching "Swept Away," then you know at that level it was a match [[made]] in [[hell]]. [[After]] [[nearly]] 20 [[years]] of trying to become a respected [[actress]] (or "octress" as she [[might]] have [[pronounced]] it in "The Next Best Thing"), she still can't [[get]] out of herself long enough to [[turn]] in a performance that [[anyone]] with [[taste]] [[could]] even [[call]] decent. And that's the thing that makes people [[dislike]] her so much on the screen: that gut feeling that her ego is so inflated that it prevents her from being able to just let go and connect with her [[audience]]. If there's any justice in this universe, she just blew her last chance. No doubt, when Madonna and [[Bloke]] [[Ricci]] married, it was because they both thought it would [[aids]] their movie [[carrera]]. If you've been through the ordeal of watching "Swept Away," then you know at that level it was a match [[effected]] in [[bordello]]. [[Upon]] [[almost]] 20 [[aged]] of trying to become a respected [[actor]] (or "octress" as she [[apt]] have [[uttered]] it in "The Next Best Thing"), she still can't [[obtain]] out of herself long enough to [[transforming]] in a performance that [[everyone]] with [[liking]] [[wo]] even [[invitation]] decent. And that's the thing that makes people [[antipathy]] her so much on the screen: that gut feeling that her ego is so inflated that it prevents her from being able to just let go and connect with her [[viewers]]. If there's any justice in this universe, she just blew her last chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had suspicions the movie was going to be bad. I'm a Duke's fan from way back. Have three years of the TV series on DVD. Well I was right. Took the family to see it. I really wanted to see the General jump again and some of the chase jump scenes were good. But to sum it up, the movie was a dumbed down tarted up version of the TV show.

Jessica Simpson was pathetic. While I can honestly say that the original Daisy's outfits were just as revealing, Jessica Simpson's interpretation of Daisy was simply awful. Sorrel Booke and Denver Pyle must be rolling in their graves as well.

Don't waste your money. If you are an old tried and true Dukes fan like me and my three kids are you will be very disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] David Mamet's [[film]] [[debut]] has been hailed by many as a [[real]] thinking-man's movie, a movie that makes you question everybody and everything. I saw it for the [[first]] time recently and couldn't [[understand]] what was [[supposed]] to be so [[great]] about it.

The movie is about a [[female]] [[psychologist]] named Margaret who is [[also]] a best-selling author. [[Margaret]] has become [[disillusioned]] by her [[profession]] and her inability to really [[help]] anyone. She tries to [[rectify]] this by [[helping]] [[settle]] her patient's gambling debt to a [[shark]] named [[Mike]] (played by Joe Mantegna, who is the only [[reason]] to watch this film). She discovers that Mike is actually a professional confidence man when she nearly falls victim to a [[scam]] he pulls immediately after meeting her. Intrigued, she returns to see him and asks him to show her how con artists operate (she plans on using this as the subject of a new psychology book). She then falls for him and accompanies him on a long con that he and his associates have set up.

I don't feel like going into details, but at the end of the film it is revealed that the events of the whole movie were an elaborate con by Mike and his [[cronies]] to swindle Margaret out of $80,000.

[[First]] of all, the big twist towards the end was VERY [[predictable]]. Any scene where the con men were operating was made very obvious by the stagey acting and weird [[line]] reads. Not only that, but the audience (and the main [[character]]) knows that they're dealing with con men, so is it really such a big surprise when we find out that Margaret has herself been conned? Besides, [[Margaret]] is [[supposedly]] an intelligent [[psychologist]] who is an [[expert]] at reading people, yet she allows herself to be duped far too easily -- and keep in mind, she knows full well that Mike is a con artist.

Secondly, we are led to believe that Margaret was conned from the very beginning, yet in order for the con to ultimately work, she had to do several things that the con men couldn't possibly have predicted that she would do. First, she had to decide to help settle her patient's debt, allowing her to meet the con men in the first place. If she hadn't done this, the entire con would have failed. I just have to say that it's pretty unreasonable to assume that a psychologist is going to take it upon herself to settle a patient's gambling debt. Not only that, but what are the odds that the con men would be at the right spot on the very night she decided to show up? Did they simply show up at that bar every night, hoping she would come and see them? Another thing that had to happen that couldn't have been predicted is that Margaret had to return to see Mike again and ask him to teach her the tricks of his trade. What are the odds of this happening? And yet the whole con is based on this premise.

Another problem I had is with the ending. Margaret finds out she's been conned and decides to get revenge on Mike. At first, Mamet leads us to believe that she's going to con the con, but that falls through, so the ultimate ending is her gunning Mike down in an airport baggage area. Somehow that just felt like a clumsy and inept way to end a movie about con artists plying their trade. Not only that, but she didn't even take back the money he stole from her.

Ultimately, the movie leaves you feeling empty and unfulfilled. And if you, like me, predicted ahead of time that Margaret was going to be conned, you will find this revelation just as unsatisfying. David Mamet's [[movie]] [[premiere]] has been hailed by many as a [[actual]] thinking-man's movie, a movie that makes you question everybody and everything. I saw it for the [[firstly]] time recently and couldn't [[understood]] what was [[suspected]] to be so [[large]] about it.

The movie is about a [[girl]] [[psychiatry]] named Margaret who is [[apart]] a best-selling author. [[Marguerite]] has become [[frustrated]] by her [[occupations]] and her inability to really [[succour]] anyone. She tries to [[remedy]] this by [[helped]] [[settling]] her patient's gambling debt to a [[mako]] named [[Mick]] (played by Joe Mantegna, who is the only [[cause]] to watch this film). She discovers that Mike is actually a professional confidence man when she nearly falls victim to a [[hustle]] he pulls immediately after meeting her. Intrigued, she returns to see him and asks him to show her how con artists operate (she plans on using this as the subject of a new psychology book). She then falls for him and accompanies him on a long con that he and his associates have set up.

I don't feel like going into details, but at the end of the film it is revealed that the events of the whole movie were an elaborate con by Mike and his [[pals]] to swindle Margaret out of $80,000.

[[Firstly]] of all, the big twist towards the end was VERY [[foreseeable]]. Any scene where the con men were operating was made very obvious by the stagey acting and weird [[bloodline]] reads. Not only that, but the audience (and the main [[traits]]) knows that they're dealing with con men, so is it really such a big surprise when we find out that Margaret has herself been conned? Besides, [[Marguerite]] is [[ostensibly]] an intelligent [[psychiatry]] who is an [[specialists]] at reading people, yet she allows herself to be duped far too easily -- and keep in mind, she knows full well that Mike is a con artist.

Secondly, we are led to believe that Margaret was conned from the very beginning, yet in order for the con to ultimately work, she had to do several things that the con men couldn't possibly have predicted that she would do. First, she had to decide to help settle her patient's debt, allowing her to meet the con men in the first place. If she hadn't done this, the entire con would have failed. I just have to say that it's pretty unreasonable to assume that a psychologist is going to take it upon herself to settle a patient's gambling debt. Not only that, but what are the odds that the con men would be at the right spot on the very night she decided to show up? Did they simply show up at that bar every night, hoping she would come and see them? Another thing that had to happen that couldn't have been predicted is that Margaret had to return to see Mike again and ask him to teach her the tricks of his trade. What are the odds of this happening? And yet the whole con is based on this premise.

Another problem I had is with the ending. Margaret finds out she's been conned and decides to get revenge on Mike. At first, Mamet leads us to believe that she's going to con the con, but that falls through, so the ultimate ending is her gunning Mike down in an airport baggage area. Somehow that just felt like a clumsy and inept way to end a movie about con artists plying their trade. Not only that, but she didn't even take back the money he stole from her.

Ultimately, the movie leaves you feeling empty and unfulfilled. And if you, like me, predicted ahead of time that Margaret was going to be conned, you will find this revelation just as unsatisfying. --------------------------------------------- Result 1620 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This [[movie]] is goofy as [[hell]]! I [[think]] it was [[written]] as a serious [[film]], but then when it came time to [[film]], Michael Cooney [[said]] "[[Hey]], let's [[throw]] in some [[humor]] and [[spice]] it up!" The [[characters]] are [[actually]] slightly [[developed]], too. Oh, and the [[death]] sequences are the [[best]]. One thing I [[hate]], [[though]], was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about? This [[cinematography]] is goofy as [[dammit]]! I [[thinks]] it was [[wrote]] as a serious [[cinema]], but then when it came time to [[movie]], Michael Cooney [[say]] "[[Hello]], let's [[toss]] in some [[comedy]] and [[gravy]] it up!" The [[character]] are [[genuinely]] slightly [[devised]], too. Oh, and the [[dies]] sequences are the [[bestest]]. One thing I [[loathed]], [[if]], was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about? --------------------------------------------- Result 1621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I bought my Toy Story tape when it came out to Video after being released in theaters I saw a trailer for this that said from the creators of Toy Story. As soon as I saw that I knew this was gonna be a good feature! I was right! A Bug's Life like Toy Story is great story, great characters and great animation. My favorite characters are Dim the rhino Beetle voiced by Brad Garrett and Hemlich the Caterpillar voiced by the late Pixar Storyman Joe Ranft. My favorite scene is when Slim the walking stick (David Hyde Pierce) lifts up Hemlich trying to distract the Bird and Hemlich's like You hoo Mr. Early Bird. How about a nice tasting worm on a stick and Slim's like I'm going to snap! I'm going to snap! I just died laughing at that scene. Being a big fan of insects I think A Bug's Life is my favorite Pixar even though I know a lot of people consider it the worst Pixar film ever! I don't know how you could hate a Pixar film! I think they're all pretty good films! Good job PIXAR! --------------------------------------------- Result 1622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I came across An Insomniac's Nightmare while [[looking]] for offbeat independent films, and glad to say it did [[NOT]] [[disappoint]]. This crazy half hour ride had me wondering all the way through, and the ending was [[excellent]] - one of those NOOOOO moments that really stays with you. I've shown it to a number of people and everyone seems to agree hands down. The little ghostie girl was very talented and I think her performance stole the [[show]]. She creeped the heck out of me, I can say that much. Nanavati did a great job putting this short together. All the pieces just fell into place and you can tell that she's a great writer from what she did with this script. SO well [[written]]. It's undoubtedly the strongest part of the film. The directing was great and the acting was enjoyable, but the most important factor here is the strength of the screenplay. Good job to this girl, I can't wait to see more! I came across An Insomniac's Nightmare while [[researching]] for offbeat independent films, and glad to say it did [[NAH]] [[defraud]]. This crazy half hour ride had me wondering all the way through, and the ending was [[wondrous]] - one of those NOOOOO moments that really stays with you. I've shown it to a number of people and everyone seems to agree hands down. The little ghostie girl was very talented and I think her performance stole the [[exhibit]]. She creeped the heck out of me, I can say that much. Nanavati did a great job putting this short together. All the pieces just fell into place and you can tell that she's a great writer from what she did with this script. SO well [[typed]]. It's undoubtedly the strongest part of the film. The directing was great and the acting was enjoyable, but the most important factor here is the strength of the screenplay. Good job to this girl, I can't wait to see more! --------------------------------------------- Result 1623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this about 2 or 3 times and haven't regretted it. Homeward bound is not just a typical animal movie. Its unique, fun and bursting with adventure. The things that make it a fun movie are the animals (obvious)who are wonderfully trained. A very good effort.

8.5/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This a fascinatingly [[awful]] movie. It make so [[little]] sense that it starts to make a kind of weird internal logic of its own. Well, it would if it didn't keep darting off up side-alleys until eventually floundering under the weight of its own indecisiveness. The movie can't make up its mind whether it is a straight forward 'Man Turns Into Monster' flick (like all those 1950s 'THE INCREDIBLE insert verb ING MAN' movies), or a ghastly big business conspiracy theory movie, or a mystical afterlife contact story, or... or what? Take your pick. It's just a mess. Grotesquely over the top and firing off in all directions, leaving loose ends flapping all over the place. It was as if Tobe Hooper had been taking David Lynch pills. Unfortunately he didn't take enough. This a fascinatingly [[abysmal]] movie. It make so [[scant]] sense that it starts to make a kind of weird internal logic of its own. Well, it would if it didn't keep darting off up side-alleys until eventually floundering under the weight of its own indecisiveness. The movie can't make up its mind whether it is a straight forward 'Man Turns Into Monster' flick (like all those 1950s 'THE INCREDIBLE insert verb ING MAN' movies), or a ghastly big business conspiracy theory movie, or a mystical afterlife contact story, or... or what? Take your pick. It's just a mess. Grotesquely over the top and firing off in all directions, leaving loose ends flapping all over the place. It was as if Tobe Hooper had been taking David Lynch pills. Unfortunately he didn't take enough. --------------------------------------------- Result 1625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Yes, [[Marie]] Dresler drinks prune [[juice]] that she thinks is [[poison]] and she exits [[running]].

Dresler is good. Never my cup of [[tea]] but she is a solid [[performer]] who [[surely]] [[holds]] the screen.

I [[watched]] this for [[Polly]] Moran, whom I've seen elsewhere. Here, Moran is OK -- just OK -- as Dressler's shrewish friend/foe. Too bad she has [[sunk]] into nearly [[total]] oblivion.

The plot is good hearted. Bad guys try to rob the townspeople. Dressler triumphs and all ends well.

I do wonder about the central plot mechanism: bonds. This came out during the Depression so maybe everyone was familiar with bonds and what they can do if used well and if used wrongly. I, however, not of that era, am vaguely familiar with them. They're like stocks only different, right? It seems odd to build a story about The Little Man around a somewhat sophisticated monetary entity. Yes, [[Marry]] Dresler drinks prune [[juices]] that she thinks is [[toxicity]] and she exits [[implementing]].

Dresler is good. Never my cup of [[shai]] but she is a solid [[entertainer]] who [[definitively]] [[hold]] the screen.

I [[saw]] this for [[Polje]] Moran, whom I've seen elsewhere. Here, Moran is OK -- just OK -- as Dressler's shrewish friend/foe. Too bad she has [[shipwrecked]] into nearly [[aggregate]] oblivion.

The plot is good hearted. Bad guys try to rob the townspeople. Dressler triumphs and all ends well.

I do wonder about the central plot mechanism: bonds. This came out during the Depression so maybe everyone was familiar with bonds and what they can do if used well and if used wrongly. I, however, not of that era, am vaguely familiar with them. They're like stocks only different, right? It seems odd to build a story about The Little Man around a somewhat sophisticated monetary entity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The acting in the film is really well [[done]] [[honestly]], but the movie is so slow and so [[boring]], as [[soon]] as it gets interesting everything [[slows]] to a major [[halt]]. I am glad to [[see]] Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great job, so did the other actors as I mentioned but man... this is one of the [[worst]] [[dragged]] out films I have ever [[seen]]. Now maybe in a short [[film]] [[form]] this [[movie]] [[would]] be good, but other than that, [[avoid]] it. This [[film]] has so much [[filler]] it makes a Twinkie [[cake]] [[jealous]].

I never, ever, [[walk]] out on [[films]], but [[watching]] this one at [[home]] with family, I walked out. [[Yeah]], it was that boring. [[Apparently]] my [[comment]] doesn't have enough lines to [[post]], so here's some more [[filler]]. I [[guess]] I was inspired by the [[movie]] I just [[watched]]. The acting in the film is really well [[effected]] [[frankly]], but the movie is so slow and so [[dull]], as [[promptly]] as it gets interesting everything [[slowing]] to a major [[stopped]]. I am glad to [[seeing]] Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great job, so did the other actors as I mentioned but man... this is one of the [[gravest]] [[languished]] out films I have ever [[watched]]. Now maybe in a short [[films]] [[forma]] this [[filmmaking]] [[could]] be good, but other than that, [[avoided]] it. This [[filmmaking]] has so much [[refill]] it makes a Twinkie [[cupcake]] [[envious]].

I never, ever, [[stroll]] out on [[cinematographic]], but [[staring]] this one at [[housing]] with family, I walked out. [[Yes]], it was that boring. [[Reportedly]] my [[commentaries]] doesn't have enough lines to [[posting]], so here's some more [[filling]]. I [[reckon]] I was inspired by the [[flick]] I just [[observed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow...I can't believe just how bad ZOMBIE DOOM (aka VIOLENT SH!T 3) really is. I'd heard the rumors, read the reviews - but had to make my mind up for myself. Well, let me tell ya - IT BLOWS!!! The worst acting of any film ever made, dubbing that must have been done while everyone involved was completely wasted, inept and laughable gore FX, no discernible plot, "cinematography" that looks like my grandma filmed it with her camcorder, weapons props that are no joke - made out of tin-foil - the list goes on and on...

Three guys get stranded on an island where a bunch of weirdos run around with plastic and tin-foil swords. Two of the captives are freed along with a rebel of the island freaks, and are given a day's head start before they are hunted down by the rest of the "tribe"...that's pretty much it...

Honestly - this is one of THE WORST films I've ever had the misfortune to subject myself too. The budget had to be about $200 and was spent entirely on the gore FX (which actually may not have been a bad idea...). There is NOTHING to ZOMBIE DOOM other than strung-together ridiculous looking gore scenes with lots of HORRIBLY dubbed dialog. This film makes other no-budget outings like PREMUTOS: LORD OF THE LIVING DEAD look like TITANIC. Some may rank ZD in the "so-bad-it's-good" category - and I guess if you're REALLY drunk or high and watching it with a few friends MST3K-style - I guess it could be looked at that way. But not by me. I hated pretty much everything about it. If ZOMBIE DOOM or ZOMBIE 90 (which is equally appalling and is included as a "bonus" on the Shock-O-Rama release of ZD) is indicative of Andreas Schnaas' other works - then he should be banned from ever having anything to do with making a film ever again under penalty of death. There is one amusing kung-fu battle in the latter half of the film, and a lot of blood - so I'll grant this one a VERY generous 3/10 - Do yourself a favor and skip this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[saw]] this by accident one lazy summer afternoon. It was playing on the family [[programming]] [[channel]] of HBO. [[At]] first I was [[drawn]] in, by what I thought was a Disney animation. But then, after a few minutes, I [[found]] myself [[searching]] for the remote, so I [[could]] [[find]] the '[[INFO]] BUTTON', to [[find]] out what in the [[world]] was on my TV. I have nothing against Harvey F., I [[enjoy]] him in [[many]] of his films, but one thing he is not, is a voice-over artist. Sure he has one of the more [[unique]] voices in Hollywood, but it [[works]] only as a part of a [[bigger]] visual package. Attaching his [[voice]] to a [[cute]] duck [[made]] watching somewhat [[difficult]]. As for the [[rest]] of the cast, [[uninspired]]. I suppose working on this film didn't appeal to the really good voice over talent out there.

So, weak voice talent, strong animation...who was this film targeting? Gay adolescent ducks? I don't get it. Is there really such a dearth of role-models for young up and coming homosexuals, that we must resort to animated ducks? Cute [[story]], and like the title, this movie I [[found]] hard to love, just like an ugly duckling. I [[watched]] this by accident one lazy summer afternoon. It was playing on the family [[programme]] [[canal]] of HBO. [[In]] first I was [[draws]] in, by what I thought was a Disney animation. But then, after a few minutes, I [[unearthed]] myself [[browsing]] for the remote, so I [[did]] [[found]] the '[[INFORMATION]] BUTTON', to [[found]] out what in the [[globe]] was on my TV. I have nothing against Harvey F., I [[enjoying]] him in [[several]] of his films, but one thing he is not, is a voice-over artist. Sure he has one of the more [[sole]] voices in Hollywood, but it [[cooperating]] only as a part of a [[greatest]] visual package. Attaching his [[voices]] to a [[lovely]] duck [[accomplished]] watching somewhat [[complex]]. As for the [[stays]] of the cast, [[unimaginative]]. I suppose working on this film didn't appeal to the really good voice over talent out there.

So, weak voice talent, strong animation...who was this film targeting? Gay adolescent ducks? I don't get it. Is there really such a dearth of role-models for young up and coming homosexuals, that we must resort to animated ducks? Cute [[storytelling]], and like the title, this movie I [[discoveries]] hard to love, just like an ugly duckling. --------------------------------------------- Result 1629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had a really hard time making it through this move. It was extermly slow and at times wondered when the plot of the movie would actually come to life.

This movie seemed to flow to slow and I kept on wondering when it was going to end. I am normally a person who likes a good indie file every once in a while but this did not satisfy what I was looking for.

It seemed they tried to make to much out of this movie. At one point it seemed to turn political which I am not a big fan of in movies. If you are looking for a slow moving movie with little to no plot then this is the right movie for you. As for me I felt I wasted 2 hours when I could of been doing something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 1630 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] This [[movie]] was [[definitely]] not one of Mary-Kate and Ashley's [[best]] movies. I [[really]] didn't like it, and I was kind of disappointed in that [[movie]]. For some [[reason]], it seemed like it was a [[movie]] that they put [[together]] [[really]] [[fast]]. [[In]] some parts, it [[got]] so [[boring]] that I had to fast [[forward]] it. It didn't have any bloopers or any [[exciting]] parts like their other [[movies]]. This [[flick]] was [[admittedly]] not one of Mary-Kate and Ashley's [[optimum]] movies. I [[truthfully]] didn't like it, and I was kind of disappointed in that [[filmmaking]]. For some [[cause]], it seemed like it was a [[flick]] that they put [[jointly]] [[truthfully]] [[rapids]]. [[For]] some parts, it [[did]] so [[dull]] that I had to fast [[forwards]] it. It didn't have any bloopers or any [[breathtaking]] parts like their other [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was recently on AMC's vibrant movie classics and I had to laugh. I had high hopes for this adventure that follows in the vein of "Voyage to the Earth's Core" and "Mysterious Island". I was sorely disappointed not only in the acting credentials but in the silly story line that reads from a five year old's comic book. Be sure to catch sight of the wires that are holding on to the Pterdactyl's wings when they grasp "Ogar" a half idiot pre-modern man who befriends the lost adventurers. The ending left it open for further rehashing of the same effects in "People that Time Forgot". Don't waste your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I know that some [[films]] (I mean: European films), that are very bad [[films]], are being [[regarded]] as [[great]] cinema by certain "critics", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being [[selected]] for certain [[big]] [[festivals]]. Don't let this fool you! Unless you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it [[great]] art afterwards, [[skip]] it! The [[film]] contains one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, [[film]] popped into my [[mind]], the [[terrible]] PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one [[surprise]] (this has been done endless times before, connecting [[several]] storylines: SHORT [[CUTS]], MAGNOLIA, [[PLAYING]] BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like [[daughter]]), and so on and so on.

As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that [[made]] the public at the preview screening laugh at so much [[incompetence]], well... This is an [[insult]] to [[cinema]], and only receives [[high]] [[ratings]] because it happens to be in "another" [[language]], in this [[case]] Spanish. Strange world we [[live]] in...3/10 I know that some [[filmmaking]] (I mean: European films), that are very bad [[cinematography]], are being [[considered]] as [[large]] cinema by certain "critics", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being [[choosing]] for certain [[immense]] [[celebration]]. Don't let this fool you! Unless you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it [[resplendent]] art afterwards, [[skipped]] it! The [[filmmaking]] contains one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, [[filmmaking]] popped into my [[intellect]], the [[scary]] PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one [[amaze]] (this has been done endless times before, connecting [[many]] storylines: SHORT [[CUTTING]], MAGNOLIA, [[PLAY]] BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like [[maid]]), and so on and so on.

As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that [[accomplished]] the public at the preview screening laugh at so much [[impotence]], well... This is an [[offend]] to [[cinemas]], and only receives [[highest]] [[assessments]] because it happens to be in "another" [[linguistics]], in this [[example]] Spanish. Strange world we [[vivo]] in...3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] There are no [[words]] to [[explain]] how [[bad]] NIGHTMARE [[WEEKEND]] is. It [[simply]] defies description. [[Something]] about a computer that can [[change]] personal [[objects]] into silver [[balls]] that enter the victims' [[mouth]], which [[kills]] them or turns them into zombies. The [[whole]] thing is so wonky that it's [[stunning]]. There's also a [[girl]] with personal computer in her [[room]] and the computer [[talks]] via a hand puppet!!!!!!!! I'm not making this [[stuff]] up. The [[computer]] [[also]] [[controls]] things like [[cars]], [[even]] [[though]] there's [[nothing]] [[linking]] the [[computer]] with the [[vehicle]].

The "[[film]]" is [[total]] trash. Surreal [[bad]] trash. [[Spectacularly]], one-of-a-kind bad trash. There's a [[lot]] of sex scenes thrown here and there, which aren't very hot or erotic. There's even one scene where a [[woman]] [[seemingly]] makes [[love]] or [[wants]] to French [[kiss]] a tarantula, which had me rolling on the floor.

[[Definitely]] one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. Up there with the [[equally]] [[wretched]] direct-to-home video BOARDINGHOUSE, or BOOGEYMAN [[II]] (both [[NIGHTMARE]] [[WEEKEND]] and BOOGEYMAN II have scenes with a killer [[toothbrush]]!). [[At]] [[least]] it's [[fun]] to watch it and try to make sense of whatever is [[going]] on. There are no [[phrase]] to [[clarified]] how [[unfavourable]] NIGHTMARE [[WEEKENDS]] is. It [[purely]] defies description. [[Anything]] about a computer that can [[alteration]] personal [[object]] into silver [[testicles]] that enter the victims' [[kisser]], which [[homicide]] them or turns them into zombies. The [[overall]] thing is so wonky that it's [[dazzling]]. There's also a [[chica]] with personal computer in her [[chambre]] and the computer [[discussions]] via a hand puppet!!!!!!!! I'm not making this [[thing]] up. The [[computers]] [[apart]] [[control]] things like [[automobiles]], [[yet]] [[despite]] there's [[none]] [[connecting]] the [[computers]] with the [[vehicles]].

The "[[filmmaking]]" is [[whole]] trash. Surreal [[negative]] trash. [[Impressively]], one-of-a-kind bad trash. There's a [[lots]] of sex scenes thrown here and there, which aren't very hot or erotic. There's even one scene where a [[girl]] [[allegedly]] makes [[amour]] or [[wish]] to French [[shag]] a tarantula, which had me rolling on the floor.

[[Doubtless]] one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. Up there with the [[similarly]] [[unfortunate]] direct-to-home video BOARDINGHOUSE, or BOOGEYMAN [[SECONDLY]] (both [[CABOS]] [[WEEKENDS]] and BOOGEYMAN II have scenes with a killer [[brush]]!). [[During]] [[lowest]] it's [[droll]] to watch it and try to make sense of whatever is [[go]] on. --------------------------------------------- Result 1634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight [[months]] has passed... The Rocky [[Mountain]] [[Rescue]] [[receive]] a distress call set by a [[brilliant]] terrorist mastermind [[Eric]] Quaien ([[John]] Lithgow). Quaien has lost three [[large]] [[cases]] that has [[millions]] of [[dollars]] inside. Two [[experienced]] [[climbers]] Walker ([[Sylvester]] Stallone) and [[Tucker]] (Micheal [[Rooker]]) and a [[helicopter]] pilot ([[Janine]] Turner) are to the [[rescue]] but they are set by a [[trap]] by Quaien and his [[men]]. Now the two climbers and [[pilot]] are [[forced]] to [[play]] a [[deadly]] [[game]] of [[hide]] and seek. [[While]] Quaien is [[trying]] to [[find]] the [[millions]] of [[dollars]] and he [[kidnapped]] Tucker to [[find]] the money. Once Tucker finds the money, Tucker will be dead. Against explosive firepower, bitter [[cold]] and dizzying [[heights]]. Walker [[must]] [[outwit]] Quaien for survival.

Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] 4:The Dream Master) made an [[entertaining]] non-stop [[action]] [[picture]]. This [[film]] is a [[spectacular]], [[exciting]], visually exciting [[action]] [[picture]] with plenty of dark [[humour]] as well. This was one of the [[biggest]] hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best [[film]]. Lithgow is a [[terrific]] [[entertaining]] villain. Stallone [[certainly]] made an short [[comeback]] of this [[sharp]] thriller. This is [[probably]] Harlin's [[best]] [[work]] as a filmmaker.

[[DVD]] has an [[sharp]] anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an terrific-Dolby [[Digital]] 5.1 [[Surround]] [[Sound]]. DVD has an [[running]] commentary track by the [[director]] with [[comments]] by Stallone. DVD [[also]] has [[technical]] crew [[commentary]] as well. DVD has behind the scenes featurette, two [[deleted]] scenes with [[introduction]] by the director and more. [[Do]] not [[miss]] this [[great]] action [[film]]. [[Screenplay]] by Micheal France ([[Fantastic]] Four) and actor:Stallone (The [[Rocky]] Series). Based on a [[premise]] by [[John]] [[Long]]. [[Excellent]] Cinematography by [[Alex]] Thomson, B.S.C. (Alien³, [[Demolition]] [[Man]], Legend). Oscar [[Nominated]] for [[Best]] Sound, [[Best]] Sound [[Editing]] and Best [[Visual]] Effects. Panavision. (****/*****). After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight [[month]] has passed... The Rocky [[Mountainous]] [[Rescuing]] [[perceive]] a distress call set by a [[awesome]] terrorist mastermind [[Erik]] Quaien ([[Jon]] Lithgow). Quaien has lost three [[major]] [[example]] that has [[mln]] of [[bucks]] inside. Two [[underwent]] [[hikers]] Walker ([[Silvestre]] Stallone) and [[Goldberg]] (Micheal [[Brooker]]) and a [[helicopters]] pilot ([[Jeannine]] Turner) are to the [[save]] but they are set by a [[trapping]] by Quaien and his [[males]]. Now the two climbers and [[experimental]] are [[obliged]] to [[playing]] a [[fatal]] [[jeu]] of [[camouflage]] and seek. [[Despite]] Quaien is [[attempting]] to [[finds]] the [[billions]] of [[usd]] and he [[abducted]] Tucker to [[finds]] the money. Once Tucker finds the money, Tucker will be dead. Against explosive firepower, bitter [[colder]] and dizzying [[altitudes]]. Walker [[should]] [[frustrate]] Quaien for survival.

Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] 4:The Dream Master) made an [[amusing]] non-stop [[efforts]] [[photographs]]. This [[cinematic]] is a [[dramatic]], [[excite]], visually exciting [[efforts]] [[image]] with plenty of dark [[comedy]] as well. This was one of the [[bigger]] hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best [[flick]]. Lithgow is a [[brilliant]] [[entertain]] villain. Stallone [[probably]] made an short [[restitution]] of this [[sharpe]] thriller. This is [[maybe]] Harlin's [[finest]] [[cooperation]] as a filmmaker.

[[DVDS]] has an [[sharpe]] anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an terrific-Dolby [[Digitally]] 5.1 [[Surrounds]] [[Audible]]. DVD has an [[execute]] commentary track by the [[headmaster]] with [[observations]] by Stallone. DVD [[similarly]] has [[technological]] crew [[remarks]] as well. DVD has behind the scenes featurette, two [[abolish]] scenes with [[intro]] by the director and more. [[Doing]] not [[mademoiselle]] this [[wondrous]] action [[cinematography]]. [[Script]] by Micheal France ([[Astounding]] Four) and actor:Stallone (The [[Rocko]] Series). Based on a [[assumption]] by [[Johannes]] [[Lengthy]]. [[Magnifique]] Cinematography by [[Xander]] Thomson, B.S.C. (Alien³, [[Obliterating]] [[Dawg]], Legend). Oscar [[Appointing]] for [[Better]] Sound, [[Better]] Sound [[Edition]] and Best [[Optic]] Effects. Panavision. (****/*****). --------------------------------------------- Result 1635 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although some may call it a "Cuban Cinema Paradiso", the movie is closer to a How Green Was My Valley, a memory film mourning for a lost innocence. The film smartly avoids falling into a political trap of taking sides (pro-Castro? anti-Castro?, focusing instead in the human frailty of the characters and the importance of family. Filled with good acting, in particular from Mexican actress Diana Bracho, who plays Keitel's wife. A masterpiece, filled with references to classic movies, from CASABLANCA to Chaplin's CITY LIGHTS. Gael Garcia Bernal plays a small role which is critical for the dramatic payoff of the story. TV director Georg Stanford Brown, in a rare return to acting (remember THE ROOKIES?), plays a homeless bum who acts as Greek chorus, superbly. It is a pity that this movie, originally titled DREAMING OF JULIA, has been released in the States by THINKfilm with the atrocious title of CUBAN BLOOD, which has nothing to do with the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Now]] I've [[always]] been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there better projects. Yes, you [[heard]] me. The story works wonderful, the atmosphere really works and the actors do a first [[rate]] job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN [[NATION]] THE [[SERIES]] and STAR [[TREK]] [[ENTERPRISE]] [[shows]] that he can be an action star who [[kicks]] ass and takes name. The [[stop]] motion effects could have been a [[tiny]] [[bit]] better. The color was wrong, they [[look]] plastic to me instead of the [[metal]] they were [[suppose]] to be. But that is a [[minor]] complaint [[compared]] to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this [[movie]]. 9 STARS [[OUT]] OF 10. [[Currently]] I've [[unceasingly]] been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there better projects. Yes, you [[audition]] me. The story works wonderful, the atmosphere really works and the actors do a first [[rates]] job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN [[NATIONS]] THE [[SERIAL]] and STAR [[HIKING]] [[VENTURES]] [[denotes]] that he can be an action star who [[karate]] ass and takes name. The [[discontinue]] motion effects could have been a [[little]] [[bite]] better. The color was wrong, they [[gaze]] plastic to me instead of the [[minerals]] they were [[reckon]] to be. But that is a [[minimal]] complaint [[comparing]] to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this [[cinematography]]. 9 STARS [[OUTWARD]] OF 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] The lead [[characters]] in this movie [[fall]] into two categories: smart and stupid. [[Simple]] enough.

Jiri Machacek (Standa) plays a hapless, dopey guy who gets arrested for a crime he did not commit. When he tries to get financially reimbursed by his evil, former boss, the situation gets out of control.

While Standa is genuinely (but endearingly) stupid, his [[buddy]] Ondrej is an absolute blithering idiot who bungles everything and manages to say and do the wrong thing every time. Without Ondrej, Standa might stand a chance of going through life with some modest degree of success. With Ondrej, life will never be boring, but it sure won't be without a lot of headaches!

Ivan Trojan plays Zdenek, an evil genius type who degenerates into some Hitler-esquire delusional tyrant. Zdenek and his henchmen try to kill Standa to keep Zdenek's secrets safe.

I am very [[impressed]] with the high quality and imagination of Czech films. For a relatively small country, the Czech Republic certainly has produced more than its share of superb entertainment. The [[best]] Czech movies I have seen are: 1) Pelišky and 2) Tmavomodrý Svet (Dark Blue World). If you see these two movies, you have seen the [[absolute]] best of Czech cinema. The lead [[attribute]] in this movie [[decline]] into two categories: smart and stupid. [[Uncomplicated]] enough.

Jiri Machacek (Standa) plays a hapless, dopey guy who gets arrested for a crime he did not commit. When he tries to get financially reimbursed by his evil, former boss, the situation gets out of control.

While Standa is genuinely (but endearingly) stupid, his [[dawg]] Ondrej is an absolute blithering idiot who bungles everything and manages to say and do the wrong thing every time. Without Ondrej, Standa might stand a chance of going through life with some modest degree of success. With Ondrej, life will never be boring, but it sure won't be without a lot of headaches!

Ivan Trojan plays Zdenek, an evil genius type who degenerates into some Hitler-esquire delusional tyrant. Zdenek and his henchmen try to kill Standa to keep Zdenek's secrets safe.

I am very [[surprising]] with the high quality and imagination of Czech films. For a relatively small country, the Czech Republic certainly has produced more than its share of superb entertainment. The [[bestest]] Czech movies I have seen are: 1) Pelišky and 2) Tmavomodrý Svet (Dark Blue World). If you see these two movies, you have seen the [[utter]] best of Czech cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] was [[extremely]] boring. It should [[least]] not more than 15 [[minutes]]. The [[images]] of [[child]] and [[animal]] being killed were [[little]] bit [[disturbing]].

[[Usually]] I don't write comments but this one was so [[bad]] having so many good and excellent [[comments]]. I think in this [[case]] we are one step closer to honest [[assessment]] of this title.

What more can I [[say]]? I fall asleep during this movie 3 times. It was about 4 hours after I had woken up from 8 [[hours]] long [[sleeping]] [[period]]. I think it is the point itself.

There is no dialog between characters except maybe 2 sentences at the very end.

When you fall asleep once watching it do not try to rewind and catch up because you will fall asleep again. This [[filmmaking]] was [[remarkably]] boring. It should [[fewer]] not more than 15 [[mins]]. The [[pictures]] of [[kid]] and [[beasts]] being killed were [[small]] bit [[disconcerting]].

[[Popularly]] I don't write comments but this one was so [[rotten]] having so many good and excellent [[observations]]. I think in this [[example]] we are one step closer to honest [[estimation]] of this title.

What more can I [[tell]]? I fall asleep during this movie 3 times. It was about 4 hours after I had woken up from 8 [[hour]] long [[asleep]] [[times]]. I think it is the point itself.

There is no dialog between characters except maybe 2 sentences at the very end.

When you fall asleep once watching it do not try to rewind and catch up because you will fall asleep again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Though this movie has a first rate roster of fine actors, special effects that are excellent, and a story line that is full of surprises, it wasn't [[picked]] up for studio distribution and went directly to DVD. Perhaps it contains too much 'anti-police force' information, or perhaps it is juts one too many action flicks [[released]] during a glut, but whatever the reason the big screens [[missed]] the opportunity, [[fortunately]] the new concept of [[releasing]] direct to DVD [[allows]] us to [[enjoy]] it.

The theme is old: rookie reporter [[uncovers]] an [[inner]] circle of [[cops]] that are [[corrupt]] - in this [[case]] the [[F]].R.A.T. ([[First]] [[Response]] [[Assault]] and [[Tactical]]) team, a [[group]] of well [[trained]] [[policeman]] created to clean up the [[mythical]] [[city]] of Edison from its low point of [[crime]], [[drugs]], prostitution etc. Working undercover the temptation of pocketing the [[confiscated]] goods and money proves too much of an [[opportunity]] and now, 15 years after its [[formation]], [[FRAT]] is responsible for [[murder]], [[drug]] [[trafficking]], terrorizing innocent people etc. The lead [[dog]] is Lazerov (Dylan McDermott, who makes a [[terrifyingly]] [[real]] [[gangster]]!) and his partner Rafe Deed (LL [[Cool]] J, even more buff than [[usual]] and [[proving]] he can be a [[sensitive]] actor). Reporter [[Pollack]] (Justin Timberlake) catches wind of a '[[bad]] mistake' and reports his [[theory]] of [[fraud]] and [[corruption]] to his paper's boss Ashford (the [[always]] reliably fine Morgan Freeman). Gradually Polack [[convinces]] Ashford and subsequently Wallace (Kevin Spacey, [[also]] a [[consistently]] fine [[character]] actor) and they [[aid]] Pollack in this investigative reporting. The closer Pollack gets to the truth the more surprises and bad incidents happen and the story runs pall mall toward a series of [[unexpected]] [[results]].

Timberlake lacks the charisma to [[carry]] the lead, [[especially]] in the company of such [[seasoned]] actors. But LL Cool J, Freeman, Spacey, and McDermott keep the well-oiled machine of a movie rolling to the very [[end]]. No, it is not a [[great]] [[movie]], but it is one that makes for an edge of the seat [[action]] flick with a [[message]]. Grady Harp Though this movie has a first rate roster of fine actors, special effects that are excellent, and a story line that is full of surprises, it wasn't [[pick]] up for studio distribution and went directly to DVD. Perhaps it contains too much 'anti-police force' information, or perhaps it is juts one too many action flicks [[emitted]] during a glut, but whatever the reason the big screens [[miss]] the opportunity, [[hopefully]] the new concept of [[freeing]] direct to DVD [[allowed]] us to [[enjoying]] it.

The theme is old: rookie reporter [[reveals]] an [[inside]] circle of [[police]] that are [[corrupted]] - in this [[lawsuits]] the [[e]].R.A.T. ([[Frst]] [[Answering]] [[Attack]] and [[Tactic]]) team, a [[clustered]] of well [[qualified]] [[constabulary]] created to clean up the [[myth]] [[ville]] of Edison from its low point of [[offenses]], [[medicines]], prostitution etc. Working undercover the temptation of pocketing the [[seized]] goods and money proves too much of an [[luck]] and now, 15 years after its [[creation]], [[BROTHERHOOD]] is responsible for [[killings]], [[narcotics]] [[smuggling]], terrorizing innocent people etc. The lead [[canine]] is Lazerov (Dylan McDermott, who makes a [[awfully]] [[actual]] [[thug]]!) and his partner Rafe Deed (LL [[Cooling]] J, even more buff than [[normal]] and [[proves]] he can be a [[delicate]] actor). Reporter [[Pollock]] (Justin Timberlake) catches wind of a '[[rotten]] mistake' and reports his [[theories]] of [[deception]] and [[bribery]] to his paper's boss Ashford (the [[invariably]] reliably fine Morgan Freeman). Gradually Polack [[persuades]] Ashford and subsequently Wallace (Kevin Spacey, [[apart]] a [[unceasingly]] fine [[traits]] actor) and they [[assisting]] Pollack in this investigative reporting. The closer Pollack gets to the truth the more surprises and bad incidents happen and the story runs pall mall toward a series of [[unintended]] [[outcomes]].

Timberlake lacks the charisma to [[carrying]] the lead, [[namely]] in the company of such [[skilled]] actors. But LL Cool J, Freeman, Spacey, and McDermott keep the well-oiled machine of a movie rolling to the very [[terminate]]. No, it is not a [[excellent]] [[kino]], but it is one that makes for an edge of the seat [[efforts]] flick with a [[messages]]. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 1640 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If the Lion [[King]] was a Disney [[version]] of Hamlet, then the Lion [[King]] 3: Hakuna Matata is a Disney version of Guildenstern and [[Rosencrantz]] are Dead. [[Just]] like Tom Stoppard's beguiling [[film]], we [[get]] to [[view]] the action from the point of [[view]] of two of the [[minor]] [[characters]] from the original: Timon, the meerkat with a [[penchant]] for [[breaking]] into song at the [[drop]] of a [[hat]], and Pumbaa, the warthog with flatulence issues. By following their [[story]] - rather than Simba's - we [[get]] to see why all the animals bowed down as Simba was presented from [[Pride]] Rock. We find out what made Timon and Pumbaa decide to follow Simba back to Pride Rock to [[oust]] Scar. And we find out how they [[dealt]] with the hyena's once and for all. Nathan Lane as Timon [[gets]] most of the [[best]] jokes, but he is [[ably]] [[supported]] by Ernie Sabella as Pumbaa. It is [[also]] good to hear Matthew Broderick and Whoopi [[Goldberg]] reprising their roles. Julie Kavner and [[Jerry]] Stiller [[lend]] their [[distinctive]] voices to two new [[characters]]: Timon's mother and uncle. The only downside is the constant stop-start-rewind-fast-forward device which doesn't always help to [[progress]] the story. Having said that, there is a [[brilliant]] zoom near the beginning of the [[movie]]. With more [[laughs]] than any other third-in-a-Disney-series [[movie]], [[Hakuna]] Matata is worth [[watching]] - if only for the [[hot]] [[tub]] scene which is [[still]] funny [[despite]] being a [[little]] bit [[predictable]]. If the Lion [[Emperor]] was a Disney [[stepping]] of Hamlet, then the Lion [[Emperor]] 3: Hakuna Matata is a Disney version of Guildenstern and [[Guildenstern]] are Dead. [[Jen]] like Tom Stoppard's beguiling [[films]], we [[obtains]] to [[opinions]] the action from the point of [[visualize]] of two of the [[lesser]] [[features]] from the original: Timon, the meerkat with a [[tendency]] for [[violating]] into song at the [[dipped]] of a [[hats]], and Pumbaa, the warthog with flatulence issues. By following their [[tale]] - rather than Simba's - we [[obtains]] to see why all the animals bowed down as Simba was presented from [[Stolz]] Rock. We find out what made Timon and Pumbaa decide to follow Simba back to Pride Rock to [[unseat]] Scar. And we find out how they [[addressed]] with the hyena's once and for all. Nathan Lane as Timon [[got]] most of the [[better]] jokes, but he is [[cleverly]] [[backed]] by Ernie Sabella as Pumbaa. It is [[apart]] good to hear Matthew Broderick and Whoopi [[Tucker]] reprising their roles. Julie Kavner and [[Jiri]] Stiller [[give]] their [[attribute]] voices to two new [[features]]: Timon's mother and uncle. The only downside is the constant stop-start-rewind-fast-forward device which doesn't always help to [[advances]] the story. Having said that, there is a [[shiny]] zoom near the beginning of the [[kino]]. With more [[grin]] than any other third-in-a-Disney-series [[movies]], [[Matata]] Matata is worth [[staring]] - if only for the [[sexier]] [[bath]] scene which is [[yet]] funny [[albeit]] being a [[petite]] bit [[foreseeable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just didn't get this movie...Was it a musical? no..but there were choreographed songs and dancing in it...

Was it a serious drama....no the acting was not good enough for that.

Is Whoopi Goldberg a quality serious Actor..Definently not.

I had difficulty staying awake through this disjointed movie. The message on apartheid and the "tribute" to the students who died during a student uprosing is noted. But as entertainment this was very poor and as a documentary style movie it was worse.

See for yourself, but in fairness I hated it --------------------------------------------- Result 1642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A quiet, sweet and beutifully nostalgic movie on how it is to be confronted with old friends and surroundings from your youth with all that memories and the problems and sorrows of the present with you. A movie that makes you feel good. All the ingredients are here: old jelousy, rivalry, friendship and loyalty. Mischief, nightly fridge-raids and all the other fun stuff that we all remember from our summer camps. All the characters get the opportunity for a week to experience this again as the old camp-leader now is retiring and want to meet the children from the golden years of the camp. All of them are now in their thirties and in the middle of their careers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] *WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The writers of this [[story]] knew these men very well. The [[actors]], likewise, [[portrayed]] them very well. The result is that by the end of the film you feel like you're actually watching John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The expected tensions are there, especially in the awkward first moments. But as the two begin to [[loosen]] up, the old camaraderie that made the Beatles work so well begins to show through. The bitterness is [[still]] there, and [[interrupts]] at [[times]], but by the [[time]] John gets the [[idea]] to [[take]] Lorne Michaels up on his [[offer]] to [[pay]] the Beatles the gag [[sum]] of $3000 to [[appear]] on "Saturday [[Night]] Live", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that [[terrorized]] [[Liverpool]] [[together]] as [[teens]], and survived [[playing]] the [[rough]] [[nightclubs]] of [[Hamburg]] to [[rise]] to Superstardom. But in the [[end]], this [[wonderful]] [[fantasy]] [[grounds]] us [[gently]]. We are [[reminded]] why a Beatles reunion was most likely never [[possible]] even before Lennon's [[assassination]]: The two [[driving]] [[forces]] of the [[group]] outgrew each other. *WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The writers of this [[histories]] knew these men very well. The [[protagonists]], likewise, [[depicted]] them very well. The result is that by the end of the film you feel like you're actually watching John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The expected tensions are there, especially in the awkward first moments. But as the two begin to [[unscrew]] up, the old camaraderie that made the Beatles work so well begins to show through. The bitterness is [[nevertheless]] there, and [[blackouts]] at [[period]], but by the [[period]] John gets the [[concept]] to [[taking]] Lorne Michaels up on his [[offers]] to [[salaries]] the Beatles the gag [[somme]] of $3000 to [[arise]] on "Saturday [[Nightly]] Live", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that [[terrorised]] [[Manchester]] [[jointly]] as [[youth]], and survived [[playback]] the [[coarse]] [[clubs]] of [[Warsaw]] to [[climbing]] to Superstardom. But in the [[ceases]], this [[wondrous]] [[chimera]] [[motivations]] us [[mildly]]. We are [[recalling]] why a Beatles reunion was most likely never [[probable]] even before Lennon's [[slain]]: The two [[drives]] [[troop]] of the [[panels]] outgrew each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 1644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Another silent [[love]] [[triangle]] [[film]] from Hitchcock, not a mystery, but very English, very well-paced and photographed. Smooth [[boxer]] Bob Corby ([[Ian]] Hunter) recruits [[circus]] boxer "One [[Round]]" Jack Sander (Carl Brisson) to be his sparring partner, partly to [[keep]] the pretty but fickle Mabel (Lilian Hall-Davis) [[nearby]]. There are lots of [[character]] actors and grotesques—at Jack and Mabel's [[wedding]] the [[verger]], [[standing]] in the [[aisle]] of the [[church]], registers [[shock]] at the sight of the very tall and the very short [[men]], the [[fat]] [[lady]], the conjoined [[twins]] who, of course, [[argue]] about which side of the aisle to sit, and the [[wedding]] feast is amusing. The rest of the movie has Jack [[losing]] [[Mabel]] and [[boxing]] his [[way]] back to her heart, or [[something]] like that. It was another era altogether, with the [[audience]] in evening dress, and the [[boxers]] dressing up, too, when out of the [[ring]]. The camera [[angles]], the [[pace]], the [[use]] of [[symbols]], the [[cutting]]—all very stylish and masterful. The camera-work and [[editing]] of the [[last]] boxing [[match]] is very gripping. Brisson's good [[looks]] are well-used in this one; his [[smiling]] is not so [[oblivious]] of what's going on [[around]] him as he is in Hitchcock's The Manxman, and so is not [[annoying]]. But can [[boxers]] have such dimples? Another silent [[adores]] [[delta]] [[movies]] from Hitchcock, not a mystery, but very English, very well-paced and photographed. Smooth [[wrestler]] Bob Corby ([[Iain]] Hunter) recruits [[carnival]] boxer "One [[Rounded]]" Jack Sander (Carl Brisson) to be his sparring partner, partly to [[sustain]] the pretty but fickle Mabel (Lilian Hall-Davis) [[near]]. There are lots of [[characteristics]] actors and grotesques—at Jack and Mabel's [[marry]] the [[orchard]], [[stands]] in the [[hallway]] of the [[basilica]], registers [[shocked]] at the sight of the very tall and the very short [[males]], the [[greasy]] [[dame]], the conjoined [[binoculars]] who, of course, [[assert]] about which side of the aisle to sit, and the [[marry]] feast is amusing. The rest of the movie has Jack [[wasting]] [[Bessie]] and [[boxer]] his [[manner]] back to her heart, or [[anything]] like that. It was another era altogether, with the [[viewers]] in evening dress, and the [[shorts]] dressing up, too, when out of the [[ringing]]. The camera [[nooks]], the [[rhythm]], the [[utilise]] of [[icons]], the [[slitting]]—all very stylish and masterful. The camera-work and [[edition]] of the [[latter]] boxing [[matching]] is very gripping. Brisson's good [[seem]] are well-used in this one; his [[laughs]] is not so [[indifferent]] of what's going on [[about]] him as he is in Hitchcock's The Manxman, and so is not [[exasperating]]. But can [[underpants]] have such dimples? --------------------------------------------- Result 1645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Here is one of those [[movies]] spoiled by the studio's [[insistence]] on a [[happy]] ending. [[Conflicts]] which have stretched out for years are [[settled]] in a few minutes. It would have been far more interesting to [[inject]] a tone of [[ambiguity]]. The talented [[Barbara]] Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from [[independent]] and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her [[life]]. Brent, as [[usual]], is well over his head and then there is the [[ludicrous]] situation of Gig Young [[playing]] a character named Gig [[Young]]. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the [[actor]]! Worth seeing though far below what it [[could]] have been. Here is one of those [[theater]] spoiled by the studio's [[tenacity]] on a [[joyful]] ending. [[Clashes]] which have stretched out for years are [[settling]] in a few minutes. It would have been far more interesting to [[infuse]] a tone of [[ambivalence]]. The talented [[Barbarian]] Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from [[independant]] and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her [[living]]. Brent, as [[normal]], is well over his head and then there is the [[senseless]] situation of Gig Young [[replay]] a character named Gig [[Youngsters]]. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the [[protagonist]]! Worth seeing though far below what it [[would]] have been. --------------------------------------------- Result 1646 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I used to watch this on either HBO or Showtime or Cinemax during the one summer in the mid 90's that my parents subscribed to those channels. I came across it several times in various parts and always found it dark, bizarre and fascinating. I was young then, in my early teens; and now years later after having discovered the great Arliss Howard and being blown away by "Big Bad Love" I bought the DVD of "Wilder Napalm" and re-watched it with my girlfriend for the first time in many years. I absolutely loved it! I was really impressed and affected by it. There are so many dynamic fluid complexities and cleverness within the camera movements and cinematography; all of which perfectly gel with the intelligent, intense and immediate chemistry between the three leads, their story, the music and all the other actors as well. It's truly "Cinematic". I love Arliss Howard's subtle intensity, ambivalent strength and hidden intelligence, I'm a big fan of anything he does; and his interplay with Debra Winger's manic glee (they are of course married) has that magic charming reality to it that goes past the camera. (I wonder if they watch this on wedding anniversaries?......."Big Bad Love" should be the next stop for anyone who has not seen it; it's brilliant.) And, Dennis Quaid in full clown make-up, sneakily introduced, angled, hidden and displayed by the shot selection and full bloomed delivery is of the kind of pure dark movie magic you don't see very often. Quaid has always had a sinister quality to him for me anyways, with that huge slit mouth span, hiding behind his flicker eyes lying in wait to unleash itself as either mischievous charm or diabolical weirdness (here as both). Both Howard and Quaid have the insane fire behind the eyes to pull off their wonderful intense internal gunslinger square-offs in darkly cool fashion. In fact the whole film has a darkly cool energy and hip intensity. It's really a fantastic film, put together by intelligence, imagination, agility and chemistry by all parties involved. I really cannot imagine how this got funded, and it looks pretty expensive to me, by such a conventional, imagination-less system, but I thank God films like this slip through the system every once in awhile. In a great way, with all of its day-glo bright carnival colors, hip intelligence, darkly warped truthful humor and enthralling chemistry it reminds me of one of my favorite films of all time: "Grosse Pointe Blank".......now that's a compliment in my book! --------------------------------------------- Result 1647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film on TV many years ago and I saw this film when I got this on tape. I thought that this was reasonably well done. It was not the best of all movies, but it was good enough. The movie has enough talent to inspire many people, especially younger kids. The acting was good, with Danny Glover leading the cast. The plot line was not very believable, but the script was well written. This movie can also be the interest of avid baseball fans. It does not directly apply to a action-packed sports movie. It directly applies to a nice film that you can watch with your family and learn some messages that are hidden in this film. Overall, the film was good, but not great. I give this a movie a 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I [[miss]] [[Dark]] [[Angel]]!..

I [[understand]] not ever one [[likes]] it, but as far as I'm [[concerned]] the [[show]] should not have been [[canceled]], [[especially]] for another [[space]] [[show]] mock up...

I'm reading the [[books]] now. they are doing a [[pretty]] [[good]] job of [[explaining]] [[somethings]], but I still [[think]] we should get a [[TV]] [[movie]] or [[something]].

THE FREAK NATION [[LIVES]]!!!!!!!! I [[missed]] [[Darkness]] [[Angels]]!..

I [[understands]] not ever one [[adores]] it, but as far as I'm [[worried]] the [[showings]] should not have been [[overturned]], [[concretely]] for another [[spacing]] [[display]] mock up...

I'm reading the [[book]] now. they are doing a [[quite]] [[alright]] job of [[indicating]] [[anything]], but I still [[thinking]] we should get a [[TELEVISIONS]] [[cinematography]] or [[anything]].

THE FREAK NATION [[IIFE]]!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1649 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] i didn't [[even]] [[bother]] [[finishing]] the [[movie]] because i was so [[bored]] i thought i was going to pass out i was watching it in the movie theaters and me and my friends just got tired so we got up and left to another movie if i ever have to sit through 2 min. of that [[movie]] again i think I'm going to shoot myself...and i do know the whole entire movie because my friend [[told]] me what happened at the end and i wasn't surprised at all i mean who didn't know she was going to do the right thing and let him be happy i mean for real you would have to be a complete idiot not to know that. i know i didn't miss anything and if somebody ask's me to see that movie i would say "over my dead body". i didn't [[yet]] [[disturb]] [[completing]] the [[filmmaking]] because i was so [[drilled]] i thought i was going to pass out i was watching it in the movie theaters and me and my friends just got tired so we got up and left to another movie if i ever have to sit through 2 min. of that [[films]] again i think I'm going to shoot myself...and i do know the whole entire movie because my friend [[tells]] me what happened at the end and i wasn't surprised at all i mean who didn't know she was going to do the right thing and let him be happy i mean for real you would have to be a complete idiot not to know that. i know i didn't miss anything and if somebody ask's me to see that movie i would say "over my dead body". --------------------------------------------- Result 1650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A woman asks for advice on the road to reach a mysterious town, and hears two ghoulish stories from the local weirdo, both zombie related. But perhaps fate has something nasty in store for her too...

The Zombie Chronicles is absolutely one of the worst films I have ever seen. In fact I must confess, so bad was it I fast forwarded through most of the garbage. And there was a lot of that, believe me. It runs for just 69 minutes, and there is still tons of filler. You get some skinhead doing a lot of push ups, plenty of dull kissy-kissy scenes between goofy teens (that rhymed, tee hee) and some fine examples of why some people should never become actors.

As for the title characters, they barely even have a footnote in the film. Why, you get more undead action in the intro than you do the preceding feature! Though, considering how pathetic the eyes bursting out of sockets and the eating of brains sequences are (amongst other 'delights'), maybe that's a blessing in disguise.

And to top it all off, it looks likes it's been filmed on someone's mobile phone for broadcast on Youtube. Jerky camera-work, scratches on the print, flickering lights... I had to rub my eyes when I realised it was made in 2001, and not 1971. Even the clothes and fashioned look about three decades out of date!

If you think I'm not qualified to do a review of Chronicles having not seen the whole film, then go ahead. YOU try sitting through it, I betcha you won't even make it to the first appearance of the blue-smartie coloured freaks before making your excuses and leaving. It is truly laughable that anyone chose to release it, and honestly you'll get far more fun resting your drink on the disc than actually torturing your DVD player with this gigglesome excuse for horror. In fact, don't for surprised if it packs it's bags and leaves in the morning, leaving you doomed to watch VHS tapes for the rest of your life. You have been warned... 0/10

P.S What kind of 18-rated horror has the woman keep a massive sports bra on during the obligatory sex scene?! See, the movie can't even get that part right... --------------------------------------------- Result 1651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would [[separate]] it from most dull and overly [[crafted]] mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned "battle of the sexes" as in "all men are the same" and "why is it that all women...;" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it). I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would [[seperated]] it from most dull and overly [[worded]] mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned "battle of the sexes" as in "all men are the same" and "why is it that all women...;" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it). --------------------------------------------- Result 1652 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] But how can you stand to mange a baseball team that can't win. For George Knox, it is not easy. As the movie opens, Roger Beaumont (Joseph-Gordon-Levitt) and his best friend J.P (Milton Davis Jr.) are riding on thier bikes around the angels' stadium. When they return to thier foster mother's home, Roger is suprised to have a visit from his dad (Dermot Mulroney). His mom is dead! And when he asks his father when they going to be a family again, he father jokes "I say when the angels win the division championship" So later on, Roger and J.P hide in a tree to watch the angels play baseball. When the manger George Knox (Danny Glover) take out his pitcher, the pitcher gets mad and gets into a fight with him, and soon the angels team get into the fightm that gets Knox ejected from the game. That night Roger makes a prayer, for the angles win the championship. When his foster mother Maggie Nelson (Brenda Ficker) agrees that Roger and J.P go to a basball, Roger sees real angles come on the field and helps the left fielder (Matthew McConaughey) makes a catch, that leaves the manger and the play-by-play man (Jay. O Sanders) how did he to that. Roger learns from the head angel (Christopher Lloyd) that only he can see the angles, because he was the only that prayed for help.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1653 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WHO'S GOT THE GOLD? is (unfortunately) the last of the HANZO THE RAZOR films, starring Shintaro Katsu as the title character - the multi-weapon proficient, authority-bucking samurai officer with the "unique" technique of raping confessions out of unwilling female informants until they "spill the beans" and beg for more...

This entry starts with Hanzo "uncovering" a woman who poses as a ghost to guard a lake that's filled with bamboo trunks filled with gold stolen from the Treasury. This leads to Hanzo discovering a loan-sharking scheme and an orgy ring run by a blind monk. The requisite swordplay and rape/interrogation ensue - finalizing in a decent ending for this strange trilogy of films.

Not quite as strong and enjoyable as THE SNARE (part 2 of the series...), but still great for fans of samurai sleaze and Japanese pinky-style films. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Gerard is a writer with a somewhat [[overactive]] [[imagination]]. He is also homosexual and Catholic prone to Catholic [[guilt]] and [[something]] of a clairvoyant, or so it [[seems]]. On a trip to Flushing he is 'seduced' by [[Christine]]. When he [[discovers]] that Christine's [[new]] boyfriend is the bit of [[rough]] trade he's been fancying from afar he decides to [[stick]] around. After all, enforced heterosexuality has its compensations. [[Then]] he [[realizes]] that Christine's previous three husbands have all died violent deaths. Did Christine murder them and is he or the boyfriend, Herman, [[going]] to be 'the fourth man'? Verhoeven's [[overheated]], over-egged melodrama is a [[delicious]] blend of Hitchcock and David Lynch, full of OTT eroticism and religious imagery and an awful [[lot]] of the colour red. A lot of the time it looks and feels like a [[dream]] and we can never be sure that what we are seeing is real or a figment of Gerard's [[imagination]]. The fun is in figuring it out. Also the fact that Christine is an infinitely more likable character that either the priggish Gerard or the bullish Herman means we are hardly like to root for either of the men over her. In fact, it's fair to [[say]] Gerard's comeuppance can't come soon enough. [[Super]] performances, too, from Jeroen Krabbe and Renee Soutendijk and [[easily]] Verhoeven's [[best]] [[film]] up to his [[wonderfully]] subversive piece of sci-fi "Starship Troopers". Gerard is a writer with a somewhat [[hyper]] [[novelty]]. He is also homosexual and Catholic prone to Catholic [[blame]] and [[anything]] of a clairvoyant, or so it [[looks]]. On a trip to Flushing he is 'seduced' by [[Kristin]]. When he [[discoveries]] that Christine's [[novel]] boyfriend is the bit of [[crude]] trade he's been fancying from afar he decides to [[wand]] around. After all, enforced heterosexuality has its compensations. [[Thereafter]] he [[recognizes]] that Christine's previous three husbands have all died violent deaths. Did Christine murder them and is he or the boyfriend, Herman, [[go]] to be 'the fourth man'? Verhoeven's [[overheating]], over-egged melodrama is a [[tasty]] blend of Hitchcock and David Lynch, full of OTT eroticism and religious imagery and an awful [[batch]] of the colour red. A lot of the time it looks and feels like a [[nightmares]] and we can never be sure that what we are seeing is real or a figment of Gerard's [[creativity]]. The fun is in figuring it out. Also the fact that Christine is an infinitely more likable character that either the priggish Gerard or the bullish Herman means we are hardly like to root for either of the men over her. In fact, it's fair to [[said]] Gerard's comeuppance can't come soon enough. [[Peachy]] performances, too, from Jeroen Krabbe and Renee Soutendijk and [[readily]] Verhoeven's [[better]] [[movies]] up to his [[stunningly]] subversive piece of sci-fi "Starship Troopers". --------------------------------------------- Result 1655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Jude]] Law [[gives]] his all in this beautifully filmed vampire flick which [[offers]] [[little]] else of [[value]]. Completely [[lacking]] in eroticism, excitement, or [[leading]] ladies with appeal. One decent fight, a few moments of mild suspense. And a one-note plot.

The movie waxes philisophic in a series of conversations between Law's character and a dogged homicide detective, well played by Timothy Spall. But [[despite]] their [[best]] [[efforts]], both [[actors]] are staked to the [[cross]] of the film's [[banality]].

With a lesser [[actor]] in the lead role -- and without the [[benefit]] of Oliver Curtis's cinematography -- [[Crocodiles]] [[would]] blend into the [[sea]] of low-budget [[vampire]] quickies. [[Judd]] Law [[delivers]] his all in this beautifully filmed vampire flick which [[provides]] [[scant]] else of [[values]]. Completely [[missing]] in eroticism, excitement, or [[culminating]] ladies with appeal. One decent fight, a few moments of mild suspense. And a one-note plot.

The movie waxes philisophic in a series of conversations between Law's character and a dogged homicide detective, well played by Timothy Spall. But [[while]] their [[optimum]] [[action]], both [[protagonists]] are staked to the [[crossing]] of the film's [[triviality]].

With a lesser [[protagonist]] in the lead role -- and without the [[interests]] of Oliver Curtis's cinematography -- [[Gators]] [[could]] blend into the [[seas]] of low-budget [[vamp]] quickies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1656 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was particularly moved by the understated courage and integrity of l'Anglaise, in this beautifully acted, intellectually and visually compelling film. Thank you so much, Monsieur le directeur Rohmer. --------------------------------------------- Result 1657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Witchcraft/Witchery/La Casa 4/ and whatever else you wish to call it. How about..Crud.

A gathering of people at a Massachusetts island resort are besieged by the black magic powers of an evil witch killing each individual using cruel, torturous methods. Photographer Gary(David Hasselhoff)is taking pictures for Linda(Catherine Hickland whose voice and demeanor resemble EE-YOR of the Winnie the Poo cartoon), a virgin studying witchcraft, on the island resort without permission. Rose Brooks(Annie Ross, portraying an incredibly rude bitch)is interested in perhaps purchasing the resort and, along with husband Freddie(Robert Champagne, who is always ogling other women much younger than him), pregnant daughter Jane(Linda Blair)and grandson Tommy(Michael Manchester, who just looks bored throughout, probably wanting to watch Sesame Street instead of starring in this rubbish), go by boat to the resort being treated to a look at the property by Realtor Tony Giordano's son Jerry(Rick Farnsworth), obviously a pup in the business getting his feet wet. Along with these folks is architect Leslie(Leslie Cumming, whose character is a nympho)who might help Rose re-design the resort. The boat's captain is killed by The Lady in Black(Hildegard Knef, wearing her make-up and lip-stick extra thick)and a storm is brewing. The boat drives off by itself(..guided by the invisible power of The Lady in Black, I guess)with everyone stuck in the decrepit resort, which is in dire need of repairs. Most of the victims, before meeting their grisly fates are carried through a type of red wormhole whose vortex leads to another dimension(..perhaps a type of hell or something)where they are tortured by these fiends dressed in raggedy clothes with a crummy visage. One victim has her mouth sown before being hung upside down in a chimney, roasted as the others light the fireplace. One poor soul is tortured by harsh twistings of rope wrapped tightly around her flesh before being found hanging from the snout of a swordfish penetrating through her neck. One fellow is slowly suffocating as his veins bulge(..and bleed) and neck's blood vessels burst squirting in Hasselhoff's face! One fellow is crucified with nails hammered into his hands before being hung upside down over an open flame. Blair's pregnant victim becomes possessed with her hair standing on end speaking in another woman's voice. One is raped by this demonic man with a "diseased" mouth as the hellish hobos stand nearby gleefully cheering. The film, despite it's excesses, is mostly dull fodder for those who really wish to see the lowest point in the careers of Hasselhoff and Blair, who deserve better than this. Almost unbearable at times, building little-to-no suspense. Clumsy execution of the death sequences which look cheap and laughable. Sure some gore is okay, but most of the film shows victims after they've been run through the ringer. We do get a chance to see pregnant women(..who look exactly like stuntmen in costume with bad wigs) jumping out three story windows. Oh, and The Lady in Black's reflected face often pops up on inanimate objects for characters to see. Tommy has a little Sesame Street recorder which tapes The Lady in Black's mumbo jumbo chants, obviously used for later. For some reason, The Lady in Black likes to visit little Tommy. He's not at all scared of her, for Tommy's just too bored to show any expression on his face, much less fear. Need I say more? This one's a real stinker. Ugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I just watched this [[movie]] on Showtime. Quite by [[accident]] actually. If I wouldn't have only had 6 hrs of sleep for the past two days then I wouldn't have came home early from work. If I hadn't came home early from work I wouldn't have [[seen]] this movie. I wouldn't have known what I was missing, but I would've [[missed]] a lot.

That's the way this [[movie]] is. It's almost [[playing]] on the Kevin Bacon [[effect]]. That and causality (hence my verbiage above). Ever [[character]] is [[intertwined]] in some [[way]] or another. Action, [[reaction]], interaction, non-interaction. This movie is just [[wonderful]]. I'm going to have to [[find]] a [[copy]] to [[buy]]. I just watched this [[cinematic]] on Showtime. Quite by [[casualty]] actually. If I wouldn't have only had 6 hrs of sleep for the past two days then I wouldn't have came home early from work. If I hadn't came home early from work I wouldn't have [[watched]] this movie. I wouldn't have known what I was missing, but I would've [[miss]] a lot.

That's the way this [[cinematography]] is. It's almost [[gaming]] on the Kevin Bacon [[effects]]. That and causality (hence my verbiage above). Ever [[trait]] is [[interlocked]] in some [[route]] or another. Action, [[reply]], interaction, non-interaction. This movie is just [[wondrous]]. I'm going to have to [[found]] a [[copier]] to [[purchase]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1659 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The problems with this film are many, but I will try to mention the most glaring and bothersome ones. First of all, while the theme suggests a number of vignettes about Manhattan life, the reality was that everything, as usual in movies and TV, was about something bizarre, usually of a sexual nature. The story lines were thin or nonexistent, and virtually every scene, camera shot, line of dialog, and expressed emotion was absolutely, and totally fake. It finally reached a point after an hour of so of mind numbing garbage that I walked out (something no uncommon for me in recent years.) I would have guessed the fi9lm was directed by some wannabe auteur drop outs from some 3rd rate film studies program, but I believe the (at one time, pre-Amelia, talented)director Mira Nair took part in this disgusting travesty, so perhaps the directorial talent in America has descended en masse into the cesspool. --------------------------------------------- Result 1660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] this is a great movie. I love the series on tv and so I loved the movie. One of the best things in the movie is that Helga finally admits her deepest darkest secret to Arnold!!! that was great. i loved it it was pretty funny too. It's a great movie! Doy!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Usually I don't really like Emma Roberts so much, but after watching Nancy Drew it kind of changed my mind. The actors in the movies made the whole thing exciting and funny. Most of the time when you watch a mystery movie you can solve it before the middle of the show, but in this movie it's like you are actually there. The clues have to all fit together until you can finally understand the whole crime. I am still amazed how she found it out. The whole movie was really clever and the people who watched it with me loved the movie too. The clothes were my favorite part of the movie, it was so cute. I don't think there will be another movie like this until the sequel comes out. I give it a nine because the popular girls didn't really seem to have the part just right, but they still make me laugh. It was a really great movie and a great mystery. I definitely recommend watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] i checked this one out on DVD for a [[dollar]] so I [[could]] [[easily]] [[smile]] as this [[dreadful]] movie unfolds. every time that you think it cannot get any worse, it [[inevitably]] does. The acting is absolutely horrific. the plot makes no sense at all. The title "cold [[vengeance]]" in the [[US]] DVD [[version]] has [[absolutely]] nothing to do with the script. The [[action]] scenes are so [[obviously]] [[taken]] in their [[first]] take. There are [[lots]] of mistakes during [[dialogues]] indicating that there is just no [[intend]] to do another take to at least try to [[make]] this [[movie]] bearable. I cannot [[remember]] having [[seen]] a [[worse]] [[movie]] and I do [[occasionally]] [[get]] [[bad]] ones--well, except for [[unstoppable]] with Wesley Snipes. No, who am I kidding, while a [[bad]] one, [[Unstoppable]] deserves Best [[Picture]] [[awards]] at the Oscars when compared to this piece of [[crap]]. i checked this one out on DVD for a [[dollars]] so I [[did]] [[comfortably]] [[grinning]] as this [[scary]] movie unfolds. every time that you think it cannot get any worse, it [[unavoidably]] does. The acting is absolutely horrific. the plot makes no sense at all. The title "cold [[avenge]]" in the [[USA]] DVD [[stepping]] has [[totally]] nothing to do with the script. The [[actions]] scenes are so [[definitely]] [[took]] in their [[frst]] take. There are [[lot]] of mistakes during [[talks]] indicating that there is just no [[intent]] to do another take to at least try to [[deliver]] this [[filmmaking]] bearable. I cannot [[remembering]] having [[saw]] a [[worst]] [[filmmaking]] and I do [[intermittently]] [[gets]] [[rotten]] ones--well, except for [[invulnerable]] with Wesley Snipes. No, who am I kidding, while a [[rotten]] one, [[Invincible]] deserves Best [[Imagery]] [[prix]] at the Oscars when compared to this piece of [[shit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This movie was a [[major]] disappointment on [[direction]], intellectual niveau, plot and in the [[way]] it dealt with its subject, [[painting]]. It is a [[slow]] [[moving]] [[film]] set like an episode of Wonder Years, with [[appalling]] [[lack]] of depth though. It also fails to deliver its [[message]] in a [[convincing]] [[manner]].

The [[approach]] to the subject of [[painting]] is very elite, [[limited]] to vague and subjective terms as "beauty". According to the [[makers]] of this movie, 'beauty' can be only experienced in Bob-Ross-style [[kitschy]] [[landscape]] [[paintings]]. [[Good]] art [[according]] to this [[film]] can be achieved by applying [[basic]] (like, [[primary]] [[school]] [[level]]) [[color]] theory and lots of sentiment. [[In]] parts the [[movie]] is offending, e.g. at a point it is stated ([[rather]], [[celebrated]] by dancing on [[tables]]) that [[mentally]] [[handicapped]] people are not [[capable]] of having [[emotions]] or [[expressing]] them through [[painting]], their [[works]] by [[definition]] being [[worthless]] 'bullshit' ([[quote]]).

I do not [[understand]] how the [[movie]] [[could]] [[get]] such [[high]] [[rating]], then again, so far not [[many]] people rated it, and they chose for only very [[high]] or very low [[grades]]. This movie was a [[important]] disappointment on [[directions]], intellectual niveau, plot and in the [[camino]] it dealt with its subject, [[lacquer]]. It is a [[slower]] [[transferring]] [[movies]] set like an episode of Wonder Years, with [[alarming]] [[lacking]] of depth though. It also fails to deliver its [[messages]] in a [[compelling]] [[ways]].

The [[approaching]] to the subject of [[paint]] is very elite, [[restrained]] to vague and subjective terms as "beauty". According to the [[strategists]] of this movie, 'beauty' can be only experienced in Bob-Ross-style [[kitsch]] [[landscaping]] [[paints]]. [[Alright]] art [[conforming]] to this [[filmmaking]] can be achieved by applying [[fundamental]] (like, [[main]] [[tuition]] [[tier]]) [[coloration]] theory and lots of sentiment. [[For]] parts the [[filmmaking]] is offending, e.g. at a point it is stated ([[somewhat]], [[famed]] by dancing on [[table]]) that [[psychologically]] [[handicap]] people are not [[able]] of having [[sentiments]] or [[express]] them through [[painted]], their [[cooperating]] by [[definitions]] being [[dispensable]] 'bullshit' ([[quotes]]).

I do not [[understands]] how the [[filmmaking]] [[did]] [[gets]] such [[highest]] [[ratings]], then again, so far not [[numerous]] people rated it, and they chose for only very [[supreme]] or very low [[grading]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[After]] watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good [[film]] but sadly The [[film]] is a joke and actually [[trying]] [[hard]] to introduce Aryeman Afterall his [[father]] Keshu is the producer

RKS [[spoke]] so [[highly]] about the [[film]] during [[promotions]], saying the [[film]] has meat unlike [[films]] [[released]] that [[time]], I wonder which films was he [[talking]] about

The [[film]] is [[actually]] a typical Masala film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbled

The ease at which the kids [[kidnap]] the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids [[kidnapping]] Dawood's family

The end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterization

RKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a bore

Music is boring

Amitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at times

Akshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hams

Aryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenes

Bhumika emerges the best of the lot

The rest are okay [[Upon]] watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good [[filmmaking]] but sadly The [[filmmaking]] is a joke and actually [[try]] [[stiff]] to introduce Aryeman Afterall his [[fathers]] Keshu is the producer

RKS [[chatted]] so [[incredibly]] about the [[flick]] during [[advancement]], saying the [[filmmaking]] has meat unlike [[movie]] [[freed]] that [[times]], I wonder which films was he [[debating]] about

The [[filmmaking]] is [[genuinely]] a typical Masala film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbled

The ease at which the kids [[hijack]] the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids [[abducted]] Dawood's family

The end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterization

RKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a bore

Music is boring

Amitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at times

Akshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hams

Aryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenes

Bhumika emerges the best of the lot

The rest are okay --------------------------------------------- Result 1665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] In the [[opening]] scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I [[could]] see. [[However]], Bette [[Davis]](Daisey Appleby),"The [[Whales]] of [[August]]",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her [[best]] [[roles]] in a [[long]] [[career]] in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her [[yacht]] with [[George]] Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral [[Staircase]]",'46. Daisey even [[proposed]] [[marriage]] to [[Johnny]] in a Ferris [[Wheel]] upside down and even [[got]] a black eye. Davis and Brent [[made]] a [[great]] [[couple]], one [[suppose]] to be very [[rich]] and the other a very [[poor]] [[reporter]]. [[Off]] [[stage]], Davis and [[Brent]] were having a [[real]] torrid love [[affair]], which is good [[reason]] why there was [[sparks]] when these two [[appeared]] in this film. If you [[liked]] Bette Davis and [[George]] Brent, this is the [[film]] for you! In the [[commencement]] scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I [[did]] see. [[Instead]], Bette [[Davies]](Daisey Appleby),"The [[Whale]] of [[Augustus]]",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her [[better]] [[duties]] in a [[lang]] [[quarry]] in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her [[sailing]] with [[Giorgi]] Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral [[Ladder]]",'46. Daisey even [[recommendation]] [[matrimony]] to [[Jonny]] in a Ferris [[Wheeled]] upside down and even [[did]] a black eye. Davis and Brent [[brought]] a [[wondrous]] [[pair]], one [[supposing]] to be very [[richest]] and the other a very [[pauper]] [[reporters]]. [[Deactivate]] [[phase]], Davis and [[Burnett]] were having a [[actual]] torrid love [[fling]], which is good [[justification]] why there was [[ignites]] when these two [[seemed]] in this film. If you [[loved]] Bette Davis and [[Georgie]] Brent, this is the [[cinema]] for you! --------------------------------------------- Result 1666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So far Nightmares and Dreamscapes has been erratic and disappointing. The first segment, directed by Brian Henson, may have offered little in the way of groundbreaking storytelling or real scares, but at least it was well-directed, suspenseful, and visually interesting, with solid acting by William Hurt and very impressive special effects for a mini-series.

However, the second story in the series was just dreadful, and not in the good way. The screenplay is bad, requiring the shallow, unlikable protagonists to act illogically in order to move the plot, and having characters ramble on endlessly for the purposes of clunky, unnecessary exposition. The acting is overdone and unconvincing, and I felt far more empathy for a cold-blooded killer in the first story than for the newlywed couple in the second. The director used a million tricks to try to make the narrative spooky, but with the amateurish acting and writing, the end result looks like a freshman-year film school project, with camera moves for their own sake, and little in the way of plot or tension.

If the rest of the series continues like this, I'll be sorely let down. I look forward to William H. Macy's installment, and hope he gets a decent director and screenwriter for his segment. So far the quality is far too inconsistent to predict either way. --------------------------------------------- Result 1667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I saw this [[show]] about 3-4 [[years]] [[ago]]. It was dam [[Funny]]! When i [[first]] [[time]] i [[saw]] it was playing on ETV([[Estonian]] [[Television]]) And i [[started]] to like it. Too [[bad]] that that show is on bad [[time]] for me. Hyde is like a cool guy who [[likes]] to sing Frank Sinatra! And he comes on stupid [[ideas]]. He [[got]] these glasses which h are brown. I like it . And there's FeZ. The group Pervert. We all know what he does when his alone..... He wants to get laid badly. He even had it with his boss in one episode.His from India. And there is Michael , The stupidest guy on whole group , probably stupidest in town and his a cop! He is so stupid that i remember follows: Hyde says: Did u called cops ? - No Michael comes in and says. Does anyone know how to turn off siren? He is a town playboy. Then comes Jackie , who is former girlfriend of Michael and then she's Hyde's girlfriend. Then is Eric Who's son of grumpy war veteran and son of Kitty the housewife. His one big pussy. But he loves Donna , his girlfriend with who they plan for they're marriage. Donna is one hot girl. Hmm what i forget? ah Hyde lives in a basement . I saw this [[display]] about 3-4 [[olds]] [[before]]. It was dam [[Amusing]]! When i [[firstly]] [[period]] i [[watched]] it was playing on ETV([[Estonia]] [[Tv]]) And i [[initiated]] to like it. Too [[negative]] that that show is on bad [[period]] for me. Hyde is like a cool guy who [[loves]] to sing Frank Sinatra! And he comes on stupid [[thinking]]. He [[get]] these glasses which h are brown. I like it . And there's FeZ. The group Pervert. We all know what he does when his alone..... He wants to get laid badly. He even had it with his boss in one episode.His from India. And there is Michael , The stupidest guy on whole group , probably stupidest in town and his a cop! He is so stupid that i remember follows: Hyde says: Did u called cops ? - No Michael comes in and says. Does anyone know how to turn off siren? He is a town playboy. Then comes Jackie , who is former girlfriend of Michael and then she's Hyde's girlfriend. Then is Eric Who's son of grumpy war veteran and son of Kitty the housewife. His one big pussy. But he loves Donna , his girlfriend with who they plan for they're marriage. Donna is one hot girl. Hmm what i forget? ah Hyde lives in a basement . --------------------------------------------- Result 1668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I'm a [[fan]] of C&C, going back to their [[records]], and [[liked]] this [[movie]], but at one point in the mid-1980's on [[cable]] [[television]] in San [[Jose]] California, it was aired with an [[alternate]] plot [[line]] that [[destroyed]] the [[entire]] point of the movie. [[All]] references to marijuana were [[replaced]] with "[[diamonds]]". The bag that "[[Red]]" [[drops]] to [[Chong]] has diamonds in it instead of marijuana, but the [[conversation]] still remains the same ("...it's worth ~$3000/lb"). There is also a subplot in which clips of aliens on a ship were added observing C&C, and talking to each other about getting the diamonds. At the end, instead of "space coke", it's something else. I'm not sure who created this version, but it was horrible, and obvious that they were attempting to make it family/child friendly. It would have been better if that network had not aired it at all. I'm a [[groupie]] of C&C, going back to their [[register]], and [[enjoyed]] this [[movies]], but at one point in the mid-1980's on [[wire]] [[tv]] in San [[Bermudez]] California, it was aired with an [[surrogate]] plot [[iine]] that [[vandalized]] the [[whole]] point of the movie. [[Every]] references to marijuana were [[superseded]] with "[[diamond]]". The bag that "[[Rojas]]" [[falls]] to [[Zheng]] has diamonds in it instead of marijuana, but the [[schmooze]] still remains the same ("...it's worth ~$3000/lb"). There is also a subplot in which clips of aliens on a ship were added observing C&C, and talking to each other about getting the diamonds. At the end, instead of "space coke", it's something else. I'm not sure who created this version, but it was horrible, and obvious that they were attempting to make it family/child friendly. It would have been better if that network had not aired it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Here are the matches . . . (adv. = [[advantage]])

The Warriors (Ultimate Warrior, Texas [[Tornado]] and Legion of Doom) [[v]] The Perfect Team ([[Mr]] Perfect, [[Ax]], Smash and Crush of Demolition): [[Ax]] is the first to [[go]] in seconds when Warrior [[splashes]] him for the pin (4-3 adv. [[Warriors]]). I knew Ax wasn't a healthy [[man]] but if he was that [[unhealthy]] why bother have him on the card? This [[would]] be his [[last]] PPV. Eventually, both Legion of Doom and [[Demolition]] [[job]] out cheaply via [[double]] disqualification (2-1 adv. Warriors). [[Perfect]] [[applies]] the [[Perfect]] Plex on Texas Tornado for the pin. He then [[attempts]] the same on Warrior but Warrior no-sells it and kicks out. Warrior [[comes]] back with a splash to [[pin]] Perfect and [[become]] the [[sole]] survivor. 5/10

The Dream Team (Dusty Rhodes, Koko B Ware and The Hart Foundation [[v]] Million Dollar Team (Ted Dibiase, Mystery Partner and Rhythm and Blues): The [[mystery]] [[partner]] is The Undertaker and, on his debut, makes an impact disposing of Koko straight away with The Tombstone(Monsoon still [[manages]] to [[say]] his correct [[height]], weight and finishing move while pretending not to know who he is) making it 4-3 to Dibiase's Team. Niedhart power-slams Honky for the pin (3-3) and his career with the WWF is over. Shortly afterwards, it is Niedhart who falls [[victim]] to Dibiase with help from Virgil (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Rhodes next after an Undertaker double axe-handle off the top rope but doesn't [[leave]] [[quietly]] attacking Brother Love. Undertaker goes after Dusty and gets counted out despite not being the [[legal]] man (2-1 adv. Dibiase's Team). [[Almost]] straight after, [[Greg]] gets [[caught]] in a cradle by Hart [[trying]] to put the figure four leg-lock on him and [[gets]] pinned. It [[comes]] down to Hart [[v]] Dibiase and after a few minutes of [[nice]] wrestling, Bret [[gets]] his body-cross [[reversed]] by Dibiase for the pin. Dibiase is the [[sole]] survivor. [[At]] [[least]] Hart is put to good [[use]]. 6/10

The Vipers (Jake 'The Snake' [[Roberts]], 'Superfly' [[Jimmy]] Snuka and The Rockers) v Visionaries (Rick 'Model' Martel, Warlord and Power and Glory): After spending some time in the ring, Marty Jannetty gets power slammed by Warlord as he comes off the top rope for the pin (4-3 adv. Visionaries). Snuka gets pinned in seconds by Martel who reverses his body cross (4-2 adv. Visionaries). Michaels gets caught in the Power Plex and pinned by Roma (4-1 adv. Visionaries). It is now Roberts against four men resembling his Survivor Series effort two years before. Despite hitting Warlord with the DDT, Roberts gets counted out chasing after Martel. The Visionaries are the first team in Survivor Series history to completely survive as one. Not much here worth watching to be honest as the psychology is rushed. 3/10

Hulkamaniacs (Hulk Hogan, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, Bigbossman and Tugboat) v Natural Disasters (Earthquake, Dino Bravo, Barbarian and Haku): One Bossman slam eliminates Haku early in the bout (4-3 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Duggan gets his 2 by 4 out after whacking Earthquake with it to get disqualified (3-3). Bravo commits career suicide shortly afterwards by allowing Hogan to cradle him for the pin (3-2 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Earthquake manages to overcome Bossman with two elbow drops for the pin shortly afterwards (2-2). Hogan gets beat down and FINALLY Tugboat gets a tag (who knew he was there at this point?), he wrestles for about 30 seconds before getting counted out with Earthquake. Only Hogan and Barbarian left. Barbarian puts in some nice offence but inevitably gets caught in the big boot and leg drop for the pin. Hogan is the sole survivor. 4/10

The Alliance (Nikolai Volkoff, Tito Santana and Bushwhackers) v Mercenaries (Sgt Slaughter, Boris Zhukov and Orient Express): All of the Mercanaries wore camouflage face paint. Lightning quick pins here with Santana pinning Zhukov in his last PPV in seconds (4-3 adv. Alliance). There wasn't even a Bolshevik showdown. Bushwhackers hit Sato with The Battering Ram even though Tanaka was the legal man (4-2 adv. Alliance) and [[would]] be his last appearance on WWF PPV as The Orient Express get repackaged. Tanaka follows Sato when Santana stuns him with the flying forearm (4-1 adv. Alliance). [[Despite]] Slaughter getting in the ring against four [[men]], he eliminates Volkoff (who's career is over after this), Butch and Luke in that order with relative ease. Finally, Santana beats Slaughter by disqualification when General Adnan hits him with Iraqi flag. At last some interesting booking even though the match was awful. Santana takes the upset victory as the sole survivor and becomes his last finest hour. 3/10

The egg hatches and it's Hector Guerrerro in a silly outfit. He dances with Gene Okerlund and gets booed by the crowd while Piper and Monsoon pretend they are enjoying it.

Match of Survival: Ultimate Warrior, Hulk Hogan and Tito Santana v Warlord, Power and Glory, Rick 'Model' Martel and 'Million Dollar Man Ted Dibiase: Just merely another catalogue of eliminations as Santana pins Warlord in seconds with flying forearm at least avenging his previous Summerslam defeat (4-3 adv. Dibiase's team). Dibiase stun guns Santana afterwards for the pin (4-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan kicks out of The Power Plex and proceeds to pin Roma after a clothesline, effectively killing off Power and Glory's push (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan eliminates Martel by count-out and Dibiase with the leg drop for the pin (2-1 adv. Hogan's team). Hogan finally allows Warrior into the match who quickly disposes of former nemesis Hercules after a splash. A very predictable ending to the point of nauseous. 2/10

Overall, too many matches and too little time obviously had a detrimental effect as the wrestlers were almost waiting on a conveyor belt to be pinned. Most of the heels were decimated by Warrior and Hogan which is a poor way to handle a great roster of wrestlers. Here are the matches . . . (adv. = [[advantages]])

The Warriors (Ultimate Warrior, Texas [[Typhoon]] and Legion of Doom) [[vs]] The Perfect Team ([[Mister]] Perfect, [[Machete]], Smash and Crush of Demolition): [[Hatchet]] is the first to [[going]] in seconds when Warrior [[splashed]] him for the pin (4-3 adv. [[Combatants]]). I knew Ax wasn't a healthy [[guy]] but if he was that [[bad]] why bother have him on the card? This [[could]] be his [[latter]] PPV. Eventually, both Legion of Doom and [[Razing]] [[employment]] out cheaply via [[dual]] disqualification (2-1 adv. Warriors). [[Flawless]] [[applying]] the [[Flawless]] Plex on Texas Tornado for the pin. He then [[attempted]] the same on Warrior but Warrior no-sells it and kicks out. Warrior [[happens]] back with a splash to [[pinned]] Perfect and [[gotten]] the [[exclusive]] survivor. 5/10

The Dream Team (Dusty Rhodes, Koko B Ware and The Hart Foundation [[vs]] Million Dollar Team (Ted Dibiase, Mystery Partner and Rhythm and Blues): The [[puzzle]] [[partners]] is The Undertaker and, on his debut, makes an impact disposing of Koko straight away with The Tombstone(Monsoon still [[administered]] to [[says]] his correct [[pinnacle]], weight and finishing move while pretending not to know who he is) making it 4-3 to Dibiase's Team. Niedhart power-slams Honky for the pin (3-3) and his career with the WWF is over. Shortly afterwards, it is Niedhart who falls [[victims]] to Dibiase with help from Virgil (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Rhodes next after an Undertaker double axe-handle off the top rope but doesn't [[leaving]] [[discretely]] attacking Brother Love. Undertaker goes after Dusty and gets counted out despite not being the [[judiciary]] man (2-1 adv. Dibiase's Team). [[Hardly]] straight after, [[Gregg]] gets [[apprehended]] in a cradle by Hart [[attempting]] to put the figure four leg-lock on him and [[got]] pinned. It [[arrives]] down to Hart [[vs]] Dibiase and after a few minutes of [[pleasurable]] wrestling, Bret [[got]] his body-cross [[flipped]] by Dibiase for the pin. Dibiase is the [[unique]] survivor. [[In]] [[minus]] Hart is put to good [[usage]]. 6/10

The Vipers (Jake 'The Snake' [[Stevens]], 'Superfly' [[Jimmie]] Snuka and The Rockers) v Visionaries (Rick 'Model' Martel, Warlord and Power and Glory): After spending some time in the ring, Marty Jannetty gets power slammed by Warlord as he comes off the top rope for the pin (4-3 adv. Visionaries). Snuka gets pinned in seconds by Martel who reverses his body cross (4-2 adv. Visionaries). Michaels gets caught in the Power Plex and pinned by Roma (4-1 adv. Visionaries). It is now Roberts against four men resembling his Survivor Series effort two years before. Despite hitting Warlord with the DDT, Roberts gets counted out chasing after Martel. The Visionaries are the first team in Survivor Series history to completely survive as one. Not much here worth watching to be honest as the psychology is rushed. 3/10

Hulkamaniacs (Hulk Hogan, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, Bigbossman and Tugboat) v Natural Disasters (Earthquake, Dino Bravo, Barbarian and Haku): One Bossman slam eliminates Haku early in the bout (4-3 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Duggan gets his 2 by 4 out after whacking Earthquake with it to get disqualified (3-3). Bravo commits career suicide shortly afterwards by allowing Hogan to cradle him for the pin (3-2 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Earthquake manages to overcome Bossman with two elbow drops for the pin shortly afterwards (2-2). Hogan gets beat down and FINALLY Tugboat gets a tag (who knew he was there at this point?), he wrestles for about 30 seconds before getting counted out with Earthquake. Only Hogan and Barbarian left. Barbarian puts in some nice offence but inevitably gets caught in the big boot and leg drop for the pin. Hogan is the sole survivor. 4/10

The Alliance (Nikolai Volkoff, Tito Santana and Bushwhackers) v Mercenaries (Sgt Slaughter, Boris Zhukov and Orient Express): All of the Mercanaries wore camouflage face paint. Lightning quick pins here with Santana pinning Zhukov in his last PPV in seconds (4-3 adv. Alliance). There wasn't even a Bolshevik showdown. Bushwhackers hit Sato with The Battering Ram even though Tanaka was the legal man (4-2 adv. Alliance) and [[could]] be his last appearance on WWF PPV as The Orient Express get repackaged. Tanaka follows Sato when Santana stuns him with the flying forearm (4-1 adv. Alliance). [[Although]] Slaughter getting in the ring against four [[hombre]], he eliminates Volkoff (who's career is over after this), Butch and Luke in that order with relative ease. Finally, Santana beats Slaughter by disqualification when General Adnan hits him with Iraqi flag. At last some interesting booking even though the match was awful. Santana takes the upset victory as the sole survivor and becomes his last finest hour. 3/10

The egg hatches and it's Hector Guerrerro in a silly outfit. He dances with Gene Okerlund and gets booed by the crowd while Piper and Monsoon pretend they are enjoying it.

Match of Survival: Ultimate Warrior, Hulk Hogan and Tito Santana v Warlord, Power and Glory, Rick 'Model' Martel and 'Million Dollar Man Ted Dibiase: Just merely another catalogue of eliminations as Santana pins Warlord in seconds with flying forearm at least avenging his previous Summerslam defeat (4-3 adv. Dibiase's team). Dibiase stun guns Santana afterwards for the pin (4-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan kicks out of The Power Plex and proceeds to pin Roma after a clothesline, effectively killing off Power and Glory's push (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan eliminates Martel by count-out and Dibiase with the leg drop for the pin (2-1 adv. Hogan's team). Hogan finally allows Warrior into the match who quickly disposes of former nemesis Hercules after a splash. A very predictable ending to the point of nauseous. 2/10

Overall, too many matches and too little time obviously had a detrimental effect as the wrestlers were almost waiting on a conveyor belt to be pinned. Most of the heels were decimated by Warrior and Hogan which is a poor way to handle a great roster of wrestlers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] My wife and I [[found]] this [[film]] to be [[highly]] unsatisfying. While the plot keeps you interested and busy wondering just what is going on, when you leave the theater, there are just too [[many]] loose ends that make no [[sense]] at all. (SPOILERS AHEAD) Christopher Plummer, [[enormously]] wealthy head of a NY bank has a terrible hidden secret. Profiting from WW [[II]] deals with the Nazis and hiding loot stolen from Jews, he keeps the evidence (including diamonds and documents with the Nazi swastika) in a safety deposit box in his bank. Why? If he wants this never to be revealed, why did he not burn and destroy the documents years ago? And the diamonds? Obviously, he does not need them - why keep them rather than dispose of them? How did the bank robbers find out his secret? How did they know to zero in on this very safety deposit box #232? Ace detective Denzel Washington also discovers bank records show SD Boxes No's 231 and 233, but no #232. Curious. He [[meticulously]] found [[time]] somehow to do an [[exhausting]] search of bank records to [[unearth]] this one [[curious]] [[fact]]. All the while dealing with a red hot [[hostage]] situation and [[bank]] [[robbers]] [[threatening]] to [[start]] [[executing]] them momentarily. Wow! Talk about [[super]] powers for a detective.

The bank [[robbers]] [[leave]] behind [[millions]] of [[dollars]] in loose currency in the vault they have [[opened]]. They take only the contents of SD Box #232, [[ostensibly]] for the [[purpose]] of blackmailing the [[bank]] [[president]]. This defies any [[rational]] attempt at a logical explanation for what the film depicts as a criminal mastermind, or for his [[henchmen]] with [[lesser]] brains.

[[Jodie]] [[Foster]], using her [[political]] [[connections]] with the Mayor of NYC, gains permission to enter the bank which is under the control of the bank robbers while holding many hostages. She offers the chief bank robber a deal to buy back the documents he now has in hand, but he ain't interested. So what's his point (if any?).

My wife was offended by the arrogance of all the players, Christopher Plummer (Bank President), [[Denzel]] Washington (ace detective), and Jodie Foster, crack trouble shooter for high-powered problems.

The last Jodie Foster [[movie]] I saw, "Flight [[Plan]]", was also riddled with holes that made no [[sense]] at all. I thought I liked Jodie Foster, but I will probably avoid her future films.

Now my problem is that I can rarely persuade my wife to go to the movies. I cannot disagree with her on this one ... "A WASTE OF [[MONEY]], AND A WASTE OF TIME." Be forewarned. A well crafted film, fine [[actors]], lousy [[script]] writing. My wife and I [[unearthed]] this [[filmmaking]] to be [[extraordinarily]] unsatisfying. While the plot keeps you interested and busy wondering just what is going on, when you leave the theater, there are just too [[myriad]] loose ends that make no [[sensing]] at all. (SPOILERS AHEAD) Christopher Plummer, [[terribly]] wealthy head of a NY bank has a terrible hidden secret. Profiting from WW [[SECONDLY]] deals with the Nazis and hiding loot stolen from Jews, he keeps the evidence (including diamonds and documents with the Nazi swastika) in a safety deposit box in his bank. Why? If he wants this never to be revealed, why did he not burn and destroy the documents years ago? And the diamonds? Obviously, he does not need them - why keep them rather than dispose of them? How did the bank robbers find out his secret? How did they know to zero in on this very safety deposit box #232? Ace detective Denzel Washington also discovers bank records show SD Boxes No's 231 and 233, but no #232. Curious. He [[painstakingly]] found [[moment]] somehow to do an [[tiring]] search of bank records to [[find]] this one [[unusual]] [[facto]]. All the while dealing with a red hot [[hostages]] situation and [[banco]] [[bandits]] [[menace]] to [[induction]] [[execute]] them momentarily. Wow! Talk about [[marvellous]] powers for a detective.

The bank [[bandits]] [[letting]] behind [[millionth]] of [[bucks]] in loose currency in the vault they have [[inaugurated]]. They take only the contents of SD Box #232, [[visibly]] for the [[intending]] of blackmailing the [[banco]] [[chair]]. This defies any [[logical]] attempt at a logical explanation for what the film depicts as a criminal mastermind, or for his [[henchman]] with [[lowest]] brains.

[[Jodi]] [[Encourages]], using her [[politician]] [[connector]] with the Mayor of NYC, gains permission to enter the bank which is under the control of the bank robbers while holding many hostages. She offers the chief bank robber a deal to buy back the documents he now has in hand, but he ain't interested. So what's his point (if any?).

My wife was offended by the arrogance of all the players, Christopher Plummer (Bank President), [[Denzil]] Washington (ace detective), and Jodie Foster, crack trouble shooter for high-powered problems.

The last Jodie Foster [[kino]] I saw, "Flight [[Systems]]", was also riddled with holes that made no [[sensing]] at all. I thought I liked Jodie Foster, but I will probably avoid her future films.

Now my problem is that I can rarely persuade my wife to go to the movies. I cannot disagree with her on this one ... "A WASTE OF [[CASH]], AND A WASTE OF TIME." Be forewarned. A well crafted film, fine [[players]], lousy [[hyphen]] writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I learned of Sir Alec Guinness' death, this was the first of his many films I thought of re-seeing. What a wonderful droll commentary the film provides even after all these years. And Guinness helps to weave the charm into every frame. His eyes and face are as luminous as that white suit he wears. Both he and the film have to be considered lifetime favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1672 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Just]] PPV'd this. I don't want to waste too much [[time]] on this as most of the posters here put it better than I ever [[could]], but I did want to [[say]] a few [[things]].

I didn't know which was funnier: Redgrave chasing tiny [[moths]] and tripping over her [[nurse]]; Close wailing that her "precious" boy (whom she and the Mr. had decided was a drunken loser) has been turned into roadkill; that the tone-deaf Ann schmoozed with Peggy Lee; or the [[horrid]] CGI of [[Crypt]] [[Keeper]] Annie [[gazing]] at her [[younger]] self!

I never [[bought]] Danes as the younger Redgrave. I didn't [[buy]] Richardson and Collette as [[sisters]], [[either]]. If Meryl Streep's [[daughter]] [[wants]] to be an actress, she [[better]] [[get]] [[Mama]] to give her a few lessons! I had zero [[idea]] why any [[girl]] (or [[Buddy]]) [[would]] make [[fools]] of themselves over vapid stud du jour Harris! Ann's [[daughters]] are as whiny and [[thoughtless]] as she, [[Luc]] is a [[retarded]] slacker on crack, and I didn't give a rot about any of them! Evening gives Chick Flicks a [[bad]] [[name]]! [[Only]] PPV'd this. I don't want to waste too much [[moment]] on this as most of the posters here put it better than I ever [[would]], but I did want to [[told]] a few [[aspects]].

I didn't know which was funnier: Redgrave chasing tiny [[moth]] and tripping over her [[medic]]; Close wailing that her "precious" boy (whom she and the Mr. had decided was a drunken loser) has been turned into roadkill; that the tone-deaf Ann schmoozed with Peggy Lee; or the [[gruesome]] CGI of [[Vault]] [[Guardian]] Annie [[gazes]] at her [[youngest]] self!

I never [[procured]] Danes as the younger Redgrave. I didn't [[acquiring]] Richardson and Collette as [[siblings]], [[neither]]. If Meryl Streep's [[girls]] [[wanted]] to be an actress, she [[optimum]] [[obtain]] [[Mommy]] to give her a few lessons! I had zero [[ideals]] why any [[women]] (or [[Dude]]) [[could]] make [[pigeons]] of themselves over vapid stud du jour Harris! Ann's [[daughter]] are as whiny and [[mindless]] as she, [[Locke]] is a [[nutcase]] slacker on crack, and I didn't give a rot about any of them! Evening gives Chick Flicks a [[unfavourable]] [[behalf]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1673 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] i [[thought]] it was [[pretty]] interesting my [[social]] [[studies]]/[[language]] arts [[teacher]] was the [[police]] chief [[guy]] that was holding the microphone on the water barrel part =D i was excited my teacher is in some commercials he was in a gas/coffee/phone/play station commercial its nice seeing him on TV he was also on everybody hates Chris except he always get the small part la la why do we have to right 10 lines [[thats]] so stupid -_- i [[think]] I'm done never mind I'm still not done what is this a joke? why do we have to go all the way to line ten... really what's the point of it??!! i will just right random words for now -_- maple story is [[fun]] i love my friends i [[brainchild]] it was [[quite]] interesting my [[societal]] [[researches]]/[[linguistics]] arts [[maestro]] was the [[policing]] chief [[blokes]] that was holding the microphone on the water barrel part =D i was excited my teacher is in some commercials he was in a gas/coffee/phone/play station commercial its nice seeing him on TV he was also on everybody hates Chris except he always get the small part la la why do we have to right 10 lines [[arent]] so stupid -_- i [[thought]] I'm done never mind I'm still not done what is this a joke? why do we have to go all the way to line ten... really what's the point of it??!! i will just right random words for now -_- maple story is [[funny]] i love my friends --------------------------------------------- Result 1674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[gave]] it a 10, [[since]] [[everyone]] else [[seemed]] to like it and it would have been churlish not to. The reason I'm troubling you is to [[add]] a personal [[observation]] on Castle's work.

I've [[seen]] "[[Homicidal]]" and "The Tingler" (the [[version]] with the [[clever]] [[colour]] [[sequence]] where everything except the blood is in black and white) a few [[times]] and "The [[House]] On Haunted [[Hill]]" [[many]] [[times]].

Even I am not [[old]] [[enough]] to have [[seen]] them when [[Castle]] was up to his showman tricks, [[thus]] I can [[appreciate]] them for their own [[merit]]. And while most pass him off as second-rate, schlocky, hammy, etc., I [[believe]] they do him a disservice.

The [[end]] sequence of "[[Homicidal]]" is [[GENUINELY]] [[shocking]] and [[works]] [[today]] - and the premise of "The Tingler" while silly, was highly original.

But "The House On Haunted [[Hill]]" was a [[TRIUMPH]]. Having used that Frank Lloyd Wright [[house]] as its exterior, the [[great]] [[Vincent]] [[Price]] and a solid cast, plus a good [[score]] and production values - when I first saw it at a packed late-night showing in the [[late]] Sixties, it produced an audience [[reaction]] I'd not [[seen]] before and have not [[seen]] [[since]].

It was the bit where the [[heroine]] is [[alone]] in the basement (if you've not [[seen]] the [[film]], [[stop]] reading NOW) and we are waiting to hear the [[hero]] on the other side of the wall.

With [[NO]] telegraphing of what is coming, the camera slowly pulls back, forcing the [[AUDIENCE]] to [[switch]] their [[gaze]] to... I'm [[saying]] no more (my "[[spoiler]]" declaration above only [[covers]] THIS movie).

The point is, I [[believe]] this ploy was [[DELIBERATE]] - not [[accidental]] - and when it happened, the WHOLE [[AUDIENCE]] SCREAMED (including most of the men!) It took the audience about TEN MINUTES to calm down.

Now THAT is [[superior]] film-making. A flamboyant showman he might have been, but "House" and the other two films I've mentioned were GOOD MOVIES. Castle may not have been a Hitchcock, but he was no Ed Wood, either.

It's easy to concentrate on someone's quirks and forget to examine their TALENT. So I hope this documentary acknowledged that. I look forward to seeing it. I [[provided]] it a 10, [[because]] [[everybody]] else [[sounded]] to like it and it would have been churlish not to. The reason I'm troubling you is to [[inserting]] a personal [[sighting]] on Castle's work.

I've [[watched]] "[[Murderous]]" and "The Tingler" (the [[stepping]] with the [[smarter]] [[coloring]] [[sequences]] where everything except the blood is in black and white) a few [[period]] and "The [[Residential]] On Haunted [[Shan]]" [[several]] [[period]].

Even I am not [[ancient]] [[adequately]] to have [[watched]] them when [[Castillo]] was up to his showman tricks, [[then]] I can [[thankful]] them for their own [[deserve]]. And while most pass him off as second-rate, schlocky, hammy, etc., I [[reckon]] they do him a disservice.

The [[ends]] sequence of "[[Murderer]]" is [[ACTUALLY]] [[frightening]] and [[work]] [[thursday]] - and the premise of "The Tingler" while silly, was highly original.

But "The House On Haunted [[Hillside]]" was a [[VICTORY]]. Having used that Frank Lloyd Wright [[home]] as its exterior, the [[grand]] [[Vicente]] [[Costs]] and a solid cast, plus a good [[scoring]] and production values - when I first saw it at a packed late-night showing in the [[tardy]] Sixties, it produced an audience [[reply]] I'd not [[noticed]] before and have not [[noticed]] [[because]].

It was the bit where the [[heroin]] is [[mere]] in the basement (if you've not [[watched]] the [[cinematography]], [[stopping]] reading NOW) and we are waiting to hear the [[heroin]] on the other side of the wall.

With [[NOS]] telegraphing of what is coming, the camera slowly pulls back, forcing the [[SPECTATORS]] to [[switches]] their [[look]] to... I'm [[arguing]] no more (my "[[baffle]]" declaration above only [[cover]] THIS movie).

The point is, I [[reckon]] this ploy was [[DELIBERATELY]] - not [[fortuitous]] - and when it happened, the WHOLE [[VIEWERS]] SCREAMED (including most of the men!) It took the audience about TEN MINUTES to calm down.

Now THAT is [[upper]] film-making. A flamboyant showman he might have been, but "House" and the other two films I've mentioned were GOOD MOVIES. Castle may not have been a Hitchcock, but he was no Ed Wood, either.

It's easy to concentrate on someone's quirks and forget to examine their TALENT. So I hope this documentary acknowledged that. I look forward to seeing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] 96 [[minutes]] of this is [[cruel]]..and I [[love]] the old Munster's. Yes, the plot is thing; yes the lines are trite; but whoever was at the [[helm]] of this was not a [[fan]]. There is so much 'intrigue' (and I use that word with great [[pause]]) that I wonder if it's an [[old]] Starsky & Hutch episode. I [[lost]] count of the number of times I noticed that [[makeup]] had missed a spot near the collar. [[Refusing]] to acknowledge that any [[time]] had passed since the mid-60's ([[ludicrous]]) the producers [[simply]] replace Marilyn & Eddie with [[younger]] [[actors]]. Why not let them [[grow]] and age? The [[addition]] of an Addam's [[Family]] style [[reunion]] does not [[add]] to the [[flavor]] of the Halloween Party.

Grandpa & Herman fly to Transylvania and back in a few [[hours]] ([[preposterous]].) [[Sid]] Ceaser is the most, [[yes]] the most unbelievable character (I am including the [[bad]] robots) since he babbles an unwild [[combination]] of gibberish & yiddish but claims to be an [[ancient]] [[Arabic]] ruler. And yes, it looks like the [[laugh]] [[track]] is [[missing]]. [[In]] fact, there are [[several]] spots where there is [[dead]] [[air]], as if the [[laugh]] [[track]] was to be inserted [[later]]. The actors [[seem]] to [[wait]] on the [[faux]] [[audience]]. It's not laughable; it's sad. Oh, and the best part! Yvonne DeCarlo has a line that just goes to show you how out of [[touch]] the writers and [[producers]] were. Marilyn [[says]] [[something]] like: "Where [[could]] Uncle Herman and Grandpa be? They could have been in an [[accident]]. They could have been hit by a car...or a train!" Lily says responds with something like: "You're Uncle [[Herman]] will be here if he has to drag himself off the train [[track]]." What's amazing about this is: Yvonne DeCarlo's [[husband]] was a [[stuntman]] in the early 60's and lost a leg and was [[nearly]] [[killed]] in a train stunt. He never [[recovered]] and this financially [[devastated]] her [[family]]. ([[check]] out Biography's [[fantastic]] [[review]] of her [[life]] and career) This line [[could]] have been [[easily]] [[changed]] to be more [[sensitive]] to her.

[[If]] you are a [[real]] [[fan]] of the Munster's then you'll have to RENT this [[mess]]. It illustrates how some [[things]] are [[better]] [[left]] [[alone]]. Even with the (nearly) original [[cast]], this is almost as bad as the attempted remake of the show a few years ago. 96 [[mins]] of this is [[ferocious]]..and I [[adores]] the old Munster's. Yes, the plot is thing; yes the lines are trite; but whoever was at the [[tiller]] of this was not a [[breather]]. There is so much 'intrigue' (and I use that word with great [[pauses]]) that I wonder if it's an [[longtime]] Starsky & Hutch episode. I [[outof]] count of the number of times I noticed that [[composition]] had missed a spot near the collar. [[Dismissing]] to acknowledge that any [[times]] had passed since the mid-60's ([[stupid]]) the producers [[exclusively]] replace Marilyn & Eddie with [[youngest]] [[players]]. Why not let them [[heightened]] and age? The [[extra]] of an Addam's [[Families]] style [[reunification]] does not [[inserting]] to the [[smell]] of the Halloween Party.

Grandpa & Herman fly to Transylvania and back in a few [[hour]] ([[farcical]].) [[Sidney]] Ceaser is the most, [[yup]] the most unbelievable character (I am including the [[wicked]] robots) since he babbles an unwild [[conjunction]] of gibberish & yiddish but claims to be an [[old]] [[Arab]] ruler. And yes, it looks like the [[laughed]] [[tracks]] is [[disappeared]]. [[Among]] fact, there are [[dissimilar]] spots where there is [[died]] [[airplane]], as if the [[laughter]] [[tracks]] was to be inserted [[then]]. The actors [[appears]] to [[waiting]] on the [[fictitious]] [[viewers]]. It's not laughable; it's sad. Oh, and the best part! Yvonne DeCarlo has a line that just goes to show you how out of [[toque]] the writers and [[maker]] were. Marilyn [[say]] [[somethin]] like: "Where [[wo]] Uncle Herman and Grandpa be? They could have been in an [[misadventure]]. They could have been hit by a car...or a train!" Lily says responds with something like: "You're Uncle [[Hermann]] will be here if he has to drag himself off the train [[rails]]." What's amazing about this is: Yvonne DeCarlo's [[hubby]] was a [[lining]] in the early 60's and lost a leg and was [[about]] [[assassinated]] in a train stunt. He never [[salvaged]] and this financially [[ravaged]] her [[families]]. ([[inspected]] out Biography's [[sumptuous]] [[reviewing]] of her [[lifetime]] and career) This line [[wo]] have been [[comfortably]] [[modify]] to be more [[delicate]] to her.

[[Though]] you are a [[veritable]] [[admirer]] of the Munster's then you'll have to RENT this [[chaos]]. It illustrates how some [[aspects]] are [[best]] [[gauche]] [[lonely]]. Even with the (nearly) original [[casting]], this is almost as bad as the attempted remake of the show a few years ago. --------------------------------------------- Result 1676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[In]] [[order]] to [[hold]] the public's [[attention]] for three hours, we were [[treated]] not so much to a family's romp through four generations and 120 [[years]] of Hungarian [[history]], as to [[sexual]] [[liaisons]] with a [[sister]], a sister-in-law and other adulteries. Oh yes, there was [[also]] a [[totally]] [[gratuitous]] [[rape]]. Having [[said]] all this, the [[first]] story of the [[relationship]] among the [[children]] of the patriarch was fresh and [[sensual]] - [[thanks]] to Jennifer Ehle. [[Across]] [[decree]] to [[holds]] the public's [[beware]] for three hours, we were [[processed]] not so much to a family's romp through four generations and 120 [[aged]] of Hungarian [[histories]], as to [[nationality]] [[ties]] with a [[sisters]], a sister-in-law and other adulteries. Oh yes, there was [[apart]] a [[fully]] [[unprovoked]] [[rapes]]. Having [[stated]] all this, the [[fiirst]] story of the [[ties]] among the [[kiddies]] of the patriarch was fresh and [[sensuous]] - [[gratitude]] to Jennifer Ehle. --------------------------------------------- Result 1677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I've seen all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the [[worst]] one [[yet]]. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The [[directors]] and producers should have named it any thing other than "Love's [[Abiding]] Joy." The only thing about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the characters ([[Willie]], Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and Cookie). The names/ages/[[genders]] of the children are wrong. The entire story line is no where in the book.

I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to [[produce]] a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The [[music]] is too [[loud]]. The [[actors]] are not convincing - they [[lack]] [[emotions]].

If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last [[movie]] from this series, but I doubt it. [[If]] there are more [[movies]] made, I wish [[Michael]] Landon, Jr and others would stick [[closer]] to the original plot and story lines. The [[books]] are [[excellent]] and, if [[closely]] followed, [[would]] make [[excellent]] [[movies]]! I've seen all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the [[gravest]] one [[however]]. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The [[managers]] and producers should have named it any thing other than "Love's [[Steadfast]] Joy." The only thing about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the characters ([[Willy]], Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and Cookie). The names/ages/[[gender]] of the children are wrong. The entire story line is no where in the book.

I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to [[generating]] a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The [[musician]] is too [[vocal]]. The [[protagonists]] are not convincing - they [[shortages]] [[feelings]].

If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last [[filmmaking]] from this series, but I doubt it. [[Unless]] there are more [[theater]] made, I wish [[Michel]] Landon, Jr and others would stick [[deeper]] to the original plot and story lines. The [[livres]] are [[sumptuous]] and, if [[inextricably]] followed, [[ought]] make [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] how [[many]] [[minutes]] does it [[take]] to paint a [[poem]]? in this film much too [[long]].

it tells the [[story]] about the impact of a first [[love]] between two schoolboys.

the [[boys]] can't withhold touching each other and making [[love]]. after a while one gets distracted by a brief encounter with a [[sensual]] [[guy]] in the [[disco]] and that [[raises]] doubt: exploration, [[fantasy]], [[longing]], [[lust]] and [[feelings]] of loosing grip on your [[love]] are [[themes]] that are all [[extensively]] painted with music, close-ups and [[silent]] scenes like [[telling]] a poem. but it really [[takes]] too long, annoying long, shame, the effort was promising how [[various]] [[mins]] does it [[taking]] to paint a [[poetry]]? in this film much too [[longue]].

it tells the [[stories]] about the impact of a first [[likes]] between two schoolboys.

the [[guys]] can't withhold touching each other and making [[iike]]. after a while one gets distracted by a brief encounter with a [[sensuous]] [[buddy]] in the [[nightclub]] and that [[evokes]] doubt: exploration, [[fantasia]], [[yearning]], [[craving]] and [[sentiments]] of loosing grip on your [[iove]] are [[topic]] that are all [[amply]] painted with music, close-ups and [[quiet]] scenes like [[saying]] a poem. but it really [[pick]] too long, annoying long, shame, the effort was promising --------------------------------------------- Result 1679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ida Lupino was one of the few women to break through the directorial glass ceiling in Hollywood under the studio system. Not surprisingly, she also tackled proto-feminist themes that, when touched at all, were approached in so gingerly a manner that it was seldom quite clear what was being talked about. In Outrage, she treats rape and its aftermath, and though throughout the short movie it's referred to as `criminal assault,' she leaves, for once, no doubt about what happened.

Mala Powers (in her official debut) plays a secretary-bookkeeper at a big industrial plant; she lives with her parents but is engaged to a swell guy (Robert Clarke), who just got a raise and now makes $90 a week. Leaving the plant after working late one night, she finds herself being stalked. In the ensuing scene – the best in the movie – she tries to escape her pursuer in a forbidding maze of buildings and alleys but fails.

When she returns home, disheveled and in shock, the police can't get much out of her; she claims she never saw her attacker (who manned a snack truck outside the factory). Trying to pretend that nothing happened, she returns to her job but falls apart, thinking that everybody is staring at her, judging her. She goes into a fugue state, running away to Los Angeles on a bus but stumbling off at a rest stop.

Waking up in a strange ranch house, she learns that she's been rescued by Tod Andrews, a young minister in a California agricultural town. She lies about her identity and takes a job packing oranges. The two fall vaguely in love, but it's clear to Andrews that Powers is keeping dire secrets. When, at a company picnic, she seizes a wrench and cracks the skull of Jerry Paris, who was trying to steal a kiss, the truth about her past comes out....

It was a courageous movie to come out in 1950, and that may explain and excuse some of its shortcomings. Lupino never recaptures the verve of the early assault scene, and the movie wanders off into the bucolic and sentimental, ending up talky and didactic. Yes, Lupino had important information to impart, but she didn't trust the narrative to speak for itself. Her cast, pleasant but bland and generic, weren't much help, either, reverting to melodramatic postures or homespun reassurance. But Outrage was a breakthrough, blazing a trail for later discourse on what the crime of rape really is, and what it really means to its victims. --------------------------------------------- Result 1680 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Short synopsis

This film opens with soldiers being released from the [[company]] of men. One of them pursues another with a weird [[scheme]] the other [[repeatedly]] [[refuses]]. [[Later]] they both get [[trapped]] in an office building in which they want to [[crack]] a safe during the Christmas holidays. Hostility [[turns]] into [[playful]] banter and then into a desperate [[fight]] for survival (during the bantering they lose all drinkable liquids, so it is really [[serious]]). With exposed, well built and well oiled torsos they ram a [[hole]] into a wall and [[finally]] manage to [[escape]] – only to find out that they have been betrayed and set up by women. One gets caught, the other remains free and is not given away by his companion. A last [[encounter]], a last light for a [[cigarette]], [[adieu]] l'ami, farewell, friend.

I found it hard not to [[see]] closet [[homosexuals]] in the two main characters, played by classical he-man superstars Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. They are obviously attracted to each other, their treatment of [[women]] is abominable and marked by contempt throughout. The whole story seems to have a strong symbolic undertow, a little like Deliverance. It is also very stylish. The safe the two men want to crack is in a – for the time – ultra modern [[glass]] and aluminum tower. It is the seat of a publicity firm, so there are many fancy posters and wall [[coverings]] around. The wardrobe is [[also]] very good. The ultra [[stylish]] Citroen DS ([[maybe]] the most modern and elegant car of all times) features [[large]] in this movie – perhaps a subtle kind of product placement.

I can [[recommend]] this movie for the actor's performances alone. Delon and Bronson are really sharing the top billing, in a [[manner]] that struck me as very fair and sporting. Both do a considerable amount of acrobatics. I have never seen Bronson better than here, he [[really]] acts - and speaks French throughout, with a heavy accent buy very passably indeed. And it is certainly the man himself we hear. (So the French language version is [[highly]] [[recommended]]). The police inspector who pursues the two is played by on of my favorite Franch character actors, Bernard Fresson who was Gene Hackman's partner in French Connection II. He is the best brainy police inspector I know. [[Also]] very good is former child actress Brigitte Fossey as the young ingénue who, as it turns out, is not so Innocent as it first seems.

Anyone who expects the „old in-an-out" of classical heist movies might be disappointed with this film. For those with a little patience this will be a rewarding experience, full of novel and original ideas and directorial quirks, although it my be a little too brutal and sadistic for its own sake. Short synopsis

This film opens with soldiers being released from the [[corporation]] of men. One of them pursues another with a weird [[systems]] the other [[systematically]] [[refuse]]. [[Afterwards]] they both get [[ambushed]] in an office building in which they want to [[slit]] a safe during the Christmas holidays. Hostility [[revolves]] into [[mischievous]] banter and then into a desperate [[struggling]] for survival (during the bantering they lose all drinkable liquids, so it is really [[gravest]]). With exposed, well built and well oiled torsos they ram a [[hellhole]] into a wall and [[eventually]] manage to [[flee]] – only to find out that they have been betrayed and set up by women. One gets caught, the other remains free and is not given away by his companion. A last [[face]], a last light for a [[smoking]], [[ciao]] l'ami, farewell, friend.

I found it hard not to [[consults]] closet [[gay]] in the two main characters, played by classical he-man superstars Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. They are obviously attracted to each other, their treatment of [[female]] is abominable and marked by contempt throughout. The whole story seems to have a strong symbolic undertow, a little like Deliverance. It is also very stylish. The safe the two men want to crack is in a – for the time – ultra modern [[luna]] and aluminum tower. It is the seat of a publicity firm, so there are many fancy posters and wall [[cover]] around. The wardrobe is [[apart]] very good. The ultra [[sleek]] Citroen DS ([[presumably]] the most modern and elegant car of all times) features [[sizable]] in this movie – perhaps a subtle kind of product placement.

I can [[recommendations]] this movie for the actor's performances alone. Delon and Bronson are really sharing the top billing, in a [[forma]] that struck me as very fair and sporting. Both do a considerable amount of acrobatics. I have never seen Bronson better than here, he [[truthfully]] acts - and speaks French throughout, with a heavy accent buy very passably indeed. And it is certainly the man himself we hear. (So the French language version is [[heavily]] [[suggested]]). The police inspector who pursues the two is played by on of my favorite Franch character actors, Bernard Fresson who was Gene Hackman's partner in French Connection II. He is the best brainy police inspector I know. [[Further]] very good is former child actress Brigitte Fossey as the young ingénue who, as it turns out, is not so Innocent as it first seems.

Anyone who expects the „old in-an-out" of classical heist movies might be disappointed with this film. For those with a little patience this will be a rewarding experience, full of novel and original ideas and directorial quirks, although it my be a little too brutal and sadistic for its own sake. --------------------------------------------- Result 1681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Years have gone by since [[Don]] Wilson used his martial arts [[expertise]] to [[take]] down a robot who was [[programmed]] to destroy him, he's [[also]] married to the blonde [[reporter]] (Stacie [[Foster]]) who [[led]] the [[rebellion]] in the first [[film]], now a [[new]] conspiracy is in the [[works]], one that involves look-alike droids who frame our two [[heroes]], and a corporation [[looking]] to rule the world (There is no plot to back any of this up) and Cyber [[Tracker]] 2 [[becomes]] a virtual [[replay]] of the first [[movie]]. I admit that I have [[bought]] [[DVDs]] from the [[bargain]] [[bin]] that were [[made]] by PM, PM was a [[company]] that [[specialized]] in cheap-jack [[action]] flicks (like this) which had tons of [[explosions]], [[little]] [[story]] and [[overall]] [[nothing]] but [[mean]] edged [[action]]. Some of these titles have been (mildly) [[enjoyable]] (Last [[Man]] [[Standing]] and The Sweeper) [[however]] Cyber Tracker 2 is [[stuck]] with the casting of the charisma-less [[Don]] Wilson. When comparing the [[protagonists]] of [[similar]] PM [[efforts]] both [[Jeff]] Wincott and C. Thomas Howell are [[Oscar]] nominees when compared to Don Wilson. Another [[telling]] sign is that this was [[directed]] by [[Richard]] [[Pepin]] who has [[none]] of the flair Joseph Merhi [[seems]] to have in crafting [[action]] sequences that feel [[much]] more [[expensive]] than their [[budgets]]. Then again though both C. [[Thomas]] and Wincott are [[probably]] more [[expensive]] to [[obtain]]. Cyber Tracker 2 is a [[rip]] off with a [[capitol]] [[R]], there are so [[many]] steals from better movies (Robocop, Terminator, Universal Soldier to even Halloween III!) that it's [[almost]] as if [[Richard]] Pepin is [[trying]] to [[infuse]] a [[sense]] of [[identity]] to the pedestrian [[material]] [[yet]] without the [[intelligent]] [[ideas]] or at [[least]] the mindless zip of great [[action]], Cyber Tracker 2 falls flat. There is literally no good idea that isn't [[borrowed]] from a [[better]] movie and the [[supporting]] cast [[overact]]. The only exception [[comes]] from Tony Burton who is miles better than the [[material]]. Also Stacie [[Foster]] [[looks]] like she [[could]] be better with far better material. However Cyber Tracker 2 comes off [[mainly]] as [[noisy]], bland and [[lackluster]] as its leading man, however with no real martial arts sequences to fall back on, all there is, is lots of cars tipping over and that [[alone]] is no [[substitute]] for the [[bankruptcy]] of ambition expressed here.

*1/2 out of 4-(Poor) Years have gone by since [[Gifts]] Wilson used his martial arts [[knowledge]] to [[taking]] down a robot who was [[planning]] to destroy him, he's [[apart]] married to the blonde [[correspondent]] (Stacie [[Encourages]]) who [[culminated]] the [[mutiny]] in the first [[flick]], now a [[nuevo]] conspiracy is in the [[cooperation]], one that involves look-alike droids who frame our two [[heroic]], and a corporation [[searching]] to rule the world (There is no plot to back any of this up) and Cyber [[Sniffer]] 2 [[become]] a virtual [[replication]] of the first [[filmmaking]]. I admit that I have [[acquired]] [[dvd]] from the [[negotiation]] [[ibn]] that were [[introduced]] by PM, PM was a [[businesses]] that [[specializing]] in cheap-jack [[measures]] flicks (like this) which had tons of [[explodes]], [[small]] [[fairytales]] and [[general]] [[nada]] but [[imply]] edged [[actions]]. Some of these titles have been (mildly) [[congenial]] (Last [[Men]] [[Stand]] and The Sweeper) [[conversely]] Cyber Tracker 2 is [[jammed]] with the casting of the charisma-less [[Donate]] Wilson. When comparing the [[players]] of [[analogue]] PM [[initiative]] both [[Jeffrey]] Wincott and C. Thomas Howell are [[Oskar]] nominees when compared to Don Wilson. Another [[saying]] sign is that this was [[oriented]] by [[Richie]] [[Appleseed]] who has [[nos]] of the flair Joseph Merhi [[appears]] to have in crafting [[measures]] sequences that feel [[very]] more [[costly]] than their [[budget]]. Then again though both C. [[Tomas]] and Wincott are [[arguably]] more [[costly]] to [[obtaining]]. Cyber Tracker 2 is a [[tears]] off with a [[congress]] [[rs]], there are so [[myriad]] steals from better movies (Robocop, Terminator, Universal Soldier to even Halloween III!) that it's [[around]] as if [[Richie]] Pepin is [[tempting]] to [[instil]] a [[feeling]] of [[identities]] to the pedestrian [[materials]] [[however]] without the [[smart]] [[reflections]] or at [[lowest]] the mindless zip of great [[actions]], Cyber Tracker 2 falls flat. There is literally no good idea that isn't [[loaned]] from a [[improved]] movie and the [[aiding]] cast [[overdo]]. The only exception [[arrives]] from Tony Burton who is miles better than the [[materials]]. Also Stacie [[Encourages]] [[seem]] like she [[did]] be better with far better material. However Cyber Tracker 2 comes off [[predominantly]] as [[loud]], bland and [[mediocre]] as its leading man, however with no real martial arts sequences to fall back on, all there is, is lots of cars tipping over and that [[exclusively]] is no [[substitutions]] for the [[flop]] of ambition expressed here.

*1/2 out of 4-(Poor) --------------------------------------------- Result 1682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have been a fan of Pushing [[Daisies]] since the very beginning. It is [[wonderfully]] thought up, and Bryan Fuller has the most [[remarkable]] ideas for this show.

It is unbelievable on how much [[TV]] has been needing a creative, original show like Pushing [[Daisies]]. It is a huge relief to see a show, that is unlike the rest, where as, if you compared it to some of the newer shows, such as Scrubs and House, you would see the [[similarities]], and it does get tedious at [[moments]] to [[see]] [[shows]] so [[close]] in [[identity]].

With a [[magnificent]] cast, [[wonderful]] script, and [[hilarity]] in [[every]] episode, Pushing Daisies is, by-far, one of the most [[remarkable]] shows on your [[television]]. I have been a fan of Pushing [[Mums]] since the very beginning. It is [[stunningly]] thought up, and Bryan Fuller has the most [[notable]] ideas for this show.

It is unbelievable on how much [[TVS]] has been needing a creative, original show like Pushing [[Mommies]]. It is a huge relief to see a show, that is unlike the rest, where as, if you compared it to some of the newer shows, such as Scrubs and House, you would see the [[analogies]], and it does get tedious at [[times]] to [[seeing]] [[showcase]] so [[shut]] in [[identities]].

With a [[super]] cast, [[wondrous]] script, and [[silliness]] in [[any]] episode, Pushing Daisies is, by-far, one of the most [[wondrous]] shows on your [[televisions]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having watched both the Lion King and Lion King II and enjoyed both thoroughly. I thought Lion King 1.5 might be worth watching. What a disappointment ! Disney must be getting desperate for revenues.

Especially now that they lost the deal with pixar.

Basically, they just picked up some bits of footage that were left on the editor's floor (or garbage can) and glued them together to make a

quick buck. Unlike LK I & II, both of which had strong story lines.

This movie hardly has a story at all. While the characters and animation are always fun to look at, there is simply not enough material here for a movie. Some of the bits could have been good 2nd disk fillers on the original offerings.

Disney - Shame on you for putting this trash out to make a quick buck!

Next time take the time and effort and put our an enduring work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The title is the sound that one of the characters makes as he drives his imaginary trolley across the garbage [[dump]] where the characters [[live]]. The [[film]] is based on a series of [[stories]] by Shugoro Yamamoto and [[tells]] the [[story]] of a group of people who effectively live in ramshackle homes on the edge of the dump. It's a mix of laughter and [[sadness]].

[[First]] [[color]] film [[made]] by Akria Kurasowa has been something I've wanted to see for a [[long]] [[time]]. Weirdly it was [[often]] listed as being only [[available]] in a shortened version from a three or four hour original due to an error in the [[run]] [[time]] in some [[promotional]] material. I was holding out for the full version, waiting to [[see]] what Kurasowa [[wanted]] us to see, only to [[find]] out on the recent [[release]] by Criterion that the 140 minute [[version]] is the full version.

[[Finally]] sitting down to [[see]] the film last night I'm of [[mixed]] [[emotions]] about the [[film]]. [[First]] and foremost its visually [[linked]] to every [[film]] that followed. You can see [[every]] other of Kurasowals [[remaining]] six [[films]] [[reflected]] in this movie, down to the [[painted]] [[sunsets]]. Its a [[striking]] [[film]] in its use of color and you can [[understand]] why it [[took]] him so long to a film stock he [[would]] he happy with (of course there are failed projects as well). The film is a visual [[work]] of art.([[Though]] be warned if you're going to [[see]] this on your widescreen TV this was [[shot]] 1.33 so will [[appear]] in [[normal]] [[TV]] ratio.) The rest of the [[film]] is a mixed [[bag]]. [[Part]] of the problem is that the [[lives]] of all of these people don't [[quite]] [[come]] together. As [[separate]] [[tales]] they all [[work]] well but as a filmic [[whole]] they don't hang as one. I don't blame Kurasowa [[since]] one can't [[always]] [[hit]] [[things]] out of the box, especially when some one like Robert Altman who specialized in multi-character films of this sort [[occasionally]] bombed himself.

This isn't to [[say]] that there aren't [[reasons]] to [[see]] the [[film]]. As will all Kurasowa [[films]] there are [[always]] [[reasons]] to [[see]] his [[films]], whether they [[work]] or not. The first [[trip]] of the "[[trolley]]" is one of the [[best]] [[things]] Kurasowa ever did and is worth the [[price]] of a rental. Its one of the most [[magical]] [[moments]] in film history as the trolley is inspected and taken out. The father and son living in the car is touching (though ultimately very sad) and there are other bits and pieces that shine (like the cast which is across the board great) and one should at least try the film as something different from a man we usually associated with samurai films or crime dramas.

Its an intriguing misfire from a master filmmaker which means in this case means its better than most other filmmakers successes.

Between 6 and 7 as a whole, much higher in pieces. The title is the sound that one of the characters makes as he drives his imaginary trolley across the garbage [[shithole]] where the characters [[vivo]]. The [[cinematic]] is based on a series of [[tales]] by Shugoro Yamamoto and [[narrates]] the [[storytelling]] of a group of people who effectively live in ramshackle homes on the edge of the dump. It's a mix of laughter and [[woe]].

[[Firstly]] [[dye]] film [[accomplished]] by Akria Kurasowa has been something I've wanted to see for a [[longue]] [[period]]. Weirdly it was [[ordinarily]] listed as being only [[accessible]] in a shortened version from a three or four hour original due to an error in the [[execute]] [[period]] in some [[propaganda]] material. I was holding out for the full version, waiting to [[behold]] what Kurasowa [[want]] us to see, only to [[unearthed]] out on the recent [[freed]] by Criterion that the 140 minute [[stepping]] is the full version.

[[Lastly]] sitting down to [[seeing]] the film last night I'm of [[blended]] [[sentiments]] about the [[movies]]. [[Outset]] and foremost its visually [[associated]] to every [[films]] that followed. You can see [[any]] other of Kurasowals [[rest]] six [[cinematography]] [[manifested]] in this movie, down to the [[painting]] [[sunrises]]. Its a [[noteworthy]] [[cinematographic]] in its use of color and you can [[realise]] why it [[taken]] him so long to a film stock he [[ought]] he happy with (of course there are failed projects as well). The film is a visual [[jobs]] of art.([[Notwithstanding]] be warned if you're going to [[behold]] this on your widescreen TV this was [[offed]] 1.33 so will [[appearing]] in [[routine]] [[TELEVISIONS]] ratio.) The rest of the [[movies]] is a mixed [[saddlebag]]. [[Portions]] of the problem is that the [[iife]] of all of these people don't [[abundantly]] [[coming]] together. As [[distinct]] [[stories]] they all [[collaborating]] well but as a filmic [[total]] they don't hang as one. I don't blame Kurasowa [[because]] one can't [[unceasingly]] [[slapped]] [[aspects]] out of the box, especially when some one like Robert Altman who specialized in multi-character films of this sort [[intermittently]] bombed himself.

This isn't to [[tell]] that there aren't [[rationale]] to [[behold]] the [[cinematography]]. As will all Kurasowa [[cinematography]] there are [[unceasingly]] [[motivations]] to [[behold]] his [[movie]], whether they [[cooperating]] or not. The first [[touring]] of the "[[wagon]]" is one of the [[nicest]] [[matters]] Kurasowa ever did and is worth the [[costing]] of a rental. Its one of the most [[quadrant]] [[times]] in film history as the trolley is inspected and taken out. The father and son living in the car is touching (though ultimately very sad) and there are other bits and pieces that shine (like the cast which is across the board great) and one should at least try the film as something different from a man we usually associated with samurai films or crime dramas.

Its an intriguing misfire from a master filmmaker which means in this case means its better than most other filmmakers successes.

Between 6 and 7 as a whole, much higher in pieces. --------------------------------------------- Result 1685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] After [[Chaplin]] made one of his best films: [[Dough]] & Dynamite, he [[made]] one of his [[worst]]: Gentlemen Of Nerve. During this first year in films, Chaplin made about a third of all his films. [[Many]] of them were experimental in terms of ad-libbing, editing, gags, location shooting, etc. This one takes place at a racetrack where Chaplin and his friend try to get in without paying. Mabel Normand is there with her friend also, and Chaplin manages to rid himself of both his and Mabel's friends. He then woos Mabel in the grandstand with no apparent repercussions from his behavior. Lots of slapstick in here, but there is very [[little]] else to [[recommend]] this film for other then watching Chaplin develop. The print I saw was badly deteriorated, which may have affected its enjoyment. Charley Chase can be glimpsed. * of 4 stars. After [[Chapin]] made one of his best films: [[Batter]] & Dynamite, he [[brought]] one of his [[meanest]]: Gentlemen Of Nerve. During this first year in films, Chaplin made about a third of all his films. [[Myriad]] of them were experimental in terms of ad-libbing, editing, gags, location shooting, etc. This one takes place at a racetrack where Chaplin and his friend try to get in without paying. Mabel Normand is there with her friend also, and Chaplin manages to rid himself of both his and Mabel's friends. He then woos Mabel in the grandstand with no apparent repercussions from his behavior. Lots of slapstick in here, but there is very [[scant]] else to [[recommends]] this film for other then watching Chaplin develop. The print I saw was badly deteriorated, which may have affected its enjoyment. Charley Chase can be glimpsed. * of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1686 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[After]] two long, long opening skits, one of which my brother saw the conclusion coming of and the other totally [[joke]] free, we start the fast-forward fest that it GROOVE [[TUBE]] proper. Naturally, uber-stupid [[frat]] boys who [[still]] mainline [[JACKASS]] or Tom [[Green]] will [[find]] the idea of [[fecal]] [[matter]] coming out of the some [[tube]], SEX OLYMPICS(I really don't need to give you details, do I), and a [[clown]] who [[basically]] does the "not very endearing clown" [[bit]] I [[think]] I've [[seen]] approxiately ninety times now will [[eat]] this up like dung beetles: well, more power to you.

I just want to express that, despite what you've heard, this movie was in no way a [[model]] for the [[many]] [[infinitely]] funnier [[movies]] like KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE or what not. The skit movie had already been done in AND NOW [[FOR]] SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX, and so on. And done way better. [[Upon]] two long, long opening skits, one of which my brother saw the conclusion coming of and the other totally [[farce]] free, we start the fast-forward fest that it GROOVE [[PIPES]] proper. Naturally, uber-stupid [[sisterhood]] boys who [[however]] mainline [[DOUCHE]] or Tom [[Greene]] will [[finds]] the idea of [[stool]] [[topic]] coming out of the some [[tubes]], SEX OLYMPICS(I really don't need to give you details, do I), and a [[joker]] who [[virtually]] does the "not very endearing clown" [[bitten]] I [[ideas]] I've [[noticed]] approxiately ninety times now will [[ate]] this up like dung beetles: well, more power to you.

I just want to express that, despite what you've heard, this movie was in no way a [[modeling]] for the [[various]] [[immensely]] funnier [[theater]] like KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE or what not. The skit movie had already been done in AND NOW [[IN]] SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX, and so on. And done way better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's been a [[vogue]] for the [[past]] few [[years]] for often-as-not [[ironic]] zombie-related [[films]], as well as other [[media]] incarnations of the flesh- [[eating]] [[resurrected]] dead. "Fido" is a film that's either an [[attempt]] to cash in on that, simply a [[manifestation]] of it, or both -- and it [[falls]] [[squarely]] into the category of ironic zombies. The [[joke]] here is that we get to [[see]] the walking dead in the [[contrasting]] context of a broadly [[stereotyped]], squeaky-clean, alternate-history (we are in the wake of a [[great]] Zombie [[War]], and the [[creatures]] are now being domesticated as slaves) version of a 1950s [[suburb]].

It's a [[moderately]] [[funny]] [[concept]] on its own, and [[enough]] [[perhaps]] for a five-minute [[comedy]] sketch, but it can't [[hold]] up a feature-film on its own. The joke that rotting corpses for servants are incongruous with this [[idealized]] version of a small town is repeated over and over again, and [[loses]] all effectiveness. The soundtrack relentlessly plays sunny tunes while zombies cannibalize bystanders. The word "zombie" is constantly inserted into an otherwise familiarly homey line for a [[cheap]] attempt at a laugh.

The very broadness and artificiality of the representation of "the nineteen fifties" here can't help but [[irritate]] me. It is so stylized, in it evidently "Pleasantville-"inspired way, that it is more apparent in waving markers of its 1950s-ness around than actually bearing any [[resemblance]] to anything that might have happened between 1950 and 1959. There is something obnoxiously sneering about it, as if the film is [[bragging]] emptily and thoughtlessly about how more open, down-to-Earth, and superior the 2000s are.

Because the characters are such broad representations of pop-culture 1950s "types," it's difficult to develop much emotional investment in them. Each has a few character traits thrown at him or her -- Helen is obsessed with appearances, and Bill loves golf and his haunted by having had to kill his father -- but they remain quite two-dimensional. Performances within the constraints of this [[bad]] writing are fine. The best is Billy Connolly as Fido the zombie, who in the tradition of Boris Karloff in "Frankenstein" [[actually]] imparts [[character]] and [[sympathy]] to a lumbering green [[monster]] who cannot [[speak]].

There are little bits of unsubtle allegory thrown around -- to [[commodity]] fetishism, racism, classism, [[war]] paranoia, et [[cetera]], but none of it really works on a [[comprehensive]] level, and the filmmakers don;t really stick with anything.

Unfortunately, this film doesn't really get past sticking with the flimsy joke of "Look! Zombies in 'Leave it to Beaver!'" for a good hour- and-a-half. There's been a [[popularity]] for the [[previous]] few [[ages]] for often-as-not [[sarcastic]] zombie-related [[filmmaking]], as well as other [[medium]] incarnations of the flesh- [[feeding]] [[revived]] dead. "Fido" is a film that's either an [[seek]] to cash in on that, simply a [[demonstrations]] of it, or both -- and it [[dip]] [[directly]] into the category of ironic zombies. The [[farce]] here is that we get to [[seeing]] the walking dead in the [[opposing]] context of a broadly [[stereotypical]], squeaky-clean, alternate-history (we are in the wake of a [[large]] Zombie [[Warfare]], and the [[creature]] are now being domesticated as slaves) version of a 1950s [[commuter]].

It's a [[slightly]] [[humorous]] [[conception]] on its own, and [[sufficient]] [[probably]] for a five-minute [[parody]] sketch, but it can't [[held]] up a feature-film on its own. The joke that rotting corpses for servants are incongruous with this [[modelled]] version of a small town is repeated over and over again, and [[losing]] all effectiveness. The soundtrack relentlessly plays sunny tunes while zombies cannibalize bystanders. The word "zombie" is constantly inserted into an otherwise familiarly homey line for a [[cheaper]] attempt at a laugh.

The very broadness and artificiality of the representation of "the nineteen fifties" here can't help but [[disturb]] me. It is so stylized, in it evidently "Pleasantville-"inspired way, that it is more apparent in waving markers of its 1950s-ness around than actually bearing any [[likeness]] to anything that might have happened between 1950 and 1959. There is something obnoxiously sneering about it, as if the film is [[brag]] emptily and thoughtlessly about how more open, down-to-Earth, and superior the 2000s are.

Because the characters are such broad representations of pop-culture 1950s "types," it's difficult to develop much emotional investment in them. Each has a few character traits thrown at him or her -- Helen is obsessed with appearances, and Bill loves golf and his haunted by having had to kill his father -- but they remain quite two-dimensional. Performances within the constraints of this [[unfavourable]] writing are fine. The best is Billy Connolly as Fido the zombie, who in the tradition of Boris Karloff in "Frankenstein" [[indeed]] imparts [[characteristics]] and [[sympathies]] to a lumbering green [[creature]] who cannot [[speaking]].

There are little bits of unsubtle allegory thrown around -- to [[commodities]] fetishism, racism, classism, [[warfare]] paranoia, et [[etcetera]], but none of it really works on a [[exhaustive]] level, and the filmmakers don;t really stick with anything.

Unfortunately, this film doesn't really get past sticking with the flimsy joke of "Look! Zombies in 'Leave it to Beaver!'" for a good hour- and-a-half. --------------------------------------------- Result 1688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I just got through watching this DVD at home. We love Westerns, so my husband rented it. He started apologizing to me half way through. The [[saddles]], costumes, accents--everything was off. The [[part]] that made me so mad is where the [[guy]] didn't shoot the "collector" with his bow and arrow as he was taking the fat guy's soul. His only [[excuse]] was "he only had 2 arrows left." We watched it all the [[way]] through, and, as someone [[else]] said...too many [[bad]] things to [[single]] out any one [[reason]] why it [[sucked]]. I [[mean]], the fact that the boy [[happened]] to snatch the [[evil]] stone from the collector on the same [[month]] and day it was [[found]], what's the point of that? And why were there a [[grave]] yard where [[everyone]] died on April 25 but the people [[whose]] [[souls]] were [[taken]] by the collector were still up [[walking]] [[around]]? If you [[want]] a [[movie]] to make fun of after a few [[beers]], this may be your [[movie]]. However, if you want a real Western, you will [[hate]] this [[movie]]. I just got through watching this DVD at home. We love Westerns, so my husband rented it. He started apologizing to me half way through. The [[feces]], costumes, accents--everything was off. The [[party]] that made me so mad is where the [[guys]] didn't shoot the "collector" with his bow and arrow as he was taking the fat guy's soul. His only [[apologies]] was "he only had 2 arrows left." We watched it all the [[camino]] through, and, as someone [[further]] said...too many [[negative]] things to [[exclusive]] out any one [[rationale]] why it [[aspired]]. I [[meaning]], the fact that the boy [[arrived]] to snatch the [[malicious]] stone from the collector on the same [[mois]] and day it was [[uncovered]], what's the point of that? And why were there a [[graves]] yard where [[everybody]] died on April 25 but the people [[who]] [[ames]] were [[picked]] by the collector were still up [[walk]] [[roundabout]]? If you [[wanting]] a [[filmmaking]] to make fun of after a few [[cervezas]], this may be your [[film]]. However, if you want a real Western, you will [[dislikes]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I just loved watching it [[though]] and having fun with it's total badness of a [[film]]. I saw this film through the helpful sarcasm of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and I have the DVD. If you flip the to the other side of the DVD, they show the actual movie, so I gave it a [[chance]]. [[Seriously]], folks this is grilled cheese.

The acting, special [[effects]], and plot in [[general]] is very cheesy and [[unrealistic]]. "Doesn't she [[need]] lungs" [[said]] [[Crow]] noticing how the head can still talk while it doesn't have a [[body]], and Tom Servo just wistfully remarks "No, she's got neck juice!". The ending is just classic and no one can touch this soundtrack with K-Porn! I loved the "[[cat]] [[fight]]" between the two strippers. That "Meow" after the fight or scene, whatever, was classic. [[So]], in some ways this was a fun movie. I [[think]] for horror fans, you'll [[probably]] enjoy it. For a good time, watch the MSTK3 version, you'll [[get]] a great [[laugh]].

MST3K version: 10/10 The Brain that would [[die]]: 1/10 I just loved watching it [[despite]] and having fun with it's total badness of a [[filmmaking]]. I saw this film through the helpful sarcasm of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and I have the DVD. If you flip the to the other side of the DVD, they show the actual movie, so I gave it a [[probability]]. [[Gravely]], folks this is grilled cheese.

The acting, special [[influences]], and plot in [[overall]] is very cheesy and [[utopian]]. "Doesn't she [[gotta]] lungs" [[says]] [[Corneille]] noticing how the head can still talk while it doesn't have a [[agency]], and Tom Servo just wistfully remarks "No, she's got neck juice!". The ending is just classic and no one can touch this soundtrack with K-Porn! I loved the "[[pussycat]] [[wrestling]]" between the two strippers. That "Meow" after the fight or scene, whatever, was classic. [[Hence]], in some ways this was a fun movie. I [[thoughts]] for horror fans, you'll [[indubitably]] enjoy it. For a good time, watch the MSTK3 version, you'll [[obtains]] a great [[giggling]].

MST3K version: 10/10 The Brain that would [[died]]: 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has an all star cast, John Candy, Richard Lewis, Ornella Mutti, Cybill Shepard, and Jim Belushi to name a few, run amuck in Monte Carlo, as well as some other beautiful European locations, and is very funny. The trouble that everyone gets in when they lie to protect themselves is great, and I highly recommend that you see this movie, it is well worth it! John Candy is in top form in Once Upon A Crime, as is everyone else! If you and your family are looking for a great family film, this is your ticket. Everyone gives stellar performances, great acting, great comedy, and great timing, which is rare in movies these days. Great plot, great mystery, (which I love anyways) and overall, well worth the money you spend on it. So get the kids, grab some popcorn, juice, or tea, or sodas, and enjoy the show!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] after [[seeing]] it on Broadway. I [[love]] the Broadway musical and I [[love]] the [[movie]]. I [[watched]] the movie like it was not [[related]] to the Broadway [[show]]. I am an avid reader and have seen what [[happens]] to most books when they are turned into [[movies]], so I [[developed]] a philosophy really early. [[Assume]] that the movie is going to be based on the [[book]] ( or musical in this [[case]]) but that while the story line may be similar it will not be the same, it will be [[different]] so watch it for what it is.

I danced for 12 [[years]] before I had to [[make]] a [[choice]]. I was a good [[dancer]]( [[picking]] up chorus work in local productions as a [[child]] etc) but I wasn't [[super]] talented.I was [[however]] [[super]] talented as a show [[rider]]. I was [[told]] by my [[dance]] instructor and my [[trainer]] ( who i [[spent]] several months a year at his farm out of state) that I had to [[make]] a [[choice]] when I [[turned]] 14. That I [[needed]] to [[move]] up from [[dancing]] two hours four-five days a week and riding 3 hours a day 7 days a [[week]].. and dedicate to one or the other. So I dearly love [[dancing]] and I love this [[movie]] and a lot of the other [[ballet]] and [[dance]] [[movies]]. I just [[chose]] to watch this movie for what it is, it is a [[great]] movie about [[raw]] emotion and human interaction. It is about the power of [[anticipation]] and [[heartbreak]] when you [[work]] really [[hard]] to get [[something]] you want and you just do not [[get]] it. I love the [[movie]]. I [[love]] the Broadway musical. I [[saw]] this [[kino]] after [[see]] it on Broadway. I [[likes]] the Broadway musical and I [[amour]] the [[cinema]]. I [[saw]] the movie like it was not [[relating]] to the Broadway [[demonstrating]]. I am an avid reader and have seen what [[occurs]] to most books when they are turned into [[theater]], so I [[formulated]] a philosophy really early. [[Suppose]] that the movie is going to be based on the [[ledger]] ( or musical in this [[lawsuits]]) but that while the story line may be similar it will not be the same, it will be [[multiple]] so watch it for what it is.

I danced for 12 [[olds]] before I had to [[deliver]] a [[elects]]. I was a good [[dances]]( [[gathering]] up chorus work in local productions as a [[children]] etc) but I wasn't [[wondrous]] talented.I was [[conversely]] [[mega]] talented as a show [[mustang]]. I was [[tells]] by my [[choreography]] instructor and my [[instructor]] ( who i [[spends]] several months a year at his farm out of state) that I had to [[deliver]] a [[chose]] when I [[transformed]] 14. That I [[needs]] to [[budge]] up from [[danced]] two hours four-five days a week and riding 3 hours a day 7 days a [[zhou]].. and dedicate to one or the other. So I dearly love [[dancers]] and I love this [[movies]] and a lot of the other [[dancers]] and [[choreography]] [[movie]]. I just [[opted]] to watch this movie for what it is, it is a [[wondrous]] movie about [[untreated]] emotion and human interaction. It is about the power of [[expectation]] and [[agony]] when you [[collaborate]] really [[stiff]] to get [[somethings]] you want and you just do not [[got]] it. I love the [[movies]]. I [[loved]] the Broadway musical. --------------------------------------------- Result 1692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] **SPOILER ALERT** W. Somerset Maugham [[classic]] on [[film]] about a [[love]] obsessed young [[man]] who's abused hurt and [[humiliated]] by the object of his obsession to the point of losing everything he has only to find true [[love]] in the end under the most [[unusual]] circumstances.

[[Leslie]] Howard plays the role of [[Philip]] [[Carey]] a [[sensitive]] young artiest in Paris [[trying]] to [[make]] a [[living]] by [[selling]] his [[paintings]]. [[Told]] by a local art [[expert]] that his [[work]] is not at all good [[enough]] to be [[sold]] to the art going public [[Philip]] [[decides]] to [[go]] back to his [[native]] [[England]] and [[study]] [[medicine]] and become a [[physician]] in [[order]] to [[help]] others.

[[Philip]] being born with a club [[foot]] is very hypersensitive about his [[awkward]] condition and makes up for that by being a very [[pleasant]] and friendly [[person]]. One [[afternoon]] [[Philip]] is at a local café with a fellow medical [[student]] and spots pretty [[waitress]] [[Mildred]] [[Rogers]], Bette [[Davis]], and [[immediately]] falls in love with her. [[Mildred]] at [[first]] rebuffs the love-sick [[Philip]] but [[later]] [[realizing]] just what a sap he is takes advantage of his [[feelings]] for her. [[Mildred]] has him [[spend]] himself into poverty [[buying]] her [[gifts]] and taking her out to the [[theater]] [[every]] [[time]] she off from [[work]]. Phlip [[also]] [[falls]] behind on his [[studies]], by [[paying]] so much attention [[towards]] Mildred, at the [[medical]] [[university]] and fails his [[final]] [[exams]].

Going into hock [[buying]] an engagement ring for [[Mildred]] in an [[attempt]] to [[ask]] for her hand in [[marriage]] the [[cold]] hearted Mildred [[tells]] the [[startled]] [[Philip]] that she's already [[engaged]] to be married to Emil Miller, [[Alan]] Hale. It turns out that he's one of the [[customers]] at the café that she's [[always]] flirting with.

[[Philip]] [[broke]] and heart-sick slowly [[get]] his [[life]] back together and [[later]] retakes his [[medical]] [[exam]] and passes it and at the same time [[finds]] a [[new]] [[love]] in Nora, Fay Johnson, a [[writer]] for a local [[love]] [[magazine]]. [[Later]] to Philip's shock and [[surprise]] [[Mildred]] walks back into his [[life]].

[[Mildred]] [[telling]] [[Philip]] that her husband Emil, who's [[child]] she's carrying, [[threw]] her out of the [[house]] has the [[kind]] and [[understanding]] [[Philip]] take her back at the expense of Nora who was very much in love with him. It [[later]] [[turns]] out that [[Mildred]] wasn't married to Emil but had a [[child]] out of [[wedlock]] by having an [[illicit]] affair with him! Emil it turns out was already married.

As before Mildred takes advantage of Philip's kind heart for her and her baby daughter, where he supports them with food medical attention and shelter, to the point where he again goes broke and can't continue his studies ending with her leaving Philip; after having a very heated and emotional encounter with him. Out on the streets with nowhere to go Philip is taken in by Mr. Athanly, Reginald Owens, who he once treated at the hospital and falls in love with his daughter Sally, Frances Dee.

Later Philip has his club foot corrected at the medical center and with the help of Mr. Athenly gets back to being a doctor. It's then when he encounters Mildred again who's really at the end of her rope. Dying of tuberculosis and having lost her daughter she's all alone with no one to look after her. Philip now well to do and respected in medical circles does all he can to help the sick and poor Mildred but in the end she succumbed to her illness and passes away.

Mildred had the love and devotion in Philip all those years that he was in love with her but choose to abuse him and have affairs with man who were just like her, cold unfeeling and selfish. In the end Mildred got back just what she gave to the kind and sensitive Philip: She became both unloved and alone. Philip found in the sweet and caring Sally everything that Mildred wasn't and in the end also found the true love that he was looking for all of his life. **SPOILER ALERT** W. Somerset Maugham [[conventional]] on [[movies]] about a [[loved]] obsessed young [[dude]] who's abused hurt and [[ashamed]] by the object of his obsession to the point of losing everything he has only to find true [[likes]] in the end under the most [[strange]] circumstances.

[[Lesley]] Howard plays the role of [[Philippe]] [[Cary]] a [[delicate]] young artiest in Paris [[tempting]] to [[deliver]] a [[iife]] by [[sold]] his [[paints]]. [[Said]] by a local art [[specialist]] that his [[cooperation]] is not at all good [[adequately]] to be [[selling]] to the art going public [[Philips]] [[decided]] to [[going]] back to his [[aboriginal]] [[Uk]] and [[studying]] [[medications]] and become a [[practitioner]] in [[decree]] to [[assistance]] others.

[[Phillip]] being born with a club [[footing]] is very hypersensitive about his [[clumsy]] condition and makes up for that by being a very [[nice]] and friendly [[somebody]]. One [[evening]] [[Philips]] is at a local café with a fellow medical [[pupils]] and spots pretty [[hostess]] [[Gertrude]] [[Rodgers]], Bette [[Davies]], and [[promptly]] falls in love with her. [[Gertrude]] at [[outset]] rebuffs the love-sick [[Phillip]] but [[subsequently]] [[realise]] just what a sap he is takes advantage of his [[sensations]] for her. [[Gertrude]] has him [[expenditure]] himself into poverty [[purchasing]] her [[donation]] and taking her out to the [[movies]] [[all]] [[times]] she off from [[collaboration]]. Phlip [[further]] [[autumn]] behind on his [[researches]], by [[paid]] so much attention [[vers]] Mildred, at the [[medicinal]] [[college]] and fails his [[definitive]] [[review]].

Going into hock [[bought]] an engagement ring for [[Elsie]] in an [[endeavour]] to [[inquired]] for her hand in [[marry]] the [[icy]] hearted Mildred [[told]] the [[horrified]] [[Philips]] that she's already [[incurred]] to be married to Emil Miller, [[Alana]] Hale. It turns out that he's one of the [[users]] at the café that she's [[repeatedly]] flirting with.

[[Philips]] [[cracked]] and heart-sick slowly [[got]] his [[living]] back together and [[subsequently]] retakes his [[physician]] [[examinations]] and passes it and at the same time [[found]] a [[newer]] [[iike]] in Nora, Fay Johnson, a [[novelist]] for a local [[amore]] [[revue]]. [[Subsequent]] to Philip's shock and [[astonishment]] [[Elsie]] walks back into his [[iife]].

[[Mabel]] [[saying]] [[Philips]] that her husband Emil, who's [[enfants]] she's carrying, [[ditched]] her out of the [[home]] has the [[genera]] and [[understand]] [[Philipp]] take her back at the expense of Nora who was very much in love with him. It [[subsequently]] [[revolves]] out that [[Elsie]] wasn't married to Emil but had a [[kiddies]] out of [[marries]] by having an [[unlawful]] affair with him! Emil it turns out was already married.

As before Mildred takes advantage of Philip's kind heart for her and her baby daughter, where he supports them with food medical attention and shelter, to the point where he again goes broke and can't continue his studies ending with her leaving Philip; after having a very heated and emotional encounter with him. Out on the streets with nowhere to go Philip is taken in by Mr. Athanly, Reginald Owens, who he once treated at the hospital and falls in love with his daughter Sally, Frances Dee.

Later Philip has his club foot corrected at the medical center and with the help of Mr. Athenly gets back to being a doctor. It's then when he encounters Mildred again who's really at the end of her rope. Dying of tuberculosis and having lost her daughter she's all alone with no one to look after her. Philip now well to do and respected in medical circles does all he can to help the sick and poor Mildred but in the end she succumbed to her illness and passes away.

Mildred had the love and devotion in Philip all those years that he was in love with her but choose to abuse him and have affairs with man who were just like her, cold unfeeling and selfish. In the end Mildred got back just what she gave to the kind and sensitive Philip: She became both unloved and alone. Philip found in the sweet and caring Sally everything that Mildred wasn't and in the end also found the true love that he was looking for all of his life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A top notch Columbo from beginning to end. I particularly like the interaction between Columbo and the killer, Ruth Gordon.

As an avid Columbo fan, I can't recall another one in which he doesn't set up the killer at the end as he does in other episodes. In this one, as he's trying to determine the correct sequence of the boxes and the "message" that the nephew left behind, it finally dawns on him.

The music in this episode is very good as well, as it is in many of other ones. --------------------------------------------- Result 1694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I absolutely love this game to death. Ever since I was 9 years old (I am now 15). It has great graphics, characters, magic, weapons, additions, and don't forget the ultimately awesome dragoon forms! I am still waiting for a remake, prequel, or a sequel to this spectacular video game.

You play as Dart, a young swordsman who has the potential to be quite the hero. On this adventure you encounter wondrous creatures and boss fights. You also encounter some friends on the way who have their own special element. Such as Fire, Darkness, Water/Ice, Thunder/Lightning, Earth, Light, and Wind. There are also items known as dragoon spirits, which allow you to transform into magical creatures of legend. Dragons, wizards, creatures called winglies and evil creatures you'll have to face on this adventure of action-packed thrills and excitement. One of my all time favorite games, The Legend of Dragoon! --------------------------------------------- Result 1695 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Easily the best known of all the [[Shakespeare]] plays, it has been [[seriously]] [[let]] down here. Shoddy [[direction]], stagnant studio [[work]] and [[erratic]] performances [[spoil]] a fine tragedy.

[[In]] the [[town]] of Verona, the Capulets and the Montagues have been feuding for [[centuries]] but tragedy is [[imminent]] when Romeo (Patrick Rycart), a Montague, falls in [[love]] with [[Juliet]] ([[Rebecca]] Saire), a Capulet. Bloodshed soon erupts...

The studio work, [[especially]] in [[daytime]] scenes, [[seriously]] stagnates the energy of the play. It's a [[story]] that, with it's energy, deserves to be shot [[outdoors]]. [[Coupled]] with this the [[costumes]] are [[hideous]], with too [[many]] tights and ludicrous codpieces. The [[stage]] [[fighting]] [[looks]] [[horrendous]], with far too much [[stretching]] and running [[around]] to be engaging.

Patrick Ryecart is too lightweight to be a [[truly]] [[effective]] Romeo. He [[manages]] the character's intensity when the plot gets [[going]] but his stately [[accent]] and bland, [[often]] inexpressive [[eyes]] [[limit]] his range. It is very [[hard]] for the [[audience]] to relate to this Romeo. Rebecca Saire is too [[youthful]] to be a good Juliet - she captures the character's [[naiveté]] but a [[little]] more sassiness [[would]] have been [[welcome]].

The [[supporting]] roles don't fare much better. Joseph O'Connor's Friar [[Laurence]] is fine but too [[many]] of his [[best]] lines have been [[cut]]. [[Anthony]] Andrews' Mercutio [[belongs]] on stage and not on [[camera]]. He gurns and gesticulates [[excessively]] and [[looks]] [[rather]] [[ridiculous]] as a result. Alan Rickman, underplaying his role, has [[virtually]] no [[presence]] as Tybalt. He did [[develop]] an edge and intensity to [[deliver]] some fine screen performances in [[later]] years, but that isn't in evidence here. The Prince can be a fine role with his brief appearances but actor [[Lawrence]] Naismith fails to give the [[part]] any authority on [[camera]]. [[Only]] [[Micheal]] Hordern, in probably his best role in this series, [[comes]] out of this with any dignity. His Capulet is well-played and a joy to watch.

[[See]] one of the other versions of this [[story]] [[instead]]. Easily the best known of all the [[Shakespearean]] plays, it has been [[harshly]] [[leave]] down here. Shoddy [[directions]], stagnant studio [[cooperation]] and [[unpredictable]] performances [[ruin]] a fine tragedy.

[[Among]] the [[urban]] of Verona, the Capulets and the Montagues have been feuding for [[ages]] but tragedy is [[next]] when Romeo (Patrick Rycart), a Montague, falls in [[likes]] with [[Jules]] ([[Rebekah]] Saire), a Capulet. Bloodshed soon erupts...

The studio work, [[particularly]] in [[daylight]] scenes, [[conscientiously]] stagnates the energy of the play. It's a [[history]] that, with it's energy, deserves to be shot [[outdoor]]. [[Matched]] with this the [[suits]] are [[outrageous]], with too [[myriad]] tights and ludicrous codpieces. The [[phase]] [[gunfight]] [[seems]] [[terrible]], with far too much [[stretch]] and running [[about]] to be engaging.

Patrick Ryecart is too lightweight to be a [[honestly]] [[effectiveness]] Romeo. He [[runs]] the character's intensity when the plot gets [[go]] but his stately [[focusing]] and bland, [[normally]] inexpressive [[eye]] [[limits]] his range. It is very [[difficult]] for the [[viewers]] to relate to this Romeo. Rebecca Saire is too [[young]] to be a good Juliet - she captures the character's [[naïveté]] but a [[petite]] more sassiness [[should]] have been [[greet]].

The [[aiding]] roles don't fare much better. Joseph O'Connor's Friar [[Laurent]] is fine but too [[several]] of his [[optimum]] lines have been [[cutting]]. [[Anton]] Andrews' Mercutio [[belonging]] on stage and not on [[cameras]]. He gurns and gesticulates [[overly]] and [[seem]] [[somewhat]] [[absurd]] as a result. Alan Rickman, underplaying his role, has [[almost]] no [[participation]] as Tybalt. He did [[developing]] an edge and intensity to [[delivering]] some fine screen performances in [[subsequent]] years, but that isn't in evidence here. The Prince can be a fine role with his brief appearances but actor [[Laurence]] Naismith fails to give the [[portions]] any authority on [[cameras]]. [[Merely]] [[Michelle]] Hordern, in probably his best role in this series, [[arises]] out of this with any dignity. His Capulet is well-played and a joy to watch.

[[Behold]] one of the other versions of this [[histories]] [[however]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Michael Is King. This film contains some of the best stuff Mike has ever done. Smooth Criminal is pure genius. The cameos are wonderful, but as always, the main event is MJ himself. He is the best, hands down. --------------------------------------------- Result 1697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Lars]] von Trier's Europa is a [[worthy]] echo of The Third [[Man]], about an American coming to post-World [[War]] II [[Europe]] and finds himself [[entangled]] in a [[dangerous]] mystery.

Jean-Marc Barr plays Leopold [[Kessler]], a German-American who [[refused]] to join the US Army during the [[war]], [[arrives]] in Frankfurt as soon as the war is over to work with his uncle as a [[sleeping]] car conductor on the Zentropa Railway. What he doesn't know is the war is [[still]] secretly going on with an underground [[terrorist]] group called the Werewolves who target American [[allies]]. Leopold is strongly against taking any sides, but is [[drawn]] in and seduced by Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the femme fatale daughter of the [[owner]] of the railway company. Her father was a Nazi sympathizer, but is [[pardoned]] by the American Colonel Harris (Eddie Considine) because he can help get the German [[transportation]] system up and running again. The colonel [[soon]] enlists, or forces, Leopold to be a spy (without giving him a choice or chance to think about it) to see if the Werewolves might carry out attacks on the trains.

Soon, Leopold is stuck in an [[adventure]] by being involved with both sides of the [[conflict]] in a mysterious and film noir-ish [[way]], where [[everyone]] and everything is not what it [[seems]]. Its [[amazing]] to watch the naive Leopold [[deal]] with everything (his lover, the terrorists, the colonel, annoying [[passengers]], his [[disgruntled]] uncle, [[even]] the [[railway]] company's [[officials]] who come to [[examine]] his work [[ethic]]) before he [[finally]] boils over and humorously and [[violently]] takes [[control]]. The [[film]] is endlessly [[unpredictable]].

The film [[stylishly]] [[shot]], it [[always]] [[takes]] place at night during the winter with [[lots]] of [[falling]] snow. Its shot in black and [[white]] with [[shots]] of [[color]] randomly [[appearing]] [[throughout]]. Also, background screens [[displaying]] [[images]] that counter [[act]] with the [[images]] up front. [[Add]] [[Max]] von Sydow's hypnotic narration, and [[Europa]] [[becomes]] a dreamlike place that's out of this world.

This is now a personal [[favorite]] [[film]] of [[mine]]. [[Jorgen]] von Trier's Europa is a [[creditable]] echo of The Third [[Males]], about an American coming to post-World [[Warfare]] II [[Eu]] and finds himself [[embroiled]] in a [[risky]] mystery.

Jean-Marc Barr plays Leopold [[Cordova]], a German-American who [[dismiss]] to join the US Army during the [[wars]], [[comes]] in Frankfurt as soon as the war is over to work with his uncle as a [[slept]] car conductor on the Zentropa Railway. What he doesn't know is the war is [[however]] secretly going on with an underground [[terrorism]] group called the Werewolves who target American [[ally]]. Leopold is strongly against taking any sides, but is [[lured]] in and seduced by Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the femme fatale daughter of the [[owning]] of the railway company. Her father was a Nazi sympathizer, but is [[forgiven]] by the American Colonel Harris (Eddie Considine) because he can help get the German [[transport]] system up and running again. The colonel [[swiftly]] enlists, or forces, Leopold to be a spy (without giving him a choice or chance to think about it) to see if the Werewolves might carry out attacks on the trains.

Soon, Leopold is stuck in an [[fling]] by being involved with both sides of the [[dispute]] in a mysterious and film noir-ish [[routes]], where [[anybody]] and everything is not what it [[seem]]. Its [[wondrous]] to watch the naive Leopold [[address]] with everything (his lover, the terrorists, the colonel, annoying [[tourists]], his [[dissatisfied]] uncle, [[yet]] the [[railways]] company's [[officer]] who come to [[investigated]] his work [[morally]]) before he [[lastly]] boils over and humorously and [[forcibly]] takes [[monitored]]. The [[cinematic]] is endlessly [[erratic]].

The film [[neatly]] [[offed]], it [[continually]] [[pick]] place at night during the winter with [[batch]] of [[diminishing]] snow. Its shot in black and [[branca]] with [[beatings]] of [[dye]] randomly [[appears]] [[in]]. Also, background screens [[displayed]] [[pictures]] that counter [[law]] with the [[picture]] up front. [[Adding]] [[Maxie]] von Sydow's hypnotic narration, and [[Europe]] [[becoming]] a dreamlike place that's out of this world.

This is now a personal [[prefers]] [[movies]] of [[mining]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1698 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This, "Prodigal Son" and "Eastern Condors" are my favourite Sammo Hung films. The Fat Dragon is fatter in this outing than he was in "Condors", but he's no less sure-footed as director or actor. He is, in fact, at the top of his form and delivers a devastating, brutal actioner that boasts half a dozen amazing sequences and manages to tell a compassionate, sweet love story also. Love and romance are not the director's priorities here, but they serve as curious adjuncts to the action, and insure that viewers don't hit the fast-forward button between the physical clashes.

The opening scene, which features a funny light sabre duel, sets a solid but deceptive tone. A sequence in which Sammo's pedicab is chased by a car is beautifully staged and sweetened with a sharp, comic tone. The fast and furious stick fight between Sammo and Lau Kar Leung is a model of dazzling choreography and sharp, superb direction, and easily one of the best ever of its type. The film's violence escalates slowly until, finally, when the climactic showdown comes, we are subjected to some of the most brutal altercations ever seen in a Sammo production. The director/actor's assault on Billy Chow and a house filled with angry, menacing opponents is a bone-cracking, physically punishing delight.

Terrific on every level and one of the best martial arts movies ever made.

Great score, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 1699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is one of those nostalgia things with me and I never REALLY expect anyone else to "get it" but am pleased when I recommend it and somebody DOES enjoy it. My late father HATED Arthur Askey but this film was one he really enjoyed and his consistent enthusiasm for "The Ghost Train" and "Old Ted 'Olmes" transferred to me as a child. Years later, I watch it every now and again, enjoying the familiarity. I always wonder if it will not be quite the same but I am never disappointed in it. There is much to enjoy. The sequence on the train is truly inspired when Askey and Murdoch proceed to annoy the arrogant male passenger. Then the whole section in the station is amazing with so much going on you have to keep up. Yes, it is dated and full of wartime Britishness in accents and plot (based on the original play by Arnold Ridley of Dad's Army fame!) but full of wonderful character performances - including Kathleen Harrison as a dotty spinster. The atmosphere is truly as near sinister as an Arthur Askey vehicle could get. This is available cheap as chips in the UK on DVD so treat yourself. It is a perfect Saturday/Sunday morning or any day lazy afternoon lightweight piece of entertainment. I Thank You....

OLD MOVIES CAN BE GOOD MOVIES! --------------------------------------------- Result 1700 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this. I got it thinking it was going to be a documentary, but it revealed itself as a good piece of tongue in cheek fun.

I think this has been well done, pretty much an extended TV show into a film, but due to the characters or rather original actors willingness to have fun and be made fun off helps this work in a great old style Innocent way.

If you are a fan of the original TV series then i am sure you will enjoy this.

Q --------------------------------------------- Result 1701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Welcome to Collinwood is one of the most delightful films I have ever seen. A superb ensemble cast, tight editing and wonderful direction. A caper movie that doesn't get bogged down in the standard tricks.

Not much can be said about this film without spoiling it. The tag line says it all - 5 guys. 1 Safe. No Brains.

William H Macy and Sam Rockwell lead an amazing cast. George Clooney should be congratulated for producing this gem.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] In her first nonaquatic role, Esther Williams plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, proving she could be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his [[finest]] performance. And he is so [[handsome]] it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward [[Andrews]] as his overly-protective father who is the standout.

Bathed in [[glorious]] Technicolor, The Unguarded Moment is irresistible hokum and at times [[compelling]] [[drama]]. In her first nonaquatic role, Esther Williams plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, proving she could be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his [[meanest]] performance. And he is so [[wondrous]] it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward [[Andrew]] as his overly-protective father who is the standout.

Bathed in [[wondrous]] Technicolor, The Unguarded Moment is irresistible hokum and at times [[convincing]] [[tragedy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I'm a fan of [[Crash]] and Blade [[Runner]] and this movie [[explores]] some of those [[highway]] [[death]] and 80s [[film]] [[noir]] themes that I like to [[see]], so I enjoyed it.

In general [[though]], the [[essential]] [[stupidity]] of the film [[noir]] [[protagonist]] is not [[pulled]] off well by the female lead and her [[hero]] is [[nearly]] a neanderthal, [[hence]] the kitch [[warning]]. I'm a fan of [[Accidents]] and Blade [[Racer]] and this movie [[studying]] some of those [[expressway]] [[deaths]] and 80s [[cinematography]] [[negro]] themes that I like to [[seeing]], so I enjoyed it.

In general [[nevertheless]], the [[vital]] [[foolishness]] of the film [[negro]] [[player]] is not [[pulling]] off well by the female lead and her [[heroin]] is [[practically]] a neanderthal, [[thereby]] the kitch [[alerting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sandra Bernhard's Without You I'm [[Nothing]], the [[movie]] released in 1990, followed on the heels of her 1988 off-Broadway [[stage]] [[production]] ... what she and others refer to in the [[movie]] as her "smash-hit one-woman [[show]]."

There were [[several]] changes in [[monologues]] and one-liners, and the [[movie]] version visually re-vamps the [[story]], taking [[Sandra]] from a [[fabulous]] existence as a successful [[stage]] [[performer]] in New York, during what she [[calls]] her "superstar summer," to an illusory, [[almost]] [[desperate]] existence back in her [[home]] in Los Angeles - her fictional manager in the film refers to it as getting Sandra back "to her [[roots]], to ... upscale [[supper]] clubs like the Parisian [[Room]]."

There's a point to be made here. Sandra tries to appeal her liberal worldview and her sometimes [[harsh]] critique of American [[pop]] [[culture]] to an audience that doesn't [[completely]] [[see]] it. [[In]] L.A. she's [[playing]] to a [[predominantly]] black [[audience]], [[trying]] to relate her [[ideas]] when all these people [[seem]] to want is "Shashonna," a Madonna-look-alike stripper. And even then, with Shashonna dancing to drum beats that [[resemble]] those from "Like a Virgin," there's not much to be [[said]] for the audience's enjoyment of the [[show]]. The scene in the club throughout the [[movie]] is dryer than a [[bone]]. A funny scene to [[catch]] is of a rotund [[man]] from the audience [[helping]] Shashonna out of her [[pants]].

But, if she's [[going]] down, Sandra's doing so with [[style]] and force, [[conveying]] everything from foul confidence to punctured vulnerability ... [[right]] to the point at which she's naked (literally), pleading for acceptance and [[yet]] somehow [[still]] swimming in the pool of her own transparent stardom. Her depictions of [[interactions]] with the likes of Calvin Klein, Jerry Lewis, [[Bianca]] Jagger, Ralph [[Lauren]] and (what we're lead to [[believe]] is) Warren Beatty are fictional and [[hilarious]].

[[Sandra]] begins her show in her most awkward moment, performing a [[quiet]] but [[mystifying]] rendition of Nina Simone's song "Four [[Women]]" while dressed in a mufti and other African [[garb]], singing lines such as "my skin is black," "my [[hair]] is wooly," and "they [[call]] me [[Sweet]] Thing."

She resurrects and celebrates the ghosts of underworld art in a tremendously funny description of the frenzied estate auction for Andy Warhol: "Leave it to Andy to have the wisdom and sensitivity into the hours and hours of toil and labor that went into the Indian product ... that they've been so lucky to cash in on this whole Santa Fe thing happening."

She expounds on the excessiveness of Hollywood, consoling a distraught friend then admonishing him, saying "Mister, if this is about Ishtar, I'm getting up right now and walking out of your life forever because that's too self-indulgent even for me!"

Sandra illustrates the expectations of women in the age of feminism. Dressed as a Cosmo girl, Sandra retells her young-girl fantasy to become an executive secretary and marry her boss. She eventually concludes in relief, "I'll never be a statistic, not me. I'm under 35, and I'm going to be married!"

Sandra extols the opening of sexuality in society: "When he touches you in the [[night]], does it feel all right, or does it feel real? I say it feels real... MIGHTY real."

Finally, she cries for change in progressive American society by channeling disco greats Patrick Cowley and Sylvester and proclaiming, "Eventually everyone will funk!"

All this comes in the form of glitzy, schmaltzy but wonderful cabaret performances of songs written and originated by Billy Paul, Burt Bacharach, Hank Williams and Laura Nyro, to name a few. At the same time, the idealized, fictional incarnation of Sandra -- her self-generated mirror image -- floats around town, a [[beautiful]] black model with flowing gowns and tight bustiers reading the Kabala, studying chemistry and listening to NWA rap music.

In Without You I'm Nothing, Sandra Bernhard explores [[emotions]] and existences that, up until then, she'd only toyed with as a regular guest on Late Night With David Letterman. Her almost child-like enthusiasm for shock, exhibited throughout the '80s, is thrown aside in the face of a subtler allure, and her confidence in the face of materialism and American celebrity proves refreshing. This approach to comedy would change Sandra's direction forever and mark the more mature, more personable entertainer to come.

If you like subtle humor to the point of engaging in inside jokes about glamour, celebrity, sex, loneliness, despair and shallow expressions of love and kinship, this movie will keep you in stitches. It may not be meant to be funny across the board. Perhaps it's a bit unsettling or even maudlin for some. But consider the emptiness of the world Sandra paints for you, and you'll understand just how funny and brilliant she really is.

But see Without You I'm Nothing with a friend "in the know" because it's definitely funnier that way. Before you know it, the two of you will be trading Sandra barbs and confusing the hell out of everyone else. Sandra Bernhard's Without You I'm [[Anything]], the [[cinematography]] released in 1990, followed on the heels of her 1988 off-Broadway [[stages]] [[productivity]] ... what she and others refer to in the [[cinematography]] as her "smash-hit one-woman [[demonstrating]]."

There were [[many]] changes in [[monologue]] and one-liners, and the [[movies]] version visually re-vamps the [[tale]], taking [[Xander]] from a [[fantastic]] existence as a successful [[stages]] [[entertainer]] in New York, during what she [[invites]] her "superstar summer," to an illusory, [[around]] [[hopeless]] existence back in her [[household]] in Los Angeles - her fictional manager in the film refers to it as getting Sandra back "to her [[sources]], to ... upscale [[lunch]] clubs like the Parisian [[Rooms]]."

There's a point to be made here. Sandra tries to appeal her liberal worldview and her sometimes [[severe]] critique of American [[pops]] [[cultures]] to an audience that doesn't [[entirely]] [[seeing]] it. [[For]] L.A. she's [[play]] to a [[principally]] black [[audiences]], [[tempting]] to relate her [[insights]] when all these people [[looks]] to want is "Shashonna," a Madonna-look-alike stripper. And even then, with Shashonna dancing to drum beats that [[resembling]] those from "Like a Virgin," there's not much to be [[say]] for the audience's enjoyment of the [[display]]. The scene in the club throughout the [[cinematography]] is dryer than a [[bony]]. A funny scene to [[captured]] is of a rotund [[guy]] from the audience [[supporting]] Shashonna out of her [[panties]].

But, if she's [[gonna]] down, Sandra's doing so with [[styles]] and force, [[transmitted]] everything from foul confidence to punctured vulnerability ... [[rights]] to the point at which she's naked (literally), pleading for acceptance and [[still]] somehow [[yet]] swimming in the pool of her own transparent stardom. Her depictions of [[interaction]] with the likes of Calvin Klein, Jerry Lewis, [[White]] Jagger, Ralph [[Lorraine]] and (what we're lead to [[reckon]] is) Warren Beatty are fictional and [[amusing]].

[[Sondra]] begins her show in her most awkward moment, performing a [[silent]] but [[baffling]] rendition of Nina Simone's song "Four [[Female]]" while dressed in a mufti and other African [[dresses]], singing lines such as "my skin is black," "my [[hairdresser]] is wooly," and "they [[calling]] me [[Sugary]] Thing."

She resurrects and celebrates the ghosts of underworld art in a tremendously funny description of the frenzied estate auction for Andy Warhol: "Leave it to Andy to have the wisdom and sensitivity into the hours and hours of toil and labor that went into the Indian product ... that they've been so lucky to cash in on this whole Santa Fe thing happening."

She expounds on the excessiveness of Hollywood, consoling a distraught friend then admonishing him, saying "Mister, if this is about Ishtar, I'm getting up right now and walking out of your life forever because that's too self-indulgent even for me!"

Sandra illustrates the expectations of women in the age of feminism. Dressed as a Cosmo girl, Sandra retells her young-girl fantasy to become an executive secretary and marry her boss. She eventually concludes in relief, "I'll never be a statistic, not me. I'm under 35, and I'm going to be married!"

Sandra extols the opening of sexuality in society: "When he touches you in the [[nighttime]], does it feel all right, or does it feel real? I say it feels real... MIGHTY real."

Finally, she cries for change in progressive American society by channeling disco greats Patrick Cowley and Sylvester and proclaiming, "Eventually everyone will funk!"

All this comes in the form of glitzy, schmaltzy but wonderful cabaret performances of songs written and originated by Billy Paul, Burt Bacharach, Hank Williams and Laura Nyro, to name a few. At the same time, the idealized, fictional incarnation of Sandra -- her self-generated mirror image -- floats around town, a [[admirable]] black model with flowing gowns and tight bustiers reading the Kabala, studying chemistry and listening to NWA rap music.

In Without You I'm Nothing, Sandra Bernhard explores [[feelings]] and existences that, up until then, she'd only toyed with as a regular guest on Late Night With David Letterman. Her almost child-like enthusiasm for shock, exhibited throughout the '80s, is thrown aside in the face of a subtler allure, and her confidence in the face of materialism and American celebrity proves refreshing. This approach to comedy would change Sandra's direction forever and mark the more mature, more personable entertainer to come.

If you like subtle humor to the point of engaging in inside jokes about glamour, celebrity, sex, loneliness, despair and shallow expressions of love and kinship, this movie will keep you in stitches. It may not be meant to be funny across the board. Perhaps it's a bit unsettling or even maudlin for some. But consider the emptiness of the world Sandra paints for you, and you'll understand just how funny and brilliant she really is.

But see Without You I'm Nothing with a friend "in the know" because it's definitely funnier that way. Before you know it, the two of you will be trading Sandra barbs and confusing the hell out of everyone else. --------------------------------------------- Result 1705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] [[If]] you've seen other movies like this, they're [[probably]] better. The Omega Man [[comes]] to mind. To the studio's credit, they avoided the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and [[premise]] were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING [[else]]! I get [[tired]] of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, [[ineffective]], arrogant [[characters]] in a movie. That pretty much [[describes]] everyone in the movie at some point. I [[rented]] it, and found myself [[yelling]] at the TV [[repeatedly]], "no, don't do that!", "why are you so [[stupid]]", "[[look]] out!", etcetera. A [[true]] [[lack]] of [[character]] [[development]] is [[evident]] about [[halfway]] in. A [[movie]] [[SHOULD]] give you a [[strong]] personal [[connection]] with at [[least]] some of the [[characters]] so that you [[actually]] [[care]] what [[happens]] to them. This one does not. [[Also]],there should have been a [[longer]], more involving end to the [[movie]] as well. [[Though]] you've seen other movies like this, they're [[undeniably]] better. The Omega Man [[arrives]] to mind. To the studio's credit, they avoided the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and [[prerequisite]] were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING [[further]]! I get [[jaded]] of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, [[ineffectual]], arrogant [[personages]] in a movie. That pretty much [[portray]] everyone in the movie at some point. I [[leases]] it, and found myself [[shrieking]] at the TV [[constantly]], "no, don't do that!", "why are you so [[dumb]]", "[[peek]] out!", etcetera. A [[veritable]] [[lacked]] of [[traits]] [[evolution]] is [[visible]] about [[midway]] in. A [[filmmaking]] [[NEEDS]] give you a [[forceful]] personal [[connecting]] with at [[lowest]] some of the [[personages]] so that you [[genuinely]] [[caring]] what [[arrives]] to them. This one does not. [[Moreover]],there should have been a [[most]], more involving end to the [[film]] as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] one of the funnest mario's i've ever played. the levels are creative, there are fluid controls, and good graphics for its time. there's also a multitude of crazy bosses and enemies to fight. Sometimes the levels get frustrating, and if you leave out some of the hard levels and still, need to get more accomplished to fight a boss, it can be annoying. another complaint is the camera angle; though it works fairly well most of the time, it can be a pain in certain situations. if your a big time mario fan; this ones for you. even if your not a huge fan of him, i'd still recommend this one. its a big game, and getting what you need can take a while, but it's very satisfying. good for playing in short bursts of time. it will almost certainly hold your interest; it sure does hold mine! --------------------------------------------- Result 1707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This is my first comment! This is a fantastic movie! I watched it all by luck one night on TV. At first 5 minutes i thought it was a B movie, but afterward i understood what an [[amazing]] product this was.

I suggested to some friends to see the movie, only to tell me that it was a bad B movie. How wrong. Superficial critiques.

I think that the movie is almost a product of genius! The well known director made an excellent job here and it is a shame to tell that he was out of the game all this time. This is my first comment! This is a fantastic movie! I watched it all by luck one night on TV. At first 5 minutes i thought it was a B movie, but afterward i understood what an [[wondrous]] product this was.

I suggested to some friends to see the movie, only to tell me that it was a bad B movie. How wrong. Superficial critiques.

I think that the movie is almost a product of genius! The well known director made an excellent job here and it is a shame to tell that he was out of the game all this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] It is not un-common to see U.S. re-makes of [[foreign]] [[movies]] that [[fall]] flat on their [[face]], but here is the [[flip]] side!!! This is an [[awful]] re-make of the U.S. movie "[[Wide]] Awake" by the British!

"Wide Awake" is strange but entertaining and funny! "Liam" on the other hand is just [[strange]]. I [[must]] give [[credit]] to "[[Liam]]" for one [[thing]], and that is making it clear that I [[made]] the right choice in [[changing]] my [[religion]]! It is not un-common to see U.S. re-makes of [[overseas]] [[filmmaking]] that [[declined]] flat on their [[encounter]], but here is the [[leafy]] side!!! This is an [[abhorrent]] re-make of the U.S. movie "[[Grands]] Awake" by the British!

"Wide Awake" is strange but entertaining and funny! "Liam" on the other hand is just [[unusual]]. I [[owe]] give [[credits]] to "[[Llam]]" for one [[stuff]], and that is making it clear that I [[effected]] the right choice in [[modifying]] my [[cults]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1709 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I [[picked]] up this [[movie]] with the [[intention]] of getting a [[bad]] zombie [[movie]]. But I had no [[Idea]] what I was [[getting]] myself into.

I [[started]] the [[movie]] and soon I had been pulled into a world of [[pain]] and [[visual]] [[torture]].

I finally know what [[hell]] is like. It's this [[movie]]. [[For]] eternity. This [[movie]] has no [[value]]. It didn't [[even]] [[really]] have a [[plot]]. There was [[stuff]] going on in each scene but no [[overall]] [[explanation]] why [[anything]] happens.

[[Instead]] of watching this [[movie]] I [[suggest]] that you line the [[nearest]] blender with [[oil]] and [[try]] and [[stuff]] as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the [[outcome]] to be far more [[pleasant]] than this [[movie]].

Don't even watch it. Not [[even]] to see how [[bad]] it is. I [[beg]] you. If you watch it, then it means they [[win]]. I [[selected]] up this [[filmmaking]] with the [[intents]] of getting a [[negative]] zombie [[flick]]. But I had no [[Thoughts]] what I was [[obtain]] myself into.

I [[initiated]] the [[filmmaking]] and soon I had been pulled into a world of [[painless]] and [[optic]] [[tortures]].

I finally know what [[brothel]] is like. It's this [[filmmaking]]. [[During]] eternity. This [[filmmaking]] has no [[values]]. It didn't [[yet]] [[truly]] have a [[intrigue]]. There was [[thing]] going on in each scene but no [[general]] [[explanations]] why [[something]] happens.

[[However]] of watching this [[filmmaking]] I [[suggests]] that you line the [[near]] blender with [[oils]] and [[attempts]] and [[thing]] as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the [[result]] to be far more [[enjoyable]] than this [[film]].

Don't even watch it. Not [[yet]] to see how [[naughty]] it is. I [[implore]] you. If you watch it, then it means they [[triumphed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] ~~I was able to see this movie yesterday morning on a early viewing pass~~

I am a mom of 2 children, who range from 11 down to 6. So I'm sure plenty of parents can relate to having to [[see]] many many "kids" [[movies]]. This was refreshing for me. I haven't read this particular book, so I don't know if it stayed true to the book or not. But it sure took the grossness factor to a [[high]] [[level]]. This is the [[story]] of the "new" [[kid]] in town and it just so happens that there are a [[group]] of [[boys]] who have formed a club of sorts and love to [[pick]] on [[kids]] ....[[sound]] familiar? Haven't we all suffered this one [[time]] or another. He has the little brother who he [[cant]] [[stand]] and [[parents]] that he is [[embarrassed]] about. What I [[enjoyed]] most of all was [[seeing]] how each [[character]] was [[totally]] [[different]] from another they all [[stood]] out. The bully (why do they [[always]] make the bully a red head? My daughter has red hair! and she is no bully!..lol) is well a [[great]] bully, who finds himself being yelled at by his own [[big]] brother. It took [[twists]] and turns and well you [[fall]] in [[love]] with all of them and [[really]] [[find]] yourself routing for all the [[characters]]! Even the parents, [[great]] connection between father and son. [[All]] around [[enjoyable]], sweet,funny, gross etc......Take your [[kids]]!!! You will [[enjoy]] it as much as they do! ~~I was able to see this movie yesterday morning on a early viewing pass~~

I am a mom of 2 children, who range from 11 down to 6. So I'm sure plenty of parents can relate to having to [[behold]] many many "kids" [[movie]]. This was refreshing for me. I haven't read this particular book, so I don't know if it stayed true to the book or not. But it sure took the grossness factor to a [[supreme]] [[levels]]. This is the [[conte]] of the "new" [[children]] in town and it just so happens that there are a [[panel]] of [[guy]] who have formed a club of sorts and love to [[selected]] on [[children]] ....[[sounds]] familiar? Haven't we all suffered this one [[times]] or another. He has the little brother who he [[couldnt]] [[stands]] and [[parenting]] that he is [[ashamed]] about. What I [[appreciated]] most of all was [[see]] how each [[nature]] was [[altogether]] [[several]] from another they all [[amounted]] out. The bully (why do they [[permanently]] make the bully a red head? My daughter has red hair! and she is no bully!..lol) is well a [[huge]] bully, who finds himself being yelled at by his own [[enormous]] brother. It took [[spins]] and turns and well you [[decline]] in [[amore]] with all of them and [[genuinely]] [[finds]] yourself routing for all the [[features]]! Even the parents, [[wondrous]] connection between father and son. [[Entire]] around [[nice]], sweet,funny, gross etc......Take your [[brats]]!!! You will [[enjoys]] it as much as they do! --------------------------------------------- Result 1711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] the only word i can think of to describe this [[movie]] is: Ordinary.

The plot line about Gary sinise's [[character]] [[attempting]] suicide is a [[ridiculous]] [[premise]] and c'mon..[[living]] as some [[sort]] Salingeristic hermit or recluse in a shack driving golf balls into the [[ocean]] because he couldn't handle life in the lucrative pro/am golf community? cry me a river. I wish these were my [[problems]]. I do enjoy [[Dylan]] [[Baker]] and Sinise but this movie was clearly a [[bad]] choice or a [[pay]] check for Sinise. The scene in which [[little]] Timmy Price [[gets]] [[verbally]] [[abused]] by the other club [[member]] in [[front]] of his father during the tournament is so over the top that i am embarrassed to watch it the only word i can think of to describe this [[filmmaking]] is: Ordinary.

The plot line about Gary sinise's [[trait]] [[tried]] suicide is a [[silly]] [[supposition]] and c'mon..[[live]] as some [[sorts]] Salingeristic hermit or recluse in a shack driving golf balls into the [[maritime]] because he couldn't handle life in the lucrative pro/am golf community? cry me a river. I wish these were my [[difficulty]]. I do enjoy [[Dillon]] [[Boulanger]] and Sinise but this movie was clearly a [[negative]] choice or a [[wages]] check for Sinise. The scene in which [[small]] Timmy Price [[got]] [[orally]] [[misused]] by the other club [[members]] in [[newsweek]] of his father during the tournament is so over the top that i am embarrassed to watch it --------------------------------------------- Result 1712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bedknobs & Broomsticks is another one of Disney's masterpieces. It was filmed with sequences of animation and the actors and actresses interacting with the animations. (A similar concept was used in Mary Poppins when the children and Mary disappear into the sidewalk art.) I am mainly rating this film through child's eyes because I have not seen it in years. Back then, it was one of my favourite films. It was magical and mystical, and the last scenes (the conflict beginning with the ghostly armour walking into battle) were my favourites. There was also a lot of stop-animation used with the spells (ie, people turning into rabbits), which may be a little dated and silly now. (Also, I believe that the film starts off slowly.) Through the eyes of a child, this is a fun film and it is easy for children to put themselves into the places of the children in the film. It is an imaginative film which is sadly largely-forgotten today. --------------------------------------------- Result 1713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Michelle Rodrigez was [[made]] for this movie, when I [[first]] [[saw]] her in Fast and the Furious. You could tell that she was a tough woman. With this movie, she has not only proven her acting, but shows no [[fear]] and is [[tough]] like she should be in this [[movie]]. She is more a bad [[girl]] and that's what I [[like]] about her. This movie is about a [[troubled]] girl, living the life as a tom boy and getting in constant trouble with school and family. As she gets interested in her brothers training to be a boxer, she decides to go after her [[love]] to fight and asks her [[brothers]] [[trainer]] to [[train]] her. Even though they don't [[think]] she has the potential, they get to be shown proven wrong.

I [[think]] this [[movie]] was a [[little]] slow at the ending, but was well [[done]]. It [[shows]], that people can do anything [[even]] if they don't think you have the potential. I [[recommend]] it to be seen. Michelle Rodrigez was [[accomplished]] for this movie, when I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] her in Fast and the Furious. You could tell that she was a tough woman. With this movie, she has not only proven her acting, but shows no [[angst]] and is [[stiff]] like she should be in this [[flick]]. She is more a bad [[female]] and that's what I [[likes]] about her. This movie is about a [[concussed]] girl, living the life as a tom boy and getting in constant trouble with school and family. As she gets interested in her brothers training to be a boxer, she decides to go after her [[iove]] to fight and asks her [[plymouth]] [[coach]] to [[forming]] her. Even though they don't [[reckon]] she has the potential, they get to be shown proven wrong.

I [[thought]] this [[kino]] was a [[kiddo]] slow at the ending, but was well [[played]]. It [[displaying]], that people can do anything [[yet]] if they don't think you have the potential. I [[recommending]] it to be seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1714 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] What [[happened]]? What we have here is basically a solid and plausible [[premise]] and with a decent and talented cast, but somewhere the [[movie]] loses it. Actually, it never [[really]] got going. There was a [[little]] excitement when we find out that Angie is not really pregnant, then find out that she is after all, but that was it. [[Steve]] [[Martin]], who is a very talented person and usually brings a [[lot]] to a movie, was [[dreadful]] and his entire character was not even close to being [[important]] to this movie, other than to make it longer. I really would have [[liked]] to see more interactions between the main characters, Kate and Angie, and [[maybe]] [[try]] not for a pure comedy, which unfortunately it was not, but [[maybe]] a drama with comedic elements. I think if the [[movie]] did this it [[could]] have been very funny [[since]] both [[actresses]] are quite funny in their own ways and [[sitting]] here I can [[think]] of [[numerous]] scenarios that would have been a riot. What [[transpired]]? What we have here is basically a solid and plausible [[supposition]] and with a decent and talented cast, but somewhere the [[filmmaking]] loses it. Actually, it never [[truly]] got going. There was a [[petite]] excitement when we find out that Angie is not really pregnant, then find out that she is after all, but that was it. [[Stephens]] [[Martins]], who is a very talented person and usually brings a [[batches]] to a movie, was [[abhorrent]] and his entire character was not even close to being [[principal]] to this movie, other than to make it longer. I really would have [[enjoyed]] to see more interactions between the main characters, Kate and Angie, and [[conceivably]] [[endeavour]] not for a pure comedy, which unfortunately it was not, but [[presumably]] a drama with comedic elements. I think if the [[filmmaking]] did this it [[did]] have been very funny [[because]] both [[actors]] are quite funny in their own ways and [[seated]] here I can [[reckon]] of [[many]] scenarios that would have been a riot. --------------------------------------------- Result 1715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] By some happy coincidence the same year that Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak made Alfred Hitchcock's haunting masterpiece "Vertigo", they also made this light comedy. Perhaps the two actors needed to do it after undergoing the heaviness of the Hitchcock film . At any rate this a great companion piece to "Vertigo" as it again explores a very un-likely but powerful romance. In fact the film can be seen as the flip side of "Vertigo" with it's happy ending. Here again Novak undergoes a transformation, in Vertigo she essentially plays two women and here she 'transforms' from witch to mortal. Stewart is again bewitched and for awhile tormented by his love for her. Unlike Vertigo the two come together in "Bell Book and Candle" , a perfect antidote for the Hitcock movie. Again the dynamics of love and attraction are examined but in an altogether different vein. The cast is terrific. Lemmon hilarious as Novak's warlock brother and Elsa Lancaster giving a classic performance as the Aunt. Ernie Kovacs as the alcoholic cult writer and of course Hermoine Gingold playing Novak's competitor are all great. The scene with Stewart drinking the potion is comedy at it's best. Anyone who has seen Vertigo or even if you haven't should see this memorable light comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Having heard quite positive [[reviews]] and having [[seen]] the trailer I had to see this movie. With William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Michael Jeter and Sam Rockwell present it had to be good. And it [[delivered]]. [[Overall]], the movie is not crack-you-up funny, but there is one scene that really stands out and is, in a my eyes, a [[classic]]. SPOILER [[At]] the end, where they break through the wall to get to the safe and we see Rockwell and Washington stare at Jeter is just [[fantastic]]. This is just as good as the scene in The [[Big]] Lebowski where The Dude is using a chair to [[barricade]] his door, but [[forgets]] the door [[turns]] outward! END SPOILER Just go [[see]] this [[movie]], you won't be [[disappointed]]. Having heard quite positive [[inspects]] and having [[watched]] the trailer I had to see this movie. With William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Michael Jeter and Sam Rockwell present it had to be good. And it [[handed]]. [[Entire]], the movie is not crack-you-up funny, but there is one scene that really stands out and is, in a my eyes, a [[conventional]]. SPOILER [[During]] the end, where they break through the wall to get to the safe and we see Rockwell and Washington stare at Jeter is just [[wondrous]]. This is just as good as the scene in The [[Major]] Lebowski where The Dude is using a chair to [[roadblock]] his door, but [[neglects]] the door [[revolves]] outward! END SPOILER Just go [[seeing]] this [[cinematography]], you won't be [[disillusioned]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I know Anime. I've been into it long before it became a national phenomenon; i loved Ranma before most people knew what Dragonball Z even was. And just so you know I'm not bragging about my, let me say this: out of all the animes I've seen, Castle in the Sky is by far one of the best. It's obvious people say Spirited Away is the best, but I really disagree. Most people only know that movie because it one an Acedmy Award; this isn't an exaggeration - I've shown Princess Mononoke and Castle in the Sky to people who'd only ever seen Spirited Away, and they agree that the latter two are the superior of the three. Personally, I'd never thought that anything could compare to Princess Mononoke, until I finally saw Castle in the Sky. I still think that the prior is the better of the two, but Castle in the Sky is easily on par with it; in many ways, Castle has major elements that Mononoke was missing. In either case, if you've only seen Spirited Away, and think that that is Miyazaki's best film, be prepared to have your earth shaken. --------------------------------------------- Result 1718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] It's [[nothing]] [[brilliant]], [[groundbreaking]] or innovative, but 'Dog Days' is for some reason an [[extremely]] [[fascinating]] [[character]] study. It's like CRASH tripping on a bad dose of heroin, but not [[really]]. It's an Austrian film following the lives of several depressed, deranged and annoying people and their abusive relationships with each other. It's [[disturbing]], [[yet]] very well-acted and it's interesting to watch the crazy little things these characters do. Certainly not for the weak-hearted, this highly pessimistic film offers no [[conclusion]] or [[revelation]] at the [[end]], we just see the [[lives]] of these [[sordid]] individuals over the course of two days. Grade: B It's [[anything]] [[resplendent]], [[revolutionary]] or innovative, but 'Dog Days' is for some reason an [[unbelievably]] [[riveting]] [[personages]] study. It's like CRASH tripping on a bad dose of heroin, but not [[genuinely]]. It's an Austrian film following the lives of several depressed, deranged and annoying people and their abusive relationships with each other. It's [[troubling]], [[even]] very well-acted and it's interesting to watch the crazy little things these characters do. Certainly not for the weak-hearted, this highly pessimistic film offers no [[conclusions]] or [[epiphany]] at the [[ceases]], we just see the [[iife]] of these [[squalid]] individuals over the course of two days. Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 1719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] This had a great cast with big-name stars like Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, Randolph Scott, Nancy Kelly, Henry Hull and Brian Donlevey and a bunch more lesser-but-known names with shorter roles. It also had Technicolor, one of the few movies made with it in 1939.

Now the [[bad]] news.......regrettably, I can't say much positive for the story. It portrayed the James boys in a totally positive light....and Hollywood has done that ever since. Why these criminals are always shown to be the "good guys" is beyond me. This film glamorizes them and made their enemies - the railroad people - into vicious human beings. The latter was exaggerated so much it was preposterous. Well, that's the film world for you: evil is good; good is bad.

Hey Hollywood: here's a news flash - The James boys were criminals! Really - look it up! This had a great cast with big-name stars like Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, Randolph Scott, Nancy Kelly, Henry Hull and Brian Donlevey and a bunch more lesser-but-known names with shorter roles. It also had Technicolor, one of the few movies made with it in 1939.

Now the [[unfavorable]] news.......regrettably, I can't say much positive for the story. It portrayed the James boys in a totally positive light....and Hollywood has done that ever since. Why these criminals are always shown to be the "good guys" is beyond me. This film glamorizes them and made their enemies - the railroad people - into vicious human beings. The latter was exaggerated so much it was preposterous. Well, that's the film world for you: evil is good; good is bad.

Hey Hollywood: here's a news flash - The James boys were criminals! Really - look it up! --------------------------------------------- Result 1720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shame on Julia Roberts and John Cusack. They are so talented and should not have had any part in this movie. The storyline was dumb and predictable. The jokes were not funny. The romance was not really romance. I was all too happy when this movie ended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I love these "Diaper Baby" movies! You couldn't make a movie like this [[today]] and it is [[rich]] in cinematic history. It is goofy and the film was [[made]] to make you laugh, which it does. How they ever got these [[kids]] to "act" I'll never [[know]]. I [[think]] they are [[precious]] and the kids make me laugh but so do the others who made this movie as it shows the naiveté that existed in the early 30's. You have to remember that this is when the film industry was very young, the stock market had crashed, the world wide depression was beginning and these films were [[made]] to give a person a break from the real world. The fact that you could see movies for five cents is beyond my comprehension, but then dinner for 25 cents is too. It was a [[different]] time with a totally [[different]] [[mind]] set. I love these "Diaper Baby" movies! You couldn't make a movie like this [[hoy]] and it is [[wealthy]] in cinematic history. It is goofy and the film was [[introduced]] to make you laugh, which it does. How they ever got these [[brats]] to "act" I'll never [[savoir]]. I [[ideas]] they are [[cherish]] and the kids make me laugh but so do the others who made this movie as it shows the naiveté that existed in the early 30's. You have to remember that this is when the film industry was very young, the stock market had crashed, the world wide depression was beginning and these films were [[brought]] to give a person a break from the real world. The fact that you could see movies for five cents is beyond my comprehension, but then dinner for 25 cents is too. It was a [[differing]] time with a totally [[various]] [[esprit]] set. --------------------------------------------- Result 1722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I had heard some [[bad]] things about Cabin Fever [[almost]] as much as I [[heard]] the cultish [[hype]]. As it [[turns]] out, the first film from the [[new]] impresario Eli Roth, it's just a so-so [[effort]] with the [[IQ]] [[points]] [[dropping]] as the film progresses. There are [[worse]] [[movies]] out there, and [[surely]] more [[gory]] ones (while I'm not sure how the hype-meter got so [[high]] on the blood-count for [[Hostel]], there is a good amount for genre fans here). The premise isn't necessarily bad either [[though]]: kids [[go]] to a cabin for a [[week]] of partying, only to come [[across]] a very sick [[man]], covered in blood, whom in a panic they set on fire. He winds up dead in the water that [[feeds]] the [[reservoir]], and [[soon]] the characters all succumb to the flesh-eating virus one [[way]] or another. The characters, either the lead [[college]] kids (including Rider Strong as the hero and James DiBello as the goofy side-bar) or the supporting 'village' folks are archetypal to the point of inertia, if not painfully so.

As they [[meet]] their [[fates]], the townspeople get pretty weird, and it just seems to be non-sensibly [[thrown]] together without the many [[laughs]]; 'Pancakes kid' comes out of nowhere, and [[maybe]] might have been funnier in another [[movie]] or by itself, but in the [[context]] of the rest of the movie, it just doesn't [[work]]. There's also a [[young]] [[police]] character who is even dumber and less [[convincing]] than the others. And the [[family]] that goes after DiBello following an [[incident]] has some [[possibilities]] that aren't realized. But all the while, [[Roth]] [[pumps]] up his script with common sense out the [[window]] and [[sudden]] scares and frights with people [[hacking]] up blood on one another and a killer [[dog]] rambling [[around]]. Which isn't all for not [[either]]. Now, unlike [[lesser]] Troma horror [[movies]] or even [[lesser]] ones of the 70s or 80s- to which I'm sure Roth is a die-hard fan- he doesn't make it unwatchable. It's also [[smart]] to not have any [[explanation]] for where the virus comes from.

But unlike those films too, he also doesn't really have a fine [[idea]] of what makes for [[great]] campy-horror [[times]]. His [[film]] [[tries]] for that, of course, and only once or twice does he make it a goofy, bloody time (I did like the random bunny Strong sees while on the gurney). It's not even very poorly shot a lot of the time (albeit with its own contrived style-choices ala red [[tint]] on the [[lens]] or that story with the bowling-alley worker). It simply contains a lot of illogical scenarios and choices made ([[shave]] your legs with a deadly virus, uh-huh), and it aims for fairly typical ground. If that's your cup of tea, more power to you. But at the end I found it to be actually un-exceptional genre territory that doesn't offend audience sensibilities ala Saw, but doesn't swing for the fence either as a clever B-movie. Roth also has the temerity to end the movie on a true note of 'what-the-hell' as the Santa Claus bearded convenience store clerk from earlier in the film serves a bunch of black people. It could work if he followed up on it with something better, or if he dropped it altogether. Same could be said for a lot of the movie. C- I had heard some [[negative]] things about Cabin Fever [[hardly]] as much as I [[listened]] the cultish [[fanfare]]. As it [[revolves]] out, the first film from the [[newest]] impresario Eli Roth, it's just a so-so [[efforts]] with the [[QI]] [[dot]] [[downed]] as the film progresses. There are [[pire]] [[film]] out there, and [[definitely]] more [[gori]] ones (while I'm not sure how the hype-meter got so [[supreme]] on the blood-count for [[Dormitory]], there is a good amount for genre fans here). The premise isn't necessarily bad either [[notwithstanding]]: kids [[going]] to a cabin for a [[chow]] of partying, only to come [[throughout]] a very sick [[guy]], covered in blood, whom in a panic they set on fire. He winds up dead in the water that [[eats]] the [[tank]], and [[shortly]] the characters all succumb to the flesh-eating virus one [[ways]] or another. The characters, either the lead [[academia]] kids (including Rider Strong as the hero and James DiBello as the goofy side-bar) or the supporting 'village' folks are archetypal to the point of inertia, if not painfully so.

As they [[respond]] their [[destinations]], the townspeople get pretty weird, and it just seems to be non-sensibly [[threw]] together without the many [[smiles]]; 'Pancakes kid' comes out of nowhere, and [[potentially]] might have been funnier in another [[filmmaking]] or by itself, but in the [[backgrounds]] of the rest of the movie, it just doesn't [[collaboration]]. There's also a [[youthful]] [[cop]] character who is even dumber and less [[persuading]] than the others. And the [[familia]] that goes after DiBello following an [[misadventure]] has some [[chances]] that aren't realized. But all the while, [[Ruth]] [[pump]] up his script with common sense out the [[luna]] and [[abrupt]] scares and frights with people [[piracy]] up blood on one another and a killer [[canine]] rambling [[throughout]]. Which isn't all for not [[neither]]. Now, unlike [[minor]] Troma horror [[filmmaking]] or even [[minor]] ones of the 70s or 80s- to which I'm sure Roth is a die-hard fan- he doesn't make it unwatchable. It's also [[shrewd]] to not have any [[explanations]] for where the virus comes from.

But unlike those films too, he also doesn't really have a fine [[concept]] of what makes for [[awesome]] campy-horror [[moments]]. His [[movie]] [[strive]] for that, of course, and only once or twice does he make it a goofy, bloody time (I did like the random bunny Strong sees while on the gurney). It's not even very poorly shot a lot of the time (albeit with its own contrived style-choices ala red [[coloration]] on the [[lenses]] or that story with the bowling-alley worker). It simply contains a lot of illogical scenarios and choices made ([[shaving]] your legs with a deadly virus, uh-huh), and it aims for fairly typical ground. If that's your cup of tea, more power to you. But at the end I found it to be actually un-exceptional genre territory that doesn't offend audience sensibilities ala Saw, but doesn't swing for the fence either as a clever B-movie. Roth also has the temerity to end the movie on a true note of 'what-the-hell' as the Santa Claus bearded convenience store clerk from earlier in the film serves a bunch of black people. It could work if he followed up on it with something better, or if he dropped it altogether. Same could be said for a lot of the movie. C- --------------------------------------------- Result 1723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My, how the mighty have fallen. Kim Basinger is a great actress but she was definitely slumming when she took this role. This movie is bad for one reason in particular: lapses in logic. Its looks like one of those movies that would have been passable with all its plot holes if it had came out in the 80s and 90s but in 2008 it just looks real stupid. This is the worst thriller I've ever seen and I've seen The Bone Collector and Twisted.

The story details Della(Kim Basinger)is just getting from buying gifts in a mall an is harassed by a gang of thugs that end up killing a cop that came to her aid. From then on she is chased by these idiotic goons through an abandoned street and she gets rid of them one by one with a toolbox full of tools.

So many things are wrong with this movie. As I said this movie leaps over logic at every turn and with the exception of Kim Basinger, the acting is made-for-TV bad. Hell, this pseudo thriller is made-for-TV bad. The way she kills each of these politically correct thugs(1 Caucasian, 1 Hispanic, 1 Asian and 1 African American all coming together to stalk a Caucasian woman. Don't you just love America?)is laughable to a fault. The way she killed the Hispanic guy made me laugh hysterically. The sex scene with the main hoodlum was so out in left field that it make you shake your head in shame. I only recommend this to lovers of bad films and no one else. Anybody else especially Kim Basinger fans would do well not to own this flick. You don't want see an actress you respect in a film this bad now do you? Of course not. You were warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 1724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is really special. It's a very beautiful movie. Which starts with three orphans, Sho, his brother Shinji and their friend Toshi, They're poor children's, living on the street, but one day they succeeded to steal a bag full of money, and then their able to live on, to buy a house, and their life seems to become much better. They're making new friend, life-friends. But something went wrong and they're becoming enemies and it all ends up with them killing each other.

I was negative about this movie in the beginning, because when singers (Gackt - Solo, ex-singer in Malice Mizer, Hyde - Solo, singer in L'Arc~en~Ciel, both very famous in Japan and Wang Lee-Hom - Taiwanese singer) trying to become actors, but this isn't like the other singers-going-actors-movies. They're doing a great job, and with no earlier experience in movies (except for Lee-Hom, who had been in two movies before).

This is absolutely one of my favorite movies. Maybe that's a little because I'm a very big fan of Hyde, but - it was this movie who made me discover him.

Well, Gackt (playing the main character - the orphan Sho) was a part of the group who wrote the script, and it was he who insisted that Hyde should play Sho's friend, the vampire Kei. At that time they didn't know each other, at least not like friends. But after the movie they became really good friend, and that shows us too that they really worked hard on this movie and that they had good cooperation.

The movie have many different feelings running trough the story, Love, Hate, Sadness, Pain, Loneliness, Happiness and so on. I think the first hour are the best, it's so beautiful. After that people are dying, Kei's leaving and it all changes so much. But still it's a great movie, it's the only movie who has ever made me cry, it ends up so sad, but still beautiful.

So if you haven't seen this movie, you really should. Because it's wonderful, but sad. You won't regret it. ^^ --------------------------------------------- Result 1725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] The [[film]] My Name is Modesty is based around an episode that takes up about one page in the 10th modesty Blaise novel called Night of the Morningstar. It describes an incident in which the young Modesty (17 in the book, mid twenties in the film)asserts her leadership in a war over a casino. As this is set before the actual Blaise adventures her trusted sidekick Willi Garvin is not in the film. That is one of the main [[problems]] as the relationship between Blaise and Garvin was certainly always one of the fascinating aspects of the novels and the long running comic strip. The other problem is that the film is quite [[simply]] [[incredibly]] boring because it really is just one small episode [[blown]] up into a screenplay. The casting is okay but Alexandra Staden is not really [[convincing]] as the heroine and actually too old for the role to play the young Modesty. I get the impression that this film was a quick and dirty solution as not to lose the rights to the Blaise franchise. The [[filmmaking]] My Name is Modesty is based around an episode that takes up about one page in the 10th modesty Blaise novel called Night of the Morningstar. It describes an incident in which the young Modesty (17 in the book, mid twenties in the film)asserts her leadership in a war over a casino. As this is set before the actual Blaise adventures her trusted sidekick Willi Garvin is not in the film. That is one of the main [[hassles]] as the relationship between Blaise and Garvin was certainly always one of the fascinating aspects of the novels and the long running comic strip. The other problem is that the film is quite [[purely]] [[extraordinarily]] boring because it really is just one small episode [[melted]] up into a screenplay. The casting is okay but Alexandra Staden is not really [[persuade]] as the heroine and actually too old for the role to play the young Modesty. I get the impression that this film was a quick and dirty solution as not to lose the rights to the Blaise franchise. --------------------------------------------- Result 1726 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[Allow]] me to just get to the bottom [[line]] here: I've got 3 [[kids]], ages 5 to 10. I consider a [[trip]] to the theater a success when there are no talking animals. I've seen most of the children's videos in our collection at least 72 times. I can tell you when the film gets reversed in The Wizard of Oz, the over-18 sexual joke in El Dorado and the tragic flaw with the ending of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. I could probably storyboard Nemo from memory alone.

What makes me [[support]] the one child of mine (it varies) who suggests this title for the family movie of an evening? In a word: Showerman.

Moment of silence...

*sigh* [[Permitted]] me to just get to the bottom [[iine]] here: I've got 3 [[brats]], ages 5 to 10. I consider a [[touring]] to the theater a success when there are no talking animals. I've seen most of the children's videos in our collection at least 72 times. I can tell you when the film gets reversed in The Wizard of Oz, the over-18 sexual joke in El Dorado and the tragic flaw with the ending of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. I could probably storyboard Nemo from memory alone.

What makes me [[assists]] the one child of mine (it varies) who suggests this title for the family movie of an evening? In a word: Showerman.

Moment of silence...

*sigh* --------------------------------------------- Result 1727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I can [[understand]] those who [[dislike]] this [[movie]] cause of a [[lack]] of [[knowledge]].

[[First]] of all, those [[girls]] are not Geisha, but [[brothel]] [[tenants]], and one that don't know the [[difference]] will not [[understand]] half of the movie, and [[certainly]] not the end. This is a [[complete]] art work about the women's life and needs in this era. Everything is [[important]], and certainly the [[way]] they dress, all over the movie means more than [[words]]. To those who [[thought]] it was a boring geisha movie, I'll suggest you to read a bit about this society before making a conclusion that is so out of the reality. This is Kurosawa's work of is life, and I'm sure that the director [[understood]] the silent meaning of Kurosawa's piece to the right intellectual [[range]]. I can [[fathom]] those who [[antipathy]] this [[film]] cause of a [[inadequacy]] of [[expertise]].

[[Firstly]] of all, those [[dame]] are not Geisha, but [[bordello]] [[occupants]], and one that don't know the [[dispute]] will not [[realise]] half of the movie, and [[assuredly]] not the end. This is a [[finish]] art work about the women's life and needs in this era. Everything is [[sizable]], and certainly the [[routes]] they dress, all over the movie means more than [[phrase]]. To those who [[brainchild]] it was a boring geisha movie, I'll suggest you to read a bit about this society before making a conclusion that is so out of the reality. This is Kurosawa's work of is life, and I'm sure that the director [[fathom]] the silent meaning of Kurosawa's piece to the right intellectual [[assortment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] This [[movie]] was o.k. but it [[could]] have been [[much]] better. There are some [[spooky]] [[moments]] but there aren't enough of them to make me ever [[want]] to see this movie again. There are some scenes you [[could]] [[fast]] forward through & not [[miss]] anything. The [[biggest]] [[flaw]] is that it is so [[predictable]], & that is the reason why I rated it so low. It's watchable but don't expect [[anything]] [[great]]. This [[filmmaking]] was o.k. but it [[did]] have been [[very]] better. There are some [[shocking]] [[times]] but there aren't enough of them to make me ever [[wanted]] to see this movie again. There are some scenes you [[wo]] [[swifter]] forward through & not [[mademoiselle]] anything. The [[strongest]] [[faults]] is that it is so [[foreseeable]], & that is the reason why I rated it so low. It's watchable but don't expect [[something]] [[tremendous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is one of the [[worst]] movies I've ever seen. I saw it at the premiere at SXSW and was [[extremely]] [[disappointed]]. The [[director]] knew little about John Lennon and even said as much at the premiere. This is a [[drama]], but people were laughing throughout at how cheesy the film was. That's never a good sign. The only saving graces were Dominic Monaghan and Jason Leonard as Livien's roommates/bandmates. They were funny while the rest of the [[movie]] [[took]] itself waaay too [[seriously]]. The cheesy dropping of Beatles lyrics was just [[absurd]]. The soundtrack was [[excellent]], [[however]], and was [[probably]] the best [[part]] of the [[movie]]. Unless you're one of those [[crazy]], rabid [[Dominic]] Monaghan fans, don't [[bother]] with this one. This is one of the [[meanest]] movies I've ever seen. I saw it at the premiere at SXSW and was [[critically]] [[disappointing]]. The [[headmaster]] knew little about John Lennon and even said as much at the premiere. This is a [[dramas]], but people were laughing throughout at how cheesy the film was. That's never a good sign. The only saving graces were Dominic Monaghan and Jason Leonard as Livien's roommates/bandmates. They were funny while the rest of the [[filmmaking]] [[taken]] itself waaay too [[harshly]]. The cheesy dropping of Beatles lyrics was just [[claptrap]]. The soundtrack was [[sumptuous]], [[nonetheless]], and was [[undeniably]] the best [[party]] of the [[flick]]. Unless you're one of those [[craziness]], rabid [[Dominik]] Monaghan fans, don't [[annoy]] with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1730 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Rather]] annoying that [[reviewers]] keep [[comparing]] this to Planet [[Earth]]... Of *course* Planet Earth is better - it has much much more of the same. [[Earth]] is like an extended trailer for the Planet Earth series, and as such, is [[inevitably]] inferior and simplified. But that is not [[comparing]] like with like.

As a feature-length [[documentary]] (or actually as a feature-length anything), it [[surpasses]] pretty much [[anything]] you will see in your [[entire]] [[life]] (unless you choose to traverse the Earth in helicopters with long-range cameras for years on end, and wait for months in the most extreme environments to catch a glimpse of the most extraordinary beings on earth, which - lets face it - is unlikely).

On the narration: yes [[everyone]] in the UK - very much including me - [[adores]] David Attenborough, and there's [[little]] [[excuse]] for him not to be narrating here, but that [[hardly]] deserves [[knocking]] down a star or three. He wasn't a [[presenter]] on [[Planet]] [[Earth]], just a [[narrator]], and I'm sure he's modest and [[gracious]] [[enough]] to [[realise]] that [[anything]] that [[gets]] more [[viewers]] in is a Good [[Thing]].

[[Anyone]] who [[sees]] this will be [[overwhelmed]] by its awe, [[majesty]] and [[glory]]. All [[reviewers]] agree on that. Those who [[love]] it ([[ie]]. [[everyone]]) will/should go on to [[see]] an [[buy]] [[Planet]] [[Earth]]. [[So]] three cheers for its cinematic [[release]], and a [[big]] boooo for [[anyone]] [[cheap]] [[enough]] to [[buy]] this on DVD [[rather]] than the Planet [[Earth]] box-set. But as [[works]] of art they're not in [[competition]] here people.

The Earth is big [[enough]] for both. [[Fairly]] annoying that [[testers]] keep [[compares]] this to Planet [[Land]]... Of *course* Planet Earth is better - it has much much more of the same. [[Land]] is like an extended trailer for the Planet Earth series, and as such, is [[invariably]] inferior and simplified. But that is not [[compared]] like with like.

As a feature-length [[documentation]] (or actually as a feature-length anything), it [[outweighs]] pretty much [[something]] you will see in your [[whole]] [[iife]] (unless you choose to traverse the Earth in helicopters with long-range cameras for years on end, and wait for months in the most extreme environments to catch a glimpse of the most extraordinary beings on earth, which - lets face it - is unlikely).

On the narration: yes [[someone]] in the UK - very much including me - [[iove]] David Attenborough, and there's [[small]] [[alibi]] for him not to be narrating here, but that [[barely]] deserves [[hitting]] down a star or three. He wasn't a [[announcer]] on [[Planetary]] [[Land]], just a [[announcer]], and I'm sure he's modest and [[courteous]] [[sufficiently]] to [[knowing]] that [[something]] that [[get]] more [[spectators]] in is a Good [[Stuff]].

[[Someone]] who [[deems]] this will be [[overburdened]] by its awe, [[empress]] and [[gloria]]. All [[testers]] agree on that. Those who [[amour]] it ([[ci]]. [[somebody]]) will/should go on to [[seeing]] an [[purchasing]] [[Planetary]] [[Terrestrial]]. [[Hence]] three cheers for its cinematic [[releases]], and a [[major]] boooo for [[nobody]] [[cheaper]] [[sufficiently]] to [[buys]] this on DVD [[fairly]] than the Planet [[Land]] box-set. But as [[work]] of art they're not in [[contest]] here people.

The Earth is big [[sufficiently]] for both. --------------------------------------------- Result 1731 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Look, there's nothing [[spectacularly]] offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a [[typical]] rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it really has no [[sense]] of movement, you feel as though you [[could]] [[get]] up and [[walk]] away at any moment. The [[production]] of the [[movie]] also has the feel of a debut [[movie]] [[made]] about fifteen years [[ago]]. I'd [[recommend]] re-watching a [[classic]] movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this [[shallow]] imitation. Oh, one other [[BIG]] [[problem]]...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously [[disappointed]] with the way they've made him look here. Look, there's nothing [[miserably]] offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a [[classic]] rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it really has no [[feeling]] of movement, you feel as though you [[did]] [[got]] up and [[marche]] away at any moment. The [[productivity]] of the [[filmmaking]] also has the feel of a debut [[flick]] [[brought]] about fifteen years [[formerly]]. I'd [[recommends]] re-watching a [[traditional]] movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this [[superficial]] imitation. Oh, one other [[PRODIGIOUS]] [[troubles]]...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously [[disappointing]] with the way they've made him look here. --------------------------------------------- Result 1732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] This movie is [[wonderful]]. What separates it from other 50's sci-fi is the fact that the alien has no features, no face, eyes, anything, yet it can't be [[killed]]. I especially like the idea that this film doesn't take place over a few days, it takes place in one night, lasting supposedly past midnight.It's also scary that once the [[blob]] gets on you, you can't get it off. you're stuck in it, as it dissolves your flesh and slowly devours your body. My all time favorite 50's sci-fi film, and what is sometimes considered the quintessential one. I can see why this rocketed Steve McQueen to stardom. All this and a catchy theme song! How can you go wrong? This movie is [[wondrous]]. What separates it from other 50's sci-fi is the fact that the alien has no features, no face, eyes, anything, yet it can't be [[assassinating]]. I especially like the idea that this film doesn't take place over a few days, it takes place in one night, lasting supposedly past midnight.It's also scary that once the [[smudge]] gets on you, you can't get it off. you're stuck in it, as it dissolves your flesh and slowly devours your body. My all time favorite 50's sci-fi film, and what is sometimes considered the quintessential one. I can see why this rocketed Steve McQueen to stardom. All this and a catchy theme song! How can you go wrong? --------------------------------------------- Result 1733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is indeed a [[god]] [[adaptation]] of [[Jane]] Austen's [[novel]]. [[Compared]] with the American Version with Guinneth Paltrow, the script was written to resemble as much as possible the book. But the acting was [[awful]]. [[Besides]] [[Kate]] Beckinsale, who I believe was a true likeness of the Emma in the book, all the other [[actors]] were trying too hard. [[Mark]] Strong was not the "[[gentleman]]" he was [[supposed]] to be. He was often rude and offensive, had no [[feeling]] whatsoever, and [[throughout]] the [[entire]] film you [[could]] not see his [[love]] "growing" for [[Emma]] at all. This had a [[terrible]] [[effect]] on [[Kate]] Beckinsale, who [[seemed]] to be trying to "resque" her [[leading]] role as well as her partner's. [[Moreover]], there was no [[chemistry]] between the [[entire]] [[cast]]. Hariett [[Smith]], played by Samantha Morton, [[seemed]] to have no real attachment to Mr. [[Elton]], [[played]] by [[Dominic]] Rowan. Therefore, she did not seem as heartbroken as she was [[portrayed]] in the book. The [[settings]] of the [[film]] are [[also]] too poor. The [[costumes]] are [[even]] more so. I [[would]] have [[imagined]] [[Emma]] Woodhouse to [[dress]] in a more fashionable and elegant [[way]] that she does here. The ending is also too [[long]]. It is [[good]] that it [[resembles]] the book's [[ending]], but it is a killer ending for a film. And again, I can see no [[feeling]] of [[happiness]] in the [[face]] of [[Mr]].Knightley. To [[conclude]], I [[believed]] this adaptation to be loyal to the [[book]], but with poor [[actors]]. It [[seemed]] as if the [[film]] was [[made]] without any [[budget]] at all. I [[would]] [[prefer]] to [[see]] the "lighter" version with Paltrow and Northam, even if it is clear that it was [[made]] to be a "blockbuster", than to watch these [[actors]] ([[excepting]] the good Olivia Williams and the [[better]] Kate Beckinsale) [[ruin]] the [[entire]] [[script]]. This is indeed a [[goodness]] [[tailoring]] of [[Jin]] Austen's [[newer]]. [[Comparison]] with the American Version with Guinneth Paltrow, the script was written to resemble as much as possible the book. But the acting was [[scary]]. [[Furthermore]] [[Cate]] Beckinsale, who I believe was a true likeness of the Emma in the book, all the other [[protagonists]] were trying too hard. [[Dialed]] Strong was not the "[[mister]]" he was [[alleged]] to be. He was often rude and offensive, had no [[sentiment]] whatsoever, and [[around]] the [[whole]] film you [[wo]] not see his [[adore]] "growing" for [[Emmy]] at all. This had a [[appalling]] [[impacts]] on [[Cate]] Beckinsale, who [[looked]] to be trying to "resque" her [[main]] role as well as her partner's. [[Also]], there was no [[chemist]] between the [[whole]] [[casting]]. Hariett [[Smiths]], played by Samantha Morton, [[appeared]] to have no real attachment to Mr. [[Alton]], [[accomplished]] by [[Dominique]] Rowan. Therefore, she did not seem as heartbroken as she was [[depicted]] in the book. The [[setting]] of the [[cinematographic]] are [[apart]] too poor. The [[outfits]] are [[yet]] more so. I [[could]] have [[conjured]] [[Emmy]] Woodhouse to [[outfits]] in a more fashionable and elegant [[route]] that she does here. The ending is also too [[lange]]. It is [[buena]] that it [[reminds]] the book's [[ceases]], but it is a killer ending for a film. And again, I can see no [[sensation]] of [[bonheur]] in the [[confronts]] of [[Olli]].Knightley. To [[finish]], I [[felt]] this adaptation to be loyal to the [[workbook]], but with poor [[protagonists]]. It [[appeared]] as if the [[filmmaking]] was [[introduced]] without any [[budgets]] at all. I [[could]] [[favorite]] to [[seeing]] the "lighter" version with Paltrow and Northam, even if it is clear that it was [[introduced]] to be a "blockbuster", than to watch these [[players]] ([[barring]] the good Olivia Williams and the [[optimum]] Kate Beckinsale) [[downfall]] the [[whole]] [[screenplay]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1734 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It is [[cheese]]. [[If]] all you [[want]] is a [[video]] [[game]], complete with what look like straight-from-the-computer cutaway sequences for [[action]] the [[film]] was too cheap to actually make [[special]] effects for, this is it. My [[friend]] and I [[actually]] had a [[great]] time seeing it, [[since]] the [[theatre]] was mostly [[empty]] and we [[could]] heckle a bit. This movie REALLY requires heckling.

[[Plot]]? There was a plot? [[OK]], some [[stupid]] [[college]] or later [[types]] get [[invited]] to "the rave of the year" and go to one of the [[San]] [[Juan]] [[Islands]] ("If they'd only stayed back in [[Seattle]], they [[would]] have survived." - direct [[quote]], or [[nearly]].) to attend. They get there and [[everyone]] is [[gone]], and the [[site]] is [[somewhat]] [[wrecked]] (but [[hey]], the keg is still full!). With the [[help]] of a crusty [[old]] [[captain]] and a [[coast]] [[guard]] [[woman]] (who acted only slightly [[less]] tough - and slightly less well - than [[Cynthia]] Rothrock), they fight [[lots]] of zombies (some which spit acid), get an earful of freaky [[legends]], and [[mostly]] [[get]] killed. That's about it.

It's not [[quite]] as BAD as Demonicus, but not by much, and still [[better]] than [[Severed]] (they are [[sort]] of my own personal [[alpha]] and omega for [[bad]] [[movies]] - the [[former]] is [[bad]] but [[fun]] to heckle, and the latter is just too [[freaking]] [[bad]] to watch more than once). On the other hand, if you're [[expecting]] a video [[game]] [[movie]] as [[excellent]] as Resident Evil, [[run]] away!!! [[run]] away now!!!

[[OK]], some [[real]] [[big]] questions (without too [[many]] [[spoilers]]): Since when did Spanish [[ships]] of the 18th century venture into the [[Pacific]] Northwest????? Why is [[anyone]] in the [[Pacific]] Northwest [[smuggling]] [[guns]], and to whom - CANADA, for [[crying]] out loud??? Why is a rave on an [[unnamed]] (oh, [[excuse]] me, it's called "[[isla]] del muerto", shya, right) San [[Juan]] [[Island]] - and outdoors, [[still]] [[keeping]] in mind this is THE PACIFIC NORTHWET. And the rave has about 30 people in [[attendance]] - "the rave of the year," my patoot.

[[Lucky]] [[thing]] there's [[lots]] of hatchets [[around]]. [[Lots]] of them. [[Everyone]] has them. Must be a [[hatchet]] sales outlet nearby.

Finally, while the movie started out playing with a little "parody" (with nudges at I [[Know]] What You Did and Jaws), it didn't carry it through near enough.

OK, really finally - when the introductory [[comments]] (in a voice-over, no less) casually mention that one of the characters "gave up her boyfriend to focus on her fencing" you can be darn sure there'll be some fencing by the end of the movie. Not GOOD fencing, but a couple of people hacking at each other with swords, anyway. It is [[queso]]. [[Unless]] all you [[wanted]] is a [[videos]] [[games]], complete with what look like straight-from-the-computer cutaway sequences for [[actions]] the [[filmmaking]] was too cheap to actually make [[specific]] effects for, this is it. My [[buddies]] and I [[genuinely]] had a [[whopping]] time seeing it, [[because]] the [[theaters]] was mostly [[hollow]] and we [[did]] heckle a bit. This movie REALLY requires heckling.

[[Intrigue]]? There was a plot? [[ALRIGHT]], some [[dumb]] [[academies]] or later [[kinds]] get [[urged]] to "the rave of the year" and go to one of the [[Saint]] [[Nguyen]] [[Isles]] ("If they'd only stayed back in [[Portland]], they [[should]] have survived." - direct [[quotes]], or [[roughly]].) to attend. They get there and [[someone]] is [[missing]], and the [[venue]] is [[slightly]] [[shattered]] (but [[bye]], the keg is still full!). With the [[assisting]] of a crusty [[former]] [[capt]] and a [[coasts]] [[guards]] [[girls]] (who acted only slightly [[fewer]] tough - and slightly less well - than [[Brenda]] Rothrock), they fight [[batch]] of zombies (some which spit acid), get an earful of freaky [[myths]], and [[principally]] [[obtains]] killed. That's about it.

It's not [[utterly]] as BAD as Demonicus, but not by much, and still [[optimum]] than [[Clipped]] (they are [[kinds]] of my own personal [[alfa]] and omega for [[naughty]] [[movie]] - the [[previous]] is [[negative]] but [[droll]] to heckle, and the latter is just too [[fucking]] [[rotten]] to watch more than once). On the other hand, if you're [[expect]] a video [[ballgame]] [[cinema]] as [[awesome]] as Resident Evil, [[execute]] away!!! [[running]] away now!!!

[[ALLRIGHT]], some [[veritable]] [[mammoth]] questions (without too [[various]] [[vandals]]): Since when did Spanish [[vessel]] of the 18th century venture into the [[Peaceful]] Northwest????? Why is [[everybody]] in the [[Peaceful]] Northwest [[smuggled]] [[shotgun]], and to whom - CANADA, for [[weeping]] out loud??? Why is a rave on an [[undisclosed]] (oh, [[alibi]] me, it's called "[[isle]] del muerto", shya, right) San [[Joanne]] [[Isla]] - and outdoors, [[again]] [[keep]] in mind this is THE PACIFIC NORTHWET. And the rave has about 30 people in [[involvement]] - "the rave of the year," my patoot.

[[Fortunate]] [[stuff]] there's [[batch]] of hatchets [[about]]. [[Batch]] of them. [[Anybody]] has them. Must be a [[ax]] sales outlet nearby.

Finally, while the movie started out playing with a little "parody" (with nudges at I [[Savoir]] What You Did and Jaws), it didn't carry it through near enough.

OK, really finally - when the introductory [[comment]] (in a voice-over, no less) casually mention that one of the characters "gave up her boyfriend to focus on her fencing" you can be darn sure there'll be some fencing by the end of the movie. Not GOOD fencing, but a couple of people hacking at each other with swords, anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 1735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was incredible, meaning that it was hard to believe, that the "forgotten tribe" would make this astounding migration twice a year, and that the filmmakers, Cooper and Schoedsack, didn't stage some of the scenes and shots. But what shots they are! The cinematography, under mostly extreme conditions, is brilliant, and the score of Iranian music added to the video release give this memorable documentary an added richness.

I had the pleasure of seeing this and "Kon Tiki" on the same weekend, which was a thrill and certainly made me see how tough and hardy and brave people can be, whether for primitive survival or the need for adventure or in the name of science. --------------------------------------------- Result 1736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] How low can someone sink while trying to recapture an old glory? ST:HF will be [[glad]] to show you.

If you are used to [[seeing]] what made for a good [[Star]] Trek show, do [[NOT]] watch this.

The [[writing]] is hodge-podge, the actors' portrayals of their [[characters]] [[weak]], and most of all, the [[design]] [[work]] is downright doggy.

Like watching strong captains, don't look here! Like the strong Federation attitude? [[Forget]] about it here! Starfleet is mocked by ensigns wearing SPIKES in their hair.

While a seemingly mentally feeble captain shuffles about and within two minutes of the opening show's credits, Ensign Spikey is attempting to arrange a tryst with an engineer. It just degrades from there. No, not even uniforms match, for goodness sake. They are too small or too big, collars down to their chests, and TNG Seasons One and Two Uniforms mixed in with Season Three and DS9 uniforms. The strict discipline and tradition of any of the originals in lacking in this production down to the treads! The only [[good]] thing about this show is its graphics, which seem to improve a bit with each season. OK, I take that back. Who uses CG that inexpertly? The designers of this show.

Don't bother with it, it will offend your Star Trek sense, as it did mine. Not even the throw backs to previous shows can save this catastrophe.

I [[wept]] openly when i watched this, probably because my eyes were bleeding and my head almost ruptured. That bad. How low can someone sink while trying to recapture an old glory? ST:HF will be [[happy]] to show you.

If you are used to [[witnessing]] what made for a good [[Stars]] Trek show, do [[NAH]] watch this.

The [[write]] is hodge-podge, the actors' portrayals of their [[traits]] [[feeble]], and most of all, the [[conceiving]] [[cooperating]] is downright doggy.

Like watching strong captains, don't look here! Like the strong Federation attitude? [[Overlook]] about it here! Starfleet is mocked by ensigns wearing SPIKES in their hair.

While a seemingly mentally feeble captain shuffles about and within two minutes of the opening show's credits, Ensign Spikey is attempting to arrange a tryst with an engineer. It just degrades from there. No, not even uniforms match, for goodness sake. They are too small or too big, collars down to their chests, and TNG Seasons One and Two Uniforms mixed in with Season Three and DS9 uniforms. The strict discipline and tradition of any of the originals in lacking in this production down to the treads! The only [[alright]] thing about this show is its graphics, which seem to improve a bit with each season. OK, I take that back. Who uses CG that inexpertly? The designers of this show.

Don't bother with it, it will offend your Star Trek sense, as it did mine. Not even the throw backs to previous shows can save this catastrophe.

I [[cry]] openly when i watched this, probably because my eyes were bleeding and my head almost ruptured. That bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd even say some shades of Hitchcock...this is clearly better than MMM, which is seen as a guilty pleasure by some if not most Woody fans. By the way, did you know that Annie Hall was first conceived as a murder mystery? Anyhow, Woody reclaims some relevance in film comedy with this one. The plot turns are nice and tight. I will say that in the first 20 minutes or so, some of the actors are a little too hasty at delivering their lines, but stick around. Scarlett Johansson proves well-cast in the Diane Keaton-type role, and at no time is there any uncomfortable moments between her and the much older Woody. No one could imagine a more perfect actor for the role of Peter Lyman than Jackman. --------------------------------------------- Result 1738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The [[Three]] Ages was Buster Keaton's [[first]] attempt at a full length comedy [[feature]]. The only similarities to [[Intolerance]] are the [[opening]] "[[book]]" scene and the fact that similar stories through the [[ages]] are edited together into a [[complete]] film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't [[succeed]] as a [[feature]] [[film]], it [[could]] be [[reduced]] to three two-reelers. [[Fortunately]], The Three Ages succeeds brilliantly as a [[comedy]] and [[contains]] some of the funniest routines I've [[seen]] in any of Keaton's [[film]]. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are [[simple]] boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the [[period]] satires are riotous and set the [[standard]] for [[future]] works by Mel [[Brooks]] and all films of this [[genre]]. [[However]], I don't [[believe]] that [[anyone]] has ever [[topped]] this comedy. No one can play the [[lovable]] goof [[like]] Keaton and the stunts in this [[film]] are some of his [[best]]. [[In]] addition, [[Wallace]] Beery's [[appearance]] as Keaton's rival [[adds]] to this film's [[appeal]]. [[Anyone]] who [[thinks]] that [[comedy]] from the 1920's cannot be [[appreciated]] by [[modern]] [[audiences]] [[needs]] to [[see]] this [[movie]]. Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The [[Tres]] Ages was Buster Keaton's [[fiirst]] attempt at a full length comedy [[characteristics]]. The only similarities to [[Fanaticism]] are the [[opened]] "[[ledger]]" scene and the fact that similar stories through the [[years]] are edited together into a [[finish]] film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't [[succeeds]] as a [[characteristics]] [[cinematography]], it [[did]] be [[lowering]] to three two-reelers. [[Mercifully]], The Three Ages succeeds brilliantly as a [[parody]] and [[involves]] some of the funniest routines I've [[noticed]] in any of Keaton's [[cinematography]]. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are [[simpler]] boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the [[deadlines]] satires are riotous and set the [[norms]] for [[next]] works by Mel [[Creek]] and all films of this [[sort]]. [[Yet]], I don't [[think]] that [[someone]] has ever [[tops]] this comedy. No one can play the [[loveable]] goof [[iike]] Keaton and the stunts in this [[flick]] are some of his [[nicest]]. [[Onto]] addition, [[Dallas]] Beery's [[semblance]] as Keaton's rival [[added]] to this film's [[appellate]]. [[Nobody]] who [[ideas]] that [[farce]] from the 1920's cannot be [[enjoyed]] by [[fashionable]] [[spectators]] [[needed]] to [[seeing]] this [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "Black Angel" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real [[culprit]]. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a cheap programmer, never achieving anything [[special]]. It is [[pleasant]] enough but then, at some point, it [[stops]] making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big "give me a break" reactions. That ending alone [[could]] have [[sank]] the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good [[either]]. Vincent is a wimpy [[heroine]] and Duryea was never very good at playing good [[guys]]. I [[love]] film noirs, but this one was a [[real]] disappointment. "Black Angel" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real [[perpetrator]]. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a cheap programmer, never achieving anything [[peculiar]]. It is [[nice]] enough but then, at some point, it [[halted]] making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big "give me a break" reactions. That ending alone [[did]] have [[plunged]] the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good [[nor]]. Vincent is a wimpy [[idol]] and Duryea was never very good at playing good [[boys]]. I [[adored]] film noirs, but this one was a [[veritable]] disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 1740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you are under 13 or above 13 and pretty intoxicated, you'll enjoy D-war. If you are a seriously dedicated fan of all kinds of brainless action films, you'll enjoy D-war. Otherwise, don't bother! I saw the movie today with my nephews and 3 of their friends. They really loved it and that made me feel good. After the movie was over, all the kids(my nephews and their friends)could not stop thanking me for taking them to the theater.

The CG is good. Acting and directing are horrible. Storyline is extremely simple. But, since the half of the audience was kids, they were screaming, shouting and cheering every time the dragons appeared on the screen. This made the viewing experience far more exciting than it should have been.

It's a good movie to take your kids to, but except for the final battle sequence, D-War is disappointing. I give this film 7 out of 10 mainly because the kids loved it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 1741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Wow]], the spookiest [[thing]] about this episode was the price of [[houses]] 40 [[years]] ago. I'll preface by [[saying]] I'm not a fan of narrated episodes. [[If]] the [[story]]/[[actors]]/etc. are worth their [[salt]], they should be able to convey the [[bulk]] of the [[narrative]] without having to read it out, [[reminded]] me of personages who can't [[think]] off the [[cuff]] but rely on teleprompters. The psychobabble was [[tedious]] and boring, but some enjoy that [[kind]] of [[thing]], it's just not my cup O [[tea]]. They [[could]] have kept the narrative but at [[least]] made it much more [[believable]] and interesting if it was coming from a psychiatrist or maybe a newspaper reporter or something. Niggling little things like Peugeot being at the house, which has a [[singular]] half circle driveway, [[yet]] he seems to have parked his car in the tree he was standing under, because it's [[nowhere]] to be seen on the road or on the property. [[Sloppy]] [[editing]], as she pulls into the driveway (for what seems the 100th time) exactly who are those 2 guys you [[see]] at 24m30s walking towards the [[car]] as she [[pulls]] into the [[driveway]] of the deserted house? The dolly close-ups were also [[overdone]], like some Jr. High [[drama]] student discovering the zoom function on his camera for the first time. I [[could]] [[keep]] picking apart, but that might get almost as boring as this episode was. It [[kept]] [[dragging]] on and the [[true]] [[purpose]] seemed to be to [[use]] absolutely all the stock footage they had shot of Elaine driving the Newport convertible. I fully [[expected]] to [[see]] the Chrysler logo and a nice jingle play while a voice over [[told]] us all about the 8 track [[player]], automatic top etc. The only good thing I have to say about his one is that it just ends, [[abruptly]]. No loose ends tied up, nothing explained or [[terminated]]. Not that [[many]] would [[notice]], I [[suspect]] most had already changed the [[channel]] or dozed off by the [[end]]. [[Whoo]], the spookiest [[stuff]] about this episode was the price of [[habitation]] 40 [[ages]] ago. I'll preface by [[telling]] I'm not a fan of narrated episodes. [[Though]] the [[stories]]/[[protagonists]]/etc. are worth their [[saline]], they should be able to convey the [[wholesale]] of the [[narratives]] without having to read it out, [[reminding]] me of personages who can't [[thinking]] off the [[bracelet]] but rely on teleprompters. The psychobabble was [[monotonous]] and boring, but some enjoy that [[type]] of [[stuff]], it's just not my cup O [[shai]]. They [[would]] have kept the narrative but at [[lowest]] made it much more [[dependable]] and interesting if it was coming from a psychiatrist or maybe a newspaper reporter or something. Niggling little things like Peugeot being at the house, which has a [[unique]] half circle driveway, [[even]] he seems to have parked his car in the tree he was standing under, because it's [[anywhere]] to be seen on the road or on the property. [[Remiss]] [[edit]], as she pulls into the driveway (for what seems the 100th time) exactly who are those 2 guys you [[seeing]] at 24m30s walking towards the [[automobile]] as she [[pull]] into the [[alley]] of the deserted house? The dolly close-ups were also [[overblown]], like some Jr. High [[dramas]] student discovering the zoom function on his camera for the first time. I [[did]] [[maintain]] picking apart, but that might get almost as boring as this episode was. It [[retained]] [[dredging]] on and the [[veritable]] [[targeting]] seemed to be to [[utilized]] absolutely all the stock footage they had shot of Elaine driving the Newport convertible. I fully [[projected]] to [[seeing]] the Chrysler logo and a nice jingle play while a voice over [[tell]] us all about the 8 track [[protagonist]], automatic top etc. The only good thing I have to say about his one is that it just ends, [[suddenly]]. No loose ends tied up, nothing explained or [[discontinued]]. Not that [[several]] would [[noticing]], I [[suspected]] most had already changed the [[channels]] or dozed off by the [[ends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] But this is a great martial arts film. Liu Chia Liang ranks second to none as a fight choreographer, only Sammo Hung at his best compares. This is immediately clear from his proud exhibition of technique -rather than flashy camera angles etc. - during fights. The direction is tightly controlled to not only excite the viewer by the speed and movement but to awe her with the precise skill displayed. This film benefits also from Liu's participation in front of the camera. Liu's performance at the banquet scene with which the film opens is one of the high points in kung fu movie history. Liu is supported by the beautiful and talented Hui Ying Hung (of My Young Auntie fame) and 'Hsiao Hou' whose acrobatics are breathtaking, and preferable to any amount of wirework As for the plot , this film follows the not uncommon theme of revenge, but with character and moral development along the way, and a most fitting resolution. The humour in this is also of the best. If you only watch one kung fu film ever, this would be a good choice- it has it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1743 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the [[best]] of all! The soundtrack is a [[true]] classic. It's a [[perfect]] [[album]], it starts out with Let's Go [[Crazy]]([[appropriate]] for the [[beginning]] as it's a [[great]] [[party]] song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun [[pop]] song...), The [[Beautiful]] Ones(a [[cheerful]] ballad, [[probably]] the [[closest]] thing to R&B on this [[whole]] [[album]]), Computer [[Blue]](a [[somewhat]] [[angry]] anthem towards Appolonia), [[Darling]] [[Nikki]](one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves [[Cry]](the climax to this [[masterpiece]]), I [[Would]] [[Die]] 4 U, [[Baby]] I'm A [[Star]], and, of course, [[Purple]] [[Rain]](a [[true]] classic, a very [[appropriate]] [[ending]] for this [[classic]] [[album]]) The [[movie]] and the [[album]] are both very good. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] them! The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the [[better]] of all! The soundtrack is a [[real]] classic. It's a [[irreproachable]] [[albums]], it starts out with Let's Go [[Insane]]([[adequate]] for the [[startup]] as it's a [[excellent]] [[parties]] song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun [[pappy]] song...), The [[Awesome]] Ones(a [[happy]] ballad, [[potentially]] the [[nearest]] thing to R&B on this [[total]] [[scrapbook]]), Computer [[Bleu]](a [[slightly]] [[outraged]] anthem towards Appolonia), [[Hon]] [[Nick]](one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves [[Outcry]](the climax to this [[centerpiece]]), I [[Should]] [[Deaths]] 4 U, [[Babies]] I'm A [[Superstar]], and, of course, [[Violet]] [[Rainfall]](a [[real]] classic, a very [[adequate]] [[ended]] for this [[typical]] [[scrapbooks]]) The [[film]] and the [[scrapbooks]] are both very good. I [[hugely]] [[recommendation]] them! --------------------------------------------- Result 1744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This early Sirk melodrama, shot in black and white, is a minor film, [[yet]] showcases the flair of the German director in [[enhancing]] tired story lines into something resembling art. Set in the 1910's, Barbara Stanwyck is the woman who has sinned by abandoning her small-town husband and family for the lure of the Chicago stage. She never fulfilled her ambitions, and is drawn back to the town she left by an eager letter from her daughter informing her that she too has taken a liking to the theatre (a high school production, that is). Back in her old town she once again comes up against small-mindedness, and has to deal with her hostile eldest daughter, bewildered (and boring) husband (Richard Carlson) and ex-lover. The plot is [[nothing]] new but Sirk sets himself apart by [[creating]] [[meaningful]] compositions, with every frame carefully shot, and he is aided [[immeasurably]] by having Stanwyck as his leading lady. It runs a [[crisp]] 76 minutes, and that's just as well, because the material doesn't really have the legs to go any further. This early Sirk melodrama, shot in black and white, is a minor film, [[even]] showcases the flair of the German director in [[strengthened]] tired story lines into something resembling art. Set in the 1910's, Barbara Stanwyck is the woman who has sinned by abandoning her small-town husband and family for the lure of the Chicago stage. She never fulfilled her ambitions, and is drawn back to the town she left by an eager letter from her daughter informing her that she too has taken a liking to the theatre (a high school production, that is). Back in her old town she once again comes up against small-mindedness, and has to deal with her hostile eldest daughter, bewildered (and boring) husband (Richard Carlson) and ex-lover. The plot is [[anything]] new but Sirk sets himself apart by [[establish]] [[valid]] compositions, with every frame carefully shot, and he is aided [[substantially]] by having Stanwyck as his leading lady. It runs a [[sharpness]] 76 minutes, and that's just as well, because the material doesn't really have the legs to go any further. --------------------------------------------- Result 1745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The Haunting. A remake, of course. The original was a creepy [[psychological]] [[thriller]], and one that has [[improved]] with time. [[Compared]] to this 1999 remake, it's a classic. There is no [[character]] [[development]] here, only caricatures (the slut, the authoritative brain, the "I'm gonna get us outta here" fellow, the oh so sensitive bookworm). But, [[seeing]] as how the were banking on the special effects being the "star", I [[guess]] characters that you can empathize with are a secondary concern. Unfortunately, the effects are [[laughable]]. Mewing cherubs, stretchy doors, [[irritating]] [[dead]] children that can't speak [[plainly]] ... and an idiotically sappy ending that does it's darnedest to give you a [[new]] age enema of butterflies and rainbows. Ill take my Skittles [[orally]], thank you. [[Bruce]] Dern, I've liked you since "The Cowboys". [[Stop]] it. The Haunting. A remake, of course. The original was a creepy [[mental]] [[thrillers]], and one that has [[improves]] with time. [[Likened]] to this 1999 remake, it's a classic. There is no [[personage]] [[evolution]] here, only caricatures (the slut, the authoritative brain, the "I'm gonna get us outta here" fellow, the oh so sensitive bookworm). But, [[see]] as how the were banking on the special effects being the "star", I [[imagines]] characters that you can empathize with are a secondary concern. Unfortunately, the effects are [[ridicule]]. Mewing cherubs, stretchy doors, [[troublesome]] [[die]] children that can't speak [[honestly]] ... and an idiotically sappy ending that does it's darnedest to give you a [[nuevo]] age enema of butterflies and rainbows. Ill take my Skittles [[verbally]], thank you. [[Bros]] Dern, I've liked you since "The Cowboys". [[Ceasing]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The first episode [[immediately]] gave a good impression what to expect from the series! [[Mysteries]] waiting to be solved and a lot of good [[drama]]! I love the [[fact]] that they [[gradually]] [[reveal]] the stories concerning the [[characters]]! [[Explaining]] just enough to stay excited! Of course this show has some flaws! [[In]] the [[first]] two series there are some characters who for some [[reason]] don't show up in the third season! Many of the characters have a [[decent]] [[sent]] off but some of them just aren't there! Like [[Rose]] and her husband! [[Where]] the hell are they? What happened to them? Maybe they will return in later [[episodes]]! But it is a little [[inconsistent]]! That being [[said]] "Lost" manages to be thrilling every episode([[especially]] the first two seasons)! That is a very hard thing to do! I do notice that in the third season the focus is more on [[character]] [[development]] than the mystery aspects of the show! This is not a [[bad]] thing! It even [[saves]] some episodes from [[getting]] [[boring]]! One of the elements that can be [[considered]] the [[strength]] of this [[show]] are the [[wonderful]] characters! You will [[grow]] to [[love]] these [[characters]]! [[Good]] or [[bad]]! But eventually I will want to [[see]] some mysteries to be solved and get closure! The [[danger]] of "[[Lost]]" getting [[canceled]] due to [[declining]] ratings is near! And that [[would]] be [[devastating]]! The first episode [[expeditiously]] gave a good impression what to expect from the series! [[Riddles]] waiting to be solved and a lot of good [[dramas]]! I love the [[facto]] that they [[progressively]] [[discloses]] the stories concerning the [[features]]! [[Indicating]] just enough to stay excited! Of course this show has some flaws! [[Into]] the [[frst]] two series there are some characters who for some [[motif]] don't show up in the third season! Many of the characters have a [[presentable]] [[expedition]] off but some of them just aren't there! Like [[Hiked]] and her husband! [[Whenever]] the hell are they? What happened to them? Maybe they will return in later [[spells]]! But it is a little [[incoherent]]! That being [[indicated]] "Lost" manages to be thrilling every episode([[specifically]] the first two seasons)! That is a very hard thing to do! I do notice that in the third season the focus is more on [[nature]] [[developments]] than the mystery aspects of the show! This is not a [[amiss]] thing! It even [[savings]] some episodes from [[obtaining]] [[bored]]! One of the elements that can be [[regarded]] the [[kraft]] of this [[demonstrating]] are the [[wondrous]] characters! You will [[grew]] to [[loved]] these [[nature]]! [[Buena]] or [[amiss]]! But eventually I will want to [[behold]] some mysteries to be solved and get closure! The [[perils]] of "[[Outof]]" getting [[quashed]] due to [[dwindling]] ratings is near! And that [[ought]] be [[ravaging]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The script was VERY [[weak]] w/o [[enough]] character arcs to make you [[care]] one [[bit]] about the characters or what happens to them. The [[script]] is way too talky and not [[enough]] gore or [[action]] to [[even]] call it slow paced. The [[story]] [[gets]] to the point that you just want everyone to [[shut]] up and [[die]] as quickly as possible so you don't have to listen to them talk this very [[muted]], [[stiff]] dialogue. [[On]] a technical [[note]], the [[music]] mix is way to high and makes it hard to understand what is being said most times. [[Then]] again, this could be called a [[blessing]]. Overall, this same story could have better been told in a short film w/ a running time under 30 minutes. The obvious "in your face" homages to Sam Raimi and "Evil Dead" would have been good had they been more subtle, but here they seem more like a bald faced rip off. C'mon, this kind of 35mm budget and THIS is the best that could be done? Still, the cinematography, lighting design and shots were very well [[done]] indeed. The script was VERY [[feeble]] w/o [[adequate]] character arcs to make you [[healthcare]] one [[bitten]] about the characters or what happens to them. The [[scripts]] is way too talky and not [[adequately]] gore or [[actions]] to [[yet]] call it slow paced. The [[tales]] [[attains]] to the point that you just want everyone to [[close]] up and [[decease]] as quickly as possible so you don't have to listen to them talk this very [[silencer]], [[tough]] dialogue. [[Onto]] a technical [[remark]], the [[musica]] mix is way to high and makes it hard to understand what is being said most times. [[Upon]] again, this could be called a [[boon]]. Overall, this same story could have better been told in a short film w/ a running time under 30 minutes. The obvious "in your face" homages to Sam Raimi and "Evil Dead" would have been good had they been more subtle, but here they seem more like a bald faced rip off. C'mon, this kind of 35mm budget and THIS is the best that could be done? Still, the cinematography, lighting design and shots were very well [[effected]] indeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I recorded this ages ago but only got round to watching it today. I have been ill so had run out of stuff to watch! I am so glad I [[saw]] it, and which I could erase my memory and watch i again for the first time. This movie is so [[wonderful]]! It reminded me very much of Fried Green Tomatoes At The Whistlestop Cafe.

The story goes back in [[time]] and at the end of the movie we [[see]] what the [[connections]] are. Some people have said this is a kids movie. I disagree - it may be made by Disney and many characters are children, but I am 23 and I LOVED it! There were moments when my spine tingled. The [[story]] is unlike any other film these days, full of adventure. I have just ordered the book from amazon, can't [[wait]]! I recorded this ages ago but only got round to watching it today. I have been ill so had run out of stuff to watch! I am so glad I [[sawthe]] it, and which I could erase my memory and watch i again for the first time. This movie is so [[wondrous]]! It reminded me very much of Fried Green Tomatoes At The Whistlestop Cafe.

The story goes back in [[moment]] and at the end of the movie we [[consults]] what the [[connector]] are. Some people have said this is a kids movie. I disagree - it may be made by Disney and many characters are children, but I am 23 and I LOVED it! There were moments when my spine tingled. The [[narratives]] is unlike any other film these days, full of adventure. I have just ordered the book from amazon, can't [[suspense]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Feeding The Masses was just another movie trying to make a little money off of the zombie craze that is going around, mostly due to the popularity of movies such as Land Of The Dead and the Resident Evil series.

It starts at a television station, which is guarded by the military, and are reporting that The Lazarus Virus (zombies) are close to containment and the city will soon be free to do their business again. The problem is, this is totally false. Zombies are running rampantly and only a small minority of people are aware. Among them are Torch (William Garberina), the camera man, Sherry (Rachael Morris), the lead anchor woman (who for some reason is listed as playing Shelly on this website) and Roger (Patrick Cohen), their military escort. Torch and Sherry are against lying to the people but the station is being run by secret service (or some other government agency) and they are heavily censored.

This movie gives itself a pat on the back on the box-cover saying "We hold FEEDING THE MASSES on a higher level than any o the three 'of the Dead' films by George A. Rombero." The source of that quote has lost ALL credibility with me.

Let me just say that this movie is BAD. I don't mean bad like I was expecting more (I obviously was, though) but I mean bad in that I could not find any redeeming qualities in the film, whatsoever. The acting in all parts are either over done or too wooden. Did anybody remember their lines or are they reading off of cue cards? I can't even think of what the best part of the movie was or the best actor/actress. There really was not one. If I had to give a nod to someone, I would say Roger, the military escort was probably the most interesting character but that is really not saying much.

I would have to recommend to pass on this movie, despite the box-cover looking pretty good (It's what originally drew me to the movie). 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Warning]]: [[contains]] a [[spoiler]]. [[Corny]] plot and in [[many]] [[cases]] terrible acting. Fontaine is [[great]], but some others, [[particularly]] [[Richard]] Ney, Ivy's husband, are [[exceedingly]] [[wooden]]. Ney lies in bed, [[dying]] of arsenical poisoning, with [[every]] [[hair]] in place. Yet the [[movie]] is so [[juicy]] and so suspenseful. More [[faithful]] to the book than most [[movies]] of its [[era]]. [[Casting]] [[Joan]] [[Fontaine]] as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as [[shocking]] then - I'm not kidding, [[kids]]) was a masterful stroke. She's just her [[usual]] [[Joan]] Fontainey self. As [[murderers]] were [[supposed]] to, she dies by [[falling]] "[[feet]] foremost through the floor into an [[empty]] space." [[Alerting]]: [[consists]] a [[deflectors]]. [[Banal]] plot and in [[multiple]] [[examples]] terrible acting. Fontaine is [[large]], but some others, [[concretely]] [[Richards]] Ney, Ivy's husband, are [[immeasurably]] [[wood]]. Ney lies in bed, [[dies]] of arsenical poisoning, with [[any]] [[hairdresser]] in place. Yet the [[kino]] is so [[earner]] and so suspenseful. More [[loyal]] to the book than most [[film]] of its [[epoch]]. [[Foundry]] [[Juana]] [[Fountain]] as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as [[staggering]] then - I'm not kidding, [[brats]]) was a masterful stroke. She's just her [[routine]] [[Juana]] Fontainey self. As [[assassins]] were [[presumed]] to, she dies by [[receding]] "[[magpies]] foremost through the floor into an [[hollow]] space." --------------------------------------------- Result 1751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched the trailer on the DVD after seeing the film, and I think anyone who saw it before watching the film would be very surprised and possibly disappointed. It made much of the fact that the film was "by the director of Cube" and made it look like a horror film, when in fact it is an Absurdist comedy (IMDB's spell checker doesn't seem to think that Absurdist is a word, but it is), reminiscent of Rosencrantz and Guildernstern are Dead.

I love the way the story builds up slowly at first, then gradually escalates. I also enjoy the fact that no explanation is given for what happens in the film. That and the fact that the story plays out mainly in just the one set are the only respects in which this film is similar to Cube. I recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The film is [[bad]]. There is no other way to say it. The [[story]] is weak and [[outdated]], [[especially]] for this [[country]]. I don't think most people know what a "walker" is or will really [[care]]. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The [[subject]] was just not [[believable]] for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I think this rang [[true]] for everyone else who watched it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.

I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the "artistic" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't [[work]]. It didn't even seem to make sense really.

The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a "walker" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it.

As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.

Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan. The film is [[unfavourable]]. There is no other way to say it. The [[tales]] is weak and [[antiquated]], [[principally]] for this [[countries]]. I don't think most people know what a "walker" is or will really [[healthcare]]. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The [[topic]] was just not [[trustworthy]] for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I think this rang [[veritable]] for everyone else who watched it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.

I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the "artistic" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't [[collaborated]]. It didn't even seem to make sense really.

The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a "walker" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it.

As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.

Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1753 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] A young solicitor in sent to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made less than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not [[liked]]. To speed [[things]] up he [[decides]] to move from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is [[usually]] fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a [[woman]] in black, is she real or [[imaginary]],he is [[also]] subjected to the blood curdling [[cries]] of a woamn and [[child]] apparently drowning in the [[marshes]], these [[events]] [[take]] their [[toll]] on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. [[Atmospheric]] [[TV]] adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a little underwhelmed. A young solicitor in sent to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made less than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not [[wished]]. To speed [[items]] up he [[decided]] to move from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is [[traditionally]] fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a [[female]] in black, is she real or [[fictional]],he is [[further]] subjected to the blood curdling [[cree]] of a woamn and [[kid]] apparently drowning in the [[swamps]], these [[phenomena]] [[taking]] their [[tolling]] on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. [[Barometric]] [[TVS]] adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a little underwhelmed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Clean [[family]] [[oriented]] [[movie]]. I laughed, I [[cried]]...I [[loved]] it. I was [[worried]] I wouldn't be [[able]] to [[see]] [[Steve]] Carrell as [[anything]] but goofy Michael from The Office. [[Boy]], was I [[wrong]]. He should [[win]] an Oscar for his performance. I will [[definitely]] [[buy]] this on DVD when it [[comes]] out. My [[husband]] [[enjoyed]] it and he isn't into [[movies]] of this "[[type]]". I [[saw]] it with 2 other couples in the 30 [[year]] old [[range]] and we all [[agreed]] it was the best [[movie]] we had [[seen]] in a LONG [[time]] and [[certainly]] the [[cleanest]]. [[Only]] 1 cuss word! Not even sure why it was PG13. I [[would]] [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to [[anyone]] who [[likes]] [[comedy]], [[drama]], romance and more! Clean [[families]] [[targeted]] [[film]]. I laughed, I [[screamed]]...I [[cared]] it. I was [[alarmed]] I wouldn't be [[capable]] to [[seeing]] [[Steven]] Carrell as [[algo]] but goofy Michael from The Office. [[Dude]], was I [[amiss]]. He should [[triumph]] an Oscar for his performance. I will [[undoubtedly]] [[buys]] this on DVD when it [[occurs]] out. My [[hubby]] [[loved]] it and he isn't into [[film]] of this "[[typing]]". I [[witnessed]] it with 2 other couples in the 30 [[annum]] old [[ranges]] and we all [[countersigned]] it was the best [[kino]] we had [[watched]] in a LONG [[period]] and [[probably]] the [[cleaner]]. [[Just]] 1 cuss word! Not even sure why it was PG13. I [[should]] [[vastly]] [[recommendation]] this [[films]] to [[someone]] who [[love]] [[farce]], [[tragedy]], romance and more! --------------------------------------------- Result 1755 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has everything a fantasy movie should have, romance, clever witticisms, great acting and a fair dose of magic.

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and was drawn to its original plot (based on the Neil Gaiman novel which I am now looking to read) and colorful characters.

One of the most striking things to me actually was how self contained the story is. Unlike so many sci-fi fantasy movies out there right now which leave open-endings and such this was a pure fairy-tale, satisfying in and of itself with no need for a sequel.

Original. Fun. Feel-good Fantasy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We rented five movies for New Year's Eve weekend and watched this one first. All I can say is that there was no place to go but up after watching this one. It was pointless and vulgar. Harvey Keitel's script must have been easy to write -- just make two out every three words a curse word. Andie McDowell is surprisingly good in a character roll, but the movie has nothing else to recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1757 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[Fred]] Gwynne, Al Lewis, Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this [[funny]], [[funny]] movie. The late Fred Gwynne is truly [[wonderful]] as [[Herman]] Munster who lives with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is [[hilarious]] as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the [[wax]] figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to terrorize the town [[everyone]] [[blames]] the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too [[late]]. You'll [[laugh]] out loud just like I did. [[Freda]] Gwynne, Al Lewis, Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this [[comical]], [[comical]] movie. The late Fred Gwynne is truly [[wondrous]] as [[Hermann]] Munster who lives with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is [[comic]] as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the [[waxy]] figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to terrorize the town [[somebody]] [[accuses]] the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too [[iate]]. You'll [[laughter]] out loud just like I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I watched 'Speak Easily' one [[night]] and [[thought]] it was o.k., but [[missing]] something. Maybe Buster Keaton strangely speaking threw me off, or the [[labored]] line delivery of a leading lady. The next day I kept thinking about the movie, though. I couldn't [[get]] Durante's song out of my head, I [[kept]] trying to better remember Thelma Todd's first scene, I considered that maybe Keaton did do some funny falls and [[physical]] comedy. The next night I watched a scene with Thelma [[Todd]] as a conniving chorus [[girl]] trying to impress Buster and Jimmy with her sex appeal. A very funny scene, the actors [[excellent]], their faces, their eyes, their silly expressions. So I watched another scene, their show is opening on Broadway. Buster in his blissful innocence botches every act. Again, I was laughing out loud, [[appreciating]] Keaton's clowning and tumbling. So the next night I watched the whole movie again, and this time I see it for the first time: It's Stupendous! It's [[Sensational]]! It's [[Sublime]]! Three great comedians! Todd dances! Durante sings! Keaton speaks! Sure it ain't poifect...but there's a lot of laughs in this picture. I watched 'Speak Easily' one [[nocturne]] and [[thinking]] it was o.k., but [[lacks]] something. Maybe Buster Keaton strangely speaking threw me off, or the [[laboured]] line delivery of a leading lady. The next day I kept thinking about the movie, though. I couldn't [[obtain]] Durante's song out of my head, I [[maintained]] trying to better remember Thelma Todd's first scene, I considered that maybe Keaton did do some funny falls and [[physique]] comedy. The next night I watched a scene with Thelma [[Thad]] as a conniving chorus [[women]] trying to impress Buster and Jimmy with her sex appeal. A very funny scene, the actors [[wondrous]], their faces, their eyes, their silly expressions. So I watched another scene, their show is opening on Broadway. Buster in his blissful innocence botches every act. Again, I was laughing out loud, [[acknowledging]] Keaton's clowning and tumbling. So the next night I watched the whole movie again, and this time I see it for the first time: It's Stupendous! It's [[Tabloid]]! It's [[Wondrous]]! Three great comedians! Todd dances! Durante sings! Keaton speaks! Sure it ain't poifect...but there's a lot of laughs in this picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 1759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I recently saw I.Q. and even though I'm not a romantic comedy type of gal, I think that it was just a nice and sweet movie to watch. So many movies in my opinion lack honesty. You know that feeling when you're watching a movie and you just feel robbed because it's taking something from the story and it was like the director just threw it together like it was trash? The story between the scientists is a sweet and funny one. How they stuck together and they tried to help Tim Robbins character become smart. I liked the love story between Tim and Meg because it was simple and brought up a good point when it comes to love, "nothing is what it seems". I would recommend this for a Sunday morning.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] With [[films]] like "Wallace & Gromit" and "[[Chicken]] Run" under their [[belt]], the good people from the other side of the [[pond]], Aardman Animation, are now [[introducing]] us to a bit of their [[twisted]] [[humor]] in the form of "Creature [[Comforts]]".

Derived from a short [[done]] [[early]] in their careers, "Creature [[Comforts]]" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.

Aardman Animation went [[across]] the [[country]] interviewing people with [[innocuous]] questions such as, "Are you a liar?" and then [[speed]] [[things]] up a [[bit]] asking about their [[sex]] lives.

The [[answers]], while [[seeming]] to be boring and mundane, are [[actually]] [[quite]] funny, when you understand the dialogs come [[first]] and the [[animals]] are [[added]] [[later]].

How [[many]] of these [[animals]] [[look]] like the [[person]] making the [[statements]]? One of the characters [[discussing]] what he [[looks]] for in a [[woman]], "I [[like]] them [[kind]] of thin." is an insect, the [[Walking]] [[Stick]].

There are two [[dogs]] [[discussing]] [[odors]] and [[smells]], while sniffing the [[behind]] of a poodle, as they talk about the [[different]] [[smells]] of a [[woman]].

There are two [[birds]] in a cage. As the "wife" tells the litany that is her [[health]], her long suffering husband stands by her, [[saying]] nothing.

[[While]] it [[might]] take some time for "Creature [[Comforts]]" to [[find]] it's "legs", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the [[ordinary]]. [[While]] there are more reality [[shows]] than Carter has liver [[pills]], "[[Creature]] [[Comforts]]" is one of a kind and [[definitely]] worth watching.

Some of the [[humor]] might [[seem]] a little racy, it's the claymation that [[catches]] the attention of the [[children]] (like the [[old]] Batman [[series]] of the 60's, the jokes are subtle [[enough]] the [[kids]] won't [[get]] them) and it's the [[jokes]] that are there for the [[adults]]. With [[film]] like "Wallace & Gromit" and "[[Pollo]] Run" under their [[strap]], the good people from the other side of the [[lagoon]], Aardman Animation, are now [[presenting]] us to a bit of their [[distorted]] [[comedy]] in the form of "Creature [[Conveniences]]".

Derived from a short [[performed]] [[prematurely]] in their careers, "Creature [[Amenities]]" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.

Aardman Animation went [[throughout]] the [[nationals]] interviewing people with [[harmless]] questions such as, "Are you a liar?" and then [[accelerated]] [[matters]] up a [[bitten]] asking about their [[sexually]] lives.

The [[reply]], while [[glaring]] to be boring and mundane, are [[genuinely]] [[rather]] funny, when you understand the dialogs come [[frst]] and the [[animal]] are [[adding]] [[then]].

How [[various]] of these [[beasts]] [[peek]] like the [[somebody]] making the [[statement]]? One of the characters [[speaking]] what he [[seem]] for in a [[women]], "I [[loves]] them [[sort]] of thin." is an insect, the [[Marche]] [[Wand]].

There are two [[hounds]] [[talk]] [[fragrances]] and [[smell]], while sniffing the [[posterior]] of a poodle, as they talk about the [[multiple]] [[fragrance]] of a [[daughters]].

There are two [[poultry]] in a cage. As the "wife" tells the litany that is her [[hygiene]], her long suffering husband stands by her, [[telling]] nothing.

[[Despite]] it [[probability]] take some time for "Creature [[Amenities]]" to [[unearthed]] it's "legs", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the [[normal]]. [[Although]] there are more reality [[showcase]] than Carter has liver [[pill]], "[[Monster]] [[Conveniences]]" is one of a kind and [[unmistakably]] worth watching.

Some of the [[comedy]] might [[seems]] a little racy, it's the claymation that [[catch]] the attention of the [[kid]] (like the [[elderly]] Batman [[serials]] of the 60's, the jokes are subtle [[adequately]] the [[enfant]] won't [[obtains]] them) and it's the [[pranks]] that are there for the [[adult]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This was a [[delightful]] presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well [[played]] by the [[animation]] with vanity, arrogance, snobbish [[superiority]] and innocent wonder. The [[quote]] (or scene) I [[recall]] [[vividly]] is when Hemo tires of "all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all" and threatens to storm out, the Scientist [[answers]] him in a single word "Thalassa" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood.

Such a [[splendid]] [[blend]] of entertainment and information make this a [[classic]] as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning. This was a [[wondrous]] presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well [[served]] by the [[animate]] with vanity, arrogance, snobbish [[primacy]] and innocent wonder. The [[quoting]] (or scene) I [[rappel]] [[eloquently]] is when Hemo tires of "all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all" and threatens to storm out, the Scientist [[answering]] him in a single word "Thalassa" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood.

Such a [[noteworthy]] [[mixing]] of entertainment and information make this a [[traditional]] as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1762 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I went into The Straight Story [[expecting]] a [[sad]]/[[happy]] [[type]] drama with nice direction and some good acting. These I [[got]]. What I wasn't [[expecting]] was an allegory for the trials of human existence. [[Leave]] it to [[Lynch]] to take a simple [[story]] about a 300 mile trip on a lawnmower and [[turn]] it into a [[microcosm]] for the human condition.

If you didn't [[notice]], watch it again, [[paying]] [[attention]] to the [[ages]] of the people Alvin meets, the [[terrain]] he's driving through, the [[reactions]] people [[give]] him, the [[kinds]] of discussions he has (one of the first is about [[pregnancy]] and children, one of the last is outside of a [[cemetery]]). The [[last]] [[road]] he [[drives]] down is particulary haunting in this [[context]], as it narrows and his [[fear]] and nervousness [[mount]]. The [[last]] mechanical [[failure]] [[could]] be [[seen]] as a [[death]], and the miraculous [[rebirth]] of his [[engine]] [[relating]] to an afterlife, in which he [[achieves]] the [[desired]] [[reunion]].

I only [[hope]] some of the people who [[branded]] this as a slow sappy melodrama take the time to watch with a more [[holistic]] attention. I went into The Straight Story [[wait]] a [[unlucky]]/[[pleased]] [[genre]] drama with nice direction and some good acting. These I [[ai]]. What I wasn't [[awaited]] was an allegory for the trials of human existence. [[Leaving]] it to [[Bastien]] to take a simple [[saga]] about a 300 mile trip on a lawnmower and [[converting]] it into a [[miniature]] for the human condition.

If you didn't [[notification]], watch it again, [[salaries]] [[beware]] to the [[centuries]] of the people Alvin meets, the [[topography]] he's driving through, the [[reply]] people [[lend]] him, the [[sort]] of discussions he has (one of the first is about [[childbirth]] and children, one of the last is outside of a [[graveyard]]). The [[latter]] [[route]] he [[driving]] down is particulary haunting in this [[background]], as it narrows and his [[affraid]] and nervousness [[mounting]]. The [[latter]] mechanical [[impossibility]] [[did]] be [[saw]] as a [[fatality]], and the miraculous [[resurrection]] of his [[engines]] [[related]] to an afterlife, in which he [[accomplishes]] the [[hoped]] [[reunite]].

I only [[hopes]] some of the people who [[trademarks]] this as a slow sappy melodrama take the time to watch with a more [[overall]] attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 1763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this bomb when it hit theaters. I laughed the whole time. Why? Because the stupidity of it seemed to have made me go insane. I look back on it and realize there was not ONE funny thing in the whole movie. At leat nothing intentional. It IS awfully funny that Lizzie cn chew a piece of Nurplex and become a gigantic, carnivorous demon...yet her itty-bitty little dress is perfectly intact, despite the fact that she is now hundreds of times larger than she was when she first put it on. Or the kind of movie in which a man can be shocked with a defibulator and only fall unconcious, and return to conciousness without ANY medical attention. And don't let me get started on the ridiculous fate of the "villain" that they decided they needed to create "conflict." Uh huh.

To the person complaining about Disney only targetting kids-The raunchy parts of this film seems to disprove that statement. Do we really need Daryl Hannah accusing Jeff Bridges of having kinky video tapes? You do if you're Disney and you're out of ideas for making the movie appeal to the above-8 crowd without writing a more intelligent script! I am thoroughly convinced that Disney pays off the ratings board so it's movies can get away with murder and still get family-friendly ratings.

What a waste of the DVD format. --------------------------------------------- Result 1764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I'll admit to being biased when I reviewed this since it was my [[introduction]] to the [[series]]. I saw this film for the [[first]] time in ~2005 on the late night "Fear Friday" on AMC, which [[often]] pulls obscure [[gems]] like this out of cold [[storage]] for new generations. I made it a point to watch the [[entire]] Amicus anthology series before reviewing any of them here to make sure I had perspective. [[Looking]] back, I still [[rate]] The House That Dripped Blood as my favorite, followed closely by Tales From The Crypt and then Asylum.

I think all of the [[elements]] that make this series charming---the vintage '60s/'70s style [[cinematography]], creepy to [[kooky]], far-fetched [[tales]] and the utter Britishness of it all right down the backing music----came together better here than any of the others [[overall]]. The [[movie]] centers around a very old English country [[house]] and the [[misfortune]] that [[befalls]] all that dwell within.

The [[first]] story [[involves]] a [[horror]] [[writer]] and his [[wife]], who [[moved]] into this secluded place to get a break from the [[city]] so he [[could]] [[concentrate]] on his [[passion]]. He [[creates]] a [[murderous]] [[character]] [[called]] Dominic and [[soon]] [[starts]] [[experiencing]] [[great]] [[difficulty]] telling [[reality]] from fiction. There is a subtle physchedelia here via his [[torment]] that I found amusing yet creepy. Oh and those [[horrible]] [[prop]] teeth (then again these are British actors, maybe those were REAL!!!)

The second [[story]] is the [[tale]] of a [[lonely]] old [[man]] ([[Peter]] Cushing) that has [[moved]] here to [[escape]] his loneliness, [[yet]] it only worsens as he is [[haunted]] by lost [[love]]. He seems to have [[found]] [[possible]] salvation at a local (very creepy) wax [[museum]], but it turns out he [[would]] have been [[much]] better off [[alone]].......

The [[third]] story [[includes]] the [[great]] Christopher Lee (my fav British [[horror]] [[actor]]) as a [[single]] [[father]] with a rather [[disturbed]] and thoroughly creepy young [[daughter]]. He is [[constantly]] [[wary]] of her [[getting]] into [[things]] she shouldn't---like witchcraft! She has a natural [[talent]] for it, with good [[reason]]. Lee is [[superb]] here as the ice cold disciplinarian, that [[man]] has a [[true]] [[talent]] for playing [[characters]] that are [[absolutely]] devoid of warmth!! But despite his best [[efforts]], the little [[troublemaker]] does in fact learn forbidden [[knowledge]] and [[bad]] [[things]] follow......

This final story is the tale of a cynical old veteran actor that feels the young director he's working with isn't qualified to capture a proper vampire film, right down to the quality of the costumes and his cloak in particular. So he goes to a old curiosity store in the middle of a foggy night to get something more "authentic". Little does he know that he picked up a truly authentic vampire's cloak! Putting it on at the stroke of midnight has rather noticeable effects. By the time I had gotten to this fourth and final story, it was after 3 am and I couldn't quite stay awake on the first try (not from boredom). But I did experience something that I have hundreds of times, a curious bonding experience I have with films or music when I drift in and out of sleep and the film/music becomes part of my dream!! Great fun!! This bizarre story was perfect for that and seemed much scarier the first time than it actually was because I woke up right when he was levitated by the cloak's power and couldn't quite comprehend was what happening at first. Not long after, the lovely Ingrid Pitt, a costar on his movie set, came to visit and he warned her not to put on the cloak at midnight---but he needn't have bothered, for she was a real vampire herself. The chintzy keyboard jingle that followed as she flew toward him on the staircase was simply hysterical!! And again in my half-asleep state, seemed rather confusing! Side Note: Make sure to catch Lee and Pitt along with the stunning Amicus star Britt Ekland in the all time classic film The Wicker Man (1973).

The weakest link here was the interlacing commentary between stories, but based on the stories themselves, this is a classic! Objectively, I would say the third story is best, but I like the 4th most because it makes me smile so much.Very highly recommended for horror fans and if you're a British horror fan, it's mandatory! I'd say it's worthwhile to view the series in chronological order if you can. The last film of this series, Monster Club (1980) is certainly the weakest. I think the first 3-4 films except for the at times mediocre Torture Garden (1967) are the best, but if you like any of them, you should watch them all at least once. You'll probably be back many more times to watch your favorites. I'll admit to being biased when I reviewed this since it was my [[introductions]] to the [[serials]]. I saw this film for the [[fiirst]] time in ~2005 on the late night "Fear Friday" on AMC, which [[ordinarily]] pulls obscure [[jewelry]] like this out of cold [[storehouse]] for new generations. I made it a point to watch the [[total]] Amicus anthology series before reviewing any of them here to make sure I had perspective. [[Search]] back, I still [[rates]] The House That Dripped Blood as my favorite, followed closely by Tales From The Crypt and then Asylum.

I think all of the [[ingredient]] that make this series charming---the vintage '60s/'70s style [[movie]], creepy to [[insane]], far-fetched [[narratives]] and the utter Britishness of it all right down the backing music----came together better here than any of the others [[comprehensive]]. The [[cinematography]] centers around a very old English country [[lodgings]] and the [[woe]] that [[befell]] all that dwell within.

The [[outset]] story [[consists]] a [[terror]] [[screenwriter]] and his [[women]], who [[relocated]] into this secluded place to get a break from the [[town]] so he [[did]] [[spotlight]] on his [[enthusiasm]]. He [[generates]] a [[bloody]] [[characters]] [[drew]] Dominic and [[rapidly]] [[launches]] [[undergoing]] [[huge]] [[trouble]] telling [[realism]] from fiction. There is a subtle physchedelia here via his [[agony]] that I found amusing yet creepy. Oh and those [[hideous]] [[helix]] teeth (then again these are British actors, maybe those were REAL!!!)

The second [[histories]] is the [[saga]] of a [[single]] old [[dude]] ([[Peters]] Cushing) that has [[shifted]] here to [[escaping]] his loneliness, [[still]] it only worsens as he is [[tormented]] by lost [[likes]]. He seems to have [[detected]] [[feasible]] salvation at a local (very creepy) wax [[museums]], but it turns out he [[ought]] have been [[very]] better off [[single]].......

The [[thirdly]] story [[consists]] the [[grand]] Christopher Lee (my fav British [[terror]] [[actress]]) as a [[sole]] [[pere]] with a rather [[flustered]] and thoroughly creepy young [[girls]]. He is [[systematically]] [[mistrustful]] of her [[obtaining]] into [[aspects]] she shouldn't---like witchcraft! She has a natural [[talents]] for it, with good [[justification]]. Lee is [[magnifique]] here as the ice cold disciplinarian, that [[dude]] has a [[real]] [[talents]] for playing [[features]] that are [[altogether]] devoid of warmth!! But despite his best [[effort]], the little [[shaker]] does in fact learn forbidden [[expertise]] and [[amiss]] [[items]] follow......

This final story is the tale of a cynical old veteran actor that feels the young director he's working with isn't qualified to capture a proper vampire film, right down to the quality of the costumes and his cloak in particular. So he goes to a old curiosity store in the middle of a foggy night to get something more "authentic". Little does he know that he picked up a truly authentic vampire's cloak! Putting it on at the stroke of midnight has rather noticeable effects. By the time I had gotten to this fourth and final story, it was after 3 am and I couldn't quite stay awake on the first try (not from boredom). But I did experience something that I have hundreds of times, a curious bonding experience I have with films or music when I drift in and out of sleep and the film/music becomes part of my dream!! Great fun!! This bizarre story was perfect for that and seemed much scarier the first time than it actually was because I woke up right when he was levitated by the cloak's power and couldn't quite comprehend was what happening at first. Not long after, the lovely Ingrid Pitt, a costar on his movie set, came to visit and he warned her not to put on the cloak at midnight---but he needn't have bothered, for she was a real vampire herself. The chintzy keyboard jingle that followed as she flew toward him on the staircase was simply hysterical!! And again in my half-asleep state, seemed rather confusing! Side Note: Make sure to catch Lee and Pitt along with the stunning Amicus star Britt Ekland in the all time classic film The Wicker Man (1973).

The weakest link here was the interlacing commentary between stories, but based on the stories themselves, this is a classic! Objectively, I would say the third story is best, but I like the 4th most because it makes me smile so much.Very highly recommended for horror fans and if you're a British horror fan, it's mandatory! I'd say it's worthwhile to view the series in chronological order if you can. The last film of this series, Monster Club (1980) is certainly the weakest. I think the first 3-4 films except for the at times mediocre Torture Garden (1967) are the best, but if you like any of them, you should watch them all at least once. You'll probably be back many more times to watch your favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Wicker Man, starring [[Nicolas]] Cage, is by no [[means]] a good [[movie]], but I can't really say it's one I [[regret]] [[watching]]. I [[could]] [[go]] on and on about the [[negative]] [[aspects]] of the movie, like the [[terrible]] acting and the [[lengthy]] scenes where Cage is looking for the girl, has a hallucination, followed by another hallucination, followed by a dream sequence- with a hallucination, etc., but it's just not worth dwelling on when it [[comes]] to a movie like this. [[Instead]], here's five reasons why you [[SHOULD]] watch The Wicker Man, even though it's bad:

5. It's hard to deny that it has some genuinely creepy ideas to it, the only problem is in its [[cheesy]], unintentionally funny [[execution]]. If [[nothing]] else, this is a movie that may [[inspire]] you to see the [[original]] 1973 [[film]], or [[even]] read the short [[story]] on which it is based.

4. [[For]] a cheesy [[horror]]/thriller, it is really aesthetically pleasing. It's [[pretty]] obvious that it was filmed on [[location]] instead of using green screen or elaborate sets, so we [[get]] to [[see]] some very [[great]] [[scenery]]. There are also many nicely composed shots. It is a very [[good]] looking movie.

3. Nicolas Cage is not so much an actor as he is a force of nature. Whether you're a fan of his or not, it seems as if it's impossible for Cage to play a "normal guy". There is always some kind of eccentricity or nerdiness he brings to the characters he plays, and personally, I am always fascinated by [[watching]] him in any [[movie]] he does. Whether [[Nicolas]] Cage is [[great]] or [[terrible]], he [[always]] [[brings]] his [[unique]] energy into play, and he is never boring to watch. He is terrible in The Wicker [[Man]], but in the most [[wonderful]] [[kind]] of way.

2. A [[student]] could probably [[write]] a hell of a paper on this movie, as it seems to be the strongest anti-feminist movie ever made. "See?" you could write, "this is what happens when women are allowed to run a society!" Also, the similarities between this "Summersisle" society and a bee colony are pretty interesting and worth noting.

1. If you're reading this, there's probably a good chance you may have seen a YouTube video that has become very popular: a collection of "highlights" from the movie, including Cage running around in a bear suit, and of course, the infamous "AAGHH!! THE BEES!! MY EYES!!!" line. These scenes are hilarious out of context, and they are still fairly funny while watching them in the film's entirety.

I bought the used DVD at Blockbuster for about 5 dollars...when you work that out, it's about a dollar per reason. It's a pretty good deal.

NOTE: The Unrated version of the movie is the best to watch, and it's better to watch the Theatrical version just for its little added on epilogue, which features a cameo from James Franco. The Wicker Man, starring [[Nikola]] Cage, is by no [[mode]] a good [[filmmaking]], but I can't really say it's one I [[sadness]] [[staring]]. I [[did]] [[going]] on and on about the [[counterproductive]] [[things]] of the movie, like the [[scary]] acting and the [[long]] scenes where Cage is looking for the girl, has a hallucination, followed by another hallucination, followed by a dream sequence- with a hallucination, etc., but it's just not worth dwelling on when it [[happens]] to a movie like this. [[However]], here's five reasons why you [[GOTTA]] watch The Wicker Man, even though it's bad:

5. It's hard to deny that it has some genuinely creepy ideas to it, the only problem is in its [[dorky]], unintentionally funny [[execute]]. If [[anything]] else, this is a movie that may [[motivate]] you to see the [[initial]] 1973 [[cinematic]], or [[yet]] read the short [[fairytales]] on which it is based.

4. [[In]] a cheesy [[abomination]]/thriller, it is really aesthetically pleasing. It's [[quite]] obvious that it was filmed on [[locations]] instead of using green screen or elaborate sets, so we [[got]] to [[seeing]] some very [[prodigious]] [[panorama]]. There are also many nicely composed shots. It is a very [[buena]] looking movie.

3. Nicolas Cage is not so much an actor as he is a force of nature. Whether you're a fan of his or not, it seems as if it's impossible for Cage to play a "normal guy". There is always some kind of eccentricity or nerdiness he brings to the characters he plays, and personally, I am always fascinated by [[staring]] him in any [[cinema]] he does. Whether [[Nikolaus]] Cage is [[sublime]] or [[dreadful]], he [[permanently]] [[poses]] his [[singular]] energy into play, and he is never boring to watch. He is terrible in The Wicker [[Mec]], but in the most [[sumptuous]] [[sort]] of way.

2. A [[schoolchildren]] could probably [[handwriting]] a hell of a paper on this movie, as it seems to be the strongest anti-feminist movie ever made. "See?" you could write, "this is what happens when women are allowed to run a society!" Also, the similarities between this "Summersisle" society and a bee colony are pretty interesting and worth noting.

1. If you're reading this, there's probably a good chance you may have seen a YouTube video that has become very popular: a collection of "highlights" from the movie, including Cage running around in a bear suit, and of course, the infamous "AAGHH!! THE BEES!! MY EYES!!!" line. These scenes are hilarious out of context, and they are still fairly funny while watching them in the film's entirety.

I bought the used DVD at Blockbuster for about 5 dollars...when you work that out, it's about a dollar per reason. It's a pretty good deal.

NOTE: The Unrated version of the movie is the best to watch, and it's better to watch the Theatrical version just for its little added on epilogue, which features a cameo from James Franco. --------------------------------------------- Result 1766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Over the years, we've seen a lot of [[preposterous]] things done by writers when the show just had to go on no matter what, [[keeping]] "8 Simple Rules" going after John [[Ritter]] died comes to mind, but this is probably the first [[time]] I cared. The [[idea]] of having "That 70's Show" without Eric or to a lesser [[extent]] Kelso is ridiculous. They tried to cover it up with a comeback of Leo and increasingly outrageous story lines, but it always felt like why bother when you don't have a main character anymore. It just didn't really connect, it was a bunch of unrelated stuff happening that most of the time wasn't even funny. The last season felt like the season too much for every single character, simply because Eric used to take a lot of screen time and now we'd be smashed in the face by how stale and repetitive the rest of the characters were. Focusing on the [[gimmick]] that is Fez was thoroughly uninteresting and the character would simply stop working, because the whole deal was that he'd say something weird from out of nowhere, and you can't say stuff from out of nowhere when every second line is yours. They also brought in the standard cousin Oliver, only this time it just wasn't a kid. Whenever you heard somebody knock on the door, you started praying it wasn't Randy, please let it not be Randy. The deal with Randy was that he'd do really awful jokes, usually as Red would say, smiling like an ass and totally screwing up delivery and Donna would be in stitches. I think more than half of the last season was Donna pretending to be amused. The problems had started earlier though: what once was a truly great show with an equally great concept that for once wasn't about a dysfunctional family slowly got into the territory of soap opera. Everybody started being in love with everybody, emotional scenes were dragged out at nausea, with just one usually lame joke placed somewhere to divert attention that we were watching "As The World Turns". I'm guessing this was character development, but come on that was written almost as clumsily as the moral lessons from "Family Matters". To be fair, the last episode, also because it had a cameo by Topher Grace (a cameo in his own show), was really good, even if not that funny either.

By the way, yet more criticism on Season 8: what the hell was with the opening theme? Not only did they use the same joke twice (a character not singing), Fez scared the hell out of me. Dude, don't open your eyes that far. But the first five seasons or so,among the best comedy ever broadcast. Over the years, we've seen a lot of [[nutty]] things done by writers when the show just had to go on no matter what, [[maintain]] "8 Simple Rules" going after John [[Knight]] died comes to mind, but this is probably the first [[period]] I cared. The [[thinking]] of having "That 70's Show" without Eric or to a lesser [[amplitude]] Kelso is ridiculous. They tried to cover it up with a comeback of Leo and increasingly outrageous story lines, but it always felt like why bother when you don't have a main character anymore. It just didn't really connect, it was a bunch of unrelated stuff happening that most of the time wasn't even funny. The last season felt like the season too much for every single character, simply because Eric used to take a lot of screen time and now we'd be smashed in the face by how stale and repetitive the rest of the characters were. Focusing on the [[trick]] that is Fez was thoroughly uninteresting and the character would simply stop working, because the whole deal was that he'd say something weird from out of nowhere, and you can't say stuff from out of nowhere when every second line is yours. They also brought in the standard cousin Oliver, only this time it just wasn't a kid. Whenever you heard somebody knock on the door, you started praying it wasn't Randy, please let it not be Randy. The deal with Randy was that he'd do really awful jokes, usually as Red would say, smiling like an ass and totally screwing up delivery and Donna would be in stitches. I think more than half of the last season was Donna pretending to be amused. The problems had started earlier though: what once was a truly great show with an equally great concept that for once wasn't about a dysfunctional family slowly got into the territory of soap opera. Everybody started being in love with everybody, emotional scenes were dragged out at nausea, with just one usually lame joke placed somewhere to divert attention that we were watching "As The World Turns". I'm guessing this was character development, but come on that was written almost as clumsily as the moral lessons from "Family Matters". To be fair, the last episode, also because it had a cameo by Topher Grace (a cameo in his own show), was really good, even if not that funny either.

By the way, yet more criticism on Season 8: what the hell was with the opening theme? Not only did they use the same joke twice (a character not singing), Fez scared the hell out of me. Dude, don't open your eyes that far. But the first five seasons or so,among the best comedy ever broadcast. --------------------------------------------- Result 1767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] [[Part]] Two [[picks]] up... not where the [[last]] [[film]] left off. As part of the quasi-conventionality of Steven Soderbergh's [[epic]] 4+ hour [[event]], Che's two stories are told as [[classic]] "Rise" and "[[Fall]]" [[scenarios]]. In [[Part]] Two, Che Guevara, leaving his post as a bureaucrat in Cuba and after a failed attempt in the Congo (only in passing [[mentioned]] in the film), goes down to Bolivia to try and start up another through-the-jungle style revolution. [[Things]] don't go quite as well [[planned]], at all, probably because of Che's then notorious stature as a Communist and revolutionary, and in part because of America's involvement on the side of the Bolivian Government, and, of course, that Castro wasn't really around as a back-up for Che.

As it goes, the second part of Che is sadder, but in some ways wiser than the first part. Which makes sense, as Guevara has to endure low morale from his men, betrayals from those around him, constant mistakes by grunts and nearby peasants, and by ultimately the [[enclosing]], larger military force. But what's sadder still is that Guevara, no matter what, won't give in. One may see this as an incredible strength or a fatal flaw- maybe both- but it's also clear how one starts to see Che, if not totally more fully rounded, then as something of a more sympathetic [[character]]. True, he did kill, and executed, and felt justified all the way. And yet it starts to work on the viewer in the sense of a primal level of pity; the [[sequence]] where Guevara's health worsens without medicine, leading up to the shocking stabbing of a horse, [[marks]] as one of the most [[memorable]] and [[satisfying]] of any [[film]] this year.

Again, Soderbergh's command of narrative is strong, if, on occasion, [[slightly]] [[sluggish]] (understandable due to the [[big]] running time), and one or two scenes just feel totally odd ([[Matt]] Damon?), but these are [[minor]] [[liabilities]]. Going this time for the [[straight]] [[color]] camera approach, this is [[almost]] like a pure militia-style war picture, told with a great deal of care for the men in the [[group]], as well as Guevara as the Lord-over this group, and how things dwindle down the final scene. And as always, Del-Toro is at the top of his game, in every scene, every beat knowing this guy so well- for better and for worse- that he comes about as close to embodiment as possible. Overall, the two parts of Che make up an impressive package: history as drama in compelling style, good for an audience even if they don't know Che or, better, if they don't think highly of him. It's that special. 8.5/10 [[Party]] Two [[selected]] up... not where the [[final]] [[kino]] left off. As part of the quasi-conventionality of Steven Soderbergh's [[manas]] 4+ hour [[incident]], Che's two stories are told as [[conventional]] "Rise" and "[[Dipped]]" [[scripts]]. In [[Party]] Two, Che Guevara, leaving his post as a bureaucrat in Cuba and after a failed attempt in the Congo (only in passing [[talked]] in the film), goes down to Bolivia to try and start up another through-the-jungle style revolution. [[Matters]] don't go quite as well [[envisaged]], at all, probably because of Che's then notorious stature as a Communist and revolutionary, and in part because of America's involvement on the side of the Bolivian Government, and, of course, that Castro wasn't really around as a back-up for Che.

As it goes, the second part of Che is sadder, but in some ways wiser than the first part. Which makes sense, as Guevara has to endure low morale from his men, betrayals from those around him, constant mistakes by grunts and nearby peasants, and by ultimately the [[besieging]], larger military force. But what's sadder still is that Guevara, no matter what, won't give in. One may see this as an incredible strength or a fatal flaw- maybe both- but it's also clear how one starts to see Che, if not totally more fully rounded, then as something of a more sympathetic [[characters]]. True, he did kill, and executed, and felt justified all the way. And yet it starts to work on the viewer in the sense of a primal level of pity; the [[sequencing]] where Guevara's health worsens without medicine, leading up to the shocking stabbing of a horse, [[branded]] as one of the most [[eventful]] and [[gratifying]] of any [[cinema]] this year.

Again, Soderbergh's command of narrative is strong, if, on occasion, [[mildly]] [[anemic]] (understandable due to the [[sizeable]] running time), and one or two scenes just feel totally odd ([[Mattie]] Damon?), but these are [[marginal]] [[accountability]]. Going this time for the [[successive]] [[dye]] camera approach, this is [[nearly]] like a pure militia-style war picture, told with a great deal of care for the men in the [[panel]], as well as Guevara as the Lord-over this group, and how things dwindle down the final scene. And as always, Del-Toro is at the top of his game, in every scene, every beat knowing this guy so well- for better and for worse- that he comes about as close to embodiment as possible. Overall, the two parts of Che make up an impressive package: history as drama in compelling style, good for an audience even if they don't know Che or, better, if they don't think highly of him. It's that special. 8.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1768 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The real story (took place in Kansas in 1959) of a murder (Perry and Dick, two ex-convicts who broke into a remote house on a rainy night to steal and kill everyone they met). Richard Brooks directed the chilling and disturbing Capote's book about the reasons that drove these kids to the crime (Are they Natural Born Killers ?). The crime scenes are very brutal and haunting because of the lack of senses and reasons for what we witnessed. Stunning black & white cinematography from Conrand Hall, excellent country - road music score from Quincy Jones, amazing performances in two principal roles from Robert Blake and Scott Wilson and first time in a movie a sad comment about capital punishment at the last moments before their deaths. Jones, Hall and Brooks (as director and as writer for adapted screenplay) are Academy Award nominees. Gripping, superbly directed and frightening, one of the best films of this decade --------------------------------------------- Result 1769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Stewart]] is a distinguished [[bachelor]] and a successful executive who is about to [[marry]] his fiancée Janice Rule but instead [[gets]] [[involved]] with a capricious, sensual art dealer (Kim Novak) who turns out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak [[desires]] [[earnestly]] and [[intensely]] to [[love]], but is [[unable]] to feel it...

Stewart slowly [[falls]] in [[love]] with her, and [[looks]] for a [[way]] to [[free]] her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese [[cat]], Pyewacket... Still, Stewart [[continues]] in his [[attempts]] to [[change]] her into a loving, feeling [[woman]] as he [[aspires]] to [[marry]] her...

[[Also]] [[blocking]] his [[way]] are such talented supporting actors as Novak's brother ([[Jack]] Lemmon), a silly, [[charming]] [[sorcerer]] who can [[walk]] nonchalantly through walls; a [[terrible]] author who is writing a book about [[witchcraft]]; and the [[Head]] of the [[Association]] of Manhattan Witches, none other than the [[incredible]] Hermione Gingold...

Novak's [[Aunt]] Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other [[relatives]], is a [[tender]] witch who [[accepts]] that [[nothing]] should [[prevent]] the course of true love... She [[aids]] and [[stimulates]] them in turning Novak into the [[woman]] of Stewart's dreams, for a happy [[ending]]...

[[If]] you like to [[see]] a [[lightweight]] [[comedy]] about [[magic]], [[fantasy]] and love; [[beautiful]] [[cinematography]]; [[stunning]] [[use]] of [[color]]; and with an [[exceptional]] cast; don't [[miss]] this [[enjoyable]] and amusing [[movie]]… [[Steward]] is a distinguished [[diploma]] and a successful executive who is about to [[wedding]] his fiancée Janice Rule but instead [[got]] [[engaged]] with a capricious, sensual art dealer (Kim Novak) who turns out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak [[wants]] [[seriously]] and [[intently]] to [[loved]], but is [[incompetent]] to feel it...

Stewart slowly [[drops]] in [[iike]] with her, and [[seem]] for a [[routes]] to [[libre]] her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese [[kitten]], Pyewacket... Still, Stewart [[continued]] in his [[attempting]] to [[modifying]] her into a loving, feeling [[women]] as he [[seeks]] to [[wedding]] her...

[[Additionally]] [[obstructing]] his [[manner]] are such talented supporting actors as Novak's brother ([[Gato]] Lemmon), a silly, [[loveable]] [[wizard]] who can [[walking]] nonchalantly through walls; a [[horrible]] author who is writing a book about [[magic]]; and the [[Leader]] of the [[Associations]] of Manhattan Witches, none other than the [[fabulous]] Hermione Gingold...

Novak's [[Auntie]] Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other [[parents]], is a [[bids]] witch who [[accepted]] that [[anything]] should [[deter]] the course of true love... She [[aid]] and [[encourages]] them in turning Novak into the [[girl]] of Stewart's dreams, for a happy [[ended]]...

[[Unless]] you like to [[seeing]] a [[slight]] [[humor]] about [[magical]], [[imagination]] and love; [[brilliant]] [[movies]]; [[striking]] [[uses]] of [[dye]]; and with an [[wondrous]] cast; don't [[mademoiselle]] this [[nice]] and amusing [[movies]]… --------------------------------------------- Result 1770 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pathetic. This is what happens when director comes to work just because someone is paying him to.

The intentions were good, great locations and settings for a film of epic proportions. But the performance, damn! I swear, in some shots you can see extras on the background staring in the camera, or looking at the actors because no one told them what they should do when they hear "Action!". The battle scenes are so bad you wonder - are these people for real? They could've done more damage just by hugging each other. In the slow-mo scenes you can see people on battle field walking around or just standing, waving their hands.

Only action in the foreground is somehow emphasized. But for what? The story is so illogical and discontinuous, it seems like random situations in chronological order, sometimes not even that. The dialogs are dumb, the love plot is more embarrassing and ridiculous than in Hong Kong action movies.

With a budget of 40 million, and you can see every dollar invested on the screen, in best case scenario, the final result of all this enormous effort is a shiny round laser disk in the thin cover placed on the shelf in video store. --------------------------------------------- Result 1771 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As [[someone]] who [[lived]] through,and still remembers that decade [[vividly]],if the actual '70s had been half this [[funny]] and (semi)normal,they would have been so much more [[enjoyable]].[[Actual]] kids in that era did not [[act]] or behave [[anything]] close to as bright-eyed and normal as these [[kids]] did.The country's [[youth]] was still under the [[influence]] of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s [[rebellion]] that it spawned,[[especially]] in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the [[childishness]],the unreasonableness of them - [[none]] of the [[characters]] exhibit any of that.

[[Someone]] compared to "[[Happy]] Days",and I can [[see]] why:They were both [[sitcoms]] that take place 20 years before the [[current]] time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't [[born]] then,[[trust]] me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than "Happy Days" were like the [[actual]] '50s,as "M*A*S*H*" didn't accurately [[portray]] [[life]] at a [[US]] Army [[medical]] base during the Korean [[War]],etc. As [[person]] who [[resided]] through,and still remembers that decade [[eloquently]],if the actual '70s had been half this [[hilarious]] and (semi)normal,they would have been so much more [[gratifying]].[[Real]] kids in that era did not [[ley]] or behave [[somethings]] close to as bright-eyed and normal as these [[enfants]] did.The country's [[jugend]] was still under the [[influenced]] of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s [[intifada]] that it spawned,[[peculiarly]] in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the [[immaturity]],the unreasonableness of them - [[nothingness]] of the [[hallmarks]] exhibit any of that.

[[Everybody]] compared to "[[Jubilant]] Days",and I can [[consults]] why:They were both [[sitcom]] that take place 20 years before the [[underway]] time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't [[ould]] then,[[trusting]] me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than "Happy Days" were like the [[real]] '50s,as "M*A*S*H*" didn't accurately [[describes]] [[lives]] at a [[AMERICANS]] Army [[medicinal]] base during the Korean [[Warfare]],etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 1772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Suffice to say that - despite the odd ludicrous panegyric to his soi disant "abilities" posted here - the director of this inept, odious tosh hasn't made a film since. Well that is excellent news as far as I'm concerned.

Dead Babies has all of the bile of its creator, but lacks the wit and technical proficiency that make Martin Amis the novelist readable.

When will the British film industry wake up and realise that if it wants to regain the status it once had it should stop producing rubbish like this and make something real people will actually want to watch?

Avoid like the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 1773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, "wonderful! This will be great!" I was so wrong. The story was all [[screwed]] up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! [[Where]] was the [[story]]? I [[made]] myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box. I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, "wonderful! This will be great!" I was so wrong. The story was all [[shafted]] up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! [[Everytime]] was the [[conte]]? I [[accomplished]] myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box. --------------------------------------------- Result 1774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[In]] this [[excellent]] Twentieth-Century Fox film-noir, the metropolis is a [[labyrinth]] of [[despair]] in which scavengers and predators survive by living off one another. Brooding cityscapes lower over puny [[humanity]] in [[bleak]] expressionist symbolism.

A prostitute has her purse snatched on the subway. It contains a microfilm, and a communist spy [[ring]] will go to any lengths to recover it. Two [[parallel]] [[investigations]] unfold as both spies and cops hunt down the [[precious]] information.

Anti-hero pickpocket Skip McCoy is played with scornful [[assurance]] by [[Richard]] Widmark. He knows the [[cops]] to be his moral equals and [[intellectual]] inferiors, so he taunts them: "Go on," he says to captain Dan Tiger (Murvyn Vye), "drum up a [[charge]]. [[Throw]] me in. You've [[done]] it before." [[In]] this pitiless world, the [[cops]] are just one more gang on the streets. Just as [[Candy]] the hooker bribes Lightning [[Louie]] to [[get]] a lead, so the police are busy paying stool [[pigeons]] for information.

It is hard to [[believe]] that when Widmark made this [[film]] he was already in early middle age. The 39-year-old [[star]], coming to the [[end]] of his [[contract]] with Fox, plays the upstart [[Skip]] McCoy with the irreverent brashness of a [[teenager]]. [[Today]] it may not be acceptable for the romantic lead to [[punch]] his love interest into unconsciousness then revive her by sloshing [[beer]] in her face, but by the mores of the [[period]] it [[signified]] [[toughness]] - and Candy, after all, is a [[fallen]] [[woman]].

Jean [[Peters]] is [[radiant]] as Candy. Here, right in the middle of her five-year [[burst]] of B-movie [[fame]], she is [[beautiful]] and engaging as the [[whore]] with the [[golden]] heart. She is the story's victim, a [[martyr]] to her [[beauty]] as much as [[anything]] else. She [[means]] well, but is [[constantly]] being manipulated by [[cynical]] [[men]] - [[Joey]], [[Skip]] and the [[cops]].

The [[real]] star of this [[movie]] is New York. Haunting urban panoramas and snidering [[subway]] stations [[offer]] a claustrophobic evocation of the city as a living, [[malevolent]] force. Like [[maggots]] in a [[rotting]] cheese, human [[figures]] scurry through the city's byways. Elevators, subway turnstiles, sidewalks - even a dumb waiter act as conduits for the flow of corrupt [[humanity]]. People cling to any niche that affords safety: Moe has her grimy rented room, Skip his tenebrous shack on the Hudson River. As the characters move and interact, they are framed by bridge architecture, or lattices of girders, or are divided by hanging winch tackle. The personality of the city is constantly imposing itself. The angles and crossbeams of the wharf timbers are an echo of the gridiron street plan, and the card-index cabinets in the squadroom mimic the Manhattan skyline. When Joey's exit from the subway is barred, it is as if the steel sinews of the city are ensnaring him.

A surprising proportion of this film is shot in extreme close-up. Character drives the plot, as it should, and the close-ups are used to augment character. When Skip interrogates Candy, the close-up captures the sexual energy between them, belying the hostility of Skip's words. Jean Peters' beauty is painted in light, in exquisite soft focus close-ups. The device is also employed to heighten the tension. The opening sequence, the purse snatch, contains no dialogue: the drama relies entirely on close-up for its powerful effect.

Snoopers, and snoopers upon snoopers, populate the film. Moe (Thelma Ritter) makes a living as an informant, and her place in the hierarchy is accepted, even by her victims. When Skip observes, "she's gotta eat", he is chanting a recurring refrain. Just as 'straight' New Yorkers peddle lamb chops or lumber, the Underworld traffics in the commodity of information.

And yet even the stool pigeons are superior to Joey and his communist friends. Joey's feet on Moe's bed symbolise a transgression of the most basic moral code. Joey is beyond the pale. Moe will not trade with Joey, even to preserve her life: " ... even in our crummy business, you gotta draw the line somewhere."

"Pick-Up" was made in the depths of the Cold War. [[Richard]] Nixon had just been chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, having made his name with his phoney Alger Hiss expose - bogus communist microfilm and all. The McCarthy show trials were a daily reality. We see the cops in the movie inveigh against "the traitors who gave Stalin the A-bomb".

New York can be seen as a giant receptacle in which human offal cheats, squeals and murders. Containers form a leitmotif throughout the film. Moe carries her trade mark box of ties, and candy's purse, container of the microfilm, is the engine of the plot. Skip keeps his only possessions in a submerged crate, symbolising his secretive street-wisdom. The paupers' coffins, moving down the Hudson on a barge, are containers of just one more cargo being shifted around the pitiless metropolis.

The film is a masterpiece of composition. Candy is shown above the skulking Skip on the rickety gangway of the shack, signifying her moral ascendancy. When the gun is placed on the table, the extreme perspective makes it look bigger than Candy - violence is beginning to dwarf compassion. The lovers are eclipsed by the shadow of a stevedore's hook, reminding us that their love is neither pure nor absolute, but contingent upon the whims of the sinister city. Enyard the communist is a shadow on a wall, or a disembodied puff of cigarette smoke. He is like the lone alley cat amongst the garbage - a predatory phantom of the night. Camera shots from under taxi hoods, inside newspaper kiosks and through the bars of hospital beds constantly reinforce in us the awareness that we are all trapped in the metropolis. We are civilisation's mulch. [[Onto]] this [[wondrous]] Twentieth-Century Fox film-noir, the metropolis is a [[maze]] of [[despondency]] in which scavengers and predators survive by living off one another. Brooding cityscapes lower over puny [[humanist]] in [[dim]] expressionist symbolism.

A prostitute has her purse snatched on the subway. It contains a microfilm, and a communist spy [[rings]] will go to any lengths to recover it. Two [[randomness]] [[probe]] unfold as both spies and cops hunt down the [[priceless]] information.

Anti-hero pickpocket Skip McCoy is played with scornful [[security]] by [[Richards]] Widmark. He knows the [[police]] to be his moral equals and [[intelligentsia]] inferiors, so he taunts them: "Go on," he says to captain Dan Tiger (Murvyn Vye), "drum up a [[fees]]. [[Toss]] me in. You've [[doing]] it before." [[Across]] this pitiless world, the [[police]] are just one more gang on the streets. Just as [[Chocolate]] the hooker bribes Lightning [[Luis]] to [[got]] a lead, so the police are busy paying stool [[fools]] for information.

It is hard to [[reckon]] that when Widmark made this [[movie]] he was already in early middle age. The 39-year-old [[stars]], coming to the [[terminating]] of his [[agreements]] with Fox, plays the upstart [[Skipped]] McCoy with the irreverent brashness of a [[teenagers]]. [[Hoy]] it may not be acceptable for the romantic lead to [[punching]] his love interest into unconsciousness then revive her by sloshing [[casket]] in her face, but by the mores of the [[timetable]] it [[intentioned]] [[harshness]] - and Candy, after all, is a [[slumped]] [[dame]].

Jean [[Petr]] is [[lustrous]] as Candy. Here, right in the middle of her five-year [[blasting]] of B-movie [[repute]], she is [[leggy]] and engaging as the [[hooker]] with the [[gilded]] heart. She is the story's victim, a [[shahid]] to her [[beaut]] as much as [[nada]] else. She [[signifies]] well, but is [[endlessly]] being manipulated by [[sarcastic]] [[man]] - [[Jojo]], [[Skipped]] and the [[police]].

The [[actual]] star of this [[movies]] is New York. Haunting urban panoramas and snidering [[mtr]] stations [[offered]] a claustrophobic evocation of the city as a living, [[satanic]] force. Like [[worms]] in a [[dripping]] cheese, human [[digits]] scurry through the city's byways. Elevators, subway turnstiles, sidewalks - even a dumb waiter act as conduits for the flow of corrupt [[humane]]. People cling to any niche that affords safety: Moe has her grimy rented room, Skip his tenebrous shack on the Hudson River. As the characters move and interact, they are framed by bridge architecture, or lattices of girders, or are divided by hanging winch tackle. The personality of the city is constantly imposing itself. The angles and crossbeams of the wharf timbers are an echo of the gridiron street plan, and the card-index cabinets in the squadroom mimic the Manhattan skyline. When Joey's exit from the subway is barred, it is as if the steel sinews of the city are ensnaring him.

A surprising proportion of this film is shot in extreme close-up. Character drives the plot, as it should, and the close-ups are used to augment character. When Skip interrogates Candy, the close-up captures the sexual energy between them, belying the hostility of Skip's words. Jean Peters' beauty is painted in light, in exquisite soft focus close-ups. The device is also employed to heighten the tension. The opening sequence, the purse snatch, contains no dialogue: the drama relies entirely on close-up for its powerful effect.

Snoopers, and snoopers upon snoopers, populate the film. Moe (Thelma Ritter) makes a living as an informant, and her place in the hierarchy is accepted, even by her victims. When Skip observes, "she's gotta eat", he is chanting a recurring refrain. Just as 'straight' New Yorkers peddle lamb chops or lumber, the Underworld traffics in the commodity of information.

And yet even the stool pigeons are superior to Joey and his communist friends. Joey's feet on Moe's bed symbolise a transgression of the most basic moral code. Joey is beyond the pale. Moe will not trade with Joey, even to preserve her life: " ... even in our crummy business, you gotta draw the line somewhere."

"Pick-Up" was made in the depths of the Cold War. [[Richards]] Nixon had just been chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, having made his name with his phoney Alger Hiss expose - bogus communist microfilm and all. The McCarthy show trials were a daily reality. We see the cops in the movie inveigh against "the traitors who gave Stalin the A-bomb".

New York can be seen as a giant receptacle in which human offal cheats, squeals and murders. Containers form a leitmotif throughout the film. Moe carries her trade mark box of ties, and candy's purse, container of the microfilm, is the engine of the plot. Skip keeps his only possessions in a submerged crate, symbolising his secretive street-wisdom. The paupers' coffins, moving down the Hudson on a barge, are containers of just one more cargo being shifted around the pitiless metropolis.

The film is a masterpiece of composition. Candy is shown above the skulking Skip on the rickety gangway of the shack, signifying her moral ascendancy. When the gun is placed on the table, the extreme perspective makes it look bigger than Candy - violence is beginning to dwarf compassion. The lovers are eclipsed by the shadow of a stevedore's hook, reminding us that their love is neither pure nor absolute, but contingent upon the whims of the sinister city. Enyard the communist is a shadow on a wall, or a disembodied puff of cigarette smoke. He is like the lone alley cat amongst the garbage - a predatory phantom of the night. Camera shots from under taxi hoods, inside newspaper kiosks and through the bars of hospital beds constantly reinforce in us the awareness that we are all trapped in the metropolis. We are civilisation's mulch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is pure, distilled, unadulterated boredom. I knew nothing of it before I entered the dark room, took my seat. I was seduced by the "mysterious and suspenseful" blurb on the poster I suppose. Also, Lena Headey is nice and unconventionally sexy, and Richard Jenkins is always a reliable guy to have around, so the cast seemed reasonable. It may have been his name above the title that convinced me to go with this instead of whatever else was on. I should've gone to see Valkyrie for the second time instead.

The thin plot revolves around Headley's Gina McVey, her boyfriend, her father, her sister and her sister's husband who for some reason are being stalked, in a very louche and unenthusiastic manner, by their evil doppelgangers who emerge from mirrors that mysteriously smash. There could be a great film behind this idea (not exactly an original idea, mind you, but still...) and in fact, if the filmmakers had shorn away all the supporting cast and simply stuck to Headey's character's story, The Broken could've made a reasonable 20-minute short. As it is, it is desperately unmotivated and boring, and terribly inconsistent.

For instance, in one scene, a mirror smashes on its own in a room housing all the main characters; they look puzzled but quickly forget about it. In another scene, a mirror smashes in an empty room, and a doppelganger is visible as she "steps out" of the shards left hanging on the wall. So why did the first mirror smash if no creepy crawly was to come crawling out? Just for a little thrill? There are far too many scenes of the characters in the dimly-lit London flats, peering around corners cos they thought they heard something, but seeing nothing there and moving on. We begin to wonder, why doesn't this malevolent doppelgang actually ever want to try to scare them? Scare the characters and you have a chance of scaring the audience. But we, the audience, will need to start threatening each other, in the darkness of the theater, if we want to have any thrills during The Broken. By the way, once we've spent time with these evil doubles, we are totally bemused as to why anyone should be expected to be frightened of them - they just stand around, blank looks on their faces, perhaps totally harmless after killing their others.

There are some nice moods and touches throughout, and I dare say director Sean Ellis could fashion a genuinely stylish and suspenseful mystery movie if he was to hire an imaginative screenwriter next time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Moon [[Child]] was one of the more [[symbolic]] [[movies]] I've [[seen]]. What I really liked about it was the illustration on immorality/[[mortality]],and the [[obstacles]] and guidances through [[life]]. The [[movie]] [[depicts]] a [[great]] [[deal]] of vampire Kei having the power of immorality and the [[advantages]] to it. Whether if it is having supernatural abilities or everlasting life, these are what humans [[usually]] wish for. Moon [[Child]] [[shows]] the [[pain]] and [[disadvantages]] of being immortal, since the [[feelings]] [[towards]] loss [[impacts]] [[almost]] all the [[characters]] [[especially]] to the [[main]] [[characters]] Sho and Kei. The [[meaning]] of the title '[[Moon]] Child' [[reveals]] as the [[film]] comes [[close]] to the [[end]] where it [[clearly]] [[shows]] that [[everyone]] is a [[moon]] which [[shines]] other people's [[way]], giving [[guidance]]. I personality [[quite]] like that moral the movie depicted on. The [[weaknesses]] of the [[film]] lies in some parts of the acting and [[special]] [[effects]] [[since]] it [[made]] the film [[less]] authentic. The scene where [[character]] Toshi [[dies]] could have been more [[powerful]] and [[realistic]] if more authentic [[emotions]] in the acting were put into it. Some scenes with [[special]] [[effects]] like the [[gun]] shots [[also]] [[could]] have been more [[authentic]] without making it seem too much like an [[action]] [[video]] [[game]]. The [[sparks]] that came out of the guns [[appeared]] too [[fake]] and I [[think]] that [[could]] have been [[eliminated]] or fixed. [[Nevertheless]], I [[think]] Moon [[Child]] should be a [[movie]] [[everyone]] should [[consider]] watching. The symbolic [[ideas]] and [[images]] the [[movie]] [[brings]] out [[would]] be easily [[accepted]] by [[everyone]] and may interest [[many]] [[viewers]]. It is [[quite]] a [[thoughtful]] [[film]] and [[also]] [[entertaining]] to watch. Moon [[Kid]] was one of the more [[emblematic]] [[cinematography]] I've [[noticed]]. What I really liked about it was the illustration on immorality/[[death]],and the [[hindrance]] and guidances through [[lifetime]]. The [[kino]] [[describes]] a [[huge]] [[addresses]] of vampire Kei having the power of immorality and the [[benefits]] to it. Whether if it is having supernatural abilities or everlasting life, these are what humans [[ordinarily]] wish for. Moon [[Kids]] [[demonstrates]] the [[painless]] and [[handicaps]] of being immortal, since the [[passions]] [[vers]] loss [[influenced]] [[hardly]] all the [[attribute]] [[namely]] to the [[primary]] [[characteristics]] Sho and Kei. The [[mean]] of the title '[[Luna]] Child' [[reveal]] as the [[movies]] comes [[shut]] to the [[termination]] where it [[blatantly]] [[showings]] that [[someone]] is a [[lune]] which [[glitters]] other people's [[pathway]], giving [[instructions]]. I personality [[pretty]] like that moral the movie depicted on. The [[deficiency]] of the [[cinema]] lies in some parts of the acting and [[specific]] [[impact]] [[because]] it [[accomplished]] the film [[lesser]] authentic. The scene where [[characteristics]] Toshi [[deaths]] could have been more [[mighty]] and [[practical]] if more authentic [[feelings]] in the acting were put into it. Some scenes with [[particular]] [[impacts]] like the [[howitzer]] shots [[similarly]] [[would]] have been more [[real]] without making it seem too much like an [[measures]] [[videos]] [[games]]. The [[sparkle]] that came out of the guns [[emerged]] too [[falsify]] and I [[believing]] that [[wo]] have been [[eliminating]] or fixed. [[However]], I [[thought]] Moon [[Children]] should be a [[film]] [[somebody]] should [[reviewing]] watching. The symbolic [[brainchild]] and [[photographs]] the [[kino]] [[puts]] out [[could]] be easily [[recognize]] by [[anybody]] and may interest [[several]] [[audience]]. It is [[rather]] a [[pensive]] [[movies]] and [[apart]] [[amusing]] to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***SPOILER*** Do not read this, if you think about watching that movie, although it would be a waste of time. (By the way: The plot is so predictable that it does not make any difference if you read this or not anyway)

If you are wondering whether to see "Coyote Ugly" or not: don't! It's not worth either the money for the ticket or the VHS / DVD. A typical "Chick-Feel-Good-Flick", one could say. The plot itself is as shallow as it can be, a ridiculous and uncritical version of the American Dream. The young good-looking girl from a small town becoming a big success in New York. The few desperate attempts of giving the movie any depth fail, such as the "tragic" accident of the father, the "difficulties" of Violet's relationship with her boyfriend, and so on. McNally (Director) tries to arouse the audience's pity and sadness put does not have any chance to succeed in this attempt due to the bad script and the shallow acting. Especially Piper Perabo completely fails in convincing one of "Jersey's" fear of singing in front of an audience. The only good (and quite funny thing) about "Coyote Ugly" is John Goodman, who represents the small ray of hope of this movie.

I was very astonished, that Jerry Bruckheimer produced this movie. First "Gone In 60 Seconds" and now this... what happened to great movies like "The Rock" and "Con Air"? THAT was true Bruckheimer stuff.

If you are looking for a superficial movie with good looking women just to have a relaxed evening, you should better go and see "Charlie's Angels" (it's much more funny, entertaining and self-ironic) instead of this flick.

Two thumbs down (3 out of 10). --------------------------------------------- Result 1778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This review owes its existence entirely to a [[review]]. We take a weekly TV magazine to see what is coming up, and [[duly]] [[decide]] what we will watch. Obligingly, there are brief reviews of most of the films scheduled to be shown on the five major terrestrial channels. In addition to the prose, each film is [[allocated]] a 1-5 star [[rating]]. 5 means Don't Miss (superior to 4 for [[Excellent]]!), down to 1 standing for Poor. We have learned from vast experience that, with few exceptions, stars are awarded for gross taste, foul language, offensive content, promiscuity, horror, blood & guts, and especially killing off the hero/heroine just when everyone was about to live happily ever after. (If that isn't done, the movie is denigrated as being 'predictable' - the worst [[insult]] imaginable!)

Brave New Girl was given only 1 star, thereby suggesting it was a candidate worthy of our time and attention. This was confirmed by the reviewer's description of the movie as being a "truly awful tale", and, "Stupid, just stupid". We [[watched]] it, and my wife and I were [[glad]] we did so. The TV magazine reviewer further stated that the movie was "not a reworking of War and Peace", with which we have to agree. Reading through the IMDb reviews for this title a day or two later, the urge to pick up my pen (so to speak) to add my halfpennyworth (pronounced harf'pen'uth (emphasis on the first syllable) for the uninitiated) became overwhelming.

Why did we take to this movie? Well, it's just a matter of taste. We like attractive characters, believable relationships between them, interesting situations, courtesy and respect, good triumphing over evil, and so on. We [[liked]] the integrity and personalities of Holly (Lindsey Haun), her Mum (Virginia Madsen), Ditz (Barbara Mamabolo), Grant (Nick Roth), Zoe (Joanne Boland) and the two male professors involved in the story. So what if the storyline includes a 'wicked witch of the west' in the form of Angela (Barbara Mamabolo), provided that she plays the part with some conviction. We appreciated the friendship depicted between the two room-mates, with one having a financially challenged upbringing by a loving single Mum, and the other having every material advantage but receiving little parental time and affection. Is it any wonder that Ditz felt the way she did about Holly's Mum? Is it surprising that Grant should take an immediate interest in Holly, considering the manner of their initial meeting, Holly's dazzling smiles and her lively self-possession? I think these issues and the events are believable enough, but it is necessary to pretend that the scholarship and other circumstances are realistic in order for the tale to have a setting.

My wife and I are greatly blessed by not having any significant musical education. This enables us to enjoy the sounds produced by instruments and voices without having our critical faculties intruding unduly on our listening, and thus spoiling the experience. We enjoyed both the classical pieces and the pop, which came over well on the TV, and we weren't struck by any lack of talent. Also, it mattered not that Holly's classical vocals were dubbed by someone else.

We enjoyed the movie enough to look for a DVD. The average delivered price we have paid per disk for the movies in our collection currently stands at £4.9484 (rounded to four decimal places). Brave New Girl was available from a trusted supplier on the Amazon Marketplace for £1.3516 (rounded to four decimal places) above this figure. Such a purchase would increase the average. Why I should resent this is a mystery to me, but it is a testimony to our enjoyment of this film that we placed an order anyway. I have awarded this film 7 IMDb stars out of ten, having docked one for overenthusiastic reception of the performances by the audiences, one for Britney advertising and one for something else I can't remember right now. (In case it hasn't tumbled, this review is an anthem in celebration of the use of brackets!) This review owes its existence entirely to a [[revisions]]. We take a weekly TV magazine to see what is coming up, and [[suitably]] [[decides]] what we will watch. Obligingly, there are brief reviews of most of the films scheduled to be shown on the five major terrestrial channels. In addition to the prose, each film is [[allocate]] a 1-5 star [[punctuation]]. 5 means Don't Miss (superior to 4 for [[Wondrous]]!), down to 1 standing for Poor. We have learned from vast experience that, with few exceptions, stars are awarded for gross taste, foul language, offensive content, promiscuity, horror, blood & guts, and especially killing off the hero/heroine just when everyone was about to live happily ever after. (If that isn't done, the movie is denigrated as being 'predictable' - the worst [[slur]] imaginable!)

Brave New Girl was given only 1 star, thereby suggesting it was a candidate worthy of our time and attention. This was confirmed by the reviewer's description of the movie as being a "truly awful tale", and, "Stupid, just stupid". We [[seen]] it, and my wife and I were [[happier]] we did so. The TV magazine reviewer further stated that the movie was "not a reworking of War and Peace", with which we have to agree. Reading through the IMDb reviews for this title a day or two later, the urge to pick up my pen (so to speak) to add my halfpennyworth (pronounced harf'pen'uth (emphasis on the first syllable) for the uninitiated) became overwhelming.

Why did we take to this movie? Well, it's just a matter of taste. We like attractive characters, believable relationships between them, interesting situations, courtesy and respect, good triumphing over evil, and so on. We [[wished]] the integrity and personalities of Holly (Lindsey Haun), her Mum (Virginia Madsen), Ditz (Barbara Mamabolo), Grant (Nick Roth), Zoe (Joanne Boland) and the two male professors involved in the story. So what if the storyline includes a 'wicked witch of the west' in the form of Angela (Barbara Mamabolo), provided that she plays the part with some conviction. We appreciated the friendship depicted between the two room-mates, with one having a financially challenged upbringing by a loving single Mum, and the other having every material advantage but receiving little parental time and affection. Is it any wonder that Ditz felt the way she did about Holly's Mum? Is it surprising that Grant should take an immediate interest in Holly, considering the manner of their initial meeting, Holly's dazzling smiles and her lively self-possession? I think these issues and the events are believable enough, but it is necessary to pretend that the scholarship and other circumstances are realistic in order for the tale to have a setting.

My wife and I are greatly blessed by not having any significant musical education. This enables us to enjoy the sounds produced by instruments and voices without having our critical faculties intruding unduly on our listening, and thus spoiling the experience. We enjoyed both the classical pieces and the pop, which came over well on the TV, and we weren't struck by any lack of talent. Also, it mattered not that Holly's classical vocals were dubbed by someone else.

We enjoyed the movie enough to look for a DVD. The average delivered price we have paid per disk for the movies in our collection currently stands at £4.9484 (rounded to four decimal places). Brave New Girl was available from a trusted supplier on the Amazon Marketplace for £1.3516 (rounded to four decimal places) above this figure. Such a purchase would increase the average. Why I should resent this is a mystery to me, but it is a testimony to our enjoyment of this film that we placed an order anyway. I have awarded this film 7 IMDb stars out of ten, having docked one for overenthusiastic reception of the performances by the audiences, one for Britney advertising and one for something else I can't remember right now. (In case it hasn't tumbled, this review is an anthem in celebration of the use of brackets!) --------------------------------------------- Result 1779 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The original [[book]] of this was set in the 1950s but that won't do for the TV [[series]] because most people watch for the 1930s [[style]]. Ironically the tube train near the end was a 1950s train painted to look like a 1930s train so the Underground can [[play]] at that [[game]] too. Hanging the storyline on a plot about the Jarrow March was [[feeble]] but the 50s version had students who were beginning to think about the world around them so I suppose [[making]] them think about the [[poverty]] of the marchers is much the same [[thing]]. All the [[stuff]] about Japp having to [[cater]] for himself was [[weak]] too but they had to put [[something]] in to [[fill]] the [[time]]. This would have made a [[decent]] half [[hour]] [[show]] or they [[could]] have [[filmed]] the [[book]] and [[made]] it a better [[long]] [[show]]. It is [[obvious]] this episode is a victim of [[style]] over content. The original [[cookbook]] of this was set in the 1950s but that won't do for the TV [[serials]] because most people watch for the 1930s [[styles]]. Ironically the tube train near the end was a 1950s train painted to look like a 1930s train so the Underground can [[playing]] at that [[ballgame]] too. Hanging the storyline on a plot about the Jarrow March was [[puny]] but the 50s version had students who were beginning to think about the world around them so I suppose [[doing]] them think about the [[indigent]] of the marchers is much the same [[stuff]]. All the [[thing]] about Japp having to [[respond]] for himself was [[feeble]] too but they had to put [[somethings]] in to [[fills]] the [[moment]]. This would have made a [[dignified]] half [[hours]] [[exhibition]] or they [[would]] have [[videotaped]] the [[cookbook]] and [[effected]] it a better [[prolonged]] [[exposition]]. It is [[noticeable]] this episode is a victim of [[elegance]] over content. --------------------------------------------- Result 1780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie made me feel as if I had missed some important scenes from the very beginning. There were continuity errors and plots that stopped as abruptly as they started. I was very disappointed because I love Whoopi Goldberg & Danny Glover, in addition to that have always trusted & respected Danny Glovers taste in his choice of roles, "Grand Canyon" for example. I just could not finish this movie, after what seemed an eternity, but was probably just a little over an hour; we had to turn it off. There was no comedy, there was nothing about the characters to make you empathize or sympathize with them, there was no evoking of emotion at all regarding this movie and the clips of their past were poorly edited, confusing, and unnecessary. What could have been a great idea for a movie, even as a drama & not a comedy (although I think a comedy in this situation would have been better, because I love to watch white people freak out & start acting like complete idiots, it makes me laugh) became a waste of my $1 credit at the video store. --------------------------------------------- Result 1781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This movie is simply [[incredible]]! I had [[expected]] something quite different [[form]] the film that I actually [[saw]]. However, it is very insightful in that it [[shows]] the aggressive nature of human [[sexuality]] and its linkage with animal behavior. Let me warn those among the readers of this article who are easily offended by content that is all too sexual, for the explicit sexual nature of this film feels like a high-brow sort of pornography. It even features a scene that comes extremely close to rape.

Meanwhile, I strongly suggest seeing this [[rare]] work of "sexual art". Every minute of the picture breathes the sexual [[spirit]] of the seventies, by the way. One should not forget how times have changed!

Go [[see]] it! It´s worth your money and time! This movie is simply [[unthinkable]]! I had [[projected]] something quite different [[shape]] the film that I actually [[watched]]. However, it is very insightful in that it [[exhibited]] the aggressive nature of human [[sex]] and its linkage with animal behavior. Let me warn those among the readers of this article who are easily offended by content that is all too sexual, for the explicit sexual nature of this film feels like a high-brow sort of pornography. It even features a scene that comes extremely close to rape.

Meanwhile, I strongly suggest seeing this [[scarce]] work of "sexual art". Every minute of the picture breathes the sexual [[geist]] of the seventies, by the way. One should not forget how times have changed!

Go [[seeing]] it! It´s worth your money and time! --------------------------------------------- Result 1782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV show. And I [[really]] enjoyed this flick. I [[enjoyed]] myself here a [[lot]] more than I did with other summer [[blockbusters]].

It's [[funny]] [[hearing]] people [[rail]] against this [[movie]] with [[excuses]] like "lame plot" and "it's [[much]] cruder than the show." Does [[ANYONE]] [[remember]] the crudeness of the humor in the pilot episode? [[Daisy]] makes incest jokes and [[Bo]] [[says]] that [[Luke]] had [[probably]] fathered half the kids in the [[orphanage]]. The only [[reason]] it was cleaned up is because it [[changed]] to and [[earlier]] [[time]] [[slot]].

And as far as the plot goes. It was the [[perfect]] Dukes plot. [[In]] fact as a remake it probably [[stays]] truer to the source material than any [[TV]] [[show]] that has [[migrated]] to the [[big]] screen.

[[While]] Sean William Scott and Johnny [[Knoxville]] aren't [[EXACTLY]] like their [[small]] screen versions, they do a [[great]] job and work very well [[together]]. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little [[bit]] more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. [[In]] the movie Roscoe is a [[little]]... [[scary]].

And who didn't have a smile on their face as the [[General]] [[Lee]] is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back [[roads]] of Hazzard?

Folks, [[allow]] yourself to [[enjoy]] a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a [[great]] dumb [[movie]]! I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV show. And I [[truthfully]] enjoyed this flick. I [[liked]] myself here a [[batches]] more than I did with other summer [[blockbuster]].

It's [[hilarious]] [[auditions]] people [[riel]] against this [[kino]] with [[pretences]] like "lame plot" and "it's [[very]] cruder than the show." Does [[PERSON]] [[recalling]] the crudeness of the humor in the pilot episode? [[Margarita]] makes incest jokes and [[Pu]] [[alleges]] that [[Matty]] had [[possibly]] fathered half the kids in the [[orphanages]]. The only [[justification]] it was cleaned up is because it [[changing]] to and [[sooner]] [[moment]] [[slots]].

And as far as the plot goes. It was the [[faultless]] Dukes plot. [[At]] fact as a remake it probably [[stay]] truer to the source material than any [[TELEVISION]] [[exhibition]] that has [[immigrated]] to the [[vast]] screen.

[[Though]] Sean William Scott and Johnny [[Chattanooga]] aren't [[PRECISELY]] like their [[little]] screen versions, they do a [[grand]] job and work very well [[jointly]]. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little [[bite]] more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. [[Onto]] the movie Roscoe is a [[petit]]... [[terrible]].

And who didn't have a smile on their face as the [[Generals]] [[Rhee]] is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back [[highways]] of Hazzard?

Folks, [[permits]] yourself to [[enjoys]] a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a [[huge]] dumb [[cinematic]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1783 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] his 1966 [[film]] "Blow Up", Antonioni had his hero question [[truth]] against a [[backdrop]] of [[British]] [[youth]] protesters. By [[setting]] such [[questions]] against a [[fabric]] of hippie [[youth]] movements, Antonioni questioned, intentionally or not, the effectiveness of these organisations. How can you fight for a [[cause]] when what you [[think]] is [[true]] may [[actually]] be a lie? On the [[flip]] side, the film said that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be [[deceiving]] us with false images and false truths. Though the hippie aspects were the most tacky parts of "Blow Up", they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. It was a very cautionary and mature little film.

With "Zabriskie Point" Antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of "Blow Up" and goes full blown hippie. The result is a film awash with [[bad]] metaphors, stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. How could somebody, who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence, make something so silly?

The film opens with a nice series of close ups, as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. Suddenly one man (Mark) gets up and leaves. He hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. He recognises that, though revolutionaries fight for freedom, to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. And so like Jack Nicholson in "The Passenger", Mark just wants to be free.

As such, Mark buys a gun and goes solo. He takes orders from no one. When police raid his university campus Mark shoots a guy and runs away. He then flees to a nearby airfield, steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. Antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia, and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities, with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. He sees the desert as a sort of Garden of Eden.

In the desert, Mark meets Daria and quickly falls in love. Antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. Free from the constraints of modern life, these tree-huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun.

The film ends with Mark dying and Daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. It's Antonioni's challenge to his audience. Pick up the guns, pickets and explosives, he says. Tear the walls down before they cage you in!

Of course the film had no effect on its audience. They recognised "Zabriskie Point" as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. A sort of commodified radicalism. It felt untruthful and tame.

Thematically the film is pretty stupid. Antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world, and the fat cats who exploit you, you should either flee to the desert (Mark) or actively fight the system (Daria). That's all well and good. But though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares, they're all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. Like the end of "Fight Club", nihilism and violence achieve nothing. In the real world, social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors, spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. I mean, what liberated women more than contraceptives?

3/10 - A very bad film. The problem is, Antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. He is a quiet and contemplative man. An introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film, "Blow Up". As such, "Zabrinskie Point" comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. It's essentially a 50 year old man say "Look at me, I'm a daring rebel!"

There are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight "the system", but they all fall into one of four categories. In the first category you have films like "Network", "Cool Hand Luke", "Cuckoo's Nest" and "Spartacus". These all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure, though in each case the "spirit of revolution" survives. The message is that you can not effect change, but by dying or failing, the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. Essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope.

Then you have films like "Fight Club", "Zabriskie Point" and "Falling Down", which simply encourage you to explode. Tear it all down. Blow it all up. Everything is a lie, so you might as well go out guns blazing. These films are borne out of angry, reactionary feelings, rather than any sort of common sense.

Then you have the "flight rather than fight" category. Terrence Malick and Antonioni are the masters of this genre. Films like "The Passenger", "Red Desert" and "Badlands" show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. Both directors are pessimists, in that Malick has his islands destroyed and Antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution.

Then you have the fourth category. Films like Donnersmarck's "The Lives of Others", Ashby's "Bound For Glory" and Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. In these dystopian worlds, in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state, it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist/criminal who keeps the system in check. By simply existing outside of the herd, you create waves. Your comments, actions and critical eye, challenges the status quo. As such, Donnersmarck's film has novelists and artists undermining Nazi Germany, whilst Kubrick has Alex the artist/criminal fighting Nazi droogs, painting the town in blood and sperm. [[Into]] his 1966 [[cinematographic]] "Blow Up", Antonioni had his hero question [[veracity]] against a [[context]] of [[Britannica]] [[adolescence]] protesters. By [[configured]] such [[subjects]] against a [[texture]] of hippie [[teens]] movements, Antonioni questioned, intentionally or not, the effectiveness of these organisations. How can you fight for a [[reason]] when what you [[ideas]] is [[veritable]] may [[genuinely]] be a lie? On the [[leafy]] side, the film said that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be [[fooling]] us with false images and false truths. Though the hippie aspects were the most tacky parts of "Blow Up", they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. It was a very cautionary and mature little film.

With "Zabriskie Point" Antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of "Blow Up" and goes full blown hippie. The result is a film awash with [[unfavourable]] metaphors, stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. How could somebody, who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence, make something so silly?

The film opens with a nice series of close ups, as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. Suddenly one man (Mark) gets up and leaves. He hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. He recognises that, though revolutionaries fight for freedom, to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. And so like Jack Nicholson in "The Passenger", Mark just wants to be free.

As such, Mark buys a gun and goes solo. He takes orders from no one. When police raid his university campus Mark shoots a guy and runs away. He then flees to a nearby airfield, steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. Antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia, and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities, with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. He sees the desert as a sort of Garden of Eden.

In the desert, Mark meets Daria and quickly falls in love. Antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. Free from the constraints of modern life, these tree-huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun.

The film ends with Mark dying and Daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. It's Antonioni's challenge to his audience. Pick up the guns, pickets and explosives, he says. Tear the walls down before they cage you in!

Of course the film had no effect on its audience. They recognised "Zabriskie Point" as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. A sort of commodified radicalism. It felt untruthful and tame.

Thematically the film is pretty stupid. Antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world, and the fat cats who exploit you, you should either flee to the desert (Mark) or actively fight the system (Daria). That's all well and good. But though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares, they're all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. Like the end of "Fight Club", nihilism and violence achieve nothing. In the real world, social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors, spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. I mean, what liberated women more than contraceptives?

3/10 - A very bad film. The problem is, Antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. He is a quiet and contemplative man. An introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film, "Blow Up". As such, "Zabrinskie Point" comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. It's essentially a 50 year old man say "Look at me, I'm a daring rebel!"

There are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight "the system", but they all fall into one of four categories. In the first category you have films like "Network", "Cool Hand Luke", "Cuckoo's Nest" and "Spartacus". These all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure, though in each case the "spirit of revolution" survives. The message is that you can not effect change, but by dying or failing, the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. Essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope.

Then you have films like "Fight Club", "Zabriskie Point" and "Falling Down", which simply encourage you to explode. Tear it all down. Blow it all up. Everything is a lie, so you might as well go out guns blazing. These films are borne out of angry, reactionary feelings, rather than any sort of common sense.

Then you have the "flight rather than fight" category. Terrence Malick and Antonioni are the masters of this genre. Films like "The Passenger", "Red Desert" and "Badlands" show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. Both directors are pessimists, in that Malick has his islands destroyed and Antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution.

Then you have the fourth category. Films like Donnersmarck's "The Lives of Others", Ashby's "Bound For Glory" and Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. In these dystopian worlds, in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state, it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist/criminal who keeps the system in check. By simply existing outside of the herd, you create waves. Your comments, actions and critical eye, challenges the status quo. As such, Donnersmarck's film has novelists and artists undermining Nazi Germany, whilst Kubrick has Alex the artist/criminal fighting Nazi droogs, painting the town in blood and sperm. --------------------------------------------- Result 1784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I bought Dark Angel seasons 1 & 2 two weeks ago, after catching a couple of season 1 episodes on Channel 5. Nothing [[prepared]] me for how [[brilliant]] the show is. I haven't enjoyed anything as much since Firefly (also and amazing show). I'll admit Season 2 wqasn't quite as good, but there are still some [[amazing]] episodes (see Designate this, Bag 'Em, the Berrisford Agenda, Harbor Lights, Freak Nation etc.) and Alec is [[great]]. I've [[heard]] some of the plans for the would-be season 3, and I have to say, I can't believe it was cancelled - I won't spoil it for you - but it would have rocked! I also think it has a lot of potential as a movie (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely). As proof of my obsessiveness, Max's barcode number is 332960073452, and in the two weeks I've had it, I am 3 episodes away from having watched both seasons twice. It's just too good. I bought Dark Angel seasons 1 & 2 two weeks ago, after catching a couple of season 1 episodes on Channel 5. Nothing [[prepare]] me for how [[wondrous]] the show is. I haven't enjoyed anything as much since Firefly (also and amazing show). I'll admit Season 2 wqasn't quite as good, but there are still some [[wondrous]] episodes (see Designate this, Bag 'Em, the Berrisford Agenda, Harbor Lights, Freak Nation etc.) and Alec is [[wondrous]]. I've [[hear]] some of the plans for the would-be season 3, and I have to say, I can't believe it was cancelled - I won't spoil it for you - but it would have rocked! I also think it has a lot of potential as a movie (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely). As proof of my obsessiveness, Max's barcode number is 332960073452, and in the two weeks I've had it, I am 3 episodes away from having watched both seasons twice. It's just too good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[John]] Cassavetes' 1977 film [[Opening]] [[Night]] is, what [[critics]] [[usually]] call the [[work]] of such a [[significant]] artist, 'overlooked'. It is an excellent film, in its own [[right]], and one of the [[best]] [[portraits]] of a midlife crisis ever put to film. It's not a [[perfect]] film, in that, at two [[hours]] and twenty four minutes it's about a half hour too long, and there's a bit too much emphasis on the drunkenness of the lead character Myrtle Gordon, played by Gena Rowlands, the wife of Cassavetes, long after we've gotten the point. But only Woody Allen's masterpiece, Another Woman, which [[also]] starred Rowlands, eleven years [[later]], is a better [[portrait]] of the internal [[conflicts]] of an aging [[woman]]. Yet, Rowlands did [[win]] the [[Best]] [[Actress]] [[Award]] at the Berlin [[Film]] [[Festival]] for this [[portrayal]], and it was well deserved. [[Often]] this [[film]], [[written]] by Cassavetes, is easily compared to his earlier- and inferior- film, A Woman Under The [[Influence]], but it's a [[spurious]] [[comparison]]. Rowlands' character in that film is severely mentally disturbed from the start, as well as coming from a blue [[collar]] background, while her characters in this film and in Allen's [[film]] are both artists who are haunted by apparitions. [[In]] this [[film]] it's the ghost of a dead young woman who can be seen as Myrtle's [[younger]] [[doppelganger]], while in Allen's [[film]] it's her character's own past…. [[Many]] critics have [[taken]] this [[film]] to be a [[portrait]] of an alcoholic, seeing [[Myrtle]] surround herself with enablers, such as a stage [[manager]] who tells her, during opening night, 'I've seen a lot of [[drunks]] in my time, but I've never [[seen]] anyone as drunk as you who could stand up. You're great!', but this is wrong, for [[alcohol]] isn't her problem- nor is her chain smoking. They are merely [[diversions]] from whatever thing is really compelling her to her own destruction, and much to Cassavetes' credit, as a storyteller, he never lets us find out exactly what's wrong with [[Myrtle]], and despite her coming through in the end, there's no reason to expect that she has really resolved anything of consequence. This sort of [[end]] without resolution links Cassavetes directly with the more daring European directors of the recent past, who were comfortable in not revealing everything to an audience, and forcing their viewers to cogitate, even if it hurts.

Yet, the film recapitulates perfectly the effect of a drunk or fever lifting out of the fog, and as such the viewer again is subliminally involved in its drama. Whether or not Myrtle Gordon does recover, after the film's universe irises about her is left for each and every viewer to decide, and as we have seen before that lid closes, one's choices do matter. [[Johannes]] Cassavetes' 1977 film [[Open]] [[Nighttime]] is, what [[detractors]] [[fluently]] call the [[working]] of such a [[cannot]] artist, 'overlooked'. It is an excellent film, in its own [[rights]], and one of the [[finest]] [[headshots]] of a midlife crisis ever put to film. It's not a [[impeccable]] film, in that, at two [[hour]] and twenty four minutes it's about a half hour too long, and there's a bit too much emphasis on the drunkenness of the lead character Myrtle Gordon, played by Gena Rowlands, the wife of Cassavetes, long after we've gotten the point. But only Woody Allen's masterpiece, Another Woman, which [[similarly]] starred Rowlands, eleven years [[afterward]], is a better [[portrayal]] of the internal [[dispute]] of an aging [[female]]. Yet, Rowlands did [[triumph]] the [[Better]] [[Actor]] [[Scholarship]] at the Berlin [[Cinematography]] [[Festivals]] for this [[depiction]], and it was well deserved. [[Habitually]] this [[cinematography]], [[typed]] by Cassavetes, is easily compared to his earlier- and inferior- film, A Woman Under The [[Implications]], but it's a [[fakes]] [[comparisons]]. Rowlands' character in that film is severely mentally disturbed from the start, as well as coming from a blue [[neck]] background, while her characters in this film and in Allen's [[movie]] are both artists who are haunted by apparitions. [[At]] this [[cinematography]] it's the ghost of a dead young woman who can be seen as Myrtle's [[youngest]] [[ringer]], while in Allen's [[flick]] it's her character's own past…. [[Several]] critics have [[took]] this [[cinematography]] to be a [[depiction]] of an alcoholic, seeing [[Mimi]] surround herself with enablers, such as a stage [[administrator]] who tells her, during opening night, 'I've seen a lot of [[drunkards]] in my time, but I've never [[watched]] anyone as drunk as you who could stand up. You're great!', but this is wrong, for [[drank]] isn't her problem- nor is her chain smoking. They are merely [[deviation]] from whatever thing is really compelling her to her own destruction, and much to Cassavetes' credit, as a storyteller, he never lets us find out exactly what's wrong with [[Moaning]], and despite her coming through in the end, there's no reason to expect that she has really resolved anything of consequence. This sort of [[ends]] without resolution links Cassavetes directly with the more daring European directors of the recent past, who were comfortable in not revealing everything to an audience, and forcing their viewers to cogitate, even if it hurts.

Yet, the film recapitulates perfectly the effect of a drunk or fever lifting out of the fog, and as such the viewer again is subliminally involved in its drama. Whether or not Myrtle Gordon does recover, after the film's universe irises about her is left for each and every viewer to decide, and as we have seen before that lid closes, one's choices do matter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] With the badly injured [[Tony]] in an [[induced]] coma, two things happen: [[Tony]] imagines himself leading the [[life]] of a [[salesman]] attending a [[business]] [[convention]], while his family and friends [[go]] through [[hell]] [[trying]] to [[cope]] with the [[possible]] [[loss]] of the [[big]] [[man]]. The [[dream]] [[sequences]] are right out of an [[old]] TWILIGHT [[ZONE]] episode, as Tony [[finds]] himself [[transformed]] into an Average [[Joe]] [[trying]] to [[deal]] with a missing wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country business [[trip]]. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an [[Italian]] [[thug]] from Noo Joisey. A nice [[touch]]. The [[shockingly]] long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls "Van Helsing" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose [[old]] [[man]]. The best moment has the big [[boys]] trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial [[dispute]]. Vito [[gets]] off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet [[case]], which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito. With the badly injured [[Toni]] in an [[caused]] coma, two things happen: [[Toni]] imagines himself leading the [[lifetime]] of a [[seller]] attending a [[enterprises]] [[conventions]], while his family and friends [[going]] through [[dammit]] [[tempting]] to [[coping]] with the [[probable]] [[losing]] of the [[prodigious]] [[dawg]]. The [[daydream]] [[sequence]] are right out of an [[antique]] TWILIGHT [[SPHERE]] episode, as Tony [[deems]] himself [[transforms]] into an Average [[Evel]] [[attempting]] to [[address]] with a missing wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country business [[excursion]]. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an [[Ltalian]] [[hooligan]] from Noo Joisey. A nice [[toque]]. The [[ridiculously]] long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls "Van Helsing" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose [[ancient]] [[hombre]]. The best moment has the big [[guys]] trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial [[quarrel]]. Vito [[get]] off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet [[cases]], which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito. --------------------------------------------- Result 1787 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Steven Seagal, Mr. Personality himself, this [[time]] is the United States' greatest Stealth pilot who is [[promised]] a pardon from the military(..who attempted to swipe his memory at the beginning of the [[movie]] for which he escaped [[base]], later caught after [[interrupting]] a gang of robbers in a shootout at a gas station)if he is able to successfully infiltrate a Northern [[Afghanistan]] terrorist base operated by a group called Black [[Sunday]], who have commandeered an [[Air]] Force stealth fighter [[thanks]] to an American traitor. Along with a fellow pilot who admired the traitor, Jannick(Mark Bazeley), [[John]] Sands(Seagal)will [[fly]] into enemy [[territory]], receiving [[help]] from his Arab lover, Jessica(Ciera Payton)and a freedom fighter, Rojar(Alki David) once they are on [[ground]]. Jannick is kidnapped by Black Sunday leaders, Stone(Vincenzo Nicoli)and his female [[enforcer]], Eliana([[Katie]] Jones), and Sands [[must]] figure out how to not only re-take [[command]] of the kidnapped stealth fighter, but [[rescue]] him as well. And, [[maybe]], Sands can [[get]] revenge on the traitor he [[trained]], [[Rather]](Steve Toussaint)in the process. Sands has 72 [[hours]] until a General's [[Navy]] pilots bomb the [[entire]] area. On board the stealth, [[Black]] [[Sunday]] [[equipped]] a biochemical [[bomb]], [[hoping]] to detonate it on the [[United]] States.

Seagal gets a chance to shoot [[Afghans]] when he isn't slicing their throats with knives. The film is mostly machine guns firing and [[bodies]] [[dropping]] dead. The setting of Afghanistan doesn't hold up to [[scrutiny]](..nor does how easily Seagal and co. are able to move about the area [[undetected]] so easily) and the [[plot]] itself is [[nothing]] to write [[home]] about. The [[movie]] is edited [[fast]], the camera a bit too jerky. Seagal isn't as active a hero as he once was and his action scenes are tightly edited where we have a hard time seeing him taking out his foes, unlike the good old days. One of Seagal's [[poorest]] [[efforts]], and he's as understated as ever(..not a compliment). Even more [[disappointing]] is the fact that Seagal never fights in hand to hand combat with the film's chief villains, tis a shame. He doesn't even snap a wrist or crack a neck in any visible way(..sure we see a slight resemblance of some tool getting tossed around, but it's not as clear a picture as I enjoy because the filmmakers have such fast edits and dizzying close-ups). Steven Seagal, Mr. Personality himself, this [[period]] is the United States' greatest Stealth pilot who is [[vowed]] a pardon from the military(..who attempted to swipe his memory at the beginning of the [[filmmaking]] for which he escaped [[basis]], later caught after [[disrupt]] a gang of robbers in a shootout at a gas station)if he is able to successfully infiltrate a Northern [[Afghan]] terrorist base operated by a group called Black [[Saturday]], who have commandeered an [[Airspace]] Force stealth fighter [[appreciation]] to an American traitor. Along with a fellow pilot who admired the traitor, Jannick(Mark Bazeley), [[Jon]] Sands(Seagal)will [[steal]] into enemy [[land]], receiving [[support]] from his Arab lover, Jessica(Ciera Payton)and a freedom fighter, Rojar(Alki David) once they are on [[overland]]. Jannick is kidnapped by Black Sunday leaders, Stone(Vincenzo Nicoli)and his female [[henchman]], Eliana([[Katy]] Jones), and Sands [[gotta]] figure out how to not only re-take [[commanding]] of the kidnapped stealth fighter, but [[salvage]] him as well. And, [[perhaps]], Sands can [[got]] revenge on the traitor he [[formed]], [[Somewhat]](Steve Toussaint)in the process. Sands has 72 [[hour]] until a General's [[Marina]] pilots bomb the [[whole]] area. On board the stealth, [[Negro]] [[Thursday]] [[endowed]] a biochemical [[bombings]], [[waiting]] to detonate it on the [[Unified]] States.

Seagal gets a chance to shoot [[Afghanis]] when he isn't slicing their throats with knives. The film is mostly machine guns firing and [[organizations]] [[downed]] dead. The setting of Afghanistan doesn't hold up to [[oversight]](..nor does how easily Seagal and co. are able to move about the area [[unnoticed]] so easily) and the [[intrigue]] itself is [[none]] to write [[habitation]] about. The [[filmmaking]] is edited [[faster]], the camera a bit too jerky. Seagal isn't as active a hero as he once was and his action scenes are tightly edited where we have a hard time seeing him taking out his foes, unlike the good old days. One of Seagal's [[poor]] [[initiative]], and he's as understated as ever(..not a compliment). Even more [[depressing]] is the fact that Seagal never fights in hand to hand combat with the film's chief villains, tis a shame. He doesn't even snap a wrist or crack a neck in any visible way(..sure we see a slight resemblance of some tool getting tossed around, but it's not as clear a picture as I enjoy because the filmmakers have such fast edits and dizzying close-ups). --------------------------------------------- Result 1788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Did [[anyone]] edit this [[film]]? Or was it only the DVD [[release]] that had [[huge]] [[thirty]] second gaps between scenes? It's [[OK]] [[though]], I fell asleep [[watching]] it the first [[time]]. Then I [[fell]] asleep the [[second]] time and the third time. The plot is actually not the worst I've [[seen]], but it's close. The acting is not the worst I've [[seen]] either...but it's close. The [[production]] .... well, I can honestly say that it was the [[worst]] I had ever [[seen]] in my [[life]]! Not trying to be [[spiteful]], but [[Unhinged]] [[could]] have [[used]] some more production.

[[Please]] don't [[think]] I'm a hater of horror [[films]], or even that I didn't [[enjoy]] this [[film]]. I just [[felt]] I was [[laughing]] at the [[film]] [[much]] more than I [[felt]] I was [[laughing]] along with it. The [[gruesome]] moments were not too poorly [[done]], but [[could]] have been [[done]] better even with a shoestring budget.

[[Characters]] [[seemed]] awkwardly [[developed]], or [[ignored]] all [[together]], twist ending was pretty [[bad]], and the [[exposition]] [[took]] [[forever]] without exposing much.

I'd recommend [[avoiding]] this [[movie]].

1/10 Did [[nobody]] edit this [[filmmaking]]? Or was it only the DVD [[freeing]] that had [[great]] [[thirtieth]] second gaps between scenes? It's [[OKAY]] [[if]], I fell asleep [[staring]] it the first [[times]]. Then I [[slipped]] asleep the [[secondly]] time and the third time. The plot is actually not the worst I've [[noticed]], but it's close. The acting is not the worst I've [[noticed]] either...but it's close. The [[productivity]] .... well, I can honestly say that it was the [[worse]] I had ever [[noticed]] in my [[living]]! Not trying to be [[sleepless]], but [[Deranged]] [[did]] have [[using]] some more production.

[[Invite]] don't [[thinking]] I'm a hater of horror [[filmmaking]], or even that I didn't [[enjoying]] this [[filmmaking]]. I just [[smelled]] I was [[giggling]] at the [[flick]] [[very]] more than I [[believed]] I was [[kidding]] along with it. The [[grisly]] moments were not too poorly [[doing]], but [[did]] have been [[performed]] better even with a shoestring budget.

[[Traits]] [[sounded]] awkwardly [[formulated]], or [[overlooked]] all [[jointly]], twist ending was pretty [[negative]], and the [[exposure]] [[picked]] [[permanently]] without exposing much.

I'd recommend [[stave]] this [[flick]].

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Q.E.D. was a [[brilliant]] TV [[series]] and it [[truly]] was one of the very few worth scheduling for! I suspect that in this [[era]] of TIVO and recording devices that it [[would]] fare much better than it did in 1982. I am [[eagerly]] awaiting its availability on DVD!

[[While]] it is true that it has some in common with other television shows like The [[Wild]], Wild West, The Bearcats and The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr., all of which I am a huge fan of,Q.E.D. had a [[much]] more intellectual quality to it. It did not suffer for that, however - the dialog was [[witty]] and the [[action]] was [[high]]. The [[show]] ran in the [[UK]] as Mastermind, and it did have something of the BBC feel to it, but with [[better]] production values than BBC [[typically]] had in that [[era]].

I was a [[nineteen]] year [[old]] lad when this [[series]] ran [[initially]], and had [[much]] too much to do in my [[life]] to [[make]] [[time]] for [[television]]. I [[remember]] my dear [[mother]], [[however]], calling me to [[remind]] me that Q.E.D. was on, and we [[would]] [[sit]] on the [[phone]] and watch it [[together]]. [[Wonderful]] [[memories]].

Truly, Q.E.D. is a [[sad]] loss and, if it [[could]] be [[done]] with the same quality and [[values]] [[today]], I [[would]] [[love]] to [[see]] it [[make]] a [[return]]. Q.E.D. was a [[wondrous]] TV [[serial]] and it [[honestly]] was one of the very few worth scheduling for! I suspect that in this [[epoch]] of TIVO and recording devices that it [[should]] fare much better than it did in 1982. I am [[impatiently]] awaiting its availability on DVD!

[[Albeit]] it is true that it has some in common with other television shows like The [[Sauvage]], Wild West, The Bearcats and The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr., all of which I am a huge fan of,Q.E.D. had a [[very]] more intellectual quality to it. It did not suffer for that, however - the dialog was [[spiritual]] and the [[efforts]] was [[highest]]. The [[exhibit]] ran in the [[BRITISH]] as Mastermind, and it did have something of the BBC feel to it, but with [[best]] production values than BBC [[fluently]] had in that [[epoch]].

I was a [[nineteenth]] year [[former]] lad when this [[serials]] ran [[firstly]], and had [[very]] too much to do in my [[vie]] to [[deliver]] [[moment]] for [[tv]]. I [[reminisce]] my dear [[moms]], [[still]], calling me to [[reminds]] me that Q.E.D. was on, and we [[could]] [[assis]] on the [[phones]] and watch it [[jointly]]. [[Magnifique]] [[reminiscences]].

Truly, Q.E.D. is a [[unlucky]] loss and, if it [[would]] be [[performed]] with the same quality and [[value]] [[yesterday]], I [[could]] [[loves]] to [[seeing]] it [[deliver]] a [[reverting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she could [[hardly]] have chosen to remake her image more [[dramatically]]. A great [[success]] in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is [[difficult]] to [[imagine]] this [[delicate]] frame standing up to a bounty [[hunters]] life... but then this is exactly what [[Domino]] Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's biggest fans) [[believe]] she carries if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more amazing than the fiction. Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she could [[barely]] have chosen to remake her image more [[immeasurably]]. A great [[avail]] in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is [[laborious]] to [[suppose]] this [[fragile]] frame standing up to a bounty [[gliders]] life... but then this is exactly what [[Domina]] Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's biggest fans) [[think]] she carries if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more amazing than the fiction. --------------------------------------------- Result 1791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] My [[Super]] X-Girlfriend is one hell of a roller coaster ride. The special effects were [[excellent]] and the costumes [[Uma]] Thurman wore were hubba buba. Uma Thurman is an underrated comedic actress but she [[proved]] everyone wrong and [[nailed]] her role as the [[lunatic]] [[girlfriend]]. She was just [[simply]] [[FABULOUS]]!!! Luke Wilson was [[also]] good as the average Joe but he was a brave man to work with one of the greatest actresses of all time. The supporting [[cast]] was [[also]] [[superb]] [[especially]] Anna Faris who was extremely good (A lot better than in the Scary Movie franchise).

Ivan Rietman did very well in directing this film because if it wasn't for him and Uma Thurman this film wouldn't have done so well. This film is clearly a 10/10 for it's cast (Uma Thurman), it's director, it's [[screenplay]] and from it's [[original]] plot line. This [[film]] is very highly recommended. My [[Concierge]] X-Girlfriend is one hell of a roller coaster ride. The special effects were [[noteworthy]] and the costumes [[Amu]] Thurman wore were hubba buba. Uma Thurman is an underrated comedic actress but she [[showed]] everyone wrong and [[pinched]] her role as the [[quirky]] [[amie]]. She was just [[purely]] [[PEACHY]]!!! Luke Wilson was [[besides]] good as the average Joe but he was a brave man to work with one of the greatest actresses of all time. The supporting [[casting]] was [[furthermore]] [[wondrous]] [[principally]] Anna Faris who was extremely good (A lot better than in the Scary Movie franchise).

Ivan Rietman did very well in directing this film because if it wasn't for him and Uma Thurman this film wouldn't have done so well. This film is clearly a 10/10 for it's cast (Uma Thurman), it's director, it's [[scenario]] and from it's [[initial]] plot line. This [[cinematography]] is very highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[realize]] that bringing a [[novel]] to the big screen is [[always]] problematic. That is the only [[positive]] [[thing]] I can say about this truly [[horrid]] [[adaptation]].

Have you read 'Wise Blood?' It's an amazing [[book]]. Flannery O'Connor [[wrote]] about the south as no one else has. She was a southerner herself, a devout catholic, and a [[remarkably]] [[gifted]] [[writer]]. [[In]] her first novel she wove together a [[dark]] and deeply disturbing tale of faith, doubt, and redemption with a macabre sense of humor and [[surprising]] evenhandedness. The [[characters]] in the book may seem outrageous to those who have not [[lived]] in the rural south, but I can assure you that such people do [[exist]]. Not only do they [[exist]], they are [[human]] [[beings]] with families, feelings, and [[concerns]] like [[anyone]] [[else]]. Flannery's [[intentions]] were so often misunderstood - she was not lampooning these backwoods [[zealots]] - she [[saw]] in them the beautiful [[operation]] of what she would have [[called]] 'grace'...even in the most violent, [[distressing]], and [[maddening]] of circumstances. To read 'Wise Blood' is to be washed over with a [[sense]] of dread and impending doom. [[Finally]], it is to think long and hard about our judgments and preconceptions - our [[entire]] world view.

None of this [[comes]] through in John Huston's 'Gilligan's Island'-like adaptation. [[None]]. It is a farce. A [[bad]] [[farce]]. The entire film is saturated with a hauteur that [[turns]] the [[stomach]]. The acting is poor, the [[southern]] accents are [[fake]] and insulting. The filmmakers [[show]] no [[insight]] into the [[thinking]] of [[religious]] southerners. [[Ms]]. O'Connor's [[intense]] prose are [[reduced]] to sight [[gags]] and [[cheap]], [[amateur]] [[theatre]]. The soundtrack is a [[mixture]] of hayseed [[silliness]] and '[[Clockwork]] Orange'-style cheeseball [[electronics]] that doesn't fit the [[story]] or [[even]] the [[MOVIE]]. I was granted free admission to this movie and [[almost]] walked out. Truly, truly [[terrible]].

As an aside, I do not [[agree]] with [[Ms]]. O'Connor's religious [[views]], and while I was [[raised]] in the [[deep]] [[south]], years ago I made my [[way]] [[north]] and have not looked back. But the [[south]] is a [[beautiful]] place full of [[fascinating]] individuals (like [[every]] other place on [[earth]]), and the cartoonish [[mockery]] with which southerners and their attitudes are dealt in this movie borders on offensive. If you're into being offended (which I am not), then this movie most DEFINITELY crosses the line.

I don't like to talk crap about an artist's work - John Huston was a man that I did not know, and I'm sure he was a sincere and gifted filmmaker, to which his respected place in film history attests. My views are clearly skewed by having read (and loved) Flannery O'Connor's work. So I don't claim to be coming from any other perspective. Maybe as a stand-alone film it works for cinephiles. But for Flannery O'Connor fans - and, I might add, for self-respecting southerners and openminded individuals of all stripes - this movie is a waste of time. I [[attain]] that bringing a [[newer]] to the big screen is [[constantly]] problematic. That is the only [[affirmative]] [[stuff]] I can say about this truly [[horrific]] [[adjustment]].

Have you read 'Wise Blood?' It's an amazing [[books]]. Flannery O'Connor [[written]] about the south as no one else has. She was a southerner herself, a devout catholic, and a [[vastly]] [[talented]] [[novelist]]. [[Onto]] her first novel she wove together a [[blackness]] and deeply disturbing tale of faith, doubt, and redemption with a macabre sense of humor and [[amazing]] evenhandedness. The [[traits]] in the book may seem outrageous to those who have not [[resided]] in the rural south, but I can assure you that such people do [[existent]]. Not only do they [[existent]], they are [[humanity]] [[humans]] with families, feelings, and [[worries]] like [[everyone]] [[elsewhere]]. Flannery's [[intent]] were so often misunderstood - she was not lampooning these backwoods [[addicts]] - she [[witnessed]] in them the beautiful [[operations]] of what she would have [[drew]] 'grace'...even in the most violent, [[disappointing]], and [[galling]] of circumstances. To read 'Wise Blood' is to be washed over with a [[feeling]] of dread and impending doom. [[Eventually]], it is to think long and hard about our judgments and preconceptions - our [[overall]] world view.

None of this [[arrives]] through in John Huston's 'Gilligan's Island'-like adaptation. [[Nos]]. It is a farce. A [[unfavourable]] [[comedy]]. The entire film is saturated with a hauteur that [[revolves]] the [[abdomen]]. The acting is poor, the [[south]] accents are [[scythe]] and insulting. The filmmakers [[illustrates]] no [[eyesight]] into the [[think]] of [[nuns]] southerners. [[Luciana]]. O'Connor's [[ferocious]] prose are [[lessen]] to sight [[jaws]] and [[inexpensive]], [[dilettante]] [[teatro]]. The soundtrack is a [[blends]] of hayseed [[hilarity]] and '[[Triumph]] Orange'-style cheeseball [[electron]] that doesn't fit the [[histories]] or [[yet]] the [[FILMMAKING]]. I was granted free admission to this movie and [[hardly]] walked out. Truly, truly [[horrific]].

As an aside, I do not [[concur]] with [[Corinne]]. O'Connor's religious [[view]], and while I was [[risen]] in the [[deepest]] [[southward]], years ago I made my [[ways]] [[nordic]] and have not looked back. But the [[southerly]] is a [[sumptuous]] place full of [[thrilling]] individuals (like [[all]] other place on [[tierra]]), and the cartoonish [[charade]] with which southerners and their attitudes are dealt in this movie borders on offensive. If you're into being offended (which I am not), then this movie most DEFINITELY crosses the line.

I don't like to talk crap about an artist's work - John Huston was a man that I did not know, and I'm sure he was a sincere and gifted filmmaker, to which his respected place in film history attests. My views are clearly skewed by having read (and loved) Flannery O'Connor's work. So I don't claim to be coming from any other perspective. Maybe as a stand-alone film it works for cinephiles. But for Flannery O'Connor fans - and, I might add, for self-respecting southerners and openminded individuals of all stripes - this movie is a waste of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] The last Tarzan film starring Johnny Weissmuller (looking surprisingly aged a year after "Tarzan and the Huntress") is [[bad]], in spite of all the trivia one can add to make it look better. It is [[obvious]] that RKO tried to make a great farewell for Weissmuller, shooting in beautiful scenery in México, with a top star of that country (Andrea Palma) and multiple award-winning cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, and bringing in prestigious composer Dimitri Tiomkin to do the score. Although it may have cost less for filming abroad, it looks more [[expensive]] than any other RKO film in the series, taking advantage of Acapulco beaches and real pyramids as Aquatania, and with impressive décors for all the scenes related to the temple of god Balu (especially the exterior, built on steep rocks.) Kurt Neumann should have stayed as director, instead of Robert Florey, who gives it a very slow pace. Neumann had done a fine work with "Tarzan and the Amazons", "Tarzan and the Leopard Woman" and "Tarzan and the Huntress", and finished his career directing the classic "The Fly" the year before his death; while Florey became a television director, after a career of few remarkable films. If Weissmuller looks tired, the chimp playing Cheeta is not as good as the others, but the worst character is Benji, an [[obnoxious]] mailman who sings [[horrendous]] songs (that have a Caribbean air, in a location supposed to be Africa and shot in México!) [[Boring]] and decidedly of dubious taste, it was a sad farewell to Weissmuller's Tarzan. The last Tarzan film starring Johnny Weissmuller (looking surprisingly aged a year after "Tarzan and the Huntress") is [[negative]], in spite of all the trivia one can add to make it look better. It is [[noticeable]] that RKO tried to make a great farewell for Weissmuller, shooting in beautiful scenery in México, with a top star of that country (Andrea Palma) and multiple award-winning cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, and bringing in prestigious composer Dimitri Tiomkin to do the score. Although it may have cost less for filming abroad, it looks more [[costly]] than any other RKO film in the series, taking advantage of Acapulco beaches and real pyramids as Aquatania, and with impressive décors for all the scenes related to the temple of god Balu (especially the exterior, built on steep rocks.) Kurt Neumann should have stayed as director, instead of Robert Florey, who gives it a very slow pace. Neumann had done a fine work with "Tarzan and the Amazons", "Tarzan and the Leopard Woman" and "Tarzan and the Huntress", and finished his career directing the classic "The Fly" the year before his death; while Florey became a television director, after a career of few remarkable films. If Weissmuller looks tired, the chimp playing Cheeta is not as good as the others, but the worst character is Benji, an [[outrageous]] mailman who sings [[monstrous]] songs (that have a Caribbean air, in a location supposed to be Africa and shot in México!) [[Bore]] and decidedly of dubious taste, it was a sad farewell to Weissmuller's Tarzan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the [[plot]] thickens and finally [[becomes]] [[black]] I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the [[first]] [[part]] of the movie. It [[continues]] in this vein for a while until, in the [[end]], it [[tries]] to go back to the [[original]] light-hearted banter. But by now it's too [[late]]. It's hard to [[see]] why these [[women]] would still be [[talking]] to one another and the finale is unconvincing. [[Truly]] a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make [[films]]. [[Difficult]] to see how the producers ever [[convinced]] themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a [[real]] flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release). Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the [[intrigue]] thickens and finally [[becoming]] [[negro]] I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the [[fiirst]] [[parties]] of the movie. It [[persists]] in this vein for a while until, in the [[terminate]], it [[attempted]] to go back to the [[initial]] light-hearted banter. But by now it's too [[belated]]. It's hard to [[behold]] why these [[daughters]] would still be [[debating]] to one another and the finale is unconvincing. [[Really]] a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make [[cinematography]]. [[Tricky]] to see how the producers ever [[persuaded]] themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a [[veritable]] flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release). --------------------------------------------- Result 1795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this film when i was around 6 or 7 years old and didn't really think it was anything particularly special. AS time went on i watched it a few more times and it started to grow on me as i started to understand the morals of the film, which i will come to later. For a while i left this film alone and didn't watch it for a while. When looking for an old classic film to watch a few weeks ago (now being 15), I dug out the VHS of homeward bound. After watching this i was left on a natural high that i couldn't really explain. The film gives an overwhelming sense of joy that you never really expect. The films nature of three completely different animals collaborating together to find their way home really sends a message home that no matter how different you are you can always find common ground, something that you all need. The way the personalities of the characters is chosen is truly fantastic. In that you have an old knowledgeable wise golden retriever, looking after or guiding 'chance' the fun loving if slightly clumsy young American bulldog, with sassy the clever, vulnerable but confident cat. The film follows these three friends or companions on a journey that is so realistically impossible it creates magic in that you start to believe that this journey can happen.

I don't want to sound like a soft tissue grabber when it comes to films i assure you i am quite the opposite, but the most uplifting part of this film is without a doubt shadows return, when shadow desperately tries to escape and chance and sassy, painfully are told by him to leave. When both animals return to their beloved owners there is a silence until shadow limps over the horizon to the awe of all. There is a fine line between heartwarming and corny rubbish but this film is pure magic even at the age of 15. This film may not be Lord of the rings but for Disney to produce such a fantastic film using animals and for it to uplift myself in the way it does even at this age it deserves 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1796 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those rare movies, it's lovely and compelling, dignified and quirky, a true gift. I consider it a prerequisite for any trip to Italy, or any vacation at all, because it reminds you to open yourself up to a broader experience (yup, find the magic). I especially loved Josie Lawrence, as Lottie Wilkins, but every lead and supporting actor is flawless in this film. Further the costumes, if you're drawn to fashion and costumes, are extraordinarily well done. I just wish they'd release it on DVD because I'm wearing my tape version out!

Absolutely well worth your time, just make sure to settle in to watch it, without any interruptions. --------------------------------------------- Result 1797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I looked forward to [[seeing]] this [[movie]] when it [[came]] out, since I was a [[huge]] SNL [[fan]]. When my [[boyfriend]] and I went to [[see]] it, the people coming out of the early show were [[yelling]], "Don't waste your [[money]]!" But of course we had to [[find]] out for ourselves.

While there were a few [[funny]] bits ([[Laser]] Bra 2000, Root Boy Slim), most of it [[felt]] like it [[could]] have been severely edited down to an amusing 1 hour show. It was pretty [[bad]].

When the opera singer came on, many people got up and walked out. This made me laugh, because I [[realized]] that O'Donoghue was just pressing people's buttons on [[purpose]] with this movie. Or [[else]] he was just insane. Whatever - you don't need to waste your [[time]] watching it, it's that bad. I looked forward to [[see]] this [[filmmaking]] when it [[became]] out, since I was a [[tremendous]] SNL [[breather]]. When my [[buddy]] and I went to [[behold]] it, the people coming out of the early show were [[shouting]], "Don't waste your [[moneys]]!" But of course we had to [[found]] out for ourselves.

While there were a few [[hilarious]] bits ([[Lasers]] Bra 2000, Root Boy Slim), most of it [[deemed]] like it [[did]] have been severely edited down to an amusing 1 hour show. It was pretty [[unfavourable]].

When the opera singer came on, many people got up and walked out. This made me laugh, because I [[effected]] that O'Donoghue was just pressing people's buttons on [[intents]] with this movie. Or [[elsewhere]] he was just insane. Whatever - you don't need to waste your [[period]] watching it, it's that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The point of the vastly extended preparatory phase of this [[Star]] is Born story seems to be to [[make]] ultimate [[success]] all the more [[sublime]]. Summer Phoenix is very effective as an inarticulate young woman imprisoned within herself but never convincing as the stage [[actress]] of [[growing]] fame who both overcomes and [[profits]] from this detachment. [[Even]] in the lengthy scenes of Esther's acting lessons, we never see her carry out the teacher's [[instructions]]. After suffering through Esther's ([[largely]] self-inflicted) pain in [[excruciating]] [[detail]], we are [[given]] no [[persuasive]] [[sense]] of her [[triumph]].

The [[obsessive]] [[presence]] of the heroine's [[pain]] seems to be [[meant]] as a [[guarantee]] of [[aesthetic]] transcendence. Yet the causes of this pain (poverty, quasi-autism, [[Judaism]], sexual betrayal) never [[come]] [[together]] in a [[coherent]] whole. A 163-minute film with a [[simple]] [[plot]] should be able to [[knit]] up its loose [[ends]]. [[Esther]] Kahn is [[still]] not [[ready]] to [[go]] before an [[audience]]. The point of the vastly extended preparatory phase of this [[Stars]] is Born story seems to be to [[deliver]] ultimate [[avail]] all the more [[sumptuous]]. Summer Phoenix is very effective as an inarticulate young woman imprisoned within herself but never convincing as the stage [[actor]] of [[raising]] fame who both overcomes and [[profit]] from this detachment. [[Yet]] in the lengthy scenes of Esther's acting lessons, we never see her carry out the teacher's [[guidance]]. After suffering through Esther's ([[overwhelmingly]] self-inflicted) pain in [[horrifying]] [[particulars]], we are [[yielded]] no [[conclusive]] [[sensing]] of her [[win]].

The [[obsessed]] [[attendance]] of the heroine's [[heartbreak]] seems to be [[intend]] as a [[collateral]] of [[cosmetic]] transcendence. Yet the causes of this pain (poverty, quasi-autism, [[Jewish]], sexual betrayal) never [[arriving]] [[jointly]] in a [[consistent]] whole. A 163-minute film with a [[easy]] [[intrigue]] should be able to [[knitting]] up its loose [[culminates]]. [[Astaire]] Kahn is [[however]] not [[prepared]] to [[going]] before an [[viewers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bromwell High is nothing short of brilliant. Expertly scripted and perfectly delivered, this searing parody of a students and teachers at a South London Public School leaves you literally rolling with laughter. It's vulgar, provocative, witty and sharp. The characters are a superbly caricatured cross section of British society (or to be more accurate, of any society). Following the escapades of Keisha, Latrina and Natella, our three "protagonists" for want of a better term, the show doesn't shy away from parodying every imaginable subject. Political correctness flies out the window in every episode. If you enjoy shows that aren't afraid to poke fun of every taboo subject imaginable, then Bromwell High will not disappoint! --------------------------------------------- Result 1800 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] 1/10 and that's only because I don't go lower with my [[ratings]].

skip this "[[movie]]" and [[wait]] for the last movie of the "Trilogy", don't buy or rent it. trust me you won't be missing a thing. the [[Architect]] brings no [[new]] info: _([[spoiler]])_ there have been more NEO's before him, he's like nr.6 or something. you [[could]] already figure something like that out from the first [[movie]]: Agent Smith [[telling]] us the first Matrix created didn't [[work]] because it was too [[perfect]]. Trinity died and Neo's "love" brought her back, where have I [[seen]] this before ? Oh right in the first [[movie]] the roles where [[reversed]] ! same as the action-scenes nothing new just with more opponents. the Action-scene (the 20+ [[ships]]) in the [[BIG]] [[battle]] which we didn't see (maybe in Revolutions ?), betrayed by [[someone]] ([[hmmmm]], maybe the [[guy]] holding the [[knife]] who [[wanted]] to stab Neo?!) who [[pushed]] the EGM-button to soon.

all in all a [[shameless]] [[ploy]] to make money (especially off the guys who went to [[see]] it more then once), which [[evidently]] [[worked]] like a charm. 1/10 and that's only because I don't go lower with my [[assessments]].

skip this "[[filmmaking]]" and [[expectation]] for the last movie of the "Trilogy", don't buy or rent it. trust me you won't be missing a thing. the [[Architects]] brings no [[newest]] info: _([[baffle]])_ there have been more NEO's before him, he's like nr.6 or something. you [[did]] already figure something like that out from the first [[filmmaking]]: Agent Smith [[saying]] us the first Matrix created didn't [[collaboration]] because it was too [[flawless]]. Trinity died and Neo's "love" brought her back, where have I [[watched]] this before ? Oh right in the first [[flick]] the roles where [[flipped]] ! same as the action-scenes nothing new just with more opponents. the Action-scene (the 20+ [[warships]]) in the [[PRODIGIOUS]] [[struggles]] which we didn't see (maybe in Revolutions ?), betrayed by [[everyone]] ([[hmmm]], maybe the [[guys]] holding the [[stab]] who [[wants]] to stab Neo?!) who [[relegated]] the EGM-button to soon.

all in all a [[impudent]] [[trick]] to make money (especially off the guys who went to [[consults]] it more then once), which [[visibly]] [[cooperating]] like a charm. --------------------------------------------- Result 1801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is one of those movies that you happen [[across]] when you're channel surfing on a [[Saturday]] afternoon, and you get [[drawn]] into it and [[end]] up watching the whole thing. I [[thought]] that it was well acted and it really made me feel for the [[characters]]. [[Though]] it's a bit [[slow]] moving, focusing more on the relationships between Bonnie and Clyde and their family [[members]], it never got [[boring]]. We don't really [[see]] too much of all the robberies that they were so [[legendary]] for, and instead most of the shootouts take place when they're ambushed by the police. I thought Tracey Needham, who [[played]] Bonnie, [[really]] did a good [[job]] with her [[character]]. Going from a nice [[country]] girl to a cold-blooded killer is a challenging thing to [[portray]], and I [[enjoyed]] the [[subtlety]] she brought to the role.

Overall, an above [[average]] effort, [[especially]] considering it was a made for TV movie. This is one of those movies that you happen [[during]] when you're channel surfing on a [[Sunday]] afternoon, and you get [[lured]] into it and [[termination]] up watching the whole thing. I [[brainchild]] that it was well acted and it really made me feel for the [[hallmarks]]. [[Nevertheless]] it's a bit [[slower]] moving, focusing more on the relationships between Bonnie and Clyde and their family [[lawmakers]], it never got [[bored]]. We don't really [[behold]] too much of all the robberies that they were so [[proverbial]] for, and instead most of the shootouts take place when they're ambushed by the police. I thought Tracey Needham, who [[done]] Bonnie, [[truthfully]] did a good [[employment]] with her [[nature]]. Going from a nice [[nationals]] girl to a cold-blooded killer is a challenging thing to [[outline]], and I [[appreciated]] the [[sophistication]] she brought to the role.

Overall, an above [[medium]] effort, [[principally]] considering it was a made for TV movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1802 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The endless bounds of our inhumanity to our own kind never fails to stun me. This truly astonishing story of a horrifically abused and largely unheard-of population is compelling, well-documented and enraging. As an American, I am constantly humiliated by my country's behaviour and this is just another in our long catalogue of international debasement. We suck. This is probably the first John Pilger documentary I've seen, but it immediately made me want to see what else he's done. My only complaint, and the reason I gave this film only 8 out of 10, is that Pilger shows us this travesty and the appalling collaboration of the US and UK governments, demands that we viewers/citizens are complicit in our own inaction...but makes no suggestion of how to help. I don't know about Britain, but America's made it nearly impossible for the citizenry to take part in their government's doings. A gesture in the right direction might help these islanders' cause. --------------------------------------------- Result 1803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[After]] what I thought was a masterful performance of two [[roles]] in [[Man]] From Snowy River, WHY was Kirk Douglas replaced by Brian Dennehy in the sequel? It just wasn't the same without Spur and Harrison, as portrayed by Douglas. Maybe he recognized how poor the plot was--Jim returns after extended absence, to find Jessica being pursued by another man. He could not expect any girl to wait that long with no contact from him, and not find competition. For a Disney movie, this contains [[foul]] language, plus the highly unnecessary part when Jim & Jessica shacked up without being married--very LAME. Quite an [[insult]] to viewer [[intelligence]], according to members of my family. I'll [[stick]] with the first one, and [[try]] to [[forget]] I ever saw the sequel! [[Afterward]] what I thought was a masterful performance of two [[duties]] in [[Bloke]] From Snowy River, WHY was Kirk Douglas replaced by Brian Dennehy in the sequel? It just wasn't the same without Spur and Harrison, as portrayed by Douglas. Maybe he recognized how poor the plot was--Jim returns after extended absence, to find Jessica being pursued by another man. He could not expect any girl to wait that long with no contact from him, and not find competition. For a Disney movie, this contains [[salacious]] language, plus the highly unnecessary part when Jim & Jessica shacked up without being married--very LAME. Quite an [[snub]] to viewer [[intelligentsia]], according to members of my family. I'll [[twig]] with the first one, and [[tried]] to [[overlook]] I ever saw the sequel! --------------------------------------------- Result 1804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched this [[show]] on the basis of it being [[told]] it was reminiscent of David Lynch's Twin Peaks - a show which I adore. The show [[quickly]] starts introducing us to the [[main]] [[characters]] and rather unusually the pilot episode is to me the [[best]] of the [[lot]], its [[extremely]] [[dramatic]] and really gets out the whole evil side of the [[show]] ready to progress [[throughout]] the rest of the season. My one biggest criticism is I [[felt]] a [[little]] let down by the show - [[probably]] not through its own fault, as it got [[cancelled]] after a [[mere]] 1 season, it [[seemed]] to [[display]] show much potential and it [[deserved]] a lot better treatment than it [[got]]. The acting is [[excellent]], and this show has some of the [[best]] [[characters]] (good and evil) in it I have ever [[seen]] that are well [[developed]] in a short space of time. There is the odd cheesy effect for the first 5 or ten [[shows]] which are a bit overly dramatic, but this is rectified as the season progressed. Well worth a watch, [[definitely]] [[something]] out of the ordinary! I watched this [[displaying]] on the basis of it being [[said]] it was reminiscent of David Lynch's Twin Peaks - a show which I adore. The show [[immediately]] starts introducing us to the [[principal]] [[character]] and rather unusually the pilot episode is to me the [[better]] of the [[batch]], its [[critically]] [[impressive]] and really gets out the whole evil side of the [[display]] ready to progress [[in]] the rest of the season. My one biggest criticism is I [[deemed]] a [[scant]] let down by the show - [[undoubtedly]] not through its own fault, as it got [[invalidated]] after a [[simple]] 1 season, it [[appeared]] to [[showing]] show much potential and it [[merit]] a lot better treatment than it [[did]]. The acting is [[wondrous]], and this show has some of the [[better]] [[hallmarks]] (good and evil) in it I have ever [[noticed]] that are well [[established]] in a short space of time. There is the odd cheesy effect for the first 5 or ten [[exposition]] which are a bit overly dramatic, but this is rectified as the season progressed. Well worth a watch, [[surely]] [[anything]] out of the ordinary! --------------------------------------------- Result 1805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just got back from a free screening and I'm very glad I didn't pay to see this very sub-par film. The theater was full and the crowd was a mix of kids and adults. It seemed like it was just the kids who were laughing at all the slap-stick and fart jokes though (good god they loved to hit these poor mice in the crotch a lot!). The movie is pretty juvenile, unintelligent, predictable, and mostly annoying. The characters just seem to be thrown together to fill in empty space and the relationships between them all seemed very forced with no charm at all.

Visually, the film is about average with nothing that really stands out. They did a decent job of mimicking the clay look from Wallace and Gromit, but other than that it's very forgettable imagery.

Although I was really bored throughout the whole film, I chuckled a couple times. It's not an absolute failure, but I most definitely would not want to watch it again. If you're a parent with kids (and you don't care that your kids see mindless cheap-jokes) then feel free to take them to see it, but everyone else shouldn't waste their money. --------------------------------------------- Result 1806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I had the opportunity to [[see]] this film debut at the Appalachian Film [[Festival]], in which it won an award for Best Picture. This film is [[brilliantly]] done, with an [[excellent]] cast that works well as an ensemble. My favorite performances were from [[Youssef]] Kerkour, Justin [[Lane]] , and Adam [[Jones]]. [[Also]], there are some [[great]] effects with dragonflies and cockroaches, that I was surprised to find out that this film was done on a small budget. The writer-director Adam Jones, who I believe also won an award for his writing, does an excellent job with direction. The audience loved this movie. Cross Eyed will keep you laughing throughout the movie. [[Definitely]] a [[must]] see. I had the opportunity to [[seeing]] this film debut at the Appalachian Film [[Celebratory]], in which it won an award for Best Picture. This film is [[beautifully]] done, with an [[wondrous]] cast that works well as an ensemble. My favorite performances were from [[Yusuf]] Kerkour, Justin [[Alleyways]] , and Adam [[Jonesy]]. [[Moreover]], there are some [[wondrous]] effects with dragonflies and cockroaches, that I was surprised to find out that this film was done on a small budget. The writer-director Adam Jones, who I believe also won an award for his writing, does an excellent job with direction. The audience loved this movie. Cross Eyed will keep you laughing throughout the movie. [[Surely]] a [[ought]] see. --------------------------------------------- Result 1807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there's one genre that I've never been a fan of, it's the biopic. Always misleading, filled with false information, over-dramatized scenes, and trickery all around, biopics are almost never done right. Even in the hands of the truly talented directors like Martin Scorsese (The Aviator) and Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind), they often do a great disservice to the people they are trying to capture on screen. Skeptiscism takes the place of hype with the majority of biopics that make their way to the big screen and the Notorious Bettie Page was no different. Some critics and moviegoers objected to Gretchen Mol given the role of Bettie Page, saying she was no longer a celebrity and didn't have the chops for the part. I never doubted Mol could handle the part since, but I never expected to as blown as away by her performance as I was upon just viewing the film hours ago. Mol delivers a knockout Oscar worthy performance as the iconic 1950's pin-up girl, who, after an early life of abuse (depicted subtlety and tastefully done, something few directors would probably do) inadvertently becomes one of the most talked about models of all time. The picture covers a lot of ground in its 90 minute running time yet despite no less than three subplots, there is still a feeling that there may be a small portion missing from the story. Director/co-writer Marry Harron and Guinevere Turner's fantastic script is only marred by a too abrupt and not as clear as it should be ending. Still, credit must be given to the two ladies for creating a nearly flawless biopic that manages to pay tribute to both its subject and the decade it emulates masterfully. Come Oscar time, Mol, Turner, and Harron should be receiving nominations. Doubt it will happen, though there certainly are no three women more deserving of them. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception. I was very excited to see a new movie coming out, based on the book of that title. Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles. Albert Finney is miscast and doesn't carry the role well. I wanted to shoot Maggie Smith....or rather her silly, [[insipid]] role. The [[real]] [[problem]] and what's lacking in this latest version is a good script, music, and direction.

I [[fell]] [[asleep]] in the theater watching this [[long]], drawn out and exceptionally [[boring]] movie. There are more pauses in the dialog than a Pinter Play. In the book I felt a deep caring for Catherine Sloper and her life. The movie had just the opposite effect. I also disliked the twist where her aunt has a sexual attraction to Morris. Eeeeeeeek. YUK.

Watch it if you can't sleep, it's a definite snoozer. Don't watch it if you're depressed. You'll need Zoloft after this.

Sure, "The Heiress" was exceptional with Olivia Haviland and Montgomery Clift in the title roles. The actor who played her father was on the mark as the uncaring, cold father....still grieving for his dead wife and hating Catherine for it. The movie was not faithful to the book but neither is this one.

This movie was a box office flop. I have no doubts as to why. I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception. I was very excited to see a new movie coming out, based on the book of that title. Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles. Albert Finney is miscast and doesn't carry the role well. I wanted to shoot Maggie Smith....or rather her silly, [[vapid]] role. The [[veritable]] [[difficulty]] and what's lacking in this latest version is a good script, music, and direction.

I [[dip]] [[behemoth]] in the theater watching this [[lengthy]], drawn out and exceptionally [[dull]] movie. There are more pauses in the dialog than a Pinter Play. In the book I felt a deep caring for Catherine Sloper and her life. The movie had just the opposite effect. I also disliked the twist where her aunt has a sexual attraction to Morris. Eeeeeeeek. YUK.

Watch it if you can't sleep, it's a definite snoozer. Don't watch it if you're depressed. You'll need Zoloft after this.

Sure, "The Heiress" was exceptional with Olivia Haviland and Montgomery Clift in the title roles. The actor who played her father was on the mark as the uncaring, cold father....still grieving for his dead wife and hating Catherine for it. The movie was not faithful to the book but neither is this one.

This movie was a box office flop. I have no doubts as to why. --------------------------------------------- Result 1809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unlike many other films, which are disturbing either by dint of their naked unpleasantness (Man Bites Dog) or their sheer violence (most Peckinpah films), Deliverance shocks by its plausibility. Certainly, the buggery scene is pretty straightforward in its unpleasantness, but the film's effect derives far more from its slow build-up and the tangible sense of isolation surrounding the four leads, both before and after everything starts to go wrong. The moment when the canoes pass under the child on the bridge, who does not even acknowledge the men he had earlier played music with, let alone show any sign of human affection towards them, is among the most sinister in modern film. The tension increases steadily throughout the canoe trip, and perseveres even after the final credits - the ending makes the significance of the characters' ordeals horrifically real. The movie's plausibility is greatly aided by the playing of the leads, particularly Ned Beatty and Jon Voight as the victim and reluctant hero respectively. Burt Reynolds, too, has never been better. The film's cultural influence is demonstrable by the number of people who will understand a reference to 'banjo territory' - perhaps only Get Carter has done such an effective hatchet-job on a region's tourist industry. I can think of only a handful of movies which put me into such a serious depression after they had finished - the oppressive atmosphere of Se7en is the best comparison I can think of. Although so much of it is excellent of itself, Deliverance is a classic above all because there are no adequate points of comparison with it - it is unique. --------------------------------------------- Result 1810 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] "The [[Mother]]" [[tells]] of a recently widowed mid-60's mother of two adult children (Reid) who, on the heels of her husband's death, finds herself awakening from a life of sleepwalking as she has an affair with a young carpenter who is also her daughter's married lover. The film dwells on the [[quietly]] passive Mom, her tenuous relationship with her grown son and [[daughter]], the [[silent]] [[needs]] she attempts to [[soothe]] in bed with her young lover, and the convolutions arising therefrom. A somewhat antiseptic drama with rumbling psychodramatic undercurrents, "The [[Mother]]" does an [[excellent]] job of [[dealing]] with [[uncomfortable]] [[issues]] realistically while avoiding gratuitous sensationalism. [[Will]] play best with more [[mature]] [[audiences]], [[possibly]] [[women]], who may better empathize with the central character, her [[needs]] and [[issues]]. (B+) "The [[Mummy]]" [[narrates]] of a recently widowed mid-60's mother of two adult children (Reid) who, on the heels of her husband's death, finds herself awakening from a life of sleepwalking as she has an affair with a young carpenter who is also her daughter's married lover. The film dwells on the [[silently]] passive Mom, her tenuous relationship with her grown son and [[girls]], the [[mute]] [[should]] she attempts to [[placate]] in bed with her young lover, and the convolutions arising therefrom. A somewhat antiseptic drama with rumbling psychodramatic undercurrents, "The [[Mom]]" does an [[wondrous]] job of [[addressing]] with [[inconvenient]] [[questions]] realistically while avoiding gratuitous sensationalism. [[Willingness]] play best with more [[adult]] [[audience]], [[presumably]] [[female]], who may better empathize with the central character, her [[requirements]] and [[questions]]. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 1811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I tried to watch this movie in a military camp during an overseas mission, and let me tell you, you'll watch anything under those circumstances. Not this piece of sh*t though.

The first five minutes set the tone by weak porn-movie quality acting, weird out-of-the-blue plot twists and unbelievable situations and behavior. It gets worse after that. This movie does not have one single saving grace, and yet it is not bad in a way that would make it funny to watch. It's just horrible. I've seen quite many movies in my life and I'm not one of those snobby know-all critics, I mean I'll enjoy most movies to some extent even if they're bad. This one... man.

Steer _well_ clear of this one, my friend. --------------------------------------------- Result 1812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best of the genre. I saw it twice about 25yrs ago and have not had another opportunity to see it again since then. It rivals the Zatoichi series (also starring Katsu) in exciting swordplay. --------------------------------------------- Result 1813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[Excellent]] film. Suzy Kendall will hold your interest [[throughout]]. Has not been shown on American TV for a decade. One scene that has always stayed with me is the German cavalry gas attack. You will find others. Hope they soon put it on tape. [[Wondrous]] film. Suzy Kendall will hold your interest [[in]]. Has not been shown on American TV for a decade. One scene that has always stayed with me is the German cavalry gas attack. You will find others. Hope they soon put it on tape. --------------------------------------------- Result 1814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Anything]] that might have been potentially interesting in this material is [[sunk]] in the first few seconds with a disclaimer that the events we're about to see can't ever be known and "This is the whisper [rumor] most often told" about one of Hollywood's most sensational "mysteries."

Okay. So we're not getting anything new (and E!'s "Mysteries & Scandals" gives you a better foothold on the particular incident...and that's not much of an endorsement). What do we get?

We learn that Hollywood is a nest of viper's and decadents. No big news there. More interesting we learn what a washed up director is willing to do to regain his position of power in the entertainment industry and/or political establishment. It raises the question of whether Peter Bogdanovich is [[speaking]] from his own experience through these [[characters]]. But what's told is so [[cynical]] and [[ugly]] and [[muddled]], we're [[left]] feeling guilty for [[witnessing]] a bunch of [[hooey]] that passes itself off as history.

The tone of the [[film]] has a [[curious]] madcap quality that I [[found]] more irritating than fun. We're not empathetic with anyone. And the [[great]] "Citizen Kane" polishes off the [[relationship]] between Davies and Hearts in a much more convincing way. [[In]] "The Cat's [[Meow]]" we're not ever sure of [[Davies]] [[motives]] for being with Hearst. As [[soon]] as we're told one thing, she's off doing the other.

And are we to believe that Davies was the [[love]] of Chaplain's [[life]]? [[Or]] is he just [[trying]] to cockold one of America's most powerful--and apparently moronic--citizens. The [[film]] never makes it clear.

What is convincing are the [[production]] values. There's a glorious recreation of the [[yacht]] and [[period]] [[costumes]]. I got more out of [[looking]] at the [[construction]] of some of the lapels on the men's jackets than following a [[story]] that libels many of the the most well-known personalities in Hollywood history. No one will remember that the screenplay is pure fiction. The disclaimers that [[frame]] the film only [[make]] it all the more [[tentative]] and unsatisfying.

The [[performers]] can't be [[faulted]], although Meg Tilly goes way past parody here. Kirsten Dunst never disappoints. She gives the most sincere performance in a sea of scenery chewing. Only Joanna Lumley rises above the material, but so much so that she seems to be distancing herself from the whole enterprise rather than narrating it. One of her first lines is, "I'm not here!" And I'm sure she wishes she wasn't.

This isn't on par with Bogdanovich's trashy, so-bad-it's-good "At Long Last Love." It's perched on attempting something serious, but hesitates and stumbles chiefly because it's so full of bitterness towards "the beast" named Hollywood. This is "National Enquirer" filmmaking. And it not only soils the names of those who the film places on board the Oneida that weekend, but the audience gets pretty dirty as well. [[Something]] that might have been potentially interesting in this material is [[poured]] in the first few seconds with a disclaimer that the events we're about to see can't ever be known and "This is the whisper [rumor] most often told" about one of Hollywood's most sensational "mysteries."

Okay. So we're not getting anything new (and E!'s "Mysteries & Scandals" gives you a better foothold on the particular incident...and that's not much of an endorsement). What do we get?

We learn that Hollywood is a nest of viper's and decadents. No big news there. More interesting we learn what a washed up director is willing to do to regain his position of power in the entertainment industry and/or political establishment. It raises the question of whether Peter Bogdanovich is [[speaks]] from his own experience through these [[nature]]. But what's told is so [[sarcastic]] and [[ghastly]] and [[disconcerted]], we're [[exited]] feeling guilty for [[experiencing]] a bunch of [[hokum]] that passes itself off as history.

The tone of the [[filmmaking]] has a [[unusual]] madcap quality that I [[finds]] more irritating than fun. We're not empathetic with anyone. And the [[splendid]] "Citizen Kane" polishes off the [[ties]] between Davies and Hearts in a much more convincing way. [[Throughout]] "The Cat's [[Meows]]" we're not ever sure of [[Davis]] [[motif]] for being with Hearst. As [[early]] as we're told one thing, she's off doing the other.

And are we to believe that Davies was the [[likes]] of Chaplain's [[vie]]? [[Neither]] is he just [[seek]] to cockold one of America's most powerful--and apparently moronic--citizens. The [[filmmaking]] never makes it clear.

What is convincing are the [[productivity]] values. There's a glorious recreation of the [[sailing]] and [[deadline]] [[suits]]. I got more out of [[searching]] at the [[build]] of some of the lapels on the men's jackets than following a [[history]] that libels many of the the most well-known personalities in Hollywood history. No one will remember that the screenplay is pure fiction. The disclaimers that [[frames]] the film only [[deliver]] it all the more [[provisional]] and unsatisfying.

The [[artist]] can't be [[failed]], although Meg Tilly goes way past parody here. Kirsten Dunst never disappoints. She gives the most sincere performance in a sea of scenery chewing. Only Joanna Lumley rises above the material, but so much so that she seems to be distancing herself from the whole enterprise rather than narrating it. One of her first lines is, "I'm not here!" And I'm sure she wishes she wasn't.

This isn't on par with Bogdanovich's trashy, so-bad-it's-good "At Long Last Love." It's perched on attempting something serious, but hesitates and stumbles chiefly because it's so full of bitterness towards "the beast" named Hollywood. This is "National Enquirer" filmmaking. And it not only soils the names of those who the film places on board the Oneida that weekend, but the audience gets pretty dirty as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I think Dolph Lundgren had [[potential]] at being a big action star a la Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and even Van Damme to certain degree. He had some big [[moments]] in his career but he also made some [[poor]] [[choices]] and this is [[definitely]] one of them [[although]] made later in his [[career]]. The [[strange]] thing about Jill The Ripper (or [[Jill]] [[Rips]]...or Tied Up) is that I honestly think they seriously [[thought]] they were making a provocative and serious thriller? It shows in the way that they describe it on IMDb, on the DVD case, in the commentaries, and this film is not serious. To call it campy would be a huge understatement. The film tries to be [[complex]] and intelligent when in fact it's [[nothing]] more than shallow, confusing and [[gratuitous]]. On top of that they put Lundgren, who is known for action films, in an attempt at a serious role which makes it even more campy because his range as an actor is pretty limited. The entire film revolves around the kinky sex world and yet they attempt at making it a serious thriller? Just the plot and [[premise]] [[immediately]] make it a B-Movie Porn at very [[best]].

Dolph Lundgren plays disgraced former cop and raging alcoholic Matt Sorenson who decides to play Detective when his brother is murdered. I mean put aside the numerous plot holes that has Lundgren getting free roam to investigate crime scenes, and witnesses and everything else even [[though]] he's not a cop anymore and you still have a pretty strange and rather lack luster performance from Lundgren. Danielle Brett is Lundgren's eventual love interest and his brother's widow. Brett plays her role decently [[enough]] [[considering]] the [[script]] and campy story. The supporting cast is huge and no one [[particularly]] stands out in their performances unless it's on the negative side such as the absolutely [[horrible]] performance by Victor Pedtrchenko who seems to go by several different names in the film, boasts an awful accent and is a really awful villain.

I honestly tried to get into the mystery and film and watch closely but there wasn't any reason to because it was all a jumble of ridiculous plot and [[gratuitous]] sex games [[including]] a downright [[ridiculously]] hilarious scene where Lundgren goes under cover and is strung upside down nearly naked. To explain how classy and well done this movie is (sarcasm...sarcasm) the back of the DVD I picked up (it was really cheap) has Lundgren's character listed as "Murray Wilson" (not the name of his character in the film.) While somehow Lundgren manages to be usually watchable the film falls flat on it's face trying to be serious. Considering director Anthony Hickox is infamous for really B-Movie Horror flicks it only makes sense even though I think he was really trying to be serious. Hard core cult Lundgren fans will have to see it...no one else should...certainly for any sort of mystery or suspense. 3/10 I think Dolph Lundgren had [[prospective]] at being a big action star a la Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and even Van Damme to certain degree. He had some big [[times]] in his career but he also made some [[poorest]] [[elects]] and this is [[certainly]] one of them [[albeit]] made later in his [[carrera]]. The [[unusual]] thing about Jill The Ripper (or [[Pinocchio]] [[Criticizes]]...or Tied Up) is that I honestly think they seriously [[ideas]] they were making a provocative and serious thriller? It shows in the way that they describe it on IMDb, on the DVD case, in the commentaries, and this film is not serious. To call it campy would be a huge understatement. The film tries to be [[knotty]] and intelligent when in fact it's [[none]] more than shallow, confusing and [[unjustified]]. On top of that they put Lundgren, who is known for action films, in an attempt at a serious role which makes it even more campy because his range as an actor is pretty limited. The entire film revolves around the kinky sex world and yet they attempt at making it a serious thriller? Just the plot and [[hypothesis]] [[expeditiously]] make it a B-Movie Porn at very [[optimum]].

Dolph Lundgren plays disgraced former cop and raging alcoholic Matt Sorenson who decides to play Detective when his brother is murdered. I mean put aside the numerous plot holes that has Lundgren getting free roam to investigate crime scenes, and witnesses and everything else even [[although]] he's not a cop anymore and you still have a pretty strange and rather lack luster performance from Lundgren. Danielle Brett is Lundgren's eventual love interest and his brother's widow. Brett plays her role decently [[adequately]] [[scrutinize]] the [[screenplay]] and campy story. The supporting cast is huge and no one [[principally]] stands out in their performances unless it's on the negative side such as the absolutely [[shocking]] performance by Victor Pedtrchenko who seems to go by several different names in the film, boasts an awful accent and is a really awful villain.

I honestly tried to get into the mystery and film and watch closely but there wasn't any reason to because it was all a jumble of ridiculous plot and [[unreasonable]] sex games [[comprises]] a downright [[shockingly]] hilarious scene where Lundgren goes under cover and is strung upside down nearly naked. To explain how classy and well done this movie is (sarcasm...sarcasm) the back of the DVD I picked up (it was really cheap) has Lundgren's character listed as "Murray Wilson" (not the name of his character in the film.) While somehow Lundgren manages to be usually watchable the film falls flat on it's face trying to be serious. Considering director Anthony Hickox is infamous for really B-Movie Horror flicks it only makes sense even though I think he was really trying to be serious. Hard core cult Lundgren fans will have to see it...no one else should...certainly for any sort of mystery or suspense. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First off, I would just like to say what a big fan of Bette Midler's I am. Stella is a very good movie with a wonderful cast (Bette Midler, John Goodman, Trini Alvarado, Stephen Collins, Marsha Mason) This is one of my favorite films of all time. It deals with a mother raising a child on her own, she goes through a lot of things that are out of her way to bring up her daughter Jenny played wonderfully by Trini Alvarado. This movie is very good and I suggest that you pick up a copy to watch it. Roger Ebert gave is 3 1/2 stars! And it deserved 4! WONDERFUL! I give it 4 out of 4! --------------------------------------------- Result 1817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] was [[made]] for fans of Dani (and [[Cradle]] of [[Filth]]). I am not one of them. I [[think]] he's just an imitator riding the black [[metal]] bandwagon ([[still]], I'm [[generally]] not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD [[case]] to [[pay]] for it, I [[convinced]] myself, that the less [[authentic]] something is the more it [[tries]] to be [[convincing]]. Thus I [[assumed]] I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself splatter with a sinister background. Now, that is what I do like.

I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. [[AWFUL]] camera work and DISGUSTING quality. And that was then (2002), that it looked like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture.

After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects annoyed me. My disliking evolved. I noticed how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5" height) looked in his platform shoes ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head apparently had no skull.) I also found that this movie may have no sense. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.

After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID [[NOT]] make sense. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very [[bad]]. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.

We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly.

The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the worst ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)

You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore. This [[filmmaking]] was [[brought]] for fans of Dani (and [[Birthplace]] of [[Dirt]]). I am not one of them. I [[believing]] he's just an imitator riding the black [[metallurgy]] bandwagon ([[yet]], I'm [[ordinarily]] not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD [[cases]] to [[salaried]] for it, I [[persuaded]] myself, that the less [[vera]] something is the more it [[attempt]] to be [[persuade]]. Thus I [[shouldered]] I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself splatter with a sinister background. Now, that is what I do like.

I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. [[SCARY]] camera work and DISGUSTING quality. And that was then (2002), that it looked like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture.

After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects annoyed me. My disliking evolved. I noticed how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5" height) looked in his platform shoes ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head apparently had no skull.) I also found that this movie may have no sense. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.

After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID [[NOPE]] make sense. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very [[unfavourable]]. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.

We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly.

The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the worst ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)

You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore. --------------------------------------------- Result 1818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Im a huge M Lillard fan that's why I ended up watching this movie. Honestly I doubt that if he wasn't in the movie i would of enjoyed it as much or even watched it but once I did watch it realize the story was pretty decent. A bad ending I must say but I did see it coming. It's a low budget movie and some of the actors weren't really good but all in all I rated this movie 7/10.

The suspense of wondering what Lillard was actually up to was what really keeped me interested in this movie.

Its a good rental!

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The stranger Jack (Matthew Lillard) arrives in the studio of the crook collector of [[antiques]] Max (Vincent D'Onofrio) and [[tells]] his ambitious [[companion]] and [[specialist]] in poisons Jamie (Valeria Golino) that he is Jack's brother. [[Jamie]] does not buy his story, dominates Jack and ties him up to a chair. When Max arrives, Jack proposes US$ 100,000.00 for each one to protect him in a negotiation of the antiques "Spanish Judges" with a [[wealthy]] and dangerous collector. Max invites his [[stupid]] [[acquaintance]] Piece ([[Mark]] Boone Junior), who [[comes]] with his retarded girlfriend that [[believes]] she is from Mars, to compose the [[backup]] team. [[However]], Jack double-crosses the collector and then he intrigues [[Jack]], [[Jamie]] and [[Piece]].

The low [[budget]] "Spanish [[Judges]]" is a [[movie]] with a reasonable [[screenplay]] with an [[awful]] conclusion that wastes a good cast. Valeria Golino is [[astonishingly]] [[beautiful]] but together with the [[good]] [[actor]] Vincent D'Onofrio, they are not able to [[save]] the [[stupid]] [[story]]. Further, the scenes that are [[supposed]] to be funny [[unfortunately]] do not [[work]], and actually they are silly and not [[funny]]. My [[vote]] is three.

Title (Brazil): "[[Tudo]] Por Dinheiro" ("All For [[Money]]") The stranger Jack (Matthew Lillard) arrives in the studio of the crook collector of [[antiquities]] Max (Vincent D'Onofrio) and [[says]] his ambitious [[comrade]] and [[specialising]] in poisons Jamie (Valeria Golino) that he is Jack's brother. [[Jaime]] does not buy his story, dominates Jack and ties him up to a chair. When Max arrives, Jack proposes US$ 100,000.00 for each one to protect him in a negotiation of the antiques "Spanish Judges" with a [[affluent]] and dangerous collector. Max invites his [[witless]] [[acquaintances]] Piece ([[Dialed]] Boone Junior), who [[happens]] with his retarded girlfriend that [[sees]] she is from Mars, to compose the [[backups]] team. [[Still]], Jack double-crosses the collector and then he intrigues [[Gato]], [[Jaime]] and [[Slice]].

The low [[budgets]] "Spanish [[Richter]]" is a [[flick]] with a reasonable [[scenario]] with an [[abhorrent]] conclusion that wastes a good cast. Valeria Golino is [[marvelously]] [[sumptuous]] but together with the [[alright]] [[protagonist]] Vincent D'Onofrio, they are not able to [[savings]] the [[silly]] [[stories]]. Further, the scenes that are [[presumed]] to be funny [[woefully]] do not [[collaborate]], and actually they are silly and not [[amusing]]. My [[votes]] is three.

Title (Brazil): "[[Isso]] Por Dinheiro" ("All For [[Cash]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 1820 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This infamous ending to Koen Wauters' [[career]] [[came]] to my attention through the '[[Night]] of [[Bad]] Taste'. Judging by the comment index i wasn't the first and i am not to be the last person in Western Europe to learn that this musician ([[undoubtedly]] one of the [[best]] on our contemporary [[pop]] scene, [[even]] the Dutch [[agree]] on that) tried to be an actor. Whether he should have [[made]] the attempt or not [[cannot]] be [[judged]].

[[In]] '[[Intensive]] Care' he's quite [[likable]], but he seems to be [[uncomfortable]] with the [[flick]] in which he is participating. No one can blame him. It deserves its ranking in Verheyen's Hall of Fame by all means & standards. The story of the Murderous Maniac Who is Supposed To Have Died In An Accident But Is Alive And Wrathful has been told dozens of times before, and even without original twists a director can deliver a more than [[mediocre]] story through innovative settings and cinematography.

IC contents itself with a hospital wing and a couple of middle class houses. The pace is dull. The tension looses the last bit of its credibility to the musical score, for every appearance of the murderer is accompagnied by a [[tedious]] menacing melody, followed by orchestral outbursts during the murders, which or largely suggested and in any case as bloodless as a small budget can make them. The sex scene is gratuitous but not in the [[least]] [[appealing]]. The couple from Amsterdamned [[could]] have made it work, though. While dealing with the couple subject : the whole subplot between Wauters and the girl does not [[work]]. A more effective emotional connection could have been established on screen if they had just been fellow victims-to-be, who loosen their nerves halfway through physical intercourse. I will not even grant the other cast members the dignity of a mentioning, for they should all have been chopped up into tiny [[greasy]] pieces. As a matter of fact, most of them do. The ones i recall where obvious for the genre : a pretty nurse and two cops.

Hence, in a slasher, the cavalry only comes in time to need rescue itself. The (anti-) hero has to take out the villain, mostly through clever thinking, for former red berets don't often get parts in these films; they might overcome the illusion of invincibility that surrounds the killer. Translated to the events, Wauters kills the doctor and saves the dame in distress.

No people, i am not finished. This is not how the story goes. Wauters makes his heroic attempt but gets beaten up with a fury that comes close to "A Clockwork Orange", so it is up to the girl to pick up the driller killer act and pierce through the doctors brains. Though this method ensures the killer's death more than the usual rounds of 9mm bullets, the doctor survives in order to enable IC to reach the 80 min mark.

I should have made my point by now. Intensive Care is a bad movie, which can only be enjoyed by Bad Taste lovers, who can verify Verheyen's catchy statements and make some up for themselves and that way try to sit through it. For example, the (unintended) parody value of the doctor's clown mask (Halloween) and the final confrontation in the park (the chase at the end of Friday the 13th).

However, let me conclude by giving an overview by a few measly elements which give IC a little credit. George Kennedy is not one of them. All he has to do is endure a horrible monologue by a fellow doctor/French actor and look horrified when they let him go down in flames in order to tag his big name on a stand-in. He could have played his Naked Gun part again, to end up as beef, but with a longer screen time. The finale may be one of them. I had never seen a maniac being brought down by launching fireworks into his guts in order to crush him against a flexible fence. It is good for a laugh.

Name one good truly point about Intensive Care ... Koen Wauters learned his lesson and devoted himself entirely to his musical career. It makes me wonder how many editions of the Paris-Dakar race he has to abort before coming to his senses.

This infamous ending to Koen Wauters' [[carrera]] [[became]] to my attention through the '[[Nightly]] of [[Unfavourable]] Taste'. Judging by the comment index i wasn't the first and i am not to be the last person in Western Europe to learn that this musician ([[indubitably]] one of the [[finest]] on our contemporary [[papa]] scene, [[yet]] the Dutch [[concur]] on that) tried to be an actor. Whether he should have [[effected]] the attempt or not [[notable]] be [[deemed]].

[[Among]] '[[Intense]] Care' he's quite [[congenial]], but he seems to be [[uneasy]] with the [[gesture]] in which he is participating. No one can blame him. It deserves its ranking in Verheyen's Hall of Fame by all means & standards. The story of the Murderous Maniac Who is Supposed To Have Died In An Accident But Is Alive And Wrathful has been told dozens of times before, and even without original twists a director can deliver a more than [[lackluster]] story through innovative settings and cinematography.

IC contents itself with a hospital wing and a couple of middle class houses. The pace is dull. The tension looses the last bit of its credibility to the musical score, for every appearance of the murderer is accompagnied by a [[tiresome]] menacing melody, followed by orchestral outbursts during the murders, which or largely suggested and in any case as bloodless as a small budget can make them. The sex scene is gratuitous but not in the [[lowest]] [[alluring]]. The couple from Amsterdamned [[wo]] have made it work, though. While dealing with the couple subject : the whole subplot between Wauters and the girl does not [[cooperate]]. A more effective emotional connection could have been established on screen if they had just been fellow victims-to-be, who loosen their nerves halfway through physical intercourse. I will not even grant the other cast members the dignity of a mentioning, for they should all have been chopped up into tiny [[tallow]] pieces. As a matter of fact, most of them do. The ones i recall where obvious for the genre : a pretty nurse and two cops.

Hence, in a slasher, the cavalry only comes in time to need rescue itself. The (anti-) hero has to take out the villain, mostly through clever thinking, for former red berets don't often get parts in these films; they might overcome the illusion of invincibility that surrounds the killer. Translated to the events, Wauters kills the doctor and saves the dame in distress.

No people, i am not finished. This is not how the story goes. Wauters makes his heroic attempt but gets beaten up with a fury that comes close to "A Clockwork Orange", so it is up to the girl to pick up the driller killer act and pierce through the doctors brains. Though this method ensures the killer's death more than the usual rounds of 9mm bullets, the doctor survives in order to enable IC to reach the 80 min mark.

I should have made my point by now. Intensive Care is a bad movie, which can only be enjoyed by Bad Taste lovers, who can verify Verheyen's catchy statements and make some up for themselves and that way try to sit through it. For example, the (unintended) parody value of the doctor's clown mask (Halloween) and the final confrontation in the park (the chase at the end of Friday the 13th).

However, let me conclude by giving an overview by a few measly elements which give IC a little credit. George Kennedy is not one of them. All he has to do is endure a horrible monologue by a fellow doctor/French actor and look horrified when they let him go down in flames in order to tag his big name on a stand-in. He could have played his Naked Gun part again, to end up as beef, but with a longer screen time. The finale may be one of them. I had never seen a maniac being brought down by launching fireworks into his guts in order to crush him against a flexible fence. It is good for a laugh.

Name one good truly point about Intensive Care ... Koen Wauters learned his lesson and devoted himself entirely to his musical career. It makes me wonder how many editions of the Paris-Dakar race he has to abort before coming to his senses.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] in the [[worst]] [[possible]] circumstance. I'd already [[missed]] 15 minutes when I [[woke]] up to it on an [[international]] [[flight]] between [[Sydney]] and Seoul. I didn't know what I was watching, I [[thought]] [[maybe]] it was a [[movie]] of the [[week]], but [[quickly]] [[became]] [[riveted]] by the performance of the lead actress [[playing]] a [[young]] [[woman]] who's [[child]] had been kidnapped. The premise started taking [[twist]] and turns I didn't see [[coming]] and by the end credits I was scrambling through the the in-flight [[guide]] to [[figure]] out what I had just watched. Turns out I was belatedly [[discovering]] Do-yeon Jeon who'd won [[Best]] Actress at Cannes for the role. I don't know if [[Secret]] [[Sunshine]] is typical of Korean cinema but I'm off to the DVD store to [[discover]] more. I [[sawthe]] this [[movie]] in the [[worse]] [[probable]] circumstance. I'd already [[miss]] 15 minutes when I [[awake]] up to it on an [[worldwide]] [[flights]] between [[Sidney]] and Seoul. I didn't know what I was watching, I [[brainchild]] [[conceivably]] it was a [[cinematographic]] of the [[chow]], but [[urgently]] [[was]] [[fascinated]] by the performance of the lead actress [[play]] a [[youths]] [[women]] who's [[children]] had been kidnapped. The premise started taking [[twisting]] and turns I didn't see [[arriving]] and by the end credits I was scrambling through the the in-flight [[guidebooks]] to [[silhouette]] out what I had just watched. Turns out I was belatedly [[detects]] Do-yeon Jeon who'd won [[Better]] Actress at Cannes for the role. I don't know if [[Covert]] [[Sunlight]] is typical of Korean cinema but I'm off to the DVD store to [[detection]] more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1822 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] The [[Good]] [[Earth]] follows the life a slave girl and a poor farmer in China. The [[movie]] is based on the [[novel]] by Pearl S. Buck. The story is great, but I [[hated]] that they decided to [[cast]] Anglos in the lead roles. Walter Connolly is [[laughable]] as the farmer's father. He has such a [[heavy]] American [[accent]], as do most of the lead actors, that I could not [[bear]] listening to him speak.

It is a shame that Hollywood could not get past their racist beliefs to cast Asians in the lead roles. To take Anglos and make them look like Chinese is akin to Anglos putting shoe polish on their faces to play African-Americans. The [[Alright]] [[Earthly]] follows the life a slave girl and a poor farmer in China. The [[filmmaking]] is based on the [[newer]] by Pearl S. Buck. The story is great, but I [[detested]] that they decided to [[casting]] Anglos in the lead roles. Walter Connolly is [[ridicule]] as the farmer's father. He has such a [[ponderous]] American [[emphasis]], as do most of the lead actors, that I could not [[xiong]] listening to him speak.

It is a shame that Hollywood could not get past their racist beliefs to cast Asians in the lead roles. To take Anglos and make them look like Chinese is akin to Anglos putting shoe polish on their faces to play African-Americans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my second time through for A Perfect Spy. I watched it 2 or 3 years ago and liked it. I like it still. It's natural that it gets compared to the beeb's other big Le Carre' series, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Tinker Tailor focuses on the "game" spies play; Perfect Spy gives us the other axis - what kind of person a spy is. There are a number of themes that these movies share, along with others in the genre.

Ambiguity - moral, sexual, interpersonal - which creates a multidimensional space of true vs. false, inside vs. outside, love vs. responsibility. In a way, these characters are happiest when they are being treated the most shabbily by those they love and respect - "backstabbed" in its various nuances.

The theme of fathers and father-figures is also important. One of the most intriguing characters in A Perfect Spy is Rick, the main character Magnus' perhaps ersatz father. Throughout the story he betrays and is betrayed. A rogue who always manages to climb back up the ladder when he's been toppled, who seems impervious to what others think of him, asks Magnus each time they meet, "Do you love your old man?" and never, "Do you love me?" Maybe it says this somewhere else, but A Perfect Spy is a love story.

Another theme is that of malignancy. The nature of the business is to turn others - turn them against their government, against their friends and associates, turn them against their values and beliefs. In each of the Le Carre' movies I have seen, The Spy who Came in From the Cold, Looking Glass War, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Smiley's People, and A Perfect Spy, turning and being turned is the foundation of the tragedy.

Finally, not so much a theme as an artistic touch - in each of these films there is usually only a single gun shot, or perhaps two shots bookending the story. Violence, torture, cruelty are always just beneath the surface. We see their results not as streams of blood or dank prison cells but in the the objects Le Carre''s characters cling to as they are ineluctably sucked down into the morass.

If you haven't seen the films above, and you enjoy A Perfect Spy, you are in for a treat. I'd also recommend The Sandbagger series (Yorkshire TV), the 2nd and 3rd seasons of which begin to reach the level of this kind of complexity. The IPCRESS File and Burial in Berlin are nice, though light weight. For political intrigue try A Very British Coup, House of Cards and Yes, Minister/Yes, Prime Minister.

If only a brit would set his hand to making The Three Kingdoms - there would be a film with intrigue and complexity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1824 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Far from [[providing]] the [[caffeine]] [[kick]] you'd [[expect]] from a [[film]] that [[shares]] its [[name]] with the most energy-boosting of warm beverages, Coffy clunks about and never really rises above being just a ropey [[revenge]] [[tale]]. Indeed, if the [[movie]] was a cup of coffee, it'd be rather weak and watery, littered with a few [[undesirable]] dregs and [[lacking]] in a lingering [[aftertaste]]. Sporadically it [[hits]] the spot, but otherwise it isn't the hot action-drama it [[hopes]] to be.

Plot-wise, Coffy is a [[nurse]] who takes the [[law]] into her own hands and delivers [[hard]] justice to the drug-pushing, lady-pimpin', mob-suckers that [[hooked]] her [[younger]] [[sister]] into a depraved, sick state. Socio-political [[commentary]] on the plight of urban [[black]] [[youths]] in [[America]] is [[prominent]] in Coffy, and it makes for some thought-provoking stuff as Coffy crusades against the political [[corruption]] and [[white]] [[establishment]] [[racism]] that [[profits]] and acts as a [[parasite]] off the [[targeted]] Afro-American [[minorities]]. [[Sadly]], the [[timely]] [[messages]] are [[undermined]] by the film's poor quality and [[lack]] of [[focus]]. Coffy's [[ideas]] are [[important]], it's just that they are not well-aimed.

One of the [[plus]] [[points]] of Coffy is the presence of Blaxploitation [[icon]] Pam Grier. Grier goes at her role with gusto and makes for an appealing action [[heroine]] as she [[shotguns]] down the [[scum]] in her [[often]] [[spectacular]] acts of vigilante violence (how do you [[deal]] with a [[house]] full of hoods? [[Drive]] the [[car]] right through the front [[door]]!). It's just a [[shame]] that the storyline wavers on occasions, [[wasting]] [[time]] squeezing as much sexual exploitation as [[possible]]. The low [[budget]] can't have [[helped]], but [[neither]] does the [[fact]] that for a Blaxploitation [[flick]], Coffy lacks groove. [[Just]] as the issues are [[undermined]] by the [[lack]] of quality, [[consequently]] the [[entertainment]] and [[excitement]] are [[also]] skewered by [[moments]] of dullness and [[misdirection]].

The [[total]] [[result]] is workmanlike and wooden. We [[get]] a hip [[heroine]] but not a hip [[movie]]. It's a [[shame]] as Coffy has its [[moments]] and should rightly be regarded as a [[key]] [[film]] in the Blaxploitation craze; it just never ascends above being an average, lukewarm number. Far from [[offered]] the [[coffeemaker]] [[whoop]] you'd [[awaited]] from a [[filmmaking]] that [[share]] its [[denomination]] with the most energy-boosting of warm beverages, Coffy clunks about and never really rises above being just a ropey [[retribution]] [[tales]]. Indeed, if the [[filmmaking]] was a cup of coffee, it'd be rather weak and watery, littered with a few [[unwelcome]] dregs and [[missing]] in a lingering [[taste]]. Sporadically it [[jolts]] the spot, but otherwise it isn't the hot action-drama it [[expect]] to be.

Plot-wise, Coffy is a [[medic]] who takes the [[legislation]] into her own hands and delivers [[tough]] justice to the drug-pushing, lady-pimpin', mob-suckers that [[hook]] her [[youngest]] [[sisters]] into a depraved, sick state. Socio-political [[comments]] on the plight of urban [[negro]] [[youthful]] in [[American]] is [[notable]] in Coffy, and it makes for some thought-provoking stuff as Coffy crusades against the political [[bribery]] and [[bianca]] [[creations]] [[ethnic]] that [[gains]] and acts as a [[deadbeat]] off the [[geared]] Afro-American [[minority]]. [[Regrettably]], the [[quick]] [[messaging]] are [[hampered]] by the film's poor quality and [[shortage]] of [[concentrations]]. Coffy's [[thinks]] are [[essential]], it's just that they are not well-aimed.

One of the [[longer]] [[dots]] of Coffy is the presence of Blaxploitation [[icons]] Pam Grier. Grier goes at her role with gusto and makes for an appealing action [[heroin]] as she [[revolvers]] down the [[froth]] in her [[generally]] [[marvellous]] acts of vigilante violence (how do you [[deals]] with a [[households]] full of hoods? [[Driving]] the [[automobiles]] right through the front [[wears]]!). It's just a [[pity]] that the storyline wavers on occasions, [[losing]] [[period]] squeezing as much sexual exploitation as [[achievable]]. The low [[budgets]] can't have [[supporting]], but [[either]] does the [[facto]] that for a Blaxploitation [[movie]], Coffy lacks groove. [[Righteous]] as the issues are [[hindered]] by the [[shortage]] of quality, [[accordingly]] the [[amusement]] and [[exhilaration]] are [[moreover]] skewered by [[times]] of dullness and [[misappropriation]].

The [[aggregate]] [[findings]] is workmanlike and wooden. We [[gets]] a hip [[heroin]] but not a hip [[flick]]. It's a [[ignominy]] as Coffy has its [[times]] and should rightly be regarded as a [[indispensable]] [[cinematographic]] in the Blaxploitation craze; it just never ascends above being an average, lukewarm number. --------------------------------------------- Result 1825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Straight to the point: "The Groove Tube" is one of the most unfunny, unclever and downright horrible films ever made. This "comedy" is so void of anything remotely resembling a trace of wit that it's almost incomprehensible that it was even made. I said almost because there are fans of everything after all.

This film isn't even "good" bad or "enjoyable" bad. To put this movie on the same level of entertainment as "Plan 9" or "Robot Monster" would be a crime to those films. Films like that you can actually watch and get a kick out of. But this film is SO bad, SO poorly made, acted and scripted and SO incredible stale, that there just isn't even a trace of "camp" or "schlock" to be found.

Even though this was made before Saturday Night Live premiered, comparisons were probably inevitable. I'm not a big fan of SNL, but this film is worse than the worst SNL skit you can find. And man, that's BAD. Just to keep the men viewers from leaving, Shapiro throws in a pair of breasts every so often, but poorly-filmed breasts from 1974 aren't going to excite anyone these days. Truthfully this film is so poorly made and is such a sleep-inducing excursion, I doubt if they excited anyone in 1974 either.

A man named Ken Shapiro made this film. I swear to God, any ten-year old with a video camera could have made something funnier and more clever. It's just downright unreal - this is truly an unbelievable film. The "jokes" and "gags" are so infantile that even little boys who like to sneak dad's porno mags out at night won't laugh.

I will give this film one thing - the very last sequence, the "dancing man" sequence, where a guy (Shapiro) on the streets of NYC dances to a tune, is easily the best thing in this horrible film. Not that the "dancing man" sequence is that great either - it definitely has its moments of not being clever as Shapiro desperately tries to fill in the time for the entire song - but it actually was somewhat watchable. The part of this sequence where the cop starts dancing with the man is the one sole trace of cleverness in the entire film. No wonder Shapiro put this sequence last - again, while not so great itself, it easily beats anything else in this "film."

Otherwise, this film is such a complete piece of crap, it's unfathomable as to how an actual human being can be so downright cleverless. The name of this film should have been "Ken Shapiro's Craparama." It's amazing that this was made, but many truly talented filmmakers can't get in. However, I will say that I bet the geniuses at NYU would love this movie. Total garbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 1826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Yet]] again, [[early]] morning television proves an [[invaluable]] [[resource]] for [[films]] that I [[otherwise]] [[would]] never have been able to [[track]] down. [[At]] four o'clock in the morning, I stumbled out of bed to begin [[recording]] 'The [[Informer]] (1935),' my fourth [[film]] from prolific American director John Ford, and an [[excellent]] one at that. Set during the Irish [[Civil]] [[War]] in 1922, the screenplay was adapted by Dudley [[Nichols]] from the novel of the same name by [[Liam]] O'Flaherty. [[Though]] he was born in the United States, and is most [[renowned]] for his "Americana" [[pictures]], both of Ford's [[parents]] were Irish, which [[explains]] the director's decision to direct the film. [[Victor]] McLaglen plays Gypo Nolan, a brutish but well-meaning ruffian who [[informs]] on an [[old]] [[friend]], Frankie McPhillip (Wallace Ford), in order to [[claim]] the £20 reward for his girlfriend, [[Katie]] ([[Margot]] Grahame). When Frankie is killed during his [[attempted]] arrest, the Irish Republican Army, of which both Frankie and Gypo were [[members]], begins to [[investigate]] the traitor behind the [[incident]], [[every]] clue bringing them [[closer]] and [[closer]] to the [[real]] culprit.

Meanwhile, Gypo is plagued with [[guilt]] for his friend's untimely [[death]], and descends into a bout of heavy-drinking that [[rivals]] [[Don]] Birnam in 'The [[Lost]] Weekend (1945)' in its excessiveness. As Gypo drowns his sorrows in copious [[volumes]] of alcohol, [[trapped]] in a [[vicious]] [[little]] [[circle]] of [[depression]], his [[extravagant]] [[spending]] [[captures]] the attention of the [[investigating]] IRA [[members]]. [[For]] the one [[time]] in his [[life]], Gypo [[finds]] himself surrounded by [[admirers]] ([[including]] an [[amusing]] J.[[M]]. Kerrigan), who [[enthusiastically]] clap him on the back and christen him "[[King]] Gypo" for his physical might. [[However]], it's obvious that these people feel no affection for the [[man]], and are [[simple]] showing him attention to [[exploit]] him for money. The additional £20 brought by Frankie's death could never buy Gypo an assembly of friends – indeed, in a bitter twist of [[irony]], the money was only made possible by the betrayal and loss of one of his only good companions. A relatively simple fellow, Gypo could not possibly have fully considered the consequences of his actions, and is eventually offered forgiveness on account of his "not knowing what he was doing," but his foolishness must not go unpunished.

Criticism is occasionally levelled at Ford's film for its allegedly propagandistic support of a "terrorist" organisation. Though this stance obviously depends on one's personal views {I certainly don't know enough Irish history to pass judgement}, there's no doubt that the film portrays the Irish Republican Army as selfless, dedicated and impartial, a proud piece of Irish patriotism if I ever saw it. However, the main theme of the story is that of betrayal; driven by intense poverty, one ordinary man betrays the confidence of his good friend, and comes to deeply regret his actions. The tormented Gypo is played mainly for pity, and Victor McLaglen gives a powerful performance that betrays a lifetime of unsatisfying existence, culminating in one terrible decision that condemns him to an uneasy death. 'The Informer' was John Ford's first major Oscar success, winning a total of four awards (from six nominations), including Best Actor for McLaglen {who snatched the statue from the three-way favourites of 'Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)'}, Best Director and Best Screenplay for Dudley Nichols {who declined the award due to Union disagreements}. [[Nonetheless]] again, [[precocious]] morning television proves an [[precious]] [[resources]] for [[movie]] that I [[alternately]] [[should]] never have been able to [[trajectory]] down. [[For]] four o'clock in the morning, I stumbled out of bed to begin [[register]] 'The [[Squealer]] (1935),' my fourth [[cinematography]] from prolific American director John Ford, and an [[wondrous]] one at that. Set during the Irish [[Civilian]] [[Wars]] in 1922, the screenplay was adapted by Dudley [[Nicholls]] from the novel of the same name by [[Llam]] O'Flaherty. [[If]] he was born in the United States, and is most [[famous]] for his "Americana" [[imaging]], both of Ford's [[parent]] were Irish, which [[elucidate]] the director's decision to direct the film. [[Vittorio]] McLaglen plays Gypo Nolan, a brutish but well-meaning ruffian who [[informed]] on an [[ancient]] [[boyfriend]], Frankie McPhillip (Wallace Ford), in order to [[claims]] the £20 reward for his girlfriend, [[Katharine]] ([[Mrs]] Grahame). When Frankie is killed during his [[strived]] arrest, the Irish Republican Army, of which both Frankie and Gypo were [[member]], begins to [[examines]] the traitor behind the [[event]], [[any]] clue bringing them [[nearer]] and [[nearer]] to the [[authentic]] culprit.

Meanwhile, Gypo is plagued with [[blame]] for his friend's untimely [[mortality]], and descends into a bout of heavy-drinking that [[contenders]] [[Donate]] Birnam in 'The [[Outof]] Weekend (1945)' in its excessiveness. As Gypo drowns his sorrows in copious [[quantities]] of alcohol, [[stuck]] in a [[sadistic]] [[petit]] [[circling]] of [[doldrums]], his [[excessive]] [[expense]] [[apprehended]] the attention of the [[examining]] IRA [[member]]. [[Per]] the one [[moment]] in his [[vida]], Gypo [[found]] himself surrounded by [[stalkers]] ([[encompass]] an [[funny]] J.[[metres]]. Kerrigan), who [[eagerly]] clap him on the back and christen him "[[Emperor]] Gypo" for his physical might. [[Still]], it's obvious that these people feel no affection for the [[bloke]], and are [[mere]] showing him attention to [[exploited]] him for money. The additional £20 brought by Frankie's death could never buy Gypo an assembly of friends – indeed, in a bitter twist of [[mockery]], the money was only made possible by the betrayal and loss of one of his only good companions. A relatively simple fellow, Gypo could not possibly have fully considered the consequences of his actions, and is eventually offered forgiveness on account of his "not knowing what he was doing," but his foolishness must not go unpunished.

Criticism is occasionally levelled at Ford's film for its allegedly propagandistic support of a "terrorist" organisation. Though this stance obviously depends on one's personal views {I certainly don't know enough Irish history to pass judgement}, there's no doubt that the film portrays the Irish Republican Army as selfless, dedicated and impartial, a proud piece of Irish patriotism if I ever saw it. However, the main theme of the story is that of betrayal; driven by intense poverty, one ordinary man betrays the confidence of his good friend, and comes to deeply regret his actions. The tormented Gypo is played mainly for pity, and Victor McLaglen gives a powerful performance that betrays a lifetime of unsatisfying existence, culminating in one terrible decision that condemns him to an uneasy death. 'The Informer' was John Ford's first major Oscar success, winning a total of four awards (from six nominations), including Best Actor for McLaglen {who snatched the statue from the three-way favourites of 'Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)'}, Best Director and Best Screenplay for Dudley Nichols {who declined the award due to Union disagreements}. --------------------------------------------- Result 1827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Oh what a condescending movie! Set in Los Angeles, the center of the universe from the POV of Hollywood filmmakers, this [[movie]] [[tries]] to be a deep [[social]] [[commentary]] on contemporary American angst.

Stereotyped, smarmy characters of widely varying socio-economic backgrounds cross paths in their everyday, humdrum lives. The plot is disjointed and desultory. Numerous unimaginative plot contrivances keep the film going, like: a drive-by shooting, an abandoned [[baby]] left in the [[weeds]], a gang of [[thugs]] intimidating a [[lawyer]], a [[guy]] [[flying]] through the night [[sky]] over the city, a kid at summer [[camp]].

And through all these events, the one [[constant]] is the generous helping of sociological "insights" imparted through the [[dialogue]], as characters compare [[notes]] on their [[life]] experiences. One character tells another: "When you [[sit]] on the edge of that thing (the [[Grand]] Canyon), you [[realize]] what a [[joke]] we people are; ... those [[rocks]] are [[laughing]] at me, I could tell, me and my [[worries]]; it's real humorous to that [[Grand]] Canyon".

And another [[character]] pontificates about the [[meaning]] of it all: "There's a [[gulf]] in this [[country]], an ever [[widening]] [[abyss]] between the people who have stuff and the people who don't have ... it's like this [[big]] [[hole]] has [[opened]] up in the [[ground]], as [[big]] as the ... [[Grand]] Canyon, and what's [[come]] pouring out ... is an [[eruption]] of [[rage]], and the [[rage]] [[creates]] violence ...".

Aside from the [[horribly]] unnatural and [[forced]] [[dialogue]], aside from the [[shallow]], smarmy [[characters]], aside from the dumb plot, the story's [[pace]] is agonizingly [[slow]]. Acting is [[uninspired]] and perfunctory. The film's tone is [[smug]] and self-satisfied, in the script's [[contempt]] for [[viewers]].

This was a [[film]] project [[approved]] by Hollywood [[suits]] who fancy themselves as [[omnipotent]] gurus, [[looking]] down from on [[high]]. They [[think]] their film will be a [[startling]] [[revelation]] to us lowly, unknowing movie goers, [[eager]] to [[learn]] about the [[real]] [[meaning]] of American [[social]] [[change]]. Oh what a condescending movie! Set in Los Angeles, the center of the universe from the POV of Hollywood filmmakers, this [[film]] [[seeks]] to be a deep [[sociable]] [[commentaries]] on contemporary American angst.

Stereotyped, smarmy characters of widely varying socio-economic backgrounds cross paths in their everyday, humdrum lives. The plot is disjointed and desultory. Numerous unimaginative plot contrivances keep the film going, like: a drive-by shooting, an abandoned [[honey]] left in the [[herb]], a gang of [[bandits]] intimidating a [[attorney]], a [[boys]] [[hovering]] through the night [[skye]] over the city, a kid at summer [[campground]].

And through all these events, the one [[nonstop]] is the generous helping of sociological "insights" imparted through the [[dialogues]], as characters compare [[note]] on their [[vie]] experiences. One character tells another: "When you [[seated]] on the edge of that thing (the [[Vast]] Canyon), you [[reaching]] what a [[prank]] we people are; ... those [[shakes]] are [[giggling]] at me, I could tell, me and my [[fears]]; it's real humorous to that [[Great]] Canyon".

And another [[personage]] pontificates about the [[meanings]] of it all: "There's a [[abyss]] in this [[nationals]], an ever [[extending]] [[chasm]] between the people who have stuff and the people who don't have ... it's like this [[large]] [[orifice]] has [[opening]] up in the [[terrestrial]], as [[prodigious]] as the ... [[Prodigious]] Canyon, and what's [[arrived]] pouring out ... is an [[volcanic]] of [[fury]], and the [[fury]] [[generates]] violence ...".

Aside from the [[excruciatingly]] unnatural and [[compelled]] [[discussions]], aside from the [[superficial]], smarmy [[character]], aside from the dumb plot, the story's [[rhythm]] is agonizingly [[sluggish]]. Acting is [[unimaginative]] and perfunctory. The film's tone is [[petulant]] and self-satisfied, in the script's [[scorn]] for [[onlookers]].

This was a [[cinema]] project [[approving]] by Hollywood [[outfits]] who fancy themselves as [[almighty]] gurus, [[researching]] down from on [[highest]]. They [[reckon]] their film will be a [[dazzling]] [[epiphany]] to us lowly, unknowing movie goers, [[impatient]] to [[learns]] about the [[veritable]] [[meanings]] of American [[sociable]] [[shifts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1828 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] To watch this film from start to finish without bursting into [[laughter]] at some point requires almost an act of faith, as one has to keep saying to oneself, "it's old", "it's a classic", "be kind", not because the movie is so bad, but because at its [[best]] it's so good. This is one dated [[movie]]. It's also a [[classic]], if a [[tarnished]] one. I'm not [[inclined]] to [[laugh]] at people anyway, on [[principle]], and I get more than a little irritated when others do so. To make fun of The [[Informer]] to my mind is a [[little]] like giggling at an idiot savant when he [[dribbles]] his orange juice all over the tablecloth. Yes, one says to oneself, he is an idiot, and yet when he's on top of his [[game]] he is also a [[true]] savant. The same is true for The Informer, which is on occasion very dreadful indeed, and [[yet]] it boasts [[splendid]] photography, some fine acting, a [[wonderful]] score and a good, decent [[simple]] [[story]]. [[In]] the end, which I won't [[give]] away, [[politics]], religion and [[psychology]] [[come]] together, in a church, in such a [[way]] as to [[make]] the scene [[seem]] corny and over the top, and yet so is life sometimes. Uneducated people of simple faith behave differently from us (presumably brilliant) modern folks, and the scene isn't so much unbelievable (I buy it, but I know the [[Irish]]) as embarrassing. Yet people do behave that [[way]], they do [[say]] things like that. Not [[everyone]] is hip, and it [[may]] not even be desirable for everyone to be hip. Are people [[today]] so much superior to those of [[seventy]] or eighty [[years]] [[ago]]? And in what [[way]]? I don't think so. We're just [[different]]. [[Now]] go watch the movie. To watch this film from start to finish without bursting into [[smile]] at some point requires almost an act of faith, as one has to keep saying to oneself, "it's old", "it's a classic", "be kind", not because the movie is so bad, but because at its [[bestest]] it's so good. This is one dated [[kino]]. It's also a [[typical]], if a [[smudged]] one. I'm not [[angled]] to [[laughter]] at people anyway, on [[tenets]], and I get more than a little irritated when others do so. To make fun of The [[Snitch]] to my mind is a [[petite]] like giggling at an idiot savant when he [[dribbled]] his orange juice all over the tablecloth. Yes, one says to oneself, he is an idiot, and yet when he's on top of his [[gaming]] he is also a [[authentic]] savant. The same is true for The Informer, which is on occasion very dreadful indeed, and [[even]] it boasts [[funky]] photography, some fine acting, a [[excellent]] score and a good, decent [[easy]] [[histories]]. [[At]] the end, which I won't [[lend]] away, [[policies]], religion and [[psyche]] [[coming]] together, in a church, in such a [[manner]] as to [[deliver]] the scene [[seems]] corny and over the top, and yet so is life sometimes. Uneducated people of simple faith behave differently from us (presumably brilliant) modern folks, and the scene isn't so much unbelievable (I buy it, but I know the [[Ireland]]) as embarrassing. Yet people do behave that [[route]], they do [[said]] things like that. Not [[someone]] is hip, and it [[maggio]] not even be desirable for everyone to be hip. Are people [[yesterday]] so much superior to those of [[seventies]] or eighty [[ages]] [[earlier]]? And in what [[manner]]? I don't think so. We're just [[various]]. [[Presently]] go watch the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] What [[seemed]] at first just another introverted French [[flick]] [[offering]] no more than baleful [[sentiment]] [[became]] for me, on second [[viewing]], a [[genuinely]] [[insightful]] and [[quite]] [[satisfying]] presentation.

Spoiler of [[sorts]] follows.

[[Poor]] [[Cedric]]; he [[apparently]] didn't know what [[hit]] him. [[Poor]] [[audience]]; we were at first [[caught]] up in what seemed a [[really]] [[beautiful]] and romantic [[story]] only to be [[led]] back and forth into the dark [[reality]] of mismatch. These two [[guys]] just didn't belong [[together]] from their first [[ambiguous]] [[encounter]]. As much as [[Mathieu]] and [[Cedric]] were sexually [[attracted]] to each other, the absence of a deeper emotional [[tie]] made it [[impossible]] for [[Mathieu]], an intellectual being, to [[find]] [[fulfillment]] in sharing life with [[someone]] [[whose]] sensibilities were more [[attuned]] to [[carnival]] [[festivities]] and romps on the beach.

On a [[purely]] technical note, I loved the camera [[action]] in this [[film]]. [[Subtitles]] were [[totally]] [[unnecessary]], even [[though]] my French is "presque rien." I [[could]] watch it again without the [[annoying]] English [[translation]] and [[enjoy]] it [[even]] more. This was a polished, very professionally [[made]] motion [[picture]]. [[Though]] [[many]] scenes [[seem]] [[superfluous]], I [[rate]] it nine out of [[ten]]. What [[appeared]] at first just another introverted French [[gesture]] [[offered]] no more than baleful [[feeling]] [[came]] for me, on second [[visualizing]], a [[actually]] [[perceptive]] and [[rather]] [[satisfactory]] presentation.

Spoiler of [[genus]] follows.

[[Pauper]] [[Jerome]]; he [[visibly]] didn't know what [[slapped]] him. [[Pauper]] [[viewers]]; we were at first [[apprehended]] up in what seemed a [[genuinely]] [[brilliant]] and romantic [[conte]] only to be [[headed]] back and forth into the dark [[realist]] of mismatch. These two [[guy]] just didn't belong [[jointly]] from their first [[unclear]] [[confrontation]]. As much as [[Mads]] and [[Jerome]] were sexually [[attracts]] to each other, the absence of a deeper emotional [[tying]] made it [[unable]] for [[Matthew]], an intellectual being, to [[found]] [[realization]] in sharing life with [[anyone]] [[who]] sensibilities were more [[tailored]] to [[circus]] [[festivals]] and romps on the beach.

On a [[merely]] technical note, I loved the camera [[efforts]] in this [[movie]]. [[Subtitle]] were [[abundantly]] [[useless]], even [[if]] my French is "presque rien." I [[wo]] watch it again without the [[galling]] English [[translating]] and [[enjoying]] it [[yet]] more. This was a polished, very professionally [[brought]] motion [[photograph]]. [[Nevertheless]] [[various]] scenes [[appears]] [[useless]], I [[rates]] it nine out of [[tio]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This film screened last night at Austin's Paramount [[theater]] as part of the SXSW [[Film]] [[Festival]]. We were [[graced]] with the presence of [[director]] [[Mike]] Binder and stars Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle who [[took]] audience questions after the [[film]]. It is a remarkable and powerful film about what it is like to lose yourself and [[begin]] to find your [[way]] back. The performances are [[phenomenal]] and the story manages to be both [[tragic]] and funny in a [[way]] that is all too [[rare]]. (The trailer for the [[film]] tries a little too [[hard]] to [[emphasize]] the comedic aspects.)

This is a breakout role for [[Adam]] Sandler. [[While]] he has [[begun]] to transition to more [[dramatic]] [[roles]] with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a [[significant]] step forward for him as a dramatic [[actor]]. He [[deserves]] an [[Oscar]] nomination as he [[continues]] down to [[transition]] to more [[dramatic]] roles as [[Tom]] Hanks did and Jim [[Carrey]] is [[also]] doing. [[In]] this role, he [[seemed]] to be trying to channel Dustin [[Hoffman]] in Rain [[Man]]. [[Although]] playing an autistic [[man]] is certainly very [[different]] than Sandler's [[traumatized]] character, both [[characters]] for [[different]] [[reasons]] are [[trapped]] in their own [[worlds]] of child-like [[isolation]] and [[confusion]].

[[Don]] Cheadle's performance is [[less]] [[surprising]], but just as good. After [[Hotel]] Rwanda and [[Crash]], we've [[come]] to [[expect]] [[remarkable]] nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the [[qualities]] of sincerity and [[honesty]] that [[comes]] through in this role. But he, too, is [[also]] broken and struggling if not in the such [[profound]] [[ways]] as Sandler's [[character]]. Cheadle is struggling with [[difficulties]] in both his [[marriage]] and in his professional life as a [[dentist]]. [[Together]] the characters played by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the way that true friends [[often]] do (in a [[way]] that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have [[lost]] and trying to find again.

Reign over Me is one of the best [[major]] studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is [[almost]] another [[character]] in the plot is wonderful. The filming in the streets of New [[York]] - a [[city]] that suffered a [[great]] [[tragedy]] and has [[also]] had to [[heal]] itself - is [[also]] [[quite]] [[beautiful]]. The supporting roles by Jada Pinkett Smith, Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and [[Mike]] Binder himself are all quite good.

Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, [[healing]], male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is almost hypnotic as it draws you into the lives of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it [[made]] more character-driven charming films like Reign over Me. This film screened last night at Austin's Paramount [[drama]] as part of the SXSW [[Flick]] [[Celebratory]]. We were [[flattered]] with the presence of [[headmaster]] [[Mick]] Binder and stars Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle who [[taken]] audience questions after the [[cinema]]. It is a remarkable and powerful film about what it is like to lose yourself and [[begins]] to find your [[manner]] back. The performances are [[wondrous]] and the story manages to be both [[dire]] and funny in a [[camino]] that is all too [[few]]. (The trailer for the [[flick]] tries a little too [[difficult]] to [[highlight]] the comedic aspects.)

This is a breakout role for [[Adams]] Sandler. [[Although]] he has [[launches]] to transition to more [[noteworthy]] [[functions]] with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a [[cannot]] step forward for him as a dramatic [[actress]]. He [[deserve]] an [[Oskar]] nomination as he [[persisted]] down to [[transitions]] to more [[impressive]] roles as [[Tum]] Hanks did and Jim [[Kari]] is [[likewise]] doing. [[Onto]] this role, he [[looked]] to be trying to channel Dustin [[Hoffmann]] in Rain [[Men]]. [[Despite]] playing an autistic [[guy]] is certainly very [[disparate]] than Sandler's [[scarred]] character, both [[traits]] for [[several]] [[motivation]] are [[stuck]] in their own [[universe]] of child-like [[isolate]] and [[mess]].

[[Donated]] Cheadle's performance is [[lesser]] [[impressive]], but just as good. After [[Motel]] Rwanda and [[Crashes]], we've [[arriving]] to [[awaited]] [[dramatic]] nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the [[qualifications]] of sincerity and [[sincerity]] that [[arrives]] through in this role. But he, too, is [[similarly]] broken and struggling if not in the such [[deep]] [[avenues]] as Sandler's [[characters]]. Cheadle is struggling with [[difficulty]] in both his [[marries]] and in his professional life as a [[dentistry]]. [[Jointly]] the characters played by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the way that true friends [[frequently]] do (in a [[route]] that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have [[forfeited]] and trying to find again.

Reign over Me is one of the best [[sizable]] studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is [[hardly]] another [[trait]] in the plot is wonderful. The filming in the streets of New [[Yorke]] - a [[town]] that suffered a [[huge]] [[drama]] and has [[similarly]] had to [[cure]] itself - is [[apart]] [[rather]] [[admirable]]. The supporting roles by Jada Pinkett Smith, Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and [[Mich]] Binder himself are all quite good.

Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, [[heal]], male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is almost hypnotic as it draws you into the lives of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it [[accomplished]] more character-driven charming films like Reign over Me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once I watched The Tenant and interpreted it as a horror movie. It uses many of the tropes of the genre: the sinister apartment, suspicious neighbors, apparitions, mysteries, hallucinations. The life of the hero, Trelkovsky, seemed surrounded by evil, secret forces trying to drive him mad.

Last time I watched it I challenged this initial interpretation. If this movie is a horror movie, it's only horror in the sense that a Kafka novel is horror. In fact this movie can be understood on a literal level as a lonely man slowly becoming crazy without any external influence.

Polanski made in his career three movies dealing with madness: Repulsion, which I don't particularly like because the development of madness in the heroine never convinced me; Rosemary's Baby, in which the heroine is driven mad by evil forces; and The Tenant, which might be the best study of paranoia ever made in cinema.

Trelkovsky is a young man who rents an apartment in which a woman killed herself. He becomes obsessed with her and slowly starts becoming her: he wears her clothes, puts on makeup, talks like her. But is he being possessed by a spirit, or is he just letting his wild imagination get the best of him? It's this hesitation between what is real and imaginary, and which Polanski never resolves, that makes this such a fascinating movie. Many events in the movie can be attributed to the supernatural as easily as they can be to normal causes, and it's up to the viewer to decide what to believe in.

Although this is not my favorite Polanski movie, it is nevertheless a good example of his ability to create suspense and portray madness in very convincing terms. And technically speaking, it's a marvel too. Suffice to say he collaborates with film composer Philippe Sarde and legendary director of photography Sven Nykvist (Bergman's DP) in the making of this movie. A slow pacing and sometimes uninteresting segments may make this movie difficult to enjoy, but it's an experience nevertheless. --------------------------------------------- Result 1832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was two and a quarter excruciating hours. Someone please tell me what the point was?

I mean, I understand the historical setting. It's supposed to be about a ragtag group of Confederate bushwhackers (terrorists?) on the Missouri-Kansas frontier, taking revenge against all northern sympathizers and abolitionists during the U.S. Civil War. But aside from gratuitous violence there wasn't really much of a point to this movie. Perhaps it was a political statement? That war is really nothing much more than gratuitous violence? If that was the point it was done quite well, but I don't think that was the point. I think the producers really thought they were making a worthwhile movie here, but as far as I was concerned there was a complete lack of any plot. It seemed like I was watching a paperback novel come to life, with the characters looking like what you would see on the covers of such novels.

This movie should be burned along with some of the towns this gang torched! --------------------------------------------- Result 1833 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Full House was and still is a great show. It's a good show for people of all ages and is also a good family show. There really aren't any shows like it anymore. The kids are very cute and even though it's a bit cheesy, it's still good, especially for anyone who watched it when they were a kid. I would love to see the cast interviewed now. Anyone that would like to see interviews of the cast, kind of like a where are they now type thing for the special features of the DVD, should go to the Petition spot website and sign a petition titled Full House Reunion on DVD as there is a petition for this in hopes that the cast may want to do it. Yay for Full House! --------------------------------------------- Result 1834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This [[movie]] can be labeled as a study [[case]]. It's not just the fact that it denotes an [[unhealthy]] and non-artistic lust for [[anything]] that might be [[termed]] as caco-imagery. The [[author]] lives with the [[impression]] that his [[sanctimonious]] revolt against some generic and childishly termed social ills ("Moldavia is the most pauper [[region]] of Europe", "I don't believe one iota in the birds flu", "[[Romanian]] people steal because they are poor; Europeans steal because they are thieves") are more or less [[close]] to a [[responsible]] moral and artistic attitude - but he is sorely off-target!

What Daneliuc doesn't know, is that it's not [[enough]] to pose as a righteous [[person]] - you [[also]] need a modicum of professionalism, talent and [[intelligence]] to [[transpose]] this stance into an artistic [[product]]. Fatefully, "The [[Foreign]] Legion" shows as much acumen as a [[family]] video with Uncle Gogu drunkenly [[wetting]] himself in front of the guests. The [[script]] is chaotic and [[incoherent]], [[randomly]] bustling together sundry half-subjects, in an [[illiterate]] attempt to [[suggest]] some [[kind]] of a [[story]]. The [[direction]] is [[pathetically]] dilettante - the so-called "[[director]]" is [[unable]] to build up at least a [[mediocre]] mise-en-scene, his [[shots]] are annoyingly [[awkward]], and any sense of storytelling shines by [[total]] [[absence]]. (Of course, any comment is [[forced]] to [[stop]] at this level; it [[would]] be [[ridiculous]] to [[mention]] [[concepts]] as "cinematographic language", "[[means]] of [[expression]]" or "style"). The acting is [[positively]] "Cântarea României" ("Romania's Chant") level, with the [[exception]] of... paradoxically, the [[soccer]] goal-keeper Necula Raducanu, who is very natural, and Nicodim Ungureanu. Oana Piecnita seems to have a [[genuine]] [[freshness]], but she is [[compromised]] by the [[amateurish]] [[directions]] [[given]] by Daneliuc.

The most [[serious]] side of this [[offense]] to decent [[cinema]] is the fact that the [[production]] received a hefty [[financing]] from the national [[budget]], via C.N.C. (the National [[Cinematography]] Council). The fact that long-time-dead [[old]] dinosaurs [[like]] Daneliuc are [[still]] [[thirsty]] for the [[government]] udder is understandable (in a market-driven economy, they would be instantly eliminated through [[natural]] selection). But the corruption of the so-called "jury" that squanders the country's money on such ridiculously scabrous non-art, non-cinema and non-culture belongs to the criminal field. This [[filmmaking]] can be labeled as a study [[example]]. It's not just the fact that it denotes an [[unhygienic]] and non-artistic lust for [[algo]] that might be [[called]] as caco-imagery. The [[auteur]] lives with the [[feeling]] that his [[moralistic]] revolt against some generic and childishly termed social ills ("Moldavia is the most pauper [[districts]] of Europe", "I don't believe one iota in the birds flu", "[[Rumanian]] people steal because they are poor; Europeans steal because they are thieves") are more or less [[nearer]] to a [[answerable]] moral and artistic attitude - but he is sorely off-target!

What Daneliuc doesn't know, is that it's not [[sufficiently]] to pose as a righteous [[persona]] - you [[similarly]] need a modicum of professionalism, talent and [[intellect]] to [[transposed]] this stance into an artistic [[commodities]]. Fatefully, "The [[Foreigner]] Legion" shows as much acumen as a [[families]] video with Uncle Gogu drunkenly [[mooring]] himself in front of the guests. The [[screenplay]] is chaotic and [[counterintuitive]], [[casually]] bustling together sundry half-subjects, in an [[illiteracy]] attempt to [[suggests]] some [[sorts]] of a [[tale]]. The [[directorate]] is [[ridiculously]] dilettante - the so-called "[[headmaster]]" is [[impossible]] to build up at least a [[lackluster]] mise-en-scene, his [[punches]] are annoyingly [[tricky]], and any sense of storytelling shines by [[entire]] [[lacks]]. (Of course, any comment is [[obliged]] to [[halt]] at this level; it [[could]] be [[nonsense]] to [[mentioning]] [[notions]] as "cinematographic language", "[[modes]] of [[expressions]]" or "style"). The acting is [[favorably]] "Cântarea României" ("Romania's Chant") level, with the [[exemption]] of... paradoxically, the [[football]] goal-keeper Necula Raducanu, who is very natural, and Nicodim Ungureanu. Oana Piecnita seems to have a [[veritable]] [[coldness]], but she is [[jeopardized]] by the [[unprofessional]] [[directives]] [[awarded]] by Daneliuc.

The most [[weighty]] side of this [[crime]] to decent [[filmmaking]] is the fact that the [[productivity]] received a hefty [[financials]] from the national [[budgets]], via C.N.C. (the National [[Filmmaking]] Council). The fact that long-time-dead [[antigua]] dinosaurs [[iike]] Daneliuc are [[however]] [[lust]] for the [[administrations]] udder is understandable (in a market-driven economy, they would be instantly eliminated through [[naturel]] selection). But the corruption of the so-called "jury" that squanders the country's money on such ridiculously scabrous non-art, non-cinema and non-culture belongs to the criminal field. --------------------------------------------- Result 1835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Warning: mild [[spoilers]].

The [[story]] of Joseph Smith [[stands]] out as an [[amazing]] - even [[moving]] - episode in American history and World Religious history. This [[movie]] portrays events in the life of Joseph Smith, whom Mormons revere as the prophet of the restoration of the true [[Church]] of Jesus [[Christ]] on the earth. I've so far [[seen]] the movie twice in its first month of public showing.

Joseph Smith is shown first to be the youngest of a trio of brothers (Alvin, Hyrum & Joseph) who, at a very young age, needed an operation. The operation, done without our modern conveniences, was bloody and difficult. The scene [[helped]] to show the cohesiveness of the Smith family and the bonds between the brothers and between Joseph and his parents.

Joseph's religious confusion and subsequent praying which lead to what Mormons call the First Vision was [[interestingly]] portrayed. The face of Jesus is never shown, but you see the unmistakable nail marks in His hands. The rejection by religious leaders and many in his small New York community is sweetened at least slightly by Joseph's marriage to Emma.

This movie does not clearly map out the events of Mormon Church history, but merely jumps from scene to scene. This is not a critique - simply a note about the style.

The practice of tarring and feathering is shown, and it is especially dramatic and [[moving]] when Joseph delivers a sermon about the Savior's love with a scarred face from having recently been attacked.

The movie [[masterfully]] portrays [[simultaneously]] the [[joy]] and [[growth]] of Mormonism as an infant church, while at the same time the ever-deepening opposition that spread into the heights of local governments.

The film shows many scenes from Joseph's life, including a few beautiful moments portraying his relationship to Emma. An attempt is made to show the depth and complexity of Joseph's life, including his fierce love for his wife, his endless love for children, his wit, his courage in the face of filthy and dangerous opposition, his religious sentiments, and his compassion.

As Joseph and Hyrum ride to Carthage, never to return home alive, most of the characters from throughout the movie, whose lives had been touched by Joseph, are shown along the way, helping to reinforce what was already seen but setting up the final scene to be more powerful.

At the end, the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is portrayed, and moviegoers are left to ponder the events they just witnessed.

When I first watched the movie I assumed it was made by the Church to introduce Joseph Smith to non-members. I no longer think that is the case, although I hope the movie can do just that. As an insider, I find that the film is a celebration of Joseph and excellently reinforces the good things we already know about him. I am curious to see how outsiders will view the film - whether they will simply see it as propagandic, an epic story of an American religious man, or something else.

The film is beautifully shot, family friendly, moving and, hopefully, something good for everyone. That the events portrayed actually happened in these United States of America is interesting to ponder in light of the many aspects of our culture - including freedom of religious expression and respect (generally) for the law - we moderns take for granted. Warning: mild [[vandals]].

The [[history]] of Joseph Smith [[standing]] out as an [[fabulous]] - even [[relocating]] - episode in American history and World Religious history. This [[flick]] portrays events in the life of Joseph Smith, whom Mormons revere as the prophet of the restoration of the true [[Religious]] of Jesus [[Jesus]] on the earth. I've so far [[noticed]] the movie twice in its first month of public showing.

Joseph Smith is shown first to be the youngest of a trio of brothers (Alvin, Hyrum & Joseph) who, at a very young age, needed an operation. The operation, done without our modern conveniences, was bloody and difficult. The scene [[supporting]] to show the cohesiveness of the Smith family and the bonds between the brothers and between Joseph and his parents.

Joseph's religious confusion and subsequent praying which lead to what Mormons call the First Vision was [[suspiciously]] portrayed. The face of Jesus is never shown, but you see the unmistakable nail marks in His hands. The rejection by religious leaders and many in his small New York community is sweetened at least slightly by Joseph's marriage to Emma.

This movie does not clearly map out the events of Mormon Church history, but merely jumps from scene to scene. This is not a critique - simply a note about the style.

The practice of tarring and feathering is shown, and it is especially dramatic and [[shifting]] when Joseph delivers a sermon about the Savior's love with a scarred face from having recently been attacked.

The movie [[artfully]] portrays [[concurrently]] the [[glee]] and [[increase]] of Mormonism as an infant church, while at the same time the ever-deepening opposition that spread into the heights of local governments.

The film shows many scenes from Joseph's life, including a few beautiful moments portraying his relationship to Emma. An attempt is made to show the depth and complexity of Joseph's life, including his fierce love for his wife, his endless love for children, his wit, his courage in the face of filthy and dangerous opposition, his religious sentiments, and his compassion.

As Joseph and Hyrum ride to Carthage, never to return home alive, most of the characters from throughout the movie, whose lives had been touched by Joseph, are shown along the way, helping to reinforce what was already seen but setting up the final scene to be more powerful.

At the end, the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is portrayed, and moviegoers are left to ponder the events they just witnessed.

When I first watched the movie I assumed it was made by the Church to introduce Joseph Smith to non-members. I no longer think that is the case, although I hope the movie can do just that. As an insider, I find that the film is a celebration of Joseph and excellently reinforces the good things we already know about him. I am curious to see how outsiders will view the film - whether they will simply see it as propagandic, an epic story of an American religious man, or something else.

The film is beautifully shot, family friendly, moving and, hopefully, something good for everyone. That the events portrayed actually happened in these United States of America is interesting to ponder in light of the many aspects of our culture - including freedom of religious expression and respect (generally) for the law - we moderns take for granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 1836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Simply, one of the funiest movies i've ever seen. It's a parody of crime-life, parody of everything that represents the Chicago 1930.- There is no realy need to underestimate this movie because rating is under 5. Its a opinion of a mass, and mass is hypnotized. Who decide to watch it - it will regret, Who decide not to watch it - will regret more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I own Ralph Bakshis forgotten masterpiece Fire & Ice on an old OOP rental videotape.

Well for one thing, this is better than any other Conan-esque film you'll ever see. Sure, it's cheesy, but who cares? It stood the test of time, and the only way it started to look cheesy is in comparisons to modern fantasy epics like LOTR:FOTR (though I love that film.)

The plot goes like this: After a battle between Fire & Ice, a kings daughter is kidnapped by Jarols (Ice) subhuman creatures, while a sole survivor of a victimized village rescues her.

Yeah it doesn't sound as a original as Nurse Betty, but that's not the point. It is really to bring to life an interesting idea of a world of two enemies: Fire & Ice. And it succeeds.

As for the action scenes: superb. They are well handled, have terrific suspence, and have plenty of loud noises. Just check out the climatic battle, now THAT'S an ending!

The acting and dialogue: competent. Really. They aren't gonna be nominated for an Oscar, but they are OK and don't get on your nerves.

The animation is quite good. Shot on 3D and rotoscoped (I THINK), it looks pretty good. A lot of the backgrounds look really detailed and well drawn, and although the character designs feel a little 1-dimentional, they are OK.

Overall, this is a fine neglected little gem and will entertain you more than any of the superfical "entertainment". 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Okay]], so the [[first]] few seasons took a while to get going on the special effects [[way]], but from the [[beginning]], [[Hidden]] [[Frontier]] has [[given]] [[consistently]] [[good]] story lines and performances, and have [[always]] been [[willing]] to mistakes they've [[made]]. They [[advice]] people to [[see]] [[newer]] [[episodes]] [[first]], so they can [[see]] just how good the [[show]] is, and [[understand]] how much it has [[changed]] [[since]] the [[first]] [[episodes]]. The [[cast]] have a fantastic camaraderie and it [[shows]] on-screen.

The [[influx]] of [[guest]] [[actors]] who make their [[mark]] on the [[show]] and with [[fans]] attests also to the [[show]], as the [[story]] lines go from [[strength]] to strength. The show has [[pushed]] [[barriers]] with its [[various]] story lines - [[depression]], [[drug]] addiction and mainstream homosexuality - and these may have rubbed a few people the [[wrong]] [[way]], but that is what [[Star]] [[Trek]] is and was all about. It [[portrays]] those story lines in a smart and [[emotional]] way, [[dealing]] with them [[subtly]] and [[smoothly]].

Yes, they have [[used]] some [[characters]] from [[Trek]] [[history]], but they have [[done]] them justice - [[characters]] like Shelby, Lefler and Necheyev, [[vastly]] underused in the [[show]], had a rebirth in the [[New]] Frontier books, but they lost their sizzle after a while, when [[Peter]] David when more towards [[wild]] [[fantasy]] [[versus]] [[serious]] sci-fi, and HF [[shows]] those [[characters]] in a [[completely]] [[different]] light, which [[serves]] them better.

The site [[also]] [[allows]] [[fans]] to [[interact]] with chat rooms and forums and they can [[get]] to know the people [[involved]]. They [[release]] bloopers for [[every]] episode, so the [[fans]] can see what a [[laugh]] they have, because they are people doing it in their spare time, with a [[dedication]] that [[would]] [[make]] [[many]] professional actors wide-eyed in shock!

What this series, now drawing to a [[close]] after 7 years, has [[accomplished]] on such a [[limited]] amount of resources is [[nothing]] short of [[amazing]] - bringing people [[together]], inspiring others to do the same. HF will live for a [[long]] time after it [[ends]], as long as people still enjoy the [[reason]] it [[started]] in the first place. [[Verywell]], so the [[frst]] few seasons took a while to get going on the special effects [[route]], but from the [[launching]], [[Ulterior]] [[Border]] has [[yielded]] [[continually]] [[buena]] story lines and performances, and have [[permanently]] been [[desirous]] to mistakes they've [[effected]]. They [[consulting]] people to [[consults]] [[novel]] [[bouts]] [[firstly]], so they can [[consults]] just how good the [[illustrating]] is, and [[fathom]] how much it has [[amended]] [[because]] the [[frst]] [[bouts]]. The [[casting]] have a fantastic camaraderie and it [[illustrates]] on-screen.

The [[surge]] of [[invited]] [[actresses]] who make their [[brands]] on the [[illustrating]] and with [[followers]] attests also to the [[shows]], as the [[stories]] lines go from [[kraft]] to strength. The show has [[shoved]] [[obstruction]] with its [[assorted]] story lines - [[slump]], [[medicine]] addiction and mainstream homosexuality - and these may have rubbed a few people the [[mistake]] [[pathways]], but that is what [[Stars]] [[Hiking]] is and was all about. It [[describes]] those story lines in a smart and [[sentimental]] way, [[addressing]] with them [[finely]] and [[mildly]].

Yes, they have [[use]] some [[nature]] from [[Hike]] [[stories]], but they have [[doing]] them justice - [[features]] like Shelby, Lefler and Necheyev, [[extremely]] underused in the [[display]], had a rebirth in the [[Novel]] Frontier books, but they lost their sizzle after a while, when [[Pieter]] David when more towards [[feral]] [[utopia]] [[vs]] [[gravest]] sci-fi, and HF [[exhibitions]] those [[nature]] in a [[absolutely]] [[several]] light, which [[serving]] them better.

The site [[similarly]] [[allowed]] [[amateurs]] to [[communicate]] with chat rooms and forums and they can [[obtain]] to know the people [[participating]]. They [[released]] bloopers for [[any]] episode, so the [[amateurs]] can see what a [[laughs]] they have, because they are people doing it in their spare time, with a [[pledge]] that [[should]] [[deliver]] [[myriad]] professional actors wide-eyed in shock!

What this series, now drawing to a [[shuts]] after 7 years, has [[made]] on such a [[curtailed]] amount of resources is [[anything]] short of [[striking]] - bringing people [[jointly]], inspiring others to do the same. HF will live for a [[longer]] time after it [[culminates]], as long as people still enjoy the [[rationale]] it [[opened]] in the first place. --------------------------------------------- Result 1839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] After seeing the [[terrible]], [[terrible]], terrible BATMAN: DEAD END I [[knew]] I had to [[see]] this as [[soon]] as I [[heard]] about it.

Pressing play to view the [[trailer]] I thought I was in for another hideous short from what so-far looked like another bad wannabe film-maker trying to bring new depth to an existing character. But was instead greeted with a GREATLY put together trailer for a movie that sadly doesn't exist, as I would LOVE to see a finished movie even if it was only 30 minutes long.

WORLD'S FINEST makes up for BATMAN: DEAD END and then some.

I look forward to the next short! After seeing the [[abominable]], [[atrocious]], terrible BATMAN: DEAD END I [[overheard]] I had to [[seeing]] this as [[quickly]] as I [[overheard]] about it.

Pressing play to view the [[camper]] I thought I was in for another hideous short from what so-far looked like another bad wannabe film-maker trying to bring new depth to an existing character. But was instead greeted with a GREATLY put together trailer for a movie that sadly doesn't exist, as I would LOVE to see a finished movie even if it was only 30 minutes long.

WORLD'S FINEST makes up for BATMAN: DEAD END and then some.

I look forward to the next short! --------------------------------------------- Result 1840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] A [[repressed]] housewife (an annoying lisping Angie Dickinson, [[whose]] [[body]] double [[treats]]/horrifies us with an extreme [[closeup]] of her delicates) is sexually [[bored]] by her husband and decides to branch-out. This [[directly]] [[results]] in a string of [[murders]] that [[soon]] involve a high-class [[prostitute]] ([[Nancy]] Allen, [[clearly]] I am in the wrong [[business]] if SHE can [[bring]] [[home]] $600 a [[night]]) and her [[psychologist]] ([[Michael]] Caine). [[If]] you are going to watch De Palma rip off (excuse me, "[[pay]] homage to") Hitchcock, watch "[[Sisters]]" [[instead]] of this. "Dressed to [[Kill]]," while [[loaded]] with [[style]] and technical [[skill]], is one of the tackiest thrillers I have had the [[displeasure]] of [[sitting]] through. The [[plot]] is absurd and [[tired]]. It does [[feature]] some [[surprisingly]] effective [[jump]] scares and nasty graphic [[murder]] sequences that should [[please]] any [[horror]] fan, as [[long]] as they can [[get]] past the [[silly]] [[story]] [[line]], that [[must]] have been dated even in 1980. A [[suppressed]] housewife (an annoying lisping Angie Dickinson, [[who]] [[bodies]] double [[deals]]/horrifies us with an extreme [[turnoff]] of her delicates) is sexually [[drilled]] by her husband and decides to branch-out. This [[immediately]] [[conclusions]] in a string of [[homicide]] that [[swiftly]] involve a high-class [[prostitution]] ([[Juventus]] Allen, [[evidently]] I am in the wrong [[firms]] if SHE can [[bringing]] [[house]] $600 a [[nighttime]]) and her [[shrink]] ([[Michele]] Caine). [[Unless]] you are going to watch De Palma rip off (excuse me, "[[paid]] homage to") Hitchcock, watch "[[Siblings]]" [[alternatively]] of this. "Dressed to [[Murder]]," while [[loading]] with [[elegance]] and technical [[ability]], is one of the tackiest thrillers I have had the [[discontent]] of [[seated]] through. The [[intrigue]] is absurd and [[knackered]]. It does [[features]] some [[marvelously]] effective [[leap]] scares and nasty graphic [[homicide]] sequences that should [[invites]] any [[abomination]] fan, as [[largo]] as they can [[gets]] past the [[farcical]] [[conte]] [[bloodline]], that [[should]] have been dated even in 1980. --------------------------------------------- Result 1841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is a [[great]] documentary [[film]]. [[Any]] fan of [[car]] [[racing]] should own a copy of this [[outstanding]] film. [[Director]] "[[Stephen]] Low" did a [[great]] job,as well as the main [[stars]] of the [[film]], [[Father]] & [[Son]], Mario & Michael Andretti. The [[DVD]] [[looks]] & sounds [[amazing]]. And [[best]] of all it's IMAX! [[Great]] [[home]] theater test [[disc]]. This is a [[huge]] documentary [[movie]]. [[Every]] fan of [[motors]] [[races]] should own a copy of this [[wondrous]] film. [[Headmaster]] "[[Steven]] Low" did a [[large]] job,as well as the main [[star]] of the [[movie]], [[Fathers]] & [[Yarns]], Mario & Michael Andretti. The [[DVDS]] [[seems]] & sounds [[fantastic]]. And [[bestest]] of all it's IMAX! [[Grand]] [[house]] theater test [[discs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was [[NOT]] a [[good]] [[movie]]. I honestly [[cant]] say that I enjoyed this [[movie]] at all. Of course It is [[effective]] in its way of being a shocking, [[realistic]], twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I found it to be very [[boring]] (and not as gory as i [[hoped]]). And also I found that the torturers were very [[annoying]], when they [[talked]] and loughed trying to sound tough all the [[time]], that [[ruined]] it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX [[cos]] they are awesome. I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was [[NAH]] a [[buena]] [[cinematographic]]. I honestly [[becuase]] say that I enjoyed this [[filmmaking]] at all. Of course It is [[efficacious]] in its way of being a shocking, [[pragmatic]], twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I found it to be very [[dull]] (and not as gory as i [[desired]]). And also I found that the torturers were very [[exasperating]], when they [[mentioned]] and loughed trying to sound tough all the [[times]], that [[thrashed]] it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX [[koos]] they are awesome. --------------------------------------------- Result 1843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sarafina was a fun movie, and some of the songs were really great. Sarafina was very entertaining. I don't normally like music things like this, but the singing was not lame like it looked like on the box. The movie was useful for learning about history because it was an interesting perspective of the Soweto rioting of 1976. It showed you things from the perspective of the students in the rioting and showed you that they were real characters. Because you got to see them as real characters this makes you like them more as an audience, and makes you more sympathetic to them as totally the victims of the white government, who you can not sympathise with. The singing of the students is correct because we know from accounts that the students in the riot were singing and dancing before it became violent. The clothing of the students in Sarafina is very similar to the clothing shown in photos from Soweto. They made the movie actually in Soweto, which is why it looks very accurate in many parts. All these things make the film more accurate for someone using it to learn about aparthied. As viewers we must be critical of the way the history of Apartheid was presented. As I said before, you become sympathetic to the students - this makes it potentially less reliable and objective. Also, it changes some of the details from other accounts. In Sarafina it turns to chaos when the policeman comes into their classroom and shoots the students. The police and army were very aggressive at Soweto, but this is probably an exaggerated event. The police and army did shoot students, but there is not evidence of them going into schools and executing people like this. The fighting was more in the streets and had looting and crime. This is done in the movie probably to make you feel more sorry for the school students. The movie would have been more useful if it had some different information about aparthied. The teacher was arrested for being against the government, and the mum goes to work in a white persons house. But there is not any information about the government and why they were doing it or any details about the racist policies and laws. -By George S, Chris and Finlay --------------------------------------------- Result 1844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Having just recently re-viewed "Lipstick" for the first time in a few decades, I backed it with "Descent" even though I have heard more negative comments than good from other film friends with tastes as varied as mine.

It's interesting to contrast how the unique niche of the [[Rape]] Revenge [[movie]] has evolved in the past 32 years, from the full-on gore of "I Spit On Your Grave," to the tawdry sensationalism of "Lipstick," to the tasteful handling of the issue in "The Accused." But "Descent," [[though]] making some important points, never really offers us anything truly new in terms of revelatory meaning. No, "Descent" is so poorly made in terms of picture and sound quality that it detracts from any significant message it could hope to make --- a message that, when examined closely, isn't that groundbreaking.

I pretty much knew the plot going in. What I wanted to see *was* the "descent" or degeneration of Dawson's character. Being a big fan of Rosario's, I was anxious to see the layers being stripped away and her psyche being slowly twisted...you know, the kind of portrayal DeNiro brings to "Taxi Driver." Unfortunately, the script and the director/writer's choices don't provide any sort of believable transition.

The biggest point of [[failure]] is the second act. It became obvious what the filmmaker's intentions were for this segment of club-hopping, drug use, and obsession with big black stallion Adrian (every white boy's nightmare, natch) from a Q&A on the DVD, but this excursion into Dawson's character is never believably rendered. We don't know exactly what the hell she's doing half the time, what she's after, or why she's doing it. The poor quality of the audio/video again don't [[help]], but the sequence is just too [[damn]] long and [[pointless]]. It [[destroys]] any [[momentum]] and [[investment]] in the lead [[character]] set up during the otherwise exceptionally well-done first act. By the time we get to the finale, our interest has already waned.

One point of success that Dawson does point out in the Q&A is that by the end "revenge" scene we are pumped for retribution, then realize just how drawn-out and ugly the reality is. While that's certainly valid, it doesn't make the scene any more intriguing.

If you have the DVD, check out the deleted "classroom" scene. This is an excellent 8 minute plus outtake that crackles with energy and provocation (though all verbal) and really DOES show Dawson's slow crack-up materializing as she delightfully vivisects poor Francie Swift's prissy, condescending dorm counselor. If more expository scenes like this had been added and more of the middle third cut down, we might have an interesting psychological study of the impact of senseless acts of violence.

As the film stands in the final cut, though, all we get is what we've seen before, only in a more graphic rendering. So what? Having just recently re-viewed "Lipstick" for the first time in a few decades, I backed it with "Descent" even though I have heard more negative comments than good from other film friends with tastes as varied as mine.

It's interesting to contrast how the unique niche of the [[Raping]] Revenge [[filmmaking]] has evolved in the past 32 years, from the full-on gore of "I Spit On Your Grave," to the tawdry sensationalism of "Lipstick," to the tasteful handling of the issue in "The Accused." But "Descent," [[if]] making some important points, never really offers us anything truly new in terms of revelatory meaning. No, "Descent" is so poorly made in terms of picture and sound quality that it detracts from any significant message it could hope to make --- a message that, when examined closely, isn't that groundbreaking.

I pretty much knew the plot going in. What I wanted to see *was* the "descent" or degeneration of Dawson's character. Being a big fan of Rosario's, I was anxious to see the layers being stripped away and her psyche being slowly twisted...you know, the kind of portrayal DeNiro brings to "Taxi Driver." Unfortunately, the script and the director/writer's choices don't provide any sort of believable transition.

The biggest point of [[impossibility]] is the second act. It became obvious what the filmmaker's intentions were for this segment of club-hopping, drug use, and obsession with big black stallion Adrian (every white boy's nightmare, natch) from a Q&A on the DVD, but this excursion into Dawson's character is never believably rendered. We don't know exactly what the hell she's doing half the time, what she's after, or why she's doing it. The poor quality of the audio/video again don't [[pomoc]], but the sequence is just too [[jeez]] long and [[senseless]]. It [[devastate]] any [[dynamism]] and [[investors]] in the lead [[characters]] set up during the otherwise exceptionally well-done first act. By the time we get to the finale, our interest has already waned.

One point of success that Dawson does point out in the Q&A is that by the end "revenge" scene we are pumped for retribution, then realize just how drawn-out and ugly the reality is. While that's certainly valid, it doesn't make the scene any more intriguing.

If you have the DVD, check out the deleted "classroom" scene. This is an excellent 8 minute plus outtake that crackles with energy and provocation (though all verbal) and really DOES show Dawson's slow crack-up materializing as she delightfully vivisects poor Francie Swift's prissy, condescending dorm counselor. If more expository scenes like this had been added and more of the middle third cut down, we might have an interesting psychological study of the impact of senseless acts of violence.

As the film stands in the final cut, though, all we get is what we've seen before, only in a more graphic rendering. So what? --------------------------------------------- Result 1845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Most]] [[complaints]] I've [[heard]] of this film [[really]] [[come]] down to one [[thing]]: It isn't [[Versus]]. Yes, the cast and crew is basically the same. Yes, Kitamura rehashes a few shots in the fight scenes that come in the film's second half, but that's about where the [[similarities]] end. Versus takes place essentially all outside, showcasing Kitamura's ability to craft an interesting B-movie in natural locations. For [[Alive]], almost everything takes place inside. [[In]] small, cramped spaces. Here the art design is thrust into your [[face]], and [[WHAT]] art design it is! We are [[treated]] to [[several]] very [[intricate]] and interesting [[spaces]], and our characters are for the most part [[confined]] to those [[spaces]]. [[Also]] a [[key]] [[difference]] is that we don't get much [[action]] here until the end of the [[film]]. [[Versus]] was all about [[action]] and [[cool]], here a [[LOT]] more [[emphasis]] is put on [[characters]] and situation and messing with your mind. [[Because]] of this, Alive is a far more interesting [[film]] than [[Versus]]. You may not [[pop]] it in and go to a [[random]] scene to watch five or [[ten]] minutes of cool zombie bloodshed, but you will sit [[glued]] to the screen for [[nearly]] two hours [[watching]] he [[interaction]] of a few genuinely interesting characters.

I'm now ecstatic that I [[ordered]] the DVD [[despite]] some naysay. You should too! But be sure to [[realize]] this is a [[different]] animal from Versus - it's [[often]] slow, and requires a bit of thought to [[get]] the most out of it. I hope Media Blasters [[picks]] it up for [[subtitled]] R1 DVD [[release]]! [[Biggest]] [[complaint]] I've [[audition]] of this film [[genuinely]] [[arrived]] down to one [[stuff]]: It isn't [[Vs]]. Yes, the cast and crew is basically the same. Yes, Kitamura rehashes a few shots in the fight scenes that come in the film's second half, but that's about where the [[parallels]] end. Versus takes place essentially all outside, showcasing Kitamura's ability to craft an interesting B-movie in natural locations. For [[Viva]], almost everything takes place inside. [[For]] small, cramped spaces. Here the art design is thrust into your [[confront]], and [[WHAR]] art design it is! We are [[treating]] to [[numerous]] very [[convoluted]] and interesting [[sites]], and our characters are for the most part [[curtailed]] to those [[places]]. [[Moreover]] a [[imperative]] [[dispute]] is that we don't get much [[activity]] here until the end of the [[cinematography]]. [[Vs]] was all about [[efforts]] and [[cooling]], here a [[LOTS]] more [[concentrate]] is put on [[attribute]] and situation and messing with your mind. [[Since]] of this, Alive is a far more interesting [[movie]] than [[Against]]. You may not [[daddy]] it in and go to a [[haphazard]] scene to watch five or [[tio]] minutes of cool zombie bloodshed, but you will sit [[pasted]] to the screen for [[practically]] two hours [[staring]] he [[interact]] of a few genuinely interesting characters.

I'm now ecstatic that I [[instructed]] the DVD [[albeit]] some naysay. You should too! But be sure to [[realise]] this is a [[several]] animal from Versus - it's [[generally]] slow, and requires a bit of thought to [[gets]] the most out of it. I hope Media Blasters [[electing]] it up for [[captioned]] R1 DVD [[liberate]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1846 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ronald Colman gives an electrifying performance as Tony John, a Broadway actor who can't separate his offstage life from Shakespeare's Othello, the character he plays on stage....Two important scenes illustrate Tony's dilemma. The first one takes place in producer Max Lasker's office. Acting is a matter of talent for the practical-minded Lasker. But Donlan, Tony's friend, disagrees: "No, no. When you do it like Tony does it, it's much more. The way he has of becoming someone else every night...so completely. No, don't tell me his whole system isn't affected by it."....The other scene occurs in waitress Pat Kroll's apartment. Tony tells her his name is Martin. She thanks him. Then he says: "Or Paul. Hamlet. Joe. And maybe Othello."....When Tony begins rehearsing Othello, we learn that though he's trying to keep his real life separated from his stage life, "The part begins to seep into your life, and the battle begins. Reality against imagination." He can't keep the two separated: In his mind Pat is Desdemona and he's Othello, and he wrongly believes she has been unfaithful to him. He murders her....Colman's bravura performance, in a complex and difficult role, earned him 1947's Academy Award for Best Actor. Oscar nominations went to Ruth Gordon and Garson Kanin for Best Original Screenplay. Not to be overlooked is Milton Krasner's atomspheric cinematography. --------------------------------------------- Result 1847 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Why [[would]] a person go back to a person, who kicks them in the teeth, not once, not twice, but over and over again.

This [[film]] teaches us that in order to find love we must accept abuse (not just forgive it, but fully accept it). Gosh! No wonder my first relationship only lasted ten years. I [[obviously]] wasn't [[embracing]] my inner masochist.

As Bucatinsky's [[writing]] [[debut]], there are many [[wonderful]] aspects to this film; [[however]], in [[order]] to [[justify]] the reunion of Eli and Tom, more character development [[would]] have been [[helpful]]. We are never acquainted with Eli's masochism, in fact, we are led to believe that he is not a masochist, although Tom's psycho-emotional sadism is highly evident. Why [[could]] a person go back to a person, who kicks them in the teeth, not once, not twice, but over and over again.

This [[filmmaking]] teaches us that in order to find love we must accept abuse (not just forgive it, but fully accept it). Gosh! No wonder my first relationship only lasted ten years. I [[assuredly]] wasn't [[covering]] my inner masochist.

As Bucatinsky's [[write]] [[infancy]], there are many [[sumptuous]] aspects to this film; [[yet]], in [[orders]] to [[warranted]] the reunion of Eli and Tom, more character development [[could]] have been [[handy]]. We are never acquainted with Eli's masochism, in fact, we are led to believe that he is not a masochist, although Tom's psycho-emotional sadism is highly evident. --------------------------------------------- Result 1848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] There is only one problem with this website, you can't give a negative rating. Additionally a [[mate]] rated this as a D grade movie. I say he was being too nice. A piece of wood could show more emotion that the [[actors]] in this movie, and the money [[used]] to produce this [[movie]] would have been [[better]] used to [[start]] a fire. This is [[absolutely]] [[terrible]], 2 hours of life that anyone who [[endures]] this untalented bloodbath will never [[get]] back. After [[watching]] 5 minutes, myself and the boys [[wondered]] if [[sinking]] bulk heavies would make this anymore [[entertaining]]. Half a carto and a bottle of 151 later I [[finally]] [[found]] some of this G grade acting remotely [[funny]]. It's an [[insult]] [[upon]] this entire planet that the [[director]] [[thought]] [[anyone]] [[could]] [[find]] [[anything]] [[beneficial]] from this more, he should go and [[buy]] a [[rope]]. And to the actors in this flick, I hope you [[got]] [[paid]] well to be in this [[joke]] because I doubt you will ever [[work]] again. In summary I fine everyone in this movie 100 grand and 12 demerit points off your acting [[licence]]. There is only one problem with this website, you can't give a negative rating. Additionally a [[companion]] rated this as a D grade movie. I say he was being too nice. A piece of wood could show more emotion that the [[players]] in this movie, and the money [[utilizes]] to produce this [[filmmaking]] would have been [[best]] used to [[initiation]] a fire. This is [[fully]] [[horrific]], 2 hours of life that anyone who [[lingers]] this untalented bloodbath will never [[gets]] back. After [[staring]] 5 minutes, myself and the boys [[asked]] if [[wrecking]] bulk heavies would make this anymore [[amuse]]. Half a carto and a bottle of 151 later I [[lastly]] [[find]] some of this G grade acting remotely [[fun]]. It's an [[slur]] [[after]] this entire planet that the [[superintendent]] [[think]] [[everybody]] [[wo]] [[finds]] [[something]] [[favorable]] from this more, he should go and [[purchased]] a [[cord]]. And to the actors in this flick, I hope you [[did]] [[paying]] well to be in this [[travesty]] because I doubt you will ever [[collaborated]] again. In summary I fine everyone in this movie 100 grand and 12 demerit points off your acting [[licensing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] How sad there is no [[option]] to post a [[mark]] lower than 1. I [[watched]] this piece of [[nonsense]] and could [[barely]] believe what i was watching. Every single part of the film was [[awful]]. Music, acting, direction, story, everything, simply everything. I actually found myself laughing out [[loud]] at various points in the film. I particularly [[loved]] the [[bit]] where our hero is dashing through the hospital in [[soft]] focus slow motion, and knocks the clipboard out of the [[nurses]] hand, because, .............well. Just because. Product placement? Crucifix's (crucifi?) everywhere. [[If]] you are of a [[Christian]] persuasion and very easily [[satisfied]], you may like this movie. If you do like this movie, you really need to get out more. How sad there is no [[surrogates]] to post a [[markup]] lower than 1. I [[observed]] this piece of [[senseless]] and could [[hardly]] believe what i was watching. Every single part of the film was [[abysmal]]. Music, acting, direction, story, everything, simply everything. I actually found myself laughing out [[rowdy]] at various points in the film. I particularly [[worshiped]] the [[bite]] where our hero is dashing through the hospital in [[gentle]] focus slow motion, and knocks the clipboard out of the [[matron]] hand, because, .............well. Just because. Product placement? Crucifix's (crucifi?) everywhere. [[Though]] you are of a [[Cristian]] persuasion and very easily [[contented]], you may like this movie. If you do like this movie, you really need to get out more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1850 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This [[movie]] was the [[worst]] movie ever [[made]] on the [[planet]], I [[like]] BARNEY more than this [[movie]]. The [[graphics]] suck, half the movie is animated, the [[deaths]] suck, and over all, I was ready to SUE the people that [[made]] this [[movie]]![[PLEASE]] DO [[NOT]] WASTE HOURS OF YOUR [[LIFE]] WATCHING THIS MOVIE. The only good part was when the movie ******* [[ended]]! This [[movie]] is 50 percent Jurassic park, .1 percent Sabretooth, and 49.9 percent [[DUMB]]! [[Please]] do not waste your [[time]] watching this [[movie]], you will [[regret]] it.You [[want]] to know why this [[movie]] sucks? Well, the [[cover]] sucked, the graphics sucked, the blood looked ( I mean is) ketchup, the people [[tried]] to blow themselves up, the [[college]] [[students]] [[think]] there all that and can stand up to the animal. I mean, there was a 5 ft. [[tiger]] running straight at a [[woman]], she throws a [[spear]] at it from 100 ft away! WAIT TILL YOU CAN Actually HIT IT! The acting was [[horrible]] too. Jurrasic [[Park]] is [[actually]] a [[good]] [[movie]], and this just had to [[go]] and [[ruin]] it. This [[filmmaking]] was the [[meanest]] movie ever [[introduced]] on the [[planets]], I [[loves]] BARNEY more than this [[movies]]. The [[charts]] suck, half the movie is animated, the [[decease]] suck, and over all, I was ready to SUE the people that [[introduced]] this [[cinema]]![[INVITES]] DO [[NO]] WASTE HOURS OF YOUR [[VIDA]] WATCHING THIS MOVIE. The only good part was when the movie ******* [[completed]]! This [[filmmaking]] is 50 percent Jurassic park, .1 percent Sabretooth, and 49.9 percent [[SILLY]]! [[Invite]] do not waste your [[moment]] watching this [[filmmaking]], you will [[sadness]] it.You [[wanting]] to know why this [[filmmaking]] sucks? Well, the [[covers]] sucked, the graphics sucked, the blood looked ( I mean is) ketchup, the people [[attempting]] to blow themselves up, the [[academies]] [[student]] [[ideas]] there all that and can stand up to the animal. I mean, there was a 5 ft. [[tigre]] running straight at a [[girl]], she throws a [[lanza]] at it from 100 ft away! WAIT TILL YOU CAN Actually HIT IT! The acting was [[abysmal]] too. Jurrasic [[Playpen]] is [[indeed]] a [[alright]] [[film]], and this just had to [[going]] and [[wrack]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Shiner, [[directed]] by [[Christian]] Calson, centers [[around]] three "couples" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good [[start]] as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The [[couples]] break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being "harmlessly" stalked by a gay man.

The "het" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real [[purpose]] since the are so [[marginalized]]. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.

The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release [[grows]] as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not [[convincing]]. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't [[work]]. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.

The more interesting pair of the characters is the "stalker couple." Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.

I [[appreciate]] that Calson [[wanted]] to [[achieve]] a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.

He seems to have something to say. Shiner, [[oriented]] by [[Cristiano]] Calson, centers [[about]] three "couples" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good [[initiating]] as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The [[couple]] break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being "harmlessly" stalked by a gay man.

The "het" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real [[target]] since the are so [[sidelined]]. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.

The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release [[widens]] as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not [[persuasive]]. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't [[cooperation]]. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.

The more interesting pair of the characters is the "stalker couple." Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.

I [[appreciative]] that Calson [[desired]] to [[realize]] a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.

He seems to have something to say. --------------------------------------------- Result 1852 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a [[terrible]] production of Bartleby, though not, as the other reviewer put it because it is "unfilmable," but rather because this version does not maintain the spirit of the book. It tells the story, almost painfully so. Watching it, I [[could]] turn the pages in my book and follow along, which is not as much fun when dealing with an adaptation. Rather, see the 2001 version of Bartleby featuring Crispin Glover. That version, while humorous, brings new details to the film while maintaining the spirit of the novel. What's important is the spirit, not the minutiae of things like setting, character names, and costumes. The difference between these film versions is like night and day, [[tedious]] and hilarious. This version is a lesson as to what can go wrong if an adaptation is handled poorly, painful, mind-numbing schlock. This is a [[frightful]] production of Bartleby, though not, as the other reviewer put it because it is "unfilmable," but rather because this version does not maintain the spirit of the book. It tells the story, almost painfully so. Watching it, I [[did]] turn the pages in my book and follow along, which is not as much fun when dealing with an adaptation. Rather, see the 2001 version of Bartleby featuring Crispin Glover. That version, while humorous, brings new details to the film while maintaining the spirit of the novel. What's important is the spirit, not the minutiae of things like setting, character names, and costumes. The difference between these film versions is like night and day, [[monotonous]] and hilarious. This version is a lesson as to what can go wrong if an adaptation is handled poorly, painful, mind-numbing schlock. --------------------------------------------- Result 1853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cuban Blood is one of those sleeper films that has a lot to say about life in a very traditional way. I actually watched it while sailing around Cuba on a western Caribbean cruise. It details the life of an 11 year old boy in a small town in Cuba in 1958 and 1959 during the revolution. Not much time is spent on the revolution until the very end, when the Socialist regime came and took the property of the boy's father. The majority of the film is the boy's coming of age and the relationships that arise in a small town where everyone knows everyone else. There are some powerful scenes that everyone can relate to. A class A film with fine acting and directing. This is a film that tells a story with no special effects or grand schemes or real twists. It is a film about people and their lives, their mistakes, and their triumphs. A good film worth watching several times annually. --------------------------------------------- Result 1854 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] "Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make [[steel]] and invent complex machines". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't [[ruin]] this [[great]] piece by your [[simple]] mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities. "Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make [[stahl]] and invent complex machines". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't [[vandalize]] this [[wondrous]] piece by your [[uncomplicated]] mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities. --------------------------------------------- Result 1855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is so bad and gets worse in every imaginable fashion. Its not just the poor acting and script nor is it the lame and perverse time one wastes on watching it. What really puts this film in my hall of shame is the apparent struggling that the writers and producers do with the film to try and make it funny. The actress replacing Jean Reno's descendant is to old and learned her lesson in the first film so they add a new girl who is to be married. Nearly all of the original extras and gags return however this time makes me want to ripe my eyes out of my sockets because it's a waste of perfectly good film. The torture of the constant camera cuts and shots in any scene in this movie can put the viewer into violent convolutions. This second film takes the successful original and drags it out of its coffin and parades the corpse out in the public square and perversely degrades not only the original idea and its legacy but our intelligence as well. This film unlike the spruce goose could not fly for it had no plot in the principals returning for a 'necklace'. No script since it was apparently written and added to daily. No attention to camera or shots in mind. Poor lighting and special effects done for the sake of doing so. This film would not even pass for a student film in basic Film 101. How this pile got through no one can tell. It was a big loosing investment and it appears that no one had the strength to put this unnatural cruel mistake out of our miseries. This movie has one good part ...its END! This film is my #1 worst film of all time, finally "Howard The Duck" is no longer the goose. --------------------------------------------- Result 1856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of my favourite "domestic" movies. I don't know if there is any person in our country who hasn't seen this movie! It's funny, and sad at some moments...I don't know how did people around the world (who had opportunity to watch it) accept this movie, because you have to know some moments in our serbian history and character of Serbs in the first half of the 20th century, to be able to understand it! But as I see here, there is somebody from Canada who watched it...and he liked it.

I think that I'll try to put all good quotes from the movie on this site, but first to find out how to do that...

Cheers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1857 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, you know the rest! This has to be the worst movie I've seen in a long long time. I can only imagine that Stephanie Beaham had some bills to pay when taking on this role.

The lead role is played by (to me) a complete unknown and I would imagine disappeared right back into obscurity right after this turkey.

Bruce Lee led the martial arts charge in the early 70's and since then fight scenes have to be either martial arts based or at least brutal if using street fighting techniques. This movie uses fast cuts to show off the martial arts, however, even this can't disguise the fact that the lady doesn't know how to throw a punch. An average 8 year old boy would take her apart on this showing.

Sorry, the only mystery on show here is how this didn't win the golden raspberry for its year. --------------------------------------------- Result 1858 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the first Jean Renoir Silent film I have watched and perhaps rightly so since it is generally regarded to be his best, besides being also his first major work. Overall, it is indeed a very assured and technically accomplished film which belies the fact that it was only Renoir’s sophomore effort. For fans of the director, it is full of interesting hints at future Renoir movies especially THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID (1946) and THE GOLDEN COACH (1952) – in its depiction of a lower class femme fatale madly desired by various aristocrats who disgrace themselves for her – but also THE RULES OF THE GAME (1939) – showing as it does in one sequence how the rowdy servants behave when their masters' backs are turned away from them – and FRENCH CANCAN (1955) – Nana is seen having a go at the scandalous dance at one point. Personally, I would say that the film makes for a respectable companion piece to G.W. Pabst’s PANDORA’S BOX (1928), Josef von Sternberg’s THE BLUE ANGEL (1930) and Max Ophuls’ LOLA MONTES (1955) in its vivid recreation of the sordid life of a courtesan.

Having said all that, the film was a resounding critical and commercial failure at the time of its release – a “mad undertaking” as Renoir himself later referred to it in his memoirs which, not only personally cost him a fortune (he eventually eased the resulting financial burden by selling off some of his late father’s paintings), but almost made him give up the cinema for good! Stylistically, NANA is quite different from Renoir’s sound work and owes a particular debt to Erich von Stroheim’s FOOLISH WIVES (1922), a film Renoir greatly admired – and, on a personal note, one which I really ought to revisit presto (having owned the Kino DVD of it and the other von Stroheims for 4 years now). Anyway, NANA is certainly not without its flaws: a deliberate pace makes itself felt during the overly generous 130 minute running time with some sequences (the horse race around the mid-point in particular) going on too long.

The overly mannered acting style on display is also hard to take at times – particularly that of Catherine Hessling’s Nana and Raymond Guerin-Catelain’s Georges Hugon (one of her various suitors)…although, technically, they are being their characters i.e. a bad actress (who takes to the courtesan lifestyle when she is booed off the stage) and an immature weakling, respectively. However, like Anna Magnani in THE GOLDEN COACH, Hessling (Renoir’s wife at the time, by the way) is just not attractive enough to be very convincing as “the epitome of elegance” (as another admirer describes her at one stage) who is able to enslave every man she meets. Other notables in the cast are “Dr. Caligari” himself, Werner Krauss (as Nana’s most fervent devotee, Count Muffat), Jean Angelo (as an initially skeptical but eventually tragic suitor of Nana’s) and future distinguished film director Claude Autant-Lara (billed as Claude Moore and also serving as art director here) as Muffat’s close friend but who is secretly enamored with the latter’s neglected wife!

The print I watched – via Lionsgate’s “Jean Renoir 3-Disc Collector’s Edition” – is, for the most part, a lovingly restored and beautifully-tinted one which had been previously available only on French DVD. Being based on a classic of French literature (by Emile Zola, no less), it cannot help but having been brought to the screen several times and the two most notable film versions are Dorothy Arzner’s in 1934 (with Anna Sten and Lionel Atwill and which I own on VHS) and Christian-Jaque’s in 1955 (with Martine Carol and Charles Boyer, which I am not familiar with). --------------------------------------------- Result 1859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Okay, [[note]] to the people that put together these [[horror]] acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am [[grateful]] and I [[hugely]] support the [[initiative]], but … have you even watched the [[films]] before [[selecting]] them as [[part]] of the [[collection]]? When I [[purchased]] the Boris Karloff [[collection]] there were [[several]] [[films]] in which the [[star]] only [[played]] a [[supportive]] and unessential role ("[[Tower]] of London", "The [[Strange]] [[Door]]"). "The [[Invisible]] Ray", [[however]], is [[part]] of the Bela Lugosi [[collection]] and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This [[actually]] would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection [[instead]]! Bela Lugosi's [[character]] is [[quite]] [[possibly]] the most good-natured and earnest one he ever [[portrayed]] in his [[entire]] [[career]] and [[good]] old Karloff [[actually]] plays the [[mad]] and dangerously obsessed [[scientist]] here. "The Invisible Ray" [[features]] three [[main]] [[chapters]]. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and [[demands]] quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are [[fundamental]] for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a [[couple]] of [[eminent]] [[colleagues]] (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he [[managed]] to capture [[extraterrestrial]] [[rays]] inside a self-manufactured [[device]]. The scientists are [[sincerely]] impressed with his [[work]] and invite Rukh and his [[lovely]] [[wife]] Diane along for an expedition in the [[heart]] of Africa. There Dr. Rukh [[isolates]] himself from the group, discovers the [[essential]] [[element]] "[[Radium]] X" to [[complete]] his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the [[best]] and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with [[ingenious]] gimmicks (melting statues) and a [[surprising]] climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, [[convinced]] the others are out to steal his [[discovery]] and [[even]] his life, he intends to eliminate them using his [[deadly]] touch. The narrative structure of "The Invisible [[Ray]]" sounds [[rather]] complicated, but the [[film]] is [[easy]] to follow and [[entertaining]]. The [[story]] is [[rather]] far-fetched but [[nevertheless]] [[compelling]] and [[director]] Lambert Hillyer [[provides]] several moments of sheer [[suspense]]. Boris Karloff is [[truly]] [[fantastic]] and so is Lugosi, even [[though]] he [[deserved]] to have a [[little]] more screen time. [[Their]] scenes [[together]] are the [[highlights]] of the film, along with the [[funky]] [[images]] of the glowing Boris. Okay, [[remark]] to the people that put together these [[terror]] acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am [[appreciate]] and I [[terribly]] support the [[efforts]], but … have you even watched the [[cinema]] before [[elected]] them as [[parties]] of the [[compiling]]? When I [[acquiring]] the Boris Karloff [[collections]] there were [[numerous]] [[movie]] in which the [[superstar]] only [[accomplished]] a [[positive]] and unessential role ("[[Torre]] of London", "The [[Weird]] [[Stargate]]"). "The [[Stealth]] Ray", [[instead]], is [[parties]] of the Bela Lugosi [[collect]] and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This [[indeed]] would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection [[however]]! Bela Lugosi's [[nature]] is [[rather]] [[potentially]] the most good-natured and earnest one he ever [[depicted]] in his [[whole]] [[quarry]] and [[alright]] old Karloff [[indeed]] plays the [[madman]] and dangerously obsessed [[scholars]] here. "The Invisible Ray" [[feature]] three [[principal]] [[sections]]. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and [[requiring]] quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are [[pivotal]] for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a [[couples]] of [[famous]] [[fellow]] (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he [[administering]] to capture [[exotic]] [[streaks]] inside a self-manufactured [[appliances]]. The scientists are [[frankly]] impressed with his [[jobs]] and invite Rukh and his [[nice]] [[women]] Diane along for an expedition in the [[heartland]] of Africa. There Dr. Rukh [[isolating]] himself from the group, discovers the [[fundamental]] [[ingredients]] "[[Diode]] X" to [[finished]] his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the [[finest]] and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with [[crafty]] gimmicks (melting statues) and a [[uncanny]] climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, [[persuaded]] the others are out to steal his [[discoveries]] and [[yet]] his life, he intends to eliminate them using his [[fatal]] touch. The narrative structure of "The Invisible [[Gleam]]" sounds [[comparatively]] complicated, but the [[kino]] is [[easier]] to follow and [[entertain]]. The [[history]] is [[fairly]] far-fetched but [[albeit]] [[convincing]] and [[headmaster]] Lambert Hillyer [[prescribes]] several moments of sheer [[wait]]. Boris Karloff is [[honestly]] [[wondrous]] and so is Lugosi, even [[albeit]] he [[deserve]] to have a [[tiny]] more screen time. [[Hun]] scenes [[jointly]] are the [[underline]] of the film, along with the [[wondrous]] [[image]] of the glowing Boris. --------------------------------------------- Result 1860 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] While rehearing Carmen of Bizet, the middle-aged choreographer Antonio (Antonio Gades) brings the sexy Carmen (Laura del Sol) to [[perform]] the lead role. Antonio falls in love for Carmen, who is an independent and seductive woman incapable to accept a possessive love. When Carmen has an affair with another dancer, Antonio is [[consumed]] by his jealousy like D. José in the original opera, entwining fiction with reality.

"Carmen" is another [[great]] [[movie]] of Carlos Saura's trilogy dedicated to the Flamenco dance. The dramatic love story is developed with the lives of the artists entwined with the characters they are rehearsing, and many times is not absolutely clear whether what is happening is reality (with the dancers) or fiction (of the play). Paco de Lucia is another [[attraction]] of this original version of the famous Bizet's opera, which is based on the novel of Prosper Mérimée. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Carmen" While rehearing Carmen of Bizet, the middle-aged choreographer Antonio (Antonio Gades) brings the sexy Carmen (Laura del Sol) to [[fulfill]] the lead role. Antonio falls in love for Carmen, who is an independent and seductive woman incapable to accept a possessive love. When Carmen has an affair with another dancer, Antonio is [[eaten]] by his jealousy like D. José in the original opera, entwining fiction with reality.

"Carmen" is another [[wondrous]] [[cinematography]] of Carlos Saura's trilogy dedicated to the Flamenco dance. The dramatic love story is developed with the lives of the artists entwined with the characters they are rehearsing, and many times is not absolutely clear whether what is happening is reality (with the dancers) or fiction (of the play). Paco de Lucia is another [[attractiveness]] of this original version of the famous Bizet's opera, which is based on the novel of Prosper Mérimée. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Carmen" --------------------------------------------- Result 1861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] This is going to be the most [[useless]] comment I have ever put down, but [[yet]] I [[must]] do it to [[warn]] you about the [[atrocity]] to [[cinema]] that "Freddy's [[Dead]]" is. It is not only the very [[worst]] chapter of the Nightmare [[series]], but is right up there with the [[worst]] horror sequel of all [[time]]! It was boring, [[pointless]], and [[nearly]] death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top [[CORNY]] [[kills]] are [[enough]] to drive this "[[film]]" into the [[ground]]. [[However]], it doesn't stop there, just [[add]] [[bad]] acting, a [[terrible]] script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping [[pile]] of guano! It's no wonder why Freddy, as [[always]] [[played]] by [[Robert]] Englund, has [[made]] two postmortem [[appearances]]. I [[would]] too if I went out like that. This is a [[strictly]] fans only movie, don't stare at our [[shame]]. This is going to be the most [[superfluous]] comment I have ever put down, but [[again]] I [[needs]] do it to [[warns]] you about the [[cruelty]] to [[filmmaking]] that "Freddy's [[Dying]]" is. It is not only the very [[pire]] chapter of the Nightmare [[serials]], but is right up there with the [[meanest]] horror sequel of all [[period]]! It was boring, [[vain]], and [[almost]] death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top [[DORKY]] [[kill]] are [[adequate]] to drive this "[[filmmaking]]" into the [[overland]]. [[Still]], it doesn't stop there, just [[summing]] [[unfavourable]] acting, a [[abysmal]] script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping [[battery]] of guano! It's no wonder why Freddy, as [[constantly]] [[effected]] by [[Roberta]] Englund, has [[introduced]] two postmortem [[phenomena]]. I [[could]] too if I went out like that. This is a [[tightly]] fans only movie, don't stare at our [[pity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1862 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[College]] [[students]], who are clearing out a condemned [[dormitory]], are [[stalked]] by an elusive [[killer]].

The Dorm That Dripped Blood ([[aka]] [[Pranks]]) is a bit of a mixed [[bag]] for slasher fans. The [[movies]] production [[values]] are [[pretty]] low and the [[story]] for the most part is pretty [[routine]], there's even a [[creepy]] [[bum]] hanging around for a red herring. In fact [[much]] of the story's build-up is [[pretty]] forgettable, [[save]] for one or two [[brutal]] [[murders]]. But the movie is [[really]] [[made]] [[better]] by its surprisingly intense climax (in an atmospheric [[setting]]) and one [[fairly]] bold, unconventional conclusion.

The cast is [[lackluster]] for the most [[part]]. [[Stephen]] Sachs is the best of the lot as he does a pretty [[nice]] turn in character. [[Also]] [[look]] for a [[young]] Daphne Zuniga as an ill-fated student.

Over all this is a pretty standard B slasher effort, but the finale is well worth savoring and for this viewer [[saved]] the movie from being a complete ho-hum.

** out of **** [[Academia]] [[schoolboys]], who are clearing out a condemned [[dorm]], are [[harassed]] by an elusive [[murderer]].

The Dorm That Dripped Blood ([[alias]] [[Adventures]]) is a bit of a mixed [[baggage]] for slasher fans. The [[films]] production [[valuing]] are [[belle]] low and the [[saga]] for the most part is pretty [[normal]], there's even a [[terrifying]] [[drifter]] hanging around for a red herring. In fact [[very]] of the story's build-up is [[belle]] forgettable, [[saves]] for one or two [[ruthless]] [[murder]]. But the movie is [[truly]] [[effected]] [[best]] by its surprisingly intense climax (in an atmospheric [[settings]]) and one [[rather]] bold, unconventional conclusion.

The cast is [[lifeless]] for the most [[party]]. [[Stephane]] Sachs is the best of the lot as he does a pretty [[pleasurable]] turn in character. [[Moreover]] [[gaze]] for a [[youthful]] Daphne Zuniga as an ill-fated student.

Over all this is a pretty standard B slasher effort, but the finale is well worth savoring and for this viewer [[rescues]] the movie from being a complete ho-hum.

** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There were a lot of 50's sci-fi movies. They were big draws for the Drive-in theaters. A lot of them were crappy even back then. This movie and 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' stand out, and both have aged well in their own way. From the very beginning with its eerie theremin musical score (which still sounds weird since theremins are hardly ever used) Forbidden Planet takes you where no man has gone before. Speaking of Star Trek there's so much material in this film that got into Star Trek TOS its like a pilot for the series; from the interactive captain/first mate/doctor, the mad scientist, alien beings, babe in short skirt, computer intelligence; it is all de rigeur now but this was the first of its kind. Besides, it has good acting and well-done artwork which even today evokes a certain awe at the imagery. Consider how the huge Krell machine is successfully depicted with some real depth. I saw this as a kid (at a drive-in :0)when it was a new movie and it scared me. Of course every movie that was even vaguely scary did back then but I remember being real worried about the invisible monster. Forbidden Planet is a movie a sci-fi fan can watch several times and find something new with each viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] ...but the actress playing the daughter just doesn't come [[across]] as [[credible]].

It doesn't [[work]] for me when I [[see]] an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have [[suggested]] that this is one of the messages of this film, that [[children]] may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the [[casting]] as it is in this film, it just doesn't [[work]] for me.

you [[might]] want to [[check]] other comments to find out what this film is actually about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.

i [[agree]] that the premise for this [[film]] is [[beautiful]] [[though]] - I wish another director would try to pick up this story again. ...but the actress playing the daughter just doesn't come [[during]] as [[plausible]].

It doesn't [[cooperation]] for me when I [[seeing]] an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have [[recommends]] that this is one of the messages of this film, that [[enfant]] may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the [[cast]] as it is in this film, it just doesn't [[collaboration]] for me.

you [[conceivably]] want to [[audits]] other comments to find out what this film is actually about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.

i [[concur]] that the premise for this [[filmmaking]] is [[sumptuous]] [[despite]] - I wish another director would try to pick up this story again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1865 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of my favorite movies, with a very nostalgic ending. The movie is about the Sullivan family, obviously Michael Sullivan (the father) is one of the main members of the mafia, the killer to say it this way, and an expert one. One of the kids wants to know the work of his father (a terrible mistake), so he hides on his father's car and well, he sees Tom Hanks in action to say it this way.

Mafia doesn't rules, in Mafia nobody wins, when they want you out, they take you out. Of course you can see anyone who works at the mafia with a giant house, the best car in the world, whatever you like, but make a wrong work, or make something your "boss" doesn't want, and you're fired, and killed.

You can see what I mean in the movie, Sullivan Jr. sees something he didn't had to see, and well, almost all his family gets killed for that "wrong thing" his son did. The movie is really entertaining, you see how the Sullivan's live after being chased by the mafia, or kinda of that.

This movie is kinda of sad, shows us about revenge, those dirty works people do, almost everything you like. Hopefully the guy is reading this comment doesn't works for the mafia, and if you work at the mafia make yourself a favor and get the hell out of the country before you get killed by your boss and their workers.

This movie receives: 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Wracked with [[guilt]] after a lot of things [[felt]] [[apart]] on that ledge, an ace mountain rescue climber Gabriel Walker (Stallone) comes back for his girlfriend Jessie (Janine Turner), while over the cloudy skies where the weather looks a bit threatening, a spectacularly [[precarious]] mid-air hijacking goes wrong and $100 million taken from a Treasury Department plane get lost in the middle of nowhere followed by a crash landing…

Stranded off the snowy peaks, and needing mountain guides to win back the stolen cash, the high-trained hikers make an emergency call asking the help of a rescue unit…

Unfortunately, Gab and Hall (Michael Rooker) have to team up to arrive at the scene of the crash unaware that the distress call was a fake, and a bunch of merciless terrorists led by a psychotic (John Lithgow),are waiting for them only to find out a way off the stormy mountain with the dumped cases of money…

With [[breathtaking]] shots, vertiginous scenery, dizzying heights, perilous climbs, freezing temperatures, "Cliffhanger" is [[definitely]] Stallone's [[best]] action adventure movie… Wracked with [[culpa]] after a lot of things [[smelled]] [[moreover]] on that ledge, an ace mountain rescue climber Gabriel Walker (Stallone) comes back for his girlfriend Jessie (Janine Turner), while over the cloudy skies where the weather looks a bit threatening, a spectacularly [[unsteady]] mid-air hijacking goes wrong and $100 million taken from a Treasury Department plane get lost in the middle of nowhere followed by a crash landing…

Stranded off the snowy peaks, and needing mountain guides to win back the stolen cash, the high-trained hikers make an emergency call asking the help of a rescue unit…

Unfortunately, Gab and Hall (Michael Rooker) have to team up to arrive at the scene of the crash unaware that the distress call was a fake, and a bunch of merciless terrorists led by a psychotic (John Lithgow),are waiting for them only to find out a way off the stormy mountain with the dumped cases of money…

With [[exciting]] shots, vertiginous scenery, dizzying heights, perilous climbs, freezing temperatures, "Cliffhanger" is [[surely]] Stallone's [[better]] action adventure movie… --------------------------------------------- Result 1867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[film]], along with WESTFRONT 1918, are my [[favorite]] Pabst-directed [[films]] and I enjoyed them more than his much more [[famous]] [[films]] which starred Louise [[Brooks]] (such as PANDORA'S BOX). It's [[probably]] because both are very [[similar]] to the Neo-Realist [[films]] that the Italians [[perfected]] in the 1940s and 50s. This [[style]] film called for [[using]] non-actors (just [[typical]] folks) in [[everyday]] [[settings]] in [[order]] to [[create]] [[intensely]] [[involving]] and [[realistic]] [[films]].

[[In]] this case, the film is about French and German [[coal]] [[miners]], so [[appropriately]], the people in the roles [[seem]] like miners--not actors. The central [[conflict]] as the [[film]] [[begins]] is that there is a [[huge]] [[mine]] located on the Franco-German [[border]]. Instead of one [[big]] [[mine]], it is [[divided]] at the [[border]] and German workers are not welcome in the French [[mine]], despite there being [[greater]] unemployment in [[Germany]]. This, [[language]] [[differences]] ([[illustrated]] wonderfully in a [[dance]] hall scene) and WWI conspire to [[create]] a [[huge]] rift between the factions--resulting in a WE [[vs]]. THEY mentality. Later, an [[explosion]] causes a [[huge]] collapse in the French and the Germans [[refuse]] to sit back and do nothing. Risking their own lives, they [[prove]] that there is [[true]] comradeship between miners and men in general.

The film is a [[strong]] [[criticism]] of xenophobia and tried, in [[vain]], to get the German audiences to [[see]] the futility of war and hatred. It was a gorgeously [[moving]] film with some of the scariest and claustrophobic [[images]] I have ever [[seen]]. Considering history, though, the film's impact was minimal at best. It's a real shame, as like this one, WESTFRONT 1918, JÁACCUSE (Gance) and [[ALL]] [[QUIET]] ON THE WESTERN [[FRONT]] (Milestone) had [[great]] messages of peace and [[harmony]] but ultimately were failures in positively swaying public opinion. So, from a historical point of view, it's an [[amazing]] and [[sad]] [[relic]] that is well worth seeing. This [[movies]], along with WESTFRONT 1918, are my [[prefer]] Pabst-directed [[movies]] and I enjoyed them more than his much more [[acclaimed]] [[movie]] which starred Louise [[Creek]] (such as PANDORA'S BOX). It's [[conceivably]] because both are very [[analogue]] to the Neo-Realist [[cinema]] that the Italians [[perfect]] in the 1940s and 50s. This [[styling]] film called for [[utilizing]] non-actors (just [[emblematic]] folks) in [[routine]] [[setting]] in [[orders]] to [[creating]] [[densely]] [[involve]] and [[realist]] [[kino]].

[[Throughout]] this case, the film is about French and German [[anthrax]] [[minors]], so [[adequately]], the people in the roles [[looks]] like miners--not actors. The central [[dispute]] as the [[cinematography]] [[starts]] is that there is a [[monumental]] [[mining]] located on the Franco-German [[frontiers]]. Instead of one [[enormous]] [[mining]], it is [[dividing]] at the [[borders]] and German workers are not welcome in the French [[mining]], despite there being [[biggest]] unemployment in [[Germans]]. This, [[linguistics]] [[difference]] ([[demonstrated]] wonderfully in a [[choreography]] hall scene) and WWI conspire to [[creating]] a [[sizeable]] rift between the factions--resulting in a WE [[v]]. THEY mentality. Later, an [[explosions]] causes a [[monumental]] collapse in the French and the Germans [[rejecting]] to sit back and do nothing. Risking their own lives, they [[demonstrating]] that there is [[genuine]] comradeship between miners and men in general.

The film is a [[forceful]] [[criticized]] of xenophobia and tried, in [[futile]], to get the German audiences to [[seeing]] the futility of war and hatred. It was a gorgeously [[shifting]] film with some of the scariest and claustrophobic [[photographs]] I have ever [[noticed]]. Considering history, though, the film's impact was minimal at best. It's a real shame, as like this one, WESTFRONT 1918, JÁACCUSE (Gance) and [[EVERY]] [[HUSH]] ON THE WESTERN [[NEWSWEEK]] (Milestone) had [[fantastic]] messages of peace and [[concordia]] but ultimately were failures in positively swaying public opinion. So, from a historical point of view, it's an [[astounding]] and [[deplorable]] [[hangover]] that is well worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was thrilled to watch this movie expecting it to be the sequel to the cult classic "Private Lessons" which portrays the dream of any male teenager.

"Private Lessons II" has NOTHING to do with the title I mention. It's just a regular soft-core Cinemax flick that won't make a change in your life. There's just one hot sex scene in a rooftop but that's it. I watched this a long time ago but believe me, this is just a regular boring soft core flick.

The women are hot but that's not enough to rent or buy the movie. My advice is to watch this only if it airs on cable. --------------------------------------------- Result 1869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] No,

Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.

A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.

I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how [[horribly]] written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.

Spoiler Starts__

They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after.

I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again. No,

Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.

A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.

I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how [[unimaginably]] written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.

Spoiler Starts__

They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after.

I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched both Bourne Identity and Bourne Supremacy on DVD before seeing this in the theater. I'd been waiting for this since before they started filming. I wasn't disappointed.

Minor spoilers below-

Overall it was good, but it also lacked the continuity of the first two. Identity and Supremacy both flowed gracefully between adrenaline rush action to introspective drama. This movie felt choppy at times. The plot-building down-times were slightly too drawn out. That caused the following action to feel too frenetic.

Camera: Speaking of frenetic, the trademark Greengrass shaky cam was present and very annoying to me. I know its has been talked/whined about to nausea on the message board, but it doesn't mean it's not relevant. All the martial arts training the actors went through was totally wasted. The ridiculous camera cuts and wiggling camera ruined most of the fighting in the movie. It is a cheap, student director trick to make the film feel unsettled. I'd expect those techniques to be used in some horror flick made for high school kids, but not in this classy, adult, action series. Too much extreme close-up also. Do some framing. Get some interesting shots. Constant close-up feels like lazy directing to me.

Story: The story was VERY confusing at first. They thrust new names and faces upon you from the get go. Gave me the feeling that you get when you come into a movie late and know you've missed some crucial information. Felt rushed or compressed for time reasons. After you catch up however the story is quite good. It's enjoyable following leads along with Bourne. HOWEVER, I did NOT care for the whole last scene of Supremacy (Landy/Bourne on the phone) being in the middle of Ultimatum thing. It basically makes the movie a half-prequel. I thought that was awkward.

Cast/Characters: The star of the movie is the action. Obviously there are only two originals left. Bourne and Nicky Parsons. Them teaming up was kind of odd to me. I think they just wanted to give Bourne someone to protect to and confide in. Unless I completely missed something, they never even tell you why they teamed up. The other assassins in the movie were pretty quiet. This felt like Gilroy/Greengrass/whoever wanting to not leave open ends. Understandable but disappointing. Seriously, Damon with Clive Owen in Identity and Marton Csokas in Supremacy.. Those scenes were phenomenal. These assassins are as uninteresting as Castel (the first fella Bourne fights in Identity). The cast in general has degraded as the the series went on. Clive Owen was practically an afterthought. That's a measure of strength for that first cast. The second, they basically trade Chris Cooper for Joan Allen.... Not exactly equal. This one trades Brian Cox and Franka Potente for 3 actors to be named later. Nothing against David Strathairn, Scott Glenn, or Albert Finney, but they're not the first names that come to mind for this kind of series. Aside from a couple pauses that seemed to long, the acting was right on.

As a whole, it was successful. Felt like they wanted to get the series over with though. If they would have trimmed or rearranged the slower parts, eliminated Scott Glenn's part entirely, zoomed out, and taken the camera away from the seizure victim, it would have been perfect.

ENDING SPOILER

I don't see why they leave Bourne alive at the end. It was my understanding this was the conclusion. They clearly made reference to the very beginning of the series with his silhouette floating motionless. I thought that was going to be it. A full circle type of ending. I did like Nicky reacting to the news report though.

SPOILER SPECIFICS WARNING - QUOTE FROM MOVIE BELOW -

Bourne's last line at the end "Look at this.. Look at what they make you give." quoting the first assassin he killed, I loved that. The final scene was great. (Except that it was Vosen {Strathairn} that shot at Bourne. Why would he do that? Just out for vengeance? If he was angry enough to murder, why not shoot Pamela Landy after she faxes his top secret file? That didn't make sense.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] I've been a [[fan]] since his first album. This [[film]] is a disservice to him. The performances, except for one by Rufus Wainwright and Teddy Thompson are [[simply]] [[terrible]].

Those by Martha Wainwright, [[Nick]] Cave, [[Antony]], and Jarvis Cocker were [[particularly]] [[annoying]]. Even the one by the McGarrigle sisters was [[ruined]] by the so [[called]] [[harmony]] of [[Martha]] Wainwright.

I've never [[seen]] my [[wife]] get up and [[walk]] out of the [[room]] on a [[film]] before and I [[found]] myself [[fast]] forwarding through the performances to [[get]] to the few [[interview]] [[segments]], which were [[also]] [[difficult]] to watch due to the poor [[camera]] [[work]].

There are [[many]] who have been able to [[interpret]] [[Mr]]. Cohen's songs, Jennifer Warnes, KD [[Lang]], [[Billy]] Joel, [[Aaron]] [[Neville]], and Willie [[Nelson]] [[come]] to [[mind]], but those people [[selected]] for this performance were just [[awful]].

[[Hopefully]] there will be another [[attempt]] at [[capturing]] Leonard Cohen on [[film]] that will [[illustrate]] his [[insight]], talent, and [[intelligence]].

So sad I've been a [[breather]] since his first album. This [[filmmaking]] is a disservice to him. The performances, except for one by Rufus Wainwright and Teddy Thompson are [[purely]] [[abysmal]].

Those by Martha Wainwright, [[Nicky]] Cave, [[Antoine]], and Jarvis Cocker were [[specially]] [[exasperating]]. Even the one by the McGarrigle sisters was [[obliterated]] by the so [[phoned]] [[concordia]] of [[Marta]] Wainwright.

I've never [[watched]] my [[femme]] get up and [[stroll]] out of the [[courtrooms]] on a [[flick]] before and I [[unearthed]] myself [[punctually]] forwarding through the performances to [[got]] to the few [[questioning]] [[pieces]], which were [[apart]] [[hard]] to watch due to the poor [[cameras]] [[cooperate]].

There are [[numerous]] who have been able to [[interpretive]] [[Monsieur]]. Cohen's songs, Jennifer Warnes, KD [[Long]], [[Billie]] Joel, [[Arun]] [[Nev]], and Willie [[Nielson]] [[arrive]] to [[intellect]], but those people [[picks]] for this performance were just [[frightful]].

[[Luckily]] there will be another [[seeks]] at [[catching]] Leonard Cohen on [[movies]] that will [[showcases]] his [[eyesight]], talent, and [[intelligentsia]].

So sad --------------------------------------------- Result 1872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is, without a doubt, the most offensive "chick flick" I have seen in years, if not ever. The writing & characterizations are so riddled with stereotypes that the film verges on parody. Before walking out of the theater an hour and five minutes into this disaster, we were subjected to the following themes: having a baby will solve all of your problems, "performer types" are miserable messes, & musicians can't be good mothers unless they toss their dreams for a more conventional lifestyle. What a waste of a talented cast & some great-looking sets & costumes. When Natasha Richardson told Toni Collette that unless she lives a more mainstream life, she'll end up - shudder - "alone!", I felt queasy. I can't believe this movie made it to theatrical release. It's the sort of fare one expects from those "women's" cable channels that I always pass right by when channel-surfing. I am female and over 35, so I should be part of this film's target audience, but boy, does "Evening" miss its target. --------------------------------------------- Result 1873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of America's most brilliant film directors was without question Elia Kazan. His directorial genius was not particularly suited to taut thrillers, since Kazan needed more room to breathe and to be slower and more subtle. However, 'Panic in the Streets' is a first-rate social thriller and is if anything more relevant to today than it was to 1950 when it was released. The themes of illegal immigrants, people-smuggling, imminent plagues, rapid transmission around the world of diseases (a worried Richard Widmark says: 'I could be in any American city in ten hours and in Africa tomorrow.'), ethnic isolation and ghettoism are today's concerns more than ever. This film features a spectacular film debut by Jack Palance, and a wonderful performance by Barbara Bel Geddes, two casting strokes of genius. Richard Widmark is allowed not to be a psychopath for once, and is a deeply caring, warmly loving, intense hero of the people. He leads basically a one-man campaign to stop an epidemic of pneumonic plague in New Orleans, struggling to convince sluggish politicians and complacent policemen that there is a problem. There is a race against time to find the small-time crooks who have contracted the plague from a dead illegal immigrant within 48 hours, before the whole city, and as they are always reminding us, the whole country, are endangered with the worst thing since the 1919 flu. One amazing scene where Jack Palance, who is infected, is prevented from climbing aboard a ship by a rat-barrier on the rope is ironic in the extreme, reminding us in the most gruesome terms that humans can be the worst carriers and vermin of all. The highly dramatic chase scenes in what they call 'the coffee factory' at the wharfs rivals the most inventive climax scenes of Hitchcock, and with just as spectacular a setting. Many non-professionals appear in the film, which has the gritty realism of, well, something called reality. Kazan really takes the cameras into places where even people rarely went, and where even rats would have thought twice. This film was a major feat of social realism. If it lacks the electricity of the most highly charged thrillers, it is because Kazan took it so seriously that he could not hype it up, for after all, the threat of plague is serious enough to scare anybody without the need for extra guns and molls. The only unfortunate thing about the film is the title, which gives a false suggestion of superficiality. But Kazan was anything but superficial. He clearly considered this project a public duty, to alert us to genuine possibilities. If only those possibilities had diminished today, but alas, they are getting worse every day. One day, after a worldwide plague, this film may be shown to a few survivors as an example of how an outbreak was contained on film, but its lessons were forgotten. --------------------------------------------- Result 1874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Less]] self-conscious and much less pretentious than [[GUTS]] OF A BEAUTY, this Kazuo Komizu [[gore]] flick is worth a [[look]] (at [[least]] once).

[[Sleazy]] snapshotters escort wanna-be actresses/models to a remote house in the woods in order to sexually molest them. [[Unfortunately]] (for the horny boys), a long-schlonged [[demon]], who lives in the woods, has already targeted the girls for [[fun]].

The [[thing]] even ends up having fun with the boys -- that's IF you consider beheadings, dismemberment and masturbation with severed limbs "fun".

Once again, it all sounds better on paper than it looks and sounds on film.

Just as Komizu mangled LIVING DEAD AT TOKYO BAY with his ineptitude, he also mangles this effort and is only saved by some audacious violence and some great white panty shots.

Don't buy the hype, though, or you'll be sorely disappointed. [[Minimum]] self-conscious and much less pretentious than [[INNARDS]] OF A BEAUTY, this Kazuo Komizu [[gora]] flick is worth a [[peek]] (at [[lowest]] once).

[[Dirty]] snapshotters escort wanna-be actresses/models to a remote house in the woods in order to sexually molest them. [[Tragically]] (for the horny boys), a long-schlonged [[daemon]], who lives in the woods, has already targeted the girls for [[droll]].

The [[stuff]] even ends up having fun with the boys -- that's IF you consider beheadings, dismemberment and masturbation with severed limbs "fun".

Once again, it all sounds better on paper than it looks and sounds on film.

Just as Komizu mangled LIVING DEAD AT TOKYO BAY with his ineptitude, he also mangles this effort and is only saved by some audacious violence and some great white panty shots.

Don't buy the hype, though, or you'll be sorely disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1875 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Well, I can [[honestly]] say that this is the [[first]] time that I [[experienced]] a [[film]] that had literally no [[meat]] or potatoes in it. The entire [[film]] felt like it was just the [[salad]] with no [[main]] course. The [[story]] [[line]] was fallible and [[laughable]], the characters were one-dimensional, the realism was out the window, and the animation was [[done]] by four-year [[olds]]. Does that [[cover]] it? I have never been more embarrassed for a [[concept]] in my [[entire]] life. I have never read the [[comics]] or [[seen]] the other [[programs]] with this character, but from the looks of the other reviews I am not off base with my observation.

To [[begin]], the story moved too [[quickly]]. For [[someone]] new to this [[character]] and situations, I [[needed]] more [[built]] into creating the reasons [[instead]] of finding the solution. I have [[seen]] other Anime (if you [[could]] [[call]] this one an Anime) that do great things with their characters because they take the time to [[develop]] them. There was nothing set aside for [[Lady]] [[Death]]. [[In]] a few short scenes, we see her train with Cremator and instantly [[become]] this aggressive she-beast of Hell. This was hard for me to swallow, [[considering]] moments before she was [[introduced]] as this weak and feeble [[woman]] [[controlled]] by her father. Suddenly, she is immersed with hatred and can do [[battle]] with an existence that has been [[around]] for millions of [[years]]. This was [[absurd]]. The [[presentation]] of Lady Death was poor, to say the least. I felt as if she was nothing more than an animated [[character]] instead of a desperate woman with revenge on the mind. For me, it just didn't [[work]]. She was nothing more than eye-candy for prepubescent boys wanting to ogle the mass quantities of skin that she suddenly grew on her chest when training with Cremator. Oh, I felt sick just watching her. The same goes for the character of Cremator. Who was this random person? The explanation they gave wasn't enough, and [[instead]] I was left with more [[incoherent]] babbling than [[actual]] [[development]]. It is a very sad day in [[Hell]] when we forgo [[characters]] to show more violence and [[action]], [[especially]] in an animated [[feature]].

Next, there was Lucifer himself. [[Let]] me just say that I think I [[could]] do battle with the King of Hell and survive. He was [[weak]], his [[voice]] was laughable, and he just didn't [[represent]] the image that I had in my mind. It was as if Disney was in control and wanted to make him semi-PC. He lacked the darkness and corrupt nature that Lucifer embodies. He was not the ruler of Hell, but instead just a lackey that had a [[bigger]] place to live. Speaking of living or dying, how can you die again in Hell? That was a concept that definitely needed more explanation. Most of the characters were worrying about dying, when they didn't even consider the option that they were already dead. That is how they got to Hell. I think it was this level of thinking that ruined the film for me. I didn't quite capture the notion that your soul was still in a solid body in Hell, but that could just be me … or maybe it was because there was NO DEVELOPMENT in this story. There was nothing built, just preparing.

The battle sequences were hysterically bad. The animation in this cartoon felt like it was made in the early 90s. There was nothing impressive about the way that this film was drawn. Why are we, America, so behind on animation? It is huge in Asia, and it is creeping in hardcore here because we keep making films like Lady Death that do not challenge or use any part of imagination. We are cheap, and this film shows it.

Overall, this film was bad. The animation coupled with the horrendous voice work was cheap. I had head somewhere that this film as in production for a long time, which is hard to understand because I think I could have made this film on my credit card. The production was horrendous as well as the story. Nothing was developed, leaving huge gaping plot holes that nearly everyone fell into. The strength of the characters was missing, and nothing was explained. I wasted my time with this one and would like to warn others so that when Death does come, you don't find yourself in my state and regretting the fact that you wasted 80 minutes on this piece of garbage.

BLAH!

Grade: * out of ***** Well, I can [[truthfully]] say that this is the [[outset]] time that I [[experimented]] a [[filmmaking]] that had literally no [[carnes]] or potatoes in it. The entire [[filmmaking]] felt like it was just the [[coleslaw]] with no [[principal]] course. The [[conte]] [[linea]] was fallible and [[silly]], the characters were one-dimensional, the realism was out the window, and the animation was [[effected]] by four-year [[yr]]. Does that [[covered]] it? I have never been more embarrassed for a [[notion]] in my [[together]] life. I have never read the [[funnies]] or [[noticed]] the other [[agendas]] with this character, but from the looks of the other reviews I am not off base with my observation.

To [[commencement]], the story moved too [[speedily]]. For [[everyone]] new to this [[traits]] and situations, I [[needs]] more [[build]] into creating the reasons [[conversely]] of finding the solution. I have [[saw]] other Anime (if you [[wo]] [[invitation]] this one an Anime) that do great things with their characters because they take the time to [[develops]] them. There was nothing set aside for [[Dame]] [[Dying]]. [[During]] a few short scenes, we see her train with Cremator and instantly [[becoming]] this aggressive she-beast of Hell. This was hard for me to swallow, [[consider]] moments before she was [[brought]] as this weak and feeble [[wife]] [[monitored]] by her father. Suddenly, she is immersed with hatred and can do [[fights]] with an existence that has been [[about]] for millions of [[yr]]. This was [[senseless]]. The [[submission]] of Lady Death was poor, to say the least. I felt as if she was nothing more than an animated [[personage]] instead of a desperate woman with revenge on the mind. For me, it just didn't [[jobs]]. She was nothing more than eye-candy for prepubescent boys wanting to ogle the mass quantities of skin that she suddenly grew on her chest when training with Cremator. Oh, I felt sick just watching her. The same goes for the character of Cremator. Who was this random person? The explanation they gave wasn't enough, and [[alternatively]] I was left with more [[disjointed]] babbling than [[real]] [[evolution]]. It is a very sad day in [[Bordello]] when we forgo [[traits]] to show more violence and [[efforts]], [[concretely]] in an animated [[hallmarks]].

Next, there was Lucifer himself. [[Leaving]] me just say that I think I [[did]] do battle with the King of Hell and survive. He was [[fragile]], his [[vowel]] was laughable, and he just didn't [[represented]] the image that I had in my mind. It was as if Disney was in control and wanted to make him semi-PC. He lacked the darkness and corrupt nature that Lucifer embodies. He was not the ruler of Hell, but instead just a lackey that had a [[akbar]] place to live. Speaking of living or dying, how can you die again in Hell? That was a concept that definitely needed more explanation. Most of the characters were worrying about dying, when they didn't even consider the option that they were already dead. That is how they got to Hell. I think it was this level of thinking that ruined the film for me. I didn't quite capture the notion that your soul was still in a solid body in Hell, but that could just be me … or maybe it was because there was NO DEVELOPMENT in this story. There was nothing built, just preparing.

The battle sequences were hysterically bad. The animation in this cartoon felt like it was made in the early 90s. There was nothing impressive about the way that this film was drawn. Why are we, America, so behind on animation? It is huge in Asia, and it is creeping in hardcore here because we keep making films like Lady Death that do not challenge or use any part of imagination. We are cheap, and this film shows it.

Overall, this film was bad. The animation coupled with the horrendous voice work was cheap. I had head somewhere that this film as in production for a long time, which is hard to understand because I think I could have made this film on my credit card. The production was horrendous as well as the story. Nothing was developed, leaving huge gaping plot holes that nearly everyone fell into. The strength of the characters was missing, and nothing was explained. I wasted my time with this one and would like to warn others so that when Death does come, you don't find yourself in my state and regretting the fact that you wasted 80 minutes on this piece of garbage.

BLAH!

Grade: * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 1876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead (2005) a [[little]] while back and, [[since]] then, I've been watching [[every]] one of his movies that [[arrives]] on my [[radar]] screen. Like Clive Owen, he has an intensity (and he [[even]] resembles Owen [[somewhat]]) that just oozes from the screen. I feel sure that, if he [[lands]] some meaty [[roles]], he'll [[crack]] an Oscar one day...

That's not to [[denigrate]] this [[film]] at all.

It's a fine story, with very [[believable]] people (well, it's [[based]] upon the author's early [[shenanigans]] with rocketry), a [[great]] cast – Chris Cooper is [[always]] good, and Laura Dern is always on my watch [[list]] – with the [[appropriate]] [[mix]] of humor, [[pathos]], [[excitement]]...and the [[great]] sound track with so [[many]] [[rock]] n [[roll]] oldies to [[get]] the feet tapping.

But, this [[film]] had a very special significance for me: in 1957, I was the same [[age]] as Homer Hickham; like him, I [[looked]] up at the night [[stars]] to watch Sputnik as it scudded [[across]] the [[blackness]]; like Homer [[also]], I [[experimented]] with rocketry in my [[backyard]] and [[used]] even the [[exact]] same [[chemicals]] for fuel; and like Homer, I [[also]] had most of my [[attempts]] [[end]] in explosive disaster! What [[fun]] it was...

I didn't achieve his [[great]] (metaphorical and [[physical]]) heights though. But, that's what you find out when you [[see]] this [[movie]].

Sure, it's a [[basic]] family [[movie]], but that's a dying [[breed]] these [[days]], it seems. [[Take]] the [[time]] to [[see]] it, with the [[kids]]: you'll all have a lot of good laughs. I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead (2005) a [[tiny]] while back and, [[because]] then, I've been watching [[each]] one of his movies that [[happens]] on my [[radars]] screen. Like Clive Owen, he has an intensity (and he [[yet]] resembles Owen [[rather]]) that just oozes from the screen. I feel sure that, if he [[land]] some meaty [[duties]], he'll [[fissure]] an Oscar one day...

That's not to [[blacken]] this [[movies]] at all.

It's a fine story, with very [[trustworthy]] people (well, it's [[founded]] upon the author's early [[escapades]] with rocketry), a [[super]] cast – Chris Cooper is [[invariably]] good, and Laura Dern is always on my watch [[listings]] – with the [[adequate]] [[blends]] of humor, [[ducks]], [[arousal]]...and the [[huge]] sound track with so [[myriad]] [[boulder]] n [[rolling]] oldies to [[obtain]] the feet tapping.

But, this [[cinematography]] had a very special significance for me: in 1957, I was the same [[aging]] as Homer Hickham; like him, I [[seemed]] up at the night [[celebrity]] to watch Sputnik as it scudded [[throughout]] the [[nightfall]]; like Homer [[further]], I [[experienced]] with rocketry in my [[patio]] and [[utilize]] even the [[correct]] same [[chemistry]] for fuel; and like Homer, I [[further]] had most of my [[endeavors]] [[ends]] in explosive disaster! What [[entertaining]] it was...

I didn't achieve his [[remarkable]] (metaphorical and [[physics]]) heights though. But, that's what you find out when you [[consults]] this [[cinematography]].

Sure, it's a [[fundamental]] family [[cinematography]], but that's a dying [[spawn]] these [[jours]], it seems. [[Taking]] the [[moment]] to [[seeing]] it, with the [[brats]]: you'll all have a lot of good laughs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] this [[movie]] [[scared]] me so bad, i am [[easily]] scared though so its no [[big]] thing but this movie was scary and whoever [[wasnt]] [[scared]] by this movie, im [[surprised]] because everyone i know said it was scary, i hope [[everyone]] [[sees]] it, but [[dont]] see it with the [[lights]] off like i did.... this [[kino]] [[spooked]] me so bad, i am [[effortless]] scared though so its no [[prodigious]] thing but this movie was scary and whoever [[suprised]] [[affraid]] by this movie, im [[horrified]] because everyone i know said it was scary, i hope [[somebody]] [[believes]] it, but [[dunno]] see it with the [[illumination]] off like i did.... --------------------------------------------- Result 1878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] I really, really [[enjoyed]] watching this movie! [[At]] [[first]], seeing its poster I [[thought]] it was just another [[easy]] romantic [[comedy]] ... but it is [[simply]] more than this! I personally believe that this idea (that I'm [[sure]] a [[good]] [[part]] of the [[viewers]] had just before they [[saw]] the movie) it's [[yet]] another important part of the [[big]] concept of this movie itself (or [[even]] of its marketing strategy)! What I [[mean]] is: Nowadays we are slaves to [[images]]! To [[impressions]]! I went to the [[cinema]] to view this [[film]] having the wrong [[impression]], the [[wrong]] [[expectations]], and at the [[end]] I felt how superficial I [[could]] be! To exemplify it [[comes]] to my mind the sequence near the end in which [[Sidney]] buys the [[plane]] [[ticket]] to go back to New York and as he is [[asked]] to '[[give]] an autograph', [[meaning]] to sign for the ticket, he believes that just because he got on [[TV]] [[thanks]] to the scandal at the [[awards]] he is now some [[kind]] of celebrity. And this is just, I [[believe]], the climax of this main [[theme]] [[around]] which the [[movies]] revolves. [[Above]] this, I [[believe]] the [[movie]] [[also]] [[offers]] us a solution to get along with this, [[illustrated]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]] by Sidney's attitude: don't [[become]] too [[serious]] about yourself or about [[anybody]] else ... "[[even]] saints were people in the [[beginning]]" ... as [[Sophie]] once [[says]] in the movie. The saints of the moment are the stars. We attribute them an 'aura' of perfection, of eternal happiness, but the reality is much less than that. Even the saints of any religion are images, ideal models of how to behave and how to live your life. Even they were not for real ... they became 'for real' after they died and we looked back at them. And that's the catch: we need our saints! we need our stars! We strive for them as if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have anything to strive for. And television and all other media are means to create and capture our strivings. We desperately need benchmarks in regard to which to measure ourselves. And that's how we got in the cinema to watch this movie in the first [[place]]: to see if we can fit the benchmark, or if the benchmark is to small for us. This time it was larger than we expected. I really, really [[adored]] watching this movie! [[For]] [[frst]], seeing its poster I [[figured]] it was just another [[easier]] romantic [[comic]] ... but it is [[simple]] more than this! I personally believe that this idea (that I'm [[convinced]] a [[buena]] [[party]] of the [[audience]] had just before they [[watched]] the movie) it's [[however]] another important part of the [[massive]] concept of this movie itself (or [[yet]] of its marketing strategy)! What I [[meaning]] is: Nowadays we are slaves to [[visuals]]! To [[fingerprints]]! I went to the [[movie]] to view this [[movie]] having the wrong [[printing]], the [[amiss]] [[prospects]], and at the [[termination]] I felt how superficial I [[did]] be! To exemplify it [[happens]] to my mind the sequence near the end in which [[Sid]] buys the [[airline]] [[banknote]] to go back to New York and as he is [[inquired]] to '[[lend]] an autograph', [[mean]] to sign for the ticket, he believes that just because he got on [[TELEVISION]] [[thank]] to the scandal at the [[prize]] he is now some [[kinds]] of celebrity. And this is just, I [[think]], the climax of this main [[subjects]] [[throughout]] which the [[movie]] revolves. [[Aforementioned]] this, I [[reckon]] the [[movies]] [[similarly]] [[offered]] us a solution to get along with this, [[exemplified]] [[during]] the [[movies]] by Sidney's attitude: don't [[gotten]] too [[grave]] about yourself or about [[somebody]] else ... "[[yet]] saints were people in the [[commence]]" ... as [[Sofie]] once [[say]] in the movie. The saints of the moment are the stars. We attribute them an 'aura' of perfection, of eternal happiness, but the reality is much less than that. Even the saints of any religion are images, ideal models of how to behave and how to live your life. Even they were not for real ... they became 'for real' after they died and we looked back at them. And that's the catch: we need our saints! we need our stars! We strive for them as if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have anything to strive for. And television and all other media are means to create and capture our strivings. We desperately need benchmarks in regard to which to measure ourselves. And that's how we got in the cinema to watch this movie in the first [[placing]]: to see if we can fit the benchmark, or if the benchmark is to small for us. This time it was larger than we expected. --------------------------------------------- Result 1879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Upon The Straight Story release in 1999, it was [[praised]] for being [[David]] Lynch's [[first]] [[film]] that [[ignored]] his regular [[themes]] of the [[macabre]] and the [[surreal]]. Based on a [[true]] [[story]] of one [[man]] and his [[journey]] to [[visit]] his estranged brother on a [[John]] Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an [[odd]] story for [[Lynch]] to direct. [[Yet]] as the story [[develops]] you can see some of Lynch's [[trademark]] [[motifs]] coming through.

Lynch's [[focus]] on [[small]] town [[America]] and its [[inhabitants]] is [[still]] as prevalent as in his [[previous]] efforts such as Blue Velvet or [[Twin]] Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the [[weirdness]] is curbed down. The [[restrictions]] imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can [[think]] of that features a G rating. [[Incredibly]] [[significant]], this films stands as evidence that [[beautiful]] and [[significant]] family films can be produced.

The Straight Story was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For [[many]] Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally acclaimed, the only overly [[negative]] [[review]] by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a [[typical]] Lynch film. "Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own." Brundage claims, with his protagonist Alvin Straight "quoting lines directly from Confucious." He argues that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only [[criticism]] that many will read for the film. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the sense of Eraserhead, Lost Highway or Mulholland [[Drive]] - all films which I [[also]] adore, The Straight Story features a different side of Lynch that is by no means [[terrible]]. If you are a Lynch fan, it is most important to separate that side of Lynch with this [[feature]].

The narrative is slow and [[thoughtful]], which [[gives]] you a [[real]] sense of the protagonist's [[thoughts]] as he travels to his destination. Alvin constantly is reminded about his [[past]] and his relationships with his wife, children and his brother. [[Yet]] particularly [[significant]] is that there are no [[flashbacks]], which only [[adds]] to the effect, which [[reminded]] me of my [[conversations]] with my grandparents. The conclusion [[arrives]] like watching a boat being carried down a slow meandering river and it is beautiful to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to [[go]] to America. The performances are also [[excellent]] with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor.

So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting [[old]] and comes highly recommended! Upon The Straight Story release in 1999, it was [[hailing]] for being [[Dawood]] Lynch's [[fiirst]] [[movie]] that [[forgotten]] his regular [[item]] of the [[ghoulish]] and the [[bizarre]]. Based on a [[real]] [[tale]] of one [[males]] and his [[tour]] to [[visited]] his estranged brother on a [[Jon]] Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an [[weird]] story for [[Bastien]] to direct. [[Even]] as the story [[develop]] you can see some of Lynch's [[brand]] [[motif]] coming through.

Lynch's [[concentrations]] on [[petite]] town [[Americas]] and its [[villagers]] is [[however]] as prevalent as in his [[former]] efforts such as Blue Velvet or [[Doubles]] Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the [[strangeness]] is curbed down. The [[limiting]] imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can [[ideas]] of that features a G rating. [[Unspeakably]] [[major]], this films stands as evidence that [[excellent]] and [[cannot]] family films can be produced.

The Straight Story was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For [[multiple]] Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally acclaimed, the only overly [[bad]] [[revisions]] by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a [[classic]] Lynch film. "Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own." Brundage claims, with his protagonist Alvin Straight "quoting lines directly from Confucious." He argues that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only [[critique]] that many will read for the film. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the sense of Eraserhead, Lost Highway or Mulholland [[Driving]] - all films which I [[apart]] adore, The Straight Story features a different side of Lynch that is by no means [[horrendous]]. If you are a Lynch fan, it is most important to separate that side of Lynch with this [[attribute]].

The narrative is slow and [[pensive]], which [[donne]] you a [[actual]] sense of the protagonist's [[idea]] as he travels to his destination. Alvin constantly is reminded about his [[preceding]] and his relationships with his wife, children and his brother. [[However]] particularly [[major]] is that there are no [[recollections]], which only [[inserting]] to the effect, which [[remind]] me of my [[interviews]] with my grandparents. The conclusion [[arriving]] like watching a boat being carried down a slow meandering river and it is beautiful to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to [[going]] to America. The performances are also [[admirable]] with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor.

So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting [[elderly]] and comes highly recommended! --------------------------------------------- Result 1880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this was an excellent and very honest portrayal of paralysis and racism. This movie never panders to the audience and never gets predictable. The acting was top-notch and the movie reminded me of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". --------------------------------------------- Result 1881 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Inappropriate. The PG rating that this movie gets is [[yet]] another [[huge]] misstep by the MPAA. Whale Rider gets a PG-13 but this movie gets a PG? Please. Parents don't be fooled, [[taking]] an elementary school child to this movie is a huge [[mistake]]. There were numerous times I found myself being uncomfortable not just because the humor was inappropriate for kids, but also because it was totally out of the blue and unnecessary.

But all that aside, The Cat in the Hat is still a [[terrible]] movie. The [[casting]] and overall look of the movie are the only saving graces. The beautiful [[Kelly]] Preston and the always likeable (or hateable in this case) Alec Baldwin are both good in their roles even [[though]] Preston is almost too [[beautiful]] for a role like this. The kids are conditioned [[actors]] and it shows, especially with Dakota Fanning. Fanning is the only human aspect of the film that kept me watching and not throwing [[things]] at the screen.

Did I mention there was an oversized talking cat in this [[movie]]? Mike Myers is [[absolutely]] deplorable. I didn't [[like]] him as the [[voice]] of Shrek, and I [[truly]] [[believe]] now that [[Myers]] should not be [[allowed]] near the [[realm]] of children's [[films]] ever again. His [[portrayal]] of The [[Cat]] is a [[slightly]] toned down version of Fat [[Bastard]] and [[Austin]] Powers.

In the end, the cat should not have come, he should have stayed away, but he [[came]], even if just for a day, he [[ruined]] 82 minutes of my [[life]], 82 minutes of personal [[anger]] and [[strife]].

The [[Cat]] in the Hat may be the worst kids movie ever. Inappropriate. The PG rating that this movie gets is [[however]] another [[great]] misstep by the MPAA. Whale Rider gets a PG-13 but this movie gets a PG? Please. Parents don't be fooled, [[adopting]] an elementary school child to this movie is a huge [[mistaken]]. There were numerous times I found myself being uncomfortable not just because the humor was inappropriate for kids, but also because it was totally out of the blue and unnecessary.

But all that aside, The Cat in the Hat is still a [[shocking]] movie. The [[foundry]] and overall look of the movie are the only saving graces. The beautiful [[Killy]] Preston and the always likeable (or hateable in this case) Alec Baldwin are both good in their roles even [[despite]] Preston is almost too [[marvellous]] for a role like this. The kids are conditioned [[players]] and it shows, especially with Dakota Fanning. Fanning is the only human aspect of the film that kept me watching and not throwing [[items]] at the screen.

Did I mention there was an oversized talking cat in this [[filmmaking]]? Mike Myers is [[totally]] deplorable. I didn't [[loves]] him as the [[vocal]] of Shrek, and I [[genuinely]] [[think]] now that [[Meyers]] should not be [[allowing]] near the [[realms]] of children's [[film]] ever again. His [[portrait]] of The [[Kitten]] is a [[somewhat]] toned down version of Fat [[Bitch]] and [[Aston]] Powers.

In the end, the cat should not have come, he should have stayed away, but he [[arrived]], even if just for a day, he [[obliterated]] 82 minutes of my [[lives]], 82 minutes of personal [[fury]] and [[dissension]].

The [[Kitten]] in the Hat may be the worst kids movie ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 1882 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having just seen this on TMC, it's fresh in my mind. It's obvious that while the stooges are featured stars, they don't really run the show. First, they're broken into 2 groups - Moe, as "Shorty" and Larry and Curly as a pair of vagrants, so there's not a whole lot of full team work. The love story that fuels the plot is uninteresting, the two ladies are the only ones with any acting ability, there's another group of musical stooges that are unfunny, unless you consider their attempts at being funny to be sadly buffoonish. The music is tiresome, they drive cars to the ranch and then depend on horses, the dorky western wear is silly, and there's an awful lot of the movie with no stooges on camera. By the way, this is obviously after Curley's first stroke, and his reduced energy level is clear. Vernon Dent appears early on in an uncredited role. I loved everything these guys ever did, including all the non-Curley stuff, but this little dogie is pretty lousy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1883 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "GOOD TIMES," in my opinion, is a must-see CBS hit! Despite the fact that I've never seen every episode, I still enjoy it. It's hard to say which one is my favorite. Also, I really love the theme song. If you ask me, even though I like everyone, it would have been nice if everyone had stayed on the show throughout its entire run. Everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though it can be seen on TV Land now, I strongly recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This piece ain't really worth a comment.. It's simply the worst "horror" movie i have ever seen. The actors are bad as bad can be and the whole plot is so silly it nearly made me cry. Shame on you I say!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really didn't expect much from this film seeing as it has people from Parkersburg WV, which is were I live, acting in it. This town is dull and so is this film. There were a few decent scened in the movie but I was distracted by all the crappy landmarks they made a point to show. This movie may have been good if there was actual acting in it but there wasn't any. Unless you are from Parkersburg and are interested in seeing what you see everyday, then stay away from this movie. The dialog will put you to sleep, the acting will bore you to tears and Steven Soderberg should lose some credibility after shooting crap like this. Its a predictable movie with no surprises. What you see is what you get and that is a 73 minute tour of Parkersburg West Virginia and Belpre Ohio without a narrator. --------------------------------------------- Result 1886 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] The title of this [[obscure]] and (almost righteously) [[forgotten]] 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have [[anything]] [[else]] to say that was [[useful]], anyway. But hey, "The Forest" isn't totally [[hopeless]] and not [[even]] *that* [[bad]], actually. [[If]] nothing else, at [[least]] it obeys the, [[admittedly]] unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as "The Forest" has a [[couple]] of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a [[bit]] of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary [[brainless]] teenagers and the script has solid [[ambitions]] towards supernaturalism. The [[concept]] isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a [[couple]] of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The [[demented]] family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. "The Forest" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie "Schoolgirls in Chains") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails. The title of this [[fuzzy]] and (almost righteously) [[forgot]] 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have [[nothing]] [[further]] to say that was [[advantageous]], anyway. But hey, "The Forest" isn't totally [[incorrigible]] and not [[yet]] *that* [[unfavourable]], actually. [[Though]] nothing else, at [[lowest]] it obeys the, [[unquestionably]] unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as "The Forest" has a [[matches]] of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a [[bite]] of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary [[jerk]] teenagers and the script has solid [[aims]] towards supernaturalism. The [[conceptions]] isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a [[matching]] of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The [[screwball]] family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. "The Forest" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie "Schoolgirls in Chains") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails. --------------------------------------------- Result 1887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've always been enthusiastic about period dramas, an art form in which the BBC has excelled in the past. This presentation of "Byron" was unbelievable. Unbelievably bad! The script was dreadful, the acting uninspired, and all the characters woefully insipid. Apparently Byron was "mad bad and dangerous to know", and set the ladies hearts all-a-flutter. Not in this production. Here he appeared as a tawdry jumped-up little squirt instead of a fiery hero of womenfolk and the Greek struggle for independence. It is said that Byron walked with a limp. This portrayal of the man was just limp all over.

I watched the whole two and a half hours waiting for something to spark into life. Not a splutter, not even a glimmer. It was utter tedium, if not downright boredom, from start to finish.

Having the opinion that no-one will ever better the Bard of Avon, I also believe that Byron's poetry is over-revered and to my mind should be flung on the back burner, and this dramatisation of his life should be accorded the same treatment.

I think the BBC lost its nous with this one --------------------------------------------- Result 1888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Having looked at some of the other [[comments]] here, I have a [[main]] complaint with this [[presentation]].

The two primary [[characters]] are attractive in their own [[ways]] - the [[beautiful]] "[[victim]]," and the [[handsome]], [[obviously]] [[extremely]] "off-center," blue-collar protagonist (if just short of "totally-deranged") - take turns [[beating]] the hell out of each other, [[sort]] of like a Caucasian Kabuki [[scenario]].

This is all right, and this is, of course, mainly a "turning-the-tables" story. However, my referenced [[complaint]] is that I believe the director got caught-up in his desire to display Farrah's well-known and obvious physical attributes. [[Beginning]] with her being enticingly clad in a thin robe, and with a number of scenes displaying more than needed for any dramatic effect - while immensely pleasing to the eyes, these distract from the poignancy level of the drama.

Her roommates I'm certain give performances as written and directed - however, their respective skepticism and histrionic babbling and sobbing, don't ring true -- based upon Farrah's previous experience with this guy, the obvious evidence of his having come to their premises with only the worst of intentions, and that she would have absolutely no grounds to be [[exaggerating]] what has occurred.

But this is a film and [[story]], [[compelling]] as much in spite of, as because of, the director's work. Having looked at some of the other [[sightings]] here, I have a [[leading]] complaint with this [[submissions]].

The two primary [[attribute]] are attractive in their own [[methods]] - the [[wondrous]] "[[victims]]," and the [[leggy]], [[unmistakably]] [[unbelievably]] "off-center," blue-collar protagonist (if just short of "totally-deranged") - take turns [[overpowering]] the hell out of each other, [[kinds]] of like a Caucasian Kabuki [[screenplays]].

This is all right, and this is, of course, mainly a "turning-the-tables" story. However, my referenced [[grievance]] is that I believe the director got caught-up in his desire to display Farrah's well-known and obvious physical attributes. [[Starts]] with her being enticingly clad in a thin robe, and with a number of scenes displaying more than needed for any dramatic effect - while immensely pleasing to the eyes, these distract from the poignancy level of the drama.

Her roommates I'm certain give performances as written and directed - however, their respective skepticism and histrionic babbling and sobbing, don't ring true -- based upon Farrah's previous experience with this guy, the obvious evidence of his having come to their premises with only the worst of intentions, and that she would have absolutely no grounds to be [[overkill]] what has occurred.

But this is a film and [[history]], [[conclusive]] as much in spite of, as because of, the director's work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1889 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a [[fine]] musical with a timeless [[score]] by one of my [[favorite]] composers (Gershwin) and a nice 'Parisien' [[atmosphere]] which gives the [[movie]] a [[lot]] of charm, but in terms of a [[story]].. well it's not really there. [[Or]] at [[least]], not very well [[worked]] out. The acting is [[also]] not so smooth by [[Caron]]. But I [[liked]] some of the [[dialogues]], I [[liked]] the scene at the Seine, I liked the [[character]] [[played]] by Levant, the [[colors]]; and the dancing of course, which is [[quite]] [[magnificent]].

A 7.5 - 8 seems on the [[dot]] to me. This is a [[fined]] musical with a timeless [[notation]] by one of my [[preferable]] composers (Gershwin) and a nice 'Parisien' [[vibe]] which gives the [[cinema]] a [[lots]] of charm, but in terms of a [[saga]].. well it's not really there. [[Nor]] at [[fewer]], not very well [[work]] out. The acting is [[apart]] not so smooth by [[Apostrophe]]. But I [[loved]] some of the [[dialog]], I [[loved]] the scene at the Seine, I liked the [[personages]] [[done]] by Levant, the [[dye]]; and the dancing of course, which is [[perfectly]] [[wondrous]].

A 7.5 - 8 seems on the [[points]] to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How I got into it: When I started watching this series on Cartoon Network,I have to say that I've never seen anything like this,and it was the best. But when I started collecting the series on VHS,and years later on DVD part of Bandai's Anime Legends collections. It was amazing,and truly worth watching. It had a lot of exploding action that will blow you out of your seat. And of course,the theme songs "Just Communication",and Rhythm Emotions" were the best.

Characters,and Gundams: My favorite characters in the show were:Heero,Duo,Relena,Treize,Lady Und,Noin,and Zechs. My favorite Gundams in the show that I liked the most are the Wing Zero,and Epyon,and of course the Altron,and Deathscythe I,and II.

Meaning of the show: What this series also tells us that in real life,wars are very hard and we can sometimes win,or lose. But peace can also be hard to obtain,and I do believe the Gundam pilots are doing the right thing,and are trying to obtain world peace.

But however,this show is truly the best of the best. So in closing to this review,after you watch this show,see the Movie Endless Waltz. --------------------------------------------- Result 1891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Seriously]] the only [[good]] [[thing]] about this year [[ceremony]] were the winners.

[[Although]] the ceremony itself was pretty [[short]] it still was somewhat boring. I think it's [[seriously]] time to look for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY [[new]]. It's [[pretty]] [[obvious]] that they tried to make the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. [[Diddy]] and Prince present a [[category]]. Also letting Chris Rock be the presenter was an attempt to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. [[None]] of it really [[worked]] out.

Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a [[good]] presenter. I [[really]] [[merely]] [[saw]] him as a guy who just [[talked]] every now and then in between of the [[different]] categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for [[instance]] [[Billy]] Crystal's.

[[Also]] the handing out of the awards was [[pretty]] dumb at [[times]]. Not letting everybody come to the stage but [[also]] handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was [[plain]] weird.

[[Still]], I can't remember being any more [[satisfied]] with the [[award]] winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the [[last]] [[couple]] of [[years]] [[always]] had been the [[case]]. So does that mean it had been a [[good]] [[year]] for [[movies]] with [[lots]] of [[competitive]] [[contestants]]? I don't [[think]] so. I [[think]] most of the [[movies]] will be [[largely]] [[forgotten]] in 20 [[years]] from now, with the exception of "Million Dollar [[Baby]]" and "The Passion of the [[Christ]]" [[maybe]]. Sure I don't agree with [[every]] single [[award]] that was [[handed]] out this year, for [[instance]] Caleb Deschanel should had won for best [[cinematography]], not that I don't like Robert Richardson's [[work]], he [[really]] did some [[amazing]] [[work]] for most of Oliver Stone's [[work]] but I [[really]] feel that Deschanel [[deserved]] the award [[way]] more. [[Also]] I [[would]] had [[liked]] [[seeing]] Jim Miller and [[Paul]] Rubell [[win]] for best editing and [[John]] Debney for [[best]] [[music]]. But [[oh]] well, there is no way the Academy Awards can [[please]] [[everybody]] of course, I [[understand]] that. There will [[always]] be people complaining about the [[winners]].

It [[also]] was [[funny]] to [[see]] that most of the [[award]] presenters were [[way]] more nervous than the [[nominees]] and [[winners]]. [[Did]] Prince [[said]] any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy "I hope they missed" Irons were the best presenters of the night.

Overall a very forgettable [[show]] but with nice winners.

4/10 [[Gravely]] the only [[alright]] [[stuff]] about this year [[ceremonies]] were the winners.

[[While]] the ceremony itself was pretty [[terse]] it still was somewhat boring. I think it's [[profoundly]] time to look for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY [[nuevo]]. It's [[quite]] [[noticeable]] that they tried to make the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. [[Didi]] and Prince present a [[class]]. Also letting Chris Rock be the presenter was an attempt to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. [[Nos]] of it really [[works]] out.

Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a [[alright]] presenter. I [[genuinely]] [[simply]] [[noticed]] him as a guy who just [[spoken]] every now and then in between of the [[diverse]] categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for [[example]] [[Billie]] Crystal's.

[[Additionally]] the handing out of the awards was [[belle]] dumb at [[moments]]. Not letting everybody come to the stage but [[apart]] handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was [[lowlands]] weird.

[[However]], I can't remember being any more [[glad]] with the [[awards]] winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the [[latter]] [[couples]] of [[olds]] [[consistently]] had been the [[example]]. So does that mean it had been a [[buena]] [[annum]] for [[theater]] with [[lot]] of [[compete]] [[contestant]]? I don't [[believe]] so. I [[believing]] most of the [[film]] will be [[primarily]] [[overlooked]] in 20 [[ages]] from now, with the exception of "Million Dollar [[Honey]]" and "The Passion of the [[Goodness]]" [[probably]]. Sure I don't agree with [[each]] single [[awards]] that was [[gave]] out this year, for [[lawsuit]] Caleb Deschanel should had won for best [[movie]], not that I don't like Robert Richardson's [[collaboration]], he [[truly]] did some [[staggering]] [[cooperate]] for most of Oliver Stone's [[collaboration]] but I [[genuinely]] feel that Deschanel [[deserves]] the award [[pathway]] more. [[Additionally]] I [[could]] had [[wished]] [[witnessing]] Jim Miller and [[Pablo]] Rubell [[wins]] for best editing and [[Jon]] Debney for [[optimum]] [[musician]]. But [[aw]] well, there is no way the Academy Awards can [[invite]] [[somebody]] of course, I [[understands]] that. There will [[perpetually]] be people complaining about the [[winner]].

It [[additionally]] was [[hilarious]] to [[behold]] that most of the [[awards]] presenters were [[ways]] more nervous than the [[nominations]] and [[winner]]. [[Got]] Prince [[says]] any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy "I hope they missed" Irons were the best presenters of the night.

Overall a very forgettable [[demonstrate]] but with nice winners.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I caught this Cuban film at at an arthouse film club. It was shown shortly after the magisterial 1935 Silly Symphony cartoon where the Isle of Symphony is reconciled with the Isle of Jazz. What with the recently deceased Ruben Gonzalez piped through speakers in this old cinema-ballroom and a Cuban flag hanging from peeling stucco rocaille motifs, the scene was set for a riproaring celebration of engaged filmmaking and [[synchronised]] hissing at the idiocies of Helms-Burton. But then the film started. And the cinema's peeling [[paint]] gradually became more interesting than the [[shoddy]] [[mess]] on-screen.

The storyline of Nada Mas [[promises]] much. Carla is a bored envelope-stamper at a Cuban post office. Her only [[escape]] from an altogether humdrum existence is to purloin letters and [[rewrite]] them, transforming basic interpersonal grunts into Brontëan outbursts of breathless emotion. Cue numerous [[shots]] of photogenic Cubans gushing with [[joy]], [[grief]], [[pity]], [[terror]] and the like.

The [[problem]] is that the [[simplicity]] of the narrative is [[marred]] by [[endless]] [[excursions]] into film-school artiness, latino [[caricature]], [[Marx]] [[brothers]] [[slapstick]] and even - during a [[particularly]] underwhelming editing trick - the celluloid scratching of a schoolkid defacement onto a character's [[face]].

Unidimensional characters abound. Cunda, the [[boss]] at the post office, is a humourless dominatrix-nosferatu. [[Her]] boss-eyed [[accomplice]], Concha, variously [[points]] [[fingers]], eavesdrops and screeches. [[Cesar]], the metalhead [[dolt]] and [[romantic]] interest, [[reveals]] hidden writing talent when [[Carla]] departs for Miami. A chase scene (in oh-so-hilarious fast-forward) is thrown in for [[good]] [[measure]]. All this [[would]] be fine in a Mortadello and Filemon [[comic]] strip, but in a black-and-white zero-FX flick with highbrow [[pretensions]], [[ahem]].

Nada Mas attempts to [[straddle]] the stile somewhere between the 'quirky-heroine-matchmakes-strangers' of [[Amelie]] and the 'poetry-as-great-redeemer' [[theme]] of Il Postino. Like Amelie, its protagonist is an [[eccentric]] [[single]] white [[female]] who combats impending spinsterdom by trying to [[bring]] magic into the [[lives]] of strangers. And like Il Postino, the film does not flinch from sustained recitals of poetry and a postman on a bicycle takes a romantic lead. Unfortunately, Nada Mas fails to capture the lushness and transcendence of either film.

There are two things that might merit watching this film in a late-night TV stupor. The first is the opening overhead shot of Carla on a checker-tiled floor, which cuts to the crossword puzzle she is working on. The second is to see Nada Mas as a cautionary example: our post Buena Vista Social Club obsession with Cuban artistic output can often blinker us into accepting any [[dross]] that features a bongo on the soundtrack. This [[film]] should not have merited a global release - films such as Waiting List and Guantanamera cover similar thematic territory far more successfully. I caught this Cuban film at at an arthouse film club. It was shown shortly after the magisterial 1935 Silly Symphony cartoon where the Isle of Symphony is reconciled with the Isle of Jazz. What with the recently deceased Ruben Gonzalez piped through speakers in this old cinema-ballroom and a Cuban flag hanging from peeling stucco rocaille motifs, the scene was set for a riproaring celebration of engaged filmmaking and [[synchronize]] hissing at the idiocies of Helms-Burton. But then the film started. And the cinema's peeling [[repaint]] gradually became more interesting than the [[inferior]] [[disarray]] on-screen.

The storyline of Nada Mas [[pledges]] much. Carla is a bored envelope-stamper at a Cuban post office. Her only [[flee]] from an altogether humdrum existence is to purloin letters and [[rewriting]] them, transforming basic interpersonal grunts into Brontëan outbursts of breathless emotion. Cue numerous [[punches]] of photogenic Cubans gushing with [[pleasure]], [[bereavement]], [[compassion]], [[panic]] and the like.

The [[difficulty]] is that the [[simplified]] of the narrative is [[tarnished]] by [[countless]] [[outings]] into film-school artiness, latino [[toon]], [[Marxism]] [[siblings]] [[comedic]] and even - during a [[specially]] underwhelming editing trick - the celluloid scratching of a schoolkid defacement onto a character's [[confronts]].

Unidimensional characters abound. Cunda, the [[chef]] at the post office, is a humourless dominatrix-nosferatu. [[His]] boss-eyed [[complicity]], Concha, variously [[dot]] [[toes]], eavesdrops and screeches. [[Ceasar]], the metalhead [[simpleton]] and [[sentimental]] interest, [[unveils]] hidden writing talent when [[Carlo]] departs for Miami. A chase scene (in oh-so-hilarious fast-forward) is thrown in for [[buena]] [[steps]]. All this [[could]] be fine in a Mortadello and Filemon [[hilarious]] strip, but in a black-and-white zero-FX flick with highbrow [[pretenses]], [[hmmm]].

Nada Mas attempts to [[overlapping]] the stile somewhere between the 'quirky-heroine-matchmakes-strangers' of [[Emilie]] and the 'poetry-as-great-redeemer' [[thematic]] of Il Postino. Like Amelie, its protagonist is an [[quirky]] [[exclusive]] white [[femmes]] who combats impending spinsterdom by trying to [[bringing]] magic into the [[iife]] of strangers. And like Il Postino, the film does not flinch from sustained recitals of poetry and a postman on a bicycle takes a romantic lead. Unfortunately, Nada Mas fails to capture the lushness and transcendence of either film.

There are two things that might merit watching this film in a late-night TV stupor. The first is the opening overhead shot of Carla on a checker-tiled floor, which cuts to the crossword puzzle she is working on. The second is to see Nada Mas as a cautionary example: our post Buena Vista Social Club obsession with Cuban artistic output can often blinker us into accepting any [[dairy]] that features a bongo on the soundtrack. This [[cinema]] should not have merited a global release - films such as Waiting List and Guantanamera cover similar thematic territory far more successfully. --------------------------------------------- Result 1893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Some people might consider this movie a piece of artwork - to be able to express your imagination on film in order to create a movie filled with antagonizing pain and death.. I personally think that this movie is a disgust, which should have never been released. This movie is repulsive, illogical and meaningless. Not only is it a complete waste of time but it makes you sick for days to come. The appalling images shown in the film not only make you grasp for air but they set in your mind and it takes days to forget them. Such a shame that people waste their imagination on such inhumane suffering.. "Kill Bill" would be another example but at least "Kill Bill" has its purpose, meaning, climax and resolution.. --------------------------------------------- Result 1894 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I avoided watching this [[film]] for the [[longest]] [[time]]. [[Long]] before it was even released I had dismissed it as an over-hyped, over-blown, overly romanticized piece of Hollywood schmaltz, and I wanted nothing to do with it. I never watched it in the [[theatre]]. I shook my head in disbelief at the 11 Academy Awards - even though I had never seen it. Then I was asked to be a judge at a high school public speaking contest. One of the girls spoke about this [[movie]]. "It was so [[great]]," she [[said]]. "You really [[felt]] like you were on the ship." "Nonsense," I thought. I shared my feelings with my fellow judges. One looked at me and said, "you might be right, but if she liked the movie that much maybe she'll want to learn more about the real Titanic. The movie must have done something right to get her so interested." "Well, maybe," thought I. Then it finally appeared on Pay TV. "OK," I thought, "I'll give it a look see." I didn't want to like it - and I didn't. I loved it! What a [[great]] movie.

Where to start? First - the directing. My high school public speaking [[contestant]] was right. James Cameron does a superb job of creating an almost "you are there" type of atmosphere. The gaiety of life aboard the most elegant ship in the world. The nonchalance as news of the iceberg first spreads; then the rising sense of panic. You don't just watch it; you really do feel it. Then - the performances. The lead performances from Kate Winslet (as Rose) and Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jack) are excellent - Winslet's being the superior, I thought, but both were good. They had their rich girl/poor boy characters down to a perfect "t" I thought. In my opinion, though, stealing the show was Frances Fisher as Rose's mother. She was perfect as the snobby aristocrat, and you could feel the fear and loathing she felt every time she looked at Jack. Then - the details. I'm no expert on the sinking of the Titanic, but I have a reasonable general knowledge, and this film does a super job of recreating the historical details accurately and then weaving them seamlessly around the fictional romance. Very impressive, indeed. Then - the song. Who can watch this movie and not be taken with Celine Dion's performance of "My Heart Goes On."

Problems. Well, the romance was perhaps too contrived, in the sense that I just don't accept that Jack could have moved so effortlessly from steerage to first class. (I know he was invited the first time; but he seems to keep getting into first class without being stopped until he's been there for a while.) The realities of the separation of the social classes were much more realistically portrayed, I thought, when the steerage passengers were going to be left locked down there after the ship hit the iceberg while the first class folks got to enjoy half empty lifeboats.

A minor quibble, though. This is truly an excellent movie. My only regret is not seeing it in the theatre, where I think it would have been so much more impressive.

9/10 I avoided watching this [[cinematography]] for the [[tallest]] [[moment]]. [[Largo]] before it was even released I had dismissed it as an over-hyped, over-blown, overly romanticized piece of Hollywood schmaltz, and I wanted nothing to do with it. I never watched it in the [[cinema]]. I shook my head in disbelief at the 11 Academy Awards - even though I had never seen it. Then I was asked to be a judge at a high school public speaking contest. One of the girls spoke about this [[kino]]. "It was so [[wondrous]]," she [[asserted]]. "You really [[smelled]] like you were on the ship." "Nonsense," I thought. I shared my feelings with my fellow judges. One looked at me and said, "you might be right, but if she liked the movie that much maybe she'll want to learn more about the real Titanic. The movie must have done something right to get her so interested." "Well, maybe," thought I. Then it finally appeared on Pay TV. "OK," I thought, "I'll give it a look see." I didn't want to like it - and I didn't. I loved it! What a [[wondrous]] movie.

Where to start? First - the directing. My high school public speaking [[contender]] was right. James Cameron does a superb job of creating an almost "you are there" type of atmosphere. The gaiety of life aboard the most elegant ship in the world. The nonchalance as news of the iceberg first spreads; then the rising sense of panic. You don't just watch it; you really do feel it. Then - the performances. The lead performances from Kate Winslet (as Rose) and Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jack) are excellent - Winslet's being the superior, I thought, but both were good. They had their rich girl/poor boy characters down to a perfect "t" I thought. In my opinion, though, stealing the show was Frances Fisher as Rose's mother. She was perfect as the snobby aristocrat, and you could feel the fear and loathing she felt every time she looked at Jack. Then - the details. I'm no expert on the sinking of the Titanic, but I have a reasonable general knowledge, and this film does a super job of recreating the historical details accurately and then weaving them seamlessly around the fictional romance. Very impressive, indeed. Then - the song. Who can watch this movie and not be taken with Celine Dion's performance of "My Heart Goes On."

Problems. Well, the romance was perhaps too contrived, in the sense that I just don't accept that Jack could have moved so effortlessly from steerage to first class. (I know he was invited the first time; but he seems to keep getting into first class without being stopped until he's been there for a while.) The realities of the separation of the social classes were much more realistically portrayed, I thought, when the steerage passengers were going to be left locked down there after the ship hit the iceberg while the first class folks got to enjoy half empty lifeboats.

A minor quibble, though. This is truly an excellent movie. My only regret is not seeing it in the theatre, where I think it would have been so much more impressive.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] It [[could]] have been better had it been directed by someone with more experience. Shumlin didn't do a bad job but it is not a great work of cinematic art.

It is, however, a [[beautiful]] [[movie]]. I have [[loved]] it [[since]] local [[channels]] [[used]] to [[show]] it. Graham [[Greene]] is one of my [[favorite]] writers of the last century. Some pretty bad movies were made from his novels and stories. ([[Many]] love "The Fallen Idol" but I am not [[among]] them. I [[think]] I [[saw]] "Brighton [[Rock]]" once [[many]] years [[ago]] and [[liked]] it but maybe I'm [[simply]] thinking fondly of the novel.) This is [[superbly]] cast. Charles [[Boyer]] does not, it's [[true]], [[come]] across as Spanish. But he [[seems]] to have the [[perfect]] temperament for this [[character]] -- tired, wary, [[caring]]. [[Lauren]] Bacall is appealing as the British [[girl]] who falls for him. But the [[supporting]] [[players]] are the [[best]]: Katina Paxinou is [[excellent]]. Her performance is a [[little]] [[Grand]] Guignol, but I [[attribute]] that to the director. [[Peter]] Lorre, whom we first [[meet]] as he [[gives]] [[Boyer]] a lesson in an Esperanto-like universal [[language]], is [[excellent]] -- as [[always]].

And Wanda Hendrix [[could]] [[break]] the [[hardest]] heart. She [[comes]] across as a precocious [[early]] [[teenager]]. The [[character]] [[wants]] to be [[helpful]]. She does her [[best]].

I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] [[highly]]. Not without [[reservations]]. The [[reservation]] is, [[primarily]], that it is a [[little]] stolid. But the story and acting can [[scarcely]] be bettered. It [[would]] have been better had it been directed by someone with more experience. Shumlin didn't do a bad job but it is not a great work of cinematic art.

It is, however, a [[wondrous]] [[movies]]. I have [[adore]] it [[because]] local [[canal]] [[using]] to [[illustrating]] it. Graham [[Green]] is one of my [[preferred]] writers of the last century. Some pretty bad movies were made from his novels and stories. ([[Numerous]] love "The Fallen Idol" but I am not [[between]] them. I [[believing]] I [[watched]] "Brighton [[Boulder]]" once [[multiple]] years [[prior]] and [[enjoyed]] it but maybe I'm [[purely]] thinking fondly of the novel.) This is [[stunningly]] cast. Charles [[Boer]] does not, it's [[genuine]], [[arriving]] across as Spanish. But he [[appears]] to have the [[impeccable]] temperament for this [[characters]] -- tired, wary, [[care]]. [[Lorraine]] Bacall is appealing as the British [[woman]] who falls for him. But the [[succour]] [[actors]] are the [[better]]: Katina Paxinou is [[wondrous]]. Her performance is a [[tiny]] [[Huge]] Guignol, but I [[features]] that to the director. [[Pete]] Lorre, whom we first [[satisfy]] as he [[delivers]] [[Boer]] a lesson in an Esperanto-like universal [[vocabulary]], is [[wondrous]] -- as [[unceasingly]].

And Wanda Hendrix [[would]] [[blackout]] the [[lousiest]] heart. She [[occurs]] across as a precocious [[precocious]] [[juvenile]]. The [[characters]] [[wanting]] to be [[instrumental]]. She does her [[nicest]].

I [[recommendations]] this [[movies]] [[vastly]]. Not without [[bookings]]. The [[booking]] is, [[basically]], that it is a [[kiddo]] stolid. But the story and acting can [[barely]] be bettered. --------------------------------------------- Result 1896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Just]] like [[last]] years event WWE New [[Years]] Revolution 2006 was headlined by an [[Elimination]] [[Chamber]] [[match]]. The [[difference]] between [[last]] [[years]] and this years [[match]] [[however]] was the [[entertainment]] value. In reality only three people stood a [[chance]] of walking out of the Pepsi Arena in Albany, New York with the WWE Championship. Those [[men]] were [[current]] champion John Cena, Kurt Angle and [[Shawn]] Michaels. There was no way Vinnie [[Mac]] [[would]] put the belt on any of the rookies; Carlito or Chris [[Masters]]. And Kane? Kane last held the WWE Championship in June 1998, and that was only for one [[night]]. It was [[obvious]] he wasn't going to be the one either. Last years match was a thrilling affair with six of the best WWE had to offer. 2006 was a predictable and disappointing affair but still the match of the night by far.

The only surprise of the evening came after the bell had run on the main event. Out strolled Vince McMahon himself and demanded they lift the chamber. It was then announced that Edge was cashing in his money in the bank championship match right then and there. With no time to prepare and just off the back of winning the Elimination Chamber match John Cena did not stand a chance and dropped the title after a [[spear]] to one of the most entertaining heels in WWE. This was the only [[entertaining]] piece of action that happened all night.

The undercard, like [[last]] year, was [[truly]] [[atrocious]]. Triple H and The Big Show put on a [[snore]] [[fest]] that had me [[struggling]] to [[stay]] away. HHH picked up the win but that was never in any real doubt was it? [[Any]] pay-per-view that has both [[Jerry]] Lawler and Viscera [[wrestling]] on the same card will never have any chance of becoming a [[success]] [[really]] does it. The King pinned Helms (who books this [[stuff]]?) and [[Big]] Vis tasted defeat against the wasted Shelton Benjamin with a [[little]] help from his Mama.

The [[women]] of the WWE also had a busy [[night]]. There was the [[usual]] Diva [[nonsense]] with a Bra and [[Panties]] Gauntlet [[match]] which was won by Ashley and the Woman's Championship was [[also]] on the line. In a [[match]], I [[thought]] would have been [[left]] to [[brew]] till WrestleMania 22 Mickie James challenged Trish Stratus in a [[good]] [[match]]. Trish won the [[contest]] but it was [[evident]] that this is going to [[continue]] for the foreseeable [[future]].

The opening contest of the night pitted soon to be WWE Champion Edge against Intercontinental Champion, Ric Flair. This could have been better but it was a battered and bloody Flair that retained after a disqualification finish. Edge obviously had bigger fish to fry.

So New Years Revolution kicked off the 2006 pay-per-view calendar in disastrous fashion. The only good thing from that is knowing that for the WWE the only way is up. They don't get much worse than this. [[Only]] like [[final]] years event WWE New [[Yr]] Revolution 2006 was headlined by an [[Eliminates]] [[Sala]] [[matches]]. The [[discrepancy]] between [[latter]] [[ages]] and this years [[coupling]] [[still]] was the [[amusement]] value. In reality only three people stood a [[chances]] of walking out of the Pepsi Arena in Albany, New York with the WWE Championship. Those [[man]] were [[contemporary]] champion John Cena, Kurt Angle and [[Shaun]] Michaels. There was no way Vinnie [[Macs]] [[ought]] put the belt on any of the rookies; Carlito or Chris [[Master]]. And Kane? Kane last held the WWE Championship in June 1998, and that was only for one [[soir]]. It was [[noticeable]] he wasn't going to be the one either. Last years match was a thrilling affair with six of the best WWE had to offer. 2006 was a predictable and disappointing affair but still the match of the night by far.

The only surprise of the evening came after the bell had run on the main event. Out strolled Vince McMahon himself and demanded they lift the chamber. It was then announced that Edge was cashing in his money in the bank championship match right then and there. With no time to prepare and just off the back of winning the Elimination Chamber match John Cena did not stand a chance and dropped the title after a [[lance]] to one of the most entertaining heels in WWE. This was the only [[amusing]] piece of action that happened all night.

The undercard, like [[latter]] year, was [[really]] [[frightful]]. Triple H and The Big Show put on a [[snoring]] [[festival]] that had me [[battles]] to [[sojourn]] away. HHH picked up the win but that was never in any real doubt was it? [[Every]] pay-per-view that has both [[Gerry]] Lawler and Viscera [[fights]] on the same card will never have any chance of becoming a [[successes]] [[genuinely]] does it. The King pinned Helms (who books this [[thing]]?) and [[Vast]] Vis tasted defeat against the wasted Shelton Benjamin with a [[small]] help from his Mama.

The [[woman]] of the WWE also had a busy [[overnight]]. There was the [[normal]] Diva [[senseless]] with a Bra and [[Pants]] Gauntlet [[matches]] which was won by Ashley and the Woman's Championship was [[furthermore]] on the line. In a [[teaming]], I [[thinks]] would have been [[exited]] to [[brewery]] till WrestleMania 22 Mickie James challenged Trish Stratus in a [[buena]] [[matches]]. Trish won the [[rivalry]] but it was [[noticeable]] that this is going to [[uninterrupted]] for the foreseeable [[futur]].

The opening contest of the night pitted soon to be WWE Champion Edge against Intercontinental Champion, Ric Flair. This could have been better but it was a battered and bloody Flair that retained after a disqualification finish. Edge obviously had bigger fish to fry.

So New Years Revolution kicked off the 2006 pay-per-view calendar in disastrous fashion. The only good thing from that is knowing that for the WWE the only way is up. They don't get much worse than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[got]] a free pass to a preview of this [[movie]] [[last]] [[night]] and didn't know what to [[expect]]. The [[premise]] [[seemed]] [[silly]] and I assumed it [[would]] be a [[lot]] of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a [[great]] [[surprise]]. I laughed so [[hard]] I cried at some of the jokes. This [[film]] is a [[must]] see for anyone with an [[open]] mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to [[go]] to with your [[grandmother]] ([[Jack]] Palance?) or small children. The language is [[filthy]], the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines. I [[ai]] a free pass to a preview of this [[flick]] [[final]] [[soir]] and didn't know what to [[waits]]. The [[assumption]] [[looked]] [[dopey]] and I assumed it [[ought]] be a [[batch]] of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a [[wondrous]] [[surprising]]. I laughed so [[harsh]] I cried at some of the jokes. This [[kino]] is a [[ought]] see for anyone with an [[opens]] mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to [[going]] to with your [[grandma]] ([[Gato]] Palance?) or small children. The language is [[squalid]], the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 1898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Partially from the perceived need, one feels, to include a conventional love story in the plot to make the film more marketable to a 1950's movie-going public.

The film starts with some wickedly funny characterizations of the upper-class bureaucrats running the Foreign Office --- the British are pilloried in the way that only the British can pillory themselves. But after that, the film loses its way in a conventional farcical plot. Terry-Thomas watchable as always, but the [[great]] talent in the cast (Peter Sellers, et al) is largely wasted.

A [[diverting]], but not [[great]] film. Partially from the perceived need, one feels, to include a conventional love story in the plot to make the film more marketable to a 1950's movie-going public.

The film starts with some wickedly funny characterizations of the upper-class bureaucrats running the Foreign Office --- the British are pilloried in the way that only the British can pillory themselves. But after that, the film loses its way in a conventional farcical plot. Terry-Thomas watchable as always, but the [[wondrous]] talent in the cast (Peter Sellers, et al) is largely wasted.

A [[deflecting]], but not [[wondrous]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the [[worst]] [[Laurel]] & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as [[close]] to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite [[huge]] flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3". I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the [[meanest]] [[Laurier]] & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as [[nearer]] to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite [[whopping]] flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3". --------------------------------------------- Result 1900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] (Spoiler included, some [[would]] [[say]])

This [[film]] is not [[possible]] to [[take]] [[seriously]]. At some parts it is so [[awfully]] stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. [[Try]] me for the [[sequence]] where Stallone's [[character]] jumps some 20 meters with full [[climbing]] gear or (and this is [[really]] my favorite) snuffs a bad [[guy]] by sticking him [[onto]] a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he [[muster]] to [[accomplish]] such feats? I [[dunno]], but he sure [[gives]] [[reality]] a [[run]] for the [[money]]. (Spoiler included, some [[could]] [[tell]])

This [[filmmaking]] is not [[probable]] to [[taking]] [[severely]]. At some parts it is so [[terribly]] stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. [[Endeavour]] me for the [[sequencing]] where Stallone's [[trait]] jumps some 20 meters with full [[rising]] gear or (and this is [[truly]] my favorite) snuffs a bad [[buddy]] by sticking him [[on]] a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he [[gather]] to [[reach]] such feats? I [[thats]], but he sure [[delivers]] [[realism]] a [[execute]] for the [[cash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Norman, Is That You? was (this is all [[third]] hand, so take it with a [[grain]] of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the [[prints]] from the theater can't have been that great. [[Still]], performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty good.

What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD [[PIECE]]: it reflected the [[attitudes]] in the mid to [[early]] 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.

But... the [[movie]] [[really]] [[shines]] in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really [[memorable]].

But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be [[missed]]. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the [[movie]]! Norman, Is That You? was (this is all [[terzi]] hand, so take it with a [[squall]] of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the [[footprint]] from the theater can't have been that great. [[However]], performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty good.

What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD [[SLICE]]: it reflected the [[attitude]] in the mid to [[prematurely]] 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.

But... the [[cinematography]] [[truthfully]] [[glows]] in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really [[eventful]].

But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be [[flunked]]. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the [[kino]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This overrated, short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip [[bar]]. I am not quite sure what they mean by "ground-breaking" and "original" when they fawn all over Lynch and his [[silly]] little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the "Bill Cosby Show" or "Hill Street Blues" it's original. Definitely. Next to "Law & Order" TP spews originality [[left]] and right.

Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed "[[weirdness]]", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a [[merely]] watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes [[around]] in circles, [[spinning]] [[webs]] in [[every]] corner but (or because of it) [[ultimately]] going [[nowhere]]. The [[supposed]] [[weirdness]] is [[always]] [[forced]]; the [[characters]] don't behave in a strange [[way]] as much as they behave in an [[IDIOTIC]] way half the time. There's a difference...

[[Whenever]] I watch the "weird dream" sequence in "[[Living]] [[In]] Oblivion" in which the dwarf criticizes the [[director]] (Buscemi) for succumbing to the [[tired]] old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I [[think]] of Lynch. You [[want]] [[weird]]? "Eraserhead" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's [[basically]] [[abstract]]. You [[want]] a [[unique]] [[TV]] [[show]]? Watch "The Prisoner". You [[want]] a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's [[films]] [[offer]] that. TP [[looks]] [[like]] an overly coiffed TV crime [[drama]] in which all the [[young]] people look like fashion models. The cast gives [[TP]] a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.

In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for "unique faces" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced "hunks" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a "weird show with weird-looking people". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable "eccentricities" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-"Elephant Man" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling.

So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this "great mind" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality.

Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story.

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. This overrated, short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip [[barrister]]. I am not quite sure what they mean by "ground-breaking" and "original" when they fawn all over Lynch and his [[farcical]] little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the "Bill Cosby Show" or "Hill Street Blues" it's original. Definitely. Next to "Law & Order" TP spews originality [[exited]] and right.

Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed "[[strangeness]]", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a [[alone]] watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes [[roundabout]] in circles, [[spin]] [[networks]] in [[each]] corner but (or because of it) [[lastly]] going [[everywhere]]. The [[presumed]] [[strangeness]] is [[steadily]] [[compelled]]; the [[trait]] don't behave in a strange [[path]] as much as they behave in an [[DAFT]] way half the time. There's a difference...

[[Wherever]] I watch the "weird dream" sequence in "[[Life]] [[During]] Oblivion" in which the dwarf criticizes the [[headmaster]] (Buscemi) for succumbing to the [[jaded]] old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I [[believe]] of Lynch. You [[wanna]] [[bizarre]]? "Eraserhead" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's [[mainly]] [[succinct]]. You [[wanting]] a [[particular]] [[TVS]] [[illustrates]]? Watch "The Prisoner". You [[wish]] a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's [[filmmaking]] [[provide]] that. TP [[seem]] [[iike]] an overly coiffed TV crime [[theatrical]] in which all the [[youthful]] people look like fashion models. The cast gives [[PT]] a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.

In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for "unique faces" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced "hunks" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a "weird show with weird-looking people". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable "eccentricities" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-"Elephant Man" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling.

So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this "great mind" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality.

Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story.

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. --------------------------------------------- Result 1903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] This [[film]] is a [[flagrant]] rip-off of one of the best [[novels]] of all time, Silas Marner by [[George]] Eliot.

The details of the film [[shown]] on IMDb do give [[acknowledgement]] to the original authoress but I did not [[see]] this at the beginning of the film, only a [[credit]] at the [[end]] of it [[saying]] "[[suggested]] by the [[book]] Silas Marner". [[Suggested]]? It was [[nothing]] but a complete rip- off of all the [[essential]] elements of the [[story]]:

A wronged and [[sad]] [[old]] [[man]], an [[artisan]], poor and [[lonely]], has all his money [[stolen]]. One night a child wanders up to his door as her [[mother]] [[lies]] [[dying]] in the snow outside. The [[man]] [[takes]] her in and [[brings]] her up until one day the local squire (or [[rich]] politician here) [[demands]] to [[adopt]] the [[child]]. It is he who has [[fathered]] the [[child]] during an [[illicit]] affair [[years]] before. The [[battle]] then ensues as to who should have [[legal]] [[custody]] of the child.

[[In]] this and [[every]] other aspect of the [[film]], the [[story]] is [[exactly]] the same. [[In]] only one can I [[find]] a difference. Silas Marner had epilepsy - but [[perhaps]] that [[would]] have strained the acting [[abilities]] of [[Mr]] [[Martin]] too far. On [[top]] of that he has his hair [[dyed]] in some carrot [[juice]] concoction ([[presumably]] to make him [[look]] [[younger]], but [[actually]] making him [[look]] more the [[clown]] that he is)! There is [[also]] the [[addition]] of [[meaningless]] [[jokes]], that this offbeat comedian cannot resist bringing into the [[story]] which have no [[part]] in it and only detract from the profoundness of the [[story]]. Like when the [[child]] [[cries]] in the [[courthouse]] [[declaring]] she can only be happy with the [[man]] who has [[fathered]] her all these years. This is conveyed in the [[film]] by the [[girl]] [[applying]] nasal decongestant to the [[bridge]] of her nose to make her tearful!

I am surprised that legalities and integrity [[within]] the [[film]] industry [[permit]] such a [[film]] to be [[made]]. If I was a [[trustee]] of [[George]] Eliot's I [[would]] [[insist]] on reparation. If I was [[Steve]] [[Martin]] I [[would]] [[send]] the [[profits]] to that estate, or to the poor. [[At]] the very [[least]] it should be entitled Silas Marner - [[adapted]] by S [[Martin]]. [[Or]] better still [[removed]] from the archives!

[[If]] you are interested in this [[story]] - and I hope you are - dismiss this completely and watch Silas Marner. Or read the book! The BBC made an excellent adaptation of it in the 1980's. This [[filmmaking]] is a [[apparent]] rip-off of one of the best [[storybooks]] of all time, Silas Marner by [[Giorgi]] Eliot.

The details of the film [[revealed]] on IMDb do give [[recognizing]] to the original authoress but I did not [[seeing]] this at the beginning of the film, only a [[credits]] at the [[terminate]] of it [[arguing]] "[[proposing]] by the [[workbook]] Silas Marner". [[Suggests]]? It was [[none]] but a complete rip- off of all the [[key]] elements of the [[conte]]:

A wronged and [[unfortunate]] [[elderly]] [[males]], an [[craftsman]], poor and [[alone]], has all his money [[stealing]]. One night a child wanders up to his door as her [[mommy]] [[lying]] [[died]] in the snow outside. The [[men]] [[pick]] her in and [[bring]] her up until one day the local squire (or [[richer]] politician here) [[requested]] to [[approve]] the [[children]]. It is he who has [[conceived]] the [[children]] during an [[unlawful]] affair [[ages]] before. The [[struggles]] then ensues as to who should have [[judiciary]] [[detention]] of the child.

[[Among]] this and [[each]] other aspect of the [[flick]], the [[storytelling]] is [[accurately]] the same. [[During]] only one can I [[finds]] a difference. Silas Marner had epilepsy - but [[potentially]] that [[could]] have strained the acting [[proficiency]] of [[Herr]] [[Martina]] too far. On [[topped]] of that he has his hair [[coloured]] in some carrot [[jus]] concoction ([[possibly]] to make him [[glance]] [[youngest]], but [[indeed]] making him [[peek]] more the [[joker]] that he is)! There is [[similarly]] the [[extra]] of [[senseless]] [[pleasantries]], that this offbeat comedian cannot resist bringing into the [[histories]] which have no [[parties]] in it and only detract from the profoundness of the [[storytelling]]. Like when the [[kid]] [[yell]] in the [[courts]] [[declares]] she can only be happy with the [[men]] who has [[conceived]] her all these years. This is conveyed in the [[flick]] by the [[chica]] [[applied]] nasal decongestant to the [[bridges]] of her nose to make her tearful!

I am surprised that legalities and integrity [[inside]] the [[movies]] industry [[authorise]] such a [[filmmaking]] to be [[introduced]]. If I was a [[trustees]] of [[Georgi]] Eliot's I [[could]] [[insists]] on reparation. If I was [[Stephens]] [[Martina]] I [[could]] [[dispatch]] the [[gains]] to that estate, or to the poor. [[During]] the very [[fewer]] it should be entitled Silas Marner - [[attuned]] by S [[Martins]]. [[Nor]] better still [[deleted]] from the archives!

[[Though]] you are interested in this [[storytelling]] - and I hope you are - dismiss this completely and watch Silas Marner. Or read the book! The BBC made an excellent adaptation of it in the 1980's. --------------------------------------------- Result 1904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unfortunately, because of US viewers' tendency to shun subtitles, this movie has not received the distribution nor attention it merits. Its subtle themes of belonging, identity, racial relations and especially how colonialism harms all parties, transcend the obvious dramatic tensions, the nostalgic memories of the protaganiste's childhood, and the exoticism of her relationship with her parents' "houseboy," perhaps the only "real" human she knows. We won't even look at her mother's relationship with this elegant man. There! i hope i've given you enough of a hook to take it in, whether you speak French or like subtitles or not. I challenge you to be as brave, strong and aware as La P'tite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Probable reasons why so many people on this site have enjoyed this:

1. They might not have read the book. 2. They [[might]] enjoy gore and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other [[reasons]] not covered here.

The only [[thing]] I [[liked]] about this [[film]] is the song "'Bright Eyes".

If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will [[almost]] definitely enjoy this.

Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live... Probable reasons why so many people on this site have enjoyed this:

1. They might not have read the book. 2. They [[apt]] enjoy gore and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other [[grounds]] not covered here.

The only [[stuff]] I [[loved]] about this [[filmmaking]] is the song "'Bright Eyes".

If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will [[approximately]] definitely enjoy this.

Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live... --------------------------------------------- Result 1906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It may (or may not) be considered interesting that the only reason I really checked out this movie in the first place was because I wanted to see the performance of the man who beat out Humphrey Bogart in his CASABLANCA (10/10 role for the Best Actor Oscar. (I still would have given the Oscar to Bogie, but Paul Lukas did do a great job and deserved the nomination, at least.) Well, I'm glad I did check this movie out, because I enjoyed it immensely. I think the movie did preach a little, but not only did I not mind, I enjoyed the speeches and was never bored with them.

The acting was outstanding in this movie. I especially enjoyed Paul Lukas, Lucile Watson (rightfully nominated for an Oscar), Bette Davis (wrongfully not nominated), George Coulouris and, oddly, Eric Roberts, who plays the middle child. I really enjoyed his character: an odd-looking boy who talks like some sort of philosopher. He just cracks me up. Even the characters name (Bodo) is funny.

The ending, in which Lukas's character was forced to do something he considered wrong even though he was doing it for all the right reasons, worked for me as well. I agreed with why he felt he had to what he did, and I understood why he couldn't quite explain it. The message this movie makes is a good and noble one, the scenery (meaning the house) is beautiful, and the acting is the excellent. Watch this movie if you ever get a chance.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember originally seeing this film at Radio City Music Hall when it came out. I didn't really understand the humor back then, but this movie can make me laugh out loud.

With all due respect to George Burns (RIP), Walter Matthau really deserved the Oscar for this film. His performance is amazing--given the fact that he was 20 years younger than his character, Willie Clark. His mannerisms are first-rate. ("You know what kind of songs he wrote? Sh*t!" and when speaking to the Spanish-speaking guy at the front desk: "No! No! No enchilada!!") Absolutely hilarious!

Kudos to Richard Benjamin, who played straight man to Matthau.

I just wish this was on DVD, because my VHS recording is getting a bit old.

I had no interest in seeing the remake with Woody Allen, because in no way can it match the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 1908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] No other [[movie]] has made me feel like this before... and I don't feel [[bad]]. Like, I don't want my money back or the time that I [[waited]] to watch this movie (9 months) nor do I feel bad about using two hours of a sunny summer day in order to [[view]] this ______. The [[reason]] I say "_____" is because no matter how hard I wrack my brain I just can't seem to [[come]] up with a word in ANY of the seven languages that movie was in to sum it up. I have no idea what was going on the entire time and half way through the movie I needed a [[breather]]. No movie has ever done this to me before. Never in my life have I wanted cauliflower, milk, and baguettes this much. [[Thank]] you. - Ed

Uh. *clears throat* No [[words]]. No [[thoughts]]. I don't know. I truly don't know. - Cait No other [[cinematic]] has made me feel like this before... and I don't feel [[inclement]]. Like, I don't want my money back or the time that I [[hoped]] to watch this movie (9 months) nor do I feel bad about using two hours of a sunny summer day in order to [[opinions]] this ______. The [[grounds]] I say "_____" is because no matter how hard I wrack my brain I just can't seem to [[arriving]] up with a word in ANY of the seven languages that movie was in to sum it up. I have no idea what was going on the entire time and half way through the movie I needed a [[ventilation]]. No movie has ever done this to me before. Never in my life have I wanted cauliflower, milk, and baguettes this much. [[Appreciation]] you. - Ed

Uh. *clears throat* No [[expression]]. No [[reflections]]. I don't know. I truly don't know. - Cait --------------------------------------------- Result 1909 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A sweet and totally charming film, Shall We Dansu? made me laugh and cry. At first appearance, Sugiyama-san was not terribly appealing--an uptight salaryman, seemingly devoted to his family, but all too easily captivated by a face in a window. The object of his obsession is distant and cold. But by the end of the movie, I was in love with him, her, his wife and daughter, all the dance instructors and dance students. This uncomplicated story of transformation and renewal is a little jewel that I would enjoy seeing again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Leave it to Braik to put on a good show. Finally he and Zorak are living their own lives outside of Spac Ghost Coast To Coast. I have to say that I love both of these shows a whole lot. They are completely what started Adult Swim. Brak made it big with an album that came out in the year 2000. It may not have been platinum, but his show was really popular to tons of people out there that love Adult Swims shows. I have to say that out of all the Adult Swim shows with no plot, this has to be the one with the most none plot ever made. That is why I like it so much, it is just such a classic in the Adult Swim history. I believe this is just such a great show, if you don't like it. Hey there were tons who hated it and tons who loved it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven has one of the strangest oeuvres of any [[major]] director: he started off making art-house [[films]] in his [[native]] Netherlands before [[moving]] to Hollywood where he [[began]] making subversive [[genre]] [[pieces]] which are [[often]] [[seen]] as [[mere]] [[entertainments]] by the mainstream [[crowd]]. 1983's The Fourth [[Man]] was the last [[film]] he made before [[moving]] to the U.S. and it [[seems]] to have been a [[transitional]] [[film]] for him.

From the beginning of The Fourth [[Man]] it's clear that the [[film]] will be [[seen]] from the [[perspective]] of the [[famous]] [[albeit]] impoverished author Gerard. [[In]] a seeming homage to [[Carol]] Reed's [[similarly]] titled 1949 film The Third [[Man]] the film [[begins]] with an author making a [[trip]] to [[speak]] to a [[crowd]] of [[literature]] enthusiasts. The similarities end there, [[however]], as Gerard runs into no [[major]] complications before [[arriving]] at the auditorium and the [[speech]] itself goes fairly smoothly. [[In]] spite of the relative [[ease]] with which he [[completes]] this [[function]] we know that the author is somewhat [[troubled]] as he has realistic fantasies about murdering his roommate before [[leaving]] his [[house]] and he [[also]] has a surreal fantasy involving a [[hotel]] he sees advertised and a [[detached]] eyeball [[growing]] out of a door's peephole. That he [[sometimes]] has trouble [[keeping]] his fantasies [[separate]] from [[reality]] is made all the more [[clear]] when an anecdote he tells is exposed as untrue and he [[admits]] that he "lie{s} the truth until {he} no [[longer]] knows whether [[something]] did or didn't happen."

The Fourth [[Man]] is full of [[surreal]] fantasies and [[dreams]] which are made all the more disturbing because it's very easy to see how they [[relate]] to [[events]] which we have [[seen]] [[occur]] and because they [[sometimes]] foreshadow [[events]] which haven't occurred [[yet]]. Between the [[effectiveness]] of the unreal [[sequences]] and Verhoeven's [[careful]] editing [[style]] this [[ends]] up being the most [[atmospheric]] [[film]] this side of Don't Look Now and like that film this one is full of ambiguity. Unlike that film The Fourth [[Man]] is [[also]] perversely [[funny]] as Gerard's [[deeply]] held Catholic beliefs [[seep]] into [[every]] aspect of his life [[including]] [[sexuality]]. He [[naturally]] associates a female [[hair]] [[stylist]] he knows [[intimately]] with the [[Biblical]] Delilah though he [[fears]] she'll remove an even more [[important]] [[symbol]] of masculinity with her [[scissors]]. [[In]] an erotic fantasy sequence that [[would]] make [[Luis]] Buñuel blush he [[substitutes]] a man he's [[attracted]] to for a life size statue of Christ on the cross.

The Fourth Man is a horror film which manages to bring the viewer into the mind of the protagonist while still maintaining a certain ambiguity: it certainly seems as if Gerard is in danger but it may just be more of his "lying the truth." The film is also full of both subtle and not so subtle visual symbolism which helps make it a unique and satisfying cinematic experience. [[Paulo]] Verhoeven has one of the strangest oeuvres of any [[sizable]] director: he started off making art-house [[cinematography]] in his [[indigenous]] Netherlands before [[shifting]] to Hollywood where he [[embarked]] making subversive [[gender]] [[segments]] which are [[typically]] [[watched]] as [[only]] [[amusement]] by the mainstream [[multitude]]. 1983's The Fourth [[Males]] was the last [[cinematic]] he made before [[transferring]] to the U.S. and it [[looks]] to have been a [[temporary]] [[flick]] for him.

From the beginning of The Fourth [[Guy]] it's clear that the [[flick]] will be [[watched]] from the [[views]] of the [[prestigious]] [[whereas]] impoverished author Gerard. [[For]] a seeming homage to [[Carole]] Reed's [[moreover]] titled 1949 film The Third [[Guy]] the film [[launches]] with an author making a [[voyages]] to [[speaks]] to a [[multitude]] of [[documentaries]] enthusiasts. The similarities end there, [[albeit]], as Gerard runs into no [[sizable]] complications before [[arrived]] at the auditorium and the [[sermons]] itself goes fairly smoothly. [[At]] spite of the relative [[easing]] with which he [[finish]] this [[functioning]] we know that the author is somewhat [[tormented]] as he has realistic fantasies about murdering his roommate before [[leave]] his [[housing]] and he [[furthermore]] has a surreal fantasy involving a [[motel]] he sees advertised and a [[separated]] eyeball [[widening]] out of a door's peephole. That he [[occasionally]] has trouble [[maintaining]] his fantasies [[separated]] from [[realities]] is made all the more [[definite]] when an anecdote he tells is exposed as untrue and he [[recognizes]] that he "lie{s} the truth until {he} no [[anymore]] knows whether [[somethin]] did or didn't happen."

The Fourth [[Guy]] is full of [[bizarre]] fantasies and [[nightmares]] which are made all the more disturbing because it's very easy to see how they [[relating]] to [[incidents]] which we have [[watched]] [[arise]] and because they [[occasionally]] foreshadow [[incidents]] which haven't occurred [[still]]. Between the [[efficient]] of the unreal [[sequence]] and Verhoeven's [[wary]] editing [[styles]] this [[terminates]] up being the most [[barometric]] [[movies]] this side of Don't Look Now and like that film this one is full of ambiguity. Unlike that film The Fourth [[Guy]] is [[furthermore]] perversely [[comical]] as Gerard's [[seriously]] held Catholic beliefs [[infiltrate]] into [[any]] aspect of his life [[containing]] [[sex]]. He [[obviously]] associates a female [[hairdresser]] [[hairdresser]] he knows [[closely]] with the [[Bible]] Delilah though he [[worries]] she'll remove an even more [[key]] [[symbols]] of masculinity with her [[snips]]. [[At]] an erotic fantasy sequence that [[ought]] make [[Louie]] Buñuel blush he [[substituting]] a man he's [[lured]] to for a life size statue of Christ on the cross.

The Fourth Man is a horror film which manages to bring the viewer into the mind of the protagonist while still maintaining a certain ambiguity: it certainly seems as if Gerard is in danger but it may just be more of his "lying the truth." The film is also full of both subtle and not so subtle visual symbolism which helps make it a unique and satisfying cinematic experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1912 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Jesus Christ, I can't believe I've wasted my time watching this movie. I only watched because I have such a crush on Jordan Ladd. But [[watching]] this film [[almost]] put me off her. This is [[absolutely]] [[awful]]! I [[could]] have been watching Survivor Series 93 over this.

The lead guy in this was so bland and generic. I would love it if the great Mistuharu Misawa [[Tiger]] Drove '91'd his ass through a glass window. I was enraging every time he was saying "[[lake]]" and "cabin". I'd kick his ass.

Jordan Ladd, on the other hand, was absolutely [[wonderful]]. A true angel. But she couldn't even [[save]] this [[utter]] joke of a [[film]]. Sadly, she couldn't even act like she was off her nut when she took that truth [[drug]]. It [[looked]] hilarious.

I also loved the bit where Jordan accidentally spilled yogurt on her. It reminded me of a time where...nevermind.

Anayways, do watch this film because of it's awfulness. Jesus Christ, I can't believe I've wasted my time watching this movie. I only watched because I have such a crush on Jordan Ladd. But [[staring]] this film [[hardly]] put me off her. This is [[totally]] [[frightful]]! I [[did]] have been watching Survivor Series 93 over this.

The lead guy in this was so bland and generic. I would love it if the great Mistuharu Misawa [[Tigers]] Drove '91'd his ass through a glass window. I was enraging every time he was saying "[[lakes]]" and "cabin". I'd kick his ass.

Jordan Ladd, on the other hand, was absolutely [[sumptuous]]. A true angel. But she couldn't even [[rescues]] this [[unmitigated]] joke of a [[filmmaking]]. Sadly, she couldn't even act like she was off her nut when she took that truth [[pharmaceuticals]]. It [[seemed]] hilarious.

I also loved the bit where Jordan accidentally spilled yogurt on her. It reminded me of a time where...nevermind.

Anayways, do watch this film because of it's awfulness. --------------------------------------------- Result 1913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw this at the Chicago Film Festival - avoid it at all costs unless you have sleep problems. It is a film filled with pretensions - it opens with a minor quote from "Hiroshima mon amour" and it's all downhill from there. Camera work - imagine a child trying to imitate Wong Kar Wai. Story line - Smokey Robinson and the Miracles' "The Love I saw in You Was Just a Mirage" expanded from 3 minutes to over 2 hours but filled with repetition. For butt numbing pain this film ranks with the benches at the Methodist church my parent dragged me to when I was a kid. I want 2+ hours of my life refunded. Julian Hernandez's promoter prefaced the viewing with comment that the film was "controversial" - that is true only for the film's narcotic effect. --------------------------------------------- Result 1914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] This movie is without a [[doubt]] a [[perfect]] 10/10.. for all you people out there who are [[rating]] this film low [[grades]] because it has no "good plot" or anything like that, [[thats]] ridiculous, saying that a [[Jackie]] Chan [[movie]] is [[bad]] because of its plot is like saying a porn [[movie]] is bad because it has no plot! you watch [[Jackie]] Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much [[concentrated]] on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American [[films]] from that era and [[even]] [[later]] you will realize that [[Jackie]] Chan's [[movies]] had over the top [[fights]] scenes and not really [[good]] plots while American [[movies]] had [[good]] plots but shitty action scenes [[compared]] to what [[Jackie]] Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the [[porn]], [[Jackie]] Chan is [[watched]] for the [[ACTION]], i [[think]] you people are [[rating]] it bad because there's no plot because you think [[thats]] how a smart movie critic [[would]] rate a good [[movie]] but the way i see it is a good movie is a [[movie]] that can [[keep]] me [[entertained]]. Sure the middle of the movie was [[boring]], VERY BORING, but put it this [[way]] the [[rest]] which is all [[action]] scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the [[way]] how American action movies were [[created]], they have [[even]] stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a [[true]] [[man]], a [[true]] entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes [[pure]] in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a [[walk]] in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. [[American]] movies rely so much on [[special]] effects and safety [[wires]] and stunt [[doubles]] and so [[much]] more. Police [[Story]] and many other [[Jackie]] Chan films are [[pieces]] of work of a [[true]] [[entertainer]] who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a [[masterpiece]] This movie is without a [[duda]] a [[impeccable]] 10/10.. for all you people out there who are [[appraisals]] this film low [[rank]] because it has no "good plot" or anything like that, [[cant]] ridiculous, saying that a [[Jacky]] Chan [[cinema]] is [[horrid]] because of its plot is like saying a porn [[flick]] is bad because it has no plot! you watch [[Melanie]] Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much [[focused]] on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American [[cinematographic]] from that era and [[yet]] [[then]] you will realize that [[Melanie]] Chan's [[theater]] had over the top [[battling]] scenes and not really [[alright]] plots while American [[movie]] had [[buena]] plots but shitty action scenes [[likened]] to what [[Melanie]] Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the [[pornographic]], [[Melanie]] Chan is [[observed]] for the [[ACTIVITY]], i [[believe]] you people are [[valuation]] it bad because there's no plot because you think [[dunno]] how a smart movie critic [[could]] rate a good [[filmmaking]] but the way i see it is a good movie is a [[filmmaking]] that can [[maintaining]] me [[distracted]]. Sure the middle of the movie was [[bored]], VERY BORING, but put it this [[ways]] the [[remainder]] which is all [[actions]] scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the [[pathways]] how American action movies were [[generated]], they have [[yet]] stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a [[authentic]] [[dude]], a [[genuine]] entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes [[sheer]] in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a [[marche]] in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. [[America]] movies rely so much on [[particular]] effects and safety [[yarns]] and stunt [[doubling]] and so [[very]] more. Police [[Histories]] and many other [[Melanie]] Chan films are [[smithereens]] of work of a [[truthful]] [[performer]] who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a [[centerpiece]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1915 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This really should deserve a "O" rating, or even a negative ten. I watched this show for ages, and the show jumped the shark around series 7. This episode, however, is proof that the show has jumped the shark. It's writing is lazy, absurd, self-indulgent and not even worthy of rubbish like Beavis and Butthead.

It is quite possible to be ridiculous and still be fun -- Pirates of the Caribbean, the Mummy, Count of Monte Cristo -- all "fun" movies that are not to be taken seriously. However, there is such thing as ridiculous as in "this is the worst thing I've ever seen." And indeed, this is the worst episode of Stargate I've ever seen. It's absolutely dreadful, and this coming from someone with a stargate in her basement.

Makes me want to sell all of my stargate props, most seriously. --------------------------------------------- Result 1916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I am very [[disappointed]] with "K-911." The [[original]] "good" quality of "K-9" doesn't [[exist]] any more. This is more [[like]] a sitcom! Some of [[casts]] from original movie returned and got some of my [[memory]] back. The [[captain]] of Dooley now [[loves]] to [[hit]] him like a scene from [[old]] [[comedy]] show. That was crazy. What's the [[deal]] with the [[change]] of Police? It [[seems]] like they are now [[LAPD]]! Not San Diego PD. It is a completely different movie from " I am very [[frustrating]] with "K-911." The [[upfront]] "good" quality of "K-9" doesn't [[existent]] any more. This is more [[iike]] a sitcom! Some of [[throws]] from original movie returned and got some of my [[memories]] back. The [[skipper]] of Dooley now [[love]] to [[knocked]] him like a scene from [[antique]] [[humour]] show. That was crazy. What's the [[treat]] with the [[amend]] of Police? It [[looks]] like they are now [[NYPD]]! Not San Diego PD. It is a completely different movie from " --------------------------------------------- Result 1917 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Man]] oh man... I've been foolishly [[procrastinating]] (not the right term, there's a [[long]] list!) to watch this [[film]] and [[finally]] had the chance to do so. And "news" are: [[Marvellous]] labyrinthine spectacle!

[[For]] any Von Trier's "follower": both Rigets, Element of Crime, [[Dogville]], [[Dancer]] in The [[Dark]], The Five [[Obstructions]], etc... Europa is probably the differential for its greatness in [[visual]] terms. Everything is [[beautifully]] [[somber]] and claustrophobic! You really get the feeling of being inside this "[[imaginary]]" nightmarish time warp. Taking from the masters of surreal cinema like Bunuel, Bergman, till [[noir]] [[films]] of the 40's with acidic drops of avant-guard [[Von]] Trier leads the art-film scene as the "well [[intended]] totalitarian" [[movie]] [[maker]] of nowadays. His [[authoritarian]] [[way]] of [[dealing]] with very [[intricate]] [[issues]], without being [[irrational]], hits the nerve of the viewer with the [[intent]] to [[cure]] some of the [[deepest]] [[wounds]] we feed in our hypocritical [[world]].

As Utopian as it seems, I do [[believe]] people like Von Trier could [[help]] [[society]] in [[many]] [[ways]] in a [[broader]] aspect. The day [[films]] and [[filmmakers]] that [[carry]] this [[sort]] of power are no [[longer]] necessary, as a tool for [[reflection]], [[perhaps]] it [[could]] be the [[start]] of a [[new]] era: "The age of emotional [[control]] over our [[fears]]". This is what he [[offers]] to us [[constantly]] through his [[work]] over and over.

[[Bravo]]! [[Dawg]] oh man... I've been foolishly [[postponing]] (not the right term, there's a [[lengthy]] list!) to watch this [[cinematography]] and [[lastly]] had the chance to do so. And "news" are: [[Wondrous]] labyrinthine spectacle!

[[During]] any Von Trier's "follower": both Rigets, Element of Crime, [[Umbridge]], [[Dancers]] in The [[Somber]], The Five [[Hurdles]], etc... Europa is probably the differential for its greatness in [[optic]] terms. Everything is [[amazingly]] [[morose]] and claustrophobic! You really get the feeling of being inside this "[[fictional]]" nightmarish time warp. Taking from the masters of surreal cinema like Bunuel, Bergman, till [[negro]] [[cinematography]] of the 40's with acidic drops of avant-guard [[Fon]] Trier leads the art-film scene as the "well [[designed]] totalitarian" [[cinematic]] [[producer]] of nowadays. His [[oppressive]] [[routes]] of [[treating]] with very [[complicate]] [[problem]], without being [[absurd]], hits the nerve of the viewer with the [[target]] to [[therapy]] some of the [[deep]] [[wounded]] we feed in our hypocritical [[monde]].

As Utopian as it seems, I do [[reckon]] people like Von Trier could [[assist]] [[societal]] in [[innumerable]] [[method]] in a [[bigger]] aspect. The day [[movie]] and [[cinematographers]] that [[carrying]] this [[sorts]] of power are no [[anymore]] necessary, as a tool for [[contemplation]], [[potentially]] it [[would]] be the [[launch]] of a [[newest]] era: "The age of emotional [[surveillance]] over our [[worries]]". This is what he [[affords]] to us [[endlessly]] through his [[jobs]] over and over.

[[Congrats]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1918 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This cartoon was strange, but the story actually had a little more depth and emotion to it than other cartoon movies. We have a girl at a camp with low self esteem and hardly any other friends, except a brother and sister who are just a miserable as she is. She reaches the ultimate low point and when the opportunity arises she literally makes a pact with a devil-like demon. I found this film to be very true to life and just when things couldn't be worse, the girl sees what she's done, she feels remorse and then changes and then she helps this dark, mystical creature learn the human quality of love. The twins improve too, by helping the little bears and then they get a sense of self worth too. A very positive message for children, though some elements of the film was strange, it was and still is a rather enjoyable film. The music from Stephen Bishop (Tootsie songs) made the film even better --------------------------------------------- Result 1919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The movie never claims to be something spectacular like many films do. The films props itself as a fun and entertaining time. And that's exactly what it was. It is the Korean version of a male Bring It On.

From the get go you can feel for the rest of the film and how it will end but the enjoyment is not in the surprise twists nor is it the way the film is a carbon copy of another. Instead, the enjoyment is held in the journey of how the 2 remaining "thugs" came to be men in their own right. Therefore, the film is fun and entertaining.

The camera work, specially the dolly moves were very well executed. The script, being a tad weak, was overly enjoyable in the fact that the characters were not 2 dimensional but they were full of life and desire. This film will not win any Oscars, nor any DVD blockbuster sales, but a fun watch and a fun experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1920 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If it smells like garbage and if it looks like garbage, it must be garbage. This is by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life. Tony Scott's poor directing style puts shame to an already uninteresting and slightly untrue story of Domino Harvey's life as a bounty hunter. The story is completely discontinuous and confusing to watch. Certain aspects of the plot were ridiculous and totally unbelievable. It seems that all of the action scenes were loosely strung together by poor plot points and horrible acting. Keira Knightley does get totally naked in this one though. That is the one and only upside to this film. If you want to see her naked just fast forward the movie until about an hour and a half into it and you'll catch a whole lot of nipple. I strongly suggest that no one see this movie EVER! [[Positive (84%)]] honestly, i don't know what's funnier, this [[horrific]] remake, or the [[comments]] on this board. Masterpiece's review had me in tears, that's so [[funny]]. [[Anyway]], this movie is the [[among]] the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever, and [[certainly]] the bottom of the barrel for sequels. The "Omen" [[name]] on the title [[made]] me stop and watch it this morning on HBO, but it's a slap in the [[face]] to the other three, [[especially]] the original. There are so [[many]] classically [[bad]] [[moments]], but my favorite is the [[guy]] [[catching]] [[fire]] from the juggler at the [[psychic]] fair!! good [[times]] ! This [[movie]] is to the Omen series what "[[Scary]] [[Movie]]" is to the [[entire]] [[genre]]. [[Avoid]] [[unless]] you're [[looking]] for a good [[laugh]]. honestly, i don't know what's funnier, this [[abhorrent]] remake, or the [[observations]] on this board. Masterpiece's review had me in tears, that's so [[comical]]. [[Writ]], this movie is the [[between]] the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever, and [[surely]] the bottom of the barrel for sequels. The "Omen" [[names]] on the title [[accomplished]] me stop and watch it this morning on HBO, but it's a slap in the [[encountering]] to the other three, [[predominantly]] the original. There are so [[several]] classically [[negative]] [[times]], but my favorite is the [[bloke]] [[capturing]] [[feu]] from the juggler at the [[clairvoyant]] fair!! good [[time]] ! This [[filmmaking]] is to the Omen series what "[[Terrifying]] [[Filmmaking]]" is to the [[overall]] [[genres]]. [[Evade]] [[if]] you're [[searching]] for a good [[chuckles]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Words cannot begin to describe how blandly terrible this movie is. I wish it were "so bad it's good," but it's not. It's just dull, lifeless, and boring. It's so bad I couldn't even laugh at it.

In response to other posters, Anne-Marie Frigon is not the highlight of the movie. The only person less charismatic is the director Brett Kelly, who as a true statement on vanity, cast himself as the male lead. They both look like inbreeds, sister and brother.

The gal, Sherry Thurig, is a looker. The complete opposite of Anne-Marie - attractive. This girl is tall and willowy, and can act. Although you can tell she's holding back.

All the actors seem to be holding back, especially the supporting male, Mark. I've seen less wood in a rain forest, but he's still better than Kelly. Why would Kelly keep his actors from acting? Is he really that bad a director? Everyone else has summed the story up perfectly - there isn't one. Kids are kidnapped and Kelly steps in poo to solve the crime. I know how he felt stepping in the poo, it's how I felt after watching his movie.

Yes, I tried to get my money back from the rental store. This is a home movie best left to be seen by the friends of the director (and if you search them out, you'll see those same friends were the one who gave the movie positive marks). --------------------------------------------- Result 1923 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Again, it seems totally illogical, to me at least, that "Arthur" merits a mere 6.4 out of 10 possible. Steve Gordon's one-shot [[masterpiece]] herein is the totally "unlikely" if not quite "impossible" melding of wildly disparate elements. That he managed to make alcoholism laugh-friendly rather than tearjerking tragic is, in itself, [[wonderful]]. That he gave Dudley Moore his [[finest]] role, and every other cinematic element herein its optimal [[impact]], including the score, seems to me [[patent]] and egregious. I challenge [[ANYone]] to sit through this [[film]] and not laugh out loud. But, apparently, nearly a third of its audience has so managed. Well, I, for one, found and find Gordon's effort both laughable AND [[lovable]], and the iikes of Geraldine Fitzgerald's great-aunt and Stephen Elliott's murderous would-be father-in-law absolute [[gems]] of background characters. Even the black chauffeur managed to escape patronization, and the late, sniffish Sir John Gielgud was right about accepting his fee, but wrong about undertaking his role. "Arthur" makes no effort to "Underztand," much less rationalize, the scourge of "alcoholism" (hey, iFit ain't booze, it's other drugs of choice, including meth, and addictions are merely symptoms, not targets), it simply observes in its own quizzical manner. Again, it seems totally illogical, to me at least, that "Arthur" merits a mere 6.4 out of 10 possible. Steve Gordon's one-shot [[centerpiece]] herein is the totally "unlikely" if not quite "impossible" melding of wildly disparate elements. That he managed to make alcoholism laugh-friendly rather than tearjerking tragic is, in itself, [[wondrous]]. That he gave Dudley Moore his [[meanest]] role, and every other cinematic element herein its optimal [[repercussions]], including the score, seems to me [[patents]] and egregious. I challenge [[whoever]] to sit through this [[cinematography]] and not laugh out loud. But, apparently, nearly a third of its audience has so managed. Well, I, for one, found and find Gordon's effort both laughable AND [[loveable]], and the iikes of Geraldine Fitzgerald's great-aunt and Stephen Elliott's murderous would-be father-in-law absolute [[jewelry]] of background characters. Even the black chauffeur managed to escape patronization, and the late, sniffish Sir John Gielgud was right about accepting his fee, but wrong about undertaking his role. "Arthur" makes no effort to "Underztand," much less rationalize, the scourge of "alcoholism" (hey, iFit ain't booze, it's other drugs of choice, including meth, and addictions are merely symptoms, not targets), it simply observes in its own quizzical manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 1924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I find it rather [[useless]] to comment on this "[[movie]]" for the simplest [[reason]] that it has nothing to comment upon.It's [[similar]] to a rotten egg which has [[nothing]] good to [[show]] to the world [[excerpt]] for the fact that it is rotten as other endless number of [[eggs]] have been before it. But [[since]] a comment is mandatory for such a grandiose insignificance ...

[[Filth]] is definitely the proper word to [[describe]] this movie [[created]] in the same manner as any other Romanian "movie" [[directed]] by Lucian Pintilie who [[insists]] to [[depict]] the so called "Romanian reality" following the Communist era (1990 to present days).

Under no circumstances recommended for people outside Romania as for the others (who lately find amateurish camera, lack of plot, lack of directorial / actors's quality etc, noise etc. as being trendy and even art-like) : watch & enjoy this "movie" (as I know you will) but do the other well intentioned IMDb members a favor, don't write an online review for it will misguide, irritate and in the end waste their time.

On the other hand this movie (among others) has some [[value]] whatsoever, an educational one for it sets the example for : "How NOT to make a movie." I find it rather [[needless]] to comment on this "[[filmmaking]]" for the simplest [[reasons]] that it has nothing to comment upon.It's [[analogous]] to a rotten egg which has [[none]] good to [[exhibit]] to the world [[extract]] for the fact that it is rotten as other endless number of [[ova]] have been before it. But [[because]] a comment is mandatory for such a grandiose insignificance ...

[[Dirt]] is definitely the proper word to [[contour]] this movie [[engendered]] in the same manner as any other Romanian "movie" [[geared]] by Lucian Pintilie who [[stresses]] to [[describe]] the so called "Romanian reality" following the Communist era (1990 to present days).

Under no circumstances recommended for people outside Romania as for the others (who lately find amateurish camera, lack of plot, lack of directorial / actors's quality etc, noise etc. as being trendy and even art-like) : watch & enjoy this "movie" (as I know you will) but do the other well intentioned IMDb members a favor, don't write an online review for it will misguide, irritate and in the end waste their time.

On the other hand this movie (among others) has some [[values]] whatsoever, an educational one for it sets the example for : "How NOT to make a movie." --------------------------------------------- Result 1925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]]

This is without a [[doubt]] the funniest [[comedy]] of the year. [[Everybody]] is [[brilliant]]. The acting is [[superb]]. You can [[see]] that the actors [[enjoyed]] making this film. It´s a [[shame]] to [[spoil]] the [[film]] with give aways, so [[rent]] it and laugh your ass off.

9 - 10.

This is without a [[duda]] the funniest [[comedian]] of the year. [[Someone]] is [[beautiful]]. The acting is [[wondrous]]. You can [[consults]] that the actors [[liked]] making this film. It´s a [[embarrassment]] to [[wrack]] the [[cinematography]] with give aways, so [[rents]] it and laugh your ass off.

9 - 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The silent one-panel cartoon Henry comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as "The world's funniest human" in this dull little cartoon. Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the Production Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes. A bore. --------------------------------------------- Result 1927 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If this is the first of the "Nemesis" films that you have seen, then I strongly urge you to proceed no further. The sequels to "Nebula" prove to be no better...hard to believe considering this entry is bottom-of-the-barrel. This movie tries, but it's just not worth your time, folks. Take a nap instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1928 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] If it were not for the "Oh So Gourgous," Natassia Malthe, this B- movie [[would]] not have been worth one sector of my Tivo disk space! In what low rent, back lot warehouse was the supposed [[space]] [[port]] [[filmed]] in? "[[Continuity]] People!" It's a basic principle in real movie making! By night an alleged space [[port]] and by day (night and day on a space station?) a [[warehouse]]!??!? People Please! The only [[thing]] I will [[commend]] this [[movie]] for, is the wardrobe dept. for [[continuously]], keeping Natassia in those tight shape revealing outfits! Even the women who saw this [[bomb]] had to appreciate the outfits that she obviously spent some time getting into, each day of filming! The Sci-fi channel would have been better off showing SpaceBalls! At [[least]] there [[would]] have been some real humor in watching something so unbelievable.

P.S. Michael Ironside, please Fire Your Agent ASAP! You are so much better of an [[actor]], to be even associated with this level of movie making. If it were not for the "Oh So Gourgous," Natassia Malthe, this B- movie [[ought]] not have been worth one sector of my Tivo disk space! In what low rent, back lot warehouse was the supposed [[spacing]] [[ports]] [[videotaped]] in? "[[Continuance]] People!" It's a basic principle in real movie making! By night an alleged space [[oporto]] and by day (night and day on a space station?) a [[storehouse]]!??!? People Please! The only [[stuff]] I will [[hailing]] this [[filmmaking]] for, is the wardrobe dept. for [[constantly]], keeping Natassia in those tight shape revealing outfits! Even the women who saw this [[explosions]] had to appreciate the outfits that she obviously spent some time getting into, each day of filming! The Sci-fi channel would have been better off showing SpaceBalls! At [[less]] there [[could]] have been some real humor in watching something so unbelievable.

P.S. Michael Ironside, please Fire Your Agent ASAP! You are so much better of an [[protagonist]], to be even associated with this level of movie making. --------------------------------------------- Result 1929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is up there with the all-time classics. The music, camera shots, and acting are excellent. Showing the movie in black and white gave it a much better appearance and complemented the music perfectly, like Psycho. Its surprising how so few people have commented on this movie. My guess is that its a hard movie to find. I gave the film a 9. See the movie and you'll know what I'm talking about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Whether this movie is propaganda or not (I [[firmly]] [[believe]] it is not), it [[really]] [[shows]] the power of Media. The importance of this [[documentary]] is not to show how good of a [[man]] [[Chavez]] is. It is really to demonstrate the [[way]] the Bolivarians [[saw]] how it [[happened]], the Chavez way of [[seeing]] it. [[Although]] it [[may]] seem [[wrong]] and bias to [[support]] a [[film]] , I think the point of [[view]] shown in the [[movie]] is utterly legitimate. The Venezuelian people via the [[private]] [[media]] [[corporation]] of Venezuela only [[saw]] a one side [[perspective]] of the coup, the Neo-Liberal side. This [[movie]] [[shows]] us the way the Bolivarians [[saw]] it . [[Call]] it propaganda , I [[say]] it's a judgment call on your part. Whether this movie is propaganda or not (I [[flatly]] [[believing]] it is not), it [[truthfully]] [[exhibitions]] the power of Media. The importance of this [[documentation]] is not to show how good of a [[dude]] [[Guzman]] is. It is really to demonstrate the [[route]] the Bolivarians [[seen]] how it [[arrived]], the Chavez way of [[witnessing]] it. [[Nevertheless]] it [[maggio]] seem [[amiss]] and bias to [[helping]] a [[movie]] , I think the point of [[views]] shown in the [[cinema]] is utterly legitimate. The Venezuelian people via the [[privy]] [[medium]] [[enterprises]] of Venezuela only [[watched]] a one side [[standpoint]] of the coup, the Neo-Liberal side. This [[movies]] [[demonstrating]] us the way the Bolivarians [[watched]] it . [[Calling]] it propaganda , I [[said]] it's a judgment call on your part. --------------------------------------------- Result 1931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] [[Really]], I can't [[believe]] that I [[spent]] $5 on this [[movie]]. I am a [[huge]] zombie fanatic and [[thought]] the movie couldn't be that bad. It had zombies in it right? Was I [[wrong]]! To be honest the movie had it's [[moments]]...I [[thought]] it was cool when the [[guy]] got his [[head]] ripped off but that was about it. Overall I [[think]] that it [[would]] be more enjoyable to [[slide]] down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a [[vat]] of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been [[better]] if we [[could]] see some boob but I had to watch the trailers for the other [[movies]] [[produced]] by this [[company]] to see that. [[Buyer]] beware...[[unless]] you are into masochism. [[Truthfully]], I can't [[think]] that I [[spends]] $5 on this [[filmmaking]]. I am a [[whopping]] zombie fanatic and [[thinking]] the movie couldn't be that bad. It had zombies in it right? Was I [[improper]]! To be honest the movie had it's [[times]]...I [[thoughts]] it was cool when the [[buddy]] got his [[jefe]] ripped off but that was about it. Overall I [[believing]] that it [[could]] be more enjoyable to [[slider]] down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a [[iva]] of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been [[best]] if we [[would]] see some boob but I had to watch the trailers for the other [[filmmaking]] [[generated]] by this [[societies]] to see that. [[Buyers]] beware...[[if]] you are into masochism. --------------------------------------------- Result 1932 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The plot is straightforward an old man living off a main road in woodland one day witnesses a man murdering a child in the woods. Soft For Digging follows the old man's attempts to try and convince the police that what he saw was not a figment of his imagination. However, there is a problem each time the old man guides the police to where the murder happen no corpse can be found. Soft For Digging has a diminutive [[dialogue]] which reflects the majority of the scenes of the film, an old man living by himself in a house. [[During]] the [[film]] I found that I was scared [[twice]] [[namely]] when the murdered child abruptly appears before the old man. The [[rest]] of the [[film]] I have to admit did not [[engage]] me; I [[found]] the [[tempo]] of the film a little too [[slow]]. The [[limited]] dialogue was not a problem. [[However]], the [[development]] of the [[story]] and its [[conclusions]], after [[watching]] the film, took too long. I feel more [[could]] have been [[made]] of the [[relationship]], ghostly encounters, with the [[child]] and the [[old]] [[man]]. [[Alone]] in the [[woods]] at night [[unsure]] of your own mind can [[lead]] to some eerie [[situations]], [[children]] are always [[scary]] as ghosts, [[see]] [[Dark]] Water. The plot is straightforward an old man living off a main road in woodland one day witnesses a man murdering a child in the woods. Soft For Digging follows the old man's attempts to try and convince the police that what he saw was not a figment of his imagination. However, there is a problem each time the old man guides the police to where the murder happen no corpse can be found. Soft For Digging has a diminutive [[dialog]] which reflects the majority of the scenes of the film, an old man living by himself in a house. [[For]] the [[filmmaking]] I found that I was scared [[twofold]] [[notably]] when the murdered child abruptly appears before the old man. The [[stays]] of the [[kino]] I have to admit did not [[embark]] me; I [[detected]] the [[rhythm]] of the film a little too [[slows]]. The [[scant]] dialogue was not a problem. [[Instead]], the [[developments]] of the [[storytelling]] and its [[finding]], after [[staring]] the film, took too long. I feel more [[wo]] have been [[brought]] of the [[ties]], ghostly encounters, with the [[enfants]] and the [[vecchio]] [[mec]]. [[Exclusively]] in the [[bois]] at night [[uncertain]] of your own mind can [[culminate]] to some eerie [[circumstances]], [[childhood]] are always [[fearful]] as ghosts, [[behold]] [[Blackness]] Water. --------------------------------------------- Result 1933 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't say much about this film. I think it speaks for itself (as do the current ratings on here). I rented this about two years ago and I totally regretted it. I even /tried/ to like it by watching it twice, but I just couldn't. I can safely say that I have absolutely no desire to see this waste of time ever, ever again. And I'm not one to trash a movie, but I truly believe this was awful. It wasn't even funny in the slightest. The only bits I enjoyed were the few scenes with Christopher Walken in them. I think this film ruined both Jack Black and Ben Stiller for me. All I can think of when I see one of their films now-a-days is this terrible movie, and it reminds me not to waste my money. Amy Poehler is so very annoying, too.

Overall, well, I think you get my point. The stars are for Walken, by the way. --------------------------------------------- Result 1934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] While in a plane, flicking through the large choice of movies, I came [[across]] [[Live]]! [[almost]] [[accidentally]]. oh boy! what a [[choice]].

I remembered vaguely seeing the trailer over a year ago and completely forgot about it expecting no more than another cheesy nonsense movie about a stupid [[reality]] show. Now I can easily [[say]] this has been a [[hell]] of a ride. I don't remember last time I have been so excited, terrified. Not sure if it was the high altitude playing with my senses, but the suspense grow [[gradually]] through the movie until reaching a climax where you can't turn away from the screen, literally sitting on the edge of your seat and biting the remaining nails you've got.

You will first go through a personal moral assessment of where you stand about the righteousness of the show. You will drift from thinking "how come the human being can be so vicious" to "why not after all?".Ask yourself would you do it. Then learn about the contestants, their motives and start guessing. You will then watch contestant pulling the trigger one by one and get excited even though you know the first candidate is safe.

Good acting, good directing, with a movie experience that reminds you those old movies where you knew what would happen in the next scene but still were craving for more.

*Spoilers* couple of things i would have changed:

- the casting of the contestants. i have really been moved by the farmer and we should have had a bit more like him. The idea of a rich writer who wants to be famous is a bit stupid, it felt like you didn't care about some of the contestants. Although this might have been done on purpose, i think the audience should have been able to associate with the majority of the contestants. - game rules, a big glitch :

what happens if the 5th contestants doesn't die when he pulls the trigger. do you seriously think the last standing guy will pull the trigger and execute himself!!! they should have given a chance to all contestants to live, ie: if 5th is a blank too, then no one dies.

interestingly I haven't been bothered too much by this bad points cause i really had a good time. just wish i had some popcorn with me! While in a plane, flicking through the large choice of movies, I came [[throughout]] [[Iive]]! [[virtually]] [[inadvertently]]. oh boy! what a [[wahl]].

I remembered vaguely seeing the trailer over a year ago and completely forgot about it expecting no more than another cheesy nonsense movie about a stupid [[realities]] show. Now I can easily [[tell]] this has been a [[whorehouse]] of a ride. I don't remember last time I have been so excited, terrified. Not sure if it was the high altitude playing with my senses, but the suspense grow [[increasingly]] through the movie until reaching a climax where you can't turn away from the screen, literally sitting on the edge of your seat and biting the remaining nails you've got.

You will first go through a personal moral assessment of where you stand about the righteousness of the show. You will drift from thinking "how come the human being can be so vicious" to "why not after all?".Ask yourself would you do it. Then learn about the contestants, their motives and start guessing. You will then watch contestant pulling the trigger one by one and get excited even though you know the first candidate is safe.

Good acting, good directing, with a movie experience that reminds you those old movies where you knew what would happen in the next scene but still were craving for more.

*Spoilers* couple of things i would have changed:

- the casting of the contestants. i have really been moved by the farmer and we should have had a bit more like him. The idea of a rich writer who wants to be famous is a bit stupid, it felt like you didn't care about some of the contestants. Although this might have been done on purpose, i think the audience should have been able to associate with the majority of the contestants. - game rules, a big glitch :

what happens if the 5th contestants doesn't die when he pulls the trigger. do you seriously think the last standing guy will pull the trigger and execute himself!!! they should have given a chance to all contestants to live, ie: if 5th is a blank too, then no one dies.

interestingly I haven't been bothered too much by this bad points cause i really had a good time. just wish i had some popcorn with me! --------------------------------------------- Result 1935 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a classic case of something that should never have been. Gloria was now a single mother, her husband had left her because she wouldn't live in some commune with him (he was mad that Reagan had been elected and wanted to turn his back on society). Right then and there I had problems with the series - come on, I say to myself, is this the same noble Michael Stivic that countered Archie Bunker's right winged philosophies? The series went on, but it just didn't have any pizazz. Whatever momentum Sally Struthers gained from All the Family was long gone. Maybe, if the series had been given another name and presented as being totally independent of All In The Family, it might have worked out. Ah well, that's show business. --------------------------------------------- Result 1936 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This is what a [[movie]] should be when trying to [[capture]] the essence of that which is very [[surreal]]. It has this hazy overtone that is rarely captured on film, it feels like a [[dream]] sequence and [[really]] moves you into a dark haunting [[memory]]. The [[Kids]] were [[extremely]] believable and I do expect some [[things]] to come of them in the [[future]]. [[Very]] natural acting for such [[young]] ones, I don't know if [[Bill]] pulled it out of them or there just that good, but no the less [[excellent]]. Bill scored as far as I'm concerned and for the [[comment]] by KevNJeff about [[Mr]]. Paxtons bad acting, what can one do in that role. He played the part rather well in my opinion. This is coming from someone who [[said]] Hamlet was good (The Ethan Hawke Version?) Wow......... [[Do]] not listen to his Comments. [[Great]] [[flick]] to [[make]] you feel really uncomfortable, if that's what you [[want]]? Cinematography gets an above the [[average]] rating also. This is what a [[kino]] should be when trying to [[caught]] the essence of that which is very [[unreal]]. It has this hazy overtone that is rarely captured on film, it feels like a [[nightmares]] sequence and [[truthfully]] moves you into a dark haunting [[remembrance]]. The [[Child]] were [[unbelievably]] believable and I do expect some [[items]] to come of them in the [[futur]]. [[Quite]] natural acting for such [[youth]] ones, I don't know if [[Invoice]] pulled it out of them or there just that good, but no the less [[wondrous]]. Bill scored as far as I'm concerned and for the [[observing]] by KevNJeff about [[Mister]]. Paxtons bad acting, what can one do in that role. He played the part rather well in my opinion. This is coming from someone who [[says]] Hamlet was good (The Ethan Hawke Version?) Wow......... [[Doing]] not listen to his Comments. [[Huge]] [[movie]] to [[deliver]] you feel really uncomfortable, if that's what you [[wants]]? Cinematography gets an above the [[medium]] rating also. --------------------------------------------- Result 1937 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a complete disappointment. The acting isn't bad, but the production was just so bad that at times I felt I needed to stop it, but I sadly made it through and was able to finish it a bit embarrassed by the whole poor movie. It is o.k. if you are o.k. with cheesy moral plots and don't mind watching a movie that vastly misconstrues Whitman. If you want a cheesy fictional story go for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ten out of the 11 short films in this movie are masterpieces (I found only the Egyptian one disappointing). Stragely, all but the Mexican director chose to portray the problems of individuals or groups in connection with 9-11: the Afghan refugees, deaf people, Palestinians, the widows of Srebrenica, AIDS and poverty and corruption in Africa, Pinochets coup and ensuing bloodbath, suicide bombings in Israel, paranoia-hit and state-persecuted Muslim Americans in the USA, old people living alone, and the aftermath of WWII in the hearts of Asian soldiers. This might say something sad about the limits of empathy, in both ways: the directors might feel that Americans ignore the pains of the rest of the world and only care about their own tragedies, while they effectively do the same with their short films.

Surprising myself, I found Sean Penn's piece one of the very best in the collection, and ***SPOILER AHEAD*** I also guess his portrayal of Ernest Borgnine as a half-crazy old man vegetating in a New York flat experiencing his widow life's happiest moment when the Sun shines through his window after the WTC "collapsed out of light's way", I guess this might also be one of the most offending as the general American audience would see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1939 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This [[movie]] [[really]] [[surprised]] me. I had my [[doubts]] about it at first but the [[movie]] [[got]] [[better]] and better for each minute.

It is [[maybe]] not for the [[action]] [[seeking]] audience but for those that like an explicit [[portrait]] of a very [[strange]] criminal, man, lover and husband. If you're not a [[fan]] of [[bad]] [[language]] or sexual content this really is not for you.

The storyline is [[somewhat]] [[hard]] to follow [[sometimes]], but in the [[end]] I [[think]] it made everything better. The ending was unexpected [[since]] you were [[almost]] fouled to [[think]] it [[would]] [[end]] [[otherwise]].

As for the acting I [[think]] it was good. It will not be up for an Oscar [[award]] for long but it at [[least]] [[caught]] my eye. [[Gil]] Bellows portrait of a [[prison]] [[man]] is not [[always]] perfect but it is very [[entertaining]]. Shaun Parkes [[portrait]] of Bellows prison [[mate]] [[Clinique]] is [[great]] and [[extremely]] powerful. On the [[downside]] I [[think]] I will put Esai Morales [[portrait]] of Markie.

Take my [[advice]] and watch this [[movie]], [[either]] you will [[love]] it or [[dislike]] it! This [[kino]] [[truthfully]] [[horrified]] me. I had my [[misgivings]] about it at first but the [[movies]] [[did]] [[best]] and better for each minute.

It is [[potentially]] not for the [[actions]] [[searching]] audience but for those that like an explicit [[depiction]] of a very [[freaky]] criminal, man, lover and husband. If you're not a [[groupie]] of [[inclement]] [[linguistics]] or sexual content this really is not for you.

The storyline is [[slightly]] [[laborious]] to follow [[occasionally]], but in the [[ends]] I [[reckon]] it made everything better. The ending was unexpected [[because]] you were [[nigh]] fouled to [[reckon]] it [[should]] [[ends]] [[alternatively]].

As for the acting I [[ideas]] it was good. It will not be up for an Oscar [[prix]] for long but it at [[fewest]] [[captured]] my eye. [[Jill]] Bellows portrait of a [[penitentiaries]] [[dawg]] is not [[permanently]] perfect but it is very [[amusing]]. Shaun Parkes [[depiction]] of Bellows prison [[companion]] [[Clinical]] is [[huge]] and [[considerably]] powerful. On the [[disadvantage]] I [[thought]] I will put Esai Morales [[portraits]] of Markie.

Take my [[councils]] and watch this [[cinematography]], [[nor]] you will [[loves]] it or [[disgust]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] If [[anybody]] [[really]] [[wants]] to [[understand]] [[Hitler]], read WWI [[history]] not WWII [[history]]. Find out what [[happened]] during that war, how [[soldiers]] had to [[live]] around [[dead]] [[corpses]] all the time. [[How]] so many [[soldiers]] went [[insane]], from what they [[saw]] during WWI, at the time they [[called]] it "shellshocked" now the [[call]] it post-traumatic [[stress]] [[disorder]]. [[If]] you [[learn]] the true horrors of WWI, you will [[begin]] to [[understand]] [[Hitler]]. You will understand how a human being can [[become]] desensitized to death, not because their evil but simply because it was the only way for them too cope with the [[horrors]] around them.

This movie unfortunately misses that, as so many others do. Read some books on the subject and you should watch the movie "paths of glory", the only good WWI movie ever made. You will see the frustration of the soldiers in that movie, the sense of helplessness, and a utter devaluation of human life, as nothing more than bullet catchers.

Thats what this [[movie]] [[misses]], its really the key point to understanding Germany. A lost war, where millions and millions of Germans lost their lives, for no real reason. Then comes an utter economic collapse, following the war. Those are the factors that create extremism.

The loss of family members and massive poverty will create always lead to extremism. Unfortunately this movie ignored these factors, and has just become another throw away piece of [[crap]] to throw on the pile. With [[really]] no real [[value]], there are fictional movie's based upon fictional characters that could give you a better idea of Hitler than this does. They just threw Hitlers [[name]] on this so it would sell more. If [[person]] [[truthfully]] [[wanna]] to [[understanding]] [[Nazi]], read WWI [[story]] not WWII [[stories]]. Find out what [[transpired]] during that war, how [[serviceman]] had to [[living]] around [[die]] [[carcasses]] all the time. [[Mode]] so many [[privates]] went [[craziness]], from what they [[sawthe]] during WWI, at the time they [[drew]] it "shellshocked" now the [[invitation]] it post-traumatic [[highlights]] [[turbulence]]. [[Though]] you [[learned]] the true horrors of WWI, you will [[lancer]] to [[realise]] [[Nazi]]. You will understand how a human being can [[becoming]] desensitized to death, not because their evil but simply because it was the only way for them too cope with the [[indignities]] around them.

This movie unfortunately misses that, as so many others do. Read some books on the subject and you should watch the movie "paths of glory", the only good WWI movie ever made. You will see the frustration of the soldiers in that movie, the sense of helplessness, and a utter devaluation of human life, as nothing more than bullet catchers.

Thats what this [[filmmaking]] [[lack]], its really the key point to understanding Germany. A lost war, where millions and millions of Germans lost their lives, for no real reason. Then comes an utter economic collapse, following the war. Those are the factors that create extremism.

The loss of family members and massive poverty will create always lead to extremism. Unfortunately this movie ignored these factors, and has just become another throw away piece of [[damnit]] to throw on the pile. With [[genuinely]] no real [[values]], there are fictional movie's based upon fictional characters that could give you a better idea of Hitler than this does. They just threw Hitlers [[designation]] on this so it would sell more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Against All Flags" is every bit the classic swashbuckler. It has all the elements the adventure fan could hope for and more for in this one, the damsel in distress is, well, not really in distress. As Spitfire Stevens, Maureen O'Hara is at her athletic best, running her foes through in defiance of the social norms of the period. Anthony Quinn rounds out the top three billed actors as the ruthless Captain Roc Brasiliano and proves to be a wily and capable nemesis for Brian Hawke (Flynn). For the classic adventure fan, "Against All Flags" is a must-see. While it may not be in quite the same league as some of Errol Flynn's earlier work (Captain Blood and The Sea Hawk, for instance), it is still a greatly entertaining romp. --------------------------------------------- Result 1942 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sadly IMDb does not allow me to rate Judges lower than 1. What a shame. This ghastly movie is so bad that I actually turned the damned thing off well before the ending. The script had a few bright moments, but the directing, editing, acting, audio quality, and especially timing on line delivery was so abhorrent as make Judges utterly unbearable.

Judges was advertised as being like a modern day comic book style western, but in reality was nothing of the sort. What it is most like is dog poop on the bottom of your shoe. You can try to pretend it is okay, but it just keeps on stinking.

Why video stores think it is okay to carry this kind of crap with constant gaps in the audio and worse than high school drama class acting is beyond me. We rent movies in order to see something better that what is on television. But Judges is worse than the most pathetic SciFi Channel original. I intend to demand my money back from Hollywood Video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Elvira Mistress of the Dark is just that, a campy concoction of fun, sex appeal, horror and comedy all poured into a low cut black gown and toped with a sky high black bouffant hair-do. This movie is sure to delight any fan of Elvira's. It takes you upclose and personal with Elvira and probes deep into her...um past revealing her enormous... ancestry.

The movie takes you on a ride with Elvira as she goes from TV Horror Hostess with the Mostess to her home town of Fallwell Mass to claim her inheritance from a deceased Great Aunt. Where she encounters a stuffy town, a studly cinema owner, a creepy Great Uncle who seems to be after her for more than her good looks. A slew of high school kids that immediately love her, and a town board who are will do anything to get her out of town, even if it means burning her at the stake! Watch Elvira woo the kids, stalk the stud, avoid her creepy Great Uncle and thumb her nose at the stuffy uptight 'preservatives' who have no kind words for her, in Elvira Mistress of the Dark!

As Elvira would say "I guarantee it'll be a scream! (screams in background) Whoa! Good thing I didn't say it'd be a gas!" --------------------------------------------- Result 1944 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Izzard is a one-in-a-million comic genius. He goes from squirrels to WWII to Stonehenge to religion to Englebert Humperdink and it's absolutely hilarious and it all makes sense! Get a copy of this now, you won't regret it! I give this an 11 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1945 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The original [[Vampires]] (1998) is one of my favorites. I was [[curious]] to [[see]] how a sequel [[would]] work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite [[surprised]] at how this [[played]] out. As a [[rule]], sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. [[Though]] this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in [[keeping]] the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a [[drawback]] initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!

All in all, this was a decent watch & I would watch it again.

I was left with two [[questions]], though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination. The original [[Vampire]] (1998) is one of my favorites. I was [[nosy]] to [[behold]] how a sequel [[ought]] work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite [[horrified]] at how this [[done]] out. As a [[stipulations]], sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. [[While]] this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in [[conserving]] the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a [[inadequacy]] initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!

All in all, this was a decent watch & I would watch it again.

I was left with two [[matters]], though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination. --------------------------------------------- Result 1946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" consists mostly of rambling, poorly assembled footage in search of a movie. The plot makes no sense, and the various characters drop in and out of the picture with no explanation at all. Watching this silly spoof, you get the feeling than so many other comments have captured so accurately: that it's easy to make a cheap, low-quality film and then use the "parody" angle as an excuse for its cheapness and low quality (in one scene, female swimmers are terrified of tomatoes that are floating near them; how far can "suspension of disbelief" go - even in a parody?). The title song is great, though. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 1947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[cried]] my [[heart]] out, [[watching]] this movie. I have never suffered from any [[eating]] disorder, but I think this [[must]] be a very [[true]] [[picture]].

[[Alison]] Lohman is [[excellent]]! She [[expresses]] these feelings [[amazingly]] well. My [[teenage]] [[years]] came back to me so [[vividly]]. [[Anyone]] who has gone through [[difficult]] [[times]] as a [[child]] or [[teenager]] will be able to relate to this [[movie]]. I [[recommend]] you all to [[see]] it!

The [[music]] is great too - I've now [[discovered]] Diana Lorden.

I'm [[also]] [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] Alison Lohman in White Oléander, because I am [[positive]] she is [[perfectly]] [[suited]] for the role as [[Agnes]]. I [[wept]] my [[nub]] out, [[staring]] this movie. I have never suffered from any [[devouring]] disorder, but I think this [[should]] be a very [[authentic]] [[photo]].

[[Rosalie]] Lohman is [[wondrous]]! She [[expressed]] these feelings [[freakishly]] well. My [[schoolgirl]] [[ages]] came back to me so [[eloquently]]. [[Somebody]] who has gone through [[problematic]] [[moments]] as a [[kids]] or [[teenagers]] will be able to relate to this [[kino]]. I [[recommendations]] you all to [[seeing]] it!

The [[musician]] is great too - I've now [[discovery]] Diana Lorden.

I'm [[moreover]] [[searching]] forward to [[witnessing]] Alison Lohman in White Oléander, because I am [[favorable]] she is [[totally]] [[readjusted]] for the role as [[Felicity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I usually come on this website prior to [[going]] to the [[movies]], as I [[like]] to [[see]] what other people [[think]] of the [[movie]]. I read [[many]] [[reviews]] which [[said]] 'thriller not a [[horror]] movie'. This prompted me to [[give]] this film a try. I [[really]] must take issue with these 'thriller/horror' [[statements]], as it was [[neither]]! I [[almost]] went and asked for my money back, and if you lot of reviewers [[enjoyed]] this rubbish....well you must be [[easily]] pleased! [[At]] the end of the movie, the people behind me said out loud "what a [[waste]] of time" and I turned to them and replied " I couldn't have summed it up better". I kept waiting for [[something]] to happen...but it didn't. There was the potential for a lot of good scares (or thrills if you like) but none happened. Williams [[acted]] the part quite well but I felt he was short changed by a poor [[script]] which dithered around and went [[nowhere]]. [[Save]] your [[money]] folks, this is a [[turkey]] which will be [[featuring]] at a DVD [[store]] '[[bargain]] box' near you in the very foreseeable future! I usually come on this website prior to [[go]] to the [[filmmaking]], as I [[likes]] to [[behold]] what other people [[thought]] of the [[filmmaking]]. I read [[various]] [[inspects]] which [[asserted]] 'thriller not a [[monstrosity]] movie'. This prompted me to [[confer]] this film a try. I [[genuinely]] must take issue with these 'thriller/horror' [[statement]], as it was [[or]]! I [[approximately]] went and asked for my money back, and if you lot of reviewers [[liked]] this rubbish....well you must be [[effortless]] pleased! [[During]] the end of the movie, the people behind me said out loud "what a [[wastes]] of time" and I turned to them and replied " I couldn't have summed it up better". I kept waiting for [[somethings]] to happen...but it didn't. There was the potential for a lot of good scares (or thrills if you like) but none happened. Williams [[reacted]] the part quite well but I felt he was short changed by a poor [[hyphen]] which dithered around and went [[somewhere]]. [[Rescues]] your [[moneys]] folks, this is a [[ankara]] which will be [[featured]] at a DVD [[shops]] '[[haggle]] box' near you in the very foreseeable future! --------------------------------------------- Result 1949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is outstanding and wonderfully scored. Prince's Oscar for music was richly deserved (many people don't know he won one). I think this is one of the best films to watch as a couple late at night on DVD. A great surprise: Prince does a fine job acting, and is pretty good at conveying pain on camera. Morris Day, Wendy, and Lisa are good in their supporting roles. Very cool landmark film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] and anyone who watches this film will agree. This film was directed in the days when plot, character believability and theme actually mattered.

Jean Peters, Widmark, and Thelma Ritter steal the spotlight. Ritter is in top form as informer "Moe" she survives in the Bowery section of NY, acting as a stool pigeon for NYC police.

The only other film in which I have seen Peters is "Niagara", and she certainly proves her acting ability here, complete with Brooklyn accent. Widmark is appropriately menacing, as the anti-hero who must discern what the right thing is, despite his need for cash.

The photography is brilliant. The neon, the subway station (though it looks cleaner than the real thing!) the harbor shack where Widmark lives as a transient. Excellent use is made of the city, with "Lightning Louie" in Chinatown; the many flavors and appetites of the city are addressed here; the political climate of the time is a haunting backdrop. 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A novel by Remarque. A cast that looks great on paper. A left-wing refugee struggling to remain in Paris between the wars. A Gestapo officer undercover.

It's a pity there's no synergy here. The bits and pieces never coalesce.

Stories about left-wing refugees in France don't have to be this dull. Read Arthur Koestler's memoir "Scum of the Earth" (if you can find it). Or his chilling "Dialogue With Death" (ditto).

To me, the only interest in this film lies in some of the incidental details.

The leads spend a lot of time drinking calvados, the Norman apple brandy. I welcome any prompting to have a nip of calvados myself. It certainly made this film appear to pass more quickly. But, according to the film, it's only sold in cheap, low-class saloons. Vive le tabac parisien! That's what I say. References to intoxicating liquors do abound here; that would seem to be a preoccupation of the scenarists.

I enjoy films set in France because it can be amusing waiting for the inevitable full-size alcohol ad to pop up on a wall in the background. I wasn't disappointed. This time it was for Byrrh, a very unusual choice. This film would rate a 10 if only we were judging it on the refinement of its booze murals.

The film's indifferent score is by Louis Gruenberg. Gruenberg is best known -- if you can call it that -- for his opera "The Emperor Jones", based on the O'Neill play. It premièred at roughly the same time as the film version starring Paul Robeson. The opera survives today in a recording or two by Lawrence Tibbett. It should surface again soon though; they're running out of potentially marketable operas to revive.

Opera seems an appropriate subject to mention here since Charles Boyer's character operates under his "Czech" aliases. Two of them are "Wozzeck" and "Gunther", both prominent roles in German opera. Is that just coincidence?

Name-dropping just seems to be part of this film. Notice that they call up "Himmelstoss" on the phone. Himmelstoss happens to be one of the main characters in Remarque's earlier "All Quiet on the Western Front".

Well, the in-jokes are all in place; guess there wasn't time to develop any drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 1952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I'm a huge Jane Austen fan and besides being a feature-length film (a true fan wants to see as little left out as possible and that can only be achieved in a mini-series) it was [[really]] [[great]]. Gwyneth Paltrow really [[captures]] the slightly clueless but well-intentioned [[rich]] girl and Jeremy Northam IS Mr. Knightly with his poise and [[nobility]]. I wasn't thrilled with [[Ewan]] McGregor even though I like him very much as an actor but didn't feel it spoiled the movie at all. Like I said, as a Jane Austen fan there were things I would have liked to have seen included that weren't but that would have made it much longer than permissible for a feature length film and as it was I felt they really encapsulated the story well. I've seen every adaptation of this book and felt this was the best one! I'm a huge Jane Austen fan and besides being a feature-length film (a true fan wants to see as little left out as possible and that can only be achieved in a mini-series) it was [[truthfully]] [[wondrous]]. Gwyneth Paltrow really [[catch]] the slightly clueless but well-intentioned [[wealthy]] girl and Jeremy Northam IS Mr. Knightly with his poise and [[aristocracy]]. I wasn't thrilled with [[Ioan]] McGregor even though I like him very much as an actor but didn't feel it spoiled the movie at all. Like I said, as a Jane Austen fan there were things I would have liked to have seen included that weren't but that would have made it much longer than permissible for a feature length film and as it was I felt they really encapsulated the story well. I've seen every adaptation of this book and felt this was the best one! --------------------------------------------- Result 1953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having seen and loved Greg Lombardo's most recent film "Knots" (he co-wrote and directed that feature as well), I decided to check out his earlier work, and this movie was well worth the effort and rental. Macbeth in Manhattan is a tongue in cheek, excellent take on the Shakespeare favorite, updated and moved to NYC. I was impressed by the underlying wit and intelligence of the script and was wowed by the way the storyline of the production in the movie mirrors the storyline of the play itself - and very cleverly at that. The trials and tribulations of life in Manhattan parallel many a Shakespeare play, and Central Park was rarely put to better use than as the woods around Macbeth's castle. Mr. Lombardo obviously has a fond place in his heart for New York and New York stories (Knots is a funny and warm sex comedy about six thirty-something New Yorkers set primarily in a charming Brooklyn neighborhood, with Manhattan offices and a downtown loft thrown in for good measure) and has spent considerable time around the plays of Shakespeare. The movie is well-paced and the story reflects a deep understanding of the essential drama at the core of Macbeth. It reminded me of Al Pacino's "Looking for Richard" - another wonderful Shakespeare "play within a movie." I highly recommend checking out Macbeth in Manhattan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Chris]] Rock stars in this [[remake]] of Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait (itself a remake of the 1941 film Here Comes Mr. Jordan), a comedy about a man who dies before his time, before he can realize his dreams, and his adventures in his new (albeit temporary) body. In the Beatty version, the protagonist was a backup quarterback for the then-Los Angeles Rams. In Rock's hipper version, our lead character is a struggling young - and decidedly low-talent - standup comedian.

It's very funny to see the razor-sharp Rock playing a bad comedian. It's kind of like seeing Tom Hanks play a bad actor. Lance Barton's dream is to play the legendary Apollo Theater on a non-amateur night. But every time he tries out his material, he's booed off the stage lustily - so much so that his nickname becomes "Booie." His jokes are lame, his delivery painful. In short, Lance is everything that the real Chris Rock isn't.

Lance is also a bike messenger, and he's riding the streets on his way to try out even more material when BAM! He's hit by a truck. Ok, so maybe he was taken from his body a tenth of a second early by a slightly incompetent angel (Eugene Levy), but hey, he was going to get hit anyway. No dice, it appears Lance isn't due in Heaven until 2044. So what to do? Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri), the "manager" of Heaven, reluctantly agrees to find a new body for the not-quite-dead Mr. Barton. Trouble is, the body they find is of a greedy, old white man. Turns out this fella (a Mr. Wellington) owns all kinds of things - he's the 15th richest man in the country! What luck! You can imagine how Lance will turn things around.

But of course, while in the body of the affluent Mr. Wellington, Lance falls for a gorgeous hospital worker (Regina King). We males know how tough it is to find a female given our own body, but try winning one over while you're an dumpy, old white guy! And it's even worse when she's not impressed by your money.

This is Rock's first shot at a lead role, and in my opinion he performs admirably. There's still a lot of the standup comedian in him - and, of course, if he ever wants to get diverse roles, he might have to stop incorporating standup routines into the script - but this isn't really a bad thing. Rock's personality - his drive, his delivery, his demeanor, and his passion - are what fuel this film. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role, and he seems bent on making sure you have fun watching him. [[Chrissy]] Rock stars in this [[redo]] of Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait (itself a remake of the 1941 film Here Comes Mr. Jordan), a comedy about a man who dies before his time, before he can realize his dreams, and his adventures in his new (albeit temporary) body. In the Beatty version, the protagonist was a backup quarterback for the then-Los Angeles Rams. In Rock's hipper version, our lead character is a struggling young - and decidedly low-talent - standup comedian.

It's very funny to see the razor-sharp Rock playing a bad comedian. It's kind of like seeing Tom Hanks play a bad actor. Lance Barton's dream is to play the legendary Apollo Theater on a non-amateur night. But every time he tries out his material, he's booed off the stage lustily - so much so that his nickname becomes "Booie." His jokes are lame, his delivery painful. In short, Lance is everything that the real Chris Rock isn't.

Lance is also a bike messenger, and he's riding the streets on his way to try out even more material when BAM! He's hit by a truck. Ok, so maybe he was taken from his body a tenth of a second early by a slightly incompetent angel (Eugene Levy), but hey, he was going to get hit anyway. No dice, it appears Lance isn't due in Heaven until 2044. So what to do? Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri), the "manager" of Heaven, reluctantly agrees to find a new body for the not-quite-dead Mr. Barton. Trouble is, the body they find is of a greedy, old white man. Turns out this fella (a Mr. Wellington) owns all kinds of things - he's the 15th richest man in the country! What luck! You can imagine how Lance will turn things around.

But of course, while in the body of the affluent Mr. Wellington, Lance falls for a gorgeous hospital worker (Regina King). We males know how tough it is to find a female given our own body, but try winning one over while you're an dumpy, old white guy! And it's even worse when she's not impressed by your money.

This is Rock's first shot at a lead role, and in my opinion he performs admirably. There's still a lot of the standup comedian in him - and, of course, if he ever wants to get diverse roles, he might have to stop incorporating standup routines into the script - but this isn't really a bad thing. Rock's personality - his drive, his delivery, his demeanor, and his passion - are what fuel this film. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role, and he seems bent on making sure you have fun watching him. --------------------------------------------- Result 1955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] After [[seeing]] only half of the film in school back in [[November]], [[today]], I saw that it was on Flix [[channel]] and decided to watch it to [[see]] the rest of it and to write a [[new]] review on it.

The book that the [[film]] is [[based]] on, Hatchet, is OK. This is a [[terrible]] adaption of it [[though]].

[[Awful]] (and I mean [[awful]]) acting, [[bad]] [[dialogue]], and average [[cinematography]] make up this [[terrible]] adaption of Hatchet.

The [[film]] [[starts]] off Brian who is the cliché [[image]] of a late 80s teen ([[sporting]] a mullet, banging his [[head]] to [[cheap]] 80s rock [[music]]) and his [[mother]] driving in a [[car]] for him to [[get]] on a [[plane]] to fly up to see his estranged [[Dad]] (his [[parents]] are divorced...now cue the [[dramatic]] [[pause]].) Now Brian has [[said]] goodbye to [[Mom]] and dog and is [[flying]] up to see his father. The [[pilot]] is a fat, ugly, rude [[man]] (wasn't like that in the [[book]]) who after 2 minutes in the [[air]], has a [[heart]] attack and dies. [[In]] the [[book]] it goes into more [[detail]] with the pilot having more [[pains]] and it [[seemed]] to be that they were in the [[air]] [[much]] longer before the pilot had his heart [[attack]].

The [[plane]] ([[within]] another two minutes) has gone empty on fuel (leaving us, the viewers, to [[assume]] that he's been up there for hours [[even]] [[though]] the [[sun]] hasn't [[changed]] [[position]] and the [[scenery]] looks [[EXACTLY]] the same.) Now's he's crashed landed.

This is the point in the [[movie]] where everything is a lot different then it was in the book. [[In]] the book it [[said]] his jacket was [[torn]] to [[shreds]] but in the [[movie]] it is [[perfectly]] fine with no [[tears]] or [[rips]] (looks [[like]] he just [[bought]] it), it never said he [[climbed]] a [[mountain]], [[saw]] a [[wolf]], and [[fell]] asleep up there on the [[mountain]], it never [[said]] he was attacked by a bear (it [[said]] a moose but not a bear), it never [[said]] he eats the [[several]] [[bugs]] that he does, it never [[mentions]] the [[second]] tornado or that he [[learned]] to [[get]] those sparrows, skin them, and [[eat]] them or that [[little]] fish farm [[trap]] that he makes (that is [[destroyed]] by one of the [[tornadoes]]) nor does it [[mention]] him hurting his [[ribs]] from one of the tornadoes.

I don't even think you can call what was depicted in the film a tornado. All it was was just a windstorm that knocked down several of his things.

My favorite part of this camp fest was Brian's lame flashbacks (that are never mentioned in the book) especially the cliché scene of Brian waking up, walking over to the window and seeing his Dad (with all of his things packed that can all perfectly fit into just the back of his truck) leaving and screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!!" (yet of course his father didn't hear him even though he was just right outside) and he punches his fist through the window (wtf?)

The ending is the only thing that is close to what happened in the book (I said close.) In the book I think one of the key things that the rescue pilot said to Brian when he landed was "you're the kid who they've been looking for! They stopped months ago..." yet they left that line out in the movie.

There's a pathetic epilogue with Brian (somehow without counseling or therapy) getting back to normal with his family. I think we were supposed to assume that they were getting together for Thanksgiving (because they had a turkey on the counter.) Then it shows his temporary home (for what, in the movie, seemed like three days, but in the book was for several months) and his hatchet, still in a tree where he left it (also didn't happen in the book) showing where he carved a message, so perfectly done: "HOME" (where we really supposed to believe that he carved that that perfectly with just that hatchet?)

No quote can sum this movie up better then when Enid from Ghost World said "this is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." Perfect description of this movie.

I wouldn't recommend it to somebody (who hasn't read the book) and are just looking to watch a movie nor would I to somebody who has read the book (because they'll be disappointed and bored to death.

For those who have read the book, leave what your imagination created as the movie. This is awful and will bring down your thoughts on the book.

1/10 After [[witnessing]] only half of the film in school back in [[December]], [[nowadays]], I saw that it was on Flix [[canals]] and decided to watch it to [[behold]] the rest of it and to write a [[nuevo]] review on it.

The book that the [[filmmaking]] is [[groundwork]] on, Hatchet, is OK. This is a [[dreaded]] adaption of it [[albeit]].

[[Scary]] (and I mean [[spooky]]) acting, [[unfavourable]] [[conversation]], and average [[movie]] make up this [[scary]] adaption of Hatchet.

The [[filmmaking]] [[initiate]] off Brian who is the cliché [[picture]] of a late 80s teen ([[athletes]] a mullet, banging his [[leader]] to [[cheaper]] 80s rock [[musician]]) and his [[mommy]] driving in a [[cars]] for him to [[gets]] on a [[aircraft]] to fly up to see his estranged [[Papa]] (his [[parenting]] are divorced...now cue the [[remarkable]] [[hiatus]].) Now Brian has [[stated]] goodbye to [[Mummy]] and dog and is [[fly]] up to see his father. The [[experiment]] is a fat, ugly, rude [[males]] (wasn't like that in the [[ledger]]) who after 2 minutes in the [[airline]], has a [[heartland]] attack and dies. [[Onto]] the [[workbook]] it goes into more [[details]] with the pilot having more [[pain]] and it [[appeared]] to be that they were in the [[aviation]] [[very]] longer before the pilot had his heart [[assault]].

The [[planes]] ([[inside]] another two minutes) has gone empty on fuel (leaving us, the viewers, to [[presume]] that he's been up there for hours [[yet]] [[while]] the [[sunshine]] hasn't [[modifying]] [[stance]] and the [[landscape]] looks [[ACCURATELY]] the same.) Now's he's crashed landed.

This is the point in the [[flick]] where everything is a lot different then it was in the book. [[Among]] the book it [[asserted]] his jacket was [[buzzed]] to [[shavings]] but in the [[filmmaking]] it is [[abundantly]] fine with no [[tear]] or [[criticizes]] (looks [[iike]] he just [[acquired]] it), it never said he [[climbing]] a [[mont]], [[observed]] a [[woolf]], and [[fallen]] asleep up there on the [[shan]], it never [[stated]] he was attacked by a bear (it [[stated]] a moose but not a bear), it never [[avowed]] he eats the [[various]] [[cockroaches]] that he does, it never [[cites]] the [[secondly]] tornado or that he [[learnt]] to [[gets]] those sparrows, skin them, and [[coma]] them or that [[petit]] fish farm [[traps]] that he makes (that is [[demolished]] by one of the [[tornado]]) nor does it [[cited]] him hurting his [[rib]] from one of the tornadoes.

I don't even think you can call what was depicted in the film a tornado. All it was was just a windstorm that knocked down several of his things.

My favorite part of this camp fest was Brian's lame flashbacks (that are never mentioned in the book) especially the cliché scene of Brian waking up, walking over to the window and seeing his Dad (with all of his things packed that can all perfectly fit into just the back of his truck) leaving and screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!!" (yet of course his father didn't hear him even though he was just right outside) and he punches his fist through the window (wtf?)

The ending is the only thing that is close to what happened in the book (I said close.) In the book I think one of the key things that the rescue pilot said to Brian when he landed was "you're the kid who they've been looking for! They stopped months ago..." yet they left that line out in the movie.

There's a pathetic epilogue with Brian (somehow without counseling or therapy) getting back to normal with his family. I think we were supposed to assume that they were getting together for Thanksgiving (because they had a turkey on the counter.) Then it shows his temporary home (for what, in the movie, seemed like three days, but in the book was for several months) and his hatchet, still in a tree where he left it (also didn't happen in the book) showing where he carved a message, so perfectly done: "HOME" (where we really supposed to believe that he carved that that perfectly with just that hatchet?)

No quote can sum this movie up better then when Enid from Ghost World said "this is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." Perfect description of this movie.

I wouldn't recommend it to somebody (who hasn't read the book) and are just looking to watch a movie nor would I to somebody who has read the book (because they'll be disappointed and bored to death.

For those who have read the book, leave what your imagination created as the movie. This is awful and will bring down your thoughts on the book.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[At]] the [[time]] I am [[writing]] this I [[see]] out of over 15,000 [[votes]] it has a 5.8 [[rating]]. Something is [[wrong]] with that [[picture]]. Personally I [[give]] it a 10. I can [[see]] a 7 at the lowest or a [[possible]] 8 if it was rated by people that [[see]] this movie for what it [[truly]] is. It is a movie based on a comic book [[hero]]. This movie won more than it's [[share]] of [[awards]]. Won 3 [[Oscars]]. Another 5 [[wins]] & 26 [[nominations]] .... right there [[tells]] me it's [[better]] than a 5.8. Some [[great]] acting from some very good [[actors]], some [[great]] special effects and in my opinion will be if not already a [[classic]] for [[years]] to come. If you're looking for pure entertainment be sure to [[check]] out [[Dick]] [[Tracy]]. [[Definitely]] a [[movie]] you can watch more than a few [[times]]. Al Pacino is [[great]] as Big Boy [[Caprice]]. [[Into]] the [[moment]] I am [[handwriting]] this I [[seeing]] out of over 15,000 [[voting]] it has a 5.8 [[appraisals]]. Something is [[amiss]] with that [[visuals]]. Personally I [[lend]] it a 10. I can [[seeing]] a 7 at the lowest or a [[reachable]] 8 if it was rated by people that [[seeing]] this movie for what it [[honestly]] is. It is a movie based on a comic book [[heroin]]. This movie won more than it's [[exchanging]] of [[scholarship]]. Won 3 [[Oscar]]. Another 5 [[earn]] & 26 [[appointment]] .... right there [[told]] me it's [[best]] than a 5.8. Some [[awesome]] acting from some very good [[protagonists]], some [[wondrous]] special effects and in my opinion will be if not already a [[typical]] for [[olds]] to come. If you're looking for pure entertainment be sure to [[checking]] out [[Penis]] [[Tracey]]. [[Certainly]] a [[films]] you can watch more than a few [[dates]]. Al Pacino is [[wondrous]] as Big Boy [[Quirk]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Awwww....[[yes]], it is heartwarming and all that some [[unlucky]] [[family]] [[gets]] [[adopted]] by ABC/Sears and has their [[home]] "[[renovated]]." That's where the humanistic appeal ends. I [[liked]] it [[early]] in its run, but now this [[show]] has [[become]] disgustingly [[excessive]].

Ten needy families could be [[given]] [[relatively]] [[luxurious]] [[homes]] with [[lots]] of [[goodies]] for every one family that each episode of this show splurges on. The people at [[Habitat]] [[For]] [[Humanity]] [[must]] be [[shaking]] their [[heads]] in [[disbelief]]. For example, is it [[necessary]] for a [[healthy]] sixteen year [[old]] [[boy]] to have a jacuzzi in his bedroom, or have his bed tricked-out with "Low Rider" hydraulics? Does the mom [[really]] [[need]] her dilapidated, non-running and [[rusted]] out [[old]] pick-up truck [[restored]] and "pimped" by some of the [[best]] customizers in California? A [[new]] one would have [[done]] the job [[quite]] nicely, and [[probably]] for a third of the [[price]]. Do people really [[need]] a sixty-five [[inch]] plasma screen in [[every]] [[room]] of the [[house]]? And then there's the [[issue]] of who pays the [[increased]] property [[taxes]] and utility bills. Even after the zaniacs at "Makeover" [[leave]], [[somebody]] [[still]] has [[earn]] a [[living]]. I [[doubt]] the friendly folks down at Social Services will see the [[humor]] in all of this largess.

This show is [[nothing]] more than a ratings grabber for ABC, and a [[tacit]] commercial for its [[sponsors]]. Awwww....[[yup]], it is heartwarming and all that some [[hapless]] [[families]] [[got]] [[passed]] by ABC/Sears and has their [[domicile]] "[[renewed]]." That's where the humanistic appeal ends. I [[loved]] it [[prematurely]] in its run, but now this [[exposition]] has [[gotten]] disgustingly [[extravagant]].

Ten needy families could be [[conferred]] [[fairly]] [[plush]] [[domicile]] with [[batch]] of [[extras]] for every one family that each episode of this show splurges on. The people at [[Habitats]] [[In]] [[Humane]] [[owe]] be [[shake]] their [[leiter]] in [[skepticism]]. For example, is it [[essential]] for a [[salubrious]] sixteen year [[former]] [[kiddo]] to have a jacuzzi in his bedroom, or have his bed tricked-out with "Low Rider" hydraulics? Does the mom [[truly]] [[gotta]] her dilapidated, non-running and [[corroded]] out [[vecchio]] pick-up truck [[reestablished]] and "pimped" by some of the [[finest]] customizers in California? A [[nuevo]] one would have [[doing]] the job [[utterly]] nicely, and [[arguably]] for a third of the [[prix]]. Do people really [[needed]] a sixty-five [[inches]] plasma screen in [[all]] [[bedroom]] of the [[maison]]? And then there's the [[issues]] of who pays the [[heightened]] property [[tolls]] and utility bills. Even after the zaniacs at "Makeover" [[leaving]], [[everyone]] [[again]] has [[gaining]] a [[vida]]. I [[duda]] the friendly folks down at Social Services will see the [[comedy]] in all of this largess.

This show is [[anything]] more than a ratings grabber for ABC, and a [[implicit]] commercial for its [[godfathers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1958 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[If]] you are a fan of Altman's large ensemble casts, as evidenced in major films like M.A.S.H., Nashville, Gosford Park, and lesser seen films like A Wedding, then you will no doubt be entertained by [[HealtH]]. [[Centered]] around a Health Convention where two women are running for President, HealtH contains many of Altman's latter 70s regulars like [[Paul]] Dooley (who helped [[write]] the [[film]]), Carol Burnett, and [[Henry]] Gibson, while [[also]] including [[top]] [[star]] Altman newcomers like [[Lauren]] Bacall, [[James]] Garner, and Glenda Jackson. Like a lot of Altman [[ensemble]] films there are [[numerous]] subplots in this [[film]], but it is not [[nearly]] as [[overwhelming]] as films like Nashville or A [[Wedding]], [[rather]] it has a more [[centered]] feel, [[perhaps]] like M.A.S.H. or Gosford Park. The whole thing is an [[obvious]] [[satire]] on the Health movement, filled with over-top, [[outlandish]], contradictive [[characters]], with [[guest]] stars like Dick Cavett providing a wry commentary on the [[whole]] thing. Underlining the [[whole]] election process is Altman's [[characteristic]] [[pessimism]] about politics and public appeal but what is most appealing about this [[film]] is the sheer [[fun]] most people seem to be having. This would be one of Altman's [[last]] [[films]] like this for a while! [[Though]] you are a fan of Altman's large ensemble casts, as evidenced in major films like M.A.S.H., Nashville, Gosford Park, and lesser seen films like A Wedding, then you will no doubt be entertained by [[hygiene]]. [[Centre]] around a Health Convention where two women are running for President, HealtH contains many of Altman's latter 70s regulars like [[Paulo]] Dooley (who helped [[handwriting]] the [[films]]), Carol Burnett, and [[Heinrich]] Gibson, while [[apart]] including [[superior]] [[superstar]] Altman newcomers like [[Loren]] Bacall, [[Jacques]] Garner, and Glenda Jackson. Like a lot of Altman [[whole]] films there are [[multiple]] subplots in this [[kino]], but it is not [[roughly]] as [[sizable]] as films like Nashville or A [[Marriage]], [[fairly]] it has a more [[focus]] feel, [[presumably]] like M.A.S.H. or Gosford Park. The whole thing is an [[flagrant]] [[sarcasm]] on the Health movement, filled with over-top, [[bizarre]], contradictive [[attribute]], with [[invited]] stars like Dick Cavett providing a wry commentary on the [[entire]] thing. Underlining the [[together]] election process is Altman's [[attribute]] [[pessimist]] about politics and public appeal but what is most appealing about this [[films]] is the sheer [[funny]] most people seem to be having. This would be one of Altman's [[latter]] [[movie]] like this for a while! --------------------------------------------- Result 1959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This may not be the [[worst]] comedy of all time, but it's close. The [[producers]] of this movie [[stole]] an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!

Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you [[realize]] that the rest of the movie is much worse. He falls into a long line of former SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been [[brilliant]], some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.

[[Avoid]] this movie like the plague.

c This may not be the [[pire]] comedy of all time, but it's close. The [[growers]] of this movie [[shoplift]] an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!

Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you [[reaching]] that the rest of the movie is much worse. He falls into a long line of former SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been [[sumptuous]], some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.

[[Shirk]] this movie like the plague.

c --------------------------------------------- Result 1960 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Underground [[Comedy]] [[Movie]], is [[possibly]] the [[worst]] train [[wrecks]] I've ever [[seen]]. Luckily I didn't [[pay]] for this movie, and my friend reluctantly [[agreed]] to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he [[needed]] to [[prove]] to me how [[awful]] it was. I [[love]] off color [[comedy]]. I [[figured]] at the least it would have that and I would be [[entertained]]. No, instead the acting was so awful, the "jokes" were [[extremely]] cheesy, and the plot was no where to be [[found]]. Maybe there wasn't [[supposed]] to be a plot so I can't [[hold]] that against this [[movie]]. It's [[pretty]] sad where the funniest [[thing]] in a [[comedy]] is an [[old]] [[woman]] having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A [[man]] dressed in a baseball uniform [[wielding]] a bat. [[Hilarious]]. Simply genius. I [[got]] the [[feeling]] [[watching]] this [[movie]] that its creators [[made]] it and [[laughed]] hysterically with their [[friends]] about it. [[Perhaps]] this was full of [[inside]] [[jokes]] we just didn't [[understand]]. [[Or]] [[perhaps]] it's the [[worst]] [[piece]] of [[trash]] ever [[made]] and it should be locked away in a [[vault]] and [[dumped]] in the Arctic [[Ocean]].

P.S. Don't buy this [[movie]]! The Underground [[Humorous]] [[Filmmaking]], is [[potentially]] the [[meanest]] train [[wreck]] I've ever [[noticed]]. Luckily I didn't [[paid]] for this movie, and my friend reluctantly [[accepted]] to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he [[required]] to [[demonstrate]] to me how [[frightful]] it was. I [[amour]] off color [[humor]]. I [[imagined]] at the least it would have that and I would be [[distracted]]. No, instead the acting was so awful, the "jokes" were [[exceptionally]] cheesy, and the plot was no where to be [[discovered]]. Maybe there wasn't [[presumed]] to be a plot so I can't [[holds]] that against this [[film]]. It's [[quite]] sad where the funniest [[stuff]] in a [[travesty]] is an [[former]] [[girl]] having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A [[guy]] dressed in a baseball uniform [[brandishing]] a bat. [[Fun]]. Simply genius. I [[gets]] the [[impression]] [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] that its creators [[accomplished]] it and [[laughs]] hysterically with their [[friendships]] about it. [[Presumably]] this was full of [[inner]] [[pleasantries]] we just didn't [[realise]]. [[Ord]] [[conceivably]] it's the [[meanest]] [[slice]] of [[litter]] ever [[introduced]] and it should be locked away in a [[crypt]] and [[jettisoned]] in the Arctic [[Oceans]].

P.S. Don't buy this [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Very]] sweet pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better [[films]]...Edward Sissorhands, [[Big]] [[Fish]], [[Charlie]] & the [[Chocolate]] [[Factory]]. The [[cinematography]], the narration, the [[music]], the [[external]] sets all [[scream]] Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a [[STRONG]] [[influence]], I just haven't [[researched]] [[enough]] to [[know]] where it is.

As I've seen in the [[forums]], yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. [[Every]] [[time]] I see her on the screen I [[see]] Zooey. Don't [[get]] me [[wrong]], [[Anna]] Friel does a [[great]] [[job]]. [[Her]] [[character]] is very [[sweet]] and lovable and you easily [[get]] attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I [[keep]] thinking "Why didn't they [[get]] Zooey Deschanel".

Lee [[Pace]] does a [[great]] [[job]] too. I [[kept]] trying to [[remember]] where I knew him from and just [[looked]] it up. Wonderfalls!!! [[Great]], short lived [[series]] from 2004. [[If]] you [[enjoy]] Pushing Daisies you MUST [[go]] [[rent]] Wonderfalls, which is another [[Brian]] [[Fuller]] [[creation]]….hmmmm

[[Loved]] seeing Swoosie Kurtz ([[World]] According to Garp) and [[Ellen]] [[Greene]] ([[Little]] [[Shop]] of Horrors) again. Two [[underrated]] [[character]] actresses that never fail to [[bring]] it with their performances. [[Hugely]] sweet pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better [[film]]...Edward Sissorhands, [[Massive]] [[Fishes]], [[Chas]] & the [[Candy]] [[Plant]]. The [[movie]], the narration, the [[musician]], the [[exterior]] sets all [[howling]] Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a [[VIGOROUS]] [[repercussions]], I just haven't [[scrutinized]] [[adequately]] to [[savoir]] where it is.

As I've seen in the [[forum]], yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. [[Everything]] [[period]] I see her on the screen I [[consults]] Zooey. Don't [[got]] me [[faulty]], [[Anne]] Friel does a [[large]] [[employment]]. [[His]] [[nature]] is very [[sugary]] and lovable and you easily [[obtain]] attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I [[conserve]] thinking "Why didn't they [[obtain]] Zooey Deschanel".

Lee [[Cadence]] does a [[huge]] [[labour]] too. I [[conserved]] trying to [[remind]] where I knew him from and just [[seemed]] it up. Wonderfalls!!! [[Tremendous]], short lived [[serials]] from 2004. [[Unless]] you [[enjoys]] Pushing Daisies you MUST [[going]] [[leases]] Wonderfalls, which is another [[Bryan]] [[Fowler]] [[formation]]….hmmmm

[[Worshipped]] seeing Swoosie Kurtz ([[Global]] According to Garp) and [[Helene]] [[Archer]] ([[Small]] [[Storing]] of Horrors) again. Two [[underestimated]] [[characteristics]] actresses that never fail to [[bringing]] it with their performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 1962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this became a cult movie in chinese college students, though i havnt watched it until it is broadcasted in channel4, UK.

full of arty giddy pretentions, the plot is mediocre and unreal; the 'spirit' it wants to convey is how independent artists 'resist the commercisliation of music industry' and maintain their' purity of an artistic soul' and wouldnt 'sell themselves for dirty money'. that is really giddy and superficial; the diologue are mainly pathetic. acting is poor. sceenplay is full of art pretention. it is a fantasy movie for kids and that;s all

--------------------------------------------- Result 1963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] As a [[study]] of the [[frailties]] of human [[nature]] in the [[context]] of [[old]] [[age]], this [[film]] is without parallel. It is, [[quite]] simply, [[brilliant]]. Full [[marks]] to [[everyone]] - from the [[scriptwriter]] to all involved in the finished [[product]]. You can only marvel at the [[perceptions]] inherent in the characterisation of the two [[ageing]] [[performers]]. As a [[studied]] of the [[inadequacies]] of human [[characters]] in the [[background]] of [[ancient]] [[older]], this [[cinematic]] is without parallel. It is, [[pretty]] simply, [[wondrous]]. Full [[mark]] to [[somebody]] - from the [[writer]] to all involved in the finished [[merchandise]]. You can only marvel at the [[conceptions]] inherent in the characterisation of the two [[aging]] [[artists]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] this is the [[perfect]] [[example]] of something [[great]] going [[awfully]] [[bad]]... hence, can i advice [[anyone]] to watch it? well, i was kinda [[obliged]] by the fact that in was in the tiff [[competition]] (i [[still]] can't believe it won)..and i only remained until the end because the [[director]] was there for a q&a section..but that was also [[anything]] but interesting.. what's it about? well the first half (the worth watching one) presents three characters: a hooker, a musician and some kind of [[official]]..the first two [[lie]] about their professions..but the third is the actual liar.. the second half (do [[something]] [[else]]..don't [[ruin]] a good [[evening]]) includes some old [[breasts]] and [[heavy]] [[drinking]].. but [[maybe]] you will see it completely different...the tiff jury did (were they [[drinking]] vodka ?) this is the [[perfected]] [[examples]] of something [[marvellous]] going [[horribly]] [[unfavorable]]... hence, can i advice [[everyone]] to watch it? well, i was kinda [[forced]] by the fact that in was in the tiff [[contest]] (i [[however]] can't believe it won)..and i only remained until the end because the [[superintendent]] was there for a q&a section..but that was also [[something]] but interesting.. what's it about? well the first half (the worth watching one) presents three characters: a hooker, a musician and some kind of [[staffer]]..the first two [[lied]] about their professions..but the third is the actual liar.. the second half (do [[somethings]] [[elsewhere]]..don't [[destroy]] a good [[afternoon]]) includes some old [[titties]] and [[ponderous]] [[alcohol]].. but [[potentially]] you will see it completely different...the tiff jury did (were they [[beverage]] vodka ?) --------------------------------------------- Result 1965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[beginning]] of this movie is [[excellent]] with tremendous sound and some nice humor, but once the film changes into animation it [[quickly]] loses its [[appeal]].

One of the reasons that was so, at least for me, was that the colors in much of the animation are too muted, with too little contrast. It doesn't look good, at least on VHS. Once in a while it breaks out and looks great, but not often Also, the characters come and go too quickly. For example, I would have liked to have seen more of "Moby Dick." When the film starts to drag, however, it picks up again with the entrance of the dragon and then the film finishes strong.

Overall, just not memorable enough or able to compete with the great animated films of the last dozen years. The [[initiating]] of this movie is [[sumptuous]] with tremendous sound and some nice humor, but once the film changes into animation it [[promptly]] loses its [[appeals]].

One of the reasons that was so, at least for me, was that the colors in much of the animation are too muted, with too little contrast. It doesn't look good, at least on VHS. Once in a while it breaks out and looks great, but not often Also, the characters come and go too quickly. For example, I would have liked to have seen more of "Moby Dick." When the film starts to drag, however, it picks up again with the entrance of the dragon and then the film finishes strong.

Overall, just not memorable enough or able to compete with the great animated films of the last dozen years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] To grasp where this 1976 version of A [[STAR]] IS BORN is [[coming]] from [[consider]] this: Its [[final]] number is [[sung]] by [[Barbra]] Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute [[freeze]] [[frame]] of [[Ms]]. Streisand -- [[striking]] a Christ-like pose -- [[behind]] the [[closing]] credits. Over ten [[uninterrupted]] minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead [[center]], [[filling]] the big screen with [[uncompromising]] ego. That just might be some [[sort]] of cinematic [[record]].

Or [[think]] about this: The plot of this musical [[revolves]] [[around]] a love affair between two musical superstars, [[yet]], while Streisand's songs are [[performed]] in their [[entirety]] -- [[including]] the [[interminable]] finale -- her costar [[Kris]] Kristofferson isn't [[allowed]] to [[complete]] even one single song he performs. Nor, [[though]] she does [[allow]] him to [[contribute]] a little back up to a [[couple]] of her ditties, do they actually [[sing]] a [[duet]].

Or [[consider]] this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six [[times]], including [[taking]] [[credit]] for "musical [[concepts]]" and her [[wardrobe]] (from her [[closet]]) -- and she [[also]] [[allegedly]] wanted, but failed to [[get]] co-directing [[credit]] as well. One of her [[credits]] was as [[executive]] producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former [[hairdresser]], Jon [[Peters]]. As such, Streisand controlled the [[final]] [[cut]] of the [[film]], which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the [[film]] in her [[direction]]. What it doesn't explain is how [[come]], given [[every]] [[opportunity]] to [[make]] The [[Great]] [[Diva]] look good, their [[efforts]] only make Streisand [[look]] [[bad]]. [[Even]] [[though]] this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is [[arguably]] her worst [[film]] and contains her [[worst]] performance.

Anyway, [[moving]] the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop [[singer]] on the [[road]] to stardom, who [[shares]] the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's [[John]] Norman Howard, a [[hard]] rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the [[previous]] incarnations of the story, "Norman Maine" sacrifices his [[leading]] [[man]] [[career]] to [[help]] newcomer "Vicky [[Lester]]" [[achieve]] her [[success]]. [[In]] the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it [[clear]] that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.

Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or [[naive]]. The only conceivable attraction he [[might]] offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.

But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from "Esther Blodgett" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.

The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning "Evergreen" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project. To grasp where this 1976 version of A [[STARS]] IS BORN is [[come]] from [[reviewing]] this: Its [[definitive]] number is [[seng]] by [[Babs]] Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute [[frost]] [[frames]] of [[Mrs]]. Streisand -- [[noteworthy]] a Christ-like pose -- [[posterior]] the [[closes]] credits. Over ten [[persistent]] minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead [[centro]], [[populate]] the big screen with [[adamant]] ego. That just might be some [[kinds]] of cinematic [[records]].

Or [[believe]] about this: The plot of this musical [[turns]] [[throughout]] a love affair between two musical superstars, [[however]], while Streisand's songs are [[fulfilled]] in their [[totality]] -- [[encompassing]] the [[infinite]] finale -- her costar [[Chris]] Kristofferson isn't [[empowered]] to [[finishes]] even one single song he performs. Nor, [[while]] she does [[allows]] him to [[helps]] a little back up to a [[matches]] of her ditties, do they actually [[sings]] a [[duo]].

Or [[considering]] this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six [[time]], including [[picked]] [[credits]] for "musical [[concept]]" and her [[cupboard]] (from her [[pantry]]) -- and she [[additionally]] [[reportedly]] wanted, but failed to [[obtain]] co-directing [[credits]] as well. One of her [[appropriations]] was as [[managerial]] producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former [[hair]], Jon [[Peter]]. As such, Streisand controlled the [[definitive]] [[chop]] of the [[filmmaking]], which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the [[filmmaking]] in her [[directions]]. What it doesn't explain is how [[arrived]], given [[each]] [[opportunities]] to [[deliver]] The [[Whopping]] [[Singer]] look good, their [[activities]] only make Streisand [[glance]] [[negative]]. [[Yet]] [[while]] this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is [[presumably]] her worst [[filmmaking]] and contains her [[worse]] performance.

Anyway, [[displacement]] the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop [[vocalist]] on the [[paths]] to stardom, who [[share]] the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's [[Jon]] Norman Howard, a [[tough]] rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the [[past]] incarnations of the story, "Norman Maine" sacrifices his [[main]] [[dude]] [[professions]] to [[pomoc]] newcomer "Vicky [[Leicester]]" [[obtain]] her [[avail]]. [[During]] the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it [[unambiguous]] that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.

Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or [[gullible]]. The only conceivable attraction he [[apt]] offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.

But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from "Esther Blodgett" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.

The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning "Evergreen" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project. --------------------------------------------- Result 1967 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Friz Freleng's 'Rumours' is an [[excellent]] Private Snafu [[cartoon]] that warns against spreading panic-inducing rumours during wartime. Produced, as were all the Snafu [[shorts]], to be shown to military audiences as entertaining instructional films, 'Rumours' is extremely [[imaginative]] and crams tons of ideas into its very brief lifespan. When Snafu starts a rumour about a bombing, it [[escalates]] into an eventual rumour that America has lost the war. This is illustrated [[brilliantly]] by way of a long, rubbery piece of baloney and several strange, [[fictional]] creatures who come back to haunt Snafu with ever more terrible news about his country's military. 'Rumours' is inventive, fast paced and funny, all of which help to overshadow the rather laboured, "don't badmouth the military" message. It [[stands]] up as one of the [[best]] of the Private Snafu shorts. Friz Freleng's 'Rumours' is an [[wondrous]] Private Snafu [[toon]] that warns against spreading panic-inducing rumours during wartime. Produced, as were all the Snafu [[britches]], to be shown to military audiences as entertaining instructional films, 'Rumours' is extremely [[creativity]] and crams tons of ideas into its very brief lifespan. When Snafu starts a rumour about a bombing, it [[aggravates]] into an eventual rumour that America has lost the war. This is illustrated [[brightly]] by way of a long, rubbery piece of baloney and several strange, [[notional]] creatures who come back to haunt Snafu with ever more terrible news about his country's military. 'Rumours' is inventive, fast paced and funny, all of which help to overshadow the rather laboured, "don't badmouth the military" message. It [[standing]] up as one of the [[nicest]] of the Private Snafu shorts. --------------------------------------------- Result 1968 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[remembered]] the title so well. To me, it was a Flora Robson [[movie]] with Olivier and Vivien Leigh in supporting roles. And it had Vincent Massey's [[voice]] from behind [[whiskers]]. Well Flora Robson was [[great]]. Her next signature, for me, [[would]] be "55 Days at Peking". The same role but with [[different]] sumptuous [[gowns]]. And the same voice. As for the [[Armada]], it was a subtext. I like black-and-white films. Was everything done in Elizbethan times at night? It was talky and difficult to fathom, at times. I couldn't tell which was the love interest. Was it the Spaniard or was it Vivien Leigh? And I do not believe that Elizabeth I would have been the brilliant strategist to recommend that fire ships be sent against the Armada. Apparently it worked for the Empire, but not for the script. This might have been more accurate, historically, but Bette Davis had more engaging scripts. And I [[missed]] daylight! I [[reminds]] the title so well. To me, it was a Flora Robson [[movies]] with Olivier and Vivien Leigh in supporting roles. And it had Vincent Massey's [[vowel]] from behind [[moustaches]]. Well Flora Robson was [[marvelous]]. Her next signature, for me, [[could]] be "55 Days at Peking". The same role but with [[disparate]] sumptuous [[scrubs]]. And the same voice. As for the [[Navy]], it was a subtext. I like black-and-white films. Was everything done in Elizbethan times at night? It was talky and difficult to fathom, at times. I couldn't tell which was the love interest. Was it the Spaniard or was it Vivien Leigh? And I do not believe that Elizabeth I would have been the brilliant strategist to recommend that fire ships be sent against the Armada. Apparently it worked for the Empire, but not for the script. This might have been more accurate, historically, but Bette Davis had more engaging scripts. And I [[mistook]] daylight! --------------------------------------------- Result 1969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] A [[fantastic]] [[show]] and an unrealized classic; The League of Gentlemen remains as one of the [[greatest]] [[modern]] comedies of [[recent]] [[times]].

With a [[dark]] and bizarre [[style]] of [[humor]] that towers over the [[tired]], formulaic [[approach]] of it's inferior, [[yet]] [[unfortunately]] far more [[acknowledged]] successor, Little [[Britain]], The League of Gentlemen was [[truly]] [[something]] special during a [[rather]] [[quiet]] era in British [[comedy]].

Up until it's arrival on the scene, there had never [[really]] been [[anything]] like The League of Gentlemen before. On the [[surface]], a seemingly simplistic sketch [[show]], the show soon unfolds as a [[vivid]], sinister but [[incredibly]] [[hilarious]] universe [[populated]] with all [[manner]] of brilliant comedic [[creations]]. What really sets the [[show]] apart from it's [[rivals]], is it's approach to [[telling]] us it's [[story]]. [[Rather]] than serve us re-hashed [[sketches]], barely distinguishable from the next, here we [[see]] each individual or [[group]] of [[characters]] go through their [[various]] [[journeys]] and [[story]] lines. No visit to them is the same, and each [[time]] they [[offer]] us up with a [[surprise]].

Gradually, over three series' and a Christmas special, the fictional town of Royston Vasey is heaving with a grotesque [[yet]] hilarious populace. And that's probably the [[main]] [[reason]] why the show is such a [[joy]] to watch (and [[also]] the reason why the show would easily merit more series') Unlike other current shows like The [[Catherine]] Tate Show or more importantly Little Britain, the League both know when a character has run it's course, and have the opportunity to deal with that. Several fan favorite's, who could have easily been [[kept]] on to entertain further, bowed out before the [[series]] came to a [[close]], giving [[room]] for fellow [[characters]] to [[grow]] more, or allow for the introduction of [[newer]] [[residents]] of Royston Vasey to [[make]] their [[mark]].

Another thing that sets this [[show]] above others is that the [[writing]] team approach the [[script]] process with [[care]] and [[intelligence]]. As [[mentioned]] before, all four [[members]] of the League have a [[sound]] mind when it [[comes]] to [[judging]] the [[longevity]] of their creations, and when it's [[time]] to [[call]] it [[quits]] in respect to certain [[characters]]. This [[awareness]] has [[also]] meant The League of Gentlemen undergoes a bold [[evolution]], not [[usually]] [[seen]] in a show of this [[nature]]. The narrative [[driven]], and far darker third [[series]] is a [[brave]] step away from the more sketch based first two series' and this bold move by the League really pays off. With the third series, there's less of an urgency for them to please an audience, and like the Christmas special, they pursue individual stories with a clear narrative, unlike the more sketch-based previous series' that (succesfully) binded together [[various]] sets of sketches into a series' long story arc.

The third [[series]] is both a refreshing change of pace of style, as well as a real treat for fans who've already seen the first two. Despite some polarized opinion on the third series, any real fan of the League will appreciate what the third series has to offer, as well as really enjoy the more character based episodes, that only delve deeper into fan favorite's, but pair up and inter-wine characters that might not have crossed paths previously.

It might take a little trying to get into the change in style, but it's definitely worth it, and in my opinion, the third series is the best and also provides a firm conclusion to the series.

The show's not without it's drawbacks, and very occasionally certain characters and set pieces appear somewhat out of place, but for the most part, the genius writing, dark nature of the show and the host of brilliant characters (that are often all too close to real life) make for a real treat and prove what comedy should be about and puts much of the more recent, catch phrase driven and often desperate attempts at comedy to shame A [[outstanding]] [[exhibitions]] and an unrealized classic; The League of Gentlemen remains as one of the [[higher]] [[fashionable]] comedies of [[newer]] [[time]].

With a [[darkness]] and bizarre [[styles]] of [[comedy]] that towers over the [[weary]], formulaic [[approaching]] of it's inferior, [[even]] [[unluckily]] far more [[recognized]] successor, Little [[England]], The League of Gentlemen was [[truthfully]] [[anything]] special during a [[somewhat]] [[quietness]] era in British [[farce]].

Up until it's arrival on the scene, there had never [[truly]] been [[something]] like The League of Gentlemen before. On the [[surfaces]], a seemingly simplistic sketch [[illustrating]], the show soon unfolds as a [[vibrant]], sinister but [[terribly]] [[funny]] universe [[inhabited]] with all [[method]] of brilliant comedic [[establishment]]. What really sets the [[illustrates]] apart from it's [[contenders]], is it's approach to [[saying]] us it's [[stories]]. [[Fairly]] than serve us re-hashed [[portraits]], barely distinguishable from the next, here we [[seeing]] each individual or [[panels]] of [[features]] go through their [[multiple]] [[distances]] and [[narratives]] lines. No visit to them is the same, and each [[times]] they [[supplying]] us up with a [[surprises]].

Gradually, over three series' and a Christmas special, the fictional town of Royston Vasey is heaving with a grotesque [[even]] hilarious populace. And that's probably the [[principal]] [[justification]] why the show is such a [[pleasure]] to watch (and [[additionally]] the reason why the show would easily merit more series') Unlike other current shows like The [[Katherine]] Tate Show or more importantly Little Britain, the League both know when a character has run it's course, and have the opportunity to deal with that. Several fan favorite's, who could have easily been [[conserved]] on to entertain further, bowed out before the [[serials]] came to a [[closed]], giving [[chamber]] for fellow [[attribute]] to [[raising]] more, or allow for the introduction of [[novel]] [[villagers]] of Royston Vasey to [[deliver]] their [[brands]].

Another thing that sets this [[spectacle]] above others is that the [[write]] team approach the [[hyphen]] process with [[healthcare]] and [[intellect]]. As [[referenced]] before, all four [[member]] of the League have a [[sounds]] mind when it [[arises]] to [[verdict]] the [[durability]] of their creations, and when it's [[times]] to [[invitation]] it [[resigns]] in respect to certain [[traits]]. This [[consciousness]] has [[further]] meant The League of Gentlemen undergoes a bold [[developments]], not [[generally]] [[watched]] in a show of this [[character]]. The narrative [[spurred]], and far darker third [[serial]] is a [[plucky]] step away from the more sketch based first two series' and this bold move by the League really pays off. With the third series, there's less of an urgency for them to please an audience, and like the Christmas special, they pursue individual stories with a clear narrative, unlike the more sketch-based previous series' that (succesfully) binded together [[assorted]] sets of sketches into a series' long story arc.

The third [[serial]] is both a refreshing change of pace of style, as well as a real treat for fans who've already seen the first two. Despite some polarized opinion on the third series, any real fan of the League will appreciate what the third series has to offer, as well as really enjoy the more character based episodes, that only delve deeper into fan favorite's, but pair up and inter-wine characters that might not have crossed paths previously.

It might take a little trying to get into the change in style, but it's definitely worth it, and in my opinion, the third series is the best and also provides a firm conclusion to the series.

The show's not without it's drawbacks, and very occasionally certain characters and set pieces appear somewhat out of place, but for the most part, the genius writing, dark nature of the show and the host of brilliant characters (that are often all too close to real life) make for a real treat and prove what comedy should be about and puts much of the more recent, catch phrase driven and often desperate attempts at comedy to shame --------------------------------------------- Result 1970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The "gangster" genre is now a worn subject one that is too often subjected to parody. In retrospect the series is a culmination of previous clichés that have been utilized in it's genre, thankfully the writers have advanced upon this flaw by creating a realism which has been applied to it. The Sopranos is an epic crime saga that illustrates it's content with psychological depth that is characterized with subtle nuance, humor and unvarnished violence. The key protagonist Tony Soprano is perceived as a perilous general bereft of fear and moral values by his crew ,however, Tony is of two persona's one which is bestial while the other is conflicted with guilt and resent. With out any inhibitions or contradictions I still adamantly believe that The Sopranos has the finest ensemble cast of recent memory. All things considered I could make an elaborate statement on the series, but I won't. If ever there is a visual dictionary in global consumerism search for these definitions vital, ambiguous, unrelenting, epic, uncompromising and the sopranos shattered visage will be smiling right back at you. --------------------------------------------- Result 1971 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An interesting animation about the fate of a giant tiger, a sloth, and a mammoth, who saved a baby, who was close to be killed by a group of tigers during the ice age. The morale of the film shows that good behavior with the others may bring benefits at the end. One of the tigers in the group got an order to finally capture the baby, who was hardly saved by his mother when the tigers attacked her community. The baby was then rescued by the sloth and the mammoth, but the tiger joined them with the objective of finally taken away the baby. They went through very troublesome paths with plenty of danger, and at once the tiger was to fall down and saved by the mammoth. At the end the group of tigers tried to capture the baby but the mammoth helped incredibly by his tiger colleague was able to overcome this attack and to give the baby back to his father and the community to which he belongs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1972 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Deliverance" is one of the best exploitation films to come out of that wonderful 1970's decade from whence so many other exploitation films came.

A group of friends sets out on a canoe trip down a river in the south and they become victimized by a bunch of toothless hillbillies who pretty much try to ruin their lives. It's awesome.

We are treated to anal rape, vicious beatings, bow and arrow killings, shootings, broken bones, etc... A lot like 1974's "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," to say that "Deliverance" is believable would be immature. This would never and could never happen, even in the dark ages of 1972.

"Deliverance" is a very entertaining ride and packed full of action. It is one in a huge pile of exploitation films to come from the early 70's and it (arguably) sits on top of that pile with it's great acting, superb cinematography and excellent writing.

8 out of 10, kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 1973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] foywonder's review of this cheap STV hits the nail squarely on the head. Make sure you read it. In case you don't, a group of scientists heads off into the deep woods of the Pacific Northwest, to fumble around with a bunch of bones in an animal graveyard. The Big Foot family doesn't take kindly to this, and proceeds to pick off the team one by one, largely offscreen. Big Foot himself has a distinctly ape-like face, but is less scary overall than Harry from HARRY AND THE HENDERSONS. Most of the movie has the wooden, generic actors pretending to be scientists tromping around in the woods and yakking away. This is a no-budget movie in which very little happens, at least on screen. We do get to watch the sexiest of the females take a shower while one of her male companions watches, but nothing comes of this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1974 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I gave up to watch it after an hour and regretted that hour a lot. the acting is horrible and there is almost no plot. my guess is that someone came up with a strange shape of an animal and started to make a story around of it. borrowing some ideas from movies like Resident Evil and Aliens doesn't result in a movie like them. if this going to be a top Korean movie, I'd rather won't bother to see even a Korean movie trailer...

By the way, this movies is a good reason to believe that not necessarily a high rating means the movie is promising. I think every Korean who has internet for online gaming rated this movie over the 8, even though has no clue what it is about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1975 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The 40 Year Old Virgin, is about Andy Stitzer, a forty year old man who works in an electronic store and doesn't have much of a social life and is very awkward around women. Some of his co-workers at the store invite him out one night and they discover that Andy, is still a virgin so they plan to help him lose his virginity. One day in the store Andy, meets a woman named Trish, who gives him her phone number and eventually Andy, works up enough courage to go on a date with her and they start to really like each other but Andy, is still very awkward when it comes to sex and he is going to have to tell this to Trish, much to his embarrassment if he can actually get up enough courage to tell her before things get awkward. The 40 Year Old Virgin, has good direction, a good script, good comedic performances by the whole cast, good cinematography and good film editing. The film stars and is co-written by Steve Carell, who does a very good comedic breakthrough performance and his writing for the film is very good too. I was very pleasantly surprised with this film. It is sweet, funny, entertaining, fun, enjoyable, clever, good natured and a good time. This film is just as good as this year's Wedding Crashers, and both films are two of the best comedies I have seen in awhile. The 40 Year Old Virgin, really showcases a lot of talent and it is put to good use and it works as a comedy and a romance and it is sweet and a lot of fun. One of the biggest surprises and one of the best comedies of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 1976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I had never read Shakespeare's Hamlet before watching it but I did have a Shakespeare book with me and [[could]] follow the dialogue through it. My [[view]] on the [[movie]] may be [[partially]] biased [[since]] I had never read the play before, but I [[got]] [[pulled]] into this movie's grasp. Shakespeare is [[undoubtedly]] one of the [[best]] [[writers]] ever to have lived and the [[story]] of [[Hamlet]] is [[definitely]] one of his [[best]] [[achievements]].

But now on to the [[movie]]...

I [[found]] that all the actors in the movie had a firm grasp of what they were [[saying]] and [[thus]], were [[able]] to articulate it [[quite]] well. Leonardo in Romeo and Juliet is [[nothing]] [[compared]] to Kenneth Branagh and the [[King]]. The [[thing]] I liked about this was that it [[worked]] very well as a "[[MOVIE]]" and not as a play you are [[studying]]. You don't need to be [[affluent]] with Shakespeare to relate to all the Misery hamlet has to [[go]] through. I would [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to a [[wide]] audience.

That's my two cents. I had never read Shakespeare's Hamlet before watching it but I did have a Shakespeare book with me and [[wo]] follow the dialogue through it. My [[standpoint]] on the [[movies]] may be [[partly]] biased [[because]] I had never read the play before, but I [[did]] [[pulling]] into this movie's grasp. Shakespeare is [[unquestionably]] one of the [[finest]] [[authors]] ever to have lived and the [[tale]] of [[Hamlets]] is [[indubitably]] one of his [[finest]] [[successes]].

But now on to the [[kino]]...

I [[uncovered]] that all the actors in the movie had a firm grasp of what they were [[arguing]] and [[therefore]], were [[capable]] to articulate it [[pretty]] well. Leonardo in Romeo and Juliet is [[anything]] [[likened]] to Kenneth Branagh and the [[Emperor]]. The [[stuff]] I liked about this was that it [[acted]] very well as a "[[CINEMATOGRAPHY]]" and not as a play you are [[examining]]. You don't need to be [[wealthiest]] with Shakespeare to relate to all the Misery hamlet has to [[going]] through. I would [[recommendation]] this [[kino]] to a [[extensive]] audience.

That's my two cents. --------------------------------------------- Result 1977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I noticed "Fire" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the film is still [[awful]]. Besides the [[synthesizer]], the [[saxophone]] was the most [[abused]] instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is [[evident]] in the title [[song]]. Hearing that [[song]] again [[made]] me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic [[misery]] inflicted [[upon]] them. And to compound this musical [[assault]] Rob Lowe's [[character]] [[played]] [[saxophone]], and there was one scene where he played a [[solo]] that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the [[characters]] were intensely unappealing, [[although]] I [[must]] say they did a great job of [[casting]] equally unappealing [[actors]] to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual [[diseases]] if such thing were voted upon. I noticed "Fire" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the film is still [[frightful]]. Besides the [[synthesizers]], the [[saxophones]] was the most [[abuse]] instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is [[manifest]] in the title [[chanson]]. Hearing that [[chanson]] again [[introduced]] me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic [[privation]] inflicted [[afterward]] them. And to compound this musical [[aggression]] Rob Lowe's [[personage]] [[effected]] [[clarinet]], and there was one scene where he played a [[alone]] that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the [[hallmarks]] were intensely unappealing, [[while]] I [[gotta]] say they did a great job of [[pouring]] equally unappealing [[protagonists]] to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual [[ailment]] if such thing were voted upon. --------------------------------------------- Result 1978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much worse than the original. It was actually *painful* to sit through, and it barely held my six year old's interest.

Introduction of some new Pokemon is marginally interesting, but storyline is extra-thin, dialogue is still bad, and music is mediocre. Watch the television show instead - it's much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I was up late flipping cable [[channels]] one [[night]] and ran into this [[movie]] from about 10 minutes into the [[start]] - every time I even [[thought]] going to [[bed]], [[something]] kept on [[telling]] me to [[keep]] on watching it [[even]] [[though]] it was way way way past my bedtime.

This [[movie]] [[could]] have been another [[easy]] slam dunk anti-gun [[film]], but [[instead]] they [[chose]] to examine the aftereffects of the shootings. And [[even]] better, the [[movie]] kept on with the [[real]] [[life]] - just when you [[think]] they are going to [[take]] the easy and [[obviously]] contrived [[way]] out, a twist [[comes]] along and changes the [[whole]] [[outlook]] of the movie. This [[film]] not only doesn't follow the [[formula]], it [[shows]] how other [[events]] [[often]] lead up to and/or affect what [[happens]] afterwards.

I only wish the filmmakers had [[explored]] the [[issues]] around anti-depressant [[drugs]] more - the [[kids]] from Columnbine who did the [[shootings]] were on them for [[years]] and it was [[frightening]] to watch the [[way]] Deanna [[popped]] them [[every]] time the [[nightmares]] [[started]]. Up until [[recently]] they were [[dispensing]] the stuff like [[candy]] and only now do they [[even]] [[begin]] to [[understand]] what [[long]] term effects the [[drugs]] have. It was very [[refreshing]] to [[see]] that the mental illness [[aspect]] of the [[story]] was [[given]] [[quite]] a bit of film, having a relative who suffers from a [[mental]] [[illness]], I can say that the [[movie]] was dead nuts on in [[every]] [[aspect]] of [[mental]] [[illnesses]]. [[Bravo]] to the director and [[writer]] who [[obviously]] did their homework on those [[issues]]. And for those who [[think]] certain things couldn't [[happen]] in a [[hospital]] (I don't [[want]] to tell any [[particulars]]), you're dead [[wrong]] on that too - I've been there. The [[script]] was so [[real]] it was [[amazing]].

Go [[BUY]] this [[film]] and [[show]] it to your [[teenage]] [[kids]] before it's too late. [[Someday]] they'll [[thank]] you for it. I was up late flipping cable [[channel]] one [[nighttime]] and ran into this [[cinematography]] from about 10 minutes into the [[startup]] - every time I even [[figured]] going to [[bedside]], [[somethings]] kept on [[saying]] me to [[preserving]] on watching it [[yet]] [[if]] it was way way way past my bedtime.

This [[film]] [[did]] have been another [[easier]] slam dunk anti-gun [[cinematography]], but [[alternatively]] they [[elects]] to examine the aftereffects of the shootings. And [[yet]] better, the [[kino]] kept on with the [[actual]] [[living]] - just when you [[ideas]] they are going to [[taking]] the easy and [[clearly]] contrived [[route]] out, a twist [[occurs]] along and changes the [[ensemble]] [[expectations]] of the movie. This [[kino]] not only doesn't follow the [[formulas]], it [[demonstrates]] how other [[incidents]] [[frequently]] lead up to and/or affect what [[arises]] afterwards.

I only wish the filmmakers had [[analyzed]] the [[issue]] around anti-depressant [[drug]] more - the [[youths]] from Columnbine who did the [[shooting]] were on them for [[olds]] and it was [[creepy]] to watch the [[path]] Deanna [[tore]] them [[all]] time the [[dream]] [[startup]]. Up until [[freshly]] they were [[dispense]] the stuff like [[chocolate]] and only now do they [[yet]] [[commence]] to [[realise]] what [[lange]] term effects the [[pharmaceuticals]] have. It was very [[refreshes]] to [[behold]] that the mental illness [[element]] of the [[storytelling]] was [[granted]] [[rather]] a bit of film, having a relative who suffers from a [[psychological]] [[sickness]], I can say that the [[film]] was dead nuts on in [[any]] [[element]] of [[spiritual]] [[disease]]. [[Congrats]] to the director and [[screenwriter]] who [[apparently]] did their homework on those [[matters]]. And for those who [[ideas]] certain things couldn't [[occur]] in a [[hospitals]] (I don't [[wanted]] to tell any [[specifics]]), you're dead [[amiss]] on that too - I've been there. The [[hyphen]] was so [[true]] it was [[astonishing]].

Go [[BOUGHT]] this [[movie]] and [[showing]] it to your [[teenager]] [[brats]] before it's too late. [[Sometime]] they'll [[appreciation]] you for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1980 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As you probably already know, Jess Franco is one prolific guy. Hes made hundreds upon hundreds of films, many of which are crap. However, he managed to sneak in an occasionally quality work amongst all the assembly line exploitation. "Succubus" isn't his best work (thats either "The Diabolical Dr. Z" or "Vampyros Lesbos"), but it has many of his trademarks that make it a must for anyone interested in diving into his large catalog. He combines the erotic (alternating between showing full-frontal nudity and leaving somethings left to the imagination) and the surreal seamlessly. This is a very dreamlike film, full of great atmosphere. I particularly liked the constant namedropping. Despite coming off as being incredibly pretentious, its amusing to hear all of Franco's influences.

Still, there are many users who don't like "Succubus" and I can see where they're coming from. Its leisurely paced, but I can deal with that. More problematic is the incoherency. The script here was obviously rushed, and within five minutes into the film I had absolutely no idea what was going on (and it never really came together from that point on). Those who want some substance with their style, look elsewhere. Also, if its a horror film, it never really becomes scary or even suspenseful. Still, I was entertained by all the psychedelic silliness that I didn't really mind these major flaws all too much. (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 1981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I debated as to whether or not I should tick the spoiler box. Since 99% of this show has probably already been seen by any follower of Scrubs it probably doesn't come under the category of a spoiler.

Clip shows. Grrr. We all knew Friends was going down the tube when they started with clip shows...and five and a half years into Scrubs they've gone and fallen down that hole.

I have to wonder if the writers just couldn't be bothered writing that week and just said to themselves "let's show the other funny stuff." It didn't work.

For starters, showing all the times that people have fallen down isn't funny when taken out of context. It's not funny to see Todd dangling by his banana hammock unless we know WHY he was dangling by his banana hammock.

Second, for what was supposed to be a compilation of JD's fantasies, one was Turk's dream, another also wasn't his fantasy, although I forget which.

And that's the problem. This episode is totally forgettable. We've seen all these things before. And the collection of clips of people dancing? Why? That's not funny.

Finally, I must admit two of my favourite Scrubs moments were shown in the last compilation...Dr. Cox realising that Ben died...and JD telling him how proud of him he is.

But even seeing those moments again didn't save the episode. The summary says it all.

Worst episode ever. Bill Lawrence, PLEASE don't let your show go the same way as Friends, keep it fresh, keep it funny...or wrap it up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1982 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is one of those [[films]] that's more interesting to watch from an academic [[perspective]] than from an [[entertainment]] perspective. I do my [[ratings]] [[based]] on how much I enjoyed or was entertained by the movie, so I'm giving it a 4. [[If]] I were to rate it as an academic [[film]], [[though]], it [[would]] [[get]] a 10.

It is shot in a very interesting [[manner]], like a pseudo-silent [[film]] with [[elements]] of [[sound]] [[effect]] and [[reality]]. It's meant to convey [[disjointed]] [[memory]] and fragmentation of the [[mind]], and it is interesting in these respects.

However, the [[film]] has a lot of disgusting [[elements]] to it that I didn't [[find]] all that [[entertaining]]. They're mainly just [[disturbing]]. It has some very interesting imagery too, and some interesting concepts, but some of the [[character]] relationships (especially between the mother and son) are pretty disturbing.

In all, this film will either appeal to you or it won't. For me, it was interesting from an academic perspective, but it wasn't a good watch, and I'll probably not go back to it a second time.

4/10 if you're looking for entertainment. 10/10 from an academic standpoint. This is one of those [[movies]] that's more interesting to watch from an academic [[views]] than from an [[amusement]] perspective. I do my [[rating]] [[founded]] on how much I enjoyed or was entertained by the movie, so I'm giving it a 4. [[Though]] I were to rate it as an academic [[filmmaking]], [[nevertheless]], it [[should]] [[obtain]] a 10.

It is shot in a very interesting [[ways]], like a pseudo-silent [[filmmaking]] with [[element]] of [[audible]] [[impacts]] and [[actuality]]. It's meant to convey [[unconnected]] [[memoir]] and fragmentation of the [[esprit]], and it is interesting in these respects.

However, the [[cinematographic]] has a lot of disgusting [[facets]] to it that I didn't [[finds]] all that [[entertain]]. They're mainly just [[disconcerting]]. It has some very interesting imagery too, and some interesting concepts, but some of the [[personage]] relationships (especially between the mother and son) are pretty disturbing.

In all, this film will either appeal to you or it won't. For me, it was interesting from an academic perspective, but it wasn't a good watch, and I'll probably not go back to it a second time.

4/10 if you're looking for entertainment. 10/10 from an academic standpoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 1983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] 'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines. This film does not really have a lot to offer, but it provides [[several]] hilarious moments that are well-worth a watch. Don't expect it to be a memorable film, however. Just expect to laugh your way through the film and at the expense of other people. The confrontation between Major Payne and the chubby boy were hilarious, and that's really all I [[remember]] about the [[film]] except for the boys wanting revenge on Major Payne. Again, it is not a great film, and it is probably best watched on a rainy day when you need some laughter. 'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines. This film does not really have a lot to offer, but it provides [[dissimilar]] hilarious moments that are well-worth a watch. Don't expect it to be a memorable film, however. Just expect to laugh your way through the film and at the expense of other people. The confrontation between Major Payne and the chubby boy were hilarious, and that's really all I [[rember]] about the [[filmmaking]] except for the boys wanting revenge on Major Payne. Again, it is not a great film, and it is probably best watched on a rainy day when you need some laughter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I find it so amazing that even after all these years, we are STILL talking about this [[movie]]! Obviously this [[movie]] wasn't THAT bad or else people wouldn't even BOTHER to talk about it. I personally enjoyed this [[film]] immensly, and still do! I [[guess]] this film isn't for [[everyone]], but it [[certainly]] did [[touch]] the hearts of [[many]].

As for those that [[think]] that this [[film]] is "[[overrated]]" or "over-hyped"...well, we only have the movie-going public to thank for that! lol* You [[see]], it's not [[CRITICS]]/article [[writers]] that [[make]] a [[film]] "[[HUGE]]" or a "[[HIT]]" with the general movie-going public. PEOPLE make the film a [[huge]] [[success]]. With Titanic, [[everyone]] was in awe. Let's [[face]] it, a film like this had never been made before. [[At]] least not with the [[type]] of [[special]] effects needed to [[really]] capture the [[essence]] of the ship [[actually]] sinking. This [[film]] is so [[accurate]] that [[even]] James Cameron [[timed]] the [[actual]] sinking of the ship in the [[film]] with the [[REAL]] sinking that [[fateful]] day in April 1912. [[Even]] the silverware for [[goodness]] sakes [[matched]]!

Give this [[movie]] a break you [[guys]]! The critics [[thought]] this [[movie]] [[would]] [[sink]] [[BIG]] time! [[When]] this [[movie]] [[actually]] [[came]] out and people [[started]] hearing by WORD [[OF]] MOUTH (which is the [[BEST]] [[form]] of advertisement [[mind]] you) that this was a good/decent/movie worth [[seeing]], then [[everyone]] [[started]] flocking to the [[theaters]] in droves to see this [[movie]]...not once, not twice, but [[maybe]] 3 [[times]] and more! So, I really wouldn't say that this [[movie]] was "overhyped"...at least not like the buildup for the MATRIX reloaded or the HULK is being "overhyped". ha! [[Critics]] didn't even think that [[Titanic]] [[would]] make [[enough]] money to cover Cameron's gigantic film [[budget]] that it took to make this [[mammoth]] of a film. However, the films money took care of that 200 million budget and MUCH more!

[[Personally]], I [[LOVE]] this [[film]]. [[However]], this film might not be for everyone. DOn't [[say]] that this film sucks just because of romance though! THat is the most sexist thing I've ever heard! Disliking a movie just because it has romance in it! The story was [[sweet]]. The dialogue could have been better, but let's face it...the REAL star of the movie wasn't Leo or Kate...it was that GIGANTIC Ship! I think all of the actors including DiCaprio and Winslet did a fine job. It's not thier best work (I've seen much BETTER work from both of them) but it wasn't the WORST I've seen on screen before. Give them a break!

I find it so amazing that even after all these years, we are STILL talking about this [[films]]! Obviously this [[film]] wasn't THAT bad or else people wouldn't even BOTHER to talk about it. I personally enjoyed this [[cinematography]] immensly, and still do! I [[suppose]] this film isn't for [[anybody]], but it [[probably]] did [[toque]] the hearts of [[several]].

As for those that [[ideas]] that this [[kino]] is "[[overstated]]" or "over-hyped"...well, we only have the movie-going public to thank for that! lol* You [[behold]], it's not [[CRITIQUES]]/article [[authors]] that [[deliver]] a [[films]] "[[GIGANTIC]]" or a "[[SLAPPED]]" with the general movie-going public. PEOPLE make the film a [[big]] [[avail]]. With Titanic, [[someone]] was in awe. Let's [[confront]] it, a film like this had never been made before. [[For]] least not with the [[genera]] of [[particular]] effects needed to [[genuinely]] capture the [[nub]] of the ship [[indeed]] sinking. This [[films]] is so [[exact]] that [[yet]] James Cameron [[synched]] the [[real]] sinking of the ship in the [[cinema]] with the [[AUTHENTIC]] sinking that [[fatal]] day in April 1912. [[Yet]] the silverware for [[christ]] sakes [[coupled]]!

Give this [[movies]] a break you [[boy]]! The critics [[ideology]] this [[films]] [[ought]] [[sinking]] [[SIZEABLE]] time! [[Whenever]] this [[films]] [[genuinely]] [[became]] out and people [[opened]] hearing by WORD [[TO]] MOUTH (which is the [[BETTER]] [[shape]] of advertisement [[intellect]] you) that this was a good/decent/movie worth [[see]], then [[somebody]] [[launches]] flocking to the [[theatre]] in droves to see this [[kino]]...not once, not twice, but [[conceivably]] 3 [[time]] and more! So, I really wouldn't say that this [[films]] was "overhyped"...at least not like the buildup for the MATRIX reloaded or the HULK is being "overhyped". ha! [[Criticisms]] didn't even think that [[Herculean]] [[ought]] make [[adequate]] money to cover Cameron's gigantic film [[budgets]] that it took to make this [[gargantuan]] of a film. However, the films money took care of that 200 million budget and MUCH more!

[[Individual]], I [[AMOUR]] this [[cinema]]. [[Instead]], this film might not be for everyone. DOn't [[tell]] that this film sucks just because of romance though! THat is the most sexist thing I've ever heard! Disliking a movie just because it has romance in it! The story was [[sugary]]. The dialogue could have been better, but let's face it...the REAL star of the movie wasn't Leo or Kate...it was that GIGANTIC Ship! I think all of the actors including DiCaprio and Winslet did a fine job. It's not thier best work (I've seen much BETTER work from both of them) but it wasn't the WORST I've seen on screen before. Give them a break!

--------------------------------------------- Result 1985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Normally]] when I go on a [[raid]] of the local Hollywood [[Video]] I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the [[basic]] [[principals]] behind a B-Horror [[movie]] is it's camp value, Heavy [[Gore]], Lots of needless Nudity, and [[special]] [[effects]] that anyone can put together with a [[pack]] of corn [[syrup]] and latex. I [[rented]] Cradle of Fear [[strictly]] because I've been a fan of the band since they [[released]] they're first [[Demo]] in 1995. The [[movie]] [[started]] off on an interesting [[note]] and then when I saw Dani [[Filth]] stomp on an extremely [[obvious]] latex mask I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the "Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of [[potential]] and really [[could]] have been a real good [[movie]] but in the [[end]] this "[[Movie]]" really is just an extended Cradle of Filth Video. [[Routinely]] when I go on a [[raiding]] of the local Hollywood [[Videos]] I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the [[fundamental]] [[chiefs]] behind a B-Horror [[filmmaking]] is it's camp value, Heavy [[Gora]], Lots of needless Nudity, and [[peculiar]] [[impact]] that anyone can put together with a [[packs]] of corn [[sesame]] and latex. I [[leases]] Cradle of Fear [[tightly]] because I've been a fan of the band since they [[liberated]] they're first [[Manifestation]] in 1995. The [[filmmaking]] [[launching]] off on an interesting [[noting]] and then when I saw Dani [[Dirt]] stomp on an extremely [[noticeable]] latex mask I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the "Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of [[prospective]] and really [[did]] have been a real good [[filmmaking]] but in the [[terminating]] this "[[Kino]]" really is just an extended Cradle of Filth Video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This time the [[hero]] from the first [[film]] has [[become]] human and this time [[uses]] fist and [[foot]] combos against [[super]] universal soldiers and a computer which has [[gone]] awry and is prepared to take over the [[world]]. I'm pretty sure it was [[Double]] Team, which convinced [[everyone]] that Jean-Claude Van Damme was no longer credible in [[providing]] watchable action flicks. However it was this that [[tarnished]] his [[credibility]] [[forever]]. While [[Universal]] Soldier:The [[Return]] isn't as [[dull]] as [[Double]] Team or The Quest,it's still [[pretty]] [[awful]] indeed, with [[none]] of the style and flair of the original and no star pairing. This sequel is made simply for kids who enjoy professional wrestling. As I look back, not even the action sequences were all that exciting and therefore this movie is a worthless dud. In other words another clunker in Van Damme's assembly line.

* out of 4(Bad) This time the [[superhero]] from the first [[filmmaking]] has [[becomes]] human and this time [[using]] fist and [[footing]] combos against [[sublime]] universal soldiers and a computer which has [[faded]] awry and is prepared to take over the [[globe]]. I'm pretty sure it was [[Doubly]] Team, which convinced [[everybody]] that Jean-Claude Van Damme was no longer credible in [[offered]] watchable action flicks. However it was this that [[sullied]] his [[credence]] [[permanently]]. While [[Globally]] Soldier:The [[Comeback]] isn't as [[boring]] as [[Dual]] Team or The Quest,it's still [[quite]] [[abhorrent]] indeed, with [[nos]] of the style and flair of the original and no star pairing. This sequel is made simply for kids who enjoy professional wrestling. As I look back, not even the action sequences were all that exciting and therefore this movie is a worthless dud. In other words another clunker in Van Damme's assembly line.

* out of 4(Bad) --------------------------------------------- Result 1987 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] As an Altman fan, I'd sought out this movie for years, thinking that with such a great cast, it would have to be at [[least]] marginally [[brilliant]].

[[Big]] [[mistake]].

This is one of Altman's big-cast mishmashes, thrown [[together]] haphazardly and improvisationally (or so it [[feels]]) with the hope that it would all come together in the editing room. It doesn't.

As Maltin points out, this [[turkey]] is [[notable]] only for the debut performance of Alfre Woodard, who outshines the vets all around her. But other than that, [[avoid]] at all costs. (Which is pretty easy to do -- it's never been released on video -- to my knowledge -- and its [[cable]] appearances have the frequency of Halley's Comet.) As an Altman fan, I'd sought out this movie for years, thinking that with such a great cast, it would have to be at [[fewest]] marginally [[sumptuous]].

[[Prodigious]] [[awry]].

This is one of Altman's big-cast mishmashes, thrown [[jointly]] haphazardly and improvisationally (or so it [[thinks]]) with the hope that it would all come together in the editing room. It doesn't.

As Maltin points out, this [[turk]] is [[remarkable]] only for the debut performance of Alfre Woodard, who outshines the vets all around her. But other than that, [[avert]] at all costs. (Which is pretty easy to do -- it's never been released on video -- to my knowledge -- and its [[wiring]] appearances have the frequency of Halley's Comet.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was [[excited]] when I heard they were finally making this [[horrific]] [[event]] into a movie. The whole era (1980's Southern California) and subject matter (drug and porn industry) is intriguing to me. I thought this would be a sure fire hit. I was not thrilled with the choice of Kilmer as Holmes, they do not resemble each other in physical appearance or [[mannerisms]]. I guess he [[sells]] [[tickets]]? However, I was willing to overlook this and give it a fair shot. I was a bit shocked that there were only like four other people in the entire [[theater]] with me on that first day of showing. Now the whole crime and story in the film is hard to do, I will [[admit]] that. There were no witnesses to this very violent and brutal act. [[John]] Holmes was there, but he was also a pathological liar and [[worried]] about what [[would]] happen to his family (and self) if he talked to [[police]] about it. [[In]] fact, Holmes never really [[testified]] about what happened and the crime did go unsolved. [[So]] this was still really one [[big]] mystery, a mystery that this [[movie]] does [[nothing]] to cast light on. The person writing the screenplay had a whole lot of [[discretion]] and most of the [[principal]] characters are [[dead]]. However, there is no real storyline, it is [[fragmented]] [[claptrap]]. The [[script]] is light and the [[actors]] try to hard to beef up paper thin lines by overacting. The film gives no [[insight]] into Holmes or the other people involved. Kilmer's character disappears for [[long]] stretches, his girlfriend is dull, the police are jokes. [[Even]] Kudrow [[tries]] [[hard]] to make a [[flimsy]] role [[look]] [[substantial]]. It is a very [[shallow]] [[piece]] and dare I say, boring. The [[director]] [[even]] [[tries]] to turn it into a love [[story]]. Which is [[nice]], unless you [[know]] [[anything]] about what a [[piece]] of trash [[John]] Holmes [[really]] was. [[Perhaps]] a [[couple]] of viewings of Anderson's "Boogie [[Nights]]" might have [[helped]] here. "Boogie [[Nights]]" was [[innovative]] and [[exciting]] in all regards. This [[film]] on the other hand was flat and without any [[real]] [[charm]] or [[style]]. Even the music is out of place, with [[Duran]] [[Duran]] being [[played]] in a scene that was supposed to have [[taken]] [[place]] in 1980. Then we have Gordon Lightfoot? Gordon Lightfoot? There [[could]] have been a [[great]] [[film]] based on this [[gruesome]] event, but I have not [[seen]] it [[yet]]. I have not [[seen]] [[even]] a [[decent]] one [[yet]] (unless you [[consider]] the Rahad Jackson scene from Boogie Nights). I was [[thrilled]] when I heard they were finally making this [[gruesome]] [[incidents]] into a movie. The whole era (1980's Southern California) and subject matter (drug and porn industry) is intriguing to me. I thought this would be a sure fire hit. I was not thrilled with the choice of Kilmer as Holmes, they do not resemble each other in physical appearance or [[quirks]]. I guess he [[sold]] [[ticket]]? However, I was willing to overlook this and give it a fair shot. I was a bit shocked that there were only like four other people in the entire [[movies]] with me on that first day of showing. Now the whole crime and story in the film is hard to do, I will [[confess]] that. There were no witnesses to this very violent and brutal act. [[Jon]] Holmes was there, but he was also a pathological liar and [[preoccupied]] about what [[could]] happen to his family (and self) if he talked to [[cops]] about it. [[For]] fact, Holmes never really [[stated]] about what happened and the crime did go unsolved. [[Therefore]] this was still really one [[grand]] mystery, a mystery that this [[filmmaking]] does [[none]] to cast light on. The person writing the screenplay had a whole lot of [[caution]] and most of the [[important]] characters are [[deaths]]. However, there is no real storyline, it is [[scattered]] [[fiddlesticks]]. The [[screenplay]] is light and the [[protagonists]] try to hard to beef up paper thin lines by overacting. The film gives no [[vision]] into Holmes or the other people involved. Kilmer's character disappears for [[lengthy]] stretches, his girlfriend is dull, the police are jokes. [[Yet]] Kudrow [[attempts]] [[tough]] to make a [[weak]] role [[peek]] [[important]]. It is a very [[superficial]] [[slice]] and dare I say, boring. The [[superintendent]] [[yet]] [[seeks]] to turn it into a love [[storytelling]]. Which is [[enjoyable]], unless you [[savoir]] [[something]] about what a [[slice]] of trash [[Johannes]] Holmes [[truly]] was. [[Potentially]] a [[match]] of viewings of Anderson's "Boogie [[Evenings]]" might have [[supporting]] here. "Boogie [[Evenings]]" was [[revolutionary]] and [[breathtaking]] in all regards. This [[filmmaking]] on the other hand was flat and without any [[actual]] [[glamour]] or [[styles]]. Even the music is out of place, with [[Jose]] [[Ortiz]] being [[done]] in a scene that was supposed to have [[picked]] [[placing]] in 1980. Then we have Gordon Lightfoot? Gordon Lightfoot? There [[did]] have been a [[prodigious]] [[movie]] based on this [[shocking]] event, but I have not [[noticed]] it [[however]]. I have not [[noticed]] [[yet]] a [[dignified]] one [[still]] (unless you [[reviewing]] the Rahad Jackson scene from Boogie Nights). --------------------------------------------- Result 1989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the intelligently written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the beautiful music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a [[rarity]] in movie going experiences: one that is nigh impossible to find fault with in any area.

There have been several comparisons made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy epic to [[rival]] Rob Roy as the [[kind]] of [[movie]] I [[would]] care to [[see]] more than once. [[While]] Braveheart [[works]] [[hard]] to be a serious epic, Rob [[Roy]] just grabs you and [[absorbs]] you into its [[tightly]] edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.

Rob [[Roy]] contains the [[perfect]] [[balance]] of dramatic [[tension]], [[action]] and even occasional [[humor]]. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that [[anchor]] them in their [[authentic]] period setting.

Further, they are not [[caricatures]] of good and [[evil]] as we all too [[often]] observe in even modern film.

For example, while we hope the heroic Rob [[Roy]] prevails, we realize his predicaments are [[products]] of his own pride and sense of [[honor]]. Tim Roth plays one of the most [[hateful]] [[bad]] [[guys]] in the [[history]] of [[cinema]], yet there are moments when we can [[understand]] how the [[events]] of his [[life]] have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob [[Roy]] employs a [[level]] of [[character]] [[development]] that makes its [[story]] [[even]] more [[believable]] and gripping.

Rob [[Roy]] is a [[delightful]] [[treasure]], featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation. From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the intelligently written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the beautiful music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a [[shortages]] in movie going experiences: one that is nigh impossible to find fault with in any area.

There have been several comparisons made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy epic to [[opponent]] Rob Roy as the [[sorts]] of [[cinematography]] I [[could]] care to [[seeing]] more than once. [[Despite]] Braveheart [[work]] [[laborious]] to be a serious epic, Rob [[Rowe]] just grabs you and [[consumes]] you into its [[strictly]] edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.

Rob [[Rowe]] contains the [[faultless]] [[counterweight]] of dramatic [[voltage]], [[efforts]] and even occasional [[comedy]]. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that [[anker]] them in their [[real]] period setting.

Further, they are not [[caricature]] of good and [[diabolical]] as we all too [[generally]] observe in even modern film.

For example, while we hope the heroic Rob [[Rowe]] prevails, we realize his predicaments are [[merchandise]] of his own pride and sense of [[honours]]. Tim Roth plays one of the most [[nauseating]] [[unhealthy]] [[fellas]] in the [[story]] of [[movies]], yet there are moments when we can [[fathom]] how the [[phenomena]] of his [[iife]] have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob [[Rowe]] employs a [[echelon]] of [[nature]] [[evolution]] that makes its [[fairytales]] [[yet]] more [[trustworthy]] and gripping.

Rob [[Rowe]] is a [[wondrous]] [[hoard]], featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation. --------------------------------------------- Result 1990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[In]] watching how the two [[brothers]] interact and [[feed]] off of each other through the whole movie makes me personally happy to [[live]] in the [[rural]] area much like they did in the movie. I have watched this movie [[countless]] times and have the book right beside my Bible. After [[watching]] the [[movie]] I [[agree]] that this is one of the few movies that does a book justice. I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] [[anyone]] that has the [[chance]] to go to Montana to fish or be outdoors to do so. It is amazing. I can not [[think]] of [[anyone]] else that could [[play]] the role better than [[Brad]] [[Pitt]]. Do yourself justice and watch one of the [[better]] [[movies]] in the [[modern]] [[movie]] era. [[STRONGLY]] [[Recommend]] And as a guide for fishing trips in both Montana and Wyoming, do not try to learn how to fly fish from the scenes of the [[movie]] because although it looks great on the film you have no idea how much practice and skill fishing like that actually takes. Thank you for listening Watch this movie [[please]] if you would like a long sad movie. [[Throughout]] watching how the two [[plymouth]] interact and [[foraging]] off of each other through the whole movie makes me personally happy to [[viva]] in the [[agricultural]] area much like they did in the movie. I have watched this movie [[endless]] times and have the book right beside my Bible. After [[staring]] the [[film]] I [[concur]] that this is one of the few movies that does a book justice. I [[forcefully]] [[recommendation]] [[somebody]] that has the [[probability]] to go to Montana to fish or be outdoors to do so. It is amazing. I can not [[believing]] of [[anybody]] else that could [[gaming]] the role better than [[Rad]] [[Beit]]. Do yourself justice and watch one of the [[improved]] [[theater]] in the [[fashionable]] [[film]] era. [[FLATLY]] [[Recommending]] And as a guide for fishing trips in both Montana and Wyoming, do not try to learn how to fly fish from the scenes of the [[film]] because although it looks great on the film you have no idea how much practice and skill fishing like that actually takes. Thank you for listening Watch this movie [[invite]] if you would like a long sad movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] All Kira Reed [[fans]] [[MUST]] see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. [[Thankfully]], Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy [[films]] are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). [[Later]], she [[marvels]] to her publishist how great it was, but she didn't [[get]] his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they [[continue]] their kinky [[games]]. But [[eventually]] she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks [[loose]], and I'll leave it at that. This is [[easily]] the [[best]] of these soft-core Playboys films I've [[seen]]. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira. All Kira Reed [[stalkers]] [[OUGHT]] see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. [[Mercifully]], Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy [[kino]] are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). [[Subsequent]], she [[wonders]] to her publishist how great it was, but she didn't [[gets]] his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they [[constants]] their kinky [[game]]. But [[finally]] she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks [[slack]], and I'll leave it at that. This is [[conveniently]] the [[nicest]] of these soft-core Playboys films I've [[noticed]]. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira. --------------------------------------------- Result 1992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's just breathtaking in it's awfulness-- you really must see it!

Depending on your perspective, Dylan Walsh is either the savior or the problem here: since he's the only one on screen that can actually get his lines out with something akin to natural cadences and inflection, he either ruins the movie by pointing up everyone else's flaws, or he saves it by providing some context for their awfulness.

I'm inclined to the later view-- thanks to him, it works as high comedy. He's the 7 footer in a game of dwarf basketball, his skill set just doesn't apply in this context, and his discombobulation is delicious.

The real treat though is Ms. Eastwood, whose inability to speak in plain English is so pervasive I actually googled her, expecting to learn that she was a Russian beauty who pronounced her lines phonetically, with no understanding of their meaning. But no: she's just a talent free American who will leave you laughing with every line she drops. Whether she knew what the lines meant must remain an open question. --------------------------------------------- Result 1993 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A very good start. I was a [[bit]] [[surprised]] to [[find]] the machinery not [[quite]] so [[advanced]]: It should have been cruder, to [[match]] we [[saw]] in the original [[series]]. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan [[lady]] [[comes]] across as a [[little]] too human. She [[needs]] to school on Spock who, after all, is the [[model]] for this [[race]]. Too bad they couldn't have [[picked]] Jeri Ryan. I [[like]] [[Ms]]. Park, the [[Korean]](?)lady. The [[doctor]] has [[possibilities]]. Haven't [[sorted]] out the other [[males]], except for the [[black]] [[guy]]. He's a [[really]] [[likeable]]. Bakula [[needs]] to [[find]] his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of [[humor]] and his [[willingness]] to [[try]] anything. He is, of course, big and [[strong]] [[enough]] for the [[heroics]]. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. A very good start. I was a [[bite]] [[horrified]] to [[unearthed]] the machinery not [[utterly]] so [[advance]]: It should have been cruder, to [[matching]] we [[observed]] in the original [[serials]]. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan [[damsel]] [[arrives]] across as a [[tiny]] too human. She [[gotta]] to school on Spock who, after all, is the [[modelling]] for this [[errand]]. Too bad they couldn't have [[took]] Jeri Ryan. I [[loves]] [[Mrs]]. Park, the [[Korea]](?)lady. The [[doctors]] has [[chances]]. Haven't [[sort]] out the other [[male]], except for the [[negro]] [[boy]]. He's a [[genuinely]] [[sympathetic]]. Bakula [[should]] to [[unearthed]] his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of [[comedy]] and his [[volition]] to [[endeavour]] anything. He is, of course, big and [[vigorous]] [[sufficiently]] for the [[exploits]]. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There is [[indeed]] much to complain about this [[movie]] version of Molnar's mystical play --Farrell [[looks]] good in his title role, but his [[line]] readings, [[frankly]], [[stink]]. This also [[suffers]], in [[large]] [[part]], from this being [[credited]] as the first [[movie]] that makes [[use]] of rear [[projection]]. The sets [[look]] phony.

There are two great strengths in this [[show]], [[however]]: [[although]] the dialogue readings limp, the visual performances are [[perfect]]. Rose Hobart, as [[Julie]], is little [[remembered]] [[today]]: mostly for ROSE HOBART, in which Joseph Cornell cut down the [[programmer]] EAST [[OF]] BORNEO to [[simply]] shots of her: [[credit]] Melford's stylish visual direction of the [[original]]. Her [[great]] beauty and [[simple]] ([[although]] stagy) performance [[help]] [[repair]] some of the damage to the earth-bound sections of this [[movie]].

However, one of Borzage's [[themes]] is the mystical power of love, and it is the [[handling]] of the celestial sections that [[make]] this [[great]], from the [[arrival]] of the celestial train to the [[journey]] to 'the [[Hot]] Place'. H.B. Warner's performance here is, as [[always]], [[perfect]].

So we have here a flawed but very interesting version. I think that Lang's 1934 version is better, as well as the celestial scenes in the Henry King [[version]] of CAROUSEL, the watered-down musical remake. But I [[still]] [[greatly]] enjoyed this [[version]] and [[think]] you should give it a chance. There is [[actually]] much to complain about this [[cinematography]] version of Molnar's mystical play --Farrell [[seems]] good in his title role, but his [[linea]] readings, [[sincerely]], [[stench]]. This also [[suffer]], in [[sizeable]] [[parte]], from this being [[paid]] as the first [[cinema]] that makes [[employs]] of rear [[projections]]. The sets [[peek]] phony.

There are two great strengths in this [[display]], [[yet]]: [[though]] the dialogue readings limp, the visual performances are [[faultless]]. Rose Hobart, as [[Jolly]], is little [[recalled]] [[thursday]]: mostly for ROSE HOBART, in which Joseph Cornell cut down the [[programmers]] EAST [[DU]] BORNEO to [[purely]] shots of her: [[credits]] Melford's stylish visual direction of the [[initial]]. Her [[huge]] beauty and [[uncomplicated]] ([[despite]] stagy) performance [[support]] [[repairs]] some of the damage to the earth-bound sections of this [[cinematography]].

However, one of Borzage's [[subject]] is the mystical power of love, and it is the [[treating]] of the celestial sections that [[deliver]] this [[huge]], from the [[incoming]] of the celestial train to the [[voyage]] to 'the [[Hottest]] Place'. H.B. Warner's performance here is, as [[permanently]], [[consummate]].

So we have here a flawed but very interesting version. I think that Lang's 1934 version is better, as well as the celestial scenes in the Henry King [[stepping]] of CAROUSEL, the watered-down musical remake. But I [[nonetheless]] [[radically]] enjoyed this [[stepping]] and [[thinking]] you should give it a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1995 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This is not a very good telling of the Tarzan epic. There was only one reason for this movie. John [[Derek]] wanted to [[show]] off his [[beautiful]] [[wife]] in the buff! Bo Derek in '10' was at [[least]] a [[humorous]] movie and there was a [[reason]] for nudity and [[sex]]. This movie is nothing more than soft porn. [[If]] you're into that, well, then fast forward to it and [[skip]] the rest! This movie (like Bolero) was again a vehicle for Bo Derek to [[show]] off her [[terrible]] acting. She is [[undoubtedly]] a [[beautiful]] woman but a poster of her is more exciting than this movie! Richard Harris was a better actor than this; this was one of his few mistakes! don't waste your time on this movie...go buy the book instead. This is not a very good telling of the Tarzan epic. There was only one reason for this movie. John [[Derrick]] wanted to [[illustrates]] off his [[sumptuous]] [[women]] in the buff! Bo Derek in '10' was at [[lowest]] a [[hilarious]] movie and there was a [[motif]] for nudity and [[sexuality]]. This movie is nothing more than soft porn. [[Though]] you're into that, well, then fast forward to it and [[jumping]] the rest! This movie (like Bolero) was again a vehicle for Bo Derek to [[display]] off her [[abysmal]] acting. She is [[unquestionably]] a [[sumptuous]] woman but a poster of her is more exciting than this movie! Richard Harris was a better actor than this; this was one of his few mistakes! don't waste your time on this movie...go buy the book instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Paperhouse is the most [[moving]] and [[poignant]] film I've ever seen. [[Often]] classed as a "[[horror]] movie" this, I believe, is a grave error. Some journo once called it "the thinking person's Nightmare on Elm Street" and while I accept the logic of his conclusion I can't help but think it's a tag that is ill deserved and misleading. Those that can only see horror are truly missing out here and only serves to demonstrate they're really not thinking at all.

In fact, just attempting to classify this [[wonderful]] work is probably a bad idea. Quite simply, Paperhouse is perfect in every exquisite detail and will always have a special place in my heart. As someone wiser than me once said, "the film hits you on a completely emotional level", which may go some way to explaining why my comments are so unrelentingly gushing. To be honest, I make no apology for this so if you feel my words are too saccharine for your taste, stop reading now because there's more to come.

It's so rare to find a film that has at its heart the pain and heartache of childhood and the struggle to overcome the dreadful feelings of isolation and loneliness that can completely overwhelm us at this fragile time in our lives. Even more unusual to find child actors who can actually play their roles with the sensitivity and intelligence required to make it all work. In Charlotte Burke and Elliott Spiers we had an inspired piece of casting and the lasting impact of Paperhouse owes much to their ability to portray the melancholy and alienation of childhood (often overlooked) in a seamless and convincing way.

And yet both of these brilliant young stars seemed to have slipped through the grasp of the studios and have somehow faded away.

Add to all this an incredibly talented director (Bernard Rose), imaginative cinematography and the most beautiful and haunting soundtrack you're ever likely to hear and you may start to get an inkling of why I have such affection and affinity for this film that no amount of words can express.

Paperhouse is the most [[transferring]] and [[agonizing]] film I've ever seen. [[Habitually]] classed as a "[[abomination]] movie" this, I believe, is a grave error. Some journo once called it "the thinking person's Nightmare on Elm Street" and while I accept the logic of his conclusion I can't help but think it's a tag that is ill deserved and misleading. Those that can only see horror are truly missing out here and only serves to demonstrate they're really not thinking at all.

In fact, just attempting to classify this [[wondrous]] work is probably a bad idea. Quite simply, Paperhouse is perfect in every exquisite detail and will always have a special place in my heart. As someone wiser than me once said, "the film hits you on a completely emotional level", which may go some way to explaining why my comments are so unrelentingly gushing. To be honest, I make no apology for this so if you feel my words are too saccharine for your taste, stop reading now because there's more to come.

It's so rare to find a film that has at its heart the pain and heartache of childhood and the struggle to overcome the dreadful feelings of isolation and loneliness that can completely overwhelm us at this fragile time in our lives. Even more unusual to find child actors who can actually play their roles with the sensitivity and intelligence required to make it all work. In Charlotte Burke and Elliott Spiers we had an inspired piece of casting and the lasting impact of Paperhouse owes much to their ability to portray the melancholy and alienation of childhood (often overlooked) in a seamless and convincing way.

And yet both of these brilliant young stars seemed to have slipped through the grasp of the studios and have somehow faded away.

Add to all this an incredibly talented director (Bernard Rose), imaginative cinematography and the most beautiful and haunting soundtrack you're ever likely to hear and you may start to get an inkling of why I have such affection and affinity for this film that no amount of words can express.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I think this movie had to be fun to make it, for us it was [[fun]] to watch it. The actors look like they have a fun time. My girlfriends like the boy actors and my boyfriends like the girl actors. Not very much do we get to have crazy fun with a movie that is horror make. I see a lot of [[scary]] movies and i would watch this one all together once more, or more because we laugh together. If this actors make other scary movies i will watch them. The grander mad man thats chase to kill the actors is very much a good bad man. He make us laugh together the most. i would give this movie a high score if you ask me.

I don't know if the market has any more of the movies with the actors, but the main boy is cute. the actor with the grand chest has to be not real. they doesn't look to real. I think this movie had to be fun to make it, for us it was [[amusing]] to watch it. The actors look like they have a fun time. My girlfriends like the boy actors and my boyfriends like the girl actors. Not very much do we get to have crazy fun with a movie that is horror make. I see a lot of [[horrible]] movies and i would watch this one all together once more, or more because we laugh together. If this actors make other scary movies i will watch them. The grander mad man thats chase to kill the actors is very much a good bad man. He make us laugh together the most. i would give this movie a high score if you ask me.

I don't know if the market has any more of the movies with the actors, but the main boy is cute. the actor with the grand chest has to be not real. they doesn't look to real. --------------------------------------------- Result 1998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Basically]] a typical [[propaganda]] film for the [[last]] [[good]] war. But there were a [[couple]] [[things]] that [[struck]] me. First was the [[use]] of mouthed epithets. In two [[cases]] the Scott [[character]] mouths one, once at the [[beginning]] when he [[drops]] his [[bomb]] off [[target]] during the bomb-off ("[[dammit]]") and once when he is [[trying]] to sway a bombardier into being a pilot ("s*%t"). I [[could]] be wrong about the second instance but I replayed it several [[times]] and that's what it [[looks]] like to me. The third case is when the Anne Shirley [[character]] wishes the O'Brien [[character]] goodbye and [[good]] luck ("Give 'em [[hell]]") over the roar of the engines. She must have thought that was too unladylike because she clearly says "heck". I also found interesting the character that has moral [[problems]] with bombing, specifically bombing civilians. The avuncular superior officer [[assures]] him that only military targets will be hit due to the precision of the bombsight used. Given what we know about the LeMay's later strategy of firebombing Japanese cities into [[oblivion]] this scene plays with not a little [[irony]]. I remember McNamara's quoting of LeMay in "The Fog of War", something to the effect that if the US did not win the conflict he would be tried as a war criminal. The ending is way overwrought, in keeping with the movie. It reminded me a bit of the end of White Heat (I'm not comparing the films, just the ending!). Maybe it's just 'cause he gets blowed up. Blowed up real good!!! [[Mostly]] a typical [[advocacy]] film for the [[latter]] [[alright]] war. But there were a [[matching]] [[items]] that [[rocked]] me. First was the [[employs]] of mouthed epithets. In two [[lawsuit]] the Scott [[characters]] mouths one, once at the [[initiates]] when he [[tumble]] his [[explodes]] off [[goal]] during the bomb-off ("[[brothel]]") and once when he is [[tempting]] to sway a bombardier into being a pilot ("s*%t"). I [[wo]] be wrong about the second instance but I replayed it several [[time]] and that's what it [[seem]] like to me. The third case is when the Anne Shirley [[characters]] wishes the O'Brien [[nature]] goodbye and [[buena]] luck ("Give 'em [[bordello]]") over the roar of the engines. She must have thought that was too unladylike because she clearly says "heck". I also found interesting the character that has moral [[hassles]] with bombing, specifically bombing civilians. The avuncular superior officer [[affirms]] him that only military targets will be hit due to the precision of the bombsight used. Given what we know about the LeMay's later strategy of firebombing Japanese cities into [[forgetfulness]] this scene plays with not a little [[paradox]]. I remember McNamara's quoting of LeMay in "The Fog of War", something to the effect that if the US did not win the conflict he would be tried as a war criminal. The ending is way overwrought, in keeping with the movie. It reminded me a bit of the end of White Heat (I'm not comparing the films, just the ending!). Maybe it's just 'cause he gets blowed up. Blowed up real good!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think that people are under estimating this incredible film. People are seeing it as a typical horror movie that is set out to scare us and prevent us from getting some sleep. Which if it was trying to do then it would deservedly get a 1/10 but i viewed this film with a few friends and we found it very entertaining and though it was a good movie after all it does have Stephanie beaton. This is the reason why i think that it deserves the 10/10 for the pure entertainment of the film.

The general view on this movie is that it has bad acting, a simple script that a 10 year old could produce and that it cant be taken seriously and people are rating it low because of this. But i see this as a thoroughly entertaining masterpiece...that has a hilariously funny script which is made even more entertaining by the actors and although not very serious it is very entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 2000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Before I'd seen this, I had seen some [[pretty]] [[bad]] Christmas [[films]]. But once I saw this, "Jingle All the Way" looked better than "The [[Godfather]]". "Santa Claus" is a jolly film about Santa [[helping]] out some [[kids]], but it almost feels demonic [[watching]] it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is [[replaces]] by an [[evil]], devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many [[kids]] off of [[Christmas]]. The plot of this massacre is very [[strange]], which fits along with all of the performances and dialog. Santa lives high above [[Earth]] in the North Pole where he, and kids from all [[around]] the world [[get]] ready for [[Christmas]]. But Santa has an enemy named [[Pitch]], or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by [[creating]] diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle.

[[Everything]] about this film, along with being downright [[bad]], is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually [[seems]] [[much]] more [[merry]] than Santa. Santa talks about [[delivering]] [[presents]] to all the [[boys]] and girls, [[yet]] he [[seems]] to only [[deliver]] to 5 [[houses]] of [[kids]] in [[Mexico]]. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer [[laughs]], I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. [[Everything]] is [[terrible]]. The first 10 minutes are [[simply]] Santa [[playing]] the [[organ]] while [[kids]] [[sing]] to it. [[Probably]] one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously [[laughing]] about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only positive is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can appreciate bad cinema.

My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins. Before I'd seen this, I had seen some [[quite]] [[negative]] Christmas [[filmmaking]]. But once I saw this, "Jingle All the Way" looked better than "The [[Nominating]]". "Santa Claus" is a jolly film about Santa [[contributes]] out some [[juvenile]], but it almost feels demonic [[staring]] it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is [[supersedes]] by an [[demonic]], devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many [[juvenile]] off of [[Claus]]. The plot of this massacre is very [[unusual]], which fits along with all of the performances and dialog. Santa lives high above [[Land]] in the North Pole where he, and kids from all [[throughout]] the world [[gets]] ready for [[Claus]]. But Santa has an enemy named [[Pitching]], or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by [[establish]] diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle.

[[Eveything]] about this film, along with being downright [[negative]], is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually [[appears]] [[very]] more [[smiley]] than Santa. Santa talks about [[providing]] [[introduces]] to all the [[boy]] and girls, [[however]] he [[appears]] to only [[make]] to 5 [[dwellings]] of [[juvenile]] in [[Mexican]]. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer [[smiling]], I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. [[Any]] is [[scary]]. The first 10 minutes are [[purely]] Santa [[play]] the [[bodies]] while [[juvenile]] [[sung]] to it. [[Potentially]] one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously [[laughs]] about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only positive is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can appreciate bad cinema.

My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins. --------------------------------------------- Result 2001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This has always been one of my favourite movies, and will always be. Over the last few years I have [[become]] a 50's / 60's Sci-fi freak, trying to [[collect]] all of the better ones that were made back then. I love lots of things about them from how [[corny]] they could be to how technically [[correct]] some of them were. The [[great]] [[colours]] and the sets get me [[going]] too. It's a [[pity]] when they re-make some of these good [[old]] movies; they [[nearly]] [[always]] stuff it up, - just look at the recent re-do of The day the [[Earth]] [[stood]] still, it's [[utter]] [[garbage]]!! [[Forbidden]] [[Planet]] is one of the benchmark space [[films]] of all time, and now they're trying to re-make it too, and I [[shudder]] to [[think]] what the new one will be like! To my mind, some [[things]], such as [[fantastic]] [[classic]] [[movies]], should just be left [[alone]] to be what they are, [[classic]] [[examples]] of [[great]] [[attempts]] at telling [[simple]] [[stories]], and giving people a thrill in the [[process]]. Once they [[add]] all the techno-crap that we have [[available]] now, the film just [[seems]] to be more dog-meat from the Hollywood sausage [[factory]], - nothing special at all. By the [[way]], I [[notice]] that the astronauts' uniforms in [[Forbidden]] [[Planet]] were [[also]] [[used]] for "[[Queen]] of Outer Space"! That just [[tells]] you that the [[budgets]] were a bit lower back then, doesn't it? [[Hey]], less money and better [[films]], [[hmmm]]....

Great performances in this movie from Leslie Nielsen, in a [[serious]] role, and Anne [[Francis]], [[Walter]] Pidgeon (who has [[always]] been one of my [[favourite]] [[actors]]), Earl Holiman, and of course Robby the Robot!

The [[special]] [[effects]] are [[fantastic]], and the storyline is not too far-fetched. This is a [[great]] sci-fi experience! This has always been one of my favourite movies, and will always be. Over the last few years I have [[becomes]] a 50's / 60's Sci-fi freak, trying to [[collection]] all of the better ones that were made back then. I love lots of things about them from how [[mundane]] they could be to how technically [[accurate]] some of them were. The [[wondrous]] [[coloring]] and the sets get me [[go]] too. It's a [[shame]] when they re-make some of these good [[elderly]] movies; they [[practically]] [[perpetually]] stuff it up, - just look at the recent re-do of The day the [[Terrestrial]] [[amounted]] still, it's [[total]] [[junk]]!! [[Outlaw]] [[Globe]] is one of the benchmark space [[kino]] of all time, and now they're trying to re-make it too, and I [[cringe]] to [[believe]] what the new one will be like! To my mind, some [[matters]], such as [[beautiful]] [[typical]] [[movie]], should just be left [[solely]] to be what they are, [[typical]] [[case]] of [[terrific]] [[strives]] at telling [[mere]] [[storytelling]], and giving people a thrill in the [[processes]]. Once they [[added]] all the techno-crap that we have [[accessible]] now, the film just [[seem]] to be more dog-meat from the Hollywood sausage [[mills]], - nothing special at all. By the [[pathways]], I [[notification]] that the astronauts' uniforms in [[Forbade]] [[Planetary]] were [[furthermore]] [[uses]] for "[[Quinn]] of Outer Space"! That just [[says]] you that the [[budget]] were a bit lower back then, doesn't it? [[Yo]], less money and better [[cinematography]], [[mhm]]....

Great performances in this movie from Leslie Nielsen, in a [[grave]] role, and Anne [[Francesco]], [[Walters]] Pidgeon (who has [[repeatedly]] been one of my [[favored]] [[actresses]]), Earl Holiman, and of course Robby the Robot!

The [[specific]] [[influencing]] are [[extraordinary]], and the storyline is not too far-fetched. This is a [[wondrous]] sci-fi experience! --------------------------------------------- Result 2002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It seems a lot of IMDB comments on this film are biased, in the sense that they try to compare it to an older version. True, "HOLLOW MAN" is a remake of sorts of "THE INVISIBLE MAN", but that's where the similarities end. "HOLLOW MAN" is an [[entertaining]] movie,period. If you watch a movie with the intention of finding as many flaws as possible, then you shouldn't watch movies in the first place. True, some movies are plain horrendous and unbearable, but "[[HOLLOW]] [[MAN]]" [[manages]] to entertain and make you think what YOU would do if you were invisible and if you had your ex getting laid with one of your friends. Kevin Bacon stars as a eccentric scientist who, along with a team of collaborators, discover the way to make animals invisible. Now his mission is to make them visible again. When this team of young scientists (working, as you might guess, for the Pentagon)think they have the formula for making animals visible again, Kevin bacon volunteers to be the first to try the new experimental drug. After that, of course, things go wrong, as Kevin Bacon remains invisible for the rest of the movie and is obliged to wear a latex mask, so his collaborators know where he is. Feelings of paranoia and desperation begin to take over Kevin's character, and when he finds out that his ex girlfriend AND collaborator (Elisabeth Shue) is having a torrid affair with another of the young scientists in the team, he finally snaps. The movie then turns into a hybrid of "ALIEN" and a slasher flick, but that's not saying it's a bad turn. There are scares and chills and the movie moves at a nice pace. The special effects are top notch (a quality always prevalent in ALL of Paul Verhoeven's films)as we get to see some "body reconstitution" sequences never seen on a movie before. If there's anything to complain about, perhaps, is the predictability of the situations herein; by the first hour of the movie you KNOW Kevin bacon will make the jump from being weird and eccentric to being a homicidal lunatic in the end. And the ending is a bit abrupt, but despite this, HOLLOW MAN is still worth watching. If you want to know what a TRULY bad movie is, then waste your money on "FEAR DOT COM" (With Stephen Dorf) or the even worse THE UNTOLD (or "Sasquatsh", with Land Henriksen). Now THAT is "hollow"! 8* out of 10*! It seems a lot of IMDB comments on this film are biased, in the sense that they try to compare it to an older version. True, "HOLLOW MAN" is a remake of sorts of "THE INVISIBLE MAN", but that's where the similarities end. "HOLLOW MAN" is an [[amusing]] movie,period. If you watch a movie with the intention of finding as many flaws as possible, then you shouldn't watch movies in the first place. True, some movies are plain horrendous and unbearable, but "[[EMPTY]] [[BLOKE]]" [[administered]] to entertain and make you think what YOU would do if you were invisible and if you had your ex getting laid with one of your friends. Kevin Bacon stars as a eccentric scientist who, along with a team of collaborators, discover the way to make animals invisible. Now his mission is to make them visible again. When this team of young scientists (working, as you might guess, for the Pentagon)think they have the formula for making animals visible again, Kevin bacon volunteers to be the first to try the new experimental drug. After that, of course, things go wrong, as Kevin Bacon remains invisible for the rest of the movie and is obliged to wear a latex mask, so his collaborators know where he is. Feelings of paranoia and desperation begin to take over Kevin's character, and when he finds out that his ex girlfriend AND collaborator (Elisabeth Shue) is having a torrid affair with another of the young scientists in the team, he finally snaps. The movie then turns into a hybrid of "ALIEN" and a slasher flick, but that's not saying it's a bad turn. There are scares and chills and the movie moves at a nice pace. The special effects are top notch (a quality always prevalent in ALL of Paul Verhoeven's films)as we get to see some "body reconstitution" sequences never seen on a movie before. If there's anything to complain about, perhaps, is the predictability of the situations herein; by the first hour of the movie you KNOW Kevin bacon will make the jump from being weird and eccentric to being a homicidal lunatic in the end. And the ending is a bit abrupt, but despite this, HOLLOW MAN is still worth watching. If you want to know what a TRULY bad movie is, then waste your money on "FEAR DOT COM" (With Stephen Dorf) or the even worse THE UNTOLD (or "Sasquatsh", with Land Henriksen). Now THAT is "hollow"! 8* out of 10*! --------------------------------------------- Result 2003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This film has special effects which for it's time are very [[impressive]]. Some if it is easily explainable with the scenes played backwards but the overlay of moving images on an object on film is [[surprisingly]] well [[done]] given that this film was [[made]] more than 94 years ago. This film has special effects which for it's time are very [[wondrous]]. Some if it is easily explainable with the scenes played backwards but the overlay of moving images on an object on film is [[interestingly]] well [[completed]] given that this film was [[brought]] more than 94 years ago. --------------------------------------------- Result 2004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[First]] a [[quick]] 'shut up!' to those [[saying]] this [[movie]] [[stinks]]. You can't [[go]] to [[every]] [[movie]] [[expecting]] '[[Citizen]] Kane'. This was actually a [[fun]] [[movie]]. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only [[flaw]] in this [[movie]] is, I don't [[think]] there was [[enough]] chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is [[good]] fun. Selma Blair [[needs]] to [[eat]] [[something]]. She's worrying me. But she [[still]] looks [[beautiful]]. So [[yes]], I [[recommend]] this movie for a date or light [[saturday]] [[afternoon]] [[fun]]. Go [[see]].

[[RATING]]: **1/2 out of **** [[Firstly]] a [[prompt]] 'shut up!' to those [[telling]] this [[kino]] [[sucks]]. You can't [[going]] to [[any]] [[film]] [[awaited]] '[[Civic]] Kane'. This was actually a [[amusing]] [[films]]. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only [[malfunction]] in this [[film]] is, I don't [[reckon]] there was [[sufficient]] chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is [[alright]] fun. Selma Blair [[needed]] to [[devour]] [[anything]]. She's worrying me. But she [[again]] looks [[wondrous]]. So [[yea]], I [[recommending]] this movie for a date or light [[sunday]] [[evening]] [[droll]]. Go [[seeing]].

[[SCORING]]: **1/2 out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Oh]] God, I [[must]] have [[seen]] this when I was only 11 or twelve, (don't ask how) I may have been young, but I wasn't stupid. [[Anyone]] [[could]] see that this is a [[bad]] [[movie]], nasty, gross, unscary and very silly. I've [[seen]] more [[impressive]] [[effects]] at [[Disneyland]], I've [[seen]] better performances at a [[school]] play, And I've [[seen]] more [[convincing]] [[crocodiles]] at the [[zoo]], where they do nothing but sit in the water, [[ignoring]] the [[children]] tapping on the [[glass]].

The [[story]] is set in northern Australia. A handful of ambitious young people, are [[trying]] out a [[new]] water sport, surfing in shark filled waters. It soon [[becomes]] [[evident]] that [[something]] more [[dangerous]] is in the water. [[After]] they [[learn]] what, they get the [[help]] of a grizzly middle aged [[fisherman]], who [[wants]] to [[kill]] the [[animal]] to [[avenge]] the [[eating]] of his [[family]].

I [[think]] I have [[seen]] [[every]] crocodile [[film]] [[made]] in the [[last]] fifteen years, the best of which is Lake [[Placid]], and the [[worse]] of which is its sequel. Blood Surf [[would]] have to be the [[second]] worst croc [[flick]] I think, with Primeval and [[Crocodile]] tailing [[closely]] behind.

The Australian [[Saltwater]] Crododile is one of the most dangerous creatures out there, [[resulting]] in more than a hundred [[injuries]] or [[deaths]] [[every]] year. Movies like Blood Surf however [[ruin]] not only the [[ferocious]] [[image]] of such a [[creature]], but a [[good]] [[hour]] and a half of the viewer's [[life]]. [[Unless]] you really [[want]] to [[see]] it, [[avoid]] Blood [[Surf]]. [[Ah]] God, I [[gotta]] have [[noticed]] this when I was only 11 or twelve, (don't ask how) I may have been young, but I wasn't stupid. [[Whoever]] [[would]] see that this is a [[negative]] [[flick]], nasty, gross, unscary and very silly. I've [[noticed]] more [[extraordinary]] [[consequences]] at [[Disney]], I've [[saw]] better performances at a [[tuition]] play, And I've [[noticed]] more [[compelling]] [[gators]] at the [[animals]], where they do nothing but sit in the water, [[disregard]] the [[childhood]] tapping on the [[glasses]].

The [[storytelling]] is set in northern Australia. A handful of ambitious young people, are [[try]] out a [[novel]] water sport, surfing in shark filled waters. It soon [[becoming]] [[noticeable]] that [[anything]] more [[unsafe]] is in the water. [[Upon]] they [[learns]] what, they get the [[pomoc]] of a grizzly middle aged [[fishermen]], who [[wanna]] to [[killed]] the [[zoo]] to [[revenge]] the [[dietary]] of his [[families]].

I [[thought]] I have [[noticed]] [[all]] crocodile [[flick]] [[introduced]] in the [[final]] fifteen years, the best of which is Lake [[Pacifist]], and the [[lousiest]] of which is its sequel. Blood Surf [[could]] have to be the [[secondly]] worst croc [[movie]] I think, with Primeval and [[Alligator]] tailing [[tightly]] behind.

The Australian [[Brine]] Crododile is one of the most dangerous creatures out there, [[ensuing]] in more than a hundred [[lesions]] or [[killings]] [[any]] year. Movies like Blood Surf however [[downfall]] not only the [[intense]] [[picture]] of such a [[monster]], but a [[alright]] [[hora]] and a half of the viewer's [[lifetime]]. [[If]] you really [[wantto]] to [[behold]] it, [[averted]] Blood [[Snowboard]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2006 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was horrible. I watched it three times, and not even the whole thing. It's just impossible to watch, the story line sucks, it's depressing, and utterly disgusting. I don't write spoilers for anything, so if you want to know why it's so disgusting, see it for yourself. The only good thing about this movie was John Savage, his dialogue at the beginning, and some funny parts in the movie. The little kid in this movie is annoying, and the whole situation is bullshit. I saw this movie at movie stores around America, so I assumed it would be a good movie. Jesus Christ, was I wrong!!!! The acting is all horrible, and the nudity itself is lame and nasty. Another thing is, Starr Andreef, the other main character, hasn't been in such bad movies in the past, in fact, she was in some pretty good ones. Same with John Savage. This movie SUCKS! --------------------------------------------- Result 2007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't give a movie or a show ten very often but this show touched a nerve in a way no other show has. I found the entire series on mysoju.com and thought the premise looked interesting so I took a look see. I wasn't disappointed in what I saw; I was moved. This story stays on the tender side as the main characters move us through the scenes. Sumire Iwaya, played thoughtfully by Koyuki, shows us human nature as she wants to keep troubles from being shown. No one really wants to lay their soul out in front of a perspective mate. So instead she substitutes a human, played by an adorable Matsumoto Jun, as a pet. This pet is like any other creature we would consider a pet. The difference; he can retaliate in the same way, after all Momo is a man, not a dog. As he is treated like a pet, he reacts to situations how a dog might react. She spends time with the new boyfriend, Momo gets jealous. It's when she realizes that her pet isn't just a pet that the sexual tension between the two starts to become thick - Momo is a dance prodigy. Her thinking slowly changes as we start to get a glance at his own thoughts. Matsumoto takes us from seeing a character who is very one dimensional in the beginning, to two dimensional when we see he's a dancer, to a three dimensional character when we see him start to fall for his master as a man, not as a dog. In my opinion, it's worth watching this story just to see this character develop. Plus Matsumoto plays Momo with such tenderness you almost start to wish you had one too. Neither wants to think about the future and how their relationship will change, but as Momo (the name she gives him as one would name their new puppy) states – we both knew this wasn't going to be able to last. Watch this show with a open mind, it's worth it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The emotional [[impact]] of this [[movie]] [[defies]] [[words]]. It is [[elegant]], subtle, [[beautiful]], and [[tragic]] all [[rolled]] into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting [[ability]], the full [[range]] of it. Who knew? I [[saw]] The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top [[actor]], Smith. His performances in both [[movies]] [[portray]] a [[whole]] other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully [[enjoy]] its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile [[condition]] of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human [[guilt]], atonement, [[love]], and sacrifice. The emotional [[consequences]] of this [[film]] [[challenging]] [[expression]]. It is [[tasteful]], subtle, [[leggy]], and [[dire]] all [[laminated]] into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting [[capabilities]], the full [[assortment]] of it. Who knew? I [[watched]] The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top [[actress]], Smith. His performances in both [[films]] [[describe]] a [[ensemble]] other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully [[enjoys]] its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile [[stipulation]] of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human [[culprit]], atonement, [[loves]], and sacrifice. --------------------------------------------- Result 2009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I read in the [[papers]] that W.Snipes was [[broke]] so no wonder he [[would]] take parts in low budget projects like The [[Contractor]].He is just the next action [[star]] to [[join]] a [[growing]] club:the penniless [[action]] stars of the 90s (Van Damme,Segal,Lundgren,Snipes). Here he stars the [[lead]] in a [[cheap]] [[action]] [[flick]] which was shot in Bulgaria( we are [[supposed]] to [[believe]] that the location is London, like only a [[complete]] [[moron]] would [[buy]] that)The [[story]] is the one of 1000 other movies: [[retired]] [[special]] [[forces]] good guy gets [[hired]] by the [[government]] again to do a [[wet]] job- after that [[government]] [[wants]] to [[get]] rid of him- [[good]] [[guy]] [[gets]] away after [[killing]] [[bad]] [[guys]] (was that a spoiler? [[guess]] not!) The [[star]] of the [[movie]]: the [[little]] girl ([[Eliza]] Bennett) outperforms [[everybody]] [[else]] of the cast!!!One star is for her plus one star for [[eye]] [[candy]] Lena Headey, makes 2 [[stars]]. Only for die [[hard]] Snipes fans!Everybody [[else]]:[[avoid]]! I read in the [[documentation]] that W.Snipes was [[broken]] so no wonder he [[could]] take parts in low budget projects like The [[Entrepreneur]].He is just the next action [[stars]] to [[participates]] a [[increasing]] club:the penniless [[activity]] stars of the 90s (Van Damme,Segal,Lundgren,Snipes). Here he stars the [[culminate]] in a [[cheaper]] [[measures]] [[movie]] which was shot in Bulgaria( we are [[suspected]] to [[think]] that the location is London, like only a [[finishing]] [[doofus]] would [[purchased]] that)The [[tales]] is the one of 1000 other movies: [[retiring]] [[specific]] [[troop]] good guy gets [[contracted]] by the [[administrations]] again to do a [[humid]] job- after that [[govt]] [[desires]] to [[gets]] rid of him- [[alright]] [[buddy]] [[receives]] away after [[killed]] [[negative]] [[guy]] (was that a spoiler? [[imagine]] not!) The [[superstar]] of the [[films]]: the [[petite]] girl ([[Liza]] Bennett) outperforms [[somebody]] [[elsewhere]] of the cast!!!One star is for her plus one star for [[eyes]] [[sweets]] Lena Headey, makes 2 [[celebrity]]. Only for die [[difficult]] Snipes fans!Everybody [[further]]:[[preventing]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Worst]] [[film]] ever, this is a statement that people here on IMDb [[often]] throw [[around]]. Whether it's an Uwe Boll [[movie]], [[bad]] classics like Manos The Hands Of [[Fate]] or the [[latest]] no [[brains]] summer [[action]] fest from [[Michael]] Bay, people are [[often]] [[quick]] to [[jump]] to the [[sudden]] [[conclusion]] that on the board they're posting that there is nothing worse in the [[movie]] world.

I envy these people, because they're blissfully ignorant and unaware of how deep the rabbit hole of [[crap]] movie [[making]] [[really]] goes. There are films out there so bad, so [[hideous]], so [[unintentionally]] hilarious and so ridiculous that cults [[form]] [[around]] them to [[celebrate]] their awfulness and their [[discussion]] boards are the [[kindest]] places on the internet due to [[everyone]] [[agreeing]] unanimously that [[said]] film is really that [[bad]].

Ladies and [[Gentlemen]], i [[present]] to you Ben and Arthur, an 85 minute gay [[epic]] that is so utterly [[bad]] that it's a lot like a violent car [[crash]], you know it's awful but you can't [[stop]] looking at it. The [[brainchild]] of self [[proclaimed]] "hollywood actor, [[director]]" and may i [[add]] beached whale Sam Mraovich, this [[film]] is legendarily [[terrible]]. [[Let]] me give you a [[hint]] of how ego driven this project was. [[Mr]] Mraovich not only [[directed]] this [[film]], he [[wrote]] it, [[produced]] it, executive [[produced]] it, scored it, [[edited]] it and then finally starred in it. This is a [[man]] so blinded by his own ego and so believing of his non existent [[genius]] that like [[someone]] with an ugly [[child]] he [[fails]] to [[recognise]] just how [[catastrophic]] his [[bastard]] [[creation]] really is.

[[Everything]] in this film fails on an epic [[level]], the acting is the [[worst]] you will ever witness, the [[plot]] is the most [[ridiculous]], the editing and [[cinematography]] is the most [[amateur]] and even the [[music]] is like nails on a chalkboard. I'm aware i've [[gone]] on a bit of a tangent here, but [[please]] [[believe]] me that this film is really as bad as i [[describe]] it, i would say this film is [[horse]] crap squished into a [[film]] [[reel]], but the truth is it wasn't even shot on [[film]], it was [[shot]] on a digital camcorder not much [[better]] than the one sitting in your [[closet]] right now [[gathering]] [[dust]]. Don't [[get]] me [[wrong]], i forgive low [[budgets]] for films provided the concept is interesting, for example as much as i disliked it The Blair Witch Project proved that low budgets can still lead to an atmospheric interesting film. Ben and Arthur does not have a good concept to fall back on, even if this film was shot on a budget of 20 million with Hollywoods finest actors it would still suck, the plot is that atrocious, and the characters are even worse. One of the main characters Arthur who is portrayed by non other than Sam Mraovich is one of the most whiny loathsome little turds ever put in a film. You'll dislike him within 5 minutes of the start of the film and by the end of the film that hate will have turned into outright loathing. Apparently Mr Mraovich forgot that we're supposed to root for the hero.

I don't want to spoil all the gut busting hilarity you'll experience watching this film (which i urge you not to pay for) so i will give you two tame mild examples of how stupid this film is, tame and mild as in amongst the least offending mistakes in the movie. In one cut we hear one of the main characters say how "they know a good lawyer and will give HIM a call" the shot fades out then fades back in and this HIM they spoke of earlier is actually a woman, quite a spectacular mistake to make in post production i think. The second is simple, seconds after seeing this transsexual lawyer the characters are told to fly to Vermont, we then cut to a shot of a plane landing amongst palm trees in a sunny area. I've never been to Vermont personally but i'm certain you won't find any palm trees there.

Imagine this kind of stupid amateur inconsistency stretched to nearly an hour and a half combined with ridiculous dialogue and plot and then multiply it by 10 and it still won't fully prepare you for Ben and Arthur. Imagine the absolute worst film you've seen in your life and imagine it being even worse and you still won't be on the same level as Ben and Arthur, this film is really that bad.

However we should be glad in a way, films like this are a true rarity. They give us hope that one day we can become film makers ourselves or that we can be screenwriters. Simply because we'll have a new found sense of confidence due to the fact that we'll know that nothing we produce no matter how amateur could be as much of a suck fest as this.

The real worst movie of all time has finally been discovered, and it is called Ben and Arthur. [[Pire]] [[flick]] ever, this is a statement that people here on IMDb [[generally]] throw [[about]]. Whether it's an Uwe Boll [[kino]], [[negative]] classics like Manos The Hands Of [[Destinies]] or the [[latter]] no [[neurons]] summer [[actions]] fest from [[Michele]] Bay, people are [[frequently]] [[rapid]] to [[jumping]] to the [[abrupt]] [[concluding]] that on the board they're posting that there is nothing worse in the [[film]] world.

I envy these people, because they're blissfully ignorant and unaware of how deep the rabbit hole of [[baloney]] movie [[doing]] [[truly]] goes. There are films out there so bad, so [[outrageous]], so [[involuntarily]] hilarious and so ridiculous that cults [[forms]] [[throughout]] them to [[festivities]] their awfulness and their [[talk]] boards are the [[nicest]] places on the internet due to [[anybody]] [[accepted]] unanimously that [[says]] film is really that [[negative]].

Ladies and [[Gentleman]], i [[presented]] to you Ben and Arthur, an 85 minute gay [[saga]] that is so utterly [[unfavourable]] that it's a lot like a violent car [[accident]], you know it's awful but you can't [[discontinue]] looking at it. The [[thought]] of self [[declared]] "hollywood actor, [[superintendent]]" and may i [[summing]] beached whale Sam Mraovich, this [[filmmaking]] is legendarily [[frightful]]. [[Letting]] me give you a [[allusion]] of how ego driven this project was. [[Herr]] Mraovich not only [[geared]] this [[filmmaking]], he [[texted]] it, [[generated]] it, executive [[generated]] it, scored it, [[edit]] it and then finally starred in it. This is a [[guy]] so blinded by his own ego and so believing of his non existent [[genie]] that like [[everybody]] with an ugly [[kid]] he [[fail]] to [[concede]] just how [[destructive]] his [[bitch]] [[establishment]] really is.

[[Any]] in this film fails on an epic [[plano]], the acting is the [[worse]] you will ever witness, the [[intrigue]] is the most [[farcical]], the editing and [[filmmaking]] is the most [[enthusiast]] and even the [[musicians]] is like nails on a chalkboard. I'm aware i've [[faded]] on a bit of a tangent here, but [[invites]] [[think]] me that this film is really as bad as i [[contour]] it, i would say this film is [[equestrian]] crap squished into a [[movie]] [[coil]], but the truth is it wasn't even shot on [[movies]], it was [[filmed]] on a digital camcorder not much [[optimum]] than the one sitting in your [[credenza]] right now [[collating]] [[stardust]]. Don't [[gets]] me [[fallacious]], i forgive low [[budget]] for films provided the concept is interesting, for example as much as i disliked it The Blair Witch Project proved that low budgets can still lead to an atmospheric interesting film. Ben and Arthur does not have a good concept to fall back on, even if this film was shot on a budget of 20 million with Hollywoods finest actors it would still suck, the plot is that atrocious, and the characters are even worse. One of the main characters Arthur who is portrayed by non other than Sam Mraovich is one of the most whiny loathsome little turds ever put in a film. You'll dislike him within 5 minutes of the start of the film and by the end of the film that hate will have turned into outright loathing. Apparently Mr Mraovich forgot that we're supposed to root for the hero.

I don't want to spoil all the gut busting hilarity you'll experience watching this film (which i urge you not to pay for) so i will give you two tame mild examples of how stupid this film is, tame and mild as in amongst the least offending mistakes in the movie. In one cut we hear one of the main characters say how "they know a good lawyer and will give HIM a call" the shot fades out then fades back in and this HIM they spoke of earlier is actually a woman, quite a spectacular mistake to make in post production i think. The second is simple, seconds after seeing this transsexual lawyer the characters are told to fly to Vermont, we then cut to a shot of a plane landing amongst palm trees in a sunny area. I've never been to Vermont personally but i'm certain you won't find any palm trees there.

Imagine this kind of stupid amateur inconsistency stretched to nearly an hour and a half combined with ridiculous dialogue and plot and then multiply it by 10 and it still won't fully prepare you for Ben and Arthur. Imagine the absolute worst film you've seen in your life and imagine it being even worse and you still won't be on the same level as Ben and Arthur, this film is really that bad.

However we should be glad in a way, films like this are a true rarity. They give us hope that one day we can become film makers ourselves or that we can be screenwriters. Simply because we'll have a new found sense of confidence due to the fact that we'll know that nothing we produce no matter how amateur could be as much of a suck fest as this.

The real worst movie of all time has finally been discovered, and it is called Ben and Arthur. --------------------------------------------- Result 2011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Filmatography: Excellent, [[nice]] camera [[angles]] (I don't [[remember]] [[seeing]] a [[movie]] of late, with good close-ups, until this one). [[Could]] have [[avoided]] gruesome scenes with a soft [[camera]]. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down [[angles]], in [[particular]] (a [[different]] [[touch]]).

[[Music]]: Not [[impressive]]. Songs don't stick around in your [[mind]] even after watching the movie. May be, I expected same quality like "Anniyan". A [[disappointment]].

Actors: [[Kamal]] needs to [[slowly]] [[pull]] away from hard-core action sequences. His [[age]] and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very [[awkward]] to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in "chandrmukhi").

Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.

Others just have a small presence.

Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie "Kakka Kakka". He disappointmented me. It [[took]] a long time to release the movie due to [[various]] issues. He slips in few scenes. [[Even]] abvious [[things]] got [[slipped]] from a [[famous]] director.

[[Overall]]: [[Just]] a okay [[movie]]. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of "Entertainment").

Thx Filmatography: Excellent, [[pleasurable]] camera [[nooks]] (I don't [[remembering]] [[see]] a [[filmmaking]] of late, with good close-ups, until this one). [[Did]] have [[dodged]] gruesome scenes with a soft [[cameras]]. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down [[corners]], in [[unique]] (a [[diverse]] [[touche]]).

[[Musica]]: Not [[phenomenal]]. Songs don't stick around in your [[intellect]] even after watching the movie. May be, I expected same quality like "Anniyan". A [[displeasure]].

Actors: [[Kemal]] needs to [[softly]] [[pulled]] away from hard-core action sequences. His [[older]] and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very [[troublesome]] to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in "chandrmukhi").

Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.

Others just have a small presence.

Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie "Kakka Kakka". He disappointmented me. It [[picked]] a long time to release the movie due to [[dissimilar]] issues. He slips in few scenes. [[Yet]] abvious [[matters]] got [[leaped]] from a [[prestigious]] director.

[[Comprehensive]]: [[Virtuous]] a okay [[filmmaking]]. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of "Entertainment").

Thx --------------------------------------------- Result 2012 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was in the film too, but i don't know if they actually put this scene in. On the [[way]] back from a school trip (in 2005) we [[stopped]] at a service station at the same time as they were doing the [[film]], and we were [[asked]] (the whole of us) to run in and shout Go! Freebird! We were all around 10 [[years]] old, [[could]] anyone who has [[seen]] the [[film]] [[tell]] me if that [[part]] was actually [[kept]] in the film, it would be [[great]] to [[know]]! I [[remember]] I thought the film had never come out, because it was another 2 and a half years before it was released. All of your comments seem to be good so I'm guessing it has been [[quite]] a successful film, I might [[buy]] it, but first I would like to know if I'm in it! :D [[Thank]] you I was in the film too, but i don't know if they actually put this scene in. On the [[path]] back from a school trip (in 2005) we [[ceasing]] at a service station at the same time as they were doing the [[kino]], and we were [[demanded]] (the whole of us) to run in and shout Go! Freebird! We were all around 10 [[olds]] old, [[wo]] anyone who has [[noticed]] the [[movies]] [[say]] me if that [[parties]] was actually [[maintained]] in the film, it would be [[wondrous]] to [[savoir]]! I [[remind]] I thought the film had never come out, because it was another 2 and a half years before it was released. All of your comments seem to be good so I'm guessing it has been [[rather]] a successful film, I might [[buying]] it, but first I would like to know if I'm in it! :D [[Gratitude]] you --------------------------------------------- Result 2013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This film was so amateurish I [[could]] [[hardly]] believe what I was [[seeing]]. It is [[shot]] on [[VIDEO]]! [[NOT]] [[film]]! I have not [[seen]] the likes of this [[since]] the early 70's, when late [[night]] networks [[showed]] movie of the [[week]] 'horror flicks' shot in......[[video]]. It [[looks]] like a [[bad]] soap [[opera]], and that is [[paying]] it a compliment. Some of the actors [[give]] it their best shot. [[Michael]] Des Barres does okay with what he is [[given]] to do, which is to [[act]] like a [[sex]] addict out of control. I can't say that it is [[pleasant]] to watch.

Nastassja Kinski as the [[therapist]] sits in a [[chair]] for [[practically]] the [[entire]] [[film]], with very little [[variation]] in camera [[angles]]. I can't fault her for [[someone]] else's [[poor]] [[blocking]], but she is [[totally]] [[unbelievable]] in her role. Her [[little]] [[girl]] [[voice]] works against her here. And I consider myself a Nastassja Kinski fan. She is [[certainly]] ageless and [[exotic]], but she's [[outside]] her [[range]] with this.

[[Alexandra]] [[Paul]] is [[pathetically]] overwrought. [[Every]] [[line]] she delivers is with three [[exclamation]] points. [[Someone]] [[must]] have directed her to [[scream]] at all [[costs]]. Why [[would]] [[Michael]] Des Barres [[want]] to have [[sex]] with such a raging shrew?

Finally, Rosanna Arquette as the sweet, maligned wife comes off [[okay]], and [[probably]] the most [[believable]] of the bunch. But that is not [[saying]] much.

This has to be the [[worst]] [[film]] I have [[seen]] in years. This film was so amateurish I [[would]] [[practically]] believe what I was [[see]]. It is [[filmed]] on [[VIDEOTAPED]]! [[NAH]] [[movies]]! I have not [[watched]] the likes of this [[because]] the early 70's, when late [[overnight]] networks [[revealed]] movie of the [[weeks]] 'horror flicks' shot in......[[videotape]]. It [[seems]] like a [[unfavorable]] soap [[dramas]], and that is [[salaried]] it a compliment. Some of the actors [[lend]] it their best shot. [[Michel]] Des Barres does okay with what he is [[bestowed]] to do, which is to [[ley]] like a [[sexuality]] addict out of control. I can't say that it is [[congenial]] to watch.

Nastassja Kinski as the [[psy]] sits in a [[wheelchair]] for [[virtually]] the [[total]] [[flick]], with very little [[variations]] in camera [[nooks]]. I can't fault her for [[anyone]] else's [[poorest]] [[bloc]], but she is [[altogether]] [[impressive]] in her role. Her [[scant]] [[dame]] [[vocals]] works against her here. And I consider myself a Nastassja Kinski fan. She is [[unquestionably]] ageless and [[alien]], but she's [[outdoor]] her [[assortment]] with this.

[[Aleksandr]] [[Paolo]] is [[ridiculously]] overwrought. [[Any]] [[bloodline]] she delivers is with three [[admiration]] points. [[Anyone]] [[owe]] have directed her to [[howl]] at all [[price]]. Why [[could]] [[Michel]] Des Barres [[wish]] to have [[sexuality]] with such a raging shrew?

Finally, Rosanna Arquette as the sweet, maligned wife comes off [[alrighty]], and [[arguably]] the most [[dependable]] of the bunch. But that is not [[arguing]] much.

This has to be the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] I have [[watched]] in years. --------------------------------------------- Result 2014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I think that most everyone [[wants]] to believe that extraordinary [[things]] exist and this [[film]] [[shows]] no [[restraint]] in trying to exploit that to the [[fullest]]. The [[presentation]] is very interesting, well [[presented]] and the graphics are state of the art, but from a scientific point of [[view]] it just doesn't [[work]]. Hydrogen filled flying bladders? They [[would]] need to be the [[size]] of a Mack [[truck]] to be useful. And then there's the ever-present possibility of a catastrophic explosion. I have no problem with fantasy, just don't try to pass it off as fact. Some folks will always [[misunderstand]]. All in all the film is entertaining, but I constantly [[found]] myself saying "[[oh]] brother, what a [[load]] of ....". If you [[want]] a [[FAKE]] documentary, watch This Is Spinal Tap [[instead]]. Or at the very [[least]] [[turn]] the sound off. I think that most everyone [[wanting]] to believe that extraordinary [[matters]] exist and this [[filmmaking]] [[exhibitions]] no [[constraints]] in trying to exploit that to the [[full]]. The [[introductions]] is very interesting, well [[lodged]] and the graphics are state of the art, but from a scientific point of [[opinion]] it just doesn't [[collaboration]]. Hydrogen filled flying bladders? They [[ought]] need to be the [[caliber]] of a Mack [[lorry]] to be useful. And then there's the ever-present possibility of a catastrophic explosion. I have no problem with fantasy, just don't try to pass it off as fact. Some folks will always [[misconstrue]]. All in all the film is entertaining, but I constantly [[find]] myself saying "[[ah]] brother, what a [[uploading]] of ....". If you [[wanting]] a [[FORGER]] documentary, watch This Is Spinal Tap [[conversely]]. Or at the very [[fewer]] [[transforming]] the sound off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Finally]], after [[years]] of [[awaiting]] a new film to continue the sexual mayhem of "[[Basic]] [[Instinct]]", we have been [[given]] a [[great]] sequel that is [[packed]] with the right [[elements]] [[needed]] for a franchise such as this! I [[remember]] everything about the original, the [[steam]], the romance, the sex, the [[interrogation]], the [[music]] (by the master [[Jerry]] Goldsmith), and everything else from violence and [[murder]], to [[intense]] confrontations of all [[kind]]! Make no mistake, "Basic [[Instinct]]" was a real winner for [[audiences]] [[everywhere]]. I can remember in 2001 when we were first given the news about such a sequel. Five years later, we have it. I never would have thought it to end up such as this. When it was declared a dropped project, time sure couldn't tell if it was ever a real possibility to begin with. Well, I guess we now know anything's possible in this case. Even if the original director, or writer are not present, all we need is the [[glamorous]], always reliable Sharon Stone, and we have a done deal! Please, hear me out...

When people say that this film is bad, I think it is only due to the fact that the style is extreme, and slightly dated. I use the word "dated" only because we have not seen a certain film of the like in many years, and audiences have become adapted to the pointless, boring storytelling seen in other movies that actually make money, and the only reason they make such big numbers is because those films are family friendly. Who needs hole some and clean? Of course it's a [[pleasant]] thing to have, but c'mon! Escapism is really seldom these days, and "Basic Instinct 2" gives us [[real]] [[fans]] what we've been expecting. This [[film]] is not an Academy [[Award]] [[winner]], nor does it [[try]] to be. It [[simply]] [[delivers]] the die-hard [[fans]] what they have been expecting. It's a [[film]] for fun. [[Movies]] [[today]] [[seem]] to take themselves [[way]] too seriously, but this [[film]] is just loose and fun, not taking itself seriously, not too seriously anyway. That said, I shall evaluate the film.

The film is a fast-paced [[film]] from the first second, as we see Cathernine Tremell in a car, speeding at 110 MPH-and enjoying lustful thrills doing so. Perhaps sex and driving does not mix, because our sexy novelist takes a bad turn and...well, she gets away unharmed, but her studly partner doesn't fare too well. Once again, Tremell is the primary suspect of the accident, and will be put under analyst's and psychiatrists. Dr. Michael Glass (Morrissey) is automatically drawn to to her from the first moment he meets her. Like another criminal investigator before him, he is entranced and seduced, slowly, and surely. His denial of it all begins to crumble around him as she weaves a spell only she has the power to do. Tramell is possibly more dangerous now, than she was before,but like the first one, we'll never really know, will we? Once the seduction is in motion, jealousy, rage, drugs, and a plateful of erotic scenery ensues!

This film does not recycle the first one, but rather mentions the previous films incidents briefly from time to time. This is a good thing. It lets us as an audience know that the script has been written to bring the level up a notch or two. Sharon Stone dazzles us again, as though 14 years has not come to pass. Her second run of the deceitful novelist is right on the spot as earlier. Just awesome! David Morrissey is well cast, and manages pretty well. The fact that a non-popular star was chosen, makes his performance all the more enjoyable because we as an audience have no background on him, just what we see him perform. My final thought-8.5 to 9 out of 10. So it's not the first one, nor can it live up to the first ones prize winning place. It can, however, live up to the standards set by the first film, and it does folks! It does. [[Lastly]], after [[olds]] of [[waiting]] a new film to continue the sexual mayhem of "[[Fundamental]] [[Gut]]", we have been [[gave]] a [[wondrous]] sequel that is [[packaging]] with the right [[ingredient]] [[needs]] for a franchise such as this! I [[rember]] everything about the original, the [[vapor]], the romance, the sex, the [[interview]], the [[musician]] (by the master [[Gerry]] Goldsmith), and everything else from violence and [[killings]], to [[ferocious]] confrontations of all [[genera]]! Make no mistake, "Basic [[Gut]]" was a real winner for [[spectators]] [[nowhere]]. I can remember in 2001 when we were first given the news about such a sequel. Five years later, we have it. I never would have thought it to end up such as this. When it was declared a dropped project, time sure couldn't tell if it was ever a real possibility to begin with. Well, I guess we now know anything's possible in this case. Even if the original director, or writer are not present, all we need is the [[illustrious]], always reliable Sharon Stone, and we have a done deal! Please, hear me out...

When people say that this film is bad, I think it is only due to the fact that the style is extreme, and slightly dated. I use the word "dated" only because we have not seen a certain film of the like in many years, and audiences have become adapted to the pointless, boring storytelling seen in other movies that actually make money, and the only reason they make such big numbers is because those films are family friendly. Who needs hole some and clean? Of course it's a [[nice]] thing to have, but c'mon! Escapism is really seldom these days, and "Basic Instinct 2" gives us [[actual]] [[amateurs]] what we've been expecting. This [[films]] is not an Academy [[Scholarship]] [[finalist]], nor does it [[tries]] to be. It [[solely]] [[offering]] the die-hard [[amateurs]] what they have been expecting. It's a [[cinematography]] for fun. [[Theater]] [[yesterday]] [[looks]] to take themselves [[pathways]] too seriously, but this [[kino]] is just loose and fun, not taking itself seriously, not too seriously anyway. That said, I shall evaluate the film.

The film is a fast-paced [[flick]] from the first second, as we see Cathernine Tremell in a car, speeding at 110 MPH-and enjoying lustful thrills doing so. Perhaps sex and driving does not mix, because our sexy novelist takes a bad turn and...well, she gets away unharmed, but her studly partner doesn't fare too well. Once again, Tremell is the primary suspect of the accident, and will be put under analyst's and psychiatrists. Dr. Michael Glass (Morrissey) is automatically drawn to to her from the first moment he meets her. Like another criminal investigator before him, he is entranced and seduced, slowly, and surely. His denial of it all begins to crumble around him as she weaves a spell only she has the power to do. Tramell is possibly more dangerous now, than she was before,but like the first one, we'll never really know, will we? Once the seduction is in motion, jealousy, rage, drugs, and a plateful of erotic scenery ensues!

This film does not recycle the first one, but rather mentions the previous films incidents briefly from time to time. This is a good thing. It lets us as an audience know that the script has been written to bring the level up a notch or two. Sharon Stone dazzles us again, as though 14 years has not come to pass. Her second run of the deceitful novelist is right on the spot as earlier. Just awesome! David Morrissey is well cast, and manages pretty well. The fact that a non-popular star was chosen, makes his performance all the more enjoyable because we as an audience have no background on him, just what we see him perform. My final thought-8.5 to 9 out of 10. So it's not the first one, nor can it live up to the first ones prize winning place. It can, however, live up to the standards set by the first film, and it does folks! It does. --------------------------------------------- Result 2016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Without a doubt, Private Lessons II is the greatest movie I have ever seen. A Japanese import (poorly) translated into English, its a joy to watch. Not much of it makes sense, but that doesn't matter. It's the greatest comedy around without ever being intentionally funny.

The film is rare and unavailable on video, but I have caught it a couple of time late, late at night on pay cable. My taped copy has been watched dozens and dozens of times as I slowly, person-by-person, introduce this film gem to the world.

Joanna Pacula plays the tutor/lover to Ken, our hero. (She apparently was just working for her check.) Ken is played by Goro Inagaki, of the Japanese pop band SMAP, who gives it his all and has great hair through out the movie. Stacy Edwards, of "In the Company of Men" fame, shows up in the movie too and is probably happy that she found other film work afterwards.

It takes at least three viewings to sorta figure out what the plot is. On repeating viewing you can enjoy elements like the abnormal amount of vases Ken has in his house (at least 50) or that Ken is wearing a shirt with embroidered husks of corn in the movie's finale.

The movie is predictable, but highly quotable. My friends and I reenact entire scenes. Yes, it sounds like we're lame losers and we are ... but we're lame losers who have seen "Private Lessons II." Be one of ten people in the world who have seen this movie. You'll thank me for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I am an [[avid]] fan of horrendous movies, [[anything]] cheesy and down right ridiculous is my [[game]]. [[So]] [[imagine]] my [[spirit]] I went to the local [[Rent]] [[Shop]], and [[found]] [[Vampires]] vs. Zombies. The [[name]] is just too [[entertaining]], you [[know]] that no one in the [[world]] [[could]] [[pull]] off [[something]] like it, it just has to be [[bad]].

And boy, is it [[BAD]]. After viewing this horror-ific movie, I was speechless, literally. Me and my pal sat outside without saying a word to each other for [[several]] minutes, both of us [[contemplating]] the [[future]] of our lives after [[watching]] this [[movie]]. I [[broke]] the [[depressing]] [[silence]] with the words, "...[[dude]]....What?" Yes, i am an [[enthralling]] individual.

Heres a [[quick]] '[[street]] review' The Plot; There is [[none]], at all, ever, constantly in "WTF" [[mode]]. The [[Characters]]; No [[development]], forgettable. The [[Music]]; Worse than porn. The [[Vampires]]; [[Theirs]] [[vampires]]? The [[Zombies]]; [[Theirs]] Zombies?

[[In]] the [[end]]; [[Everyone]] should [[see]] this movie, [[honestly]], its so [[bad]] I [[yearn]] to see it again. [[So]] do yourself a favor, watch it and [[get]] [[Depressed]]. I am an [[impassioned]] fan of horrendous movies, [[nothing]] cheesy and down right ridiculous is my [[games]]. [[Thus]] [[reckon]] my [[wits]] I went to the local [[Rental]] [[Stores]], and [[discovered]] [[Bloodsucker]] vs. Zombies. The [[behalf]] is just too [[entertain]], you [[savoir]] that no one in the [[globe]] [[wo]] [[pulled]] off [[anything]] like it, it just has to be [[faulty]].

And boy, is it [[ROTTEN]]. After viewing this horror-ific movie, I was speechless, literally. Me and my pal sat outside without saying a word to each other for [[many]] minutes, both of us [[recital]] the [[futuristic]] of our lives after [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]]. I [[shattered]] the [[somber]] [[hush]] with the words, "...[[boy]]....What?" Yes, i am an [[mesmerizing]] individual.

Heres a [[timely]] '[[rue]] review' The Plot; There is [[nos]], at all, ever, constantly in "WTF" [[modes]]. The [[Characteristic]]; No [[evolution]], forgettable. The [[Musician]]; Worse than porn. The [[Vampire]]; [[Yours]] [[vamps]]? The [[Walkers]]; [[Yours]] Zombies?

[[During]] the [[ends]]; [[Everybody]] should [[behold]] this movie, [[genuinely]], its so [[rotten]] I [[yearning]] to see it again. [[Accordingly]] do yourself a favor, watch it and [[obtain]] [[Depressive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surprisingly well done for an independent film, An Insomniac's Nightmare paints a startling picture of what it would be like to suffer from insomnia. Wonderfully well written, and directed, it creates the atmosphere of a dream as the viewer is taken through one night in the life of an insomniac.

Starring Dominic Monaghan as Jack, we get to see everything he sees as the long hours of a lonely night drag on. The narration is almost hypnotizing, and from the opening lines, it is impossible to turn away. Fascinating and slightly disturbing, it shows how someone copes with a lack of sleep, balancing on the brink between sanity and madness.

With twists and turns around every corner, An Insomniac's Nightmare is provocative and engaging. It comes very highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] There are three movies with this animation [[style]] that I fondly remember from my [[youth]]. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "[[Dragons]]" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I [[wish]] I hadn't. What [[bothered]] me the most was the [[script]]. It was incredibly [[choppy]] and often [[inane]]. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that [[music]] in movies such as these rarely have what one would call [[classic]] pieces, but the [[music]] in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to [[show]] to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I [[could]] ever sit through that [[crap]] fest again. [[Disappointed]] is putting it mildly. There are three movies with this animation [[elegance]] that I fondly remember from my [[teenage]]. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "[[Dragon]]" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I [[desire]] I hadn't. What [[disturbed]] me the most was the [[hyphen]]. It was incredibly [[turbulent]] and often [[insignificant]]. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that [[musica]] in movies such as these rarely have what one would call [[typical]] pieces, but the [[musician]] in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to [[illustrating]] to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I [[did]] ever sit through that [[baloney]] fest again. [[Frustrating]] is putting it mildly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2020 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I didn't know this was a silent movie with narration. I don't care for silent movies - the [[corny]] humor, flickering lighting and film, etc. I'm sure that attributes to the low [[score]] I [[assigned]] it. It was about [[chapter]] 8 before I found any interest in this [[story]] and had I had popcorn I may have thrown it at the screen. Maybe this [[appeals]] to the sci-fi crowd? The only thing missing was a zombie scene and a brain [[transplant]]. I went with two other people on a Friday night and there were a total of 6 people in the entire theater. Isabella Rosselinni narrated this movie - the one [[enjoyable]] [[aspect]] of the [[movie]]. No one left commenting how much they enjoyed this nor appreciated the unusual approach to telling this story. I cannot [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. I didn't know this was a silent movie with narration. I don't care for silent movies - the [[dorky]] humor, flickering lighting and film, etc. I'm sure that attributes to the low [[notation]] I [[awarded]] it. It was about [[sections]] 8 before I found any interest in this [[fairytales]] and had I had popcorn I may have thrown it at the screen. Maybe this [[appellate]] to the sci-fi crowd? The only thing missing was a zombie scene and a brain [[grafts]]. I went with two other people on a Friday night and there were a total of 6 people in the entire theater. Isabella Rosselinni narrated this movie - the one [[pleasurable]] [[facet]] of the [[movies]]. No one left commenting how much they enjoyed this nor appreciated the unusual approach to telling this story. I cannot [[recommends]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2021 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1937's "Stella Dallas" with Barbara Stanwyck hasn't exactly aged well--how anyone thought a semi-updated version of the story would work now is a real puzzler. Perhaps they thought jaunty, cheerfully brash Bette Midler could make something out of it, but this hoary script defeats her. Plot about a female bartender having a baby out of wedlock, and years later giving the young girl over to the child's wealthy father so she'll have a shot at a better life, can't escape tatty, old-fashioned trappings and sentiment. Midler works best with a movie director who can control her excesses, but that fails to happen here; Stephen Collins is stolid as the man who changes her life, but Trini Alvarado is well-cast as Midler's daughter. This is what used to be referred to as a "woman's picture", a wallow, but it doesn't pass muster because it stays too faithful to its 1930's origins. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy [[movie]] [[using]] circa 1979 [[ideas]] of what [[constitutes]] [[illicit]] romance for 13 year [[old]] [[girls]]. [[Script]], pacing, and [[direction]] are uniformly [[awful]]. Action sequences [[defy]] [[belief]]. Characters speak with the [[simplified]] diction one [[usually]] finds in [[films]] [[aimed]] at the under 10 set, but [[also]] includes [[multiple]] sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic [[deaths]].

The [[movie]] [[wants]] to be a [[comedy]] on some [[level]] but is never [[funny]], an adventure picture but plot and [[action]] are [[insipid]], and a children's [[movie]] but introduces pedophilia and child [[rape]] as [[real]] [[possibilities]]. It [[also]] [[wants]] to be a buddy [[picture]], a coming of age [[picture]], a [[ghost]] [[movie]], an Indian [[spiritual]] [[movie]], a travelogue, and a [[western]]. The [[overall]] [[affect]] is of [[massive]] [[stupidity]] with a [[nasty]] [[twist]]. Wanda Nevada is a [[complete]] [[waste]] of [[time]] [[unless]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a good [[many]] [[terrific]] shots of the [[Grand]] Canyon. That it manages to do just fine. Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy [[cinematography]] [[uses]] circa 1979 [[thinking]] of what [[constituted]] [[illegal]] romance for 13 year [[longtime]] [[girl]]. [[Screenplay]], pacing, and [[directions]] are uniformly [[horrific]]. Action sequences [[braving]] [[beliefs]]. Characters speak with the [[rationalized]] diction one [[normally]] finds in [[cinematography]] [[directed]] at the under 10 set, but [[additionally]] includes [[countless]] sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic [[mortality]].

The [[filmmaking]] [[wanted]] to be a [[travesty]] on some [[grades]] but is never [[comical]], an adventure picture but plot and [[actions]] are [[tacky]], and a children's [[filmmaking]] but introduces pedophilia and child [[raping]] as [[true]] [[potentialities]]. It [[apart]] [[wanted]] to be a buddy [[photo]], a coming of age [[photography]], a [[ghostbusters]] [[flick]], an Indian [[mental]] [[cinematographic]], a travelogue, and a [[westen]]. The [[comprehensive]] [[influences]] is of [[formidable]] [[craziness]] with a [[dirty]] [[twisting]]. Wanda Nevada is a [[completes]] [[squander]] of [[period]] [[if]] you [[wanna]] to [[behold]] a good [[numerous]] [[sumptuous]] shots of the [[Grande]] Canyon. That it manages to do just fine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Those who [[love]] Elivra as I did in her late [[night]] [[movie]] hostess [[duties]] will [[love]] this [[movie]] - she is just [[plain]] cool - her car is [[great]], and she is a [[bit]] of a Transylvanian [[Dolly]] Parton - she is so innocent and [[naive]] at [[times]] - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a [[touch]] of Mae West -

The sets are well done as well, and the [[comic]] cast is [[great]], with Edie McClurg at her [[usual]] best - plus [[Sally]] Kellerman as Patty is [[hilarious]]. Any [[time]] I have to [[crunch]] [[something]] for a topping, I will [[think]] of how Elvira crunches the [[potato]] chips -

This [[movie]] is one to be [[watched]] again and again - just for the [[fun]] of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it [[lives]] up to this one ---- Those who [[loves]] Elivra as I did in her late [[soir]] [[films]] hostess [[responsibilities]] will [[amour]] this [[kino]] - she is just [[ganges]] cool - her car is [[wondrous]], and she is a [[bite]] of a Transylvanian [[Darlene]] Parton - she is so innocent and [[unsuspecting]] at [[time]] - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a [[touches]] of Mae West -

The sets are well done as well, and the [[comedian]] cast is [[wondrous]], with Edie McClurg at her [[ordinary]] best - plus [[Suzie]] Kellerman as Patty is [[comic]]. Any [[times]] I have to [[contraction]] [[somethin]] for a topping, I will [[thinking]] of how Elvira crunches the [[starch]] chips -

This [[cinema]] is one to be [[seen]] again and again - just for the [[amusing]] of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it [[iife]] up to this one ---- --------------------------------------------- Result 2024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Having lived in Japan for several years this [[movie]] does not reflect the Japanese culture and does not [[even]] come close to explain what being a Geisha is all about. Unfortunately, a great opportunity has been missed to [[bring]] the Japanese culture a bit closer to the broad Western audience and help demystify the country where Zen, Samurai, the Geisha world of Kyoto originate from. Some of the most poignant moments of the movie are when the Americans are shown in Japanese surroundings.The Geisha dances were not [[authentic]]. There was far too much use of Chinese music. A [[minor]] but essential detail: proper use of the incense sticks was nowhere to be seen. The Sakura scenes were almost obscenely kitschy ! Interestingly, some of the Chinese actors were quite convincing as Japanese persons. Having lived in Japan for several years this [[filmmaking]] does not reflect the Japanese culture and does not [[yet]] come close to explain what being a Geisha is all about. Unfortunately, a great opportunity has been missed to [[brings]] the Japanese culture a bit closer to the broad Western audience and help demystify the country where Zen, Samurai, the Geisha world of Kyoto originate from. Some of the most poignant moments of the movie are when the Americans are shown in Japanese surroundings.The Geisha dances were not [[real]]. There was far too much use of Chinese music. A [[underage]] but essential detail: proper use of the incense sticks was nowhere to be seen. The Sakura scenes were almost obscenely kitschy ! Interestingly, some of the Chinese actors were quite convincing as Japanese persons. --------------------------------------------- Result 2025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[originally]] came across Linda Feferman's Seven Minutes in Heaven when I was 14 and [[worked]] at a [[video]] [[store]] and I loved it. I [[recently]] watched the movie again and have realized that it is a lost [[treasure]]. The movie stars Jennifer Connelly, [[almost]] twenty years before she [[would]] go on to [[win]] an Oscar for [[Beautiful]] [[Mind]], as [[Natalie]] Becker. Byron Thames plays her [[best]] [[friend]] in the [[world]], Jeff Moran. The [[film]] is [[definitely]] a milder, cuter and softer version of the Pretty in Pink's and Some [[Kind]] of Wonderful's of the 1980's, which is [[exactly]] why it is so [[good]]. It's honest, not [[forced]] [[like]] those [[films]], and [[parents]] will enjoy watching this [[movie]] with there [[kids]].

When Natalie's [[Dad]] leave [[home]] on a business trip, Jeff convinces her that he should [[move]] in because his [[home]] life sucks. With [[support]] from Natalie's [[friend]], Polly, [[played]] [[exquisitely]] by Maddie Corman, she [[lets]] him. But this [[movie]] isn't about putting [[kids]] in [[situations]] and seeing what they can [[get]] away with. The three leads are so [[natural]] and the script, [[surprisingly]] so [[honest]], that what [[comes]] through best in their performances is heart breaking. These [[characters]] [[really]] do care about each other. It's a [[great]] [[film]] to [[show]] to [[kids]] who are [[reaching]] pre-teen [[adolescence]].

I [[initially]] came across Linda Feferman's Seven Minutes in Heaven when I was 14 and [[acted]] at a [[videos]] [[storing]] and I loved it. I [[newly]] watched the movie again and have realized that it is a lost [[treasury]]. The movie stars Jennifer Connelly, [[virtually]] twenty years before she [[should]] go on to [[gaining]] an Oscar for [[Awesome]] [[Intellect]], as [[Yasmeen]] Becker. Byron Thames plays her [[better]] [[boyfriend]] in the [[worldwide]], Jeff Moran. The [[flick]] is [[obviously]] a milder, cuter and softer version of the Pretty in Pink's and Some [[Kinds]] of Wonderful's of the 1980's, which is [[accurately]] why it is so [[alright]]. It's honest, not [[compelled]] [[iike]] those [[film]], and [[parent]] will enjoy watching this [[cinematography]] with there [[brats]].

When Natalie's [[Pope]] leave [[homes]] on a business trip, Jeff convinces her that he should [[budge]] in because his [[house]] life sucks. With [[help]] from Natalie's [[boyfriend]], Polly, [[done]] [[divinely]] by Maddie Corman, she [[allowing]] him. But this [[film]] isn't about putting [[enfant]] in [[instances]] and seeing what they can [[obtain]] away with. The three leads are so [[naturel]] and the script, [[impossibly]] so [[truthful]], that what [[occurs]] through best in their performances is heart breaking. These [[nature]] [[truthfully]] do care about each other. It's a [[awesome]] [[movie]] to [[demonstrating]] to [[brats]] who are [[accomplishing]] pre-teen [[teenagers]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] From the [[moment]] the [[film]] [[begins]], already there is a [[discrepancy]]. As this [[film]] takes place on the [[borders]] of [[Normandy]] and the middle [[East]], and is [[also]] an international [[film]], one [[would]] expect [[proper]] accents portrayed. This is not done as the majority of the cast sound [[American]]. Also, I [[find]] the acting to be rehearsed at best, the [[story]] line a little difficult to follow from the [[beginning]]. Who is who? Otherwise the [[film]] is very [[accurate]] in [[costume]] and scenery. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a [[movie]] to [[get]] a feel of what it was like in the [[past]] (albeit the [[lack]] of accents) then this movie is worth a [[rent]]. If you're [[looking]] for a [[movie]] as [[epic]] as Kingdom of [[Heaven]], then [[look]] elsewhere. From the [[time]] the [[filmmaking]] [[started]], already there is a [[divergence]]. As this [[filmmaking]] takes place on the [[limitations]] of [[Normandie]] and the middle [[Easterly]], and is [[apart]] an international [[filmmaking]], one [[should]] expect [[suitable]] accents portrayed. This is not done as the majority of the cast sound [[Americano]]. Also, I [[unearth]] the acting to be rehearsed at best, the [[tales]] line a little difficult to follow from the [[outset]]. Who is who? Otherwise the [[movie]] is very [[meticulous]] in [[outfit]] and scenery. [[Though]] you [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] a [[flick]] to [[gets]] a feel of what it was like in the [[elapsed]] (albeit the [[dearth]] of accents) then this movie is worth a [[rentals]]. If you're [[searching]] for a [[filmmaking]] as [[odyssey]] as Kingdom of [[Heavens]], then [[gaze]] elsewhere. --------------------------------------------- Result 2027 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Wow, I can't believe people consider this a 'good' [[movie]]. Now, I have seen much worse, but there are much more romantic/funny comedies with John Cusack.

This is a mediocre film at [[best]]. While the acting wasn't [[terrible]], but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was [[little]] passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as complete cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.

The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).

The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.

It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.

If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society). Wow, I can't believe people consider this a 'good' [[filmmaking]]. Now, I have seen much worse, but there are much more romantic/funny comedies with John Cusack.

This is a mediocre film at [[nicest]]. While the acting wasn't [[atrocious]], but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was [[scant]] passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as complete cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.

The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).

The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.

It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.

If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society). --------------------------------------------- Result 2028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I was raised watching the [[original]] Batman Animated [[Series]], and am an avid Batman graphic novel collector. With a [[comic]] book [[hero]] as iconic as Batman, there are certain traits that cannot be changed. [[Creative]] liberties are all well and good, but when it completely changes the character, then it is too far. I [[purchased]] one of the seasons of "The Batman" in the [[hopes]] that an extra [[bonus]] [[feature]] [[could]] shed some light on the creators' reasoning for making this show such an [[atrocity]]. In an interview on the making of "The Batman," one of the artists or writers (I'm [[unsure]] which) said that "We felt we shouldn't [[mess]] with Batman, but we [[could]] [[mess]] with the villains." So, they proceeded to [[make]] the Joker into an immature little kid begging for attention, the Penguin into some anime [[knockoff]], [[Mr]]. [[Freeze]] into a super-powered [[jewel]] thief, [[Poison]] Ivy into a [[teenage]] hippie, and countless other [[shameful]] acts which are [[making]] Bob Kane roll over in his [[grave]].

To [[sum]] it all up: I [[wish]] I had more hands so I [[could]] give this [[show]] FOUR THUMBS DOWN. It squeezes by my rating with a 2 out of 10 [[simply]] because it [[uses]] the Batman [[name]]. Warner [[Bros]]...[[rethink]] this! Please! I was raised watching the [[upfront]] Batman Animated [[Serials]], and am an avid Batman graphic novel collector. With a [[comedian]] book [[heroin]] as iconic as Batman, there are certain traits that cannot be changed. [[Inventive]] liberties are all well and good, but when it completely changes the character, then it is too far. I [[acquire]] one of the seasons of "The Batman" in the [[waits]] that an extra [[bonuses]] [[trait]] [[did]] shed some light on the creators' reasoning for making this show such an [[monstrosity]]. In an interview on the making of "The Batman," one of the artists or writers (I'm [[uncertain]] which) said that "We felt we shouldn't [[muddle]] with Batman, but we [[wo]] [[chaos]] with the villains." So, they proceeded to [[deliver]] the Joker into an immature little kid begging for attention, the Penguin into some anime [[knockoffs]], [[Mister]]. [[Froze]] into a super-powered [[jewelry]] thief, [[Toxin]] Ivy into a [[teen]] hippie, and countless other [[scandalous]] acts which are [[doing]] Bob Kane roll over in his [[graveyard]].

To [[suma]] it all up: I [[wanna]] I had more hands so I [[did]] give this [[display]] FOUR THUMBS DOWN. It squeezes by my rating with a 2 out of 10 [[mere]] because it [[used]] the Batman [[denomination]]. Warner [[Bruce]]...[[reconsidering]] this! Please! --------------------------------------------- Result 2029 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think it was an overrated PG-13 crap! At least BRITTANY SNOW's performance was good and some others like IDRIS ELBA were good too, but some others teens in the prom like the leads friends were not that convincing. The killer was so dumb and looked so stupid too. The deaths were stupid, boring and completely unoriginals. The movie was very boring too and very overrated. It wasn't suspenseful at all, i almost fall asleep. Its another bad PG-13 remake, its really a dreadful movie IMO. The ending was so stupid and the climax was very rushed and boring. The movie is pretty slow too. Overall the only good thing about this crap fest is maybe BRITTANY SNOW i think she gave a good performance and IDRIS ELBA too, but besides that it was a completely dreadful movie and horrible remake. Well thats just my opinion. i gave it a 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2030 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This little seen movie is a languid and laid-back giallo. It veers away from some of the cliché's of the genre and adopts a looser approach. It's about a woman searching for her missing lover; a psychiatrist who has suddenly vanished for no apparent reason. Her search leads her to a villa populated by a group of eccentric individuals. In true giallo style, murder is never far away.

The cast is really rather good. We have Aldofo Celi (Thunderball), Alida Valli (Suspiria), Horst Frank (Cat o' Nine Tails) and a very young Sybil Danning (80's scream queen). The lead actress is Rosemary Dexter, and while I am not familiar with her, she does a good job in leading the picture.

One of the defining features of Eye in the Labyrinth is its music. Atypically for a giallo it features a jazz-rock fusion soundtrack. This score, composed by Roberto Nicolosi, is reminiscent of Miles Davis, especially his work on In A Silent Way. It's an excellent soundtrack and really gives this movie a different feel than most gialli. The fusion groove accentuates the languid atmosphere and compliments the sunny, sea-front scenery that the film is mostly made up of.

This is a giallo so we really need to talk about the murder set-pieces. Well, this film falls a little short in this regard. It's certainly not devoid of them but they are few and far between. The opening dream-murder being probably the best on offer as well as a memorable burning car sequence. But this really isn't a particularly violent film. Still, I don't think it should disappoint too many seasoned fans of the genre. The mystery is fairly compelling and it has enough eccentric characters (the idiot boy Saro and THAT unsettlingly inappropriate dubbed accent?) and moments of the bizarre to satisfy; while the sleaze-factor is upheld with a smattering of nudity throughout.

Eye in the Labyrinth plays like a giallo version of an Agatha Christie mystery, as it features a group of unsympathetic characters in a villa, all under suspicion of murder; we have the obligatory flashbacks detailing their connections with the final hours of the (highly unsympathetic) murder victim. While this isn't a grade-A example of the genre, it's certainly an appealingly different one, as it doesn't borrow too heavily from other films of the sub-genre. For giallo enthusiasts I give this a thumbs up and hope one day it's given a nice DVD transfer. It certainly deserves the treatment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2031 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed the story by itself, but the things that I learned about WWI Planes & boats, make this movie a must see. The close-ups on the plane & the torpedo boat & how they were used were completely new to me. I heartily recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 2032 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is really a very [[bad]] movie. Why? [[First]] of all, the [[story]] is bad. It is an artificial [[story]], [[combining]] all sorts of things together that make no sense. It just seems a wrong [[experiment]]. Secondly, the actors cannot play in a realistic manner. They cannot even [[talk]] as an actor should. Why did I buy this [[movie]]? And what [[must]] I do with it now? This is really a very [[unfavourable]] movie. Why? [[Firstly]] of all, the [[histories]] is bad. It is an artificial [[narratives]], [[merging]] all sorts of things together that make no sense. It just seems a wrong [[experiences]]. Secondly, the actors cannot play in a realistic manner. They cannot even [[conversation]] as an actor should. Why did I buy this [[filmmaking]]? And what [[should]] I do with it now? --------------------------------------------- Result 2033 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I liked the [[movie]], first of all because it told an interesting [[story]], but the story as told in the movie felt like it was [[condensed]] from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a [[fictional]] South American country, [[also]] a lot to [[fit]] into the time [[available]]. I think it would have been [[much]] better as a six-hour mini-series than it [[turned]] out as a 140-minute movie.

Even though it's rushed, the story doesn't [[skip]] so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.

The acting is [[excellent]]. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is [[outstanding]]. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also [[excellent]]. [[Meryl]] Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. I liked the [[kino]], first of all because it told an interesting [[histories]], but the story as told in the movie felt like it was [[succinct]] from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a [[bogus]] South American country, [[similarly]] a lot to [[suited]] into the time [[accessible]]. I think it would have been [[very]] better as a six-hour mini-series than it [[revolved]] out as a 140-minute movie.

Even though it's rushed, the story doesn't [[jumping]] so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.

The acting is [[wondrous]]. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is [[unresolved]]. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also [[handsome]]. [[Merrill]] Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. --------------------------------------------- Result 2034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll give writer/director William Gove credit for finding someone to finance this ill-conceived "thriller." A good argument for not wasting money subscribing to HBO, let alone buying DVDs based on cover art and blurbs. A pedestrian Dennis Hopper and a game Richard Grieco add nothing significant to their resumes, although the art direction is not half bad. The dialogue will leave you grimacing with wonder at its conceit; this is storytelling at its worst. No tension, no suspense, no dread, no fear, no empathy, no catharsis, no nothing. A few attractive and often nude females spice up the boredom, but this is definitely a film best seen as a trailer. I feel sorry for the guy who greenlighted this thing. Good for late-night, zoned-out viewing only. You have been warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 2035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the only David Zucker movie that does not spoof anything the first of its kind. The funniest movie of 98 with Night at the Roxbury right behind But I did not think Theres something about mary was funny so that doesnt count except for the frank and beans thing he he. Dont listen to the critics especially Roger Ebert he does not know solid entertainment just look at his reviews.Anyway see it you wont be dissapionted --------------------------------------------- Result 2036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[So]] [[many]] [[wonderful]] [[actresses]] in one [[film]] serve as a practical [[invitation]] to the local [[movie]] house so I duly [[responded]]. Here are some [[remarks]]..

Vanessa Redgrave is [[great]] [[even]] while lying in bed. She also looks very old and I don't think this is achieved with much make-up which is a good [[thing]] for the film but a sad thing for us cinema-goers. I think her aging got a bit [[harsh]] in [[recent]] years. Claire [[Danes]] [[continues]] her [[welcome]] [[return]] to the movies and exudes a [[definite]] warmth. Mamie Gummer's [[resemblance]] to her [[mother]] Merly Streep both in terms of [[physical]] appearance and acting style is so [[striking]] that I lost my [[concentration]] to the [[film]] for a [[couple]] of minutes after her [[entrance]]. She is [[surprisingly]] good; [[however]] such a [[resemblance]] has the [[danger]] of [[working]] against her favor. I agree with a [[previous]] comment: Natasha [[Richardson]] definitely had some plastic [[job]] [[done]] to her face. She [[certainly]] does not look like how I remember her from previous [[films]] ("Nell" for example.) [[Both]] she and [[Toni]] [[Collette]] [[sadly]] do not make much [[impression]] [[partly]] because they do not [[look]] [[convincing]] as [[sisters]]. Their interplay is [[weak]]. [[Toni]] Collette additionally is [[way]] too [[old]] for her [[character]]. Glenn [[Close]] and Meryl Streep had to have more screen time. Streep's performance actually is little more than a cameo. Her scenes on the other hand have bigger [[emotional]] resonance than the [[rest]] of the film. Eileen Atkins [[provides]] some welcome dry wit, especially in her second role as an [[imaginary]] nighttime companion to Redgrave's [[character]]. As for the men; Hugh Dancy enlivenes the film [[considerably]] even though he [[gives]] a [[broader]] performance than [[needed]]. As a [[matter]] of fact as [[soon]] as he exits the [[story]] it starts to [[drag]]. It is [[also]] to his [[credit]] that he [[manages]] to create the [[exact]] [[necessary]] [[sense]] of boyish [[charm]] in the viewer. Patrick Wilson on the other hand is a complete void at the [[center]] of the [[film]]. He [[also]] has the misfortune that the script is [[insufficient]] in [[explaining]] why three people (one of them a [[man]]) are so much smitten by this [[man]]. The backstory to this should have been [[developed]] more.

The [[cinematography]] is [[excellent]] as [[expected]]. [[However]] the main summer [[house]] set failed to [[convince]] me. It does not [[look]] natural on the [[top]] of that rocky hill, [[particularly]] with its [[grass]] patch in the [[front]]. A [[bit]] too [[cardboard]] like.

Overall, the film is a classy production, but a seen-it-all-before, cried-at-it-all-before feeling took over me during most of its duration and consequently it failed to make the kind of impact on me that I expected from a tearjerker. However, it still managed to make me thoughtful about the passing of time, about one's expectations from life and the extent to which these are fulfilled or not. Worth trying at least on DVD if not at the movies... [[Therefore]] [[innumerable]] [[gorgeous]] [[actors]] in one [[cinema]] serve as a practical [[invite]] to the local [[film]] house so I duly [[replied]]. Here are some [[observations]]..

Vanessa Redgrave is [[formidable]] [[yet]] while lying in bed. She also looks very old and I don't think this is achieved with much make-up which is a good [[stuff]] for the film but a sad thing for us cinema-goers. I think her aging got a bit [[hard]] in [[freshly]] years. Claire [[Danish]] [[persisted]] her [[salute]] [[homecoming]] to the movies and exudes a [[concrete]] warmth. Mamie Gummer's [[similarity]] to her [[mummy]] Merly Streep both in terms of [[corporal]] appearance and acting style is so [[dramatic]] that I lost my [[focusing]] to the [[flick]] for a [[matching]] of minutes after her [[inlet]]. She is [[unexpectedly]] good; [[yet]] such a [[similarity]] has the [[risk]] of [[collaborating]] against her favor. I agree with a [[preceding]] comment: Natasha [[Roberts]] definitely had some plastic [[employment]] [[played]] to her face. She [[definitely]] does not look like how I remember her from previous [[cinematography]] ("Nell" for example.) [[Whether]] she and [[Tony]] [[Colette]] [[unfortunately]] do not make much [[printing]] [[partially]] because they do not [[gaze]] [[compelling]] as [[siblings]]. Their interplay is [[flimsy]]. [[Tony]] Collette additionally is [[pathways]] too [[elderly]] for her [[characters]]. Glenn [[Closes]] and Meryl Streep had to have more screen time. Streep's performance actually is little more than a cameo. Her scenes on the other hand have bigger [[sentimental]] resonance than the [[remainder]] of the film. Eileen Atkins [[gives]] some welcome dry wit, especially in her second role as an [[fictitious]] nighttime companion to Redgrave's [[characteristics]]. As for the men; Hugh Dancy enlivenes the film [[substantially]] even though he [[provides]] a [[extensive]] performance than [[required]]. As a [[question]] of fact as [[swiftly]] as he exits the [[histories]] it starts to [[towed]]. It is [[apart]] to his [[credits]] that he [[administered]] to create the [[correct]] [[requisite]] [[feeling]] of boyish [[amulet]] in the viewer. Patrick Wilson on the other hand is a complete void at the [[centre]] of the [[movies]]. He [[further]] has the misfortune that the script is [[inadequate]] in [[clarifying]] why three people (one of them a [[men]]) are so much smitten by this [[men]]. The backstory to this should have been [[formulated]] more.

The [[cinematic]] is [[wondrous]] as [[scheduled]]. [[Still]] the main summer [[household]] set failed to [[convincing]] me. It does not [[gaze]] natural on the [[supreme]] of that rocky hill, [[namely]] with its [[grasses]] patch in the [[newsweek]]. A [[bite]] too [[carton]] like.

Overall, the film is a classy production, but a seen-it-all-before, cried-at-it-all-before feeling took over me during most of its duration and consequently it failed to make the kind of impact on me that I expected from a tearjerker. However, it still managed to make me thoughtful about the passing of time, about one's expectations from life and the extent to which these are fulfilled or not. Worth trying at least on DVD if not at the movies... --------------------------------------------- Result 2037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is one of Michael Keaton's best. Throughout the film he is 'on'. With co-stars like Ms. Henner, Joe Piscopo and Danny DeVito, you can't go wrong. Great laughs, great fun for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 2038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[For]] a low [[budget]] [[project]], the Film was a success. The [[story]] is interesting, and the actors were convincing. [[Eva]] Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show "Dragnet," is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the [[director]] [[shows]] his [[talent]] by taking on [[many]] roles for his [[project]]. Of [[course]] this low [[budget]] film [[could]] use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the music keeps this script [[moving]]. [[Although]] this [[film]] has it's [[share]] of [[problems]], such as [[continuity]], I [[must]] say that I would [[rent]] the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary. [[In]] a low [[budgets]] [[projects]], the Film was a success. The [[histories]] is interesting, and the actors were convincing. [[Evy]] Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show "Dragnet," is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the [[headmaster]] [[exhibitions]] his [[talents]] by taking on [[several]] roles for his [[projects]]. Of [[cours]] this low [[budgets]] film [[would]] use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the music keeps this script [[shifting]]. [[While]] this [[movie]] has it's [[interchange]] of [[trouble]], such as [[continuation]], I [[gotta]] say that I would [[renting]] the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary. --------------------------------------------- Result 2039 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] With [[Harry]] [[Callahan]] getting up in [[years]], the inevitable `old man with a chip on his shoulder' story had to come into play eventually. Callahan, looking fragile [[sometimes]] and out of place, his demeanor still was [[unwavering]]. Thankfully, this film took some time off to [[develop]] a different type of story, one that might reinvent the Dirty Harry and the whole genre. While the film [[fell]] [[short]] in doing so, it was still an [[excellent]] [[addition]] to the series, [[even]] if it was getting a little out of place during a time of silly fashion trends and New Wave music. With [[Hari]] [[Callaghan]] getting up in [[ages]], the inevitable `old man with a chip on his shoulder' story had to come into play eventually. Callahan, looking fragile [[intermittently]] and out of place, his demeanor still was [[unflinching]]. Thankfully, this film took some time off to [[elaborate]] a different type of story, one that might reinvent the Dirty Harry and the whole genre. While the film [[tumbled]] [[succinct]] in doing so, it was still an [[wondrous]] [[addendum]] to the series, [[yet]] if it was getting a little out of place during a time of silly fashion trends and New Wave music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[like]] [[Brad]] [[Pitt]] enormously. He is an [[actor]] with [[brains]] and wit, not to mention face, pectorals and all the [[rest]]. Since I saw him in "Thelma and [[Louise]]" a thought has been bothering me, who does he remind me of? "[[Troy]]" did it for me. He is the new Brigitte Bardot. The differences are obvious of course. Male, American etc but Brigitte Bardot [[comes]] to [[mind]] nonetheless. He is so [[beautiful]] that he is at his most effective when he plays against it. "Kalifornia" "12 Monkeys" "Fight Club" "Snatch" His self deprecating humor makes him human, [[almost]] accessible. Fortunately "Troy" will soon be forgotten. Only still photographs with Pitt, semi naked in ravishing sprint positions will decorate the walls of legions of salivating fans. [[Strange]], "Das Boot" is one of the great films of the second part of the 20th Century. What is Wolfgang Petersen doing directing this? Well, I suppose it would be very hard to say no at the chance of working with the new Brigitte Bardot. I [[iike]] [[Rad]] [[Beit]] enormously. He is an [[protagonist]] with [[neurons]] and wit, not to mention face, pectorals and all the [[stays]]. Since I saw him in "Thelma and [[Luis]]" a thought has been bothering me, who does he remind me of? "[[Trojans]]" did it for me. He is the new Brigitte Bardot. The differences are obvious of course. Male, American etc but Brigitte Bardot [[occurs]] to [[esprit]] nonetheless. He is so [[sumptuous]] that he is at his most effective when he plays against it. "Kalifornia" "12 Monkeys" "Fight Club" "Snatch" His self deprecating humor makes him human, [[practically]] accessible. Fortunately "Troy" will soon be forgotten. Only still photographs with Pitt, semi naked in ravishing sprint positions will decorate the walls of legions of salivating fans. [[Peculiar]], "Das Boot" is one of the great films of the second part of the 20th Century. What is Wolfgang Petersen doing directing this? Well, I suppose it would be very hard to say no at the chance of working with the new Brigitte Bardot. --------------------------------------------- Result 2041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This final Voyager episode begins 23 years in the future. Voyager has made it back home. In the many years it took to return tho, the Vulcan Tuvoks' mind has been destroyed. He carried a disease they were too late getting home to cure.

Captain Janeway comes across aliens who have time travel technology. She realizes, there's a Warp Conduit in the Delta Quadrant that could bring Voyager home immediately - if she could go back in time and notify Voyager. There's one problem. The Conduit is deep inside Borg Space.

Janeway visits Tuvok. He's like a child. He scribbles tho, obsessed, working on math problems or movie reviews or something, he's convinced are important somehow. In the institution, Tuvok cries, asking for 'Janeway' to please, please come back to him.

Janeway decides to commandeer a federation shuttle and equip it with weapons technology 20 years ahead of the Borg, in the hopes of going back in time and using this new technology to guide Voyager to the Warp Conduit.

When she goes back in time and links up with Voyager, Janeway meets her younger self. The two captains disagree, arguing about the plan. The real-captain visits Tuvok asking him if it's true he has a brain disorder. Tuvok admits it's true, but it can't be cured by the facilities on the ship so he's kept it to himself.

The young Captain agrees to the older Captains' plan. To increase their chances of success the older Janeway plans to distract the Borg with her shuttle craft. The Borg actually capture Janeway and her shuttle. The Borg Queen personally assimilates Captain Janeway. But Janeway's expected this! the Borg Queen has assimilated a virus into herself that kills her. With the Borg Queen dead Voyager makes it thru the Warp Conduit back to federation space. --------------------------------------------- Result 2042 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Very, very humdrum [[movie]] fare here with [[Stella]] [[Stevens]] [[taking]] [[directions]] from [[someone]] in [[disguise]](it didn't [[take]] me long to [[guess]] who it was) in [[Old]] Nevada [[Town]] outside Vegas for a [[money]] [[heist]] in the [[Circus]] [[Circus]] [[Hotel]] in Las Vegas. [[Stevens]] [[leads]] her girl gang of three, and they find out that they [[must]] [[act]] much [[quicker]] than had been [[anticipated]]. Despite some neat looks at [[Las]] Vegas in the 70's, very average [[yet]] [[credible]] acting from most involved, and a plot [[line]] with [[potential]], [[Las]] Vegas [[Lady]] [[lays]] one [[big]] [[boring]] egg. It [[seems]] forever for the [[film]] to kick into gear,and when it does it just sputters here and there and never really speeds up. I was somewhat disappointed with this film. Sure, I wasn't expecting anything great, but I at [[least]] thought this might be one of those neat exploitation films from the 70's or something like it. Not even [[close]]. No one dies. There is a lame gunfight between creaky [[Stuart]] Whitman and officious George DiCenzo, one year [[prior]] to his [[grand]] performance as the prosecuting [[attorney]] Bugliosa in Helter [[Skelter]]. The gunfight has all the suspense of watching a [[waterfall]]. There is one [[punch]] and one head hit with a blunt [[instrument]]. [[Beyond]] that [[nothing]] in terms of [[action]]. And as for the [[girls]], don't [[expect]] much there [[either]]. Stella and her [[girls]](both very [[mediocre]] [[yet]] pretty talents, get in a sauna and a [[bath]]. What do we [[see]]? [[Nothing]] but a fleeting side profile. [[Stella]] wears these nice open blouses accentuating her [[real]] [[talents]], but I wish she [[would]] have been a bit more [[open]] with her performance. That [[way]] I [[could]] [[write]] one thing that [[would]] [[recommend]] the [[film]]. Alas, it was not to be, and I have [[little]] to say in this film's favor. It isn't a horrible [[film]] in any way, it just has [[nothing]] going for it [[either]]. YAWN. Very, very humdrum [[filmmaking]] fare here with [[Stell]] [[Stephens]] [[take]] [[directive]] from [[everybody]] in [[outfit]](it didn't [[taking]] me long to [[guessing]] who it was) in [[Elderly]] Nevada [[Cities]] outside Vegas for a [[cash]] [[robbery]] in the [[Carnival]] [[Carnival]] [[Motel]] in Las Vegas. [[Roberts]] [[leeds]] her girl gang of three, and they find out that they [[gotta]] [[acts]] much [[sooner]] than had been [[planned]]. Despite some neat looks at [[Angeles]] Vegas in the 70's, very average [[nonetheless]] [[dependable]] acting from most involved, and a plot [[bloodline]] with [[prospective]], [[La]] Vegas [[Damsel]] [[laying]] one [[prodigious]] [[bore]] egg. It [[seem]] forever for the [[filmmaking]] to kick into gear,and when it does it just sputters here and there and never really speeds up. I was somewhat disappointed with this film. Sure, I wasn't expecting anything great, but I at [[less]] thought this might be one of those neat exploitation films from the 70's or something like it. Not even [[shutting]]. No one dies. There is a lame gunfight between creaky [[Stewart]] Whitman and officious George DiCenzo, one year [[ago]] to his [[grande]] performance as the prosecuting [[attorneys]] Bugliosa in Helter [[Helter]]. The gunfight has all the suspense of watching a [[cascade]]. There is one [[punching]] and one head hit with a blunt [[devices]]. [[Afterlife]] that [[none]] in terms of [[efforts]]. And as for the [[girl]], don't [[expects]] much there [[neither]]. Stella and her [[dame]](both very [[lackluster]] [[however]] pretty talents, get in a sauna and a [[swim]]. What do we [[seeing]]? [[Nothin]] but a fleeting side profile. [[Stell]] wears these nice open blouses accentuating her [[veritable]] [[talent]], but I wish she [[could]] have been a bit more [[opening]] with her performance. That [[ways]] I [[wo]] [[handwriting]] one thing that [[ought]] [[recommends]] the [[kino]]. Alas, it was not to be, and I have [[small]] to say in this film's favor. It isn't a horrible [[kino]] in any way, it just has [[none]] going for it [[neither]]. YAWN. --------------------------------------------- Result 2043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is about a man who has been too caught up with the accepted convention of success, trying to be ever upwardly mobile, working hard so that he could be proud of owning his own home. He assumes this is all there is to life until he accidentally takes up dancing, all because he wanted to get a closer look of a beautiful girl that he sees by the dance studio everyday while riding the subway on his way home.

His was infatuated with her at first, going to the dance class just to idolize her, but he eventually lets himself go and gets himself into the dancing. It eventually becomes apparent to him that there is more to life than working yourself to death. There is a set of oddball characters also learning in the studio, giving the film a lot of laughs and some sense of bonding between the dejected.

There is also revelations of various characters, including the girl he initially admired, giving some depth to them by showing their blemished past and their struggle to overcome it.

The dancing was also engaging, with the big competition at the end, but it is not the usual story where our underdog come out at the top by winning it. Instead, there are downfalls, revelations and redemption.

All these makes it a moving and fun film to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] First, it takes a full half hour to [[get]] Hackman out of [[jail]] and to start doing the [[job]]. What a waste of time, we all [[know]] Hackman is [[getting]] out to do some [[job]] for his masters, why waste [[almost]] a third of the [[movie]] on these sequences. Then Hackman [[stays]] in a hotel and the [[story]] [[arc]] again goes [[nowhere]], [[simply]] [[proving]] to us that Hackman is under [[close]] watch and anything he [[says]] or does is [[know]] by the masters. [[Again]], another 20 minutes. [[Then]] more wasted time showing the [[reunion]] with his [[wife]]. All of this should have [[taken]] 10-15 minutes at most [[simply]] as a set-up for the [[real]] action, [[intrigue]] and [[plot]] [[twists]]. By the time the [[real]] action gets going, I was so [[bored]] that I just [[wanted]] the [[movie]] to end. Hackman is [[great]] as usual, and the other [[actors]] as well, but this is a dud of the first [[magnitude]]. First, it takes a full half hour to [[got]] Hackman out of [[internment]] and to start doing the [[jobs]]. What a waste of time, we all [[savoir]] Hackman is [[obtain]] out to do some [[jobs]] for his masters, why waste [[hardly]] a third of the [[filmmaking]] on these sequences. Then Hackman [[resting]] in a hotel and the [[tales]] [[archangel]] again goes [[somewhere]], [[straightforward]] [[proves]] to us that Hackman is under [[closed]] watch and anything he [[contends]] or does is [[savoir]] by the masters. [[Yet]], another 20 minutes. [[Thus]] more wasted time showing the [[reunification]] with his [[femme]]. All of this should have [[took]] 10-15 minutes at most [[purely]] as a set-up for the [[true]] action, [[plot]] and [[intrigue]] [[kinks]]. By the time the [[veritable]] action gets going, I was so [[drilled]] that I just [[wished]] the [[film]] to end. Hackman is [[marvellous]] as usual, and the other [[players]] as well, but this is a dud of the first [[amplitude]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ((NB: Spoiler warning, such as it is!))

First off, this is a teen slasher flick -- the Spam-In-A-Cabin genre, as Joe Bob Briggs piquantly put it. If you're looking for Roshambo, this isn't it and wasn't going to BE it. I'm desperately unimpressed by stabs at its cinematography, directing or acting performances.

Secondly, this wasn't Zuniga's first horror flick, it was her first screen appearance period, cinema, TV, whatever. For what it is worth; neither is Daphne Zuniga Susan Sarandon or Katherine Hepburn.

Thirdly, you have to give even a lame slasher flick props. Sure, it follows the deeply insulting formulaic message of its genre: any young woman having or showing interest in sex is beef on the hoof, and the harvest time is now.

Except this one gives the chop to the sweet, virginal protagonist as well! Now THERE is a mediocre teen death film that has the courage of its convictions! Interesting that this was said ingenue's only film role. Another One Hit Wonder, except that term gives the lass too much credit.

(Then again, this film probably has one of the highest percentage of one-movie actors in history. Of the nineteen credited actors, a whopping thirteen never appeared in any other film. Three appeared in one other movie by the same producers. Only one other besides Zuniga has as many as six screen credits. What was this, the Has Been And Never Were Mutual Aid Society?)

Granted, I saw this a long time ago on late night cable when I was bored and never anticipate being that bored in my life again, but I see no reason to hunt down everyone involved and toss them in the incinerator with Joanne.

2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surely no Saturday morning TV kids' show was ever done this poorly. After all, those producers had to count on the audience coming back. Well, in this awful offering, they could at least count the money they saved on sets. The script could have been a reject from some long-forgotten space opera serial, with a few smarmy lines added for cool-dude Gerald Mohr to murmur to Naura Hayden. No director could have done anything decent with such a loony storyline, so the action just plods boringly along. The spaceship props are absurd--a Bulova wall clock and portable typewriter, for example--but the planet sets have got to be some of the worst in cinematic history. Most are crude drawings, and it's all bathed in an often misfocused red light. Even Mohr's bare hairy chest is used as a prop. And it's a bad one--as rib-thin as the plot. Any viewer who can make it to the end of this movie will hear a message from the Martians--and will probably agree completely! --------------------------------------------- Result 2047 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This "coming of age" film deals with the experiences of two young girls, Dani and Maureen, as they learn about life and love one fateful summer.

Directed by Robert Mulligan, famous for his superb work in "To Kill a Mockingbird," the film never hits a [[false]] note. All the acting is [[superb]]. As Dani, Reese Witherspoon makes a stunning film debut. Watching this beautifully photographed and [[superbly]] directed and edited film, I [[felt]] like I was looking through a window to reality, rather than watching a movie.

I have [[watched]] this movie at least 5 [[times]], and can honestly say that it is one of the single [[best]] [[movies]] ever made about being young, being in love, and going through the feelings, challenges, and changes of young adulthood. Families with children between 10 and 15 should watch it together, and use it as a discussion piece, as it raises a number of issues about sibling rivalry, how to deal with being in love, the responsibilities of a parent, etc. This "coming of age" film deals with the experiences of two young girls, Dani and Maureen, as they learn about life and love one fateful summer.

Directed by Robert Mulligan, famous for his superb work in "To Kill a Mockingbird," the film never hits a [[specious]] note. All the acting is [[funky]]. As Dani, Reese Witherspoon makes a stunning film debut. Watching this beautifully photographed and [[beautifully]] directed and edited film, I [[deemed]] like I was looking through a window to reality, rather than watching a movie.

I have [[observed]] this movie at least 5 [[moments]], and can honestly say that it is one of the single [[better]] [[cinematography]] ever made about being young, being in love, and going through the feelings, challenges, and changes of young adulthood. Families with children between 10 and 15 should watch it together, and use it as a discussion piece, as it raises a number of issues about sibling rivalry, how to deal with being in love, the responsibilities of a parent, etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 2048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] There are [[many]] illnesses born in the [[mind]] of man which have been given [[life]] in [[modern]] times. Constant vigilance or accrued information in the realm of Pyschosis, have kept psychologists, counselors and psychiatrists busy with enough work to last them decades. Occasionally, some of these [[mental]] phenomenon are discover by those with no knowledge of their remedy or even of their existence. That is the [[premise]] of the [[film]] entitled " The [[Night]] Listner." It tells the [[story]] of a popular [[radio]] host called Gabriel Noon (Robin [[Williams]]) who spends his evenings enthralling his audiences with vivid [[stories]] about Gay lifestyles. Perhaps its because his show is losing it's authentic veneer which causes Noon to admit he is no longer himself. Feeling abandoned by both his lover Jess (Bobby Cannavale) and his and best friend (Joe Morton), he seeks shelter in his deepening despair and isolation. It is here, a mysterious voice in the night asks him for help. Noon needs to feel useful and [[reaches]] out to the desperate voice which belongs to a 14 year old boy called Peter (Rory Culkin). In reading the boy's harrowing manuscript which depicts the early life and sexual [[abuse]] at the hands of his brutal parents, Noon is [[captivated]] and wants to help. However, things are not what they seem and Noon soon finds himself en-wrapped in an elusive and bizarre tale torn right out of a medical nightmare. This movie is pure [[Robin]] Williams and were it not for [[Toni]] Collette who plays Donna D. Logand, [[Sandra]] [[Oh]] as Anna and [[John]] Cullum as [[pop]], this might be comical. Instead, this may prove to be one of William's more serious performances. *** There are [[countless]] illnesses born in the [[intellect]] of man which have been given [[vie]] in [[contemporary]] times. Constant vigilance or accrued information in the realm of Pyschosis, have kept psychologists, counselors and psychiatrists busy with enough work to last them decades. Occasionally, some of these [[spiritual]] phenomenon are discover by those with no knowledge of their remedy or even of their existence. That is the [[hypothesis]] of the [[cinematographic]] entitled " The [[Nightly]] Listner." It tells the [[narratives]] of a popular [[radios]] host called Gabriel Noon (Robin [[William]]) who spends his evenings enthralling his audiences with vivid [[narratives]] about Gay lifestyles. Perhaps its because his show is losing it's authentic veneer which causes Noon to admit he is no longer himself. Feeling abandoned by both his lover Jess (Bobby Cannavale) and his and best friend (Joe Morton), he seeks shelter in his deepening despair and isolation. It is here, a mysterious voice in the night asks him for help. Noon needs to feel useful and [[attained]] out to the desperate voice which belongs to a 14 year old boy called Peter (Rory Culkin). In reading the boy's harrowing manuscript which depicts the early life and sexual [[mistreat]] at the hands of his brutal parents, Noon is [[enthralled]] and wants to help. However, things are not what they seem and Noon soon finds himself en-wrapped in an elusive and bizarre tale torn right out of a medical nightmare. This movie is pure [[Robyn]] Williams and were it not for [[Tony]] Collette who plays Donna D. Logand, [[Xander]] [[Aw]] as Anna and [[Giovanni]] Cullum as [[papa]], this might be comical. Instead, this may prove to be one of William's more serious performances. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 2049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] OK so a 10 for a 2 1/2 star movie you [[ask]]?...well see this one and maybe it will make more sense.. Hitchcock never [[blended]] scenes together [[better]]....The film weaves scenes together flawlessly from the start and yet you don't [[get]] that [[scattered]] [[feeling]] you sometimes get when a movie runs you through the many characters it attempts to develop. You [[sense]] that the [[characters]] will show you something unusual about themselves and then they don't [[disappoint]] you when they do. [[Screenwriter]]/[[Producer]] Phil Hay's [[surreal]] [[tale]] of life, [[blended]] with an [[absolutely]] [[superb]] soundtrack makes you [[think]] more about the 6 [[degrees]] of [[separation]] in [[life]] than the movie by the same title...I will be [[looking]] for more good things from this [[producer]] in the [[future]]. OK so a 10 for a 2 1/2 star movie you [[poser]]?...well see this one and maybe it will make more sense.. Hitchcock never [[mixing]] scenes together [[best]]....The film weaves scenes together flawlessly from the start and yet you don't [[gets]] that [[littered]] [[sense]] you sometimes get when a movie runs you through the many characters it attempts to develop. You [[feeling]] that the [[character]] will show you something unusual about themselves and then they don't [[defraud]] you when they do. [[Writer]]/[[Manufacturer]] Phil Hay's [[unreal]] [[narratives]] of life, [[blending]] with an [[totally]] [[wondrous]] soundtrack makes you [[thinking]] more about the 6 [[grades]] of [[segregation]] in [[vie]] than the movie by the same title...I will be [[searching]] for more good things from this [[producers]] in the [[impending]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I saw Crispin Glover's "What Is It?" at the Ann Arbor film festival. Admittedly, the film was at least aptly named, because I got the distinct sense that even the writer/director [[could]] provide no [[answer]]. At the question and answer session after the screening, [[Mr]]. Glover said that the film was originally meant to be a short film to show the virtue of using actors with down-syndrome. However, this is in itself not enough of a reason to create a film. [[Actors]] are, in my opinion, building blocks for a larger vision - a larger vision that seemed [[muddled]] at best and absent at worst.

Crispin [[Glover]] also said that he wanted to address taboo subjects. Well, he does do that. But why? The [[film]] seems to have no stance, no reason for addressing anything. Does he feel these things shouldn't be taboo? The [[film]] doesn't [[even]] give me an [[indicator]] of that. Taboo for the sake of taboo is not interesting. It can't [[even]] afford to [[make]] the taboo disturbing or inciting on any [[level]] because he hasn't made the audience care in any [[way]].

[[Ignoring]] problems with the concept for a moment, the thing that [[actually]] shocked me most was how poorly the [[film]] was put [[together]]. The editing, [[cinematography]], and other technical [[aspects]] [[seemed]] [[frequently]] to be [[extremely]] amateur. Glover said 125-150 thousand dollars went into the [[movie]], and I feel that the [[money]] should have been spent on different [[designers]] (Glover [[actually]] did some design himself - I know I saw at least sound design in the credits). The [[painted]] sets are okay (not great), but used poorly. Parts feel like a [[photographed]] stage play - which would be fine if that went to any sort of purpose, but in Glover's hands it just feels sloppy. Other parts are filmed [[like]] a sort of [[Home]] Movie, of inferior quality to a lot of the stuff I see first-time filmmakers do on iMovie.

Perhaps the [[biggest]] problem with "What Is It?" is I can't even [[understand]] how [[seriously]] the film is to be taken. There are some parts that feel like Glover is [[screaming]] at you to think seriously. At other points, he seems off on his own little joke. Perhaps he meant for this to be ironic, or meaningful in some way, but I just felt that Glover couldn't even get himself to give his film any sort of serious attention.

Glover said he originally wanted it to be a short film. If only it had been. At seventy-two minutes, the film runs out of imagery and ideas in the first twenty, and it is arguable if the ideas were formulated enough to claim that they were even there for that period of time. I saw Crispin Glover's "What Is It?" at the Ann Arbor film festival. Admittedly, the film was at least aptly named, because I got the distinct sense that even the writer/director [[would]] provide no [[replied]]. At the question and answer session after the screening, [[Mister]]. Glover said that the film was originally meant to be a short film to show the virtue of using actors with down-syndrome. However, this is in itself not enough of a reason to create a film. [[Protagonists]] are, in my opinion, building blocks for a larger vision - a larger vision that seemed [[puzzled]] at best and absent at worst.

Crispin [[Grover]] also said that he wanted to address taboo subjects. Well, he does do that. But why? The [[filmmaking]] seems to have no stance, no reason for addressing anything. Does he feel these things shouldn't be taboo? The [[filmmaking]] doesn't [[yet]] give me an [[indicators]] of that. Taboo for the sake of taboo is not interesting. It can't [[yet]] afford to [[deliver]] the taboo disturbing or inciting on any [[grades]] because he hasn't made the audience care in any [[pathway]].

[[Ignores]] problems with the concept for a moment, the thing that [[indeed]] shocked me most was how poorly the [[filmmaking]] was put [[jointly]]. The editing, [[film]], and other technical [[things]] [[appeared]] [[often]] to be [[very]] amateur. Glover said 125-150 thousand dollars went into the [[filmmaking]], and I feel that the [[cash]] should have been spent on different [[developers]] (Glover [[genuinely]] did some design himself - I know I saw at least sound design in the credits). The [[brushed]] sets are okay (not great), but used poorly. Parts feel like a [[pictured]] stage play - which would be fine if that went to any sort of purpose, but in Glover's hands it just feels sloppy. Other parts are filmed [[iike]] a sort of [[Housing]] Movie, of inferior quality to a lot of the stuff I see first-time filmmakers do on iMovie.

Perhaps the [[greater]] problem with "What Is It?" is I can't even [[fathom]] how [[conscientiously]] the film is to be taken. There are some parts that feel like Glover is [[yelling]] at you to think seriously. At other points, he seems off on his own little joke. Perhaps he meant for this to be ironic, or meaningful in some way, but I just felt that Glover couldn't even get himself to give his film any sort of serious attention.

Glover said he originally wanted it to be a short film. If only it had been. At seventy-two minutes, the film runs out of imagery and ideas in the first twenty, and it is arguable if the ideas were formulated enough to claim that they were even there for that period of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2051 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] was great the first [[time]] I [[saw]] it, when it was [[called]] "Lost in Translation." But somehow Bill [[Murray]] turned into an eccentric black [[man]] [[played]] by Morgan Freeman, [[Scarlett]] Johansson turned into a cranky [[Latino]] [[woman]] played by [[Paz]] Vega, and Tokyo, [[Japan]] turned into Carson, California. [[Instead]] of [[meaningful]] [[conversations]] and silence we [[enjoyed]] in Translation, we [[get]] [[meaningless]] [[blabbering]] in 10 Items that verges on [[annoying]]. [[Instead]] of [[characters]] that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that [[spew]] [[pointless]] advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most [[annoying]] part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a [[hurry]] to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less [[lists]] of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to [[yell]] at them saying, "Didn't you [[say]] you had [[somewhere]] to be? What the heck are doing? A minute [[ago]] you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!" Until I saw this movie, I never [[truly]] understood how something [[could]] "insist upon itself," but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and [[unsympathetic]]…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project. This [[filmmaking]] was great the first [[times]] I [[sawthe]] it, when it was [[drew]] "Lost in Translation." But somehow Bill [[Moray]] turned into an eccentric black [[bloke]] [[served]] by Morgan Freeman, [[Scarlet]] Johansson turned into a cranky [[Hispanic]] [[girl]] played by [[Baz]] Vega, and Tokyo, [[Japans]] turned into Carson, California. [[However]] of [[valid]] [[talk]] and silence we [[adored]] in Translation, we [[obtains]] [[pointless]] [[yammering]] in 10 Items that verges on [[exasperating]]. [[However]] of [[personages]] that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that [[spewed]] [[superfluous]] advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most [[pesky]] part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a [[rush]] to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less [[listing]] of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to [[cree]] at them saying, "Didn't you [[tell]] you had [[someplace]] to be? What the heck are doing? A minute [[before]] you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!" Until I saw this movie, I never [[really]] understood how something [[wo]] "insist upon itself," but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and [[insensitive]]…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project. --------------------------------------------- Result 2052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Possibly]] the most [[brilliant]] thing about Che: [[Part]] Two, as we [[begin]] to [[integrate]] it with Part One in our [[minds]], is that there is no [[clarification]] of why Che [[chose]] to confidentially abscond from [[Cuba]] after the revolution, no allusion to his experience in the Congo, no clarification of why he [[chose]] Bolivia as his [[subsequent]] setting for a coup d'etat, no [[allusion]] to the political [[decisions]] he made as a young man motorcycling across South America, which Walter Salles has [[given]] prominent familiarity. [[Extraordinary]] focus is [[given]] to Che meeting the volunteers who accompany his guerrilla factions. Yet [[hardly]] any endeavor is made to [[single]] them out as individuals, to establish involved relationships. He is reasonably unreasonable. Che drives an unbreakable doctrine to leave no wounded man behind. But there is no feeling that he is deeply directly concerned with his men. It is the concept.

[[In]] Part 1, in Cuba, the rebels are welcomed by the people of the villages, given food and cover, supported in what grows to be a victorious revolution. Here, in Bolivia, not much understanding is apparent. Villagers expose him. They protect government troops, not his own. When he expounds on the onesidedness of the government medical system, his audience appears uninterested. You cannot lead a people into revolution if they do not want to comply. Soderbergh shows U.S. military advisers working with the Bolivians, but doesn't fault the United States for Che's collapse. Che seems to have just misfigured his fight and the place where he wanted to have it.

In showcasing both wars, Soderbergh doesn't build his battle scenes as actions with specific results. Che's men attack and are attacked. They exchange fire with faraway assailants. There is generally a cut to the group in the aftershock of combat, its death toll not paused for. This is not a war movie. It is about one man's reasonably unreasonable drive to endure. There is no elaborate cinematography. Soderbergh looks firmly at Che's inflexible [[dedication]]. There are [[remarkable]] [[sporadic]] visceral shots, but being few they are all the more powerful, such as Che's POV shot during his final beats. There is an abundance of the terrain, where these [[men]] [[live]] for [[weeks]] at a [[time]], and the all-consuming effect is of languor, Guevara himself having malaria [[part]] of the time.

Benicio Del Toro, one of the film's [[producers]], gives a champion's performance, not [[least]] because it's modest. He isn't portrayed as the cutting edge [[like]] most [[epic]] heroes. [[In]] Cuba, he arises in conquest, in Bolivia, he [[falls]] to the reverse, and occasionally is actually difficult to distinguish behind a tangle of beard and hair. Del Toro illustrates not so much an identity as an attitude. You may think the film is too long. I think there's a genuine cause for its breadth. Guevara's affairs in Cuba and particularly Bolivia was not a sequence of episodes and sketches, but an undertaking of staying power that might virtually be called [[insane]]. In the end, Che as a whole or in parts is a commercially ballsy movie, one where its director begins by understanding the limits innate in cinematic biography and working progressively [[within]] those means. [[Potentially]] the most [[wondrous]] thing about Che: [[Party]] Two, as we [[launches]] to [[embed]] it with Part One in our [[esprit]], is that there is no [[details]] of why Che [[selects]] to confidentially abscond from [[Cuban]] after the revolution, no allusion to his experience in the Congo, no clarification of why he [[picks]] Bolivia as his [[posterior]] setting for a coup d'etat, no [[hint]] to the political [[rulings]] he made as a young man motorcycling across South America, which Walter Salles has [[afforded]] prominent familiarity. [[Spectacular]] focus is [[yielded]] to Che meeting the volunteers who accompany his guerrilla factions. Yet [[barely]] any endeavor is made to [[exclusive]] them out as individuals, to establish involved relationships. He is reasonably unreasonable. Che drives an unbreakable doctrine to leave no wounded man behind. But there is no feeling that he is deeply directly concerned with his men. It is the concept.

[[Among]] Part 1, in Cuba, the rebels are welcomed by the people of the villages, given food and cover, supported in what grows to be a victorious revolution. Here, in Bolivia, not much understanding is apparent. Villagers expose him. They protect government troops, not his own. When he expounds on the onesidedness of the government medical system, his audience appears uninterested. You cannot lead a people into revolution if they do not want to comply. Soderbergh shows U.S. military advisers working with the Bolivians, but doesn't fault the United States for Che's collapse. Che seems to have just misfigured his fight and the place where he wanted to have it.

In showcasing both wars, Soderbergh doesn't build his battle scenes as actions with specific results. Che's men attack and are attacked. They exchange fire with faraway assailants. There is generally a cut to the group in the aftershock of combat, its death toll not paused for. This is not a war movie. It is about one man's reasonably unreasonable drive to endure. There is no elaborate cinematography. Soderbergh looks firmly at Che's inflexible [[pledges]]. There are [[phenomenal]] [[casual]] visceral shots, but being few they are all the more powerful, such as Che's POV shot during his final beats. There is an abundance of the terrain, where these [[males]] [[viva]] for [[chou]] at a [[period]], and the all-consuming effect is of languor, Guevara himself having malaria [[parte]] of the time.

Benicio Del Toro, one of the film's [[grower]], gives a champion's performance, not [[fewer]] because it's modest. He isn't portrayed as the cutting edge [[iike]] most [[odyssey]] heroes. [[Across]] Cuba, he arises in conquest, in Bolivia, he [[autumn]] to the reverse, and occasionally is actually difficult to distinguish behind a tangle of beard and hair. Del Toro illustrates not so much an identity as an attitude. You may think the film is too long. I think there's a genuine cause for its breadth. Guevara's affairs in Cuba and particularly Bolivia was not a sequence of episodes and sketches, but an undertaking of staying power that might virtually be called [[coot]]. In the end, Che as a whole or in parts is a commercially ballsy movie, one where its director begins by understanding the limits innate in cinematic biography and working progressively [[inside]] those means. --------------------------------------------- Result 2053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This movie should have been named Need For Speed: The [[Movie]]. For those who have not played the games Need For [[Speed]] is mostly about hot cars and [[beautiful]] [[women]] and almost no plot. This applies perfectly to Redline. The only thing about this movie that was A-Level were the [[cars]]. The acting seemed forced and scripted, the premise was flimsy at best, and the plot was almost nonexistent. I only really [[watched]] this movie to see how [[bad]] it was and, while it was pretty bad, it could have been worse. And at [[least]] it was entertaining. I just wish they had showed Eddie Griffin crashing the Enzo somewhere in the movie. All in all, don't pay for it, don't go out of your way to see it, but if it's on Showtime or HBO and there isn't anything else on, it's a decent distraction. This movie should have been named Need For Speed: The [[Filmmaking]]. For those who have not played the games Need For [[Swiftness]] is mostly about hot cars and [[sumptuous]] [[mujer]] and almost no plot. This applies perfectly to Redline. The only thing about this movie that was A-Level were the [[carriages]]. The acting seemed forced and scripted, the premise was flimsy at best, and the plot was almost nonexistent. I only really [[seen]] this movie to see how [[naughty]] it was and, while it was pretty bad, it could have been worse. And at [[lowest]] it was entertaining. I just wish they had showed Eddie Griffin crashing the Enzo somewhere in the movie. All in all, don't pay for it, don't go out of your way to see it, but if it's on Showtime or HBO and there isn't anything else on, it's a decent distraction. --------------------------------------------- Result 2054 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Veteran [[director]] and producer [[Allan]] Dwan, whose huge string of films [[includes]] both the utterly forgettable and the recurrently [[shown]] (for example, John Wayne in "Sands of Iwo Jima") tried his hand at a big musical with "I Dream of Jeanie." Harnessing a lead cast of [[singers]] with little past [[film]] [[experience]] and, as it turned out, virtually no [[future]], he [[spun]] a fictional and in no small [[part]] [[offensive]] [[story]] about the great American songwriter, Stephen Foster.

[[Bill]] Shirley is the [[young]], lovestruck Foster [[whose]] [[kindness]] to slaves includes giving the [[money]] saved for an engagement [[ring]] to [[pay]] the hospital [[cost]] for an injured [[little]] [[black]] boy. His intended is Inez McDowell (Muriel [[Lawrence]]) whose [[pesky]] younger sister, Jeanie ([[Eileen]] [[Christy]]), is [[slowly]] [[realizing]] she's in [[love]] with the [[nearly]] impecunious song-smith. Foster is in [[love]] with Inez who is [[revolted]] by the composer's Number 1 on the [[Levee]] Hit Parade Tune, "O [[Susannah]]." Enter minstrel [[Edwin]] P.Christy ([[Ray]] Middleton) to [[help]] [[launch]] the profit-making [[phase]] of Foster's career.

This is, by the musical-film [[standards]] of the early Fifties, a big production. The sets are lavish in that special Hollywood way that portrayed [[fakes]] with all the trimmings. The singers aren't half bad and the [[Foster]] songs are almost impossible to ruin.

But this is also a literal [[whitewash]] of the antebellum [[South]]. The [[biggest]] number [[features]] black-face for all on [[stage]], an [[historical]] anomaly and a contemporary [[piece]] of [[unthinking]] racism. [[Were]] these portrayals of blacks anywhere near [[reality]], the abolitionists would be [[rightly]] [[condemned]] for [[interfering]] with so beneficent an [[institution]].

"I Dream of Jeanie" [[apparently]] [[sank]] into the studio's vault with barely a [[death]] whisper. Now revived by [[Alpha]] [[Video]] for a [[mere]] $4.99 it's a [[period]] piece with charming [[songs]] and repulsive sentimentalizing about the victims of America's great crime, slavery.

This was what Hollywood was putting out two years before Brown v. Board of Education. Must have warmed the hearts of some moviegoers who [[wore]] their bed linen to the theater. Veteran [[superintendent]] and producer [[Alan]] Dwan, whose huge string of films [[encompass]] both the utterly forgettable and the recurrently [[indicated]] (for example, John Wayne in "Sands of Iwo Jima") tried his hand at a big musical with "I Dream of Jeanie." Harnessing a lead cast of [[vocalist]] with little past [[filmmaking]] [[experiences]] and, as it turned out, virtually no [[upcoming]], he [[woven]] a fictional and in no small [[party]] [[abusive]] [[storytelling]] about the great American songwriter, Stephen Foster.

[[Billing]] Shirley is the [[youthful]], lovestruck Foster [[who]] [[generosity]] to slaves includes giving the [[cash]] saved for an engagement [[rings]] to [[salaries]] the hospital [[pricing]] for an injured [[petite]] [[negro]] boy. His intended is Inez McDowell (Muriel [[Laurent]]) whose [[troublesome]] younger sister, Jeanie ([[Ellen]] [[Christie]]), is [[softly]] [[attaining]] she's in [[amore]] with the [[almost]] impecunious song-smith. Foster is in [[likes]] with Inez who is [[rebelled]] by the composer's Number 1 on the [[Dam]] Hit Parade Tune, "O [[Susanna]]." Enter minstrel [[Erwin]] P.Christy ([[Gleam]] Middleton) to [[supporting]] [[launched]] the profit-making [[phases]] of Foster's career.

This is, by the musical-film [[norms]] of the early Fifties, a big production. The sets are lavish in that special Hollywood way that portrayed [[faux]] with all the trimmings. The singers aren't half bad and the [[Adoptive]] songs are almost impossible to ruin.

But this is also a literal [[beautify]] of the antebellum [[Southern]]. The [[greatest]] number [[traits]] black-face for all on [[phases]], an [[historic]] anomaly and a contemporary [[slice]] of [[mindless]] racism. [[Was]] these portrayals of blacks anywhere near [[realism]], the abolitionists would be [[deservedly]] [[condemning]] for [[intervening]] with so beneficent an [[creation]].

"I Dream of Jeanie" [[clearly]] [[plunged]] into the studio's vault with barely a [[dies]] whisper. Now revived by [[Alfa]] [[Videos]] for a [[only]] $4.99 it's a [[schedules]] piece with charming [[melodies]] and repulsive sentimentalizing about the victims of America's great crime, slavery.

This was what Hollywood was putting out two years before Brown v. Board of Education. Must have warmed the hearts of some moviegoers who [[donned]] their bed linen to the theater. --------------------------------------------- Result 2055 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[movie]] is the [[best]] [[horror]] [[movie]], bar-none.I [[love]] how [[Stanley]] just dumps the [[women]] into the [[lake]].I have been a fan of [[Judd]] Nelson's work for [[many]] [[years]], and he [[blew]] me away. Its a [[blend]] of [[horror]], and [[drama]] ,and [[romance]], not so much [[comedy]]. His evil, [[yet]] [[charming]] look [[captured]] me right then and there. That [[look]] in his [[eyes]], I will never [[forget]]. There's [[something]] about him, I [[cant]] [[describe]]. This [[kino]] is the [[better]] [[terror]] [[cinematography]], bar-none.I [[adore]] how [[Stan]] just dumps the [[female]] into the [[lakes]].I have been a fan of [[Jude]] Nelson's work for [[various]] [[yrs]], and he [[farted]] me away. Its a [[amalgam]] of [[abomination]], and [[opera]] ,and [[romanticism]], not so much [[farce]]. His evil, [[again]] [[enchanting]] look [[caught]] me right then and there. That [[gaze]] in his [[eye]], I will never [[forgot]]. There's [[anything]] about him, I [[dunno]] [[depict]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a wonderful movie with a fun, clever story and the dynamics of culture differences and the running theme of what's important in life make this a very under-appreciated movie. Don't let the cynics of the world deter you from seeing this. Keaton has wonderful moments and I wonder at the fact that comedy is never appreciated, because actors like Keaton make going from humor to serious bits look tremendously easy. Great movie all around! --------------------------------------------- Result 2057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well, one has to give the [[director]] credit for how gutsy he was. Gutsy would be the right term. Not only did he [[use]] a [[total]] [[cast]] of five people (no extras at ALL), but he [[also]] [[decided]] to use sub-par [[special]] effects with a [[confusing]] and boring plot, he [[also]], and I AM NOT kidding, put a [[warning]] at the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]] that you [[might]] DIE OF [[FRIGHT]]!!! However, they do [[promise]] a FREEEEEE COOOOFFFFFFFIIIIINNNNN. To have a [[creepy]] [[limping]] [[gardener]] is always a good [[move]]. Yaaa-unique-aaawwwwnnn....

If you watch Mystery Science [[Theater]] 3000, you might've seen this. They like to [[showcase]] [[horrible]] [[movies]], just to [[let]] you know.

A good [[gift]] for someone you [[hate]]. Well, one has to give the [[headmaster]] credit for how gutsy he was. Gutsy would be the right term. Not only did he [[used]] a [[aggregate]] [[casting]] of five people (no extras at ALL), but he [[apart]] [[opted]] to use sub-par [[especial]] effects with a [[disconcerting]] and boring plot, he [[further]], and I AM NOT kidding, put a [[warn]] at the [[startup]] of the [[filmmaking]] that you [[probability]] DIE OF [[FREAKED]]!!! However, they do [[promises]] a FREEEEEE COOOOFFFFFFFIIIIINNNNN. To have a [[frightening]] [[hobbling]] [[florist]] is always a good [[budge]]. Yaaa-unique-aaawwwwnnn....

If you watch Mystery Science [[Teatro]] 3000, you might've seen this. They like to [[illustrate]] [[frightening]] [[filmmaking]], just to [[leaving]] you know.

A good [[gifts]] for someone you [[hating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2058 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a brilliant documentary that follows the life of Herge and his creating TinTin. Its based around a series of interviews conducted in 1971, and covers every thing from his early life and "Nazi collaboration" to the final moments of his life.

Brilliantly edited, very cinematic and fast paced enough to not get boring. This film will give you a new appreciation for the work of Herge.

The film makers make the film more than just another documentary. Using the latest state of the art technology and for a change putting it to good use.

Recently more and more documentaries have been making it to cinemas. But this one as to be amongst the best... --------------------------------------------- Result 2059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is another North [[East]] Florida [[production]], filmed mainly in and near by to Fernandina Beach and the Kingsley [[Plantation]]. I was rather surprised the [[company]] was able to [[take]] over the main [[street]] of Fernandina Beach as [[long]] as was [[necessary]] to achieve the [[street]] scenes. The film is pretty, and [[pretty]] [[bad]]. Tami Erin is [[cute]], but overacts. Eileen Brennan overacts even more. Good for small [[kids]], or for those who like fluff in large doses. A 4 from the Miller-Movies formula. This is another North [[Eastern]] Florida [[productivity]], filmed mainly in and near by to Fernandina Beach and the Kingsley [[Planting]]. I was rather surprised the [[societies]] was able to [[taking]] over the main [[thoroughfare]] of Fernandina Beach as [[longer]] as was [[indispensable]] to achieve the [[rue]] scenes. The film is pretty, and [[quite]] [[unfavourable]]. Tami Erin is [[adorable]], but overacts. Eileen Brennan overacts even more. Good for small [[child]], or for those who like fluff in large doses. A 4 from the Miller-Movies formula. --------------------------------------------- Result 2060 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Remembering the dirty particulars of this insidiously vapid "movie" is akin to digging into your chest cavity with a rusty, salted spoon. Perhaps "Home Alone 2: Lost in New York" (1992) was a bit on the predictable side, but this pathetic excuse for a film is just one of the most shameless bids at commercialization I have ever heard of. A boy fighting off spies/terrorists when he's home alone in a Chicago suburb with the chickenpox? Ridiculous! Why did this film have to be made? I am the kind of person who believes even terrible movies are not wastes of time, but rather learning experiences. However, this is actually a waste of time. It should be avoided at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2061 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] In a lot of his films ([[Citizen]] Kane, [[Confidential]] [[Report]], [[Touch]] of [[evil]]) Orson Welles [[gave]] him the role of an [[exuberant]] [[men]]. [[In]] "The [[Lady]] from Shanghai" it's the only time I [[see]] him holding the role of the [[victim]]. The role of the [[culprit]], he [[gave]] it to Rita Hayworth, I [[guess]] it's because he was in love with her. Therefore, it's an interesting film. But I [[find]] the story [[excellent]] too. The direction is [[genius]], as [[usual]] with [[Welles]] : two scenes are particularly brilliant: the one in the aquarium and the [[final]] one with the mirrors. This film is [[brilliant]].(10/10) In a lot of his films ([[Citizenship]] Kane, [[Covert]] [[Reporting]], [[Toque]] of [[satanic]]) Orson Welles [[given]] him the role of an [[luxuriant]] [[males]]. [[During]] "The [[Ladies]] from Shanghai" it's the only time I [[behold]] him holding the role of the [[victims]]. The role of the [[perpetrator]], he [[delivered]] it to Rita Hayworth, I [[imagine]] it's because he was in love with her. Therefore, it's an interesting film. But I [[unearth]] the story [[super]] too. The direction is [[genie]], as [[ordinary]] with [[Orson]] : two scenes are particularly brilliant: the one in the aquarium and the [[last]] one with the mirrors. This film is [[wondrous]].(10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2062 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ... and how they bore you right out of your mind! The Crater Lake Monster is one of the classic [[BAD]] films from the 70's made with no [[actors]] of any note, an [[embarrassing]] script, [[woeful]] direction, and a tireless [[desire]] to fuse "[[horror]]" with light [[comedy]]. This movie introduces a paleontologist who finds drawings of an aquatic dinosaur underneath Crater Lake...a meteor falls from the sky, and an aquatic dinosaur of the claymation variety begins to terrorize and eat the inhabitants surrounding Crater Lake. The whole matter is taken care of by Steve our local sheriff. Much of the film - when not showing pools of blood left behind from what we imagine must have been the beast dining - is spent following the bumbling antic of two guys named Arnie and Mitch who run a boat rental place. They try so bad to be funny, that we get lines like, looking at a business sign, Mitch saying to Arnie "You spelled bait wrong, it's spelled B-A-T-E." The laughs were rather [[scarce]] here. We then see them get drunk together and imagine a tree trunk to be the dinosaur. Laurel and Hardy watch out! The dinosaur looks fake, but the movie is fun in a bad way. And at the very [[least]], the [[lake]] is [[beautiful]]. ... and how they bore you right out of your mind! The Crater Lake Monster is one of the classic [[UNFAVOURABLE]] films from the 70's made with no [[protagonists]] of any note, an [[distracting]] script, [[hapless]] direction, and a tireless [[willingness]] to fuse "[[terror]]" with light [[humour]]. This movie introduces a paleontologist who finds drawings of an aquatic dinosaur underneath Crater Lake...a meteor falls from the sky, and an aquatic dinosaur of the claymation variety begins to terrorize and eat the inhabitants surrounding Crater Lake. The whole matter is taken care of by Steve our local sheriff. Much of the film - when not showing pools of blood left behind from what we imagine must have been the beast dining - is spent following the bumbling antic of two guys named Arnie and Mitch who run a boat rental place. They try so bad to be funny, that we get lines like, looking at a business sign, Mitch saying to Arnie "You spelled bait wrong, it's spelled B-A-T-E." The laughs were rather [[rare]] here. We then see them get drunk together and imagine a tree trunk to be the dinosaur. Laurel and Hardy watch out! The dinosaur looks fake, but the movie is fun in a bad way. And at the very [[less]], the [[lakes]] is [[sumptuous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2063 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's a shame this movie is so hard to get your hands on in the US. I found it through a rare video dealer, and it was certainly worth it. This is, without a doubt, the best film made during the pre-code era, and the finest film of the 1930s. Masterful director Frank Borzage made wonderful films about the Depression, and with MAN'S CASTLE he created a fairy tale amidst the hardships of the era.

Loretta Young and Spencer Tracy have a wonderful chemistry between them, and they help make this movie a wonderful romance. Young's Trina is sweet and hopeful, while Tracy's Bill is gruff and closed-off. The dynamic between the character creates one of the most difficult, but in the end rewarding relationships on film.

MAN'S CASTLE is the most soft-focus pre-code film I've seen. Borzage uses the hazy and dreamy technique to turn the squatter's village where Bill and Trina live into a palace. The hardships of the Depression are never ignored, in fact they're integral to the film. But as Borzage crafts the film as a soft focus fairy tale, the love between the characters makes the situation seem less harsh. It makes the film warm and affectionate.

MAN'S CASTLE is the crowning achievement of the pre-code era. If only more people could see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a really fun, breezy, light hearted romantic comedy. You cannot go wrong with Meg Ryan's cute perkiness combined with Albert Einstein's genius. Normally, I'm not a fan of completely fabricated fictional tales about actual people, now deceased and not able to defend themselves, but I think the late Einstein might himself have gotten a chuckle out of this one.

It's the 1950's...Princeton, New Jersey in the spring. The story revolves around a pretty, young, scatter brained mathematician, Catherine (Meg Ryan), who is all set to marry a stuffy jerk, a behavioral researcher named James, merely because he has the brains she's looking for in the father of her future children. However, it's love at first sight when her car breaks and she meets an auto mechanic named Ed (Tim Robbins). As she doesn't think Ed is intelligent enough, her uncle, none other than Albert Einstein, plays match maker, assisted in his endeavors by three mischievous cronies, all theoretical physicists. Uncle Albert must make Ed appear suitably smart, so concocts a charade portraying him as a physicist...naturally with amusing results.

Walter Matthau is his usual hilarious self, and pulls off the character of Einstein quite effectively. With his three professorial buddies, Kurt, Nathan, and Boris, a lot of laughs ensue. The real Einstein had a genuine human side and this film just takes it one (outrageous) step further. If you suspend all logic, you can almost imagine this silly story happening!

It might not be rocket science (despite its main character) but it is a wonderful sweet, refreshing movie. One of the best of the comedy romance genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 2065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This is not a [[bad]] movie. It follows the [[new]] conventions of [[modern]] [[horror]], that is the movie within a movie, the well known actress [[running]] for her [[life]] in the first scene. This movie takes the [[old]] [[convention]] of a [[psycho]] [[killer]] on he loose, and [[manage]] to do something [[new]], and interesting with it. It is [[also]] [[always]] nice to see Molly Ringwald back for the attack.

So this might be an [[example]] of what the [[genre]] has [[become]]. [[Cut]] [[hits]] all the [[marks]], and is [[actually]] [[scary]] in some parts. I [[liked]] it I [[gave]] it an eight. This is not a [[rotten]] movie. It follows the [[novel]] conventions of [[fashionable]] [[terror]], that is the movie within a movie, the well known actress [[implementing]] for her [[vie]] in the first scene. This movie takes the [[antigua]] [[conventions]] of a [[madman]] [[slayer]] on he loose, and [[administer]] to do something [[newer]], and interesting with it. It is [[similarly]] [[steadily]] nice to see Molly Ringwald back for the attack.

So this might be an [[case]] of what the [[genus]] has [[gotten]]. [[Chopped]] [[rattles]] all the [[mark]], and is [[indeed]] [[dreadful]] in some parts. I [[enjoyed]] it I [[provided]] it an eight. --------------------------------------------- Result 2066 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This [[movie]] [[deserves]] credit for its [[original]] approach. It [[combines]] [[elements]] of theater, [[film]], and [[epic]] storytelling. [[Unfortunately]], it [[falls]] flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and [[epic]] [[elements]] without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his [[grave]] at this [[horrible]] [[adaptation]] which [[turns]] the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.

Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I [[found]] the [[movie]] unwatchable and an [[incredibly]] [[shabby]], disrespectful [[treatment]] of a beautiful [[story]]. This [[flick]] [[merits]] credit for its [[upfront]] approach. It [[merges]] [[facets]] of theater, [[filmmaking]], and [[saga]] storytelling. [[Sadly]], it [[dips]] flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and [[manas]] [[facets]] without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his [[gravesite]] at this [[scary]] [[coping]] which [[revolves]] the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.

Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I [[unearthed]] the [[filmmaking]] unwatchable and an [[surprisingly]] [[seedy]], disrespectful [[treat]] of a beautiful [[storytelling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Letters with no destination end up in another world found in the back rooms of the [[post]] office. Here, [[Alice]] [[manages]] to land a job in hope of finding her lost father. What she does discover is the tormented soul of her boss, Frank. A [[quiet]] little Aussie flic that came and went at the cinema. Now you find it in the deep dark corner of the video [[shop]], overshadowed by fifty [[copies]] of that [[dreaded]] GODZILLA [[film]]. It's a [[shame]] because this [[turned]] out to be a [[satisfying]] film telling a [[brave]] tale with [[strong]] [[simple]] images and effective performances from the two leads. This film [[succeeds]] where [[Garry]] Marshall's other dead letter office flic DEAR GOD (1996 - USA) failed, and comes close to the brilliance of, not the Kevin Costner turkey, but He Jianjun's POSTMAN (1995 - China). Letters with no destination end up in another world found in the back rooms of the [[posting]] office. Here, [[Altar]] [[administering]] to land a job in hope of finding her lost father. What she does discover is the tormented soul of her boss, Frank. A [[silent]] little Aussie flic that came and went at the cinema. Now you find it in the deep dark corner of the video [[storage]], overshadowed by fifty [[copied]] of that [[terrifying]] GODZILLA [[movie]]. It's a [[pity]] because this [[transformed]] out to be a [[satisfactory]] film telling a [[bold]] tale with [[vigorous]] [[mere]] images and effective performances from the two leads. This film [[succeeding]] where [[Gary]] Marshall's other dead letter office flic DEAR GOD (1996 - USA) failed, and comes close to the brilliance of, not the Kevin Costner turkey, but He Jianjun's POSTMAN (1995 - China). --------------------------------------------- Result 2068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Following the disasterous Revolution, this film was pretty much the [[final]] nail in the [[coffin]] of Goldcrest and thus the British [[Film]] [[Industry]]. The film is absolute [[pants]], it's full of [[music]] from the [[attempted]] mid-80's [[jazz]] [[revival]] and [[based]] on a [[book]] & author that was [[briefly]] popular at that time and has [[deservedly]] sank back into obscurity. Temple searched for ages trying to find Suzette and came up with 8th Wonders Patsy Kensett another person who was briefly popular at the time. By the time the film came out of post production the Jazz revival was over, as was Kensett's career and the film met a totally [[uncaring]] film public.

Mediocre would be an overstatement for some of the [[worst]]/campest/cheesiest acting to ever grace the British silver screen watching it almost 20 years on and the film is truely cringeworthy. Following the disasterous Revolution, this film was pretty much the [[definitive]] nail in the [[casket]] of Goldcrest and thus the British [[Filmmaking]] [[Industries]]. The film is absolute [[shorts]], it's full of [[musica]] from the [[endeavour]] mid-80's [[jaz]] [[resurgence]] and [[founded]] on a [[workbook]] & author that was [[succinctly]] popular at that time and has [[correctly]] sank back into obscurity. Temple searched for ages trying to find Suzette and came up with 8th Wonders Patsy Kensett another person who was briefly popular at the time. By the time the film came out of post production the Jazz revival was over, as was Kensett's career and the film met a totally [[apathetic]] film public.

Mediocre would be an overstatement for some of the [[meanest]]/campest/cheesiest acting to ever grace the British silver screen watching it almost 20 years on and the film is truely cringeworthy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] while watching this [[movie]] I got sick. I have been grewing up with [[Pippi]] and every time was a real [[pleasure]]. when my wife came to Sweden she was looking at the oldies and had a [[real]] good [[laugh]]. but this American version should be renamed and never be shown again. it is [[terrible]] from [[beginning]] to it's end. how can they manage to make it soo bad. well I guess someone blames the translation ha ha ha.. but they are never close to [[Pippi]]. may this movie never been seen again and never sent out on a [[broadcast]]. burn the [[movie]] and [[save]] the [[kids]]. if you [[want]] to [[look]] at Pippi then look at the [[original]] movie and have a good laugh. [[WE]] LOVE [[PIPPI]] INGER NILSSON, [[sorry]] Tami [[Erin]] you will never stand up to be Pippi.. [[Oh]] yes.. when read the "[[spoilers]]" explanation, "'spoiling' a surprise and [[robbing]] the viewer of the suspense and enjoyment of the film." well I guess the director stands for this... you are looking at this movie at your own [[risk]].. it is [[really]] a [[waste]] of [[time]]... while watching this [[filmmaking]] I got sick. I have been grewing up with [[Longstocking]] and every time was a real [[joy]]. when my wife came to Sweden she was looking at the oldies and had a [[actual]] good [[laughing]]. but this American version should be renamed and never be shown again. it is [[horrific]] from [[onset]] to it's end. how can they manage to make it soo bad. well I guess someone blames the translation ha ha ha.. but they are never close to [[Longstocking]]. may this movie never been seen again and never sent out on a [[disseminate]]. burn the [[filmmaking]] and [[rescues]] the [[children]]. if you [[wantto]] to [[peek]] at Pippi then look at the [[initial]] movie and have a good laugh. [[OURS]] LOVE [[FIFI]] INGER NILSSON, [[apology]] Tami [[Ern]] you will never stand up to be Pippi.. [[Oooh]] yes.. when read the "[[troublemakers]]" explanation, "'spoiling' a surprise and [[shoplift]] the viewer of the suspense and enjoyment of the film." well I guess the director stands for this... you are looking at this movie at your own [[endangerment]].. it is [[truthfully]] a [[squander]] of [[times]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 2070 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Every]] scene was put [[together]] perfectly.This movie had a [[wonderful]] cast and crew. I mean, how can you have a bad movie with Robert Downey Jr. in it,[[none]] have and ever will [[exist]]. He has the ability to brighten up any movie with his amazing talent.This movie was [[perfect]]! I [[saw]] this movie sitting all alone on a movie shelf in "Blockbuster" and like it was calling out to me,I couldn't resist [[picking]] it up and bringing it [[home]] with me. You can [[call]] me a sappy romantic, but this [[movie]] just touched my heart, not to [[mention]] [[made]] me laugh with [[pleasure]] at the same [[time]]. Even [[though]] it [[made]] me [[cry]],I admit, at the [[end]], the [[whole]] [[movie]] just brightened up my [[outlook]] on life [[thereafter]].I [[suggested]] to my [[horror]], [[action]], and [[pure]] [[humor]] [[movie]] [[buff]] of a brother,who [[absolutely]] [[adored]] this movie. This is a [[movie]] with a good [[sense]] of feeling.It could [[make]] you laugh out [[loud]], touch your [[heart]], make you [[fall]] in [[love]],and [[enjoy]] your [[life]].[[Every]] [[time]] you [[purposefully]] [[walk]] past this [[movie]], just be [[aware]] that you are [[consciously]] making the [[choice]] to [[live]] and feel this inspiring [[movie]].Who knows? What if it [[could]] [[really]] happen to you?, and [[keep]] your [[mind]] open to the mystical [[wonders]] of [[life]]. [[Any]] scene was put [[jointly]] perfectly.This movie had a [[wondrous]] cast and crew. I mean, how can you have a bad movie with Robert Downey Jr. in it,[[nothing]] have and ever will [[existing]]. He has the ability to brighten up any movie with his amazing talent.This movie was [[faultless]]! I [[watched]] this movie sitting all alone on a movie shelf in "Blockbuster" and like it was calling out to me,I couldn't resist [[selecting]] it up and bringing it [[houses]] with me. You can [[invitation]] me a sappy romantic, but this [[cinematography]] just touched my heart, not to [[referenced]] [[effected]] me laugh with [[glee]] at the same [[moment]]. Even [[nevertheless]] it [[brought]] me [[outcry]],I admit, at the [[terminates]], the [[total]] [[cinema]] just brightened up my [[expectations]] on life [[then]].I [[propose]] to my [[abomination]], [[actions]], and [[sheer]] [[comedy]] [[cinematography]] [[buffy]] of a brother,who [[wholly]] [[love]] this movie. This is a [[cinema]] with a good [[feeling]] of feeling.It could [[deliver]] you laugh out [[rowdy]], touch your [[heartland]], make you [[fallen]] in [[loves]],and [[enjoys]] your [[lives]].[[Each]] [[moment]] you [[intentionally]] [[marche]] past this [[cinematography]], just be [[mindful]] that you are [[purposely]] making the [[selecting]] to [[iive]] and feel this inspiring [[flick]].Who knows? What if it [[would]] [[genuinely]] happen to you?, and [[preserving]] your [[esprit]] open to the mystical [[miracles]] of [[living]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this one when I was seven or eight. I [[must]] have [[found]] the [[characters]] [[round]], because they [[left]] a [[impression]] in my mind that lasted for a [[long]] [[time]] after the [[end]] of the movie. And the ending, now that's [[sad]], well... for a 7-8 year old [[kid]].

I had the opportunity of seeing this [[movie]] again [[lately]], and [[found]] that the plot was too [[simple]], the [[character]], two-dimensional... I [[guess]] it's the [[kind]] of [[movie]] that you can only with the innocence of a [[young]] [[child]]... [[Pity]]...

I [[recommend]] this one for all you parents with [[small]] [[kids]]... ( I [[saw]] it in its [[original]] french version, so I cannot tell you whether the translation is good or not.) I [[rember]] [[see]] this one when I was seven or eight. I [[should]] have [[detected]] the [[attribute]] [[redondo]], because they [[walkout]] a [[printing]] in my mind that lasted for a [[lengthy]] [[period]] after the [[ceases]] of the movie. And the ending, now that's [[regrettable]], well... for a 7-8 year old [[kiddo]].

I had the opportunity of seeing this [[cinematography]] again [[freshly]], and [[finds]] that the plot was too [[easy]], the [[characters]], two-dimensional... I [[guessing]] it's the [[genre]] of [[kino]] that you can only with the innocence of a [[youths]] [[kids]]... [[Shame]]...

I [[recommendation]] this one for all you parents with [[petite]] [[youths]]... ( I [[sawthe]] it in its [[preliminary]] french version, so I cannot tell you whether the translation is good or not.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2072 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Jessica Simpson not only lacks any acting skill, but the script is incredibly shallow and lame. You actually hear serious dialogue that goes, "I love you more." "No, I love YOU more." I stopped watching the movie (online) after the first half hour, I couldn't take it anymore. Her "southern girl charm" just doesn't work and is really quite annoying; her attempts at slapstick humor fall flat and she delivers lines like she is reading the script right off the page.

Poor Luke Wilson. Did he not read the script before agreeing to do this, or did he fall for Papa Joe's (Jessica's dad and also the producer of the movie) promise of big profits? Hopefully he now knows better than to sign on to another movie like this. Luke Wilson is actually a good actor - I hate seeing the pained look on his face as he suffers through the bad dialogue.

Also, I think the previous commenter giving this movie an 8 out of 10 was probably either involved in the movie somehow or hired by Papa Joe to give the movie a better rating. No one in their right mind would actually find this movie engaging.

Jessica has lots of money, right? Maybe buy some acting lessons? --------------------------------------------- Result 2073 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this movie at the Rotterdam IFF. You may question some decisions of the maker - like choosing a mockumentary form for such a sensitive and horrible subject - but this movie sure hits you in the gut. Especially the last scenes were almost painful to watch. Hope it gets the distribution it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] [[Excellent]] documentary, ostensibly about the friendship and subsequent rivalry between two West Coast retro rock'n'roll bands: The Dandy Warhols and the Brian Jonestown Massacre. What it actually turns out to be is a portrait of a borderline psychopath - Anton Newcomb - and his tortured relationship with the rest of the world. Interestingly, for a music documentary, there is hardly any music. What there is - snatches of songs, more often than not aborted by the performers - is incidental rather than central. Although the protagonists are musicians, the story is not about music but rather about a particularly American version of a British myth of a cartoon lifestyle, ie, one where nobody has to take responsibility for behaving like spoiled adolescents on a full-time basis. Tantrums, drugs, violence, grossly dysfunctional attitudes, egomania on a truly epic scale - all of this is excused or positively encouraged because it conforms to some collectively held idea about what rock'n'roll is about. As a film this is a first-class documentary but it raises more questions than it answers. For example, why is Anton's music so conservative? For someone so wild and outrageous (and he IS wild and outrageous) his music never seems to have progressed beyond the most obvious derivations of his 60s idols (The Stones, Velvets etc.) For someone who claims to be able to play 80 instruments he has never bothered to learn to play any one of them beyond the most rudimentary level. Similarly, the Dandy Warhols burning ambition is based on a vision of rock'n'roll which is astonishingly fossilised in 1969. Nothing wrong with pastiches, of course, but surely there's more to musical life than perpetually acting out a cartoon from the late 60s. Why don't they take some risks with their music - in the way that their role models did? Because, one suspects, this is not about music. Music is just an accessory, a prop, or an excuse, to lead completely dysfunctional and irresponsible lives. But why? In the Dandy Warhols case, the answer is obvious: to make lots of money and be famous. Big deal. Anton Newcomb's case is more interesting. He is obviously very talented, but every time he is given an opportunity to reach a wider audience he sabotages it, usually in the most dramatic way possible. He is terrified of success, and at the same time, deeply resents anyone else who has it - especially his former friends the Dandy Warhols. Fascinating movie. Highly recommended. [[Wondrous]] documentary, ostensibly about the friendship and subsequent rivalry between two West Coast retro rock'n'roll bands: The Dandy Warhols and the Brian Jonestown Massacre. What it actually turns out to be is a portrait of a borderline psychopath - Anton Newcomb - and his tortured relationship with the rest of the world. Interestingly, for a music documentary, there is hardly any music. What there is - snatches of songs, more often than not aborted by the performers - is incidental rather than central. Although the protagonists are musicians, the story is not about music but rather about a particularly American version of a British myth of a cartoon lifestyle, ie, one where nobody has to take responsibility for behaving like spoiled adolescents on a full-time basis. Tantrums, drugs, violence, grossly dysfunctional attitudes, egomania on a truly epic scale - all of this is excused or positively encouraged because it conforms to some collectively held idea about what rock'n'roll is about. As a film this is a first-class documentary but it raises more questions than it answers. For example, why is Anton's music so conservative? For someone so wild and outrageous (and he IS wild and outrageous) his music never seems to have progressed beyond the most obvious derivations of his 60s idols (The Stones, Velvets etc.) For someone who claims to be able to play 80 instruments he has never bothered to learn to play any one of them beyond the most rudimentary level. Similarly, the Dandy Warhols burning ambition is based on a vision of rock'n'roll which is astonishingly fossilised in 1969. Nothing wrong with pastiches, of course, but surely there's more to musical life than perpetually acting out a cartoon from the late 60s. Why don't they take some risks with their music - in the way that their role models did? Because, one suspects, this is not about music. Music is just an accessory, a prop, or an excuse, to lead completely dysfunctional and irresponsible lives. But why? In the Dandy Warhols case, the answer is obvious: to make lots of money and be famous. Big deal. Anton Newcomb's case is more interesting. He is obviously very talented, but every time he is given an opportunity to reach a wider audience he sabotages it, usually in the most dramatic way possible. He is terrified of success, and at the same time, deeply resents anyone else who has it - especially his former friends the Dandy Warhols. Fascinating movie. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2075 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched like 8 or 9 Herzog movies and none of them had any impact on me.

I watched several documentaries about him. He is obviously an intelligent man, with great knowledge about films and passion for making them, but does this makes him a good director. Definitely NO! A complete anti-talent. He can make a good documentary because of previously mentioned traits, but a film with actors – never!

He can't direct nor write. His screenplays are full of badly thought out situations, and many situations/dialogues in his movies are so childishly and badly done that they cannot be hidden behind the word "art" in any sense. No way. Not to mention the unskillful direction, so amateurish-like. To say that he wants to direct like that and write crap like that is a lie.

Like the scene when Scheitz gets arrested and Storszek hides in the back of the store. WHO IS HE KIDDING?

He is a cheater; he knows what fake intellectuals and critics want. He knows what elements he needs to put in the script to get your their attention and empty praising. Never mind the rest of the script and sloppy direction.

Just look at Julio Medem. If Herzog can make a movie like Medem can, then I might re-check his old movies and try to find talent in them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Who actually created this piece of crap this is the worst movie i have ever seen in my life it is such a waste of time and money. I hate it how they create low budget sequels featuring D-Lister actors and a storyline so similar to the 1st one.

I found this movie in the bargain bin sitting right next to Wild Things 2 and Death To The Supermodels for $2.99 what a fool i was to actually think that this could be good instead i watched in disgust as poor acting stereotypes ripped of the storyline and script from the 1st one.

Whoever thought that this straight-to-video production was actually even a half decent film you must be on crackd or something because I think what pretty much most of the people who've seen this film thinks WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I [[could]] not, for the life of me, follow, figure out or understand the story. As the plot advances it too stays [[incomprehensible]]. I'm going to [[guess]] and [[say]] that there was a preproduction story/plot problem that never got [[sorted]] out. The producers could never separate the many details that the [[novel]], or any [[novel]], has the [[time]] and space to create from the other idea, which was to make a movie about a serial killer and the killer's pursuit by the police. They ended up with too [[many]] things happening in a [[proscribed]] feature film time limit. Too bad really because they had a solid cast, a director who knows how to move things around and excellent cinematography. In fact, a well made [[movie]] that one could enjoy and relax with for a couple of hours. I [[wo]] not, for the life of me, follow, figure out or understand the story. As the plot advances it too stays [[unimaginable]]. I'm going to [[guessing]] and [[tell]] that there was a preproduction story/plot problem that never got [[classified]] out. The producers could never separate the many details that the [[newer]], or any [[newer]], has the [[moment]] and space to create from the other idea, which was to make a movie about a serial killer and the killer's pursuit by the police. They ended up with too [[innumerable]] things happening in a [[aban]] feature film time limit. Too bad really because they had a solid cast, a director who knows how to move things around and excellent cinematography. In fact, a well made [[filmmaking]] that one could enjoy and relax with for a couple of hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 2078 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There are some [[comments]] about this [[film]] that [[say]] that it is a bad and silly one and such an [[excellent]] actor as Pierre Fresnay should not have [[accepted]] to act in it.

I [[think]], just the opposite, that, [[even]] when the [[film]] is strange and has some [[weaknesses]], the performance of [[Pierre]] Fresnay is so [[formidable]] that it [[converts]] the film in [[something]] excellent.

His performance is probably the [[best]] in [[history]].

The film itself has a very polemic scene about the consecration of wine in the [[cabaret]].

[[For]] [[somebody]] who does not [[believe]] that a [[priest]] – even a defrocked one – can convert it in Christ's blood, the scene is perhaps [[bizarre]]. But for somebody who has been raised in a catholic framework, it is very emotive even if quite unpleasant.

The scene of the [[death]] of the [[younger]] [[priest]] is tremendously shocking. But it is very well acted. [[Pierre]] Fresnay turns the [[crazy]] act of [[murder]] in something [[understandable]] within the temporal [[madness]] of his [[character]], the tortured defrocked Morand who, in this [[terrible]] [[way]], comes back to his [[duty]]. There are some [[commentaries]] about this [[cinematography]] that [[tell]] that it is a bad and silly one and such an [[brilliant]] actor as Pierre Fresnay should not have [[accepting]] to act in it.

I [[thoughts]], just the opposite, that, [[yet]] when the [[cinematography]] is strange and has some [[frailties]], the performance of [[Pedro]] Fresnay is so [[dreaded]] that it [[conversions]] the film in [[anything]] excellent.

His performance is probably the [[better]] in [[story]].

The film itself has a very polemic scene about the consecration of wine in the [[nightclub]].

[[During]] [[someone]] who does not [[believing]] that a [[pastor]] – even a defrocked one – can convert it in Christ's blood, the scene is perhaps [[strange]]. But for somebody who has been raised in a catholic framework, it is very emotive even if quite unpleasant.

The scene of the [[dying]] of the [[youngest]] [[reverend]] is tremendously shocking. But it is very well acted. [[Pedro]] Fresnay turns the [[lunatic]] act of [[assassinations]] in something [[comprehensible]] within the temporal [[foolishness]] of his [[characters]], the tortured defrocked Morand who, in this [[horrid]] [[manner]], comes back to his [[obligations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is an extremely difficult film to watch, particularly as it targets the innermost core of all of our lives. But ultimately it is a very beautiful and deeply moving film. Any person who finds it cynical I have to say that they must have greatly missed the point of the film's entire message. For those who actually watch the film, they will see that the way the issues are dealt with is absolutely necessary, and the outcome is ultimately uplifting. Sure, it's very hard to watch, a difficult subject matter and even brutal. Yet it's extremely relevant to society and everybody. It shows the peak of what world cinema is doing at the moment (I will not restrict that term to just France) and everyone should try to see it. I will say that it is best to go in with a clear head without being swayed by conflicting views, and just let the film work for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2080 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] This movie is basically a [[documentary]] of the chronologically [[ordered]] [[series]] of events that took place from April 10, 2002 through April 14, 2002 in the Venezuelan [[Presidential]] [[Palace]], Caracas Venezuela.

The [[pathos]] of the [[movie]] is [[real]] and one [[feels]] the [[pain]], [[sorrow]] and [[joy]] of the people who [[lived]] through this [[failed]] [[coup]] d'etat of [[President]] Hugo Chavez.

One [[comes]] away from [[viewing]] this [[film]] that Hugo Chavez is [[truly]] a great [[historical]] figure. Hugo Chavez's persona single-handedly [[brought]] the Venezuelan people to overthrow the 3-day [[old]] military-installed junta and re-establish the democratically [[installed]] government of Venezuela.

It is [[obvious]] from the [[film]] footage that George W Bush [[aided]] and [[abetted]] the [[Venezuelan]] coup d'etat. That the mainstream media [[aided]] and [[abetted]] [[George]] W Bush is not [[surprising]].

What is [[surprising]] is how few people has [[seen]] this [[movie]] and how few people [[realize]] the [[total]] [[corruption]] of America's [[mass]] media.

It has [[taken]] only 20 [[years]] for Ronald Reagan [[elimination]] of the [[Fairness]] [[Doctrine]] in 1986 to [[turn]] [[America]] into blind and rudderless state.

May [[Hugo]] Chavez open patriotic Americans' eyes to the truth and beauty of the [[true]] American [[vision]]. This movie is basically a [[literature]] of the chronologically [[instructed]] [[serial]] of events that took place from April 10, 2002 through April 14, 2002 in the Venezuelan [[Presidency]] [[Mansions]], Caracas Venezuela.

The [[ducks]] of the [[movies]] is [[true]] and one [[believes]] the [[painless]], [[regret]] and [[pleasure]] of the people who [[resided]] through this [[faulted]] [[putsch]] d'etat of [[Chairing]] Hugo Chavez.

One [[happens]] away from [[visualizing]] this [[movie]] that Hugo Chavez is [[really]] a great [[historic]] figure. Hugo Chavez's persona single-handedly [[tabled]] the Venezuelan people to overthrow the 3-day [[antigua]] military-installed junta and re-establish the democratically [[fitted]] government of Venezuela.

It is [[visible]] from the [[movie]] footage that George W Bush [[helping]] and [[encouraged]] the [[Venezuela]] coup d'etat. That the mainstream media [[helped]] and [[encouraged]] [[Georges]] W Bush is not [[impressive]].

What is [[unbelievable]] is how few people has [[saw]] this [[cinematography]] and how few people [[realise]] the [[utter]] [[graft]] of America's [[mace]] media.

It has [[picked]] only 20 [[yr]] for Ronald Reagan [[erase]] of the [[Equity]] [[Doctrines]] in 1986 to [[converting]] [[Americans]] into blind and rudderless state.

May [[Ugo]] Chavez open patriotic Americans' eyes to the truth and beauty of the [[genuine]] American [[eyesight]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was a nice attempt at [[something]] but it is too [[pretentious]] and boring to [[rise]] above it's low budget trappings. The [[use]] of virtual sets [[almost]] works but at some points it fails [[miserably]]. They [[made]] good [[use]] of the small [[budget]] I guess. I just [[wish]] the story and most of the acting was [[better]]. There are a lot of parts where you see what they were aiming for and it would of been great if they actually [[hit]] those marks but they don't. Confusing and unbelievable story. [[Bad]] DVD transfer too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one sitting. This I had to [[shut]] off. It was too boring. I can do [[slow]] [[movies]]. But just [[make]] them [[appealing]] in some aspect. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all [[departments]] so it never [[added]] up to an engrossing [[experience]]. [[Maybe]] the [[film]] maker's next attempt will be [[better]]. This was a nice attempt at [[algo]] but it is too [[conceited]] and boring to [[climbing]] above it's low budget trappings. The [[uses]] of virtual sets [[roughly]] works but at some points it fails [[woefully]]. They [[introduced]] good [[employs]] of the small [[budgets]] I guess. I just [[desire]] the story and most of the acting was [[optimum]]. There are a lot of parts where you see what they were aiming for and it would of been great if they actually [[slugged]] those marks but they don't. Confusing and unbelievable story. [[Unfavourable]] DVD transfer too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one sitting. This I had to [[closed]] off. It was too boring. I can do [[decelerate]] [[filmmaking]]. But just [[deliver]] them [[attractive]] in some aspect. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all [[ministries]] so it never [[addendum]] up to an engrossing [[enjoying]]. [[Probably]] the [[filmmaking]] maker's next attempt will be [[nicer]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2082 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[Most]] of the French [[films]] I've [[seen]] - and [[enjoyed]] - were more [[talk]] than [[action]], but that's okay. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with [[intriguing]] [[actors]]. ([[However]], I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in [[every]] French [[film]] ever [[made]]! It [[seemed]] that [[way]].)

This [[movie]] has the same interesting [[visuals]] and had a good [[opening]]. But then it [[became]] [[talk]], talk and more [[talk]]....which is fine for a [[drama]] but not for a [[murder]] [[mystery]]. After awhile, I [[almost]] [[fell]] asleep watching this.

Actually, the [[film]] was more [[like]] a [[play]] with almost all the scenes played out in one room. [[Thus]], if you [[love]] plays, you should [[like]] this...but I [[want]] a little more bang for a murder [[story]]. [[Greatest]] of the French [[movies]] I've [[noticed]] - and [[appreciated]] - were more [[conversations]] than [[activities]], but that's okay. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with [[exciting]] [[players]]. ([[Instead]], I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in [[all]] French [[movie]] ever [[introduced]]! It [[sounded]] that [[camino]].)

This [[filmmaking]] has the same interesting [[photos]] and had a good [[introductory]]. But then it [[was]] [[chatter]], talk and more [[chitchat]]....which is fine for a [[dramas]] but not for a [[assassinate]] [[conundrum]]. After awhile, I [[hardly]] [[shrunk]] asleep watching this.

Actually, the [[flick]] was more [[iike]] a [[playing]] with almost all the scenes played out in one room. [[So]], if you [[loves]] plays, you should [[iike]] this...but I [[wanting]] a little more bang for a murder [[conte]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] this [[film]] was almost a [[great]] imaginative [[film]]. A [[mixture]] of shakespeare, [[pop]], [[jazz]], and faerie [[tales]]. This [[movie]] was an [[imaginative]] twist on the Cinderella theme. [[Featuring]] a strong cast, [[headed]] by the [[perfectly]] cast Kathleen Turner, this [[movie]] had everything going for it. Everything but [[production]] [[values]]. I [[almost]] never [[think]] that a [[movie]] [[needs]] [[special]] [[effects]] or [[big]] [[budgets]], but with an over the [[top]] [[production]] like this, it [[came]] off with the same [[seedy]] quality as [[every]] other made for tv [[movie]]. Besides [[better]] cinematography, this film was almost [[perfect]].

this [[cinematography]] was almost a [[awesome]] imaginative [[films]]. A [[mix]] of shakespeare, [[pops]], [[jaz]], and faerie [[narratives]]. This [[film]] was an [[creative]] twist on the Cinderella theme. [[Features]] a strong cast, [[led]] by the [[totally]] cast Kathleen Turner, this [[film]] had everything going for it. Everything but [[productivity]] [[value]]. I [[practically]] never [[reckon]] that a [[cinema]] [[must]] [[peculiar]] [[implications]] or [[major]] [[budget]], but with an over the [[superior]] [[productivity]] like this, it [[arrived]] off with the same [[shabby]] quality as [[any]] other made for tv [[kino]]. Besides [[best]] cinematography, this film was almost [[impeccable]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] [[Just]] so that you fellow movie fans get the point about this [[film]], I decided to write another review. I missed a few things out [[last]] [[time]]...

First, the [[script]]. Second, the acting. [[Third]], Jesus [[Christ]] what were they [[thinking]] making a [[piece]] of [[garbage]] like this and then [[expecting]] us to [[enjoy]] it when there are no [[redeeming]] [[features]] whatsoever from beginning to end except when [[Joseph]] Fiennes finally gets blown away in a very unexciting [[climax]]!!!

I can't believe I wasted my [[money]] on this when I [[could]] have given it to a homeless [[person]] or a busker or SOMETHING!

Are you getting the picture? [[Only]] so that you fellow movie fans get the point about this [[filmmaking]], I decided to write another review. I missed a few things out [[latter]] [[times]]...

First, the [[screenplay]]. Second, the acting. [[Thirds]], Jesus [[God]] what were they [[thoughts]] making a [[slice]] of [[refuse]] like this and then [[expect]] us to [[enjoys]] it when there are no [[redeem]] [[featured]] whatsoever from beginning to end except when [[Youssef]] Fiennes finally gets blown away in a very unexciting [[apogee]]!!!

I can't believe I wasted my [[cash]] on this when I [[did]] have given it to a homeless [[anybody]] or a busker or SOMETHING!

Are you getting the picture? --------------------------------------------- Result 2085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE!

If Roger Kumble did such a fancy job on the [[first]] Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad [[job]] on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, [[true]] it may have [[improved]] if its series was ever aired but lets be realistic...this movie a [[crock]]! A lot of [[bad]] acting *NOTE The Shower scene* "Kissing Cousins" ?????? What kind of line is that? "Slipery when wet" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had [[effort]], I'll give you that, but it was too [[stupid]]! They even tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T [[FUNNY]]! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one [[look]] [[Absolutely]] [[NOTHING]] like the original cast. It's as if they made them [[look]] different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...[[Okay]], what were you thinking? Could you [[possibly]] choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the [[fabulous]] [[Sarah]] Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no offense Amy Adams. Oh, yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH! Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE!

If Roger Kumble did such a fancy job on the [[fiirst]] Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad [[workplace]] on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, [[veritable]] it may have [[enhanced]] if its series was ever aired but lets be realistic...this movie a [[baloney]]! A lot of [[unfavourable]] acting *NOTE The Shower scene* "Kissing Cousins" ?????? What kind of line is that? "Slipery when wet" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had [[endeavours]], I'll give you that, but it was too [[dumb]]! They even tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T [[DROLL]]! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one [[peek]] [[Abundantly]] [[NOTHIN]] like the original cast. It's as if they made them [[peek]] different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...[[Allright]], what were you thinking? Could you [[conceivably]] choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the [[sumptuous]] [[Darah]] Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no offense Amy Adams. Oh, yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH! --------------------------------------------- Result 2086 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] seems to have a lot of people [[saying]] it is one of the most brutal of all [[time]]. [[After]] having just viewed it, I can [[say]] it does not [[live]] up to those [[claims]].

The [[idea]] of the [[movie]] is indeed demented. But [[overall]], the [[execution]] wasn't at all cringe worthy. Even the [[final]] scene (the eyeball [[thing]]) isn't really that nasty. I was [[expecting]] [[something]] insane, instead it was of lower quality than gore put forth on films like the ultra low [[budget]] [[Violent]] Sh!t.

Any one [[wanting]] to see an [[actual]] [[movie]] will be disappointed, since there is no [[story]] whatsoever (though [[surely]] most people know this). Gore [[fans]] will be disappointed since, contrary to [[belief]], the blood and guts here are few and far between. Not to mention the actress [[playing]] the victim might be one of the worst in [[history]].

[[Regardless]] of what people [[say]], this [[movie]] isn't that [[shocking]], it just [[plain]] all out sucks. [[Avoid]] it. This [[filmmaking]] seems to have a lot of people [[arguing]] it is one of the most brutal of all [[moment]]. [[Upon]] having just viewed it, I can [[said]] it does not [[vivo]] up to those [[claim]].

The [[thinking]] of the [[filmmaking]] is indeed demented. But [[general]], the [[execute]] wasn't at all cringe worthy. Even the [[last]] scene (the eyeball [[stuff]]) isn't really that nasty. I was [[expects]] [[anything]] insane, instead it was of lower quality than gore put forth on films like the ultra low [[budgets]] [[Ferocious]] Sh!t.

Any one [[desire]] to see an [[real]] [[filmmaking]] will be disappointed, since there is no [[stories]] whatsoever (though [[arguably]] most people know this). Gore [[enthusiasts]] will be disappointed since, contrary to [[creed]], the blood and guts here are few and far between. Not to mention the actress [[playback]] the victim might be one of the worst in [[stories]].

[[Whatever]] of what people [[says]], this [[filmmaking]] isn't that [[staggering]], it just [[plains]] all out sucks. [[Shirk]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kurt Russell's chameleon-like performance, coupled with John Carpenter's flawless filmmaking, makes this one, without a doubt, one of the finest boob-tube bios ever aired. It holds up, too: the emotional foundation is strong enough that it'll never age; Carpenter has preserved for posterity the power and ultimate poignancy of the life of the one and only King of Rock and Roll. (I'd been a borderline Elvis fan most of my life, but it wasn't until I saw this mind-blowingly moving movie that I looked BEYOND the image at the man himself. It was quite a revelation.) ELVIS remains one of the top ten made-for-tv movies of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You'll [[notice]] that the [[chemist]], who [[appears]] in two scenes and gets to [[speak]], is [[played]] by Stephen [[King]]. "Don't [[give]] up your day [[job]]" is the standard thing to say, but that's not [[fair]]. King acquits himself [[reasonably]] well: he's no [[worse]] than any other [[member]] of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is [[pure]] [[rubbish]]. [[Please]], [[give]] up your day [[job]].

Never have I [[seen]] so [[many]] [[dreadful]] performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is [[probably]] the worst - [[gathered]] together in the one [[film]]. [[Everyone]] acts hammily, but not in any [[entertaining]] [[way]]; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I [[blame]] [[screenwriter]]/[[director]] [[Tom]] [[Holland]]. It can't be that ALL the [[actors]] are [[REALLY]] this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never [[heard]] of any of them before, but [[still]], I don't think I [[could]] walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many [[bad]] [[performers]] if I [[tried]]: ONE [[actor]], [[despite]] my [[best]] [[efforts]], [[would]] [[turn]] out to have talent. [[So]] what's more [[likely]] - that [[Tom]] Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he [[wrote]] a [[lousy]] [[script]] and then [[directed]] it poorly? That [[would]] [[also]] [[explain]] why [[actors]] are [[bad]] in direct proportion to their prominence in the [[script]]. The more [[direction]] an [[actor]] [[got]], the [[worse]] he [[performed]]. ("You [[want]] me to [[bend]] over like a hunchback, [[talk]] from the back of my [[throat]], [[show]] all my teeth, and look [[bored]], all at the same time? [[Okay]]...")

This [[theory]] is [[confirmed]] by the fact that [[Holland]] undeniably managed to co-write a [[lousy]] [[script]]. [[Several]] [[writers]] here have commented on the fact that [[Billy]] Halleck is not a [[likeable]] [[character]], but that's a [[misleading]] [[way]] of putting it. He's not a knowable [[character]]. All we [[find]] out about him before the [[supernatural]] stuff [[starts]] happening is that he's [[fat]], and that all he can think about is food. ("All I can think about is [[food]]," he [[tells]] us, helpfully.) And in the end...

(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...

[[In]] the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By "evil" perhaps I mean "inexplicable" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end [[psychology]]. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much [[sense]], and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.

By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: "I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT..." [big dramatic pause] "...I don't think you'd like it at all." You'll [[notices]] that the [[pharmacists]], who [[transpires]] in two scenes and gets to [[speaks]], is [[effected]] by Stephen [[Emperor]]. "Don't [[confer]] up your day [[jobs]]" is the standard thing to say, but that's not [[impartiality]]. King acquits himself [[sensibly]] well: he's no [[worst]] than any other [[members]] of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is [[pur]] [[trash]]. [[Invites]], [[confer]] up your day [[jobs]].

Never have I [[noticed]] so [[countless]] [[scary]] performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is [[arguably]] the worst - [[collect]] together in the one [[cinema]]. [[Everybody]] acts hammily, but not in any [[fun]] [[manner]]; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I [[guilt]] [[writer]]/[[headmaster]] [[Thom]] [[Antilles]]. It can't be that ALL the [[actresses]] are [[TRULY]] this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never [[audition]] of any of them before, but [[nevertheless]], I don't think I [[did]] walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many [[negative]] [[artists]] if I [[attempts]]: ONE [[protagonist]], [[albeit]] my [[better]] [[endeavours]], [[should]] [[transforming]] out to have talent. [[Accordingly]] what's more [[apt]] - that [[Tum]] Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he [[authored]] a [[rotten]] [[hyphen]] and then [[aimed]] it poorly? That [[could]] [[additionally]] [[clarifying]] why [[actresses]] are [[unfavourable]] in direct proportion to their prominence in the [[screenplay]]. The more [[directions]] an [[protagonist]] [[gets]], the [[pire]] he [[achieved]]. ("You [[wanting]] me to [[bent]] over like a hunchback, [[speaks]] from the back of my [[larynx]], [[exhibit]] all my teeth, and look [[drilled]], all at the same time? [[Alright]]...")

This [[doctrine]] is [[affirmed]] by the fact that [[Dutch]] undeniably managed to co-write a [[rotten]] [[hyphen]]. [[Numerous]] [[screenwriters]] here have commented on the fact that [[Pele]] Halleck is not a [[congenial]] [[characteristics]], but that's a [[specious]] [[ways]] of putting it. He's not a knowable [[trait]]. All we [[found]] out about him before the [[uncanny]] stuff [[starting]] happening is that he's [[greasy]], and that all he can think about is food. ("All I can think about is [[foods]]," he [[told]] us, helpfully.) And in the end...

(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...

[[Across]] the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By "evil" perhaps I mean "inexplicable" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end [[psyche]]. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much [[feeling]], and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.

By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: "I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT..." [big dramatic pause] "...I don't think you'd like it at all." --------------------------------------------- Result 2089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The [[kids]] grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did [[outstanding]] performances. Yes, I shed a tear along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A [[must]] see for those who care about their families. Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The [[youths]] grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did [[wondrous]] performances. Yes, I shed a tear along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A [[ought]] see for those who care about their families. --------------------------------------------- Result 2090 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really, it's nothing much. I only recommend watching it if; 1.) You're a big fan of any of the main stars. 2.) If you really want to check out the first time Lucille Ball was seen with red hair.

4 out of 10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 2091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Ballad of Django is a meandering mess of a movie! This spaghetti western is simply a collection of scenes from other (and much better!) films supposedly tied together by "Django" telling how he brought in different outlaws. Hunt Powers (John Cameron) brings nothing to the role of Django. Skip this one unless you just HAVE to have every Django movie made and even THAT may not be a good enough excuse to see this one!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Shintarô Katsu, best known for the Zatôichi films, again stars in this third and [[final]] [[movie]] in the Kenji Misumi (mostly known for "[[Lone]] Wolf and Cub), directed [[saga]] of Hanzo 'The Razor' Itami feature the big dicked one [[battling]] ninjas, rapeing 'ghosts', and uncovering [[shady]] [[goings]] on at the Shogunate treasury. The Hanzo 'plot' was kinda getting [[stale]] and repetitive. What was once novel in the first film, was not any longer. [[Fortunately]], this one was [[better]] then the second thanks to having more [[humor]]. I'm just [[glad]] that they choose to stop at the one [[trilogy]] (I'm [[looking]] at [[YOU]] Lucas)

My Grade: B

DVD [[Extras]]: Merely Trailers for all 3 Hanzo the Razor films

[[Eye]] Candy: Aoi Nakajima unleashes both tits, Mako Midori just her [[left]] one Shintarô Katsu, best known for the Zatôichi films, again stars in this third and [[latter]] [[cinematography]] in the Kenji Misumi (mostly known for "[[Unaccompanied]] Wolf and Cub), directed [[historian]] of Hanzo 'The Razor' Itami feature the big dicked one [[gunfight]] ninjas, rapeing 'ghosts', and uncovering [[dodgy]] [[separations]] on at the Shogunate treasury. The Hanzo 'plot' was kinda getting [[rancid]] and repetitive. What was once novel in the first film, was not any longer. [[Blithely]], this one was [[nicer]] then the second thanks to having more [[comedy]]. I'm just [[gratified]] that they choose to stop at the one [[triad]] (I'm [[searching]] at [[VOUS]] Lucas)

My Grade: B

DVD [[Supplemental]]: Merely Trailers for all 3 Hanzo the Razor films

[[Eyes]] Candy: Aoi Nakajima unleashes both tits, Mako Midori just her [[exited]] one --------------------------------------------- Result 2093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was attracted to this movie when I looked at cast [[list]], but after I [[watched]] it I must admit that I [[felt]] a bit disappointed. The [[main]] problem of this movie is that actors aren't [[capable]] of holding this [[movie]] on their back. Why? Because of [[bad]] [[script]]. [[Although]] Dillon, [[Lane]] and Jones try very hard to take this movie on another level, there is no [[innovative]] storytelling and the direction is too [[ordinary]]. So for Matt [[Dillon]] [[fans]] this is watchable movie, just like for [[admirers]] of [[beautiful]] Diane [[Lane]]. [[Legendary]] Tommy Lee Jones is [[always]] great but this is not [[movie]] for him; far below his [[level]]. [[So]] if you [[get]] [[hooked]] up by this great cast watch it but don't expect [[anything]] big or [[extraordinary]]. The only thing that you'll [[remember]] about this [[flick]] is Diane [[Lane]] scenes; [[rest]] of it is very forgettable. I was attracted to this movie when I looked at cast [[lists]], but after I [[seen]] it I must admit that I [[believed]] a bit disappointed. The [[primary]] problem of this movie is that actors aren't [[able]] of holding this [[cinematographic]] on their back. Why? Because of [[negative]] [[scripts]]. [[Despite]] Dillon, [[Alleyways]] and Jones try very hard to take this movie on another level, there is no [[revolutionary]] storytelling and the direction is too [[normal]]. So for Matt [[Dylan]] [[blowers]] this is watchable movie, just like for [[fans]] of [[sumptuous]] Diane [[Alleyways]]. [[Fabled]] Tommy Lee Jones is [[repeatedly]] great but this is not [[movies]] for him; far below his [[tier]]. [[Therefore]] if you [[gets]] [[hook]] up by this great cast watch it but don't expect [[something]] big or [[tremendous]]. The only thing that you'll [[remind]] about this [[gesture]] is Diane [[Lanes]] scenes; [[stays]] of it is very forgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2094 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] A [[missed]] train. A [[wrong]] phone number. An [[extra]] cup of [[coffee]]. What happens to those around you when you make a [[seemingly]] [[innocuous]] decision? Most people don't give it a thought as they absorbed in their own [[thoughts]] and [[actions]].

"Happenstance" [[tells]] the [[story]] of the interrelations and cause-and-effect of the [[mundane]] as it pertains to a [[group]] of normal Parisian folk. It has all the [[components]] of what passes for contemporary [[theater]], with the full cast of the dysfunctional and disillusioned.

There's a cheating husband, an [[illegal]] immigrant, a classic slacker, a pickpocket, a crazy grandmother, an annoying girlfriend, a selfish roommate, and a homeless man. Audrey Tautou serves as the erstwhile protagonist (in the sense that she's on [[camera]] as much as anyone else and opens and closes the film) and normal [[girl]] who just can't seem to find the right rhythm in her life.

She learns at the [[beginning]] of her day from a stranger on a train what her horoscope holds for her. What happens to her in the course of the day is told through various characters. Does the prediction [[come]] [[true]]? The concept is good, but the [[storytelling]] is [[flimsy]]. The connections from one [[event]] to the next are [[weak]]. There's better storytelling in 15 [[seconds]] of the [[Liberty]] [[Mutual]] [[insurance]] [[commercial]] where one [[person]] sees a good deed and passes it along to another than there is in two hours of Happenstance.

If you enjoy Audrey Tautou, then you certainly can [[sacrifice]] the time for this film, but you'll [[finish]] it [[dissatisfied]] and [[wondering]] what this same storyline could be if it were handled by a better producer and [[director]]. A [[flunked]] train. A [[erroneous]] phone number. An [[supplemental]] cup of [[coffeehouse]]. What happens to those around you when you make a [[reportedly]] [[inoffensive]] decision? Most people don't give it a thought as they absorbed in their own [[reflections]] and [[steps]].

"Happenstance" [[says]] the [[histories]] of the interrelations and cause-and-effect of the [[trite]] as it pertains to a [[cluster]] of normal Parisian folk. It has all the [[elements]] of what passes for contemporary [[drama]], with the full cast of the dysfunctional and disillusioned.

There's a cheating husband, an [[undocumented]] immigrant, a classic slacker, a pickpocket, a crazy grandmother, an annoying girlfriend, a selfish roommate, and a homeless man. Audrey Tautou serves as the erstwhile protagonist (in the sense that she's on [[cameras]] as much as anyone else and opens and closes the film) and normal [[women]] who just can't seem to find the right rhythm in her life.

She learns at the [[initiation]] of her day from a stranger on a train what her horoscope holds for her. What happens to her in the course of the day is told through various characters. Does the prediction [[coming]] [[real]]? The concept is good, but the [[tale]] is [[frail]]. The connections from one [[happenings]] to the next are [[feeble]]. There's better storytelling in 15 [[second]] of the [[Libertad]] [[Reciprocal]] [[seguro]] [[mercantile]] where one [[persona]] sees a good deed and passes it along to another than there is in two hours of Happenstance.

If you enjoy Audrey Tautou, then you certainly can [[cull]] the time for this film, but you'll [[finalize]] it [[discontented]] and [[requests]] what this same storyline could be if it were handled by a better producer and [[headmaster]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2095 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just watched I. Q. again tonight and had forgotten how much I love this movie. It is wonderfully entertaining and leaves you feeling that all is right with the world. I love the allusions to Mozart all throughout from the opening with "Einstein" playing "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" on the violin to him humming Eine Kleine Nachtmusik during the IQ testing of the Ed Walters. I love that a woman is portrayed as intelligent and encouraged to have a career, an especially unique situation for the 1950's, the time in which this movie is set. (I myself have been a teacher but stayed at home to raise my children, so please don't think I am some staunch women's libber.) It's wonderful how a man who is "only a grease monkey" is finally seen to be just as important and worthy as Catherine's fiance, a clinical behavioral researcher. The message to me is that we are not what we do, but who we are is defined by so much more - no labels. There are so many little gags and one-liners that are almost throwaways if you don't watch and listen carefully.

I did catch a few things in the movie that are not listed on the goofs page. In the scene when Ed Walters is to speak at symposium, there are 3 instruments (protractor, ruler, etc.) hanging on the right from the chalk ledge. In the next camera shot, there only 2. In the credits on our video, it lists Tony Shaloub's character as Bob Watters, not Bob Rosetti as he introduces himself in the movie and is listed here on Imdb.

I highly recommend this movie. It may be a piece of fluff in some estimations, but has lots more substance than many give it credit for. Not only that, what a great cast is assembled here. Watch it and enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have not read the other comments on the film, but judging from the average rating I can see that they are unlikely to be very complementary.

I watched it for the second time with my children. They absolutely loved it. True, it did not have the adults rolling around the floor, but the sound of the children's enjoyment made it seem so.

It is a true Mel Brooks farce, with plenty of moral content - how sad it is to be loved for our money, not for whom we are, and how fickle are our friends and associates. There are many other films on a similar subject matter, no doubt, many of which will have a greater comic or emotional impact on adults. It's hard for me to imagine such an impact on the junior members of the family, however.

Hence, for the children, a 9/10 from me. --------------------------------------------- Result 2097 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shallow, shallow script ...stilted acting ...the shadows of boom mikes lingering over the actors' heads in scenes ...worth watching because Kate Mulgrew plays the most selfish mother in TV movie history and it's all before Ben Affleck got his teeth capped. --------------------------------------------- Result 2098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Well, sorry for the [[mistake]] on the one line [[summary]].......Run people, [[run]]!! This [[movie]] is an [[horror]]!! [[Imagine]]! [[Gary]] Busey in another low budget [[movie]], with an [[incredibly]] [[bad]] scenario...isn't that a [[nightmare]]? [[No]] (well [[yes]]), it is Plato's [[run]]...........I give it * out of *****. Well, sorry for the [[error]] on the one line [[abstract]].......Run people, [[running]]!! This [[filmmaking]] is an [[terror]]!! [[Reckon]]! [[Garry]] Busey in another low budget [[movies]], with an [[surprisingly]] [[rotten]] scenario...isn't that a [[cabos]]? [[Nos]] (well [[yep]]), it is Plato's [[execute]]...........I give it * out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One Stinko of a movie featuring a shopworn plot and, to be kind, acting of less than Oscar caliber. But to me the single worst flaw was the total misrepresentation of a jet aircraft, and especially a 747. Some of the major blunders:

1. No Flight Engineer (or even a flight engineer station. 2. Mis-identifying the F-16 interceptors as F-15's (no resmblance whatsoever). 3. Loading passengers into an "aft baggage compartment" supposedly accesible from the cabin - Even if such a compartment existed, placing that much weight that far aft would make the aircraft unflyable. 4. Hollow point bullets that "won't damage the aircraft". 5. The entire landing procedure was so bad I wanted to puke. 6. An SR-71 (of all planes) with a pressure seal hatch 7. Opening a cabin door outward - into the wind - in flight!!

Ah nuts, it was just a truly lousy movie. Gotta make the list of bottom 10 of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 2100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Realistic movie,sure,except for the fact that the characters don't look like to be [[scared]]. When Billy Zane [[tries]] to [[kill]] someone, he feels bad...but he doesn't look like to. That's why I don't like his performance in this [[movie]]. Tom Berenger is again [[playing]] a soldier. No good thrill, [[realistic]] [[sequences]]. Not [[always]] [[shooting]], that is one [[great]] thing. Well filmed. I [[hate]] the [[helicopter]] sequence, [[cause]] only one terrorist [[kills]] [[almost]] the [[whole]] [[marine]] bunch...I [[give]] it **and a half out of ***** Realistic movie,sure,except for the fact that the characters don't look like to be [[spooked]]. When Billy Zane [[endeavours]] to [[murder]] someone, he feels bad...but he doesn't look like to. That's why I don't like his performance in this [[filmmaking]]. Tom Berenger is again [[gaming]] a soldier. No good thrill, [[practical]] [[sequence]]. Not [[constantly]] [[gunfire]], that is one [[super]] thing. Well filmed. I [[hating]] the [[choppers]] sequence, [[reason]] only one terrorist [[murdered]] [[practically]] the [[ensemble]] [[sailor]] bunch...I [[confer]] it **and a half out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 2101 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this at an arty cinema that was also showing "Last Days" and some Charlie Chaplin films. Based on the quality of the other features, I decided to give "Immortel" a chance. I nearly walked out of this movie, and I LIKE science-fiction! The story is set in a futuristic New York city, filled with Blade Runner-style sky advertisements and some similar debates about cloning/synthetic humans. Unfortunately, the screenplay was not condensed enough for an hour-and-forty-five-minute movie. Three groups exist in this world: humans, artificial humans, and Egyptian gods. The artificial humans seem to have the upper hand and control the politics of the city. The humans are slaves and are used for eugenics and organ donation. The Egyptian gods have a floating pyramid (modeled on the Great Pyramid of Khufu, and complete with a deteriorated exterior, leaving a smooth "cap" on the pyramid. Wouldn't a floating futuristic pyramid be in perfect condition?). The pyramid rests above the city and nobody on the ground understands what it is or why it's there. I won't bore you with the so-called plot, but there is lots of unnecessary gore and many gross-out scenes. The film, as I said, looks to have been influenced by Blade Runner, and perhaps also by The Fifth Element and The Matrix. At the end of the film credits were listed thank-yous to the United Kingdom, France, and Italy. The film is FRENCH, but uses British actors who don't speak French. Hence, it is obvious that their French dialog has been dubbed. This is a distraction, and I also thought that switching back and forth between real humans and animations quite distracting. It doesn't help that the animations are poor--no better than a video game. Skip this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2102 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] This is a depressingly [[shallow]], naive and [[mostly]] unfunny look at a [[wildly]] improbable [[relationship]] between Brooks' psychotic [[film]] [[editor]] and [[Harold]], his vapid girlfriend. The two have [[ZERO]] [[chemistry]] [[together]] - [[primarily]] because Harold is [[incapable]] of doing [[anything]] besides looking pretty at this stage of her [[career]]; but also because Brooks' [[character]] is neither interesting nor likeable. There are 15 static, excruciating minutes at the beginning where [[Brooks]], having just [[broke]] up with [[Harold]], stumbles about his [[apartment]] in a [[depressed]], drugged out state - [[unbearable]].

Sappily and unimaginatively bookended by Joe Cocker's "You Are [[So]] [[Beautiful]]", there [[simply]] is not [[enough]] [[material]] here for a [[feature]] [[film]]. There is [[hardly]] [[anything]] [[going]] on on the [[periphery]] of their [[relationship]] to give the [[appearance]] that these people [[exist]] in a [[real]] [[world]]. I'm sure Brooks' intention was to [[shine]] a white hot [[spotlight]] on the [[affair]] and, in a [[way]], deconstruct it; but if you're [[going]] to do that the writing and acting [[needs]] to be far far [[better]] than what it is here. This is a depressingly [[superficial]], naive and [[predominantly]] unfunny look at a [[deliriously]] improbable [[nexus]] between Brooks' psychotic [[flick]] [[editorial]] and [[Hiccup]], his vapid girlfriend. The two have [[ZILCH]] [[chemicals]] [[jointly]] - [[basically]] because Harold is [[unable]] of doing [[nothing]] besides looking pretty at this stage of her [[carrera]]; but also because Brooks' [[trait]] is neither interesting nor likeable. There are 15 static, excruciating minutes at the beginning where [[Brook]], having just [[shattered]] up with [[Hiccup]], stumbles about his [[townhouse]] in a [[depressive]], drugged out state - [[untenable]].

Sappily and unimaginatively bookended by Joe Cocker's "You Are [[Therefore]] [[Sumptuous]]", there [[exclusively]] is not [[suffice]] [[materials]] here for a [[characteristics]] [[flick]]. There is [[almost]] [[nothing]] [[go]] on on the [[fringe]] of their [[relationships]] to give the [[apparition]] that these people [[existent]] in a [[veritable]] [[worldwide]]. I'm sure Brooks' intention was to [[glossy]] a white hot [[focuses]] on the [[fling]] and, in a [[camino]], deconstruct it; but if you're [[go]] to do that the writing and acting [[gotta]] to be far far [[optimum]] than what it is here. --------------------------------------------- Result 2103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Just when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a [[single]] movie a "[[Bomb]]" rating, a friend [[brought]] this notorious [[turd]] to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its [[reputation]], and it was as God-awful as I'd [[anticipated]]. This is a Mexican-made [[mess]], [[dubbed]] into English, and [[produced]] by K. Gordon Murray. It's got [[terrible]] sets and [[effects]], and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't [[operate]] at the [[North]] [[Pole]], but [[instead]] from a [[cloud]] in outer [[space]], and who doesn't have little elves helping him make his [[toys]] but [[rather]] all different [[groups]] of [[children]] from [[practically]] every [[country]] there is. The opening [[sequence]], where St. [[Nick]] chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing [[terrible]] holiday [[songs]] in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no [[story]]. [[Obviously]], THIS Santa Claus doesn't [[observe]] the [[child]] labor laws!

Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the [[devil]] himself traveling from [[hell]] to [[Earth]], just to make [[little]] [[kids]] naughty and [[turn]] Santa's [[Christmas]] Eve [[rounds]] into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's [[bound]] to [[frighten]] [[little]] [[children]] and [[turn]] them off Santa [[Claus]] and the [[holidays]] forever. [[Oddly]], the [[name]] of [[Jesus]] [[Christ]] is mentioned [[often]] in this Christmas [[film]], which somehow makes it all the creepier in the [[context]] of all the [[bizarre]] [[things]] that are [[going]] on. This easily makes my personal [[list]] of the "[[Worst]] [[Movie]] I've Ever [[Seen]]", but I'm sure that's [[nothing]] unique. Just when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a [[alone]] movie a "[[Explodes]]" rating, a friend [[made]] this notorious [[poo]] to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its [[notoriety]], and it was as God-awful as I'd [[waited]]. This is a Mexican-made [[chaos]], [[nicknamed]] into English, and [[generated]] by K. Gordon Murray. It's got [[scary]] sets and [[impact]], and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't [[operated]] at the [[Norte]] [[Poles]], but [[however]] from a [[clouds]] in outer [[spacing]], and who doesn't have little elves helping him make his [[toy]] but [[quite]] all different [[grouped]] of [[childhood]] from [[virtually]] every [[nationals]] there is. The opening [[sequences]], where St. [[Nicky]] chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing [[scary]] holiday [[ballads]] in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no [[tales]]. [[Apparently]], THIS Santa Claus doesn't [[observes]] the [[kids]] labor laws!

Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the [[diablo]] himself traveling from [[brothel]] to [[Lands]], just to make [[petite]] [[youths]] naughty and [[turning]] Santa's [[Claus]] Eve [[cycles]] into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's [[link]] to [[spook]] [[petit]] [[childhood]] and [[transforming]] them off Santa [[Eaton]] and the [[vacation]] forever. [[Surprisingly]], the [[names]] of [[Christ]] [[Goodness]] is mentioned [[frequently]] in this Christmas [[filmmaking]], which somehow makes it all the creepier in the [[backgrounds]] of all the [[surreal]] [[aspects]] that are [[go]] on. This easily makes my personal [[listing]] of the "[[Pire]] [[Filmmaking]] I've Ever [[Watched]]", but I'm sure that's [[none]] unique. --------------------------------------------- Result 2104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to be the best movie I've ever seen.

Combine breathtaking cinematography with stunning acting and a gripping plot, and you have a masterpiece.

Dog Bite Dog had me gripping the edge of my seat during some scenes, recoiling in horror during others, and left me drowning in my own tears after the tragic ending.

The film left a deep impression on me. It's shockingly violent scenes contrasted sharply with the poignant and tender 'love' scenes. The film is undeserving of it's Cat III (nudity) rating; there are no nude scenes whatsoever, and the 'love' scenes do not even involve kissing or 'making out'.

The message which this film presented to me? All human beings, no matter how violent or cruel they may seem, have a tender side. Edison Chen does a superb job playing the part of the murderous Pang.

I rate this film 10/10. It's a must-watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It is a well known fact that when Gene Roddenberry first pitched Star Trek to NBC, the original pilot episode, The Cage, was rejected for being "too cerebral". When the series was given another chance, Roddenberry thought it would be fun to establish the events of the rejected episode as canon, and did so by writing The Menagerie, which has the unique distinction of being the sequel to what was still, at the time, an unaired episode.

This time, rather than exploring a new planet, Kirk and his crew are on Starbase 11, paying a visit to the former commander of the Enterprise, Christopher Pike (Sean Kenney), now horribly disfigured and paralyzed because of an accident. Pike joins his successor on the starship, where an unpleasant surprise awaits: Spock, who used to serve under Pike, has effectively hijacked the vessel and set the course for Talos IV, a planet which is off-limits (the punishment is death) since Pike and Spock's last visit there, 13 years earlier. Naturally, being a logical creature, Spock turns himself in and arranges a court-martial so that he can justify his actions.

There's no need to say more about the plot, since the rest will play out in Part 2. What really impresses is how Roddenberry creates the connection between The Cage and the rest of the Star Trek universe, by coming up with a particular type of flashback (to say more would be too much) that allows everyone, on screen and off, to see what could have been of Trek, had NBC not turned down the original project. In particular, it's fun to see Jeffrey Hunter (who was unable to return in The Menagerie) play Pike as a more serious captain than Kirk usually is and Nimoy's early days as Spock, whose personality hadn't been fully established yet: this is the only time in the entire series that everybody's favorite Vulcan spontaneously grins.

In short, not just a great "mystery" episode, but also a treat for those who can't be bothered to track down The Cage in its original form (it's available as part of the Season 3 box set). --------------------------------------------- Result 2106 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] OK, the movie is good but I [[give]] it a 1 because the idea of a computer virus becoming an organic virus is pure fairy [[tale]]. This [[kind]] of [[crap]] just [[adds]] to those uncomputer savvy moron's paranoid delusions that a computer virus is exactly like an organic virus. First of all, strings of code and [[dozens]] of 1s and 0s add up to computer virus. An [[organic]] virus is much more [[complex]], even [[though]] it's way tinier. Though, it's [[considered]] one of the simplest forms in the universe, [[organic]] virus's attach burrow into your [[cells]] and attach themselves to the [[RNA]], then [[change]] your own [[RNA]] [[code]]. [[Explain]] to me how something like that could be [[processed]] from a [[monitor]]? [[Maybe]] the [[radiation]] has some [[effect]] on the user's cornea that [[turns]] your eyeballs into these [[viruses]]? I [[could]] [[see]] that, but [[obviously]], the [[writer]] didn't think of that. OK, the movie is good but I [[confer]] it a 1 because the idea of a computer virus becoming an organic virus is pure fairy [[history]]. This [[sort]] of [[damnit]] just [[summing]] to those uncomputer savvy moron's paranoid delusions that a computer virus is exactly like an organic virus. First of all, strings of code and [[tens]] of 1s and 0s add up to computer virus. An [[biologic]] virus is much more [[tortuous]], even [[albeit]] it's way tinier. Though, it's [[regarded]] one of the simplest forms in the universe, [[biological]] virus's attach burrow into your [[cell]] and attach themselves to the [[ARN]], then [[shift]] your own [[ARN]] [[codes]]. [[Explains]] to me how something like that could be [[handled]] from a [[oversight]]? [[Potentially]] the [[radiating]] has some [[impacts]] on the user's cornea that [[revolves]] your eyeballs into these [[antivirus]]? I [[did]] [[seeing]] that, but [[apparently]], the [[screenwriter]] didn't think of that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2107 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I saw this [[film]] on the History Channel today (in 2006). First of all, I realize that this is not a documentary -- that it is a [[drama]]. But, one might hope that at [[least]] the critical "facts" that the [[story]] turns on might be based on [[actual]] events. Reagan was shot and the other characters were real people. The movie got that [[right]]. From there on, reliance on facts [[rapidly]] decays. I had never heard of this movie before seeing it. Having been a [[TV]] reporter at the time of these events, I was stunned that I had never [[heard]] anything about the [[bizarre]] behavior of Secretary Haig as portrayed by [[Richard]] Dreyfuss. The whole nation had heard the "I am in control...", etc., but Dreufuss' Haig is bullying a cowered cabinet and totally out of control personally. Having watched the film, I began researching the subject on the Internet and quickly found actual audio tapes and transcripts of most of the Situation [[Room]] conversations that this [[film]] pretends to reenact. Incredibly, many the the principal "[[facts]]" of the film [[meant]] to show a White [[House]], [[Secret]] Service etc. in total [[chaos]] -- and the nation's leadership behaving irrationally and driving the world near the brink of nuclear war -- are demonstrably incorrect. They didn't happen! There is [[internal]] [[conflict]], to be sure. Haig makes missteps, his press [[room]] performance is historically [[regrettable]] and he is "[[difficult]]". But there is nothing approaching the scenes [[depicted]] in the film. There are too many gross errors to [[list]], but any fair comparison of the [[recorded]] and [[written]] [[record]] and the fantasy of this film begs the [[question]] as to what the [[producers]] were [[really]] [[trying]] to accomplish. Enlighten? [[Inform]]? [[Entertain]]? I believe they failed on all three fronts. It is [[difficult]] to ascribe [[motives]] to others, but one [[must]] [[seriously]] question what was behind such [[shameless]] invention. And, as for my beloved History Channel's "[[Reel]] to [[Real]]" follow-on documentary, there was almost no mention of the [[issues]] that were the central [[focus]] of the [[film]] -- [[namely]] the [[events]] [[within]] the [[Administration]] on the day of the [[shooting]]. So, the viewer was [[left]] to [[research]] those without much -- if any -- [[help]] from the network. I saw this [[filmmaking]] on the History Channel today (in 2006). First of all, I realize that this is not a documentary -- that it is a [[tragedy]]. But, one might hope that at [[lowest]] the critical "facts" that the [[tales]] turns on might be based on [[real]] events. Reagan was shot and the other characters were real people. The movie got that [[rights]]. From there on, reliance on facts [[faster]] decays. I had never heard of this movie before seeing it. Having been a [[TELEVISION]] reporter at the time of these events, I was stunned that I had never [[audition]] anything about the [[strange]] behavior of Secretary Haig as portrayed by [[Ritchie]] Dreyfuss. The whole nation had heard the "I am in control...", etc., but Dreufuss' Haig is bullying a cowered cabinet and totally out of control personally. Having watched the film, I began researching the subject on the Internet and quickly found actual audio tapes and transcripts of most of the Situation [[Rooms]] conversations that this [[movie]] pretends to reenact. Incredibly, many the the principal "[[truths]]" of the film [[intended]] to show a White [[Housing]], [[Concealed]] Service etc. in total [[confusion]] -- and the nation's leadership behaving irrationally and driving the world near the brink of nuclear war -- are demonstrably incorrect. They didn't happen! There is [[indoor]] [[conflicts]], to be sure. Haig makes missteps, his press [[bedroom]] performance is historically [[regretful]] and he is "[[problematic]]". But there is nothing approaching the scenes [[illustrated]] in the film. There are too many gross errors to [[listed]], but any fair comparison of the [[registered]] and [[authored]] [[registering]] and the fantasy of this film begs the [[issue]] as to what the [[manufacturers]] were [[truly]] [[try]] to accomplish. Enlighten? [[Informed]]? [[Entertaining]]? I believe they failed on all three fronts. It is [[complex]] to ascribe [[grounds]] to others, but one [[needs]] [[profoundly]] question what was behind such [[brazen]] invention. And, as for my beloved History Channel's "[[Coil]] to [[Veritable]]" follow-on documentary, there was almost no mention of the [[issue]] that were the central [[emphasis]] of the [[filmmaking]] -- [[notably]] the [[phenomena]] [[inside]] the [[Management]] on the day of the [[shootings]]. So, the viewer was [[exited]] to [[researches]] those without much -- if any -- [[aids]] from the network. --------------------------------------------- Result 2108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have a 5 minute rule (sometimes I'll leave leway for 10). If a movie is not good in the first 5 or 10 minutes it's probably not going to ever get better. I have yet to experience any movie that has proved to contest this theory. Dan in Real Life is definitely no exception. I was watching this turkey and thought; wow, this is not funny, not touching, not sad, and I don't like any of the characters at all.

The story of an advice columnist/widower raising three young daughters, who falls in love with his brothers girlfriend. I suppose the tagline would be "advice columnist who could USE advice"? I don't know. Dans character in no way struck me as someone qualified to give advice. I guess THAT'S the irony? I don't know. He goes to see his parents, brothers, sisters and their kids at some sort of anual family retreat, which seems very sweet, and potential fodder for good comedy, story lines...none which ever emerge. The central story is basically how he loves this woman, but can't have her. Anyone with a pulse will realise that eventually he WILL get her, but you have to suffer through painfully unfunny, trite, lifetime movie network dialogue "murderer of love" to get to the inevitable happy ending.

This is truly one of the worst movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is absolutely nothing to redeem this movie. They took a sleazy story, miscast it, miswrote it, misfilmed it. It has bad dialogue badly performed in a meandering and trashy story.

As badly as it fails as art, it fails even worse as commerce. Who could have been the target market for this. What age group? What interest group?

Someone should make a movie about how and why they made this movie. That I would pay to see.

I've seen thousands of bad movies, and this ranks with "Sailor Who Fell from Grace" and "Manos" ... my choices as the three most unredeemably bad movies I've ever seen. Everybody associated with it should be forced to make conversation with VanDamme for all eternity.

I challenge you. Watch this movie and perform an academic exercise - how could you take this and make it worse? I can't think of one way. --------------------------------------------- Result 2110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I hate to even waste the time it takes to write 10 lines on this atrocity. Hyung-Rae Shim is lucky that bad film-making isn't a capital crime or he'd be put to death twice for writing and directing this disaster. I'm amazed that this film had a $75m budget, but actually glad in the sense that it was such a tremendous flop, that Shim will hopefully, never get to make another movie the rest of the life and, therefore, not waste any more of filmgoers time. I would think the actors would have gotten together and lynched him by now.

With the effects resources available to them, a great film could have been made with this budget. As usual, the failure should have been spotted at the very beginning with the terrible script and story. "Transformers" was another visual feast with a weak script, but this makes it look like "Citizen Kane". --------------------------------------------- Result 2111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was looking for a cute, simple comedy to pass the time but choosing this film proved to be an enormous mistake.

I can't write a single good thing about it. First, the script is stupid and not funny at all, relying on tired, recycled jokes and a farting turtle for laughs. In my book, that's not funny, that's pathetic.

Low budget 'effects' (if I can even call them effects) with horrible cinematography. In many places it feels almost like an indie film shot with no money.

Acting... I feel sorry for the actors. Are Pamela Anderson and Denise Richards that desperate for some money that they've agreed to take part in this? (looking at their recent filmography, it would appear so.) Despite the outfits, Pamela is showing her age and as a whole, they don't even come across as sexy, let alone funny.

This movie is not even in the so-bad-it-is-funny category. It's just bad, as if everybody involved was sick of it.

Avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is not a good [[movie]] but I [[still]] like it. The [[cat]] Clovis is gold in a [[jar]] as well as the [[premise]] of the cats themselves - intrinsically [[opposed]] to the [[evil]] Sleepwalkers. I [[think]] there is more to this [[movie]] than people [[realize]], [[basically]] it is very [[harsh]], but this brusqueness can sometimes be good. It's [[got]] the [[corny]] lines, the [[abrupt]] [[ending]] and a [[comedic]] [[element]] [[conveyed]] by the bumbling [[policemen]].

Did [[anyone]] [[find]] the incestuous [[element]] a bit [[disturbing]]? Ultimately this [[movie]] is [[casually]] and randomly acrimonious, which is [[quite]] [[effective]], I liken it to [[Psycho]] - the [[relationship]] between the [[mother]] and son, the [[changing]] of [[protagonists]]. I [[think]] the abruptness [[works]] [[also]], this is not a movie that you [[want]] them to [[lengthen]], it only [[works]] if it's short.

I'm still not sure whether the [[director]] [[lacked]] depth, or whether he did these things with [[purpose]], we [[know]] [[Stephen]] [[King]] has [[ability]], yet I haven't even read his [[books]], only [[seen]] some of his [[movies]].

[[Anyway]], I [[liked]] it. If you [[like]] harsh [[corny]] [[movies]] with 80's overtones just watch it. but don't expect too much. It [[really]] is so [[bad]] its good. This is not a good [[flick]] but I [[yet]] like it. The [[ctu]] Clovis is gold in a [[urn]] as well as the [[supposition]] of the cats themselves - intrinsically [[oppose]] to the [[satanic]] Sleepwalkers. I [[believing]] there is more to this [[cinema]] than people [[achieving]], [[broadly]] it is very [[hard]], but this brusqueness can sometimes be good. It's [[ai]] the [[trite]] lines, the [[steep]] [[terminated]] and a [[slapstick]] [[components]] [[transmitted]] by the bumbling [[police]].

Did [[someone]] [[unearthed]] the incestuous [[ingredients]] a bit [[alarming]]? Ultimately this [[flick]] is [[randomly]] and randomly acrimonious, which is [[rather]] [[efficiency]], I liken it to [[Psychotic]] - the [[relations]] between the [[mothers]] and son, the [[alter]] of [[actors]]. I [[reckon]] the abruptness [[collaborated]] [[furthermore]], this is not a movie that you [[wanna]] them to [[prolong]], it only [[worked]] if it's short.

I'm still not sure whether the [[superintendent]] [[lacking]] depth, or whether he did these things with [[intent]], we [[savoir]] [[Stephan]] [[Emperor]] has [[capacity]], yet I haven't even read his [[ledgers]], only [[watched]] some of his [[film]].

[[Writ]], I [[enjoyed]] it. If you [[loves]] harsh [[mundane]] [[cinema]] with 80's overtones just watch it. but don't expect too much. It [[truthfully]] is so [[amiss]] its good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2113 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I must [[warn]] you, there are some [[spoilers]] in it. But to start it off, I got "Spanish Judges" on [[February]] I think. It was mention it was the last copy, but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But [[either]] [[way]], I have it. I [[thought]] it was good. I wanted to see this mainly because of the great [[actor]], Matthew Lillard (I'm surprised no one on the [[reviews]] mention the scar) although it is [[kind]] of low budget, getting enough money to make this film would be worth spending. Man, what a good actor.

The story it about a con artist known as Jack ([[Matthew]] Lillard) who "claims" to have merchandises called The Spanish [[Judges]]. If you don't know what Spanish Judges are or haven't seen the [[trailer]] for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He [[needs]] [[protection]], so he [[hires]] a [[couple]] who are [[also]] crooks, Max and Jamie ([[Vincent]] D'Onofrio and [[Valeria]] Golino) as well as a [[crook]] that goes by the [[name]] of [[Piece]] ([[Mark]] [[Boone]] Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even [[tell]] [[anyone]] her [[name]] because she's from Mars, as she [[said]]. [[So]] they ([[mainly]] [[Jack]]) [[call]] her "Mars [[Girl]]". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one [[big]] [[game]]. A [[game]] that involves some [[lust]], [[lies]] and betrayal.

There was some over acting in it (Matt and [[Valeria]], as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've [[done]] better and the [[score]] could've been a [[little]] better as well. Some of the [[score]] was actually good. The [[theme]] they [[used]] for the [[beginning]] and the end (before the [[credits]]) was a good song [[choice]], that's my [[opinion]]. The fight scene in the [[end]] could've been a [[little]] longer and a [[little]] more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.

I know this is a [[review]], but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: [[Valeria]] Golino is not a newcomer. [[According]] to this site, she has been acting [[since]] 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the "Hot Shots!" [[movies]]. But good review.

Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.

8/10 I must [[alert]] you, there are some [[saboteurs]] in it. But to start it off, I got "Spanish Judges" on [[Feb]] I think. It was mention it was the last copy, but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But [[neither]] [[manner]], I have it. I [[brainchild]] it was good. I wanted to see this mainly because of the great [[actress]], Matthew Lillard (I'm surprised no one on the [[inspecting]] mention the scar) although it is [[types]] of low budget, getting enough money to make this film would be worth spending. Man, what a good actor.

The story it about a con artist known as Jack ([[Mathew]] Lillard) who "claims" to have merchandises called The Spanish [[Judiciary]]. If you don't know what Spanish Judges are or haven't seen the [[caravan]] for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He [[should]] [[protections]], so he [[recruiting]] a [[matches]] who are [[moreover]] crooks, Max and Jamie ([[Tome]] D'Onofrio and [[Naomi]] Golino) as well as a [[bandit]] that goes by the [[names]] of [[Slice]] ([[Dialed]] [[Boon]] Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even [[told]] [[someone]] her [[naming]] because she's from Mars, as she [[indicated]]. [[Accordingly]] they ([[fundamentally]] [[Jacques]]) [[calling]] her "Mars [[Woman]]". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one [[overwhelming]] [[jeu]]. A [[games]] that involves some [[thirsty]], [[lying]] and betrayal.

There was some over acting in it (Matt and [[Felicity]], as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've [[accomplished]] better and the [[scoring]] could've been a [[tiny]] better as well. Some of the [[notation]] was actually good. The [[subject]] they [[use]] for the [[start]] and the end (before the [[credit]]) was a good song [[picks]], that's my [[view]]. The fight scene in the [[ends]] could've been a [[scant]] longer and a [[small]] more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.

I know this is a [[revisions]], but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: [[Dominguez]] Golino is not a newcomer. [[Conforming]] to this site, she has been acting [[because]] 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the "Hot Shots!" [[cinema]]. But good review.

Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I have [[NOT]] [[seen]] this movie, but I [[must]]. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's [[books]] (Kon Tiki, Ra and [[Aku]] [[Aku]]) I am [[actively]] looking for a copy of this movie.

The thesis that Peruvians [[migrated]] to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their [[voyage]] was [[heroic]] to say the least.

Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.

I would be interested in buying it. I have [[NOPE]] [[watched]] this movie, but I [[gotta]]. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's [[book]] (Kon Tiki, Ra and [[Kau]] [[Kau]]) I am [[forcefully]] looking for a copy of this movie.

The thesis that Peruvians [[migrating]] to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their [[travelling]] was [[gutsy]] to say the least.

Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.

I would be interested in buying it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2115 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a FUNNY film. It has all the usual Disney components (music, great range of characters, story, appeal), entwined with superb animation and the excellent voice talents of less well known actors as those in say "Antz" and "Price of Egypt".

The characters work really well, and have a strong appeal, and the humour is aimed at a wide level which overcomes generational barriers. The movie is also presented in superb cinemascope format, which adds to the cinema experience.

Call me crazy, but I have seen the film three times, and I intend on taking more friends to see it this weekend. Many skeptics have seen this film on my recommendation and not been disappointed. I work in a multiplex, and I can honestly say that no-one has ever walked out of this movie without a sense of satisfaction.

See it, and don't be put off because it is animated. You are sure to enjoy this movie, and make sure you stay for the end credits! The bloopers and out-takes at the end are the funniest part of the film, which is packed with laughs throughout. --------------------------------------------- Result 2116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Superhero movies [[pretty]] much [[always]] suck, and this is no exception. Its only redeeming quality is the [[fact]] the movie [[COULD]] have been even [[worse]]. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this [[movie]], so yes it is that [[bad]]...

[[If]] your [[looking]] for a [[black]] [[superhero]], check out 'Blankman' its not a "serious" [[superhero]] [[movie]] but at [[least]] its [[entertaining]]. Superhero movies [[quite]] much [[consistently]] suck, and this is no exception. Its only redeeming quality is the [[facto]] the movie [[DID]] have been even [[worst]]. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this [[filmmaking]], so yes it is that [[unfavorable]]...

[[Though]] your [[searching]] for a [[negra]] [[hero]], check out 'Blankman' its not a "serious" [[hero]] [[filmmaking]] but at [[lowest]] its [[amuse]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] [[If]] you're [[watching]] this without an inkling of an idea what the [[story]] is about, then you're in for quite the surprise. Even then the [[synopsis]] has [[painted]] a [[picture]] of a rather [[sane]] storyline, but the actual [[film]] is [[anything]] but.

As the [[synopsis]] went, it [[tells]] of an obsessed [[mountain]] [[climber]], which you'll [[see]] as the prologue before the [[opening]] credits and text [[crawl]], which [[tells]] you of the presence of Chronopolis, an imaginary [[city]] that [[exists]] in dreamy [[manuscripts]] of the mind (note to self – this spells [[trouble]] with [[flashing]] lights), where its inhabitants are immortals [[yearning]] for a [[change]] in their omnipresence. They can [[see]] our [[world]], and [[notice]] of all [[persons]] this mountain [[climber]], and the [[synopsis]] [[explained]] that they [[decided]] to contact him through alchemy, [[creating]] an [[intelligent]] sphere to [[meet]] the [[man]].

What that translated to, is a [[repetitive]] piece of animation that a 5 year [[old]] [[kid]] could produce. [[Have]] [[shapes]] created, [[though]] [[credit]] goes to the [[stop]] [[motion]] [[style]], and put it through a mind-numbing [[loop]]. And repeat until your [[eyes]] [[start]] to [[close]], then move on to the [[next]] scene. [[If]] [[anything]], the Chonopolisians (if this term exists) [[really]] [[love]] their sticks and balls, [[constantly]] [[playing]] at conjuring up that magical [[sphere]], and having a field day [[playing]] with it before [[releasing]] it to the "other" world. It gets no better as well, when the [[man]] interacts with the [[sphere]] in [[yet]] another hypnotically [[boring]] and sleep inducing [[sequence]].

[[Thank]] goodness of course that the run [[time]] is shorter than what's advertised, which is 57 minutes (or [[less]]) against the 70 stated. While [[firmly]] dated, its dull [[colours]], non-existent [[story]], scratchy soundtrack and repetitive [[pictures]] will [[win]] over no [[fans]]. Don't [[waste]] [[time]]. [[Though]] you're [[staring]] this without an inkling of an idea what the [[saga]] is about, then you're in for quite the surprise. Even then the [[recap]] has [[painting]] a [[photograph]] of a rather [[sensible]] storyline, but the actual [[filmmaking]] is [[something]] but.

As the [[recap]] went, it [[says]] of an obsessed [[shan]] [[mountaineer]], which you'll [[seeing]] as the prologue before the [[introductory]] credits and text [[creeping]], which [[says]] you of the presence of Chronopolis, an imaginary [[ville]] that [[exist]] in dreamy [[manuscript]] of the mind (note to self – this spells [[difficulty]] with [[blinking]] lights), where its inhabitants are immortals [[longing]] for a [[adjustments]] in their omnipresence. They can [[seeing]] our [[monde]], and [[noticing]] of all [[person]] this mountain [[mountaineer]], and the [[recap]] [[explain]] that they [[deciding]] to contact him through alchemy, [[establishing]] an [[smart]] sphere to [[respond]] the [[dude]].

What that translated to, is a [[recur]] piece of animation that a 5 year [[former]] [[petit]] could produce. [[Has]] [[modes]] created, [[if]] [[credits]] goes to the [[stops]] [[motions]] [[elegance]], and put it through a mind-numbing [[loops]]. And repeat until your [[eye]] [[starts]] to [[near]], then move on to the [[future]] scene. [[Though]] [[something]], the Chonopolisians (if this term exists) [[truly]] [[amore]] their sticks and balls, [[steadily]] [[replay]] at conjuring up that magical [[zone]], and having a field day [[gaming]] with it before [[freed]] it to the "other" world. It gets no better as well, when the [[men]] interacts with the [[zone]] in [[however]] another hypnotically [[dull]] and sleep inducing [[sequences]].

[[Thanking]] goodness of course that the run [[moment]] is shorter than what's advertised, which is 57 minutes (or [[lowest]]) against the 70 stated. While [[decidedly]] dated, its dull [[coloration]], non-existent [[history]], scratchy soundtrack and repetitive [[imaging]] will [[wins]] over no [[enthusiasts]]. Don't [[wastes]] [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Since]] the [[advent]] of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and easily [[touched]] by [[accounts]] of unhappy [[love]]. Even more fascinating have [[always]] been the [[tales]] of impossible [[love]], [[love]] that cannot be. The Israeli filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The Bubble" is about that. And then it is [[also]] not. The title of the film refers to the „bubble" that is Tel-Aviv set against the [[background]] of the political realities of Israel. The country's [[cosmopolitan]] and unofficial capital [[city]] doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a [[city]] in the Palestinian West Bank which [[also]] features in the [[film]]. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the [[Palestinian]] checkpoints. Actually, it doesn't seem to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble" of Tel-Aviv [[allows]] people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western [[city]]. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' [[records]], a lifestyle [[magazine]] [[editor]] [[looking]] for a [[sexy]] cover for his [[next]] [[issue]], trendy people [[sitting]] in trendy cafes discussing trendy [[things]] over [[cups]] of cappuccino and other similarly trendy [[drinks]], while those at [[home]] are watching the local [[edition]] of [[Pop]] Idol. It is this „bubble" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of [[reality]].

The film evolves around the lives of three young [[Israelis]] who [[share]] a flat and, for the most [[part]], [[try]] to [[stay]] out of politics. Yelli, the [[camp]] [[owner]] and [[manager]] of „Orna & Ella", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the [[city]] and [[prefers]] not to [[think]] about the „[[crap]] that [[surrounds]] them". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a [[slightly]] avantguard [[record]] [[store]], [[seems]] to be [[equally]] unwilling to engage in [[long]] [[political]] [[discussions]] and contemplations. Lulu, the only [[female]] of the [[lot]], is on the contrary [[linked]] to the Israeli Left, [[although]] her [[political]] [[activities]] [[seem]] to be [[confined]] to „raves against the occupation". Yelli and Noam [[naturally]] don't object to [[participating]] in these. [[Lulu]] and her [[political]] [[friends]] make t-shirts with the rave's logo, put up [[posters]] and hand out [[booklets]] [[advertising]] it in the [[neighbourhood]]. [[Their]] [[main]] concern [[seems]] to be that there are never any actual [[Palestinians]] [[participating]] and that the police might [[come]] and [[spoil]] all the [[fun]] for them again. The [[closest]] they [[come]] to an [[actual]] [[confrontation]] is when they [[get]] into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble".

The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the [[initial]] hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with Hebrew, he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.

At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.

„The Bubble" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched. [[Because]] the [[emergence]] of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and easily [[impacted]] by [[account]] of unhappy [[iove]]. Even more fascinating have [[invariably]] been the [[tale]] of impossible [[amore]], [[likes]] that cannot be. The Israeli filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The Bubble" is about that. And then it is [[further]] not. The title of the film refers to the „bubble" that is Tel-Aviv set against the [[context]] of the political realities of Israel. The country's [[metropolis]] and unofficial capital [[town]] doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a [[town]] in the Palestinian West Bank which [[furthermore]] features in the [[cinema]]. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the [[Israeli]] checkpoints. Actually, it doesn't seem to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble" of Tel-Aviv [[permitting]] people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western [[town]]. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' [[registered]], a lifestyle [[revue]] [[editorial]] [[searching]] for a [[hot]] cover for his [[imminent]] [[issuing]], trendy people [[seated]] in trendy cafes discussing trendy [[aspects]] over [[drinks]] of cappuccino and other similarly trendy [[beverages]], while those at [[house]] are watching the local [[editing]] of [[Pops]] Idol. It is this „bubble" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of [[realist]].

The film evolves around the lives of three young [[Palestinian]] who [[shares]] a flat and, for the most [[party]], [[endeavour]] to [[staying]] out of politics. Yelli, the [[campsite]] [[proprietor]] and [[administrator]] of „Orna & Ella", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the [[town]] and [[favors]] not to [[believe]] about the „[[bullshit]] that [[surround]] them". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a [[mildly]] avantguard [[recordings]] [[boutique]], [[appears]] to be [[likewise]] unwilling to engage in [[longer]] [[politician]] [[talk]] and contemplations. Lulu, the only [[females]] of the [[batch]], is on the contrary [[associated]] to the Israeli Left, [[albeit]] her [[politician]] [[action]] [[appears]] to be [[limited]] to „raves against the occupation". Yelli and Noam [[clearly]] don't object to [[participant]] in these. [[Lou]] and her [[politician]] [[boyfriends]] make t-shirts with the rave's logo, put up [[banners]] and hand out [[brochure]] [[adverts]] it in the [[vicinity]]. [[Hun]] [[principal]] concern [[seem]] to be that there are never any actual [[Israeli]] [[implicated]] and that the police might [[arrived]] and [[wrack]] all the [[amusing]] for them again. The [[nearest]] they [[coming]] to an [[real]] [[encounters]] is when they [[obtains]] into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble".

The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the [[incipient]] hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with Hebrew, he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.

At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.

„The Bubble" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched. --------------------------------------------- Result 2119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I [[totally]] disagreed with those comments which [[said]] this is a good [[movie]]. This is a totally SUCKED [[movie]]. I mean SUCKED - S.U.C.K.E.D. The [[story]] [[development]] is [[strange]]. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent [[girl]] to a party-fun [[seeking]] chick for no [[convincing]] [[reasons]] at all. [[In]] [[addition]], all the actresses [[looked]] way too [[old]] for being college [[students]] - [[College]] students looked like about 30 [[years]] old - you figure out the [[rest]]. I [[watched]] only about first [[ten]] minutes and [[started]] fast [[forwarding]] to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, [[hasty]] and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are laughable, considering how [[many]] [[clothes]] they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and [[save]] yourself a few bucks. [[Conclusion]]: [[Story]] - 0, Sex - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10. I [[fully]] disagreed with those comments which [[says]] this is a good [[film]]. This is a totally SUCKED [[filmmaking]]. I mean SUCKED - S.U.C.K.E.D. The [[tales]] [[evolution]] is [[weird]]. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent [[chick]] to a party-fun [[trying]] chick for no [[persuade]] [[reason]] at all. [[At]] [[supplement]], all the actresses [[seemed]] way too [[longtime]] for being college [[student]] - [[Campus]] students looked like about 30 [[ages]] old - you figure out the [[stays]]. I [[seen]] only about first [[dix]] minutes and [[startup]] fast [[transmitting]] to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, [[headlong]] and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are laughable, considering how [[multiple]] [[costumes]] they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and [[savings]] yourself a few bucks. [[Conclusions]]: [[Tale]] - 0, Sex - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This documentary is a reenactment of the last few years of Betty Page's(Paige [[Richards]]) career. The Tennessee tease was the most [[recognizable]] pin-up [[queen]] in [[history]]. Her most [[memorable]] [[work]] [[came]] in the 1950's and was fetish photos, bondage and cat-fight "girly flicks". Irving Klaw(Dukey Flyswatter)at his [[Movie]] Star News [[instructed]] Betty on what to do in front of the [[camera]]. There was no nudity in the famous [[photos]] or "stag [[films]]", but [[nonetheless]], Klaw was charged with distributing [[obscene]] materials and was [[ordered]] to [[destroy]] them to [[avoid]] prosecution. It is no surprise that Betty had a cult following at the height of her [[career]]. The girl-next-door with jet black [[hair]], blue eyes and an hour [[glass]] figure dressed in fetish gear or not would mesmerize for decades. After all, it has been said that she was photographed more than Marilyn Monroe and second only to the most photographed image in the world, Elvis Presley. Betty Page would disappear and [[devote]] her last years to [[religion]]. This movie actually [[could]] have been a lot better; but good enough to hold interest.

Miss Richards is stunning in her own right. Bra, panties, garter belt and hose do not hurt her image in the least. Also in the [[cast]]: Jaimie Henkin, Jana Strain, Emily Marilyn and Julie Simone. Be advised this movie can [[change]] your heart rate. This documentary is a reenactment of the last few years of Betty Page's(Paige [[Richard]]) career. The Tennessee tease was the most [[palpable]] pin-up [[quinn]] in [[story]]. Her most [[unforgettable]] [[collaboration]] [[arrived]] in the 1950's and was fetish photos, bondage and cat-fight "girly flicks". Irving Klaw(Dukey Flyswatter)at his [[Movies]] Star News [[commissioned]] Betty on what to do in front of the [[cameras]]. There was no nudity in the famous [[photographing]] or "stag [[filmmaking]]", but [[however]], Klaw was charged with distributing [[immodest]] materials and was [[decreed]] to [[destroyed]] them to [[forestall]] prosecution. It is no surprise that Betty had a cult following at the height of her [[carrera]]. The girl-next-door with jet black [[hairstyle]], blue eyes and an hour [[glassware]] figure dressed in fetish gear or not would mesmerize for decades. After all, it has been said that she was photographed more than Marilyn Monroe and second only to the most photographed image in the world, Elvis Presley. Betty Page would disappear and [[expend]] her last years to [[religions]]. This movie actually [[did]] have been a lot better; but good enough to hold interest.

Miss Richards is stunning in her own right. Bra, panties, garter belt and hose do not hurt her image in the least. Also in the [[casting]]: Jaimie Henkin, Jana Strain, Emily Marilyn and Julie Simone. Be advised this movie can [[modifications]] your heart rate. --------------------------------------------- Result 2121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Thank]] God this wasn't based on a [[true]] story, because what a story it is. Populated by [[despicable]] [[characters]] whose [[depravity]] knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a [[mesmerizing]], jaw-dropping [[excursion]] into perversion which would be [[laughable]] (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly [[tragic]] undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such [[magnificent]], overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than [[Sidney]] Lumet doesn't hurt either.

The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.

The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: "Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution. [[Appreciation]] God this wasn't based on a [[genuine]] story, because what a story it is. Populated by [[obnoxious]] [[features]] whose [[debauchery]] knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a [[riveting]], jaw-dropping [[trip]] into perversion which would be [[grotesque]] (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly [[dire]] undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such [[wondrous]], overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than [[Sid]] Lumet doesn't hurt either.

The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.

The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: "Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution. --------------------------------------------- Result 2122 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Is it possible to give a movie NO STARS? I suppose not. However many stars IMDb [[displays]] this just think zero and you'll get my drift. Director and photographer Timothy Hines didn't have much of a budget compared to Spielberg's Herculean effort with the same material (rumored to be the most expensive movie ever made), but that need not be an [[insurmountable]] [[handicap]]. I've [[seen]] some wonderful work done on a comparative shoestring ("Soldier and Saints" is a recent example). With hard work, integrity and, above all, talent it is certainly possible to realize a faithful rendition of Wells' novella -- and at [[fraction]] of what was spent by Dreamworks on its "[[War]] of the Worlds". [[Unfortunately]], Hines failed in all these departments. [[Even]] if he had had Spielberg's budget and [[Tom]] [[Cruise]] signed for the lead his movie [[would]] have stunk just as badly as this barnyard animal he's foisted on us.

Primarily, Hines seems unable to tell a [[story]]. Thanks to [[digital]] video [[technology]] he can [[record]] [[images]] and [[sound]], but he [[shows]] [[little]] [[aptitude]] for assembling a narrative with what he [[records]]. A [[guy]] [[walks]] down a country [[lane]], a lot. He [[talks]] badly aped Received English to some other guy. Then he walks down the same lane, only shot from the back this time to show he's [[returning]] -- clever, eh? Walking and talking, for nearly an hour that's all that happens. OK, I'll grant that one extended excursion from the main character's house to the impact site on Horsell Common to show that it's a considerable distance from one place to the other might be [[useful]] (a first-year film [[student]] [[could]] storyboard a more economical and more aesthetical [[establishing]] [[sequence]] than this, btw), but half a dozen times? Back and forth, back and forth, et cetera, et cetera with some yakkity-yak in between. Remarkable. The only explanation for this surfeit of redundancy other than [[total]] artistic [[ineptitude]] is a desire to pad out thirty [[minutes]] of [[wretchedly]] amateurish CG works into [[something]] that [[could]] be offered as a feature-length film. [[Finally]] the Martian fighting machines appear and the walking and [[talking]] becomes running and talking, or [[shrieking]]. Later we get staggering and wailing for dessert.

Thankfully, much of the [[dialogue]] is [[lifted]] straight from H.[[G]]. Wells' text; else we'd have no idea what is going on. But is it not the whole point of [[cinema]] to illuminate a text, to realize what words alone can't convey? If a film relies on dialogue or monologue to tell us what we see or how to feel, why bother? Why not do a radio play? Orson Welles made himself a household name doing just that. However, Hines thinks he's a filmmaker, so he's content to mouth the words and swallow the meaning.

Secondly, Hines was able to buy some CG effects of a sort for his movie, but he has no idea how to use them. Now I for one have no unquenchable sweet tooth for eye candy. I believe good science fiction cinema doesn't need dazzling technical effects. Some really potent Sci-Fi's have flourished on virtually none at all. But "The War of the Worlds" as film requires a certain baseline effort. Wells tells a story that hinges on things can be seen and heard and even smelled. The effects don't need to be complex; they can even be crude (e.g. fighting machines on wires gliding over miniature streets as seen in the George Pal/Byron Haskins 1953 version), but they must be handled well. Unfortunately Hines' effects are both crude and incompetent – tripod fighting machines higher than a cathedral spire stomp around making a noise like a pogo stick bouncing on linoleum – Martian squidoids even though oppressed by four times the gravity of their native world scurry and flit about without perceptible effort – skeletons totally denuded of flesh and muscle writhe and scream -- the same damn horse and buggy greenscreens its way across the foreground a dozen times ([[flipped]] left for right occasionally in hope that we might not notice) – and on ad nauseum. Crude technique is forgivable. So you have a CG fire effect that's less than convincing? Fine, we can work around that. Just don't use it too often and only show glimpses of it. That stomped woman sequence looks more like a crushed plum? Throw it away. It's not necessary. You say your Martian flyer [[looks]] like a toy on a string? If you must use it, go ahead, but please don't show it twice! But no, Hines won't listen. We get the worst looking stuff used again and again. Gotta get those 180 minutes somehow, boy.

Next we have acting, or more precisely too much acting. Whether in a speaking role or just paid to die on queue everybody in this film is acting his little heart out. Evidently Hines thinks he's getting a bargain -- More fleeing in terror over there! You, quaking behind that tree, let's have a real conniption fit this take. You call that writhing in agony? Nonsense, my grandmother can writhe better -- Nevertheless the cast as a whole and individually stink. They aren't even good amateurs. But this needn't prove fatal. Many a good movie has been made with rancid acting. That's what directors are for. And editors. Which brings up another point… Who the hell let Tim Hines edit this cheese factory? If America's butchers were as adept at meat cutting as Hines is at film cutting your next hamburger would be all fingers and no beef. In spite of the near three-hour running time there is lots of stuff missing from this movie -- not sequences, but single frames, creating a herky-jerky effect that's nauseating to watch. Maybe Hines intention was to simulate the effect of a hand cranked cine camera of the 1890's. If he was I can say he doesn't know how to do it. Is it possible to give a movie NO STARS? I suppose not. However many stars IMDb [[showed]] this just think zero and you'll get my drift. Director and photographer Timothy Hines didn't have much of a budget compared to Spielberg's Herculean effort with the same material (rumored to be the most expensive movie ever made), but that need not be an [[unstoppable]] [[handicapped]]. I've [[noticed]] some wonderful work done on a comparative shoestring ("Soldier and Saints" is a recent example). With hard work, integrity and, above all, talent it is certainly possible to realize a faithful rendition of Wells' novella -- and at [[portion]] of what was spent by Dreamworks on its "[[Warfare]] of the Worlds". [[Sadly]], Hines failed in all these departments. [[Yet]] if he had had Spielberg's budget and [[Thom]] [[Cruises]] signed for the lead his movie [[ought]] have stunk just as badly as this barnyard animal he's foisted on us.

Primarily, Hines seems unable to tell a [[history]]. Thanks to [[scanned]] video [[technique]] he can [[registering]] [[imagery]] and [[sounds]], but he [[show]] [[scant]] [[dexterity]] for assembling a narrative with what he [[recordings]]. A [[buddy]] [[walking]] down a country [[lanes]], a lot. He [[discussion]] badly aped Received English to some other guy. Then he walks down the same lane, only shot from the back this time to show he's [[reverted]] -- clever, eh? Walking and talking, for nearly an hour that's all that happens. OK, I'll grant that one extended excursion from the main character's house to the impact site on Horsell Common to show that it's a considerable distance from one place to the other might be [[handy]] (a first-year film [[learners]] [[would]] storyboard a more economical and more aesthetical [[establish]] [[sequences]] than this, btw), but half a dozen times? Back and forth, back and forth, et cetera, et cetera with some yakkity-yak in between. Remarkable. The only explanation for this surfeit of redundancy other than [[overall]] artistic [[imperfection]] is a desire to pad out thirty [[mins]] of [[atrociously]] amateurish CG works into [[somethin]] that [[wo]] be offered as a feature-length film. [[Lastly]] the Martian fighting machines appear and the walking and [[discussing]] becomes running and talking, or [[howling]]. Later we get staggering and wailing for dessert.

Thankfully, much of the [[discussions]] is [[hoisting]] straight from H.[[gram]]. Wells' text; else we'd have no idea what is going on. But is it not the whole point of [[cine]] to illuminate a text, to realize what words alone can't convey? If a film relies on dialogue or monologue to tell us what we see or how to feel, why bother? Why not do a radio play? Orson Welles made himself a household name doing just that. However, Hines thinks he's a filmmaker, so he's content to mouth the words and swallow the meaning.

Secondly, Hines was able to buy some CG effects of a sort for his movie, but he has no idea how to use them. Now I for one have no unquenchable sweet tooth for eye candy. I believe good science fiction cinema doesn't need dazzling technical effects. Some really potent Sci-Fi's have flourished on virtually none at all. But "The War of the Worlds" as film requires a certain baseline effort. Wells tells a story that hinges on things can be seen and heard and even smelled. The effects don't need to be complex; they can even be crude (e.g. fighting machines on wires gliding over miniature streets as seen in the George Pal/Byron Haskins 1953 version), but they must be handled well. Unfortunately Hines' effects are both crude and incompetent – tripod fighting machines higher than a cathedral spire stomp around making a noise like a pogo stick bouncing on linoleum – Martian squidoids even though oppressed by four times the gravity of their native world scurry and flit about without perceptible effort – skeletons totally denuded of flesh and muscle writhe and scream -- the same damn horse and buggy greenscreens its way across the foreground a dozen times ([[overthrew]] left for right occasionally in hope that we might not notice) – and on ad nauseum. Crude technique is forgivable. So you have a CG fire effect that's less than convincing? Fine, we can work around that. Just don't use it too often and only show glimpses of it. That stomped woman sequence looks more like a crushed plum? Throw it away. It's not necessary. You say your Martian flyer [[seem]] like a toy on a string? If you must use it, go ahead, but please don't show it twice! But no, Hines won't listen. We get the worst looking stuff used again and again. Gotta get those 180 minutes somehow, boy.

Next we have acting, or more precisely too much acting. Whether in a speaking role or just paid to die on queue everybody in this film is acting his little heart out. Evidently Hines thinks he's getting a bargain -- More fleeing in terror over there! You, quaking behind that tree, let's have a real conniption fit this take. You call that writhing in agony? Nonsense, my grandmother can writhe better -- Nevertheless the cast as a whole and individually stink. They aren't even good amateurs. But this needn't prove fatal. Many a good movie has been made with rancid acting. That's what directors are for. And editors. Which brings up another point… Who the hell let Tim Hines edit this cheese factory? If America's butchers were as adept at meat cutting as Hines is at film cutting your next hamburger would be all fingers and no beef. In spite of the near three-hour running time there is lots of stuff missing from this movie -- not sequences, but single frames, creating a herky-jerky effect that's nauseating to watch. Maybe Hines intention was to simulate the effect of a hand cranked cine camera of the 1890's. If he was I can say he doesn't know how to do it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Proof that not everything Tarantino touches turns to gold. This is most definitely plastic, all the way. Its easy to see that without Quentin's involvement this would have probably sat on the shelf for years, that's assuming it would have ever got produced in the first place. It is about a woman with a fascination of death who gets a job cleaning up after crime scenes, Angela Jones is unconvincing in this role, William Baldwin is better as the Serial Killer who keeps Jones in employment!. All in all pretty poor. --------------------------------------------- Result 2124 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[liked]] [[nearly]] all the movies in the [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] series with the [[exception]] of the one I [[think]] is titled "[[Enforcer]]". "Deadpool" was a bit [[weak]] in [[areas]] too, but I [[still]] [[enjoyed]] it. This one is one of my [[favorites]] of the series, if [[nothing]] else for the [[great]] line of "Go ahead, [[make]] my day". This one also [[features]] an interesting [[albeit]] familiar plot of someone [[killing]] those that have [[done]] her [[wrong]]. Just [[think]] "Magnum Force" with [[less]] mystery about who is behind the [[killings]] and you have your [[plot]]. Granted there is a bit more than that as this one does [[feature]] a very [[nice]] final [[showdown]] at an amusement park. It [[also]] [[features]] [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] [[getting]] a bulldog as a [[gift]] and it tripping up Sandra Locke in a [[rather]] [[humorous]] scene. The only [[question]] that [[remains]] is why Clint [[Eastwood]] had to have the [[rather]] mediocre [[actress]] Sandra Locke in so [[many]] of his [[movies]]. She brings the [[score]] down a point every [[time]] even when [[overall]] the [[movie]] is [[enjoyable]] to me. [[Granted]] she is not to bad here, but her [[character]] could have been so much better by [[someone]] else. Another problem with this [[movie]] and other [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] [[movies]], at [[times]] they [[almost]] seem to be [[advertisements]] for [[guns]]. I like guns as [[much]] as the next [[person]], but do we really [[need]] scenes of him [[explaining]] all the [[different]] strengths of his [[newest]] [[weapon]] and how [[many]] bullets it [[holds]]? [[Still]], very nice [[entry]] into the [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] [[series]] of [[movies]]. I [[loved]] [[almost]] all the movies in the [[Grubby]] [[Hari]] series with the [[exceptions]] of the one I [[thinking]] is titled "[[Gorilla]]". "Deadpool" was a bit [[vulnerable]] in [[area]] too, but I [[however]] [[appreciated]] it. This one is one of my [[favorite]] of the series, if [[anything]] else for the [[large]] line of "Go ahead, [[deliver]] my day". This one also [[attribute]] an interesting [[while]] familiar plot of someone [[slaying]] those that have [[performed]] her [[amiss]]. Just [[thought]] "Magnum Force" with [[fewer]] mystery about who is behind the [[murdering]] and you have your [[intrigue]]. Granted there is a bit more than that as this one does [[attribute]] a very [[pleasant]] final [[confrontation]] at an amusement park. It [[additionally]] [[featured]] [[Filthy]] [[Hari]] [[obtain]] a bulldog as a [[don]] and it tripping up Sandra Locke in a [[somewhat]] [[comic]] scene. The only [[matter]] that [[stays]] is why Clint [[Nolan]] had to have the [[fairly]] mediocre [[actor]] Sandra Locke in so [[multiple]] of his [[cinematography]]. She brings the [[notation]] down a point every [[moment]] even when [[general]] the [[cinema]] is [[pleasant]] to me. [[Conferred]] she is not to bad here, but her [[characters]] could have been so much better by [[somebody]] else. Another problem with this [[flick]] and other [[Squalid]] [[Hari]] [[movie]], at [[moments]] they [[roughly]] seem to be [[commercials]] for [[rifles]]. I like guns as [[very]] as the next [[somebody]], but do we really [[required]] scenes of him [[explain]] all the [[multiple]] strengths of his [[latest]] [[firearms]] and how [[countless]] bullets it [[held]]? [[However]], very nice [[entrances]] into the [[Soiled]] [[Harri]] [[serial]] of [[movie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] This is a [[great]] movie that [[everyone]] should [[see]]. It plays like a Dean Koontz [[book]].

[[Bill]] Paxton's performance was great in that it [[really]] seems like he [[believes]] in what he is [[saying]] and doing.

I don't know why viewers have to read in some [[kind]] of [[advocacy]] for religious [[murder]] in to the [[film]]. It is fiction. The [[ending]] is [[surprising]], but [[fictional]]. [[So]] what? I [[think]] that is what makes this [[movie]] so good. SPOILER DO [[NOT]] READ FURTHER IF YOU [[HAVENT]] [[SEEN]] THE MOVIE. [[Throughout]] the [[movie]], the [[viewer]] is [[continually]] [[shocked]] at the sickness of Paxton's [[character]], the impact on the [[children]], and the [[way]] the children [[handle]] this [[outrageous]] [[conduct]]. And then at the end, it [[turns]] out to be true. [[God]] has put him on a [[mission]] to [[rid]] the world of [[demons]]. Paxton is not clairvoyant as other [[viewers]] [[suggest]]. Sure, he is [[given]] info that he couldn't have known [[otherwise]], but the [[movie]] goes further to [[show]] how [[God]] is "[[protecting]]" [[Adam]] through the convenient [[video]] quality [[problem]] and the complete [[lack]] of [[memory]] of the [[second]] FBI agent. The [[film]] isn't advocating Christian [[murder]], it is [[merely]] taking the [[viewer]] on a very [[unexpected]] ride. This is a [[wondrous]] movie that [[somebody]] should [[consults]]. It plays like a Dean Koontz [[books]].

[[Billings]] Paxton's performance was great in that it [[genuinely]] seems like he [[thinks]] in what he is [[arguing]] and doing.

I don't know why viewers have to read in some [[types]] of [[propaganda]] for religious [[kill]] in to the [[cinema]]. It is fiction. The [[ended]] is [[impressive]], but [[fictitious]]. [[Hence]] what? I [[ideas]] that is what makes this [[film]] so good. SPOILER DO [[NAH]] READ FURTHER IF YOU [[SHOULDNT]] [[WATCHED]] THE MOVIE. [[Across]] the [[cinematography]], the [[viewfinder]] is [[systematically]] [[appalled]] at the sickness of Paxton's [[trait]], the impact on the [[enfant]], and the [[routes]] the children [[manipulated]] this [[obnoxious]] [[behaviours]]. And then at the end, it [[revolves]] out to be true. [[Christ]] has put him on a [[delegations]] to [[extricate]] the world of [[devils]]. Paxton is not clairvoyant as other [[onlookers]] [[insinuate]]. Sure, he is [[awarded]] info that he couldn't have known [[else]], but the [[kino]] goes further to [[displays]] how [[Seigneur]] is "[[preserving]]" [[Adem]] through the convenient [[videos]] quality [[difficulty]] and the complete [[lacks]] of [[memories]] of the [[secondly]] FBI agent. The [[flick]] isn't advocating Christian [[kill]], it is [[only]] taking the [[viewfinder]] on a very [[unintended]] ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 2126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I watched this [[movie]] after watching Practical Magic, and the [[older]] film was far superior. I [[liked]] the [[way]] the lighting, makeup, and costumes changed as Gillian changed in the story. [[Jimmy]] Stewart's mannerisms didn't do a lot for me in this [[film]], but I suppose they did serve to highlight the [[reserve]] of Gillian's [[character]]. I was also [[struck]] by Nicky's and Gillian's mannerisms--it was as if the director wanted him to appear effeminate and Gillian to appear masculine. The [[gestures]] [[Nicky]] makes when he's showing Redlich his powers [[especially]] struck me. I've never thought of warlocks as being effeminate, so it was an interesting way of contrasting those characters. I watched this [[cinematography]] after watching Practical Magic, and the [[aged]] film was far superior. I [[enjoyed]] the [[routes]] the lighting, makeup, and costumes changed as Gillian changed in the story. [[Jimbo]] Stewart's mannerisms didn't do a lot for me in this [[kino]], but I suppose they did serve to highlight the [[reservation]] of Gillian's [[characters]]. I was also [[befallen]] by Nicky's and Gillian's mannerisms--it was as if the director wanted him to appear effeminate and Gillian to appear masculine. The [[flicks]] [[Nick]] makes when he's showing Redlich his powers [[particularly]] struck me. I've never thought of warlocks as being effeminate, so it was an interesting way of contrasting those characters. --------------------------------------------- Result 2127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the beginning of this film, one of the commentators says that he was told that he has two strikes against him: he is black and male. But in addition to that, he has a third strike: he's gay. "You're going to have to be stronger than you ever imagined," he is told. "Paris is Burning" is a documentary about gay black and Hispanic men who are tranvestites or transsexuals.

The miracle of "Paris is Burning" is that director Jennie Livingston takes a subject that could have very easily become a freak show and allows the people in it their humanity. We learn their views of homosexuality, men, women, their hopes, their disappointments, their dreams. Some of these dreams are so unattainable it's tragic. Many of the people are seriously in denial;

This is not a film for everyone. There are shots in this movie of nude transsexuals. If you have a problem with homosexuality, then this movie isn't for you. But if you do see this movie you'll realise "Paris is Burning" isn't really about men wearing women's clothes, it's about a group of people who are routinely marginalised and put down by society at large, and what they do to get a sense of community in their lives.

I've watched this movie four times since it was released in 1991, because it says so many things: it's a commentary about materialism in our culture, about gender roles, about rich and poor people, about the media and what it celebrates, about fame and adulation. "Paris is Burning" is one of the most humane, and one of the saddest, movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2128 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] do not ever watch this film...it is the [[biggest]] [[pile]] of sh*te i have ever come [[across]] in my [[whole]] life. and [[thats]] [[saying]] something. the acting, storyline and filming were [[absolutely]] [[dire]] this is THE [[WORST]] [[FILM]] [[IN]] THE [[WORLD]]!!! seriously doesn't it even give you a [[hit]] seeing as it [[cost]] my 99p from sainsburys and it was only [[made]] in 2005? [[hahaha]] this [[film]] is like a [[cheap]] [[college]] [[movie]] you can even [[see]] the camera in the corner of the screen....[[although]] if u [[really]] wanna watch it you gotta watch the "[[scary]] [[shark]] scene"...possibly the best piece of acting i have seen in my [[life]]...ha ha. i mean [[seriously]] this is the [[biggest]] [[waste]] of 2 1/2 [[hours]] EVER!! do not ever watch this film...it is the [[greatest]] [[battery]] of sh*te i have ever come [[throughout]] in my [[ensemble]] life. and [[aint]] [[arguing]] something. the acting, storyline and filming were [[totally]] [[horrific]] this is THE [[PIRE]] [[FILMMAKING]] [[AT]] THE [[WORLDWIDE]]!!! seriously doesn't it even give you a [[strike]] seeing as it [[costs]] my 99p from sainsburys and it was only [[introduced]] in 2005? [[ahah]] this [[filmmaking]] is like a [[cheaper]] [[academia]] [[film]] you can even [[seeing]] the camera in the corner of the screen....[[despite]] if u [[genuinely]] wanna watch it you gotta watch the "[[fearful]] [[mako]] scene"...possibly the best piece of acting i have seen in my [[lifetime]]...ha ha. i mean [[profoundly]] this is the [[bigger]] [[squander]] of 2 1/2 [[hour]] EVER!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] And here's yet another piece of [[evidence]] to claim that we should all worship the Italian giallo and acknowledge it to be the absolute most [[unique]] sub genre in horror. Emilio Miraglia's "The [[Red]] Queen Kills Seven [[Times]]" is a [[totally]] [[mesmerizing]] wholesome of [[original]] plotting, stylish production [[values]], enchanting [[music]], [[great]] acting talents and inventively [[gory]] [[murder]] sequences. It's a [[fabulous]] giallo ([[released]] in the golden year 1972) that belongs in the top-five of [[every]] fan of Italian [[cinema]]. The storyline doesn't just introduce your average black-gloved & sexually [[frustrated]] [[killer]], but [[blends]] [[good]] old-fashioned [[revenge]] [[motives]] with the macabre myth of the murderous "[[Red]] [[Queen]]". [[At]] young age, their [[grandfather]] tells the [[constantly]] fighting [[siblings]] Kitty and Evelyn about an [[uncanny]] lady who, once [[every]] 100 [[years]] on April 6th, [[kills]] seven people of which her sister is the inevitable last victim. Fourteen years later, Kitty has become the successful choreographer of a [[prominent]] modeling [[agency]] (even [[sharing]] her bed with the general manager) when suddenly the [[killing]] [[spree]] [[begins]]. Sister Evelyn would be the [[obvious]] [[culprit]], but she [[moved]] to the States [[recently]]... [[Or]] has she? [[Complex]] [[yet]] [[compelling]] and involving [[red]] herrings are [[thrown]] at you [[every]] couple of minutes and the [[Red]] [[Queen]] character is [[definitely]] the most [[fascinating]] [[killer]] in giallo-history. Her face can never be [[seen]], but she wears a blood red [[cloak]] and [[produces]] the most [[ghastly]] laugh [[whenever]] she [[made]] a [[new]] victim. She's not exactly gentle either, as her [[victims]] are barbarically stabbed with a dagger, dragged behind [[cars]] and even impaled on [[fences]]! That [[latter]] one is [[truly]] one of the [[greatest]] (= most gruesome) [[acts]] of violence I've ever [[seen]]! What more [[could]] you [[possibly]] [[request]]? Some classy and tasteful nudity, [[perhaps]]? The [[gorgeous]] female actresses [[got]] this more than [[covered]], [[among]] them [[Barbara]] Bouchet and a young Sybil Danning. [[Emilio]] Miraglia isn't the most [[famous]] giallo-director, as he only [[made]] this one and the [[equally]] [[recommended]] "The [[Night]] Evelyn Came [[Out]] of the [[Grave]]", but his [[influence]] and [[importance]] should [[NOT]] be [[forgotten]]. And here's yet another piece of [[proofs]] to claim that we should all worship the Italian giallo and acknowledge it to be the absolute most [[exclusive]] sub genre in horror. Emilio Miraglia's "The [[Reid]] Queen Kills Seven [[Moments]]" is a [[entirely]] [[entrancing]] wholesome of [[initial]] plotting, stylish production [[value]], enchanting [[musicians]], [[huge]] acting talents and inventively [[gori]] [[slain]] sequences. It's a [[wondrous]] giallo ([[publicized]] in the golden year 1972) that belongs in the top-five of [[any]] fan of Italian [[cinemas]]. The storyline doesn't just introduce your average black-gloved & sexually [[disappointed]] [[shooter]], but [[mingling]] [[buena]] old-fashioned [[retaliation]] [[reasons]] with the macabre myth of the murderous "[[Reid]] [[Quinn]]". [[Under]] young age, their [[grandpa]] tells the [[systematically]] fighting [[plymouth]] Kitty and Evelyn about an [[supernatural]] lady who, once [[any]] 100 [[olds]] on April 6th, [[assassination]] seven people of which her sister is the inevitable last victim. Fourteen years later, Kitty has become the successful choreographer of a [[illustrious]] modeling [[agencies]] (even [[exchanging]] her bed with the general manager) when suddenly the [[killed]] [[frenzy]] [[launching]]. Sister Evelyn would be the [[glaring]] [[perpetrator]], but she [[relocated]] to the States [[lately]]... [[Neither]] has she? [[Tricky]] [[however]] [[convincing]] and involving [[rojas]] herrings are [[tossed]] at you [[all]] couple of minutes and the [[Reid]] [[Quinn]] character is [[surely]] the most [[riveting]] [[murderer]] in giallo-history. Her face can never be [[watched]], but she wears a blood red [[gown]] and [[generating]] the most [[ugly]] laugh [[wherever]] she [[introduced]] a [[newer]] victim. She's not exactly gentle either, as her [[fatalities]] are barbarically stabbed with a dagger, dragged behind [[motor]] and even impaled on [[fence]]! That [[last]] one is [[really]] one of the [[biggest]] (= most gruesome) [[act]] of violence I've ever [[watched]]! What more [[did]] you [[potentially]] [[asking]]? Some classy and tasteful nudity, [[possibly]]? The [[wondrous]] female actresses [[did]] this more than [[covering]], [[in]] them [[Barbaric]] Bouchet and a young Sybil Danning. [[Calderon]] Miraglia isn't the most [[acclaimed]] giallo-director, as he only [[effected]] this one and the [[similarly]] [[suggested]] "The [[Nocturne]] Evelyn Came [[Outward]] of the [[Gravesite]]", but his [[repercussions]] and [[significance]] should [[NOPE]] be [[disregarded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It [[started]] out with an interesting premise. I [[always]] [[like]] Civil [[War]] [[stuff]] and [[ancient]] secret [[societies]]. The more the [[film]] [[progressed]], the more I [[realized]] that this was a B [[movie]] at [[best]]. [[In]] the latter half, it [[quickly]] became a C [[movie]], then D, then F, then "I wish that this wasn't a rental so that I [[could]] put it in the microwave!" I can't say that the acting in all cases was [[awful]], just most. The writing, however... I never read the [[book]]. [[Maybe]] the book is well [[written]]. The [[screenplay]] was [[written]] by a 10 year [[old]]. It was ridiculously shallow, the dialog drab and uninteresting, the [[characters]] about as interesting as a 5 [[pound]] bag of [[fertilizer]]. I really [[hated]] this movie, as did my [[wife]]. I am a Christian and I have no [[problem]] with [[movies]] that promote or [[support]] [[Christianity]]. This movie did a great disservice to the cause. [[Awful]], [[terrible]], [[worthless]]. [[If]] you [[liked]] it, I [[strongly]] recommend Superman 4. It [[startup]] out with an interesting premise. I [[continually]] [[loves]] Civil [[Warfare]] [[thing]] and [[antigua]] secret [[societal]]. The more the [[filmmaking]] [[headway]], the more I [[performed]] that this was a B [[film]] at [[finest]]. [[For]] the latter half, it [[immediately]] became a C [[film]], then D, then F, then "I wish that this wasn't a rental so that I [[did]] put it in the microwave!" I can't say that the acting in all cases was [[scary]], just most. The writing, however... I never read the [[books]]. [[Probably]] the book is well [[wrote]]. The [[scenario]] was [[wrote]] by a 10 year [[former]]. It was ridiculously shallow, the dialog drab and uninteresting, the [[trait]] about as interesting as a 5 [[pounds]] bag of [[fertilization]]. I really [[abhor]] this movie, as did my [[femme]]. I am a Christian and I have no [[issues]] with [[filmmaking]] that promote or [[aiding]] [[Christendom]]. This movie did a great disservice to the cause. [[Scary]], [[frightful]], [[fruitless]]. [[Though]] you [[enjoyed]] it, I [[solidly]] recommend Superman 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 2131 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] "Revolt of the [[Zombies]]" proves that having the same [[director]] revamp and [[recycle]] an idea doesn't [[necessarily]] make lightning [[strike]] [[twice]].

The Halperin [[brothers]], [[responsible]] for the horror [[classic]] "White Zombie", made this [[trite]] piece of [[garbage]] a [[mere]] few years later to cash in on its popularity and even [[recycled]] close-ups of Lugosi's eyes from that previous film. There was a court battle with the "White Zombie" film's rights owners, who didn't [[want]] the Halperins to be able to [[use]] the word 'zombie' in this title. That word was the only [[thing]] that could [[help]] this [[film]], because, as [[everyone]] knows, [[bad]] [[films]] can [[make]] much more [[money]] [[simply]] by having the word 'Zombie' [[appear]] in the title. Knowing what [[Victor]] Halperin was [[capable]] of a few years before only makes this uninteresting [[film]] more insulting. It seems he never directed another horror [[film]] after this [[debacle]]. The [[zombies]] here seem not to be [[true]] [[walking]] dead, but [[simply]] hypnotism [[victims]].

Wanna create a mind-controlled army of zombies? [[Be]] ready to [[crack]] a few [[eggs]], [[including]] your own.

THE LAME PLOT: [[Man]] falls in love with scheming [[woman]] who plays with his [[heart]] and becomes [[engaged]] to him only to [[make]] his [[friend]], whom she [[loves]], jealous. This [[sends]] man into a spiral of [[madness]] in which he tries [[using]] zombie mind-control techniques to [[change]] [[things]] to his advantage in an [[attempt]] to [[win]] over a [[woman]] who isn't worth spit.

This [[includes]] one of the most [[blatantly]] [[obvious]] plot [[developments]] I've ever [[seen]]. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see the [[ending]] coming. The acting isn't [[even]] good. This [[movie]] makes the racially [[insensitive]] "King of the Zombies" (which appeared on the same double bill DVD I [[bought]]) seems like an [[atmospheric]] horror masterpiece by comparison and [[reminds]] us that not [[every]] black and [[white]] [[film]] is a classic. It makes the [[atomic]] age sci-fi [[alien]] zombie cheese fest "[[Invisible]] Invaders" [[seem]] like a serious [[drama]]. This is one big ball of cheese so ridiculously melodramatic it [[could]] probably make many a Korean film fan [[twitch]] (South Korean films are [[often]] [[known]] for their use of melodrama). The credits list the [[ironically]] named [[company]] Favorite Films. I'm not sure whose favorite film this [[would]] be, but they're obviously an idiot.

Not [[recommended]] for fans of: zombies, romance, or [[classic]] films. "Revolt of the [[Walkers]]" proves that having the same [[headmaster]] revamp and [[retraining]] an idea doesn't [[invariably]] make lightning [[strikes]] [[doubly]].

The Halperin [[brethren]], [[accountable]] for the horror [[typical]] "White Zombie", made this [[corny]] piece of [[detritus]] a [[simple]] few years later to cash in on its popularity and even [[recycling]] close-ups of Lugosi's eyes from that previous film. There was a court battle with the "White Zombie" film's rights owners, who didn't [[wants]] the Halperins to be able to [[using]] the word 'zombie' in this title. That word was the only [[stuff]] that could [[pomoc]] this [[filmmaking]], because, as [[everybody]] knows, [[mala]] [[movies]] can [[deliver]] much more [[cash]] [[purely]] by having the word 'Zombie' [[appears]] in the title. Knowing what [[Viktor]] Halperin was [[able]] of a few years before only makes this uninteresting [[filmmaking]] more insulting. It seems he never directed another horror [[films]] after this [[breakup]]. The [[walkers]] here seem not to be [[genuine]] [[marching]] dead, but [[exclusively]] hypnotism [[victim]].

Wanna create a mind-controlled army of zombies? [[Are]] ready to [[slit]] a few [[egg]], [[include]] your own.

THE LAME PLOT: [[Guy]] falls in love with scheming [[girl]] who plays with his [[heartland]] and becomes [[implicated]] to him only to [[deliver]] his [[boyfriend]], whom she [[like]], jealous. This [[sending]] man into a spiral of [[insanity]] in which he tries [[uses]] zombie mind-control techniques to [[amended]] [[matters]] to his advantage in an [[endeavor]] to [[victorious]] over a [[girl]] who isn't worth spit.

This [[contains]] one of the most [[notoriously]] [[unmistakable]] plot [[development]] I've ever [[watched]]. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see the [[ended]] coming. The acting isn't [[yet]] good. This [[filmmaking]] makes the racially [[oblivious]] "King of the Zombies" (which appeared on the same double bill DVD I [[purchase]]) seems like an [[atmosphere]] horror masterpiece by comparison and [[resembles]] us that not [[all]] black and [[blanca]] [[movie]] is a classic. It makes the [[atom]] age sci-fi [[stranger]] zombie cheese fest "[[Unseen]] Invaders" [[looks]] like a serious [[theatrical]]. This is one big ball of cheese so ridiculously melodramatic it [[wo]] probably make many a Korean film fan [[shudder]] (South Korean films are [[normally]] [[renowned]] for their use of melodrama). The credits list the [[mockingly]] named [[businesses]] Favorite Films. I'm not sure whose favorite film this [[could]] be, but they're obviously an idiot.

Not [[recommend]] for fans of: zombies, romance, or [[classical]] films. --------------------------------------------- Result 2132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A concept with potential, and it was fun to see these two holiday icons together, but...

Rudolph's glowing nose didn't require the "explanation" offered in this film - much like The Force in the Star Wars films didn't need the explanation of "medichlorians in the bloodstream." But mainly, the film left me cold because of Winterbolt's over-complicated plot to destroy Santa. He's got the power to put suggestions into people's minds, so why does he do things in such a roundabout way? Breaking the magic of Rudolph's nose, framing Rudolph, threatening to melt the Frosty family...The comedically exaggerated plots of Pinky and the Brain and "Phineas and Ferb's" Dr. Doofenshmirtz (which are done that way on purpose and played for laughs) seem simple and straightforward compared to Winterbolt's, which we're expected to take somewhat seriously.

There is a particularly (and amusingly) strange moment when a character throws her two guns at the bad guy, like boomerangs. I understand if they don't want to have guns being shot in a family film, but then why have guns in the first place? --------------------------------------------- Result 2133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All in all a good film and better for the fact that had the film not been made the story might remain hidden to the masses. Brosnan does a good job as the native American with a hidden past and the photography is stunning. To some, this may be too whimsical, to others boring - for me it is a gentle, well-told tale and perfect for family viewing. Now that's not something you get a lot of recently. --------------------------------------------- Result 2134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a must-see documentary movie for anyone who fears that modern youth has lost its taste for real-life adventure and its sense of morality. Darius Goes West is an amazing roller-coaster of a story. We live the lives of Darius and the crew as they embark on the journey of a lifetime. Darius has Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, a disease which affects all the muscles in his body. He is confined to a wheelchair, and needs round-the-clock attention. So how could this crew of young friends possibly manage to take him on a 6,000 mile round-trip to the West Coast and back? Watch the movie and experience the ups and downs of this great adventure - laugh and cry with the crew as they cope with unimaginable challenges along the way, and enjoy the final triumph when they arrive back three weeks later in their home town to a rapturous reception and some great surprises! --------------------------------------------- Result 2135 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This Movie has [[great]] fight scenes. Now its true that the acting is a little rough. But If I wanted to see a movie based on acting skills I would watch a [[Cheesy]] movie Like American Beauty. But If you want to see a movie with true martial arts in it and with [[Amazing]] [[stunts]] WITHOUT the use of wires and flying threw the air like so many movies around now which are over killing the matrix. Then Watch this. Now it's [[true]] the two main stars in the show where in the kid show the power rangers and another cast member of that show has a bit part in this movie. But hey the fight scenes are [[enough]] to make Jet Li p**s his pants. And the stunts are [[worthy]] enough for [[Jackie]] Chan to sit threw and [[admire]]. This Movie has [[wondrous]] fight scenes. Now its true that the acting is a little rough. But If I wanted to see a movie based on acting skills I would watch a [[Dorky]] movie Like American Beauty. But If you want to see a movie with true martial arts in it and with [[Striking]] [[acrobatics]] WITHOUT the use of wires and flying threw the air like so many movies around now which are over killing the matrix. Then Watch this. Now it's [[truthful]] the two main stars in the show where in the kid show the power rangers and another cast member of that show has a bit part in this movie. But hey the fight scenes are [[suffice]] to make Jet Li p**s his pants. And the stunts are [[creditable]] enough for [[Jacqui]] Chan to sit threw and [[behold]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I was intrigued by the title, so during a [[small]] bout of [[insomnia]] (fueled by my curiosity...), I stayed up and watched it. I then [[checked]] my TV [[listings]] and watched it again! There is one very [[obvious]] [[realization]] that occurred to me when I [[saw]] this film- in [[spite]] of [[politics]], traditions, [[culture]], etc., teenagers [[everywhere]] are [[virtually]] the same. The [[characters]] of the [[kids]] from Belgrade could have been [[transported]] to, let's say, somewhere in the American Midwest during the same time [[period]], and language differences aside, [[would]] be impossible to tell [[apart]] from any of the local teens of that [[era]]. They certainly [[displayed]] the same [[growing]] pains and preoccupations, politics aside: Music, sex, movie idols, music, drinking, sports, music... As a matter of [[fact]], much the same [[things]] that occupied my time growing up in 1970's [[Southern]] California.

This was a bittersweet [[story]], but the [[joy]] of [[youth]] made it very enjoyable. The [[characters]], especially the young actors, were [[completely]] [[believable]] [[also]]. I won't say this was the Yugoslav "American Graffiti", but I will say that it fits in [[nicely]] with other 50's-themed movies. I was intrigued by the title, so during a [[little]] bout of [[sleepiness]] (fueled by my curiosity...), I stayed up and watched it. I then [[audits]] my TV [[list]] and watched it again! There is one very [[flagrant]] [[implementation]] that occurred to me when I [[watched]] this film- in [[sadness]] of [[politicians]], traditions, [[civilisations]], etc., teenagers [[nowhere]] are [[basically]] the same. The [[attribute]] of the [[brats]] from Belgrade could have been [[hauled]] to, let's say, somewhere in the American Midwest during the same time [[deadline]], and language differences aside, [[ought]] be impossible to tell [[furthermore]] from any of the local teens of that [[epoch]]. They certainly [[exhibitions]] the same [[augment]] pains and preoccupations, politics aside: Music, sex, movie idols, music, drinking, sports, music... As a matter of [[facto]], much the same [[aspects]] that occupied my time growing up in 1970's [[South]] California.

This was a bittersweet [[history]], but the [[pleasure]] of [[teenage]] made it very enjoyable. The [[character]], especially the young actors, were [[fully]] [[trustworthy]] [[similarly]]. I won't say this was the Yugoslav "American Graffiti", but I will say that it fits in [[delicately]] with other 50's-themed movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 2137 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Awlright, [[damn]] it, the MooCow will grudgingly [[admit]] the truth: I kinda' like this cheap, [[cheesy]] 70's parody. The [[idea]] that [[vast]] [[hordes]] of [[killer]] tomatoes are [[destroying]] the [[US]] is a [[great]] [[idea]], and in spite of itself, the moovie does [[provide]] some [[decent]] chuckles, moostly the [[sight]] of [[terrified]] extras [[running]] away from [[large]], [[obviously]] fake tomatoes. This film, along with The [[Kentucky]] Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier [[attempts]] at spoofs, which became so [[popular]] in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to [[Airplane]]!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at [[humor]] are dismal [[failures]], and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious "Puberty Love" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people [[must]] also have [[enjoyed]] it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! [[Large]] chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty [[dull]]. And dig those 70's [[clothes]], dude!! ;=8) This [[tomato]] is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow [[says]] grab a pizza and [[pop]] in the Tomatoes!! : Awlright, [[fucking]] it, the MooCow will grudgingly [[recognise]] the truth: I kinda' like this cheap, [[dorky]] 70's parody. The [[thinking]] that [[big]] [[herds]] of [[assassin]] tomatoes are [[demolished]] the [[AMERICANS]] is a [[gorgeous]] [[thinking]], and in spite of itself, the moovie does [[provides]] some [[dignified]] chuckles, moostly the [[conception]] of [[scare]] extras [[implementing]] away from [[great]], [[undoubtedly]] fake tomatoes. This film, along with The [[Kfc]] Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier [[endeavors]] at spoofs, which became so [[folk]] in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to [[Flight]]!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at [[comedy]] are dismal [[faults]], and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious "Puberty Love" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people [[gotta]] also have [[appreciated]] it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! [[Prodigious]] chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty [[boring]]. And dig those 70's [[clothe]], dude!! ;=8) This [[onion]] is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow [[tells]] grab a pizza and [[pops]] in the Tomatoes!! : --------------------------------------------- Result 2138 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***Possible spoilers***

I recently watched this movie with my 11 year old son and was pleased to see that he laughed in the right places and was thrilled by the action sequences. Ron Ely is just right as Doc. Cool, calm, almost always in control(and with an occasional twinkle in his eye). What more can one ask for? I have never read a Doc Savage book, so I don't know if it is faithful to the source but I enjoyed the light tone and derring-do. Many people have compared this movie to Raiders of the Lost Ark, which I don't think is fair. The difference in budget is astounding(Raiders must have at least 10 times the budget). Doc Savage does not have the extensive location work that Raiders has. Special effects are also at a minimum but come on people, the story is a lot of fun and the humor is just right. The Sousa music is catchy(love that theme song- Every time I watch the film, I end up humming the theme for days).The best way to approach this film is to just RELAX and enjoy. Highlights include the exciting opening sequence where the fabulous five and Doc chase the Indian sniper throughout the rooftops of New York and the VERY funny fight sequence between Doc and Captain Seas. Not as good is the villain who sleeps in a giant crib (really!). Overall a great movie to watch on a rainy day. I give it 7 out of 10.

Doc Savage, Doc Savage...thank the lord he's here! --------------------------------------------- Result 2139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Child]] 'Sexploitation' is one of the most [[serious]] issues facing our world [[today]] and I [[feared]] that any film on the [[topic]] [[would]] [[jump]] straight to scenes of an explicitly sexual [[nature]] in order to shock and [[disturb]] the audience. [[After]] having seen both 'Trade' and 'Holly', one [[film]] moved me to want to actually [[see]] a [[change]] in [[international]] laws. The other felt like a poor [[attempt]] at making me cry for five [[minutes]] with emotive music and the [[odd]] [[suicide]].

I do not believe that turning this [[issue]] into a Hollywood [[tear]] jerker is a [[useful]] or necessary [[strategy]] to [[adopt]] and I [[must]] [[commend]] the makes of 'Holly' for engaging [[subtly]] but [[powerfully]] with the [[terrible]] conditions these children are sadly forced to [[endure]]. 'Trade' wavered between [[serious]] and [[stupid]] with scenes [[involving]] the [[death]] of a cat coming after [[images]] that [[represented]] [[children]] being [[forced]] to [[commit]] some [[horrendous]] [[acts]]. I found this unengaging and at [[times]] offensive to the cause. If I had [[wanted]] a cheap [[laugh]] I [[would]] not have signed up for a [[film]] on [[child]] [[trafficking]].

[[For]] [[anyone]] who would like to watch a [[powerful]] [[film]] that actually [[means]] something I [[would]] [[suggest]] [[saving]] the money on the [[cinema]] [[ticket]] for the [[release]] of 'Holly'. [[Kid]] 'Sexploitation' is one of the most [[grave]] issues facing our world [[thursday]] and I [[fears]] that any film on the [[themes]] [[should]] [[hop]] straight to scenes of an explicitly sexual [[characters]] in order to shock and [[disrupt]] the audience. [[Upon]] having seen both 'Trade' and 'Holly', one [[cinematic]] moved me to want to actually [[seeing]] a [[altering]] in [[global]] laws. The other felt like a poor [[try]] at making me cry for five [[mins]] with emotive music and the [[freaky]] [[kamikaze]].

I do not believe that turning this [[issuing]] into a Hollywood [[torn]] jerker is a [[helpful]] or necessary [[strategies]] to [[adopting]] and I [[ought]] [[hailing]] the makes of 'Holly' for engaging [[finely]] but [[flatly]] with the [[horrific]] conditions these children are sadly forced to [[withstand]]. 'Trade' wavered between [[severe]] and [[dumb]] with scenes [[encompassing]] the [[mortality]] of a cat coming after [[visuals]] that [[constituted]] [[kids]] being [[compelled]] to [[committed]] some [[gruesome]] [[act]]. I found this unengaging and at [[time]] offensive to the cause. If I had [[wanna]] a cheap [[laughs]] I [[should]] not have signed up for a [[films]] on [[enfants]] [[smuggling]].

[[During]] [[someone]] who would like to watch a [[influential]] [[kino]] that actually [[signifies]] something I [[could]] [[proposes]] [[rescues]] the money on the [[theatre]] [[banknote]] for the [[freeing]] of 'Holly'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a let down! This started with an intriguing mystery and interesting characters. Admittedly it moved along at the speed of a snail, but I was nevertheless gripped and kept watching.

David Morrissey is always good value and he Suranne Jones were good leads. The Muslim aspects were very interesting. We were tantalised with possible terrorist connections.

But then Morrissey's character was killed off and all the air left the balloon. The last episode was dull, dull, dull. The whole thing turned out to be very small beer and the dénouement was unbelievably feeble.

Five hours of my life for that? My advice: watch paint dry instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 2141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Shown in Australia as 'Hydrosphere', this [[incredibly]] [[bad]] movie is SO [[bad]] that you become hypnotised and have to watch it to the end, just to [[see]] if it [[could]] [[get]] any [[worse]]... and it does! The storyline is so [[predictable]] it [[seems]] [[written]] by a high school dramatics class, the sets are [[pathetic]] but marginally [[better]] than the miniatures, and the acting is [[wooden]].

The [[infant]] 'muppet' [[seems]] to have been [[stolen]] from the props [[cupboard]] of '[[Total]] Recall'. There didn't seem to be a [[single]], [[original]] [[idea]] in the [[whole]] [[movie]].

I [[found]] this movie to be so [[bad]] that I [[laughed]] most of the [[way]] through.

Malcolm [[McDowell]] should [[hang]] his [[head]] in shame. He [[obviously]] [[needed]] the money! Shown in Australia as 'Hydrosphere', this [[surprisingly]] [[naughty]] movie is SO [[rotten]] that you become hypnotised and have to watch it to the end, just to [[seeing]] if it [[did]] [[obtain]] any [[worst]]... and it does! The storyline is so [[foreseeable]] it [[seem]] [[wrote]] by a high school dramatics class, the sets are [[unhappy]] but marginally [[optimum]] than the miniatures, and the acting is [[wood]].

The [[childhood]] 'muppet' [[appears]] to have been [[stealing]] from the props [[wardrobe]] of '[[Whole]] Recall'. There didn't seem to be a [[lonely]], [[initial]] [[concept]] in the [[ensemble]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[detected]] this movie to be so [[rotten]] that I [[laughs]] most of the [[ways]] through.

Malcolm [[mcneill]] should [[heng]] his [[leader]] in shame. He [[apparently]] [[need]] the money! --------------------------------------------- Result 2142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] What [[reviewers]] and MST3K left out is the best [[part]] (and only [[memorable]] scene) of this otherwise [[dreadful]] movie: There is a very [[good]] rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s [[ineptitude]]). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, "prison mating ritual" may be more appropriate. The background behind this [[chance]], yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding "Ben Gazzara," introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later. What [[examiners]] and MST3K left out is the best [[portions]] (and only [[unforgettable]] scene) of this otherwise [[shocking]] movie: There is a very [[alright]] rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s [[idiocy]]). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, "prison mating ritual" may be more appropriate. The background behind this [[opportunities]], yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding "Ben Gazzara," introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later. --------------------------------------------- Result 2143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] You know that feeling of [[hilarity]] you get when you watch a [[film]] that's [[trying]] so [[hard]] to be a [[serious]], [[thought]] [[provoking]] [[piece]] of [[cinema]] and fails [[miserably]]? When you can't help but bust out laughing at the [[sheer]] [[terrible]] nature of the trash littering your screen? "[[House]] of the Dead" [[struggles]] to achieve even this low graded level of [[cinema]].

From start to end "House of the Dead" manages to [[recreate]] the feeling like you've just woken up to find out that the cat has laid it's curled business neatly on your forehead while you slept. It is clear from the start that the female actors have been cast for their cleavage size (which they exploit shamelessly) whereas the males for their hardcore "kick-ass" attitude. I honestly did not care any of the characters for any moment of the film and found myself actually wishing their demise so as to spare me a good hour of this torture. Uwe Boll should have considered screening two hours of footage from the actual game as a movie. At least then we'll get better acting… However not all blame can be placed on the actors as it is certainly a challenge to produce a convincing film when faced with the script of this film. It is arguably the [[worst]] section of the film and actually contains such lines as: "These are zombies, pure and simple" and "No cap'n, we must not go there! It's evil!".

We all know that Zombie movies are never going to be particularly thought provoking or full of meaning; at best they are a harmless two hours of action, blood and closet terror. Trash, yes, but entertaining trash. Not the kind of trash which bursts out of your bin bag as you haul it across the room and smothers your shoes in sour milk cartons and decaying banana skins. According to IMDb, "House of the Dead" received such bad reviews that no Danish cinemas bought the movie. If only we could have had the same privilege.

[[Final]] Score: 1/10. You know that feeling of [[silliness]] you get when you watch a [[filmmaking]] that's [[seeking]] so [[stiff]] to be a [[grave]], [[thoughts]] [[sparking]] [[slice]] of [[filmmaking]] and fails [[woefully]]? When you can't help but bust out laughing at the [[pure]] [[horrific]] nature of the trash littering your screen? "[[Housing]] of the Dead" [[brawls]] to achieve even this low graded level of [[film]].

From start to end "House of the Dead" manages to [[rehabilitate]] the feeling like you've just woken up to find out that the cat has laid it's curled business neatly on your forehead while you slept. It is clear from the start that the female actors have been cast for their cleavage size (which they exploit shamelessly) whereas the males for their hardcore "kick-ass" attitude. I honestly did not care any of the characters for any moment of the film and found myself actually wishing their demise so as to spare me a good hour of this torture. Uwe Boll should have considered screening two hours of footage from the actual game as a movie. At least then we'll get better acting… However not all blame can be placed on the actors as it is certainly a challenge to produce a convincing film when faced with the script of this film. It is arguably the [[gravest]] section of the film and actually contains such lines as: "These are zombies, pure and simple" and "No cap'n, we must not go there! It's evil!".

We all know that Zombie movies are never going to be particularly thought provoking or full of meaning; at best they are a harmless two hours of action, blood and closet terror. Trash, yes, but entertaining trash. Not the kind of trash which bursts out of your bin bag as you haul it across the room and smothers your shoes in sour milk cartons and decaying banana skins. According to IMDb, "House of the Dead" received such bad reviews that no Danish cinemas bought the movie. If only we could have had the same privilege.

[[Definitive]] Score: 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Like Freddy's Revenge, this sequel takes a pretty weird [[idea]] and doesn't go to [[great]] lengths to squeeze a story out of it. [[Basically]] [[Alice]] from number 4 is pregnant and her baby is haunted by Freddy which gives him an outlet to haunt her [[friends]]. This has the least deaths out of the [[whole]] series and the wise-cracks are [[quite]] poor, so [[neither]] the horror fans or [[comedy]] fans are [[happy]].

I've not alot to [[say]] about this. It's moderately interesting to see the [[characters]] of Alice and Dan [[returning]] from four, but not worth [[watching]] a [[movie]] over. Uninspriring and unenjoyable, [[possibly]] only the competant [[direction]] saves it from being the [[worst]] in the [[series]]. Like Freddy's Revenge, this sequel takes a pretty weird [[thoughts]] and doesn't go to [[grand]] lengths to squeeze a story out of it. [[Fundamentally]] [[Altar]] from number 4 is pregnant and her baby is haunted by Freddy which gives him an outlet to haunt her [[chums]]. This has the least deaths out of the [[ensemble]] series and the wise-cracks are [[rather]] poor, so [[either]] the horror fans or [[parody]] fans are [[joyous]].

I've not alot to [[told]] about this. It's moderately interesting to see the [[character]] of Alice and Dan [[return]] from four, but not worth [[staring]] a [[filmmaking]] over. Uninspriring and unenjoyable, [[potentially]] only the competant [[directorate]] saves it from being the [[meanest]] in the [[serials]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this movie is not porn, it was not meant to be porn, and unless my uncle runs for president of the world it should never be considered porn.

now that that issue was sorted out, i can say i thoroughly recommend this film, as it's issues are still widely available. it's funny, the acting is great and it raises serious(curious) questions.

i can't fully understand why this film was so mistreated, probably this is why i plan to never visit the us. Lena is the true pioneer of the modern riot-grrrl movement, confusion, curiosity and wit are her main attributes, she is occasionally angry, but aren't we all? --------------------------------------------- Result 2146 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] When you [[pick]] a movie I [[hope]] one factor you will [[consider]], are the [[actors]] in the [[movie]] [[using]] their fame to [[influence]] the moral [[fabric]] of our [[society]] in a positive or [[negative]] way? This is not a political [[statement]] this is a [[moral]] [[issue]] that effects are [[society]]. When a comedian/actor makes [[curl]] sexual and [[racist]] [[remarks]] about a [[teenager]] and her father we should ask ourselves (do I [[want]] to [[support]] that behavior)? In this case [[Mr]]. Foxx [[behavior]] [[tears]] at the social [[fabric]] that teaches our youth right from wrong, good behavior from bad that loving-kindness is better than hatefulness. Mr. Foxx should remember he is only entertainment and there is a lot of that out there for us to choose from. Saying sorry does not get him off the hook. It will not undue the hurt or remove the bad behavior he spreads to our youth. One way to stop this behavior is to stop being a fan of it. No longer see anything they are part of. We cannot change them but we can stop the fame we give them. When you [[elect]] a movie I [[expectancy]] one factor you will [[examine]], are the [[protagonists]] in the [[cinema]] [[usage]] their fame to [[influenced]] the moral [[texture]] of our [[societal]] in a positive or [[adverse]] way? This is not a political [[statements]] this is a [[ethical]] [[issuing]] that effects are [[societies]]. When a comedian/actor makes [[buckle]] sexual and [[racial]] [[observations]] about a [[adolescents]] and her father we should ask ourselves (do I [[wish]] to [[helps]] that behavior)? In this case [[Hannes]]. Foxx [[behaviors]] [[sobs]] at the social [[texture]] that teaches our youth right from wrong, good behavior from bad that loving-kindness is better than hatefulness. Mr. Foxx should remember he is only entertainment and there is a lot of that out there for us to choose from. Saying sorry does not get him off the hook. It will not undue the hurt or remove the bad behavior he spreads to our youth. One way to stop this behavior is to stop being a fan of it. No longer see anything they are part of. We cannot change them but we can stop the fame we give them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The first five minutes of this [[movie]] showed [[potential]]. After that, it went straight from something [[possibly]] decent to some [[sort]] of illegitimate [[comedy]]. The [[best]] [[part]] is that I couldn't [[stop]] [[thinking]] of Supertroopers [[thanks]] to Joey Kern. I would recommend watching this [[movie]] for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a [[movie]]. There are so [[many]] scenes in this [[movie]] that makes one just stop and wonder if the [[entire]] [[cast]] and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that [[amazes]] me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only [[cost]] about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's [[Gate]] for being able to [[pull]] that one off. The first five minutes of this [[filmmaking]] showed [[prospective]]. After that, it went straight from something [[maybe]] decent to some [[kind]] of illegitimate [[parody]]. The [[optimum]] [[portions]] is that I couldn't [[discontinue]] [[thoughts]] of Supertroopers [[appreciation]] to Joey Kern. I would recommend watching this [[filmmaking]] for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a [[filmmaking]]. There are so [[numerous]] scenes in this [[filmmaking]] that makes one just stop and wonder if the [[whole]] [[casting]] and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that [[astonishes]] me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only [[price]] about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's [[Puerta]] for being able to [[pulling]] that one off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[Howling]] [[II]] [[starts]] as it [[means]] to [[go]] on with a [[bizarre]] and surreal [[opening]] [[narration]] by Christopher Lee whose [[image]] is [[imposed]] over a moving [[star]] [[field]], oh and a skeleton [[appears]] as well for some [[reason]]. He says "for it's [[written]] the [[inhabitants]] of the [[Earth]] have been [[made]] [[drunk]] with her blood. And I [[saw]] her sip [[upon]] a hairy beast and she [[held]] forth a golden challis full of the [[filthiest]] fornication's and [[upon]] her [[forehead]] was [[written]], behold I am the [[great]] [[Mother]] of #an inaudible word I couldn't make out no matter how many [[times]] I rewound the tape and [[tried]] to, [[sorry]]# and all [[abominations]] of the [[Earth]]". This opening narration means [[nothing]] at all and is just downright bizarre. After the opening credits which are set over shots of Transylvanian architecture we get an on screen [[caption]] that informs us we're in 'Los Angeles, California U.S.A. City of the Angels'. I knew I was in for a long 86 minutes. It's [[probably]] not too long after the events of the original [[Howling]] (1981) and it's Karen White's funeral. After the ceremony Karen's brother Ben (Reb Brown) is spoken to by an 'occult investigator' called [[Stefan]] Crosscoe (Christopher Lee) who says that Karen is a Werewolf and that she will [[come]] back to [[life]]. Ben [[dismisses]] such [[nonsense]]. But together with one of Karen's [[friends]] and colleagues Jenny (Annie McEnroe) he [[visits]] [[Stefan]] at his [[home]]. There [[Stefan]] tells them about [[Werewolves]] and how they can be [[killed]], he mentions Stirba ([[Sybil]] Danning) who is the [[queen]] of [[Werewolves]]. [[Stefan]] [[also]] shows them a [[photograph]] [[taken]] at Karen's funeral of a [[woman]] named [[Mariana]] ([[Marsha]] A. Hunt) and that she is an [[extremely]] [[vicious]] and [[dangerous]] Werewolf who [[wants]] [[Karen]]. [[Stefan]] [[says]] he will stake any Werewoves through the [[heart]] with titanium. Ben figures out that [[Stefan]] means he will stake [[Karen]] as well so [[together]] with [[Jenny]] he travels to the [[graveyard]] where his sister's crypt is to [[stop]] [[Stefan]]. However lots of [[Werewolves]] turn up and attack [[Stefan]], Ben and [[Jenny]]. They survive the [[attack]] and [[manage]] to [[find]] out that Stirba is to be [[found]] in Transylvania. They all [[decide]] to [[travel]] to Transylvania and [[stop]] Stirba and her Werewolves from [[taking]] over the [[Earth]] by fulfilling a [[centuries]] [[old]] [[curse]]. Once there they [[travel]] to a [[small]] [[town]] [[called]] Vlkava which means 'where [[wolves]] live' and meet up with the local priest, Father Florin (Ladislav Krecmer) and his [[small]] but loyal group of Werewolf hunters, hey what else can I call them? Oh, and a dwarf named Florica (Ludmila Safarova) helps too. They follow Mariana who they hope will lead them to Stirba. But Stirba knows of Stefan's arrival and has plans for him Ben and Jenny. Will Stefan be able to put an end to Stirba's plans for world domination? Will this film get any more bizarre or surreal? Watch it and find out. Directed by Philippe Mora this is one strange mess of a film. It's poorly edited as certain sequences just jump around incoherently. The single biggest problem is the script by Robert Sano and Gary Brandner based on his novel which is all over the place and doesn't make any sort of sense or introduces us to any proper characters that we like. Luckily it moves along like a rocket and is never dull or boring, unlike the original. Something strange or bizarre is always happening to keep the viewer entertained. Most people will probably hate it, but for those of us who enjoy 'bad' films this is right up there with the best of them. There are Werewolf orgies which are just freaky to watch. We get some cool Werewolf killing weaponry. The sets and locations just seem so out of place and I don't know if this was actually [[shot]] in Transylvania but it doesn't look like what I thought mid 80's Transylvania would. Stirba's castle is [[part]] dungeon, part Gothic castle and part modern luxury house. Stirba and her servant's costumes are very over-the-top, Stirba wears an outfit that looks like it belongs in a S/M video and to be fair to her she looks pretty sexy, and her minions wear skimpy leather clothing too. The special make-up effects range from good to poor, a dwarf's eyes explode, someone has their hand ripped off and a priest has some creature emerge from his mouth but this isn't a film loaded with gore, although there are plenty of effect sequences with Werewolf transformations and attacks. There is plenty of nudity as well as Stirba and her minions are a real randy bunch of Werewolves! I should also mention the music, the soundtrack is dominated by awful rock music that I hated and I ended up turning the volume down. Acting is weak all round and what on Earth was Christopher Lee thinking about when he accepted this film?! I wonder what he thinks of it. Basically the whole thing is a real mess, but I found it a fairly entertaining mess all the same. Impossible to recommend but it kept me watching through to the end. Speaking of which the end credits run over what appears to be deleted scenes and cut footage, it also features the same shot of Sybil Danning taking her dress off and exposing her breasts probably in excess of 20 times! If that's your thing. The [[Shouting]] [[SECONDLY]] [[launched]] as it [[modes]] to [[going]] on with a [[weird]] and surreal [[opens]] [[storytelling]] by Christopher Lee whose [[imagery]] is [[dictated]] over a moving [[stars]] [[campo]], oh and a skeleton [[appearing]] as well for some [[reasons]]. He says "for it's [[wrote]] the [[residents]] of the [[Overland]] have been [[brought]] [[drunken]] with her blood. And I [[noticed]] her sip [[after]] a hairy beast and she [[hold]] forth a golden challis full of the [[dirtiest]] fornication's and [[after]] her [[brows]] was [[wrote]], behold I am the [[marvellous]] [[Mom]] of #an inaudible word I couldn't make out no matter how many [[time]] I rewound the tape and [[attempted]] to, [[apologizing]]# and all [[horrors]] of the [[Overland]]". This opening narration means [[nada]] at all and is just downright bizarre. After the opening credits which are set over shots of Transylvanian architecture we get an on screen [[subtitles]] that informs us we're in 'Los Angeles, California U.S.A. City of the Angels'. I knew I was in for a long 86 minutes. It's [[arguably]] not too long after the events of the original [[Shouting]] (1981) and it's Karen White's funeral. After the ceremony Karen's brother Ben (Reb Brown) is spoken to by an 'occult investigator' called [[Stephen]] Crosscoe (Christopher Lee) who says that Karen is a Werewolf and that she will [[coming]] back to [[lives]]. Ben [[denies]] such [[claptrap]]. But together with one of Karen's [[friendships]] and colleagues Jenny (Annie McEnroe) he [[tours]] [[Stephen]] at his [[households]]. There [[Stephen]] tells them about [[Werewolf]] and how they can be [[killing]], he mentions Stirba ([[Sibyl]] Danning) who is the [[quinn]] of [[Werewolf]]. [[Stephane]] [[additionally]] shows them a [[picture]] [[picked]] at Karen's funeral of a [[dame]] named [[Marion]] ([[Mircea]] A. Hunt) and that she is an [[greatly]] [[cruel]] and [[risky]] Werewolf who [[wish]] [[Carin]]. [[Stephane]] [[tells]] he will stake any Werewoves through the [[heartland]] with titanium. Ben figures out that [[Steven]] means he will stake [[Karin]] as well so [[jointly]] with [[Jennie]] he travels to the [[funerals]] where his sister's crypt is to [[cease]] [[Stephen]]. However lots of [[Werewolf]] turn up and attack [[Stephen]], Ben and [[Jennie]]. They survive the [[onslaught]] and [[managing]] to [[finds]] out that Stirba is to be [[uncovered]] in Transylvania. They all [[deciding]] to [[journey]] to Transylvania and [[discontinue]] Stirba and her Werewolves from [[adopting]] over the [[Tierra]] by fulfilling a [[ages]] [[longtime]] [[calamity]]. Once there they [[travels]] to a [[petite]] [[city]] [[termed]] Vlkava which means 'where [[woolf]] live' and meet up with the local priest, Father Florin (Ladislav Krecmer) and his [[little]] but loyal group of Werewolf hunters, hey what else can I call them? Oh, and a dwarf named Florica (Ludmila Safarova) helps too. They follow Mariana who they hope will lead them to Stirba. But Stirba knows of Stefan's arrival and has plans for him Ben and Jenny. Will Stefan be able to put an end to Stirba's plans for world domination? Will this film get any more bizarre or surreal? Watch it and find out. Directed by Philippe Mora this is one strange mess of a film. It's poorly edited as certain sequences just jump around incoherently. The single biggest problem is the script by Robert Sano and Gary Brandner based on his novel which is all over the place and doesn't make any sort of sense or introduces us to any proper characters that we like. Luckily it moves along like a rocket and is never dull or boring, unlike the original. Something strange or bizarre is always happening to keep the viewer entertained. Most people will probably hate it, but for those of us who enjoy 'bad' films this is right up there with the best of them. There are Werewolf orgies which are just freaky to watch. We get some cool Werewolf killing weaponry. The sets and locations just seem so out of place and I don't know if this was actually [[filmed]] in Transylvania but it doesn't look like what I thought mid 80's Transylvania would. Stirba's castle is [[parties]] dungeon, part Gothic castle and part modern luxury house. Stirba and her servant's costumes are very over-the-top, Stirba wears an outfit that looks like it belongs in a S/M video and to be fair to her she looks pretty sexy, and her minions wear skimpy leather clothing too. The special make-up effects range from good to poor, a dwarf's eyes explode, someone has their hand ripped off and a priest has some creature emerge from his mouth but this isn't a film loaded with gore, although there are plenty of effect sequences with Werewolf transformations and attacks. There is plenty of nudity as well as Stirba and her minions are a real randy bunch of Werewolves! I should also mention the music, the soundtrack is dominated by awful rock music that I hated and I ended up turning the volume down. Acting is weak all round and what on Earth was Christopher Lee thinking about when he accepted this film?! I wonder what he thinks of it. Basically the whole thing is a real mess, but I found it a fairly entertaining mess all the same. Impossible to recommend but it kept me watching through to the end. Speaking of which the end credits run over what appears to be deleted scenes and cut footage, it also features the same shot of Sybil Danning taking her dress off and exposing her breasts probably in excess of 20 times! If that's your thing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe it that was the worst movie i have ever seen in my life. i laughed a couple of times. ( probably because of how stupid it was ) If someone paid me to see that movie again i wouldn't. the plot was so horrible , it made no sense , and the acting was so bad that i couldn't even tell if they were trying. that movie was terrible rating: F --------------------------------------------- Result 2150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Strained]] comedy, a sketch-like revue which was initially a [[vehicle]] to showcase one-time radio star Jack Pearl but is now best remembered as America's introduction to The Three Stooges. Actually, Larry, Curly and Moe are [[billed]] [[alongside]] comic Ted Healy as Ted Healy and his Three Stooges. Although the supporting cast features Jimmy Durante (who is completely wasted on [[dim]] material) and ZaSu Pitts, the only [[audience]] for the film these days are Stooges-addicts, and even they won't find much to applaud here. [[Incredibly]] loud and [[overbearing]], it shows how far Hollywood had to go to reach a certain level of slapstick [[sophistication]]. *1/2 from **** [[Uptight]] comedy, a sketch-like revue which was initially a [[motor]] to showcase one-time radio star Jack Pearl but is now best remembered as America's introduction to The Three Stooges. Actually, Larry, Curly and Moe are [[billing]] [[beside]] comic Ted Healy as Ted Healy and his Three Stooges. Although the supporting cast features Jimmy Durante (who is completely wasted on [[bleak]] material) and ZaSu Pitts, the only [[audiences]] for the film these days are Stooges-addicts, and even they won't find much to applaud here. [[Extraordinarily]] loud and [[domineering]], it shows how far Hollywood had to go to reach a certain level of slapstick [[complexity]]. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Here's an interesting little movie that strictly gives the phrase "low budget" a horrible name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes "molecular reorganization". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high camp [[fun]], which is way, WAY off the mark. A glamorous showcase of [[breasts]] and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, [[opposing]] the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic "F", so rest easy! Here's an interesting little movie that strictly gives the phrase "low budget" a horrible name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes "molecular reorganization". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high camp [[funny]], which is way, WAY off the mark. A glamorous showcase of [[boobies]] and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, [[contrasting]] the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic "F", so rest easy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2152 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Seeing as I hate reading long essays hoping to find a point and being disappointed, I will first tell everyone that this movie was terrible. Downright terrible. And not, [[surprisingly]] for the reasons [[mentioned]] in the first [[review]]. I [[thought]] I [[might]] agree with him, seeing as he gave the movie the rank it [[deserved]], but was sorrowfully rebuked upon reading what he [[said]]. I am [[quite]] ashamed to be [[taking]] the same side as someone who commented that the movie "definitely lacks good-looking females." Let me be the first to say, "Wow! that was definitely some serious in-depth [[reviewing]] there. My [[mind]] can [[hardly]] [[comprehend]] the philosophical musings about this [[movie]]." [[Seriously]] though, a [[lack]] of "good-looking females" shouldn't be considered an [[essential]] to a [[movie]]. If you're desperate enough for "good-looking [[females]]" you should really watch other [[types]] of movies, not necessarily [[falling]] into the sci-fi category. Seeing as I hate reading long essays hoping to find a point and being disappointed, I will first tell everyone that this movie was terrible. Downright terrible. And not, [[unexpectedly]] for the reasons [[quoted]] in the first [[reviewing]]. I [[thinks]] I [[apt]] agree with him, seeing as he gave the movie the rank it [[deserves]], but was sorrowfully rebuked upon reading what he [[told]]. I am [[rather]] ashamed to be [[picked]] the same side as someone who commented that the movie "definitely lacks good-looking females." Let me be the first to say, "Wow! that was definitely some serious in-depth [[revisit]] there. My [[intellect]] can [[practically]] [[understanding]] the philosophical musings about this [[filmmaking]]." [[Severely]] though, a [[shortage]] of "good-looking females" shouldn't be considered an [[indispensable]] to a [[filmmaking]]. If you're desperate enough for "good-looking [[female]]" you should really watch other [[genre]] of movies, not necessarily [[diminishing]] into the sci-fi category. --------------------------------------------- Result 2153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This game is one of the best RPG. Fist, It is actually more amusing than any other because of the battle system (you harm the enemy depending on how you aim the attack, you can transform into dragoon, the special attack, the magic...). The script is very good. Characters are all lovely and you have no long dialogs to support, as happened in several games of Final Fintasy series. I got bored of that dialogs about past, when you just want to go on with the game's story. Ambientation is a jewel on this game, it combines Middle-age fantasy with futuristic science fiction. It's remarkable that animation effects are just incredible, i like them more than other in other modern games (we can't remember that Legend of the Dragoon is 8 years now). Then, Map is huge, there are all kinds of places an enemies. Finally, Music is not the best game muse I have heard, but it's perfect for a game like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2154 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After you've seen this small likable and comical film, you will for sure feel better. Cheer to Yves B. Pelletier to have given birth to this small magnificent movie moment, that according to me, will be recognized as a marking movie of year 2004 for the Quebec. The actors Isabelle Blais, Emmanuel Bilodeau, Sylvie Moreau and Stéphane Gagnon all deliver a touching performance. I would compare the feeling that this wonderful story gives you to the ones that Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain have given me. So if you've like the Jean-Pierre Jeunet magnificent film, I would say that you should also like the first movie from Yves B. Pelletier, Les Aimants --------------------------------------------- Result 2155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Maria Braun got married right in the middle of [[combat]] all [[around]] her and her husband Hermann. An explosion [[ripped]] through the [[building]], to [[begin]] with, and she and Hermann had to sign the [[papers]] on a [[pile]] of [[rubble]] on the [[street]]. [[Perhaps]] this may [[strike]] some as a heavy-handed metaphor for what's about to [[come]]: [[marriage]] on the [[rocks]], so to [[speak]]. It's a betrothal where the husband goes off to war and is held in a Russian [[prison]] [[camp]], unbenownst to the [[helpless]] but hopeful and proud Maria, who [[keeps]] standing by the [[depressing]] rubble of the train station as some come [[home]], others don't, with a sign [[awaiting]] Hermann.

Trouble [[arises]], as [[happens]] in Rainer [[Werner]] Fassbinder's melodramas, and as its one of his [[best]] and most [[provocative]], we [[see]] as Maria ([[uncommonly]] [[gorgeous]] [[Hanna]] Schygulla in this role) will do a two-face: she'll stand by her [[man]], [[even]] if it means [[working]] at a [[bar]] for American GI's and, even [[still]] after she hears from a fellow soldier that Hermann has died will still stand by him as she sleeps with a [[black]] GI and [[comes]] [[close]] to bearing his [[child]] (that is, [[naturally]], until he reappears and a [[murder]] [[occurs]] and he takes the [[rap]] so she can be safe), or [[working]] for a German [[businessman]] ([[effectively]] [[sympathetic]] [[Ivan]] Desny) and becoming his sometimes mistress and [[rising]] [[star]] in the company. Maria will do whatever it takes to be successful, but she'll [[always]] be [[married]].

It's [[hard]] to say there's anything about Maria that isn't fascinating. [[Money]], sex, power, all of these become interchangeable for Maria. She's like the feminist that has her [[cake]] and eats it with a sultry [[smile]]: she gets to have a husband, more or [[less]] ([[actually]] a [[lot]] less until the [[last]] ten minutes of the [[film]]) while [[obtaining]] things- a [[man]] who dotes on her whenever he can, a [[new]] and [[expensive]] [[house]] with servants, a [[secretary]], money- that others [[around]] her aren't getting due to already being with a [[man]] or too [[weak]] in a [[position]] to [[rise]] [[anywhere]] (such as the secretary, [[played]] [[interestingly]] enough by Fassbinder's own mother).

[[Maria]] is [[sexy]], confident, and all [[alone]], with an [[idealized]] [[life]] [[going]] against a life that should be made in the shade. She says of the two men- the American soldier and poor old and sick Oswald- that she's fond of them, and at the same time will stick by those roses the confused and soul-searching husband Hermann sends from Canada, after being released from prison. She's casts a profile that a feminist would love to trounce, but understand where she's coming from and going all the way.

Fassbinder employs this inherent contradiction, and moments with Maria appear to go against the conventions of a melodrama (for example, Hermann walking in on the jubilant and half-naked Maria and GI is just about a masterpiece of a scene, with Maria's reaction not of surprise or guilt but pure happiness to see that he's there let alone alive), while sticking to his guns as a director of such high-minded technique with a storyline that should be predictable. But it isn't really. It's like one big metaphor for a country that, after the war, couldn't really move on to normalcy. A few times Fassbinder puts sound of the radio on in the background, and we see Maria walking around her family house, hustle and bustle [[going]] on around her, and the radio speaks of a divided Germany, of things still very unsettled, of a disarray. Maybe the only way to cope is excess, or maybe that's just my interpretation of it.

It's hard to tell, really, under Schygulla's stare face and eyes, anyway. It's such an incredible performance, really, one of those showstoppers that captures the glamor and allure of an old-time Hollywood female star while with the down-and-dirty ethic of a girl of the streets. Most telling are the opposing costumes one sees in one scene when she finally is with her husband, where she stars in one of those super-lustful black lingerie pieces and high heels, and then moves on to a dress without even thinking about it. That's almost the essence of what Maria is, and Schygulla wonderfully gets it down, a headstrong but somehow loving figure who is adored and perplexed by the men around her, sometimes in a single sentence. This is what Fassbinder captures in his wonderful first part of his "trilogy"; while I might overall prefer Veronika Voss as a masterpiece, Maria Braun is perhaps just as good as a character study, of what makes a woman tick and tock with (almost) nothing to lose. Maria Braun got married right in the middle of [[counter]] all [[about]] her and her husband Hermann. An explosion [[buzzed]] through the [[construction]], to [[startup]] with, and she and Hermann had to sign the [[documentation]] on a [[heap]] of [[wrack]] on the [[rue]]. [[Possibly]] this may [[strikes]] some as a heavy-handed metaphor for what's about to [[arriving]]: [[marital]] on the [[rattles]], so to [[talking]]. It's a betrothal where the husband goes off to war and is held in a Russian [[internment]] [[campground]], unbenownst to the [[powerless]] but hopeful and proud Maria, who [[retains]] standing by the [[demoralizing]] rubble of the train station as some come [[household]], others don't, with a sign [[hoping]] Hermann.

Trouble [[emerges]], as [[arises]] in Rainer [[Warner]] Fassbinder's melodramas, and as its one of his [[finest]] and most [[inflammatory]], we [[seeing]] as Maria ([[eminently]] [[beautiful]] [[Hannah]] Schygulla in this role) will do a two-face: she'll stand by her [[males]], [[yet]] if it means [[collaborating]] at a [[solicitor]] for American GI's and, even [[yet]] after she hears from a fellow soldier that Hermann has died will still stand by him as she sleeps with a [[negro]] GI and [[occurs]] [[near]] to bearing his [[children]] (that is, [[clearly]], until he reappears and a [[slain]] [[arises]] and he takes the [[rapper]] so she can be safe), or [[works]] for a German [[trader]] ([[effectiveness]] [[empathy]] [[Evan]] Desny) and becoming his sometimes mistress and [[rises]] [[stars]] in the company. Maria will do whatever it takes to be successful, but she'll [[permanently]] be [[wedding]].

It's [[stiff]] to say there's anything about Maria that isn't fascinating. [[Moneys]], sex, power, all of these become interchangeable for Maria. She's like the feminist that has her [[pudding]] and eats it with a sultry [[mouse]]: she gets to have a husband, more or [[lesser]] ([[genuinely]] a [[batch]] less until the [[latter]] ten minutes of the [[films]]) while [[obtain]] things- a [[guy]] who dotes on her whenever he can, a [[novel]] and [[pricey]] [[haus]] with servants, a [[secretaries]], money- that others [[about]] her aren't getting due to already being with a [[dude]] or too [[flimsy]] in a [[posture]] to [[increase]] [[somewhere]] (such as the secretary, [[served]] [[suspiciously]] enough by Fassbinder's own mother).

[[Mariah]] is [[sexier]], confident, and all [[merely]], with an [[modelled]] [[iife]] [[go]] against a life that should be made in the shade. She says of the two men- the American soldier and poor old and sick Oswald- that she's fond of them, and at the same time will stick by those roses the confused and soul-searching husband Hermann sends from Canada, after being released from prison. She's casts a profile that a feminist would love to trounce, but understand where she's coming from and going all the way.

Fassbinder employs this inherent contradiction, and moments with Maria appear to go against the conventions of a melodrama (for example, Hermann walking in on the jubilant and half-naked Maria and GI is just about a masterpiece of a scene, with Maria's reaction not of surprise or guilt but pure happiness to see that he's there let alone alive), while sticking to his guns as a director of such high-minded technique with a storyline that should be predictable. But it isn't really. It's like one big metaphor for a country that, after the war, couldn't really move on to normalcy. A few times Fassbinder puts sound of the radio on in the background, and we see Maria walking around her family house, hustle and bustle [[go]] on around her, and the radio speaks of a divided Germany, of things still very unsettled, of a disarray. Maybe the only way to cope is excess, or maybe that's just my interpretation of it.

It's hard to tell, really, under Schygulla's stare face and eyes, anyway. It's such an incredible performance, really, one of those showstoppers that captures the glamor and allure of an old-time Hollywood female star while with the down-and-dirty ethic of a girl of the streets. Most telling are the opposing costumes one sees in one scene when she finally is with her husband, where she stars in one of those super-lustful black lingerie pieces and high heels, and then moves on to a dress without even thinking about it. That's almost the essence of what Maria is, and Schygulla wonderfully gets it down, a headstrong but somehow loving figure who is adored and perplexed by the men around her, sometimes in a single sentence. This is what Fassbinder captures in his wonderful first part of his "trilogy"; while I might overall prefer Veronika Voss as a masterpiece, Maria Braun is perhaps just as good as a character study, of what makes a woman tick and tock with (almost) nothing to lose. --------------------------------------------- Result 2156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK this movie was made for one [[reason]] and one [[reason]] only TO MAKE [[MONEY]]!!The producers [[obviously]] didn't [[care]] about [[killing]] a [[classic]] horror [[movie]]. I [[knew]] this movie [[would]] suck as soon as it was [[going]] to be a pg-13 how [[many]] pg-13 slashers [[movies]] have [[turned]] out to be good? [[Thats]] like [[asking]] how many [[women]] have been on the [[moon]]? The answer is NONE!! Prom night 1980 was of cource no [[masterpiece]] but it certainly deserves to be [[recognised]] as a movie that stays true to its [[genre]] and deosnt [[try]] to be anything more than that.

My [[problem]] with Prom night 2008 is the [[way]] that it handles the killer and i have 3 [[major]] problems with him.....................

1)The way he escapes, he was locked up in a mental institute and he escapes through a air conditioning vent!! WHAT THE HELL? why would they have an air conditioning vent in the patients room? Do they want him to be comfortable during his stay or something? 2)His intentions are somewhat uncertain the killer want all of the main [[victims]] family and friends dead so he can have her all to his self, he [[says]] he loves her but the next minute he trys to kill her, so does he [[want]] to kill her, [[love]] her or just plain rape her?? 3) The [[killer]] is too [[good]], how did he [[develop]] all of his [[skills]]? He [[used]] to be a [[teacher]], so in this one scene where he [[kills]] the main [[victims]] [[boyfriend]] while hes basically on [[top]] of her [[asleep]] and she doesn't [[notice]], it all silly 2 stars out of 10 [[terrible]],silly,[[stupid]] [[attempt]] at a [[horror]] [[movie]] OK this movie was made for one [[motif]] and one [[cause]] only TO MAKE [[FINANCIAL]]!!The producers [[definitely]] didn't [[healthcare]] about [[killed]] a [[typical]] horror [[film]]. I [[knowed]] this movie [[ought]] suck as soon as it was [[go]] to be a pg-13 how [[countless]] pg-13 slashers [[kino]] have [[revolved]] out to be good? [[Didnt]] like [[asked]] how many [[wife]] have been on the [[luna]]? The answer is NONE!! Prom night 1980 was of cource no [[centerpiece]] but it certainly deserves to be [[admitted]] as a movie that stays true to its [[type]] and deosnt [[attempt]] to be anything more than that.

My [[troubles]] with Prom night 2008 is the [[paths]] that it handles the killer and i have 3 [[momentous]] problems with him.....................

1)The way he escapes, he was locked up in a mental institute and he escapes through a air conditioning vent!! WHAT THE HELL? why would they have an air conditioning vent in the patients room? Do they want him to be comfortable during his stay or something? 2)His intentions are somewhat uncertain the killer want all of the main [[fatalities]] family and friends dead so he can have her all to his self, he [[tells]] he loves her but the next minute he trys to kill her, so does he [[wanna]] to kill her, [[amour]] her or just plain rape her?? 3) The [[murderer]] is too [[alright]], how did he [[develops]] all of his [[jurisdiction]]? He [[uses]] to be a [[educator]], so in this one scene where he [[slain]] the main [[fatalities]] [[dude]] while hes basically on [[supreme]] of her [[sleeps]] and she doesn't [[notices]], it all silly 2 stars out of 10 [[scary]],silly,[[dumb]] [[tries]] at a [[abomination]] [[filmmaking]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Excellent]] [[show]]. [[Instead]] of watching the same [[old]] sitcom [[type]] [[shows]] where it's the same [[old]] [[thing]], just different "[[stars]]", this refreshing [[show]] [[provided]] an [[incredibly]] entertaining [[view]] of office situations. We have been away from watching any [[television]] for 2 [[years]] and after coming back, of all the [[shows]] available we look forward to [[watching]] this [[show]] on W. Shame on [[Global]] for pulling the plug on this one. I thought this one would be a winner. Let's be realistic about things, FEW Canadian SHOWS [[make]] it. Everyone I [[talk]] to [[enjoys]] this show and I believe it was [[foolish]] of Global to walk away. I guess they [[want]] to stick it out with the typical [[mind]] numbing [[shows]] from the States [[instead]] of pulling behind a Canadian made show that had a lot of promise. Don't get me [[wrong]], I enjoy a lot of shows on TV, but, [[come]] on people, let's keep the [[variety]]. This [[unique]] [[show]] provided a very [[comedic]] [[view]] of a [[slightly]] exaggerated realistic side of office life and relationships, with [[unique]] [[characters]] that you don't [[see]] on any sitcoms [[today]] or in the past. Too bad that global had to say no to this one, foolish mistake. [[Great]] [[shows]]. [[However]] of watching the same [[elderly]] sitcom [[kind]] [[demonstrates]] where it's the same [[antigua]] [[stuff]], just different "[[celebrity]]", this refreshing [[demonstrating]] [[gave]] an [[extremely]] entertaining [[opinion]] of office situations. We have been away from watching any [[tvs]] for 2 [[ages]] and after coming back, of all the [[show]] available we look forward to [[staring]] this [[spectacle]] on W. Shame on [[Universally]] for pulling the plug on this one. I thought this one would be a winner. Let's be realistic about things, FEW Canadian SHOWS [[deliver]] it. Everyone I [[schmooze]] to [[enjoy]] this show and I believe it was [[moronic]] of Global to walk away. I guess they [[wanted]] to stick it out with the typical [[intellect]] numbing [[demonstrate]] from the States [[however]] of pulling behind a Canadian made show that had a lot of promise. Don't get me [[incorrect]], I enjoy a lot of shows on TV, but, [[coming]] on people, let's keep the [[multiple]]. This [[sole]] [[displayed]] provided a very [[slapstick]] [[opinions]] of a [[mildly]] exaggerated realistic side of office life and relationships, with [[sole]] [[features]] that you don't [[behold]] on any sitcoms [[yesterday]] or in the past. Too bad that global had to say no to this one, foolish mistake. --------------------------------------------- Result 2158 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am a MAJOR fan of the horror genre! I LOVE horror/slasher/gore flicks of all kinds. Some of my favorites are the really "good" bad horror flicks. But this movies has NOTHING to warrant it's viewing!! I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about everything that's wrong with it.

The script is horrid. The acting is horrid. The FX are not even worth discussing. The "set" is an absolute JOKE!! The sad thing is I think there MAY be some real potential in a couple of the actors, but this vehicle left them NOTHING to work with!!!

Suffice it to say I saw it for "free" & feel I was robbed!! The time you'd WASTE watching this would be better spent flossing your cat. --------------------------------------------- Result 2159 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Sisters in law will be released theatrically on march 24th in Sweden. A good occasion for our Nordic friends to discover this [[original]] and thoughtful [[documentary]]. It was shown in Göteborg together with a retrospective dedicated to Kim Longinotto, "director in focus" of the festival. She gave a master class, very much appreciated, [[telling]] about her method as documentary filmmaker and told the audience about the special [[circumstances]] which [[led]] her to shoot Sisters in [[law]] twice : the [[first]] [[version]] [[got]] lost for good, so a second shooting was organized and the film turned out to be [[different]] at the [[end]]. A pretty [[awful]] problem [[happened]], in this [[case]], to create the possibility of a very strong [[movie]]. Sisters in law will be released theatrically on march 24th in Sweden. A good occasion for our Nordic friends to discover this [[initial]] and thoughtful [[documentation]]. It was shown in Göteborg together with a retrospective dedicated to Kim Longinotto, "director in focus" of the festival. She gave a master class, very much appreciated, [[saying]] about her method as documentary filmmaker and told the audience about the special [[situations]] which [[culminated]] her to shoot Sisters in [[ley]] twice : the [[outset]] [[stepping]] [[gets]] lost for good, so a second shooting was organized and the film turned out to be [[several]] at the [[terminates]]. A pretty [[horrible]] problem [[sweated]], in this [[lawsuit]], to create the possibility of a very strong [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Every time I watch this movie I am more impressed by the whole production. I have come to the conclusion that it is the best romantic comedy ever made. Everyone involved is perfect; script, acting, direction, sets and editing. Whilst James Stewart can always be relied upon for a good performance, and the supporting cast are magnificent, it is Margaret Sullavan who reveals what an underrated actress she was. Her tragic personal life give poignancy to her qualities as a performer where comedy acting skills are not easy to achieve. Lubitsch managed to get the best and he obviously gave his best. Watch for the number of scenes which were done on one take - breathtaking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] "John Hughes' [[son]] [[wrote]] a high school [[drama]]! Wow!" I thought as I [[checked]] the flick's [[info]] here on IMDb, late on a Saturday night, having found myself [[watching]] the [[opening]] [[credits]] on BBC2.

I've just [[finished]] [[watching]] it, and sadly it was downhill from there on. [[Arguably]] you can't [[spoil]] a film this poor, but I'll leave the spoilers out of this review...

There's an [[awful]] lot of style over very little substance: unfortunately the [[style]] hasn't [[dated]] too well in the eight [[years]] since its [[release]]. As for the substance, the [[film]] tries to pose an interesting [[look]] at the [[nature]] of [[control]] in society through the microcosm of school-life; but beneath the [[shiny]] veneer, a remotely [[meaningful]] or relevant [[argument]] fails to materialise. [[Characters]] are painted in childishly [[broad]] strokes, [[falling]] into the [[kind]] of generic stereotypes the writer's father sought to question in [[Breakfast]] Club.

Director Kyle Cooper does a decent job keeping the [[pace]] up ([[perhaps]] relying a little too much on montages of [[information]], which soon becomes a [[tiresome]] device, but at [[least]] pushes the [[story]] along), but his [[efforts]] don't [[sufficiently]] [[detract]] from the [[poor]] [[script]] and [[bizarre]] [[casting]] (how [[anyone]] is [[supposed]] to side with 'Maddox', when Blake [[Shields]] gurns and glowers his [[way]] through the [[part]], I just can't [[understand]]), not to mention the [[numerous]] gaping plot holes (I'm all for [[creative]] [[license]], but when the "bad [[guys]]" know the [[identities]] of the "good [[guys]]" [[making]] their [[lives]] a misery, but [[fail]] to [[act]] in any [[way]] to [[stop]] them, you really have to wonder why this [[script]] didn't undergo another few re-drafts before production - did [[Daddy]] even read it?).

I'm sure a [[younger]] [[audience]] might get some enjoyment from this [[film]] (and all power to them), but they're [[really]] [[better]] off sticking with Hughes Sr.'s high school output, and if the [[idea]] of school-time [[rebellion]] is what [[really]] appeals, the 1968 [[classic]] "If..." is a [[much]] more satisfying [[examination]] of the [[subject]]. "John Hughes' [[sons]] [[written]] a high school [[tragedy]]! Wow!" I thought as I [[audit]] the flick's [[information]] here on IMDb, late on a Saturday night, having found myself [[staring]] the [[introductory]] [[credit]] on BBC2.

I've just [[finishing]] [[staring]] it, and sadly it was downhill from there on. [[Presumably]] you can't [[ruin]] a film this poor, but I'll leave the spoilers out of this review...

There's an [[frightful]] lot of style over very little substance: unfortunately the [[elegance]] hasn't [[dating]] too well in the eight [[olds]] since its [[freeing]]. As for the substance, the [[films]] tries to pose an interesting [[gaze]] at the [[characters]] of [[supervise]] in society through the microcosm of school-life; but beneath the [[brilliant]] veneer, a remotely [[valid]] or relevant [[controversy]] fails to materialise. [[Attribute]] are painted in childishly [[extensive]] strokes, [[decline]] into the [[genre]] of generic stereotypes the writer's father sought to question in [[Supper]] Club.

Director Kyle Cooper does a decent job keeping the [[rhythm]] up ([[maybe]] relying a little too much on montages of [[info]], which soon becomes a [[exhausting]] device, but at [[lowest]] pushes the [[history]] along), but his [[endeavors]] don't [[appropriately]] [[distract]] from the [[poorest]] [[hyphen]] and [[strange]] [[foundry]] (how [[somebody]] is [[presumed]] to side with 'Maddox', when Blake [[Shield]] gurns and glowers his [[route]] through the [[party]], I just can't [[realise]]), not to mention the [[various]] gaping plot holes (I'm all for [[imaginative]] [[authorized]], but when the "bad [[boy]]" know the [[identity]] of the "good [[boy]]" [[doing]] their [[life]] a misery, but [[fails]] to [[ley]] in any [[pathway]] to [[cease]] them, you really have to wonder why this [[hyphen]] didn't undergo another few re-drafts before production - did [[Papa]] even read it?).

I'm sure a [[youngest]] [[viewers]] might get some enjoyment from this [[filmmaking]] (and all power to them), but they're [[truly]] [[optimum]] off sticking with Hughes Sr.'s high school output, and if the [[concept]] of school-time [[insurrection]] is what [[genuinely]] appeals, the 1968 [[classical]] "If..." is a [[very]] more satisfying [[reviewed]] of the [[themes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This [[film]] [[came]] out 12 [[years]] [[years]] [[ago]], and was a revelation [[even]] for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The [[textbooks]] on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing houses. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's "The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field [[Guide]]" with its flow chart of influence that pulls together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the [[film]] - ignores the houses [[completely]]. Even Laurence Senelick's "The Changing Room" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive [[book]] on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the [[background]] information that one would have expected from it.

I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in "The Queen", 1968. The historical [[context]] is the biggest missing [[part]] of "Paris is Burning".

The film is [[valuable]] because it [[focuses]] on a scene [[otherwise]] being [[ignored]]. It is a valuable snapshot of [[life]] in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not [[come]] out until [[three]] [[years]] later.

Of historical importance, but we still [[need]] [[someone]] to do [[either]] a [[book]] or a documentary film that provides more context. This [[kino]] [[arrived]] out 12 [[olds]] [[olds]] [[formerly]], and was a revelation [[yet]] for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The [[schoolbooks]] on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing houses. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's "The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field [[Handbook]]" with its flow chart of influence that pulls together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the [[flick]] - ignores the houses [[absolutely]]. Even Laurence Senelick's "The Changing Room" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive [[ledger]] on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the [[context]] information that one would have expected from it.

I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in "The Queen", 1968. The historical [[backgrounds]] is the biggest missing [[portions]] of "Paris is Burning".

The film is [[precious]] because it [[spotlight]] on a scene [[else]] being [[forgotten]]. It is a valuable snapshot of [[iife]] in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not [[arriving]] out until [[tre]] [[olds]] later.

Of historical importance, but we still [[needed]] [[everyone]] to do [[neither]] a [[ledger]] or a documentary film that provides more context. --------------------------------------------- Result 2163 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I don't know what [[would]] be so great about this [[movie]]. Even worse, why should anyone [[bother]] seeing this one ? First of all there is no [[story]]. One [[could]] [[say]] that even without a [[story]] a movie [[could]] be worth watching because it invokes some [[sort]] of [[strong]] feeling (laughter, [[cry]], fear, ...), but in my [[opinion]] this [[movie]] does not do that either.

You are just watching [[images]] for +/- 2 hrs. There are more [[useful]] things to do.

I guess you [[could]] [[say]] the movie is an experiment and it is daring because it lacks all the above. But is this worth 2 hrs of your valuable time and 7 EUR of your money ? For me the answer is: no. I don't know what [[should]] be so great about this [[movies]]. Even worse, why should anyone [[irritate]] seeing this one ? First of all there is no [[fairytales]]. One [[wo]] [[says]] that even without a [[histories]] a movie [[did]] be worth watching because it invokes some [[sorts]] of [[forceful]] feeling (laughter, [[cries]], fear, ...), but in my [[viewing]] this [[filmmaking]] does not do that either.

You are just watching [[pictures]] for +/- 2 hrs. There are more [[advantageous]] things to do.

I guess you [[wo]] [[says]] the movie is an experiment and it is daring because it lacks all the above. But is this worth 2 hrs of your valuable time and 7 EUR of your money ? For me the answer is: no. --------------------------------------------- Result 2164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] The reason I intended to give this movie a chance to take 2 hours of my life (actually it was only 35 minutes) was my wish to try to understand and hopefully appreciate Indian cinema. All I have ever seen were few older movies of S.Ray.

Browsing through IMDb I came across this one and after seeing [[rating]] of 8.7 I [[concluded]] this must be the one which will open the doors of [[unknown]] and bring [[artistic]] enjoyment. Oh my how wrong I was! The only logical explanation for this rating of 8.7 is that most of 970 people who voted are Indian and their only venture outside Bolliwood production were Adam Sandler movies.

With this rating this movie would be ranked on 9th place on IMDb List of 250 best movies above Citizen Cane, Goodfellas of Psycho! I am really not in a mood to review and criticize because there is [[simply]] [[nothing]] that I find worth remembering from this painful [[experience]]. My only hope is that there is a lot of Hindu who like me find this movie as is -- plain stupid, with abundance of kitsch and [[cheesy]] music. The reason I intended to give this movie a chance to take 2 hours of my life (actually it was only 35 minutes) was my wish to try to understand and hopefully appreciate Indian cinema. All I have ever seen were few older movies of S.Ray.

Browsing through IMDb I came across this one and after seeing [[appraisals]] of 8.7 I [[finalised]] this must be the one which will open the doors of [[unbeknownst]] and bring [[artsy]] enjoyment. Oh my how wrong I was! The only logical explanation for this rating of 8.7 is that most of 970 people who voted are Indian and their only venture outside Bolliwood production were Adam Sandler movies.

With this rating this movie would be ranked on 9th place on IMDb List of 250 best movies above Citizen Cane, Goodfellas of Psycho! I am really not in a mood to review and criticize because there is [[exclusively]] [[anything]] that I find worth remembering from this painful [[experiences]]. My only hope is that there is a lot of Hindu who like me find this movie as is -- plain stupid, with abundance of kitsch and [[corny]] music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Young]] [[beautiful]] [[Eva]] (Hedy Lamarr) marries an [[older]] [[man]] (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't [[satisfy]] her [[sexually]] and ignores her. Frustrated she goes home and plans to [[get]] a divorce. [[Then]], one day, she's [[skinny]] dipping in a lake in the middle of the woods. Her horse gallops off with her [[clothes]]...and she runs after it! She meets young and very handsome [[Adam]] (Aribert Mog). They make [[love]] and she realizes this is the [[man]] she [[wants]].

[[ENDING]] SPOILER!!!! Naturally, [[since]] this was [[made]] in 1933, she has to be punished for her sin so it [[leads]] to a [[tragic]] finale. [[END]] OF [[ENDING]] SPOILER!!!!

This [[horrified]] people in 1933 but it's [[pretty]] tame by today's standards. Lamarr's nude [[swim]] [[shows]] nothing and when she [[runs]] after the [[horse]] [[totally]] [[nude]], it's [[either]] [[shown]] in extreme [[long]] shot or is [[covered]] by branches and such. There's only a few minor shots of her [[breasts]]. [[Also]] when she has [[sex]] with Mog, nothing is [[shown]] but her [[face]] but you [[see]] her [[achieving]] an orgasm. These scene were [[considered]] pretty extreme in their day and were [[cut]] out [[completely]] of the American [[release]]. Now [[today]] they're back in. This [[film]] would [[get]] by with a PG-13 [[easily]] now.

[[Shock]] episodes [[aside]] this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no [[dialogue]]. Except for the music [[score]] this [[could]] be a [[silent]] picture. [[Luckily]] all the [[actors]] are good--Lamarr and Mog [[especially]] and they're so [[attractive]] that they just take your [[breath]] away watching them. [[Also]] the sequence where they make love is easily one of the most beautifully shot and acted [[sequences]] I've ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]]. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's [[quite]] a few of them) are [[unfortunately]] [[pretty]] [[obvious]] today. I actually started to giggle during one!

So, great direction, beautiful imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly bowled over by it. I [[found]] the movie slow-moving ([[beautiful]] imagery does not make a picture for me), [[somewhat]] dull, obvious, static and had a negative [[ending]]. I can [[live]] with the [[ending]] but it doesn't [[excuse]] the other problems I had with it. Also the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to [[love]] this [[movie]] so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment. [[Youngsters]] [[fabulous]] [[Ewa]] (Hedy Lamarr) marries an [[oldest]] [[dude]] (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't [[respond]] her [[sexuality]] and ignores her. Frustrated she goes home and plans to [[obtain]] a divorce. [[Thereafter]], one day, she's [[lean]] dipping in a lake in the middle of the woods. Her horse gallops off with her [[outfits]]...and she runs after it! She meets young and very handsome [[Adams]] (Aribert Mog). They make [[likes]] and she realizes this is the [[males]] she [[wanted]].

[[DISCONTINUE]] SPOILER!!!! Naturally, [[because]] this was [[introduced]] in 1933, she has to be punished for her sin so it [[leeds]] to a [[dire]] finale. [[TERMINATES]] OF [[DISCONTINUE]] SPOILER!!!!

This [[aghast]] people in 1933 but it's [[quite]] tame by today's standards. Lamarr's nude [[swimmer]] [[exhibitions]] nothing and when she [[manages]] after the [[racehorse]] [[wholly]] [[bare]], it's [[neither]] [[illustrated]] in extreme [[lengthy]] shot or is [[encompassed]] by branches and such. There's only a few minor shots of her [[nipples]]. [[Apart]] when she has [[sexuality]] with Mog, nothing is [[revealed]] but her [[confront]] but you [[behold]] her [[achieve]] an orgasm. These scene were [[regarded]] pretty extreme in their day and were [[cutting]] out [[utterly]] of the American [[freed]]. Now [[yesterday]] they're back in. This [[movies]] would [[got]] by with a PG-13 [[readily]] now.

[[Shocked]] episodes [[sideways]] this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no [[conversation]]. Except for the music [[notation]] this [[did]] be a [[mute]] picture. [[Lucky]] all the [[protagonists]] are good--Lamarr and Mog [[specially]] and they're so [[seductive]] that they just take your [[respiratory]] away watching them. [[Similarly]] the sequence where they make love is easily one of the most beautifully shot and acted [[sequence]] I've ever [[noticed]] in a [[kino]]. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's [[rather]] a few of them) are [[woefully]] [[quite]] [[visible]] today. I actually started to giggle during one!

So, great direction, beautiful imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly bowled over by it. I [[unearthed]] the movie slow-moving ([[fabulous]] imagery does not make a picture for me), [[slightly]] dull, obvious, static and had a negative [[ended]]. I can [[iive]] with the [[terminated]] but it doesn't [[alibi]] the other problems I had with it. Also the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to [[adore]] this [[cinema]] so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Haven't seen any of the Japanese Grudge-films, but I really enjoy this one. I rarely get SCARED when watching films. I can jump, if the effect and sound is startling enough, but getting scared from a movie is a rare thing for me. But I did get scared from Grudge. Maybe because I didn't expect anything at all when I watched it. I didn't expect getting scared. I didn't know anything about it either. That was probably a good thing.

This is a film that you, apparently, either love or hate. Most people seem to compare it to the Japanese Grudge-films, but even though I haven't seen them, I believe it isn't right to compare any film, actually. This film stands on it its own.

The story is weak, most people say. I don't agree. The story is minimalistic, and done so on purpose. The story-telling techniques used - the broken time frame for instance - is perfectly done. The director knows exactly what he's doing, and I believe he got his vision through as he wanted it.

I gave this film 8 of 10. It is a film you will enjoy watching, or hate. It's as simple as that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2167 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. [[Brilliant]], [[clever]] [[movie]] by Francis Leclerc(son of a [[legendary]] french Canadian signer [[Felix]] Leclerc). Flashy [[photo]] and [[clever]] editing is the word of Leclerc, [[strongly]] [[helped]] by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.

The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.

Not spooky, but very [[mysterious]] and well played movie. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.

I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] it 9.5/10 You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. [[Sparkly]], [[artful]] [[kino]] by Francis Leclerc(son of a [[fabled]] french Canadian signer [[Jerome]] Leclerc). Flashy [[photographs]] and [[smarter]] editing is the word of Leclerc, [[flatly]] [[assisted]] by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.

The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.

Not spooky, but very [[shadowy]] and well played movie. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.

I [[strenuously]] [[recommendation]] it 9.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I've watched a few episodes of this show and have found certain [[elements]] of it to be rather interesting, considering medical facts that can be learned. But this is totally upstaged and [[wrecked]] by the neverending [[immoral]] relationships of the show's [[characters]]. Everybody seems to have slept with just about everyone, even during office hours, which is ridiculously [[unrealistic]]. There doesn't [[seem]] to be one solid, lasting marriage or relationship in the [[entire]] [[show]] - everyone is [[broken]] up and on the prowl - [[hardly]] a [[true]] [[reflection]] of all Americans. [[Indeed]], there is a [[total]] [[lack]] of respect for marriage or monogamy and it's truly fulsome.

Then we are presented with endless little moral 'dilemmas' and they're generally solved in such a way that belittles anyone who doesn't agree with the all-knowing degenerate management and staff of the private practice. For instance, in one of the latest episodes we're presented with an exceedingly rare situation of a baby who is born with an uncertain gender and Addison absolutely refuses to perform the surgery because we're supposed to let the baby decide his gender later on. Anyone who disagrees with this is portrayed as immature and stupid.

And I think that anyone opposed to abortion would be offended by the way the show treats pro-lifers. Addison made the comment that no man was allowed to have an opinion on the issue and only one black character was given dignity for opposing abortion on moral grounds. The general feeling was that if you opposed abortion, you're a freak - hardly the popular sentiment in the US. Two of the main characters in the show nonchalantly mention that they had abortions when they were younger and had no apologies or regrets, in spite of the fact that research has shown women can undergo intense depression. What's more a young girl comes to the clinic for an abortion and then thanks the staff on the way out and someone talks about it as how they were helping this young person and it was like something to exult in. The script could have been written by Planned Parenthood.

All in all, this is a [[cheap]] show that lacks much of a future unless it decides to present more real relationships rather than just totally unbelievable soap opera relationships and far-fetched medical situations throughout the whole show. I've watched a few episodes of this show and have found certain [[element]] of it to be rather interesting, considering medical facts that can be learned. But this is totally upstaged and [[obliterated]] by the neverending [[amoral]] relationships of the show's [[nature]]. Everybody seems to have slept with just about everyone, even during office hours, which is ridiculously [[impractical]]. There doesn't [[seems]] to be one solid, lasting marriage or relationship in the [[overall]] [[exhibition]] - everyone is [[broke]] up and on the prowl - [[almost]] a [[veritable]] [[meditation]] of all Americans. [[Admittedly]], there is a [[unmitigated]] [[scarcity]] of respect for marriage or monogamy and it's truly fulsome.

Then we are presented with endless little moral 'dilemmas' and they're generally solved in such a way that belittles anyone who doesn't agree with the all-knowing degenerate management and staff of the private practice. For instance, in one of the latest episodes we're presented with an exceedingly rare situation of a baby who is born with an uncertain gender and Addison absolutely refuses to perform the surgery because we're supposed to let the baby decide his gender later on. Anyone who disagrees with this is portrayed as immature and stupid.

And I think that anyone opposed to abortion would be offended by the way the show treats pro-lifers. Addison made the comment that no man was allowed to have an opinion on the issue and only one black character was given dignity for opposing abortion on moral grounds. The general feeling was that if you opposed abortion, you're a freak - hardly the popular sentiment in the US. Two of the main characters in the show nonchalantly mention that they had abortions when they were younger and had no apologies or regrets, in spite of the fact that research has shown women can undergo intense depression. What's more a young girl comes to the clinic for an abortion and then thanks the staff on the way out and someone talks about it as how they were helping this young person and it was like something to exult in. The script could have been written by Planned Parenthood.

All in all, this is a [[inexpensive]] show that lacks much of a future unless it decides to present more real relationships rather than just totally unbelievable soap opera relationships and far-fetched medical situations throughout the whole show. --------------------------------------------- Result 2169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was [[wonderful]] as was his toying with the [[audience]]. [[Very]] [[nice]] [[work]].

There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.

Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.

If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too. Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was [[wondrous]] as was his toying with the [[audiences]]. [[Quite]] [[handsome]] [[cooperates]].

There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.

Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.

If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Have not seen this 1958 film in a very long time and greatly enjoyed Kim Novak playing the role as Gil Holroyd who is an actual witch and has an aunt named Queenie Holroyd who is also a witch and Gillian also has a brother warlock named Nick played by Jack Lemmon. When Gillian sets her eyes on Shep Henderson,(James Stewart) who is engaged to a girl he is going to marry; Gillian performers some magic spells with a cat and changes his mind about his intended bride and then becomes very lust full and falls in love with Gillian. The story tells that a real witch cannot fall in love, blush or cry and this begins to prove a big problem between Shep and Gillian, so Nick and Aunt Queenie decided they have to do something about this situation. Great film to view over and over again and a great classic film from 1958. --------------------------------------------- Result 2171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Elizabeth Taylor never could act at all and she was just her usual annoying, untalented self in this film. This was before she got so fat but she still looked very short and dumpy. Rock Hudson was OK as Bick Benedict but clearly an actor with more range like William Holden would have been better. James Dean certainly proved he knew how to mumble his way through a movie. The whole film is incredibly slow and goes on for far too long. The actors were all too young and lightweight and none of them aged convincingly due to the poor make-up. Hudson looked ridiculous just being padded out and Dean and Carroll Baker were obviously the same age.

0/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not [[ashamed]] to [[admit]] I [[loved]] it, even with all its flaws.

First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.

So what [[works]]? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that. I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not [[embarrassed]] to [[recognise]] I [[cared]] it, even with all its flaws.

First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.

So what [[cooperated]]? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2173 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This [[film]] starts out with a [[family]] who were all going in different directions and their teenage daughter [[Martha]] MacIssac ([[Olivia]] [[Dunne]]) was very much in love with Joe MacLeod,([[Zack]]). The [[mother]] is played by Mitzi Kapture,(Jill Dunne) who suddenly walks in on her [[daughter]] and [[Zack]] making out and then all [[kinds]] of [[problems]] [[seem]] to [[surface]]. Jill Dunne has a husband who is always traveling or staying away from the home quite often. There are [[also]] big problems that occur when the family decides to go on a camping trip which their daughter Olivia dislikes and just cannot adapt to sleeping outdoors and requires a tent to be kept out all the bugs. In many ways, Olivia does an outstanding performance as the [[teenage]] and Nick Mancuso,([[Richard]] Grant) gives a great supporting role as a hotel owner. This [[film]] will [[keep]] you guessing how it will end and you will enjoy a film [[filled]] with plenty of horror and terror. Enjoy This [[movies]] starts out with a [[familial]] who were all going in different directions and their teenage daughter [[Tasha]] MacIssac ([[Olivier]] [[Dunn]]) was very much in love with Joe MacLeod,([[Zak]]). The [[mamma]] is played by Mitzi Kapture,(Jill Dunne) who suddenly walks in on her [[fille]] and [[Zac]] making out and then all [[genre]] of [[disorders]] [[looks]] to [[surfacing]]. Jill Dunne has a husband who is always traveling or staying away from the home quite often. There are [[similarly]] big problems that occur when the family decides to go on a camping trip which their daughter Olivia dislikes and just cannot adapt to sleeping outdoors and requires a tent to be kept out all the bugs. In many ways, Olivia does an outstanding performance as the [[youngsters]] and Nick Mancuso,([[Richards]] Grant) gives a great supporting role as a hotel owner. This [[cinematography]] will [[conserve]] you guessing how it will end and you will enjoy a film [[fills]] with plenty of horror and terror. Enjoy --------------------------------------------- Result 2174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wow I loved this movie! It is about normal life in a small village. About hypocrisy and honesty, love and surrender. Great! It is about things everybody encounters in life. You have to do things with passion. But some people will not appreciate your passion and will try to stop you. There are people who find the opinion of others and 'what will the neighbors think' more important than to follow their heart. Don't let anybody's opinion stop you from fulfilling your dreams and passion. I loved the fact that the actors were all really normal people, it could have been my family. No big beauties, but all people you fall in love with during the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This was a movie that I had [[heard]] about all my life growing up, but had never [[seen]] it until a few years [[ago]]. It's [[reputation]] [[truly]] proceeded it. I knew of Michael [[Myers]], had seen the [[mask]], [[saw]] commercials for all of the crummy sequels that followed. But I was growing up during the decade where [[Jason]] and [[Freddy]] had a [[deadly]] grip on the horror game, and never [[thought]] [[much]] of the Halloween franchise. Boy, how I was being [[cheated]] with cheap knock offs.

Halloween is a [[genuinely]] [[terrifying]] movie. Now, by today's standards, it isn't as graphic and visceral, but this [[film]] [[delivers]] on all the other [[levels]] most [[horror]] [[movies]] [[fail]] to [[achieve]] [[today]]. The [[atmosphere]] that John [[Carpenter]] [[creates]] is so creepy, and the fact that it is set in a quaint, mid-west [[town]] is a testament to his ability. The lighting effects are down right horrifying, with "The Shape" [[seemingly]] appearing and [[disappearing]] into the [[shadows]] at will. The [[simple]] [[yet]] brutally effective music score only adds to the suspense.

The performances by all the players are well done, with [[specific]] [[nods]] to [[Jamie]] Lee [[Curtis]] and Donald Pleasance. Ms. [[Curtis]] is such a good [[Laurie]] Strode because she is so [[likable]] and vulnerable. It is all the more [[frightening]] when she is being stalked by Michael [[Myers]] because the director and viewer have invested so much into her, we want her to survive and get away.

Donald Pleasance plays Dr. Loomis like a man on a mission, and it works well. He adds a sense of urgency to the predicament the town finds itself in because he knows what evil stalks their streets.

[[Overall]], not only is Halloween a great [[horror]] movie, but [[also]] a [[great]] film. It [[works]] on [[many]] [[levels]] and draws the audience in and never [[lets]] up. This should be standard viewing for [[anyone]] wanting to [[experience]] a [[truly]] scary movie. And for an even more frightful time, try watching it alone with the lights off. Don't be [[surprised]] if you think you [[see]] "The Shape" lurking around in the shadows! This was a movie that I had [[hear]] about all my life growing up, but had never [[saw]] it until a few years [[earlier]]. It's [[fame]] [[truthfully]] proceeded it. I knew of Michael [[Meyers]], had seen the [[disguises]], [[watched]] commercials for all of the crummy sequels that followed. But I was growing up during the decade where [[Jas]] and [[Freddie]] had a [[mortal]] grip on the horror game, and never [[thinking]] [[very]] of the Halloween franchise. Boy, how I was being [[misled]] with cheap knock offs.

Halloween is a [[actually]] [[horrid]] movie. Now, by today's standards, it isn't as graphic and visceral, but this [[cinematography]] [[furnishes]] on all the other [[grades]] most [[terror]] [[movie]] [[fails]] to [[accomplish]] [[thursday]]. The [[vibe]] that John [[Woodwork]] [[generates]] is so creepy, and the fact that it is set in a quaint, mid-west [[cities]] is a testament to his ability. The lighting effects are down right horrifying, with "The Shape" [[allegedly]] appearing and [[vanishing]] into the [[shade]] at will. The [[mere]] [[even]] brutally effective music score only adds to the suspense.

The performances by all the players are well done, with [[peculiar]] [[nod]] to [[Jaime]] Lee [[Curtiss]] and Donald Pleasance. Ms. [[Curtiss]] is such a good [[Lori]] Strode because she is so [[endearing]] and vulnerable. It is all the more [[horrific]] when she is being stalked by Michael [[Meyers]] because the director and viewer have invested so much into her, we want her to survive and get away.

Donald Pleasance plays Dr. Loomis like a man on a mission, and it works well. He adds a sense of urgency to the predicament the town finds itself in because he knows what evil stalks their streets.

[[Generals]], not only is Halloween a great [[abomination]] movie, but [[similarly]] a [[wondrous]] film. It [[cooperated]] on [[innumerable]] [[grades]] and draws the audience in and never [[entitles]] up. This should be standard viewing for [[someone]] wanting to [[enjoying]] a [[really]] scary movie. And for an even more frightful time, try watching it alone with the lights off. Don't be [[horrified]] if you think you [[consults]] "The Shape" lurking around in the shadows! --------------------------------------------- Result 2176 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour." This [[quote]] was essentially the [[theme]] for the movie in my [[opinion]]. Tom Cruise plays a young [[man]] who was handed everything in his [[life]]. He [[takes]] things for [[granted]] and it comes around full [[swing]] in this [[great]] movie with a [[superb]] twist. This [[film]] will keep you [[engaged]] in the plot and [[unable]] to [[pause]] it to take a [[bathroom]] [[break]].

Its a [[movie]] that really makes you step back and look at your [[life]] and how you live it. You cannot [[really]] appreciate the [[better]] things in life (the sweet), like [[love]], until you have [[experienced]] the [[bad]] (the sour). The theme will really [[get]] you to "[[open]] your eyes".

[[Only]] [[complaint]] is that the [[movie]] gets very [[twisted]] at [[points]] and is [[hard]] to really [[understand]]. I [[think]] the [[end]] is [[perfect]] though. I [[recommend]] you watch it and see for yourself. "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour." This [[quoting]] was essentially the [[themes]] for the movie in my [[avis]]. Tom Cruise plays a young [[men]] who was handed everything in his [[vida]]. He [[pick]] things for [[given]] and it comes around full [[wobble]] in this [[wondrous]] movie with a [[wondrous]] twist. This [[kino]] will keep you [[betrothed]] in the plot and [[impossible]] to [[paused]] it to take a [[toilettes]] [[intermission]].

Its a [[kino]] that really makes you step back and look at your [[iife]] and how you live it. You cannot [[truthfully]] appreciate the [[nicer]] things in life (the sweet), like [[loves]], until you have [[undergone]] the [[amiss]] (the sour). The theme will really [[got]] you to "[[opens]] your eyes".

[[Solely]] [[grievance]] is that the [[kino]] gets very [[deformed]] at [[dots]] and is [[stiff]] to really [[realise]]. I [[thought]] the [[terminating]] is [[faultless]] though. I [[recommendation]] you watch it and see for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 2177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Short, but [[long]] enough, Cat [[Soup]] is a very [[wild]] [[trip]] to watch. One day, I was just [[searching]] [[though]] my On-demand [[list]] through the anime section and [[came]] [[across]] it, and [[decided]] to watch it. I [[spent]] the whole [[time]] [[basically]] sitting with my jaw agape. The [[whole]] time I was either vacant of [[thought]], or had a fleeting one which [[screamed]] "[[TURN]] IT [[OFF]]!!!". But I didn't. And actually, I'm [[glad]] I did.

The [[animation]] is stunning. Very [[artistic]], [[odd]] and dark. I personally [[loved]] it for the [[amazing]] [[animation]], but the [[seemingly]] vacant story [[behind]] it is [[equally]] [[compelling]] for myself.

A [[young]] boy--well, cat--goes in [[search]] of his sister's soul. [[In]] the first [[part]] she's lying sick in bed, and is [[soon]] [[paid]] by a visit from a [[sort]] of grim reaper. Her soul is [[split]] in half. One is [[regained]] by the cat [[boy]] while the other half is lost.

Then the [[rest]] of the [[film]] is [[slightly]] lost to me, [[honestly]]. I [[expect]] they [[go]] back, and their world is... [[perhaps]] [[slowly]] [[falling]] [[apart]]? [[Maybe]] her [[absence]] of soul is the [[answer]] behind this, for the [[rest]] of the [[film]] [[contains]] [[various]] [[stages]] of which the world's in. [[First]] there's a [[giant]] flood, and next it dries up into a [[bleak]] desert, and then everything [[freezes]] (thanks to [[either]] what is [[God]] or [[fate]], as you will [[see]]). [[Then]] I [[believe]] they [[find]] the sister's soul in the [[form]] of an orange [[flower]]. After that, the whole [[world]] disappears. [[Haha]], [[totally]] didn't [[get]] that, but it [[sends]] shivers down my spine each time.

[[Despite]] it's [[seemingly]] random scenes, I'm sure there's a deeper message behind it if you watch it [[enough]] and do some research. Personally, I LOVE trippy [[stuff]] like this, and [[would]] love to [[spend]] time doing that just to [[understand]] it. But to some people it's [[probably]] not their [[cup]] of tea. It comes off as highly [[disturbing]], so if you [[like]] your straight forward anime, this is not a [[film]] for you. If you have an [[open]] [[mind]] however, I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[movie]]. Short, but [[lang]] enough, Cat [[Gumbo]] is a very [[feral]] [[voyager]] to watch. One day, I was just [[looking]] [[while]] my On-demand [[listing]] through the anime section and [[arrived]] [[during]] it, and [[opted]] to watch it. I [[expenditures]] the whole [[moment]] [[fundamentally]] sitting with my jaw agape. The [[ensemble]] time I was either vacant of [[ideology]], or had a fleeting one which [[hissed]] "[[CONVERTING]] IT [[DISABLE]]!!!". But I didn't. And actually, I'm [[happier]] I did.

The [[animate]] is stunning. Very [[arty]], [[weird]] and dark. I personally [[cared]] it for the [[excellent]] [[animate]], but the [[evidently]] vacant story [[backside]] it is [[alike]] [[convincing]] for myself.

A [[youth]] boy--well, cat--goes in [[quest]] of his sister's soul. [[During]] the first [[portions]] she's lying sick in bed, and is [[promptly]] [[credited]] by a visit from a [[genre]] of grim reaper. Her soul is [[splitting]] in half. One is [[retrieved]] by the cat [[dude]] while the other half is lost.

Then the [[stays]] of the [[films]] is [[mildly]] lost to me, [[sincerely]]. I [[expecting]] they [[going]] back, and their world is... [[potentially]] [[softly]] [[tumbling]] [[also]]? [[Probably]] her [[lacks]] of soul is the [[responses]] behind this, for the [[remainder]] of the [[cinematography]] [[involves]] [[multiple]] [[phases]] of which the world's in. [[Firstly]] there's a [[gigantic]] flood, and next it dries up into a [[pessimistic]] desert, and then everything [[freezing]] (thanks to [[neither]] what is [[Lord]] or [[destiny]], as you will [[behold]]). [[Thus]] I [[think]] they [[found]] the sister's soul in the [[forms]] of an orange [[flores]]. After that, the whole [[monde]] disappears. [[Dunno]], [[utterly]] didn't [[got]] that, but it [[sent]] shivers down my spine each time.

[[While]] it's [[reportedly]] random scenes, I'm sure there's a deeper message behind it if you watch it [[adequate]] and do some research. Personally, I LOVE trippy [[thing]] like this, and [[ought]] love to [[expenditure]] time doing that just to [[comprehend]] it. But to some people it's [[unquestionably]] not their [[goblet]] of tea. It comes off as highly [[nagging]], so if you [[iike]] your straight forward anime, this is not a [[films]] for you. If you have an [[opens]] [[intellect]] however, I [[very]] [[recommending]] this [[films]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have no idea how IMDb sorts reviews but I do know that, as happens often on Amazon.com, there are a striking number of very negative reviews for this movie which repeat the same, somewhat obscure talking points, almost verbatim. A campaign? Only IMDb knows.

As for this movie: it's fine. It's a funny, cute and very straightforward movie.

It's been over a decade since I worked in Brooklyn, lived in Queens and visited relatives in the South Bronx. But I found nothing inauthentic or exploitative about these kids. Is the grandmother a bizarre character? Yup. Do the dialogue and plot acknowledge this? Yes, thankfully, they do. Are other movies set in the LES and featuring Dominican / Puerto Rican kids possible? You betcha. Does that make this movie a crime — as some of the (to my eyes, astroturf) comments would suggest? Hardly. Let a thousand plastic flowers bloom.

This is better than any episode of Degrassi JR. High or Degrassi High. Scoff at the comparison but _we've never had that_ and I'm touched, to the core, by this movie's humility of purpose and tender spirit.

That said, I'd love to know the backstory behind all this backbiting! :-D --------------------------------------------- Result 2179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Since]] their [[nasty]] divorce from the Disney Company (with Disney [[keeping]] the Miramax brand) the Weinstein Company seems to specialize in above average movies which are then under-promoted and seen by few. THE [[FLOCK]] is a prime example.

A story about the civil servants who have the nasty job of keeping track of registered sex offenders, this [[picture]] will [[tell]] you more about sex [[criminals]] than an [[entire]] season of Law and [[Order]] - SVU.

Richard Gere gives his best-ever performance as the soft-spoken [[agent]] worn-out by the task. Claire [[Danes]] for once has the [[opportunity]] to get into a solid role ([[instead]] of the junk she [[normally]] gets stuck in) and she makes the most of playing the [[novice]]. The [[cinematography]], pacing, [[editing]], all of it is [[first]] [[rate]] --- and I [[saw]] no [[trace]] of the attention-deficit-disorder camera jump-around or excess camera cuts that others complained about. The [[subject]] is handled with restraint, but it's [[still]] a [[tough]] [[subject]] and might make you [[sick]].

Fifty years [[ago]] there was [[almost]] no [[problem]] with the [[kinds]] of sex [[crimes]] [[herein]] [[shown]] in abundance which will [[shock]] [[even]] the jaded. Then came the [[Supreme]] [[Court]] [[decisions]] which [[simultaneously]] [[tied]] police hands as the "[[rights]]" of sex perverts were [[opened]] up and [[America]] was turned into a shopper's paradise for sexual [[perversity]], both willing and [[unwilling]]. Each such step was met with [[praise]] by Liberals, who [[celebrated]] the Warren Court's ill deeds with [[glossy]] [[covers]] on [[Time]] and Newsweek. [[Everyday]] liberals also [[praised]] the Court's [[action]] and mocked those who [[disagree]]. [[In]] 2007 how [[many]] [[Americans]] know that the [[kind]] of pornography that depicts [[savage]] violence and torture of [[young]] women -- can be [[subscribed]] to, and delivery of it is subsidized by the discount periodicals rate by the [[US]] [[Post]] Office. Just one part of the problem -- a problem that can tare anyone's [[family]] to [[shreds]].

[[Richard]] Gere is a Liberal, but he [[gives]] his best in his performance here. Perhaps in his maturing age he's gained a measure of wisdom. [[Because]] their [[naughty]] divorce from the Disney Company (with Disney [[maintain]] the Miramax brand) the Weinstein Company seems to specialize in above average movies which are then under-promoted and seen by few. THE [[HERD]] is a prime example.

A story about the civil servants who have the nasty job of keeping track of registered sex offenders, this [[image]] will [[say]] you more about sex [[perpetrators]] than an [[total]] season of Law and [[Ordering]] - SVU.

Richard Gere gives his best-ever performance as the soft-spoken [[patrolman]] worn-out by the task. Claire [[Denmark]] for once has the [[likelihood]] to get into a solid role ([[conversely]] of the junk she [[usually]] gets stuck in) and she makes the most of playing the [[rookie]]. The [[film]], pacing, [[edited]], all of it is [[fiirst]] [[rates]] --- and I [[sawthe]] no [[vestige]] of the attention-deficit-disorder camera jump-around or excess camera cuts that others complained about. The [[theme]] is handled with restraint, but it's [[yet]] a [[stiff]] [[theme]] and might make you [[sicker]].

Fifty years [[previously]] there was [[hardly]] no [[trouble]] with the [[sort]] of sex [[offence]] [[hereto]] [[indicated]] in abundance which will [[shocked]] [[yet]] the jaded. Then came the [[Higher]] [[Courthouse]] [[rulings]] which [[meanwhile]] [[tying]] police hands as the "[[right]]" of sex perverts were [[opens]] up and [[Americans]] was turned into a shopper's paradise for sexual [[depravity]], both willing and [[loath]]. Each such step was met with [[extol]] by Liberals, who [[commemorate]] the Warren Court's ill deeds with [[shine]] [[cover]] on [[Period]] and Newsweek. [[Ordinary]] liberals also [[praising]] the Court's [[efforts]] and mocked those who [[disagreement]]. [[Among]] 2007 how [[innumerable]] [[Us]] know that the [[sort]] of pornography that depicts [[cruel]] violence and torture of [[jeune]] women -- can be [[signed]] to, and delivery of it is subsidized by the discount periodicals rate by the [[USA]] [[Posting]] Office. Just one part of the problem -- a problem that can tare anyone's [[families]] to [[crumbs]].

[[Richards]] Gere is a Liberal, but he [[donne]] his best in his performance here. Perhaps in his maturing age he's gained a measure of wisdom. --------------------------------------------- Result 2180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When this [[initially]] [[aired]] in 1984, my [[wife]] and I [[taped]] it on our very [[first]] VHS recorder. I [[still]] have that [[aging]] tape, which I [[try]] to watch [[annually]]. It was the year my first [[child]] was born, and [[seeing]] A Christmas [[Carol]] in this incarnation [[brings]] back [[fond]] [[memories]] of [[happy]] [[times]] -- [[many]] hours of which were spent with this [[film]] [[playing]] in the [[background]]. I [[finally]] [[broke]] down this year and [[ordered]] a DVD, which prompted me to take a [[moment]] to write this brief [[reaction]] to the movie. Charles Dickens' [[story]] is [[captured]] in [[outstanding]] [[fashion]] here. [[George]] C. Scott is [[absolutely]] amazing and [[totally]] believable as Scrooge. The supporting cast is [[equally]] [[spectacular]]. This is, to my mind, a [[flawless]] [[production]]. Little [[details]] add much to the enjoyment. The game "similes" Scrooge's nephew and wife play with their [[party]] [[guests]] is a neat [[item]]. (I've [[since]] re-created it with my [[high]] [[school]] English students as a brief respite from [[class]] [[work]]!) Honestly, I can [[think]] of few [[ways]] to entertain myself over the [[holidays]] I enjoy more than indulging in this CBS production, which was [[originally]] [[sponsored]] by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the [[old]] tape with the [[original]] IBM [[commercials]] ... which [[show]] just how much computers have evolved in 21 [[years]]. [[Amazing]] how things have [[changed]]!) Bottom line: A [[Christmas]] Carol is a timeless [[story]], and this rendition is a timeless classic. Enjoy ... and [[God]] Bless [[Us]], [[Every]] One! When this [[firstly]] [[circulated]] in 1984, my [[women]] and I [[strapped]] it on our very [[frst]] VHS recorder. I [[nonetheless]] have that [[ageing]] tape, which I [[tries]] to watch [[yearly]]. It was the year my first [[kid]] was born, and [[see]] A Christmas [[Carole]] in this incarnation [[poses]] back [[like]] [[memorabilia]] of [[pleased]] [[dates]] -- [[countless]] hours of which were spent with this [[cinematography]] [[playback]] in the [[backdrop]]. I [[ultimately]] [[raped]] down this year and [[commanded]] a DVD, which prompted me to take a [[time]] to write this brief [[response]] to the movie. Charles Dickens' [[tale]] is [[caught]] in [[unresolved]] [[manner]] here. [[Jorge]] C. Scott is [[perfectly]] amazing and [[perfectly]] believable as Scrooge. The supporting cast is [[similarly]] [[dramatic]]. This is, to my mind, a [[impeccable]] [[productivity]]. Little [[detail]] add much to the enjoyment. The game "similes" Scrooge's nephew and wife play with their [[parties]] [[guest]] is a neat [[topics]]. (I've [[because]] re-created it with my [[higher]] [[tuition]] English students as a brief respite from [[categories]] [[jobs]]!) Honestly, I can [[thought]] of few [[way]] to entertain myself over the [[festivals]] I enjoy more than indulging in this CBS production, which was [[initially]] [[financed]] by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the [[ancient]] tape with the [[preliminary]] IBM [[ads]] ... which [[demonstrating]] just how much computers have evolved in 21 [[olds]]. [[Awesome]] how things have [[amended]]!) Bottom line: A [[Claus]] Carol is a timeless [[histories]], and this rendition is a timeless classic. Enjoy ... and [[Lawd]] Bless [[Usa]], [[Any]] One! --------------------------------------------- Result 2181 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A thin story with many fine shots. Eyecatchers here are the three ladies from the D.R.E.A.M. team. And, to a lesser extent, the guy accompanying them. Traci Lords convincingly acts out the female half of an evil business-couple intending to poison the world with antrax. Original in this movie is the bra-bomb, put on a captured member of the D.R.E.A.M.-team. Of course she is rescued by a co-member, three seconds before explosion. Although clearly lent from James Bond's 'Goldfinger' and 'You only live twice', such a climax always works well. All in all a nice watch, James Bond replaced here by three Charlie's Angels. --------------------------------------------- Result 2182 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This really is an [[incredible]] [[film]]. Not only does it document the [[eternal]] [[struggle]] of indigenous and [[disenfranchised]] people to gain their rightful voice but it also [[shows]] the [[United]] States up for its dishonesty, subterfuge, and blatant disregard for human rights and self-determination. [[Chavez]] is shown as a very brave and charismatic leader struggling against what can only be characterized as a despicable elite devoid of any sense of proportion or justice. These filmmakers have recorded a coup unlike anything witnessed before.

And in the cross hairs we see the USA, once again pulling the strings and blurring all sense of reality. It's heart-breaking to watch the [[initial]] [[stages]] of the revolt knowing full well that the subversion of democracy that we're witnessing is a [[tool]] long [[used]] by [[successive]] American governments and their [[seemingly]] blinkered [[citizens]]. The footage makes it clear that this is not a manipulation of [[TV]] or generic footage but an active [[documentation]] of a people and its government [[fighting]] for its future. [[Truly]] a moving [[experience]] for [[anyone]] with a conscience. These Irish film [[makers]] [[deserve]] our [[gratitude]]. Long live [[Chavez]].

We need to enshrine the notion that each country must be [[allowed]] to [[choose]] its government and to develop in ways that the majority sees fit. First [[phase]] in this process is the [[need]] to know what the [[realities]] of the situation are, and this documentary does a [[great]] job of doing just that. This really is an [[unthinkable]] [[cinematic]]. Not only does it document the [[permanent]] [[struggling]] of indigenous and [[disadvantaged]] people to gain their rightful voice but it also [[displays]] the [[Unidos]] States up for its dishonesty, subterfuge, and blatant disregard for human rights and self-determination. [[Gonzalez]] is shown as a very brave and charismatic leader struggling against what can only be characterized as a despicable elite devoid of any sense of proportion or justice. These filmmakers have recorded a coup unlike anything witnessed before.

And in the cross hairs we see the USA, once again pulling the strings and blurring all sense of reality. It's heart-breaking to watch the [[original]] [[phase]] of the revolt knowing full well that the subversion of democracy that we're witnessing is a [[tools]] long [[using]] by [[straight]] American governments and their [[allegedly]] blinkered [[citizen]]. The footage makes it clear that this is not a manipulation of [[TELEVISION]] or generic footage but an active [[papers]] of a people and its government [[struggles]] for its future. [[Honestly]] a moving [[enjoying]] for [[nobody]] with a conscience. These Irish film [[industrialists]] [[merits]] our [[recognition]]. Long live [[Calderon]].

We need to enshrine the notion that each country must be [[authorised]] to [[selection]] its government and to develop in ways that the majority sees fit. First [[stage]] in this process is the [[necessity]] to know what the [[factual]] of the situation are, and this documentary does a [[wondrous]] job of doing just that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I recently saw the Broadway revival of "Blithe [[Spirit]]" [[starring]] [[Angela]] Lansbury, [[Rupert]] Everett, [[Christine]] Ebersole, and Jayne Atkinson. It's a [[terrific]] production, and [[shows]] what good actors can do with a [[play]] that is [[less]] than [[perfect]]. [[Angela]] Lansbury is [[extremely]] [[funny]] as [[Madame]] Arcati.

It was [[probably]] a [[mistake]], then, to [[check]] out the [[film]] version of the play [[starring]] Rex Harrison. The [[movie]] does not have the energy or the [[laughs]] of a good [[stage]] production.

"Blithe Spirit" is [[probably]] one of those plays that [[works]] better with a [[live]] [[cast]], in an [[audience]] full of people who have [[come]] to laugh. The [[actors]] can improvise, give [[touches]] and [[nuances]] to their performance and delivery of the lines, and [[involve]] the [[audience]] on a personal [[level]] that you can't [[get]] in a [[movie]] [[house]], or with a [[DVD]] [[showing]], where the [[audience]] is separated from the [[story]] by the "Fourth Wall." The [[story]]: Charles Condomine (Rex Harrison), a successful [[writer]], lives with his [[wife]] [[Ruth]] (Constance Cummings) in a [[house]] in the [[English]] countryside. Seeking information for his [[next]] book, a book dealing with the [[supernatural]], Charles [[invites]] [[Madame]] Arcati ([[Margaret]] Rutherford, reprising her role from the original 1941 London [[production]]), a local spiritual [[medium]], over to his [[house]] to [[conduct]] a séance. Charles believes that spiritism is a sham, but [[hopes]] to [[pick]] up "the tricks of the [[trade]]." But then Madame Arcati [[brings]] back the ghost of Elvira (Kaye Hammond), Charles's first [[wife]], who [[died]] of pneumonia [[seven]] [[years]] [[ago]]. Elvira [[refuses]] to leave, and develops a spitting [[rivalry]] with Ruth over Charles ([[complicated]] by the fact that only Charles can see or hear Elvira).

On [[stage]], the [[actors]] can [[give]] performances that invite [[laughs]] in this situation. But on the screen, the [[actors]] in "Blithe Spirit" [[tear]] through the lines as if they don't know that [[anyone]] is [[listening]] to them. They mumble lines that were [[designed]] to get laughs on the [[stage]]. The performances by Harrison, Cummings, and even Kaye Hammond are flat and [[lifeless]]. [[Only]] [[Margaret]] Rutherford seems to have [[retained]] her spark and humor as Madame Arcati.

The Oscar-winning visual effects in the film are unimpressive -- not just by today's standards, but by the standards of 1946! They consist mostly of Kaye Hammond walking around in fluorescent green outfits and makeup, being photographed in special lighting to make her look like a glowing ghost.

The cinematographer deserves some credit for creative lighting. But compare the dull visual effects of "Blithe Spirit" to the truly groundbreaking effects in Disney's "Song of the South" -- which was eligible for awards the same [[year]]. [[In]] "South," humans and animated characters share the screen seamlessly for minutes at a time. Compared to "South," the Oscar that "Blithe Spirit" received for special effects was completely undeserved.

At any rate, I can only encourage you to catch the Broadway revival of this play with Angela Lansbury before it closes. As for the movie with Rex Harrison, skip it. I recently saw the Broadway revival of "Blithe [[Wits]]" [[championships]] [[Angeli]] Lansbury, [[Cornelius]] Everett, [[Kristin]] Ebersole, and Jayne Atkinson. It's a [[sumptuous]] production, and [[displaying]] what good actors can do with a [[gaming]] that is [[lesser]] than [[irreproachable]]. [[Angeli]] Lansbury is [[eminently]] [[fun]] as [[Senora]] Arcati.

It was [[presumably]] a [[mistaken]], then, to [[audits]] out the [[movie]] version of the play [[featuring]] Rex Harrison. The [[filmmaking]] does not have the energy or the [[chuckles]] of a good [[ballpark]] production.

"Blithe Spirit" is [[undeniably]] one of those plays that [[work]] better with a [[vive]] [[casting]], in an [[viewers]] full of people who have [[coming]] to laugh. The [[actresses]] can improvise, give [[touching]] and [[subtleties]] to their performance and delivery of the lines, and [[involving]] the [[viewers]] on a personal [[levels]] that you can't [[got]] in a [[filmmaking]] [[households]], or with a [[DVDS]] [[exhibiting]], where the [[viewers]] is separated from the [[history]] by the "Fourth Wall." The [[histories]]: Charles Condomine (Rex Harrison), a successful [[screenwriter]], lives with his [[femme]] [[Roth]] (Constance Cummings) in a [[households]] in the [[Francais]] countryside. Seeking information for his [[upcoming]] book, a book dealing with the [[uncanny]], Charles [[urged]] [[Madam]] Arcati ([[Marguerite]] Rutherford, reprising her role from the original 1941 London [[productivity]]), a local spiritual [[average]], over to his [[households]] to [[demeanor]] a séance. Charles believes that spiritism is a sham, but [[expects]] to [[selects]] up "the tricks of the [[trading]]." But then Madame Arcati [[puts]] back the ghost of Elvira (Kaye Hammond), Charles's first [[woman]], who [[succumbed]] of pneumonia [[vii]] [[olds]] [[prior]]. Elvira [[denying]] to leave, and develops a spitting [[contest]] with Ruth over Charles ([[sophisticated]] by the fact that only Charles can see or hear Elvira).

On [[phases]], the [[protagonists]] can [[confer]] performances that invite [[giggles]] in this situation. But on the screen, the [[protagonists]] in "Blithe Spirit" [[tears]] through the lines as if they don't know that [[person]] is [[listen]] to them. They mumble lines that were [[conceived]] to get laughs on the [[phases]]. The performances by Harrison, Cummings, and even Kaye Hammond are flat and [[lackluster]]. [[Exclusively]] [[Marguerite]] Rutherford seems to have [[maintained]] her spark and humor as Madame Arcati.

The Oscar-winning visual effects in the film are unimpressive -- not just by today's standards, but by the standards of 1946! They consist mostly of Kaye Hammond walking around in fluorescent green outfits and makeup, being photographed in special lighting to make her look like a glowing ghost.

The cinematographer deserves some credit for creative lighting. But compare the dull visual effects of "Blithe Spirit" to the truly groundbreaking effects in Disney's "Song of the South" -- which was eligible for awards the same [[annum]]. [[Across]] "South," humans and animated characters share the screen seamlessly for minutes at a time. Compared to "South," the Oscar that "Blithe Spirit" received for special effects was completely undeserved.

At any rate, I can only encourage you to catch the Broadway revival of this play with Angela Lansbury before it closes. As for the movie with Rex Harrison, skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ashanti is a very 70s sort of film (1979, to be precise). It reminded me of The Wild Geese in a way (Richard Burton, Richard Harris and Roger Moore on a mission in Africa). It's a very good film too, and I enjoyed it a lot.

David (Michael Caine) is a doctor working in Africa and is married to a beautiful Ashanti woman called Anansa (Beverley Johnson) who has trained in medicine in America and is also a doctor. While they're doctoring, one day she is snatched by slavers working for an Arabic slave trader called Suleiman (played perfectly by Peter Ustinov, of all people). The rest of the film is David trying to get her back.

Michael Caine is a brilliant actor, of course, and plays a character who is very determined and prepared to do anything to get his wife back, but rather hopeless with a gun and action stuff. He's helped out first by a Englishman campaigning against the slave trade that no one acknowledges is going on (Rex Harrison!), then briefly by a helicopter pilot (William Holden), and then by an Arab called Malik (Kabir Bedi). Malik has a score to settle with Suleiman (he is very intense throughout, a very engaging character), and so rides off with David to find him and get Anansa back - this involves a wonderful scene in which David fails miserably to get on his camel.

Then there's lots of adventure. There's also lots of morality-questioning. The progress of the story is a little predictable from this point, and there are a few liberties taken with plotting to move things along faster, but it's all pretty forgivable. The question is, will David get to Anansa before Peter Ustinov sells her on to Omar Sharif (yes, of course Omar Sharif is in it!)? --------------------------------------------- Result 2185 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Lee [[hosted]] the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said [[something]] to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The [[Howling]] [[II]], then he quipped, "The less said about that the better." [[Indeed]] he was right as this film may very well be the [[worst]] in his entire catalog of screen performances. The [[first]] Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking werewolf film with its incredible [[special]] [[effects]] and its campy [[sense]] of [[style]] and subject [[matter]]. It was a [[film]] to be [[taken]] seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some [[strange]] [[reason]] thought that [[even]] more campy sequels were [[needed]] [[rather]] than what [[worked]] the first [[time]]([[See]] CHUD then CHUD [[II]] to [[illustrate]] this point). This film is [[miles]] and miles away from the first on [[every]] [[front]]. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the [[major]] scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning([[okay]], I'll [[cede]] Ferdy Mayne too). Lee [[looks]] embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does [[ridiculous]] [[things]](check out that [[ending]] with him and Stirba). Lee looks [[incredibly]] [[tired]] and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that [[dreadful]] noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a [[zero]] - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck! Lee [[greeted]] the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said [[somethin]] to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The [[Yelling]] [[SECONDLY]], then he quipped, "The less said about that the better." [[Actually]] he was right as this film may very well be the [[gravest]] in his entire catalog of screen performances. The [[frst]] Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking werewolf film with its incredible [[particular]] [[impact]] and its campy [[sensing]] of [[styles]] and subject [[topic]]. It was a [[filmmaking]] to be [[took]] seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some [[curious]] [[motif]] thought that [[yet]] more campy sequels were [[require]] [[somewhat]] than what [[cooperate]] the first [[times]]([[Behold]] CHUD then CHUD [[SECONDLY]] to [[portray]] this point). This film is [[kilometers]] and miles away from the first on [[all]] [[newsweek]]. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the [[big]] scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning([[alright]], I'll [[renounce]] Ferdy Mayne too). Lee [[seem]] embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does [[silly]] [[matters]](check out that [[terminating]] with him and Stirba). Lee looks [[exceptionally]] [[mangy]] and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that [[abhorrent]] noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a [[zilch]] - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck! --------------------------------------------- Result 2186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've been [[trying]] to [[find]] out about this [[series]] for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a child and have never [[quite]] been able to [[get]] it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was [[particularly]] [[struck]] by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the [[atmosphere]], which was unusual right from the beginning - [[mysterious]], [[austere]], and extremely authentic. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. [[Every]] 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an enormous let-down. The characters in this series seemed [[genuine]], [[real]] people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood [[stars]] in costumes. This is a [[real]] [[masterpiece]]! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it [[available]] on VHS or [[DVD]]? I would just [[love]] to have the [[chance]] to [[see]] this again! I've been [[striving]] to [[unearthed]] out about this [[serials]] for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a child and have never [[abundantly]] been able to [[got]] it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was [[notably]] [[slugged]] by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the [[ambiance]], which was unusual right from the beginning - [[enigmatic]], [[strict]], and extremely authentic. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. [[Entire]] 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an enormous let-down. The characters in this series seemed [[vera]], [[actual]] people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood [[star]] in costumes. This is a [[true]] [[centerpiece]]! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it [[accessible]] on VHS or [[DVDS]]? I would just [[amour]] to have the [[probability]] to [[behold]] this again! --------------------------------------------- Result 2187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] To [[sum]] this documentary up in a few words is next to impossible. Every fiber of your body tells you that this is not happening right from the opening montage of rapid-fire images, through to the last shot of the clean up at Ground Zero, but [[every]] [[frame]] is [[real]]. The story was [[thought]] up by two French brothers living in New York. Jules (28) and Gideon (31) Naudet (pronounced "Nau-day") want to make a documentary on New York City Firefighters, beginning with a "[[newbie]]" from the academy and follow him through the nine month probationary period to full-fledged firefighter. Seeking the help of their close friend, actor James Hanlon (36), an actor and firefighter at Station 1, Engine 7, the Naudets sift through the "Probies" at the academy and find one, Tony Benetakos to focus the bulk of their documentary on.

Tony becomes the butt of jokes and slowly learns the ins and outs of station life through the members of this close-knit family. Firefighters have a superstition about "Probies." It is that they are either "White Clouds" or "Black Clouds," meaning that with the latter, all kinds of fires follow the "Probie." The former means that very little fire activity follows, but one day, there will be the mother of all fires. Tony is a "White Cloud." After some initial growing pains, Tony settles into the firehouse as if he were a seasoned vet. Then the unthinkable occurs....

September 11, 2001 begins with a clear blue sky and an early morning call to go and see about a supposed gas leak not far from Wall Street. Because Jules has had little camera experience, Gideon hands a camera to his younger brother and tells him to ride with the chief, T. K. Pfeiffer. Arriving at about 8:42, the firefighters begin to use their gas detectors over a grate. Then the sudden roar of what seems to be a low flying airplane rips past the scene, and as Jules pans upwards, we see the first strike of the day. American Airlines Flight 11 smashes into the face of the North Tower of 1 World Trade. Pfeiffer orders his men into the fire engine and they head for the World Trade Center. Once there, Jules asks to accompany the Chief into the tower. Pfeiffer tells Naudet to stick close to him. Once inside, the full impact of the growing disaster begins to show on the faces of the men whose sole purpose is to save lives.

Gideon Naudet decides to leave the firehouse and walk down to the impact area. Once there, he captures the impact of the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, with 2 World Trade. He knows Jules is with Chief Pfeiffer inside the towers. Watching and capturing the crowds' reaction to the unimaginable, Gideon begins to capture on tape the growing fear in Lower Manhattan. Inside tower one, Jules records the last view the world, or loved ones will have of their sons, fathers, uncles, grandfathers, husbands, boyfriends, friends as one by one, each firefighter, carrying 60 lbs of equipment begin the long arduous climb up 80 stories to rescue the injured and trapped. Jules also catches the last glimpse Chief Pfeiffer will have of his brother, Kevin, as he leaves to do his selfless duty. Also caught on video is the gutwrenching sound of falling bodies hitting pavement from victims choosing to jump from the higher floors above the impact zones, sooner than face death at the hands of the flames and smoke. But Jules is respectful, never once does he capture a sensationalistic moment...the money shot. His work is professional through his baptism of fire. He also catches the sight of debris falling from tower two after it is hit by the second plane and the ordered way the firefighters evacuated civilians from the building. Then Jules is caught in the collapse of the south tower and the first official victim is taken: Father Michael Judd, the Chaplain for the fire department. Then as Jules and Chief Pfeiffer make their way from the fallout of the collapse of tower two, tower one begins its structural collapse.

What results is a breathtakingly, poignant view from inside Ground Zero as Jules and Gideon work separately to document that day. Not knowing if either is alive, each fearing the worst. As each firefighter arrives at the firehouse, they greet each other with joyous hugs at having made it back. And in one moment of overwhelming emotion, Jules and Gideon are reunited. As Jules cries on his brother's shoulder, Gideon embraces his younger brother as Hanlon makes the filmmakers the subject. There is one fearful moment when Tony Benetakos, who left the station with a former chief, is believed to have been lost...but returns to the fold, this "Probie" has proven himself.

Shown with only three interruptions, 9/11 is a stunning achievement in documentary filmmaking. It ranks up there with the Hindenburg footage in showing history as it unfolds. The Naudets are to be commended for their deft handling of the subject. In lesser hands, the tendency would be toward the sensational, but the Naudets temper their eye toward dignity and compassion. Narrated by Hanlon, we get the feel of his words as he takes the audience through the events of September 11. Robert De Niro hosts the program in a sombre, restrained way. He never seeks the camera for his own glory, rather he lays out the scenes you are about to see. I also commend CBS for their bravery at airing this special. Chastised for their attempt at grabbing ratings, they temper their editing toward the emotions of the relatives of those who perished. This is a must see for anyone who needs to be reminded of what true heroism is. It isn't about dribbling a basketball, or selling an album of hate lyrics...9/11 is about humanity at its best. Heroism at its finest and the cost of freedom.

To [[somme]] this documentary up in a few words is next to impossible. Every fiber of your body tells you that this is not happening right from the opening montage of rapid-fire images, through to the last shot of the clean up at Ground Zero, but [[any]] [[framework]] is [[true]]. The story was [[ideas]] up by two French brothers living in New York. Jules (28) and Gideon (31) Naudet (pronounced "Nau-day") want to make a documentary on New York City Firefighters, beginning with a "[[pledging]]" from the academy and follow him through the nine month probationary period to full-fledged firefighter. Seeking the help of their close friend, actor James Hanlon (36), an actor and firefighter at Station 1, Engine 7, the Naudets sift through the "Probies" at the academy and find one, Tony Benetakos to focus the bulk of their documentary on.

Tony becomes the butt of jokes and slowly learns the ins and outs of station life through the members of this close-knit family. Firefighters have a superstition about "Probies." It is that they are either "White Clouds" or "Black Clouds," meaning that with the latter, all kinds of fires follow the "Probie." The former means that very little fire activity follows, but one day, there will be the mother of all fires. Tony is a "White Cloud." After some initial growing pains, Tony settles into the firehouse as if he were a seasoned vet. Then the unthinkable occurs....

September 11, 2001 begins with a clear blue sky and an early morning call to go and see about a supposed gas leak not far from Wall Street. Because Jules has had little camera experience, Gideon hands a camera to his younger brother and tells him to ride with the chief, T. K. Pfeiffer. Arriving at about 8:42, the firefighters begin to use their gas detectors over a grate. Then the sudden roar of what seems to be a low flying airplane rips past the scene, and as Jules pans upwards, we see the first strike of the day. American Airlines Flight 11 smashes into the face of the North Tower of 1 World Trade. Pfeiffer orders his men into the fire engine and they head for the World Trade Center. Once there, Jules asks to accompany the Chief into the tower. Pfeiffer tells Naudet to stick close to him. Once inside, the full impact of the growing disaster begins to show on the faces of the men whose sole purpose is to save lives.

Gideon Naudet decides to leave the firehouse and walk down to the impact area. Once there, he captures the impact of the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, with 2 World Trade. He knows Jules is with Chief Pfeiffer inside the towers. Watching and capturing the crowds' reaction to the unimaginable, Gideon begins to capture on tape the growing fear in Lower Manhattan. Inside tower one, Jules records the last view the world, or loved ones will have of their sons, fathers, uncles, grandfathers, husbands, boyfriends, friends as one by one, each firefighter, carrying 60 lbs of equipment begin the long arduous climb up 80 stories to rescue the injured and trapped. Jules also catches the last glimpse Chief Pfeiffer will have of his brother, Kevin, as he leaves to do his selfless duty. Also caught on video is the gutwrenching sound of falling bodies hitting pavement from victims choosing to jump from the higher floors above the impact zones, sooner than face death at the hands of the flames and smoke. But Jules is respectful, never once does he capture a sensationalistic moment...the money shot. His work is professional through his baptism of fire. He also catches the sight of debris falling from tower two after it is hit by the second plane and the ordered way the firefighters evacuated civilians from the building. Then Jules is caught in the collapse of the south tower and the first official victim is taken: Father Michael Judd, the Chaplain for the fire department. Then as Jules and Chief Pfeiffer make their way from the fallout of the collapse of tower two, tower one begins its structural collapse.

What results is a breathtakingly, poignant view from inside Ground Zero as Jules and Gideon work separately to document that day. Not knowing if either is alive, each fearing the worst. As each firefighter arrives at the firehouse, they greet each other with joyous hugs at having made it back. And in one moment of overwhelming emotion, Jules and Gideon are reunited. As Jules cries on his brother's shoulder, Gideon embraces his younger brother as Hanlon makes the filmmakers the subject. There is one fearful moment when Tony Benetakos, who left the station with a former chief, is believed to have been lost...but returns to the fold, this "Probie" has proven himself.

Shown with only three interruptions, 9/11 is a stunning achievement in documentary filmmaking. It ranks up there with the Hindenburg footage in showing history as it unfolds. The Naudets are to be commended for their deft handling of the subject. In lesser hands, the tendency would be toward the sensational, but the Naudets temper their eye toward dignity and compassion. Narrated by Hanlon, we get the feel of his words as he takes the audience through the events of September 11. Robert De Niro hosts the program in a sombre, restrained way. He never seeks the camera for his own glory, rather he lays out the scenes you are about to see. I also commend CBS for their bravery at airing this special. Chastised for their attempt at grabbing ratings, they temper their editing toward the emotions of the relatives of those who perished. This is a must see for anyone who needs to be reminded of what true heroism is. It isn't about dribbling a basketball, or selling an album of hate lyrics...9/11 is about humanity at its best. Heroism at its finest and the cost of freedom.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2188 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film a few years ago and I got to say that I really love it.Jason Patric was perfect for this weird role that he played.The director?I don't too many things about him...and I don't care.The screenplay is good,that's for sure.In just a few words I have to say about this movie that is weird,strange,even dark,but it's a good one.I saw it a few years ago and never saw it since then.I want to see it again and again.I know that I'm not gonna get sick of watching it.The scenes,the atmosphere,the actors,the story...everything is good.The movie should have lasted longer.I think 120 minutes should have been perfect.I was hoping for a part 2 for this movie.Too bad it din't happened.Jason Patric:you're the man ! very good movie. the end. :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henry Thomas was "great". His character held my attention. I was so "into" the story that I forgot it wasn't real. I wanted him to keep the baby and see what a special person he was. The other people in the story were essential in the makeup of his character. The way they banded together to help one another was truly awe inspiring. I love movies that show the real side of human emotions without having to hit you over the head, in that you are not smart enough to figure things out for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 2190 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Never cast models and Playboy bunnies in your films! Bob Fosse's "Star 80" about Dorothy Stratten, of whom Bogdanovich was obsessed enough to have married her SISTER after her murder at the hands of her low-life husband, is a zillion times more interesting than Dorothy herself on the silver screen. Patty Hansen is no actress either..I expected to see some sort of lost masterpiece a la Orson Welles but instead got Audrey Hepburn cavorting in jeans and a god-awful "poodlesque" hair-do....Very disappointing...."Paper Moon" and "The Last Picture Show" I could watch again and again. This clunker I could barely sit through once. This movie was reputedly not released because of the brouhaha surrounding Ms. Stratten's tawdry death; I think the real reason was because it was so bad! --------------------------------------------- Result 2191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Originally called The Changer. The Nostril Picker is a poorly constructed tale about a loner named Joe Bukowski ([[Carl]] Zschering) who "[[likes]] em young". [[Unable]] to socially interact with girls he bumps into a tramp who teaches him a [[special]] Vietnamese [[chant]]. This "[[chant]]" [[involves]] whistling 'London [[Bridge]] is [[Falling]] Down' whilst [[hopping]] around like an epileptic [[morris]] dancer. [[Nonetheless]], [[Ugly]] Joe tries it out and [[hey]] presto! He is now a girl. [[Ideally]] he [[needs]] to be a young [[guy]] in order attract [[girls]]. But [[lets]] not talk about ideals here - this [[film]] was [[made]] in 1983 and released in 1993, in an ideal world it should have NEVER been released.

The Film Asylum dubbed this horror hokum as "mind numbing, ham handed story telling". Its worse than that. The Nostril Picker really takes the biscuit, in fact the whole god-damn cookie jar. Terribly scripted dialogue [[delivered]] by brain-dead actors, a ridiculous plot and a predictable twist. Just when things couldn't get any more absurd the story goes off on its own nonsensical tangent. For [[instance]], Joe decides to kill the girls by changing back into himself. But i thought he wanted to get close to them? Not content with being a murderer Joe also turns into a cannibal and eats some of his victims, of which there were only around 3-4.

The highlight of this [[terrible]] movie involves Joe picking up a hooker (Steven Andrews) then taking "her" back to his apartment. What happens next defies belief... Joe turns back into a man, but also discovers the hooker is a [[man]]. How does he react? Well, in a Benny Hill-esquire fashion, he chases "her" around the apartment with a bunch of squirty dildo's only to trip up on a blow up doll. God knows what Patrick J Matthews and Stephen Hodge were thinking of. At least this scene paved the [[way]] for another priceless moment. This [[involved]] the [[male]] [[hooker]] reporting the [[incident]] to a curly haired [[police]] [[officer]] with a 2-bit [[joke]] shop 'cop' uniform. The hilarious acting is a must see. Especially the hooker's [[inability]] at [[saying]] "dildo" and his demand for "satisfaction".

[[Apart]] from the above [[mentioned]] [[incident]] this monotonous [[slash]] [[flick]] was a complete [[bore]]. You know a movie's bad when the DVD trailers were more exciting. Normally, i'd fast forward to the good bits, only there weren't any here. The main action sequences involved Joe simply stabbing his victims repeatedly. Forget quick cuts, Matthews utilizes fadeouts (one during a stab scene) to limit any form of suspense there might already be. One girl's non-reaction to her fingers being chopped off is laughable. Normally i'd relish the words "uncut" but in this case they were far from a blessing. Just more agonizing cinematic torture. The whole movie felt like an unedited episode of Midsummer Murders, only less entertaining. I'd hate to see the cut version.

To sum up, The Nostril picker is the most unentertaining thing i've seen since Richard Hammond's 5 O' Clock Show. Dismal performances made worse by a terribly tinny soundtrack and bad dubbing. Don't be fooled by the box label, this is NOT a cult classic unless it qualifies for the lets-use-shitty-horror-dvds-for-coffee-coasters cult. Which i think it does. Unless re-edited to 30 minutes stay away from this coma inducing mess. Originally called The Changer. The Nostril Picker is a poorly constructed tale about a loner named Joe Bukowski ([[Karl]] Zschering) who "[[loves]] em young". [[Impossible]] to socially interact with girls he bumps into a tramp who teaches him a [[particular]] Vietnamese [[purity]]. This "[[purity]]" [[includes]] whistling 'London [[Bridges]] is [[Dropping]] Down' whilst [[jumping]] around like an epileptic [[maurice]] dancer. [[Nevertheless]], [[Nasty]] Joe tries it out and [[hi]] presto! He is now a girl. [[Preferably]] he [[require]] to be a young [[pal]] in order attract [[woman]]. But [[allowing]] not talk about ideals here - this [[filmmaking]] was [[effected]] in 1983 and released in 1993, in an ideal world it should have NEVER been released.

The Film Asylum dubbed this horror hokum as "mind numbing, ham handed story telling". Its worse than that. The Nostril Picker really takes the biscuit, in fact the whole god-damn cookie jar. Terribly scripted dialogue [[rendered]] by brain-dead actors, a ridiculous plot and a predictable twist. Just when things couldn't get any more absurd the story goes off on its own nonsensical tangent. For [[lawsuits]], Joe decides to kill the girls by changing back into himself. But i thought he wanted to get close to them? Not content with being a murderer Joe also turns into a cannibal and eats some of his victims, of which there were only around 3-4.

The highlight of this [[shocking]] movie involves Joe picking up a hooker (Steven Andrews) then taking "her" back to his apartment. What happens next defies belief... Joe turns back into a man, but also discovers the hooker is a [[men]]. How does he react? Well, in a Benny Hill-esquire fashion, he chases "her" around the apartment with a bunch of squirty dildo's only to trip up on a blow up doll. God knows what Patrick J Matthews and Stephen Hodge were thinking of. At least this scene paved the [[ways]] for another priceless moment. This [[participating]] the [[men]] [[prostitute]] reporting the [[incidents]] to a curly haired [[policemen]] [[officers]] with a 2-bit [[joking]] shop 'cop' uniform. The hilarious acting is a must see. Especially the hooker's [[infirmity]] at [[arguing]] "dildo" and his demand for "satisfaction".

[[Furthermore]] from the above [[quoted]] [[misadventure]] this monotonous [[reduces]] [[gesture]] was a complete [[boring]]. You know a movie's bad when the DVD trailers were more exciting. Normally, i'd fast forward to the good bits, only there weren't any here. The main action sequences involved Joe simply stabbing his victims repeatedly. Forget quick cuts, Matthews utilizes fadeouts (one during a stab scene) to limit any form of suspense there might already be. One girl's non-reaction to her fingers being chopped off is laughable. Normally i'd relish the words "uncut" but in this case they were far from a blessing. Just more agonizing cinematic torture. The whole movie felt like an unedited episode of Midsummer Murders, only less entertaining. I'd hate to see the cut version.

To sum up, The Nostril picker is the most unentertaining thing i've seen since Richard Hammond's 5 O' Clock Show. Dismal performances made worse by a terribly tinny soundtrack and bad dubbing. Don't be fooled by the box label, this is NOT a cult classic unless it qualifies for the lets-use-shitty-horror-dvds-for-coffee-coasters cult. Which i think it does. Unless re-edited to 30 minutes stay away from this coma inducing mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 2192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] For my first [[taste]] of [[Shakespeare]] on [[stage]], I cannot [[believe]] what these people did to a [[perfectly]] [[good]] play.

-Let's [[start]] off with the [[good]] [[bit]], shall we?-

[[Alan]] Rickman is alright, [[although]] some of his [[dialog]] [[could]] have been [[delivered]] with more feeling. The rest of the actors [[needed]] to pull it together.

Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art [[thou]] not [[dead]] yet, Romeo? The [[actor]], while not only completely [[wooden]] and deadpan, [[could]] not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was [[completely]] out of [[focus]], had [[difficulty]] even looking Juliet in the face, and [[absolutely]] [[NO]] grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. [[Juliet]] is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her [[character]],and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of [[character]] for the [[entirety]] of his [[dialog]]. Benvolio was unfeeling and [[mercilessly]] choppy with his lines.

I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and [[Juliet]]. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have [[seen]] kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this [[movie]] a [[rating]] of [[zero]]. For my first [[liking]] of [[Shakespearean]] on [[phase]], I cannot [[reckon]] what these people did to a [[abundantly]] [[buena]] play.

-Let's [[startup]] off with the [[alright]] [[bitten]], shall we?-

[[Alain]] Rickman is alright, [[despite]] some of his [[dialogue]] [[did]] have been [[rendered]] with more feeling. The rest of the actors [[needs]] to pull it together.

Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art [[thine]] not [[decedent]] yet, Romeo? The [[protagonist]], while not only completely [[lumber]] and deadpan, [[would]] not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was [[perfectly]] out of [[spotlight]], had [[challenges]] even looking Juliet in the face, and [[abundantly]] [[NOS]] grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. [[Jules]] is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her [[trait]],and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of [[trait]] for the [[whole]] of his [[dialogues]]. Benvolio was unfeeling and [[brutally]] choppy with his lines.

I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and [[Juliette]]. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have [[saw]] kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this [[kino]] a [[assessment]] of [[nothingness]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For all of the Has-Beens or Never Was's or for the curious, this film is for you....Ever played a sport, or wondered what it felt like after the lights went down and the crowd left..this film explores that and more.

Robin Williams(Jack Dundee) is a small town assistant banker in Taft CA., whose life has been plagued, by a miscue in a BIG rival high school football game 13 years ago, when he dropped the pass that would have won over Bakersfield, their Arch-Rival, that takes great pleasure in pounding the Taft Rockets, season after season . Kurt Russell(Reno Hightower) was the Quarterback in that famous game, and is the local legend, that now is a van repair specialist, whose life is fading into lethargy, like the town of Taft itself.

Williams gets an idea to remake history, by replaying the GAME ! He meets with skeptical resistance, so he goes on a one man terror spree, and literally paints the town , orange, yellow and black , to raise the ire of the residents to recreate THE game . After succeeding, the players from that 1972 team reunite, and try to get in shape to practice, which is hysterical . The game is on , Bakesfield is loaded with all of the high tech gadgets, game strategies, and sophisticated training routines . Taft is drawing plays in the mud, with sticks, stones, and bottle caps, what a riot ! Does Taft overcome the odds, does Robin Willians purge the demons from his bowels, does Kurt Russell rise from lethargy, watch "The Best of Times" for one of the BEST viewing experiences ever!

One of Robin Williams best UNDERSTATED performances, the chemistry between Robin and Russell is magic . And who is Kid Lester ???

Holly Palance and Pamela Reed give memorable performances as the wives of Williams and Russell. Succeeds on Many Levels. A 10 ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[In]] the [[process]] of trying to [[establish]] the audiences' [[empathy]] with Jake Roedel (Tobey [[Maguire]]) the [[filmmakers]] [[slander]] the North and the Jayhawkers. Missouri never [[withdrew]] from the Union and the Union Army was not an [[invading]] force. The Southerners [[fought]] for State's Rights: the [[right]] to own slaves, [[elect]] crooked legislatures and [[judges]], and employ a political spoils system. There's [[nothing]] noble in that. The Missourians [[could]] have [[easily]] [[traveled]] [[east]] and [[joined]] the Confederate Army.

It seems to me that the [[story]] has [[nothing]] to do with [[ambiguity]]. When Jake [[leaves]] the Bushwhackers, it's not because he [[saw]] [[error]] in his [[way]], he [[certainly]] doesn't [[give]] himself over to the virtue of the [[cause]] of [[abolition]]. [[Among]] the [[processes]] of trying to [[creating]] the audiences' [[compassionate]] with Jake Roedel (Tobey [[Molloy]]) the [[cinematographers]] [[defamation]] the North and the Jayhawkers. Missouri never [[withdraw]] from the Union and the Union Army was not an [[invasion]] force. The Southerners [[campaigned]] for State's Rights: the [[rights]] to own slaves, [[chooses]] crooked legislatures and [[richter]], and employ a political spoils system. There's [[anything]] noble in that. The Missourians [[wo]] have [[comfortably]] [[visited]] [[eastward]] and [[joins]] the Confederate Army.

It seems to me that the [[storytelling]] has [[anything]] to do with [[equivocation]]. When Jake [[sheets]] the Bushwhackers, it's not because he [[sawthe]] [[errors]] in his [[routing]], he [[surely]] doesn't [[lend]] himself over to the virtue of the [[reason]] of [[expunge]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2195 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Angels in the Outfield" was originally a 1951 movie from the Ted Turner library; Disney remade it in 1994, this time, using the California Angels (now the Los Angeles Angels) as the team (Disney used to own this and the Anaheim Mighty Ducks Hockey Team; also, good use of the words, huh?????).

This movie was about a couple of orphaned children who wanted a family. A man promised the boys a family, only if the Angels won the pennant. So, he called upon God one night about this. The boy who prayed could see the help coming on the way (and ONLY that boy); for instance, when the first angel had come down, a player hit a ball so hard not only did the bat break, so did the ball!!!!! For much of the post-All Star season of 1994, the Angels were at the top of the AL West (of which my home team the Rangers is one and it still is). However, they lost a game because the boy was at court instead of the White Sox/Angels game (there was no Central Division in Baseball back then, hence Chicago being in the West), and no angels were there to help. Thus, a new rule was created: no angels can help in championship games. But wait! In the final championship game, the Angels won!!!!! It was a miracle indeed!

What I liked about this film: This is a good movie. I mean, I prayed every night for the last few years asking for help with school and stuff; look at me now! My work was good!!!!! So for one, this shows that if you believe, God can send His angels down to help you with any troubles that you may have in life. And second, this is a family baseball movie, which is always exciting. This is an old Disney movie, too; I've seen this just recently on the New Disney Channel (blech!!!!!).

"Angels in the Outfield" will change your life forever once you've seen it!!!!!

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2196 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the one in which the diminutive Ruth Gordon plays an Agatha-Christie type of murder mystery author who locks her nephew by marriage into a safe. Gordon believes that he murdered her niece and the young fellow dies of suffocation, while Gordon is traveling back and forth to New York. He manages, however, to leave behind some clues, scratches on a couple of black safe deposit boxes and an improvised and well-hidden note. Columbo enters the case, suspects her at once, and solves the mystery by simply using his supernatural mystical intuitive powers. Oh, and Mariette Hartley is on hand as Gordon's secretary and would-be blackmailer. Hartley is, I believe, the grand daughter of the psychologist B. F. Skinner. I'm not sure her ancestry had anything to do with her attractive belly button, which is on display during a belly dance sequence, but I've always admired Skinner anyway.

The murder is well handled. It's a good plot, and none of the performers or crew fluff anything. But the outstanding figure here is Ruth Gordon, only a skosh over five feet tall. She was over 80 years old and looked it. There are moments when she almost teeters, but she consistently exudes charm. Her acting is idiosyncratic. You can never be sure when she's being serious or when she's putting Columbo and the audience on. She's given some good lines too. What humor there is comes from Gordon. Columbo doesn't have any of his frequent comic moments.

All in all, a nice job by everyone concerned. --------------------------------------------- Result 2197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My sincere advice to all: don't watch the movie.

Don't even go near to the theater where this movie is being played!! even a glimpse of it is bad for health. serious. no jokes. it's 3.30 am in the morning. and i returned from this crappiest movie on this universe. FOUR HOURS DAMN!!! I am proud that i survived after all of it! If this is called survival.

i am highly frustrated. annoyed. disappointed. it was sheer waste of time! money went in drain! no plot. Hope i wake up tomorrow sane and with no memories of this night!! RUBBISH MOVIE.

Happy Republic day to one and all :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Battlestar]] Gallactica was so great because it had tight writing, a [[great]] look, [[excellent]] actors, and interesting [[stories]]... AND [[yeah]], had hot [[men]] and [[women]] [[running]] [[around]] in and out of [[uniform]].

Caprica was just lazy. Lazy writing. [[Actors]] [[smoking]] up a storm to give them "[[character]]." Outdoor sequences that [[ruin]] the feeling of being somewhere else (yes, that is a Ford [[Focus]] sitting in the background). Lots and lots of [[teenage]] angst. [[LOTS]] of gyrating [[naked]] women (but in the background. [[Which]] I'm sure will be [[cut]] for the series) and a token view of some men in towels. [[None]] of the actors except [[Polly]] Walker [[took]] my [[attention]] at all. [[At]] an [[hour]] and a half, I was [[still]] [[wondering]] when it was [[going]] to be over.

So what [[exactly]] is it that's [[supposed]] to [[bring]] me back? The science fiction? It's awfully light on that. The [[actors]]? [[Besides]] Polly Walker's fine [[turn]], there isn't much interesting being [[done]] here. There aren't [[even]] any "hotties" in the cast, except for maybe Esai, [[although]] for the younger set he's [[pretty]] [[old]], since he's over 25.

I [[loved]] BSG. I was skeptical when I [[heard]] about Caprica, and [[unfortunately]], I [[think]] I'm right. I [[predict]] a very [[short]] run for it as a [[series]] unless they really [[sharpen]] their pencils over at SciFi and [[get]] to [[work]] making this more than The [[OC]] on another [[planet]]. [[Pegasus]] Gallactica was so great because it had tight writing, a [[huge]] look, [[sumptuous]] actors, and interesting [[fairytales]]... AND [[yup]], had hot [[man]] and [[wife]] [[executing]] [[nearly]] in and out of [[uniformed]].

Caprica was just lazy. Lazy writing. [[Actresses]] [[tobacco]] up a storm to give them "[[nature]]." Outdoor sequences that [[destroy]] the feeling of being somewhere else (yes, that is a Ford [[Emphasis]] sitting in the background). Lots and lots of [[youth]] angst. [[LOT]] of gyrating [[nude]] women (but in the background. [[Whose]] I'm sure will be [[chop]] for the series) and a token view of some men in towels. [[Nil]] of the actors except [[Polje]] Walker [[picked]] my [[beware]] at all. [[During]] an [[hours]] and a half, I was [[however]] [[requesting]] when it was [[go]] to be over.

So what [[accurately]] is it that's [[suspected]] to [[brings]] me back? The science fiction? It's awfully light on that. The [[protagonists]]? [[Furthermore]] Polly Walker's fine [[transforming]], there isn't much interesting being [[completed]] here. There aren't [[yet]] any "hotties" in the cast, except for maybe Esai, [[while]] for the younger set he's [[quite]] [[ancient]], since he's over 25.

I [[worshiped]] BSG. I was skeptical when I [[overheard]] about Caprica, and [[sadly]], I [[thought]] I'm right. I [[anticipate]] a very [[terse]] run for it as a [[serials]] unless they really [[whet]] their pencils over at SciFi and [[got]] to [[cooperating]] making this more than The [[ORC]] on another [[planets]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Any [[film]] that deals with bigotry in a [[positive]] [[manner]] is a [[film]] that should [[still]] be [[seen]] by [[current]] audiences as the message and moral of the [[story]] will [[always]] be [[relevant]] as long as we have a world full of bigotry.

Aside from that, the [[film]] is [[really]] an old-fashioned [[love]] [[story]]..[[boy]] meets [[girl]]..[[boys]] loses [[girl]]...boy [[gets]] girl back....

The [[weakest]] role goes to the late [[Kent]] [[Smith]] as Lt. [[General]] [[Webster]]([[Riccardo]] Montalban is a [[close]] [[second]])...my [[question]] [[would]] be how did he ever get to be a 3-star [[general]]...the [[character]] is such a [[wimp]] in the presence of his [[wife]] and military [[subordinates]], it's a wonder they [[show]] him any respect at all.

Brando's [[southern]] [[accent]] is a little [[overdone]], and some scenes have a few holes but [[overall]], I enjoy the [[film]] every [[time]] I [[see]] it.

Red Buttons is [[great]]...I [[always]] [[love]] seeing comedians in dramatic [[roles]]...as in Button's [[case]], [[often]] a [[comedian]] can better [[portray]] the [[tragedy]] of a [[person]] than a more [[traditional]] [[dramatic]] [[actor]]. Any [[kino]] that deals with bigotry in a [[conducive]] [[method]] is a [[cinematography]] that should [[yet]] be [[saw]] by [[underway]] audiences as the message and moral of the [[tale]] will [[unceasingly]] be [[germane]] as long as we have a world full of bigotry.

Aside from that, the [[cinematographic]] is [[genuinely]] an old-fashioned [[likes]] [[narratives]]..[[dude]] meets [[daughter]]..[[boy]] loses [[daughter]]...boy [[receives]] girl back....

The [[weaker]] role goes to the late [[Kean]] [[Smiths]] as Lt. [[Generals]] [[Sarge]]([[Ricardo]] Montalban is a [[nearer]] [[secondly]])...my [[issue]] [[ought]] be how did he ever get to be a 3-star [[overall]]...the [[characters]] is such a [[weakling]] in the presence of his [[women]] and military [[underlings]], it's a wonder they [[illustrates]] him any respect at all.

Brando's [[south]] [[focus]] is a little [[overkill]], and some scenes have a few holes but [[general]], I enjoy the [[movies]] every [[period]] I [[seeing]] it.

Red Buttons is [[wondrous]]...I [[unceasingly]] [[iove]] seeing comedians in dramatic [[duties]]...as in Button's [[example]], [[normally]] a [[comic]] can better [[outline]] the [[drama]] of a [[someone]] than a more [[conventional]] [[impressive]] [[actress]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I absolutely loved this movie. It met all expectations and went beyond that. I loved the humor and the way the movie wasn't just randomly silly. It also had a message. Jim Carrey makes me happy. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have [[done]] [[excellent]] analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to [[comment]], but the film just [[bugs]] me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I [[must]] toss in my hat to join the naysayers.

I saw the [[original]] "Wicker Man" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is "The Thing". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like "The Wicker Man" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this [[piece]] of [[crap]] just because it's a re-make.

This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.

The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient ("The drone must die!"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. "The Stepford Wives" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.

The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage "saves" ultimately brings him death.

The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen "Law & Order" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.

So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that. Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have [[doing]] [[sumptuous]] analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to [[observation]], but the film just [[beetles]] me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I [[owes]] toss in my hat to join the naysayers.

I saw the [[preliminary]] "Wicker Man" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is "The Thing". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like "The Wicker Man" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this [[slice]] of [[dammit]] just because it's a re-make.

This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.

The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient ("The drone must die!"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. "The Stepford Wives" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.

The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage "saves" ultimately brings him death.

The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen "Law & Order" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.

So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2202 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a big fan of rom/coms at the best of times. A few have been quite good (check of Dream for an Insomniac), but this one is just more of the same but less.

With a running time of 100min, I expect more than 1 laugh every 30mins. The only real belly laugh are when male strangers and friends instinctively help out Lee's character.

All I can say is AVOID. I guarantee there is at least 10 other movies on the shelf that deserve you $$

3 of out 10 (And only cos I'm a big Lee fan) --------------------------------------------- Result 2203 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked the movie. I remember reading it several times as a kid and was glad to see a movie had been made about the book.

I was kid-sitting for a boy and a girl, ages 11 and 8 and had to talk the girl in to seeing the movie. But happily, at the end, she was glad she saw it and even said that she wanted to buy it on DVD as soon as it came out.

There were some great laugh-out-loud moments and the movie was not as "gross" as I expected it would be ... tho it did rank pretty high up there on the gross-o-meter ...

The only thing I cannot figure out is why they had to have the "dilly" line in there that was done by Woody in reference to his private part ... that to me was the only shocker moment (and you could hear the adults in the audience audibly gasp at that moment in the movie) ... I have no clue why that was put in the movie; it added nothing to the actual movie except for that shock/gasp factor ... other than that, a pretty good movie. Nice to see the "Pepsi" girl all grown up. --------------------------------------------- Result 2204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Snuggle down in your favourite chair and switch on the play-station, as you toss this into the waste disposal unit. [[Spend]] a [[useful]] 90 min. [[living]] your [[favourite]] game. Disjointed - poorly [[filmed]] - non [[directed]] [[junk]]. It [[takes]] a bits from [[several]] other "science fiction" [[movies]] and badly attempts to join the parts into a [[pathetically]] weak [[story]]. There's nothing new here, the filmmakers do not seem to [[realise]] that providing simple entertainment [[would]] achieve a monetary game, but a touch of skill ingenuity and flair is required to turn it into a good film. Any [[money]] spent watching this is a waste, and personally i [[would]] like my 90 min of [[life]] back. Snuggle down in your favourite chair and switch on the play-station, as you toss this into the waste disposal unit. [[Expended]] a [[advantageous]] 90 min. [[iife]] your [[favorite]] game. Disjointed - poorly [[videotaped]] - non [[aimed]] [[trash]]. It [[pick]] a bits from [[many]] other "science fiction" [[filmmaking]] and badly attempts to join the parts into a [[woefully]] weak [[conte]]. There's nothing new here, the filmmakers do not seem to [[understand]] that providing simple entertainment [[could]] achieve a monetary game, but a touch of skill ingenuity and flair is required to turn it into a good film. Any [[cash]] spent watching this is a waste, and personally i [[should]] like my 90 min of [[lives]] back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1933 seemed to be a great year for satires ("Duck Soup" for instance) and this one fits in well even though it is about the obsession with contract bridge. The tone is like a humorous piece from The New Yorker, appropriate, since the film begins with the "Goings On About Town" page of that magazine. The only thing odd is the casting. Made a few years later William Powell and Myrna Loy would have been perfect. However, after 1934, you wouldn't have had adultery handled in such a sophisticated fashion, the young and beautiful Loretta Young in some shear and slinky outfits, or a group of prostitutes listening to a bridge contest on radio. Even if you know nothing about bridge, you may still want to check out a rare example of Hollywood satire. --------------------------------------------- Result 2206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There's a theory of time that posits that all the moments that ever existed and will exist, actually exist right now. It's a bit too much to wrap your head around, but perhaps a bit of a comfort to those who wish they could go back to a simpler time and place. For Barbara Jean Trenton (Ida Lupino), that time was twenty five years earlier, the mid 1930's when her youth and glamor held the greatest promise. For my part, if I could travel through time, it would be back to the 1950's when I grew up. Maybe to a place like Willoughby, but that's another episode.

One thing that wouldn't be so special about 1959 would involve dealing with all that clunky machinery just to watch an episode of "The Twilight Zone". How many reels do you think it would take to catalog the entire series, and then find a particular story you wanted to watch? I guess you have to consider the trade offs, convenience versus simplicity, having it right now or taking the time to spool it up to the exact spot where the story begins. Popping in a CD has it's advantages.

I'm a little surprised that Rod Serling would pen a story that so closely resembled "Sunset Boulevard". Ida Lupino's character mirror imaged Norma Desmond just a bit too closely to be considered an original concept. Martin Balsam portrays very much a similar character to Erich von Stroheim, the husband turned butler who's loyalty is unquestioned. Where the story diverges has to do with the way Danny (Balsam) and Sall (Ted de Corsia) challenge Barbara Jean to get with reality and clear the cobwebs that paralyze her existence.

Fortunately for us viewers, Ida Lupino had no such reservations about taking parts that were 'not big, but a nice showcase'. It's a real treat to watch any episode of "The Twilight Zone" and get to see who pops up from days gone by. Sometimes you get a two-fer, like you have here with Lupino and Balsam, celebrities who sometimes made their mark before the series began, and sometimes after. Combined with the stories that the program produced, it's not surprising that they still manage to entertain so well today. --------------------------------------------- Result 2207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

But since this is a biopic, it's [[important]] to at [[least]] know what to [[expect]] from the character.

I don't know if the [[manner]] the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the [[way]] Ned [[Kelly]] is portrayed as a [[hero]] and a fighter for justice really makes me want to [[believe]] everything is true. I don't [[think]] he's [[portrayed]] as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

This is a [[solid]] Western-type [[movie]] for everybody's tastes. Heath [[Ledger]] is [[great]] as [[always]] and the [[sexy]] Naomi Watts [[charms]] the screen.

Give this [[movie]] a [[chance]] if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I could recommend it. I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

But since this is a biopic, it's [[pivotal]] to at [[fewest]] know what to [[hopes]] from the character.

I don't know if the [[method]] the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the [[camino]] Ned [[Kelley]] is portrayed as a [[heroin]] and a fighter for justice really makes me want to [[believing]] everything is true. I don't [[believing]] he's [[depicted]] as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

This is a [[solids]] Western-type [[films]] for everybody's tastes. Heath [[Books]] is [[wondrous]] as [[continually]] and the [[hot]] Naomi Watts [[psalms]] the screen.

Give this [[movies]] a [[chances]] if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I could recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this film. It was lighthearted, delightful, and very colorful. You can see that MGM was showing off Technicolor. There are hardly any colors that do not appear in this film. Every scene is packed full. The choreography was great. Gene Kelly is a wonder. He is so talented. The dance numbers in this film are all perfectly executed, and perfectly designed. He understands that the dances can tell the story as much as anything else. The last section of the film, the grand dance sequence, is very impressive. What makes this film very special is Gershwin's music. Few American composers have had a better gift for melody. I very much enjoy Gershwin's music. It is enchanting. Ira Gershwin is definitely one of the greatest lyric writers. He is so witty and charming. This was a highly entertaining film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2209 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First of all, I don't understand why some people find this movie so anti-american. Sure, there are moments when the U.S. are accused directly, like at the segments of Youssef Chahine, Ken Loach and, to a certain extent, Mira Nair. But come on, they aren't naive accusations; instead, they are based on real and documented facts, and all the documents that the CIA released about Chile confirms this, for example.

But returning to the film itself, what I enjoyed most on it is the variety of moods we find in it. We find children being educated for the respect of the all the people who died in the event; we find a unhappy couple that will be changed by the tragedy of that day; we find common people that have their feelings downgraded on the shadow of the events of September 11 and react differently to this, with dignity or frustration; we even find someone in the movie for who the fall of the towers grounds for a moment of real happiness.

All these visions and others - as powerful as these or even more - make a consistent blend and help the spectator to have a glimpse about how different people spread across the world reacted to the events of September 11th. Thus, what we see is a panorama that is much more complex than whites and blacks, and this may make some people infuriated; but this is the world where we live, and in it there is no place for manicheistic ideologies, regardless of what presidents or priests may say us.

Finally, I think it's a shame that there isn't even a release date for this movie in the United States of America. It's a shame because most of the american people is asking why this catastrophe happened, and this movie could give some clues to them. This film puts very clearly - differently of what some people of this forum think - that everything we do today will determine our future, and that the errors of the past will affect how we live today. --------------------------------------------- Result 2210 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Guys, you got to watch this awesome movie. At the end of this movie you will have a strong passion and profundity imbued into yourselves. The acting of the two characters, Billy Sunday and Carl Brashear deeply touches the heart from inside. This movie is about principles, dignity, patriotism and HONOR. You will hear Chief Carl Brashear say, the Navy has greatest tradition of all - Honor - practiced thoroughly by these two characters. Mere glances of these characters during the movie fills you with enthusiasm. Dialogue delivery of this movie is perfect. You can't find any flaws in the dialogues. What the Master Chief Billy says roams in and out of your mind for a long time after watching the movie. Please watch this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our [[reporter]] hero battles hindersome [[authorities]], [[duplicitous]] co-workers, [[renegade]] UFO debunkers, and [[silent]], [[skulking]] aliens. ([[Though]] [[capable]] of [[mind]] [[control]] and zapping [[objects]] from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The [[script]] clomps from [[event]] to event,[[leaving]] puzzlers aplenty. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese [[abduct]] the ugly photographer first [[instead]] of his model? Inquiring minds [[want]] to know! Writer-director [[Mario]] Gariazzo [[apparently]] [[researched]] his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics [[double]] [[feature]]. (The [[closing]] screen crawl boasts that it's based on [[actual]] events...just like "[[Plan]] 9!") Some may feel burned by the [[abrupt]] finale, but it should [[still]] appeal to [[conspiracy]] [[cranks]]. In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our [[journalist]] hero battles hindersome [[governments]], [[devious]] co-workers, [[apostate]] UFO debunkers, and [[quiet]], [[slinking]] aliens. ([[Whilst]] [[able]] of [[esprit]] [[supervision]] and zapping [[object]] from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The [[hyphen]] clomps from [[incidents]] to event,[[letting]] puzzlers aplenty. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese [[hijacked]] the ugly photographer first [[however]] of his model? Inquiring minds [[wanting]] to know! Writer-director [[Maria]] Gariazzo [[clearly]] [[examined]] his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics [[dual]] [[trait]]. (The [[close]] screen crawl boasts that it's based on [[real]] events...just like "[[Scheme]] 9!") Some may feel burned by the [[brusque]] finale, but it should [[however]] appeal to [[conspiracies]] [[crevices]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MULHOLLAND DRIVE made me the definitive fan of David Lynch. He's a modern genius, because he's not only a film-maker. His stories and his style have a spell that cross the screen. So THE STRAIGHT STORY was quite a surprise to me, with its easy to follow storyline and sunny sets. Still, Lynch is there, and, while this is far from his best, it's a film not to be missed. Late Richard Farnsworth's performance is one of the reasons.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[So]] there's an [[old]] [[security]] guard and a [[guy]] who dies and then there's KEVIN, the world's biggest [[wuss]]. Kevin [[wants]] to impress his [[incredibly]] insensitive, bratty, and virginal girlfriend AMY. As he returns from [[work]] to... a random [[house]]... he finds his "friends," the sexually [[confusing]] red-shorted [[KYLE]] and the truly [[revolting]] sluttish DAPHNE. They are [[soon]] [[joined]] by Daphne's [[boyfriend]], the trigger-happy sex-crazed macho lunkhead [[NICK]]. And there's the title creatures, [[horrid]] little dogeared puppets who [[kill]] people by giving them their heart's [[desire]]. Kyle's heart's [[desire]] is to [[mate]] with a creepy, yucky [[woman]] in spandex. Nick's heart's [[desire]] is to throw grenades in a [[grade]] school cafeteria-- I mean [[nightclub]]. Kevin's heart's desire is to [[beat]] up a [[skinny]] thug with nunchucks. Amy's heart's [[desire]] is to be a disgusting slut. Daphne's already a disgusting slut, so she doesn't have a heart's desire. Along the [[way]] a truly [[hideous]] band sings a truly [[odd]] song. The hobgoblins [[randomly]] [[go]] back to where they [[came]] from then blow up. "[[Citizen]] Kane" cannot [[hold]] a candle to this true masterpiece of American [[cinema]]. [[Accordingly]] there's an [[former]] [[insurance]] guard and a [[boy]] who dies and then there's KEVIN, the world's biggest [[sissy]]. Kevin [[want]] to impress his [[extremely]] insensitive, bratty, and virginal girlfriend AMY. As he returns from [[cooperate]] to... a random [[maison]]... he finds his "friends," the sexually [[perplexing]] red-shorted [[BRANDON]] and the truly [[disgusting]] sluttish DAPHNE. They are [[quickly]] [[joining]] by Daphne's [[dude]], the trigger-happy sex-crazed macho lunkhead [[NICKY]]. And there's the title creatures, [[nasty]] little dogeared puppets who [[mata]] people by giving them their heart's [[willingness]]. Kyle's heart's [[wishing]] is to [[buddy]] with a creepy, yucky [[girl]] in spandex. Nick's heart's [[willingness]] is to throw grenades in a [[grades]] school cafeteria-- I mean [[cabaret]]. Kevin's heart's desire is to [[defeating]] up a [[lean]] thug with nunchucks. Amy's heart's [[wanting]] is to be a disgusting slut. Daphne's already a disgusting slut, so she doesn't have a heart's desire. Along the [[ways]] a truly [[outrageous]] band sings a truly [[unusual]] song. The hobgoblins [[casually]] [[going]] back to where they [[became]] from then blow up. "[[Citizens]] Kane" cannot [[holds]] a candle to this true masterpiece of American [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I don't think I could have enjoyed it more, though certain things were disturbing. I'm not going to say what, if you haven't seen it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what movie can [[lack]] with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was developed [[sufficiently]]. [[Nothing]] [[seemed]] too [[rushed]], as [[movies]] like this [[tend]] to be. The [[characters]] were like-able, and there were plenty of [[hilarious]] scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the [[story]] is very well [[tied]] [[together]], [[even]] if certain [[aspects]] may be unsatisfactory...by [[matter]] of [[opinion]]. But like I [[said]] before, it's [[hard]] not to love any [[movie]] with Robert Downey Jr. I don't think I could have enjoyed it more, though certain things were disturbing. I'm not going to say what, if you haven't seen it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what movie can [[insufficiency]] with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was developed [[enough]]. [[Nada]] [[looked]] too [[harried]], as [[kino]] like this [[tending]] to be. The [[features]] were like-able, and there were plenty of [[comic]] scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the [[conte]] is very well [[connected]] [[jointly]], [[yet]] if certain [[things]] may be unsatisfactory...by [[issue]] of [[visualise]]. But like I [[avowed]] before, it's [[arduous]] not to love any [[movies]] with Robert Downey Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 2215 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This final entry in George Lucas's STAR WARS [[movies]] is [[often]] [[regarded]] as the weakest of the [[lot]]. [[However]], this is not to say that it is a totally worthless entry in the series. On the [[contrary]]. Sure, it's not as groundbreaking as its predecessors and a [[bit]] more slow-going at [[times]], but RETURN OF THE JEDI [[still]] offers a [[lot]] to [[warrant]] the price of admission.

The first third of the movie, where Luke and his friends rescue Han from the palace of Jabba the Hutt, is a [[classic]]. Jabba, a truly disgusting blob of bloated flesh who speaks in his own language, not only makes a [[great]] villain, but a [[memorable]] one, too. It must have been a nightmare to construct this giant puppet, much less give it the spark and life that we see on the finished product. Actually, what also makes this sequence [[fun]] is the [[clever]] [[use]] of puppets for the [[various]] members of Jabba's [[court]], [[including]] the intimidating, slavering Rancor and [[scary]] Sarlaac pit monster. It [[builds]] [[masterfully]] to its climax and pulls punches all the while.

[[Things]] [[get]] a [[little]] [[bit]] [[slower]] [[around]] the second [[act]], where Luke discovers that he and Leia are related by blood and when we [[travel]] to the forest [[planet]] of Endor, [[home]] of the cuddlesome [[yet]] stalwart Ewoks. Most of the [[complaints]] about [[RETURN]] OF THE JEDI that I've read seem to be centered on these furry creatures, in that they somehow disrupt the tone of the saga. I don't totally agree with that, although this moment is probably played out a bit longer than it should. However, their leader, Wicket (played by Warrick Davis) is a [[delightfully]] memorable creation, and watching how they handle the Imperial Troops' technology with their simple, natural weapons provides a nice contrast.

By the time we get to the third [[act]], though, the pace picks up again, as we intercut between the Ewoks battle against the troops, Lando and the Rebel Forces launching an attack against the Empire's all-new half-completed Death Star, and Luke's final showdown with Darth Vader and the Emperor. The latter ties with the Jabba Palace sequence as the highlight of the movie. Mark Hamill flexes his acting chops once again as Luke Skywalker in these scenes, and watching him as a fully matured Jedi Knight makes for an unforgettable performance. Also, as iconic as James Earl Jones' voice as Darth Vader is, he is rivaled only by the shriveled, crone-like Emperor, played with deliciously raspy, frightening evil by Ian McDiarmid. The tension between this trio heightens the excitement of this climactic moment, which is appropriately darkly lit and menacingly underscored.

The STAR WARS movies have always set standards for special effects, and the technical work in RETURN OF THE JEDI can easily hold a candle to its predecessors. The space battle fights are as exhilarating as always, and the speeder bike chase through the forest is a knockout. Of course, given that this movie was made after A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, it probably shouldn't be so surprising that the special effects have reached an even greater level of excellence. The acting is classic STAR WARS fare; Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher all mature and deepen into their roles, and Anthony Daniels provides more hilarious moments as C-3PO. Frank Oz's Yoda only appears in two scenes, but he makes the most of it. And yes, there's also John Williams' music.

All told, while RETURN OF THE JEDI falters a little bit in the middle, the first and third acts deliver in style, making this a rather satisfactory finale to one of the greatest sagas ever.

In 1997, George Lucas re-released the classic STAR WARS in digitally restored (and revamped) "Special Editions", which featured added-in effects and/or shots as well as some enhancements. Of the three, RETURN OF THE JEDI appears to have caused the most commotion with STAR WARS fans. Perhaps it can be due to the jarringly out-of-place (albeit funny if you're not so easily offended) "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Jabba's Palace, which, although technically amazing, does disrupt the flow of the film. However, I DID like the ending montage scenes where we see victory celebrations occurring on the various planets of the galaxy. This DVD version features yet more tweaking--we get to see more montage finale scenes (notably on Naboo, where we hear what sounds like Jar Jar Binks screaming, "Wesa free!"), and, in what is probably the most controversial change, Hayden Christensen as the specter of Anakin Skywalker in the closing scenes. Probably due to the intense (and unfair) disdain fans have for his somewhat shaky work in EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES it seems inevitable that fans would put this edition down for that alone. However, if you're watching the STAR WARS saga chronologically (and contemplating about it), chances are you may react a little differently. Nonetheless, it is an issue that fans have raised, so it's probably best to be warned beforehand.

As nice as it would be to have Lucas release the original versions of these three classic films, he nonetheless stands by what he said about these revamps being the "definitive" editions of his classic trilogy, and, when viewing the STAR WARS movies altogether as one complete saga (as Lucas intended), it actually makes sense to keep them technically and aurally consistent. The original films will always be engraved in our memories, but these new incarnations are just as much fun, if one can give them a chance. This final entry in George Lucas's STAR WARS [[kino]] is [[ordinarily]] [[viewed]] as the weakest of the [[batch]]. [[Still]], this is not to say that it is a totally worthless entry in the series. On the [[inverse]]. Sure, it's not as groundbreaking as its predecessors and a [[bitten]] more slow-going at [[time]], but RETURN OF THE JEDI [[again]] offers a [[batches]] to [[justifies]] the price of admission.

The first third of the movie, where Luke and his friends rescue Han from the palace of Jabba the Hutt, is a [[conventional]]. Jabba, a truly disgusting blob of bloated flesh who speaks in his own language, not only makes a [[huge]] villain, but a [[landmark]] one, too. It must have been a nightmare to construct this giant puppet, much less give it the spark and life that we see on the finished product. Actually, what also makes this sequence [[amusing]] is the [[smarter]] [[utilise]] of puppets for the [[varied]] members of Jabba's [[courthouse]], [[comprises]] the intimidating, slavering Rancor and [[awful]] Sarlaac pit monster. It [[constructed]] [[artfully]] to its climax and pulls punches all the while.

[[Matters]] [[gets]] a [[petit]] [[bitten]] [[slow]] [[roundabout]] the second [[law]], where Luke discovers that he and Leia are related by blood and when we [[voyages]] to the forest [[planetary]] of Endor, [[dwelling]] of the cuddlesome [[even]] stalwart Ewoks. Most of the [[allegations]] about [[HOMECOMING]] OF THE JEDI that I've read seem to be centered on these furry creatures, in that they somehow disrupt the tone of the saga. I don't totally agree with that, although this moment is probably played out a bit longer than it should. However, their leader, Wicket (played by Warrick Davis) is a [[divinely]] memorable creation, and watching how they handle the Imperial Troops' technology with their simple, natural weapons provides a nice contrast.

By the time we get to the third [[legislation]], though, the pace picks up again, as we intercut between the Ewoks battle against the troops, Lando and the Rebel Forces launching an attack against the Empire's all-new half-completed Death Star, and Luke's final showdown with Darth Vader and the Emperor. The latter ties with the Jabba Palace sequence as the highlight of the movie. Mark Hamill flexes his acting chops once again as Luke Skywalker in these scenes, and watching him as a fully matured Jedi Knight makes for an unforgettable performance. Also, as iconic as James Earl Jones' voice as Darth Vader is, he is rivaled only by the shriveled, crone-like Emperor, played with deliciously raspy, frightening evil by Ian McDiarmid. The tension between this trio heightens the excitement of this climactic moment, which is appropriately darkly lit and menacingly underscored.

The STAR WARS movies have always set standards for special effects, and the technical work in RETURN OF THE JEDI can easily hold a candle to its predecessors. The space battle fights are as exhilarating as always, and the speeder bike chase through the forest is a knockout. Of course, given that this movie was made after A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, it probably shouldn't be so surprising that the special effects have reached an even greater level of excellence. The acting is classic STAR WARS fare; Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher all mature and deepen into their roles, and Anthony Daniels provides more hilarious moments as C-3PO. Frank Oz's Yoda only appears in two scenes, but he makes the most of it. And yes, there's also John Williams' music.

All told, while RETURN OF THE JEDI falters a little bit in the middle, the first and third acts deliver in style, making this a rather satisfactory finale to one of the greatest sagas ever.

In 1997, George Lucas re-released the classic STAR WARS in digitally restored (and revamped) "Special Editions", which featured added-in effects and/or shots as well as some enhancements. Of the three, RETURN OF THE JEDI appears to have caused the most commotion with STAR WARS fans. Perhaps it can be due to the jarringly out-of-place (albeit funny if you're not so easily offended) "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Jabba's Palace, which, although technically amazing, does disrupt the flow of the film. However, I DID like the ending montage scenes where we see victory celebrations occurring on the various planets of the galaxy. This DVD version features yet more tweaking--we get to see more montage finale scenes (notably on Naboo, where we hear what sounds like Jar Jar Binks screaming, "Wesa free!"), and, in what is probably the most controversial change, Hayden Christensen as the specter of Anakin Skywalker in the closing scenes. Probably due to the intense (and unfair) disdain fans have for his somewhat shaky work in EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES it seems inevitable that fans would put this edition down for that alone. However, if you're watching the STAR WARS saga chronologically (and contemplating about it), chances are you may react a little differently. Nonetheless, it is an issue that fans have raised, so it's probably best to be warned beforehand.

As nice as it would be to have Lucas release the original versions of these three classic films, he nonetheless stands by what he said about these revamps being the "definitive" editions of his classic trilogy, and, when viewing the STAR WARS movies altogether as one complete saga (as Lucas intended), it actually makes sense to keep them technically and aurally consistent. The original films will always be engraved in our memories, but these new incarnations are just as much fun, if one can give them a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 2216 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is [[mindless]], it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) wasted on some. The cast of this movie plays their [[characters]] to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/[[world]] with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 [[times]] the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at. I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is [[foolish]], it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) wasted on some. The cast of this movie plays their [[attribute]] to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/[[worldwide]] with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 [[period]] the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at. --------------------------------------------- Result 2217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] I have [[seen]] a [[lot]] of Saura films and [[always]] [[found]] [[amazing]] the [[way]] he assembles [[music]], [[dance]], [[drama]] and [[great]] cinema in his [[movies]]. Ibéria shows an [[even]] better Saura, [[dealing]] with multimedia [[concepts]] and a more [[contemporary]] concept of [[dance]] and music. Another [[thing]] that [[called]] my [[attention]] is the [[fact]] that, in this [[movie]], [[dancers]] and musicians, [[dance]] and music, are equally [[important]]: the [[camera]] [[shows]] [[various]] [[aspects]] of music [[interpretation]], [[examining]] not only technical [[issues]] but [[also]] the [[emotional]] experience of [[playing]]. The interest of Saura on the [[bridge]] between classical and [[contemporary]] [[music]] and [[dance]] is one more [[ingredient]] in turning this [[movie]] [[maybe]] the most aesthetically exciting [[among]] his other [[works]]. That's why I [[recommend]] it [[strongly]] to those who [[love]] good [[cinema]], good music, good [[dance]], [[great]] art. I have [[noticed]] a [[batch]] of Saura films and [[invariably]] [[discovered]] [[striking]] the [[routing]] he assembles [[musicians]], [[dancers]], [[theater]] and [[huge]] cinema in his [[movie]]. Ibéria shows an [[yet]] better Saura, [[treating]] with multimedia [[concept]] and a more [[modern]] concept of [[choreography]] and music. Another [[stuff]] that [[phoned]] my [[beware]] is the [[facto]] that, in this [[cinematography]], [[ballerinas]] and musicians, [[dancers]] and music, are equally [[sizable]]: the [[cameras]] [[displayed]] [[assorted]] [[things]] of music [[explanations]], [[considering]] not only technical [[problem]] but [[additionally]] the [[affective]] experience of [[gaming]]. The interest of Saura on the [[bridging]] between classical and [[modern]] [[musician]] and [[dancers]] is one more [[ingredients]] in turning this [[kino]] [[likely]] the most aesthetically exciting [[in]] his other [[work]]. That's why I [[recommended]] it [[mightily]] to those who [[loved]] good [[theaters]], good music, good [[dancing]], [[wondrous]] art. --------------------------------------------- Result 2218 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yeah, unfortunately I came across the DVD of this and found that it was incredibly awful.

First of all, the characters suck. I mean, come on, if some dork in an orange hat who calls himself 'Orange Sherbert' is the best creative idea these guys could come up for a character, then they should definitely not be in the film-making scene. Poor "costumes", bad "interviews", and basically there is not one "wrestler" on this whole disc with any shred of charisma.

The "wrestling" in Splatter Rampage Wrestling is nothing more than these idiots gently and playfully bouncing together on a trampoline. They make sure to giggle together all the while, too, making the experience seem more like a toddler's playtime than a "wrestling deathmatch".

Basically, Splatter Rampage Wrestling is a pretty lackluster Backyard Wrestling clone. Only, instead of blood, weapons, mayhem, and WRESTLING, we get a trampoline, giggling kids, TERRIBLE audio, and some guy called Orange Sherbert.

Wrestling fan or not, avoid this DVD. It's awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Besides the fact that my list of favorite movie makers is: 1)Stanley Kubrick 2)God Allmighty 3)the rest... this movie actually is better than the book (and the TV miniseries though this is an easy feat, considering the director). The flawless filming stile, the acting and (Kubrick's all time number one skill) the music - make it THE masterpiece of horror. I watched the TV miniseries a few years ago and liked the story and I had my hopes about this when I got a hold of it. IT BLEW ME AWAY!!! It is far better than I ever imagined it. It starts slow (Kubrick trademark) and has a lot of downtime that builds up the suspense. The intro scene is a classic by all means and I watched it about 20 times just for the shear atmosphere it induces to the whole film. Also the film doesn't offer a lot of gore (it has just enough and it is by no means tasteless) a trend that I hate in recent day horror films. Just watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[saw]] this not too [[long]] [[ago]], and I [[must]] say: This movie is [[terrible]]. I watch [[crappy]] [[movies]] for fun. Scarecreow is not fun. Scarecrow is [[stupid]]. You have an [[incredibly]] [[corny]] villain that [[enjoys]] screaming [[awful]] puns as he [[kills]] his [[victims]](actually worse than the one contained in this [[sentence]]). He has his [[hard]] [[luck]] [[story]] that he [[uses]] to [[justify]] his [[killings]]. "Everyone picks on me. The only [[girl]] that [[thinks]] I'm not trailer-trash [[likes]] one of the [[guys]] that [[pick]] on me. I want to kill [[everybody]]. Wah." [[OK]], I'm [[exaggerating]]. But the premise to this [[movie]] alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the [[list]] of crappy movies.

[[Adding]] to what I just [[said]], the kid's [[mom]] is promiscuous, he walks in on his [[mother]] and her [[current]] boyfriend getting it on, mom's [[boyfriend]] tells him to leave, kid refuses, insisting that he isn't [[going]] to leave his own house. Boyfriend chases kid into corn field. He [[kills]] kid right in front of mom, [[mom]] [[screams]] in terror, boyfriend is like, "OMG! I didn't [[mean]] to!" [[Then]] he tells mom not to [[say]] anything to the [[police]] about it. [[Kid]] was [[killed]] under a scarecrow, though. So, like any kid who gets [[murdered]] under a scarecrow, he [[comes]] back as a [[killer]] scarecrow with a vengeance. His [[victims]] "haven't been [[stalked]] like this before..." (Scarecrow's official tag line)

To make [[matters]] worse, this [[movie]] was filmed in a whopping 8 days. That's right, 8 days. I was [[going]] to give this [[movie]] a 2, because in spite of itself, it has one or two redeeming [[moments]]. (They're spoilers, so I won't spoil it for you, if you actually [[want]] to see this [[crap]].) I [[could]] have somewhat [[forgiven]] the [[bad]] acting, the [[horrible]] special effects, the [[abysmal]] script, and the [[bad]] camera work, but I [[simply]] have no [[respect]] for [[lack]] of effort on that [[level]].

This movie isn't [[nearly]] as good as I'm making it out to be. If you [[want]] to [[see]] an [[example]] of how not to make a movie, or if you enjoy [[watching]] bad [[movies]], like I do, then watch this at your own [[risk]]. Everyone else should [[stay]] a safe distance away from this movie at all times. I [[noticed]] this not too [[longer]] [[formerly]], and I [[owes]] say: This movie is [[frightful]]. I watch [[shite]] [[filmmaking]] for fun. Scarecreow is not fun. Scarecrow is [[dumb]]. You have an [[extraordinarily]] [[dorky]] villain that [[enjoy]] screaming [[horrific]] puns as he [[mata]] his [[victim]](actually worse than the one contained in this [[sentences]]). He has his [[tough]] [[likelihood]] [[tales]] that he [[usage]] to [[justifying]] his [[death]]. "Everyone picks on me. The only [[chick]] that [[think]] I'm not trailer-trash [[fond]] one of the [[blokes]] that [[taking]] on me. I want to kill [[everyone]]. Wah." [[ALRIGHT]], I'm [[overstating]]. But the premise to this [[film]] alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the [[listings]] of crappy movies.

[[Adds]] to what I just [[say]], the kid's [[momma]] is promiscuous, he walks in on his [[mama]] and her [[contemporary]] boyfriend getting it on, mom's [[dude]] tells him to leave, kid refuses, insisting that he isn't [[go]] to leave his own house. Boyfriend chases kid into corn field. He [[killings]] kid right in front of mom, [[mama]] [[yelling]] in terror, boyfriend is like, "OMG! I didn't [[meaning]] to!" [[Subsequently]] he tells mom not to [[said]] anything to the [[cops]] about it. [[Petit]] was [[kill]] under a scarecrow, though. So, like any kid who gets [[assassinate]] under a scarecrow, he [[happens]] back as a [[assassin]] scarecrow with a vengeance. His [[fatalities]] "haven't been [[hounded]] like this before..." (Scarecrow's official tag line)

To make [[questions]] worse, this [[filmmaking]] was filmed in a whopping 8 days. That's right, 8 days. I was [[go]] to give this [[cinematic]] a 2, because in spite of itself, it has one or two redeeming [[times]]. (They're spoilers, so I won't spoil it for you, if you actually [[wants]] to see this [[shit]].) I [[did]] have somewhat [[pardoned]] the [[negative]] acting, the [[scary]] special effects, the [[appalling]] script, and the [[unfavourable]] camera work, but I [[mere]] have no [[respecting]] for [[deficit]] of effort on that [[plano]].

This movie isn't [[practically]] as good as I'm making it out to be. If you [[wants]] to [[seeing]] an [[case]] of how not to make a movie, or if you enjoy [[staring]] bad [[cinema]], like I do, then watch this at your own [[danger]]. Everyone else should [[remain]] a safe distance away from this movie at all times. --------------------------------------------- Result 2221 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (aka: The Bloodsucker Leads the Dance)

Lots of naked babes in this one with a couple of lesbo scenes thrown in. The film is supposed to take place in Ireland but it looks more like Rome and the Adriatic to me.

Gothic lesbians get invited to a Count's island castle for the weekend. One by one they seem to be missing their heads due to a madperson running around.

It's not very scary or bloody and the rooms look like they are lit with floodlights even though candles are lit. Go figure...(sic)

Dubbing is worse than usual and the plot only serves as an excuse for the eroticism and nudity. Directed by euro horror actor Alfredo Rizzo, this is one snoozer.

Pretty boring 2 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really hate this retarded show, it SUCKS! big time, and personally I think it is insulting to fairy kind (if you believe in fairies that is); I mean the people who had come up with such crap 'ought to have their heads examine huh? and also there is a LOT of craziness (the evil school teacher, which I think is getting really old) and also stupidity (the boy's parents and fairy godfather) in this show - two of the things that I dispised and loathe in the WHOLE world (especially stupidity).

Overall, I say that this show is so f*****' annoying and should not be seen by prying eyes at ALL (it would make'em bleed to death)! --------------------------------------------- Result 2223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have found this movie available for streaming on Netflix and thought I'd give it a [[try]].

The plot revolves around Ryan and Theo Taylor (Colm Feore and David Cubitt) who have [[finally]] [[seen]] each other after their [[father]] has passed away. Ryan and Theo at [[first]] [[argue]] about who did what. But [[later]], Theo [[finds]] out that his [[brother]] Ryan is not only gay but he is [[dying]] of a terminal [[illness]]. So, Ryan and Theo [[spend]] their [[time]] patching up their differences.

This is such an [[incredible]] [[film]]. I have only [[seen]] Colm Feore in Season 7 of 24 but he was [[phenomenal]] in this. David Cubitt, an actor I have NEVER [[heard]] of before did a [[phenomenal]] [[job]] as well.

I would [[recommend]] this to those who are interested in the [[Gay]] and Lesbian [[genre]]. This is one [[movie]] you don't [[want]] to [[miss]].

I give this film 10 [[stars]] out of 10. [[Excellent]] film! I have found this movie available for streaming on Netflix and thought I'd give it a [[tries]].

The plot revolves around Ryan and Theo Taylor (Colm Feore and David Cubitt) who have [[eventually]] [[noticed]] each other after their [[fathers]] has passed away. Ryan and Theo at [[frst]] [[plead]] about who did what. But [[thereafter]], Theo [[discoveries]] out that his [[brah]] Ryan is not only gay but he is [[died]] of a terminal [[morbid]]. So, Ryan and Theo [[expended]] their [[period]] patching up their differences.

This is such an [[unthinkable]] [[movies]]. I have only [[watched]] Colm Feore in Season 7 of 24 but he was [[wondrous]] in this. David Cubitt, an actor I have NEVER [[audition]] of before did a [[dramatic]] [[employment]] as well.

I would [[recommending]] this to those who are interested in the [[Homosexuals]] and Lesbian [[sort]]. This is one [[cinematic]] you don't [[wantto]] to [[missed]].

I give this film 10 [[superstar]] out of 10. [[Magnifique]] film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2224 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I saw this [[movie]], just now, not when it was released and [[hailed]] as best picture of the year here in Israel. and to [[summarize]] everything right now, I will just say: this is not a good [[film]].

This is Dror Shaul's second feature film, and I have to admit that his first and the TV [[drama]] he [[made]] before this [[picture]] are [[much]] better. further more, this is his first [[attempt]] at directing a drama. the early works were comedies, and were [[funny]] and [[effective]].

The [[first]] [[thing]] you have to know if you'll ever [[see]] this [[film]]: Israel of the 21st century [[hates]] the kibbutz and the values it represented since the [[formation]] of the state of [[Israel]]. the real situation of the kibbutzim is very [[dire]], and some of them [[disappear]] one by one. the kibbutz, [[Hebrew]] word for [[collective]], was a [[sort]] of village for [[members]] only, where the [[values]] of [[equality]] and [[socialism]] were the [[dogma]] for [[everyday]] [[life]]. with the [[change]] in [[social]] values with [[time]], it [[seems]] now that the kibbutz was a place where the human spirit was [[repressed]], [[locked]] [[within]] the [[dogma]] [[rules]], with no ticket out. the [[entrance]] of [[capitalist]] values and [[way]] of [[life]] in the 90's and so far [[made]] it very hard on the [[kibbutzim]] to survive. the crazy [[mother]] in the [[film]] is the central metaphor for that.

But, I regard this [[film]] as having nothing to do with nostalgia for the [[good]] [[old]] days of the kibbutz. once, it was a [[dream]] of [[every]] [[young]] [[couple]] to [[live]] in a [[kibbutz]] and [[raise]] [[children]] in this [[quite]] and [[beautiful]] [[environment]]. but the film shows the [[opposite]]. that the kibbutz, with it's socialist dogma, was a place sort of like a [[cult]] of crazy people, with crazy ideas that [[undermine]] the freedom of each individual within the collective. this is the central philosophy of post modern capitalism: your [[individuality]] is the most [[important]] [[thing]]. you [[must]] [[place]] yourself in the center, and no one [[else]] but you is the [[matter]]. this is the philosophy the film stands for, and that's just it's first [[sin]].

If you disagree with me on the political side, I'm sure you will agree that the acting, the tone of the film, it's script and it's direction are the four sins that follow. the film has no real visual text and none of it's shots is something to remember. it is also very "delicate", a delicacy that is no more than artsy fartsy attempt to provoke emotions, which do not surface, not in the film and not with the viewer. it brings nothing but boredom.

Can someone please explain: why this film won so many prizes? maybe because it shows that Israel is in line with the rest of the world, hating socialist and human values? or maybe it shows that Israel is a "delicate" place, not giving in to dogmas and fanaticism? that we are basically very human and good people, capable of emotions, especially when they are fake ones, just like capitalism expects us to be? or maybe because it tells one of the biggest lies of Israeli cinema in recent years, a lie that undermines the justification of the existence of the Jewish state? no matter what the answer is, it's not a good one. not for the world, not for human values and not for the Jews. I saw this [[filmmaking]], just now, not when it was released and [[applauded]] as best picture of the year here in Israel. and to [[synthesizing]] everything right now, I will just say: this is not a good [[filmmaking]].

This is Dror Shaul's second feature film, and I have to admit that his first and the TV [[dramas]] he [[introduced]] before this [[imagery]] are [[very]] better. further more, this is his first [[attempts]] at directing a drama. the early works were comedies, and were [[humorous]] and [[efficient]].

The [[outset]] [[stuff]] you have to know if you'll ever [[behold]] this [[cinema]]: Israel of the 21st century [[hatred]] the kibbutz and the values it represented since the [[formed]] of the state of [[Israelis]]. the real situation of the kibbutzim is very [[tragic]], and some of them [[fade]] one by one. the kibbutz, [[Jew]] word for [[joint]], was a [[kind]] of village for [[member]] only, where the [[valued]] of [[equity]] and [[socialists]] were the [[doctrine]] for [[ordinary]] [[lives]]. with the [[adjustments]] in [[societal]] values with [[times]], it [[appears]] now that the kibbutz was a place where the human spirit was [[stifled]], [[bolted]] [[inside]] the [[doctrine]] [[ordinance]], with no ticket out. the [[inlet]] of [[capitalism]] values and [[manner]] of [[lives]] in the 90's and so far [[brought]] it very hard on the [[kibbutz]] to survive. the crazy [[mom]] in the [[flick]] is the central metaphor for that.

But, I regard this [[cinematographic]] as having nothing to do with nostalgia for the [[alright]] [[longtime]] days of the kibbutz. once, it was a [[nightmares]] of [[all]] [[youths]] [[matches]] to [[viva]] in a [[kibbutzim]] and [[raising]] [[childhood]] in this [[pretty]] and [[sumptuous]] [[environments]]. but the film shows the [[opus]]. that the kibbutz, with it's socialist dogma, was a place sort of like a [[cults]] of crazy people, with crazy ideas that [[undercut]] the freedom of each individual within the collective. this is the central philosophy of post modern capitalism: your [[peculiarity]] is the most [[momentous]] [[stuff]]. you [[owes]] [[placing]] yourself in the center, and no one [[further]] but you is the [[topic]]. this is the philosophy the film stands for, and that's just it's first [[oin]].

If you disagree with me on the political side, I'm sure you will agree that the acting, the tone of the film, it's script and it's direction are the four sins that follow. the film has no real visual text and none of it's shots is something to remember. it is also very "delicate", a delicacy that is no more than artsy fartsy attempt to provoke emotions, which do not surface, not in the film and not with the viewer. it brings nothing but boredom.

Can someone please explain: why this film won so many prizes? maybe because it shows that Israel is in line with the rest of the world, hating socialist and human values? or maybe it shows that Israel is a "delicate" place, not giving in to dogmas and fanaticism? that we are basically very human and good people, capable of emotions, especially when they are fake ones, just like capitalism expects us to be? or maybe because it tells one of the biggest lies of Israeli cinema in recent years, a lie that undermines the justification of the existence of the Jewish state? no matter what the answer is, it's not a good one. not for the world, not for human values and not for the Jews. --------------------------------------------- Result 2225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A simple comment...

What can I say... this is a wonderful film that I can watch over and over. It is definitely one of the top ten comedies made. With a great cast, Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau wording a perfect script by Neil Simon, based on his play.

It is real to life situation done perfectly. If you have digital cable, one gets the menu on bottom of screen to give what is on. It usually gives this film ***% stars but in reality it deserves **** stars. If you really watch this film, one can tell that it will be as funny and fresh a hundred years from now. --------------------------------------------- Result 2226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I [[saw]] "Brother's [[Shadow]]" at the Tribeca Film [[Festival]] and found myself still thinking about it two days [[later]]. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture [[business]] after a stint in jail, it offers all the [[necessary]] qualities of a solid drama--memorable [[characters]]; [[sharp]], [[observant]] dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.

But more than that, it presents something that is all too [[rare]] at the multiplex these days: the [[uncompromising]] vision of a mature sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to emerge full-blown, but we get the sense he (like his protagonist) has paid his dues. He knows how real people struggle in this world, and he knows how we yearn to see--or at least, to experience vicariously--success. Yet Yellin respects his audience too much to blow happy smoke up our rear ends. In the end, we see that Jake's triumph doesn't lie in commissions, or even in the esteem of his family, but in "the work" he couldn't abandon if he tried.

It's an essential theme in a [[world]] (and especially a movie industry) that can't rise above "the bottom line". This film [[deserves]] a [[wide]] audience. I [[noticed]] "Brother's [[Shade]]" at the Tribeca Film [[Fest]] and found myself still thinking about it two days [[then]]. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture [[firms]] after a stint in jail, it offers all the [[needed]] qualities of a solid drama--memorable [[character]]; [[steep]], [[watchful]] dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.

But more than that, it presents something that is all too [[scarce]] at the multiplex these days: the [[inflexible]] vision of a mature sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to emerge full-blown, but we get the sense he (like his protagonist) has paid his dues. He knows how real people struggle in this world, and he knows how we yearn to see--or at least, to experience vicariously--success. Yet Yellin respects his audience too much to blow happy smoke up our rear ends. In the end, we see that Jake's triumph doesn't lie in commissions, or even in the esteem of his family, but in "the work" he couldn't abandon if he tried.

It's an essential theme in a [[monde]] (and especially a movie industry) that can't rise above "the bottom line". This film [[deserved]] a [[vast]] audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ...but this just isn't [[working]] and I am surprised to [[see]] how [[many]] people [[consider]] it good. [[On]] what [[grounds]]? There are some [[loose]] hints here and there, but the [[whole]] [[material]] is self-indulgent and [[unconvincing]]. Lynch's [[movies]] are [[generally]] [[intriguing]] because they [[generate]] a sense of confusion and [[yet]], are very playful when doing that. There is some visual sense, there are some subplots, [[characters]], [[ideas]] etc. But this is [[dull]] and yes, [[pointless]]. [[Because]] whatever there is to explore is [[either]] to "small", [[either]] too far-fetched, or simply told before in a [[superior]] [[manner]]. It's just Lynch [[exploring]] DV, nothing more so it should be [[treated]] [[like]] this. 1/10 ...but this just isn't [[cooperating]] and I am surprised to [[consults]] how [[innumerable]] people [[contemplating]] it good. [[Onto]] what [[motives]]? There are some [[lax]] hints here and there, but the [[ensemble]] [[materials]] is self-indulgent and [[feeble]]. Lynch's [[filmmaking]] are [[often]] [[enthralling]] because they [[generates]] a sense of confusion and [[still]], are very playful when doing that. There is some visual sense, there are some subplots, [[nature]], [[thoughts]] etc. But this is [[boring]] and yes, [[vain]]. [[Since]] whatever there is to explore is [[neither]] to "small", [[neither]] too far-fetched, or simply told before in a [[supreme]] [[ways]]. It's just Lynch [[explores]] DV, nothing more so it should be [[treating]] [[iike]] this. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back. The difference between the two is disgusting. Now i know that people are going to say that the prequel was made on a small budget but that never had anything to do with a bad script. Now maybe it's just me, but i always thought that a prequel was made to go set up the other movie, starring key characters and maybe filling in a bit about life that we didn't know. Rise to Power is just a [[movie]] that has Carlito's name. There should have been at least a few characters from the original movie, the ending makes no sense in relation to the original. In the end of this movie he retires with his sweet heart but how the hell do we get him coming out of prison in the next movie? And his woman isn't even the same woman that he talks about as his only love in the original. I would say the movie is [[mildly]] entertaining in its self, with a few decent bits but it pales when held up to it's big brother. Don't lay awake at night waiting to see this, watch the original one more time if you really need a hit. I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back. The difference between the two is disgusting. Now i know that people are going to say that the prequel was made on a small budget but that never had anything to do with a bad script. Now maybe it's just me, but i always thought that a prequel was made to go set up the other movie, starring key characters and maybe filling in a bit about life that we didn't know. Rise to Power is just a [[filmmaking]] that has Carlito's name. There should have been at least a few characters from the original movie, the ending makes no sense in relation to the original. In the end of this movie he retires with his sweet heart but how the hell do we get him coming out of prison in the next movie? And his woman isn't even the same woman that he talks about as his only love in the original. I would say the movie is [[gently]] entertaining in its self, with a few decent bits but it pales when held up to it's big brother. Don't lay awake at night waiting to see this, watch the original one more time if you really need a hit. --------------------------------------------- Result 2229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[In]] one word: excruciating. I was [[advised]] to read some [[articles]] about this film's [[philosophical]] meanings [[afterward]], but, having sat through the movie's [[interminable]] 115 minutes and being [[slowly]] crushed beneath its [[bloated]] symbolism and lava-flowing oppressiveness, it [[seemed]] [[better]] to just [[report]] my reactions to the [[movie]]. [[After]] all, who goes to [[see]] a [[movie]] with a syllabus in hand? And this [[flick]] was dismal. Lead [[actor]] [[Claude]] Laydu, from the film's [[opening]] to its [[end]], [[wears]] the same wearying and [[annoying]] mask of [[agony]] as to be [[practically]] indistinguishable from the film's [[eternal]], [[dreary]] voice-over. Filming one over the other might have [[worked]] better than subjecting an [[audience]] to both, as they [[basically]] [[say]] the same [[thing]]: The [[priest]] of Ambricourt is a [[wretched]] human being. The [[story]], about a persecuted [[priest]] who [[tries]] to [[help]] out a [[troubled]] rich family, does nothing [[toward]] [[making]] its [[characters]] remotely interesting or sympathetic, as the [[family]] are a bunch of [[unpleasant]] [[weirdos]], and the [[priest]], himself, comes across as a nosy pest. The last 30 minutes [[suggests]] some breath-taking [[message]] about grace and one man's suffering equaling that of others, but due to all the [[indulgent]] close-ups of a [[suffering]] Laydu and the [[vague]] subtext in [[Robert]] Bresson's [[script]], all I [[felt]] was, [[Finally]], it's over, let's have some ice-cream. Interesting for fans of Bresson fanatic [[Paul]] Schrader, just to [[see]] how [[many]] [[elements]] of character and setting Schrader carried into in his own [[scripts]] and movies, [[especially]] "Taxidriver", "Raging [[Bull]]" and "[[Light]] Sleeper". [[During]] one word: excruciating. I was [[warned]] to read some [[clauses]] about this film's [[philosophic]] meanings [[subsequently]], but, having sat through the movie's [[infinite]] 115 minutes and being [[softly]] crushed beneath its [[swollen]] symbolism and lava-flowing oppressiveness, it [[looked]] [[best]] to just [[reports]] my reactions to the [[filmmaking]]. [[Upon]] all, who goes to [[behold]] a [[filmmaking]] with a syllabus in hand? And this [[gesture]] was dismal. Lead [[protagonist]] [[Claudius]] Laydu, from the film's [[initiation]] to its [[terminate]], [[wearing]] the same wearying and [[exasperating]] mask of [[heartache]] as to be [[hardly]] indistinguishable from the film's [[incorruptible]], [[dismal]] voice-over. Filming one over the other might have [[collaborated]] better than subjecting an [[audiences]] to both, as they [[mostly]] [[tell]] the same [[stuff]]: The [[pastor]] of Ambricourt is a [[pitiable]] human being. The [[history]], about a persecuted [[pastor]] who [[strive]] to [[aids]] out a [[tormented]] rich family, does nothing [[about]] [[doing]] its [[trait]] remotely interesting or sympathetic, as the [[families]] are a bunch of [[nasty]] [[psychos]], and the [[vicar]], himself, comes across as a nosy pest. The last 30 minutes [[insinuate]] some breath-taking [[messages]] about grace and one man's suffering equaling that of others, but due to all the [[permissive]] close-ups of a [[hardship]] Laydu and the [[nebulous]] subtext in [[Roberto]] Bresson's [[screenplay]], all I [[believed]] was, [[Lastly]], it's over, let's have some ice-cream. Interesting for fans of Bresson fanatic [[Paolo]] Schrader, just to [[seeing]] how [[numerous]] [[ingredient]] of character and setting Schrader carried into in his own [[screenplays]] and movies, [[mostly]] "Taxidriver", "Raging [[Niu]]" and "[[Lighting]] Sleeper". --------------------------------------------- Result 2230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Musically [[speaking]] Irving [[Berlin]] gave Fred Astaire and [[Ginger]] [[Rogers]] another pluperfect musical after Top [[Hat]] if that was [[possible]]. [[Although]] in this [[case]] like that [[Jerome]] Kern [[confection]] Roberta that they were in, Follow the Fleet [[retained]] Randolph Scott with another singer, this time Harriet Hilliard.

Randolph Scott is a career Navy CPO and Fred Astaire is an ex-vaudevillian who enlisted in the Navy to [[forget]] Ginger Rogers his former partner. But now the two are on [[shore]] leave. Fred and Ginger take up right where they left off, and Randy accidentally meets Ginger's dowdy sister Harriet who blossoms into a real beauty. But Randy's a typical love 'em and leave 'em sailor.

[[Again]] Irving Berlin wrote a hit filled score with him tightly supervising the [[production]]. Ginger gets to do some really outstanding vocalizing with Let Yourself Go which she and Fred later dance to. But the real hit of the show is Let's Face the Music and Dance which is a number done at a Navy show. Sung first by Astaire and later danced to by the [[pair]], Let's Face the Music and Dance is one of the [[great]] romantic numbers ever written for the screen. Their [[dancing]] on this one is [[absolute]] [[magic]].

I'm sure that when I mention Harriet Hilliard a few younger people might ask who that was. But they will know immediately when I mention her in conjunction with her famous husband Ozzie Nelson. That's right Ozzie and Harriet. It's something of a mystery to me why Harriet stopped singing when she just became David and Ricky's mom on television. Then again she didn't even keep her own name.

[[Neither]] [[Ozzie]] or Harriet sang on television. Ozzie was a pale imitation of Rudy Vallee as a singer, but Harriet could really carry a tune. She sings Get Thee Behind Me Satan and The Moon and I Are Here, But Where Are You, both with [[real]] [[feeling]] and class. I recommend you see Follow the Fleet if for no other [[reason]] than to [[hear]] a dimension of Harriet Hilliard incredibly forgotten [[today]]. Musically [[talk]] Irving [[Berliner]] gave Fred Astaire and [[Jiang]] [[Rodgers]] another pluperfect musical after Top [[Hats]] if that was [[achievable]]. [[While]] in this [[example]] like that [[Cordova]] Kern [[confectionery]] Roberta that they were in, Follow the Fleet [[maintained]] Randolph Scott with another singer, this time Harriet Hilliard.

Randolph Scott is a career Navy CPO and Fred Astaire is an ex-vaudevillian who enlisted in the Navy to [[overlook]] Ginger Rogers his former partner. But now the two are on [[coast]] leave. Fred and Ginger take up right where they left off, and Randy accidentally meets Ginger's dowdy sister Harriet who blossoms into a real beauty. But Randy's a typical love 'em and leave 'em sailor.

[[Afresh]] Irving Berlin wrote a hit filled score with him tightly supervising the [[productivity]]. Ginger gets to do some really outstanding vocalizing with Let Yourself Go which she and Fred later dance to. But the real hit of the show is Let's Face the Music and Dance which is a number done at a Navy show. Sung first by Astaire and later danced to by the [[couple]], Let's Face the Music and Dance is one of the [[wondrous]] romantic numbers ever written for the screen. Their [[dancer]] on this one is [[unmitigated]] [[wizardry]].

I'm sure that when I mention Harriet Hilliard a few younger people might ask who that was. But they will know immediately when I mention her in conjunction with her famous husband Ozzie Nelson. That's right Ozzie and Harriet. It's something of a mystery to me why Harriet stopped singing when she just became David and Ricky's mom on television. Then again she didn't even keep her own name.

[[Either]] [[Uzi]] or Harriet sang on television. Ozzie was a pale imitation of Rudy Vallee as a singer, but Harriet could really carry a tune. She sings Get Thee Behind Me Satan and The Moon and I Are Here, But Where Are You, both with [[actual]] [[impression]] and class. I recommend you see Follow the Fleet if for no other [[raison]] than to [[listened]] a dimension of Harriet Hilliard incredibly forgotten [[hoy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Being a [[genre]] [[film]] fan, a [[child]] of the 80's AND a fan of [[hard]] [[rock]] music...this movie [[holds]] a [[special]] [[place]] in my [[heart]]. It has everything you [[could]] want in a supernatural movie: action, [[great]] special effects (for 1986) and a guitar wailing glam- [[rock]] soundtrack. It certainly was THE [[movie]] for all the heavy [[metal]] [[fans]] at the [[time]]. I didn't [[see]] this at the [[cinema]] because it was never [[released]] theatrically over here...but it's [[popularity]] on [[video]] during the [[mid]] to late eighties [[secured]] it's [[cult]] status and [[eventually]] led to a ([[sadly]], mediocre) [[DVD]] [[release]] in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy [[movies]] or [[rock]] [[music]] then this [[probably]] isn't your [[cup]] of tea...but, trust me, there are worse [[films]] of this [[type]] out there...and, despite average acting and some [[outrageously]] ridiculous [[situations]], Trick or [[Treat]] is most [[definitely]] a wailing [[riff]] above the [[usual]] [[horror]] fare. You'll never [[look]] at your stereo the same [[way]] again. [[Or]] should I [[say]] MP3 player?

[[TRICK]] [[OR]] [[TREAT]] TRIVIA- Marc [[Price]] (Eddie) [[played]] geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom '[[Family]] [[Ties]].' [[After]] a string of direct to [[video]] flops [[including]], 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes [[eat]] France' and 'The Rescue' he [[gave]] up on acting to [[pursue]] a [[career]] in stand-up [[comedy]]. [[Recently]], he has been [[considering]] a TV [[comeback]].

Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a [[major]] Hollywood [[producer]]/ screenwriter. He has [[written]] and produced several major [[films]] and [[TV]] [[series]], [[including]]: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most [[recently]] '[[Final]] [[Destination]] 3'.

[[Tony]] [[Fields]] (Sammi) [[started]] his performing [[career]] as a [[dancer]] on the TV [[series]] 'Solid Gold'. He [[appeared]] in [[several]] low [[budget]] [[films]] and TV [[shows]] before landing his breakout role as the [[devilish]] Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. [[Sadly]], [[Tony]] passed away on [[February]] 27th 1995 of [[AIDS]] related [[cancer]].

Doug [[Savant]] (Tim) is [[probably]] [[best]] remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the [[popular]] [[sitcom]] 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'. Being a [[gender]] [[movies]] fan, a [[kiddies]] of the 80's AND a fan of [[harsh]] [[boulder]] music...this movie [[held]] a [[peculiar]] [[placing]] in my [[coeur]]. It has everything you [[did]] want in a supernatural movie: action, [[phenomenal]] special effects (for 1986) and a guitar wailing glam- [[boulder]] soundtrack. It certainly was THE [[cinematography]] for all the heavy [[metallic]] [[amateurs]] at the [[moment]]. I didn't [[behold]] this at the [[film]] because it was never [[freed]] theatrically over here...but it's [[vogue]] on [[videos]] during the [[medium]] to late eighties [[guaranteed]] it's [[worship]] status and [[lastly]] led to a ([[regrettably]], mediocre) [[DVDS]] [[releases]] in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy [[theater]] or [[boulder]] [[musicians]] then this [[surely]] isn't your [[copa]] of tea...but, trust me, there are worse [[movie]] of this [[genus]] out there...and, despite average acting and some [[ridiculously]] ridiculous [[instances]], Trick or [[Treatment]] is most [[surely]] a wailing [[riffs]] above the [[habitual]] [[monstrosity]] fare. You'll never [[gaze]] at your stereo the same [[routing]] again. [[Oder]] should I [[said]] MP3 player?

[[RUSE]] [[NEITHER]] [[ADDRESSING]] TRIVIA- Marc [[Prices]] (Eddie) [[served]] geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom '[[Families]] [[Links]].' [[Upon]] a string of direct to [[videotaped]] flops [[containing]], 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes [[swallowed]] France' and 'The Rescue' he [[given]] up on acting to [[pursuit]] a [[quarries]] in stand-up [[comedian]]. [[Lately]], he has been [[contemplating]] a TV [[revert]].

Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a [[principal]] Hollywood [[manufacturer]]/ screenwriter. He has [[wrote]] and produced several major [[movies]] and [[TELEVISION]] [[serials]], [[consisting]]: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most [[lately]] '[[Lastly]] [[Destinations]] 3'.

[[Tonda]] [[Domains]] (Sammi) [[launched]] his performing [[occupations]] as a [[dancers]] on the TV [[serial]] 'Solid Gold'. He [[seemed]] in [[different]] low [[budgets]] [[cinema]] and TV [[demonstrates]] before landing his breakout role as the [[baleful]] Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. [[Woefully]], [[Toni]] passed away on [[December]] 27th 1995 of [[SUCCOUR]] related [[tumors]].

Doug [[Scientist]] (Tim) is [[presumably]] [[better]] remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the [[fashionable]] [[sitcoms]] 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I [[saw]] this [[ages]] ago when I was younger and [[could]] never [[remember]] the title, until one day I was scrolling through John Candy's [[film]] credits on IMDb and [[noticed]] an [[entry]] named "Once Upon a [[Crime]]...". Something rang a bell and I [[clicked]] on it, and after reading the plot [[summary]] it [[brought]] back a lot of [[memories]].

I've [[found]] it has [[aged]] pretty well despite the [[fact]] that it is not by any means a "[[great]]" [[comedy]]. It is, however, [[rather]] enjoyable and is a good [[riff]] on a Hitchcock [[formula]] of mistaken identity and [[worldwide]] thrills.

The [[movie]] has a [[large]] cast of [[characters]], amongst them an [[American]] [[couple]] who [[find]] a woman's [[dog]] while [[vacationing]] in Europe and [[decide]] to [[return]] it to her for a [[reward]] - only to [[find]] her [[dead]] [[body]] upon arrival. From there the plot gets [[crazier]] and sillier and they [[go]] on the [[run]] after the police think they are the killers.

[[Kind]] of a [[mix]] between "It's a [[Mad]] [[Mad]] [[Mad]] [[Mad]] [[World]]" and a lighter Hitchcock [[feature]], this was [[directed]] by [[Eugene]] Levy and he [[managed]] to get some of his good [[friends]] - such as [[John]] Candy - to [[star]] in it. The movie is mostly engaging due to its [[cast]], and the [[ending]] has a funny [[little]] twist that isn't [[totally]] [[unpredictable]] but also is kind of [[unexpected]]. I [[witnessed]] this [[centuries]] ago when I was younger and [[wo]] never [[remembering]] the title, until one day I was scrolling through John Candy's [[movie]] credits on IMDb and [[observed]] an [[input]] named "Once Upon a [[Offenses]]...". Something rang a bell and I [[ticked]] on it, and after reading the plot [[recap]] it [[tabled]] back a lot of [[memorabilia]].

I've [[uncovered]] it has [[ageing]] pretty well despite the [[facto]] that it is not by any means a "[[wondrous]]" [[parody]]. It is, however, [[somewhat]] enjoyable and is a good [[riffs]] on a Hitchcock [[formulas]] of mistaken identity and [[world]] thrills.

The [[movies]] has a [[big]] cast of [[hallmarks]], amongst them an [[Americas]] [[matches]] who [[unearthed]] a woman's [[puppy]] while [[holidaying]] in Europe and [[decides]] to [[homecoming]] it to her for a [[bonuses]] - only to [[unearthed]] her [[died]] [[bodies]] upon arrival. From there the plot gets [[madder]] and sillier and they [[going]] on the [[executing]] after the police think they are the killers.

[[Type]] of a [[mixing]] between "It's a [[Madman]] [[Furious]] [[Enraged]] [[Lunatic]] [[Global]]" and a lighter Hitchcock [[attribute]], this was [[aimed]] by [[Gonzalez]] Levy and he [[administering]] to get some of his good [[mates]] - such as [[Giovanni]] Candy - to [[superstar]] in it. The movie is mostly engaging due to its [[casting]], and the [[terminated]] has a funny [[petite]] twist that isn't [[utterly]] [[erratic]] but also is kind of [[unintended]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian [[propaganda]] look out for this documentary and you will see facts and [[truth]] http://imdb.com/title/tt0283181/

The Death of Yugoslavia documentary series (of five episodes) is a painstakingly compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which [[marked]] the end of the old Federal [[Yugoslavia]] and spanned almost the [[entire]] first half of the 1990's. It [[includes]] a huge wealth of news footage and [[interviews]] with [[involved]] parties both "Yugoslav" and otherwise. The only [[real]] "[[improvement]]" which [[could]] be [[made]] to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later [[developments]] in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat [[showing]] on BBC [[television]], but the addition of some even more recent events [[would]] [[help]] to [[complete]] this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of [[work]]. [[Perhaps]] another whole episode might be [[warranted]]? The very succinct title of this [[documentary]] was [[made]] all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term "Yugoslavia" by the now-named Federal Republic of [[Serbia]] and [[Montenegro]] - a much [[belated]] and [[formal]] [[admission]] of that which occurred [[years]] before.

not fiction like in "[[Yugoslavia]]: The [[Avoidable]] [[War]] (1999)" don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian [[advocacy]] look out for this documentary and you will see facts and [[veracity]] http://imdb.com/title/tt0283181/

The Death of Yugoslavia documentary series (of five episodes) is a painstakingly compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which [[mark]] the end of the old Federal [[Yugoslav]] and spanned almost the [[total]] first half of the 1990's. It [[encompasses]] a huge wealth of news footage and [[conversations]] with [[implicated]] parties both "Yugoslav" and otherwise. The only [[actual]] "[[enhance]]" which [[did]] be [[introduced]] to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later [[evolution]] in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat [[displayed]] on BBC [[tv]], but the addition of some even more recent events [[should]] [[pomoc]] to [[completes]] this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of [[cooperation]]. [[Likely]] another whole episode might be [[vindicated]]? The very succinct title of this [[documentaries]] was [[introduced]] all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term "Yugoslavia" by the now-named Federal Republic of [[Serb]] and [[Lions]] - a much [[delayed]] and [[official]] [[admitting]] of that which occurred [[olds]] before.

not fiction like in "[[Yugoslav]]: The [[Preventable]] [[Warfare]] (1999)" --------------------------------------------- Result 2234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm not sure how related they are, but I'm almost certain that [[Lost]] and Delirious is a remake of this movie (or the story that it's [[based]] on). Very similar plotline, and even some of the scenes and sets seem to be very, very similar. Lost & [[Delirious]] is [[actually]] a much [[better]] [[movie]], so [[see]] that one instead.

This one moves very slowly, but being a late 60s French [[movie]], that is to be expected of the style. Told in a retrospect from the perspective of one of the girls revisiting the school. The editing of the flashbacks with the current scenes is a little bit confusing at first, particularly since the audio from each overlaps (ie, hearing flashbacks while seeing the present and vice versa). Also, the "girls" are a bit old to think that they are in a boarding school. [[Finally]], not much character development to [[even]] get you attached to the movie. I'm not sure how related they are, but I'm almost certain that [[Forfeited]] and Delirious is a remake of this movie (or the story that it's [[founded]] on). Very similar plotline, and even some of the scenes and sets seem to be very, very similar. Lost & [[Delusional]] is [[indeed]] a much [[optimum]] [[film]], so [[behold]] that one instead.

This one moves very slowly, but being a late 60s French [[filmmaking]], that is to be expected of the style. Told in a retrospect from the perspective of one of the girls revisiting the school. The editing of the flashbacks with the current scenes is a little bit confusing at first, particularly since the audio from each overlaps (ie, hearing flashbacks while seeing the present and vice versa). Also, the "girls" are a bit old to think that they are in a boarding school. [[Eventually]], not much character development to [[yet]] get you attached to the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very good dramatic comedy about a playwright trying to figure out how to keep his head above water after running out of ideas. Can't say much about this film without giving away the story. I can say that little was as it seems as you are watching the picture. Everybody has his or her own agenda. Nice little surprise at the end - after all the other surprises. Well written with good performances by all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This movie was like a [[bad]] train wreck, as horrible as it was, you still had to [[continue]] to watch. My boyfriend and I rented it and wasted two hours of our day. Now don't get me wrong, the acting is good. [[Just]] the [[movie]] as a whole just [[enraged]] both of us. There wasn't [[anything]] positive or [[good]] about this [[scenario]]. After this movie, I had to go [[rent]] something else that was a little lighter. Jennifer Tilly is as usual a very dramatic actress. Her character seems manic and not all there. Darryl Hannah, [[though]] over played, she does a [[wonderful]] job playing out the situation she is in. More than once I found myself yelling at the TV telling her to fight back or to get violent. All in all, very violent movie...not for the faint of heart. This movie was like a [[unfavourable]] train wreck, as horrible as it was, you still had to [[incessant]] to watch. My boyfriend and I rented it and wasted two hours of our day. Now don't get me wrong, the acting is good. [[Jen]] the [[filmmaking]] as a whole just [[irked]] both of us. There wasn't [[algo]] positive or [[alright]] about this [[screenplays]]. After this movie, I had to go [[rented]] something else that was a little lighter. Jennifer Tilly is as usual a very dramatic actress. Her character seems manic and not all there. Darryl Hannah, [[albeit]] over played, she does a [[sumptuous]] job playing out the situation she is in. More than once I found myself yelling at the TV telling her to fight back or to get violent. All in all, very violent movie...not for the faint of heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 2237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I wasn't [[expecting]] much, and, to be [[honest]], I didn't like this [[film]] the [[first]] [[time]] [[around]] but watching it again and I [[realised]] that it's kinda cool. Sure, it's a one joke [[film]] but it's a [[funny]] gag.

[[Someone]] posted that it [[could]] be better [[written]] and it [[could]] be. I think this film had the potential to be a over-the-top My Cousin Vinny. But with a horror host instead of a [[lawyer]]. Sadly it's a [[wasted]] opportunity. With just a bit more writing it could be a [[classic]]. The kids are underused there's no reason why they should latch on to Elvira. Apart from the obvious reasons. It would have been great to see their relationship flourish. I know it's a comedy but it's little differences that separate the good films from the brilliant.

Elvira herself is always fun and engaging. Not to mention flirty. Every time she smiles you will too. It's hard to knock a film when the main character is so charming. And it really is her charm, don't let her looks fool you into thinking that she's some sort of tart. Well she is. But she's a nice one. The sort of person you'd let look after your kids. Wouldn't let her cook for them, though...

I'd recommend giving it a go.

Just don't [[expect]] too much.

She's more than just a great set of boobs. She's also an incredible pair of legs. I wasn't [[waiting]] much, and, to be [[truthful]], I didn't like this [[kino]] the [[fiirst]] [[moment]] [[about]] but watching it again and I [[realized]] that it's kinda cool. Sure, it's a one joke [[movies]] but it's a [[amusing]] gag.

[[Anybody]] posted that it [[wo]] be better [[authored]] and it [[did]] be. I think this film had the potential to be a over-the-top My Cousin Vinny. But with a horror host instead of a [[jurist]]. Sadly it's a [[squandered]] opportunity. With just a bit more writing it could be a [[conventional]]. The kids are underused there's no reason why they should latch on to Elvira. Apart from the obvious reasons. It would have been great to see their relationship flourish. I know it's a comedy but it's little differences that separate the good films from the brilliant.

Elvira herself is always fun and engaging. Not to mention flirty. Every time she smiles you will too. It's hard to knock a film when the main character is so charming. And it really is her charm, don't let her looks fool you into thinking that she's some sort of tart. Well she is. But she's a nice one. The sort of person you'd let look after your kids. Wouldn't let her cook for them, though...

I'd recommend giving it a go.

Just don't [[awaited]] too much.

She's more than just a great set of boobs. She's also an incredible pair of legs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] HORRENDOUS! Avoid like the plague. I would rate this in the top 10 worst movies ever. Special effects, acting, mood, sound, etc. appear to be done by day care students...wait, I have seen programs better than this. Opens like a soft porn show with a blurred nude female doing a shower scene then goes bad from there. Good nude scenes, but that is it. Sound and light problems were persistent throughout the movie. At times I would swear I could hear the roaring of the camera motors. YIKES! I would like to see another movie on this story, but done by different people. This batch of actors and crew need more acting and movie making lessons. Voted 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Tara [[Reid]] as an intellectual, [[Christian]] Slater([[usually]] great) as a dollar [[store]] [[Constantine]] and Stephen Dorff as...well it's STEPHEN DORFF FOR Christ SAKE!!!! I personally just [[want]] to [[thank]] those [[brilliant]] [[casting]] directors for the hard [[work]] and effort. You guys are on. Heres an [[idea]], just my humble [[lowly]] opinion as the movie [[going]] public but it follows [[directly]] with your previous [[choices]],a [[movie]] about the most brilliant neuro-physicist in [[history]] [[invent]] one pill to cure all [[diseases]] ever known to man and [[get]] this, heres the clincher they have to be [[played]] by Jessica [[Simpson]] and [[Paris]] Hilton. I knew you guys would love that. [[Seriously]] [[though]] you [[owe]] me $7.50. Tara [[Red]] as an intellectual, [[Christianity]] Slater([[generally]] great) as a dollar [[shop]] [[Konstantin]] and Stephen Dorff as...well it's STEPHEN DORFF FOR Christ SAKE!!!! I personally just [[wanna]] to [[appreciation]] those [[sumptuous]] [[pouring]] directors for the hard [[works]] and effort. You guys are on. Heres an [[notions]], just my humble [[unassuming]] opinion as the movie [[gonna]] public but it follows [[immediatly]] with your previous [[selection]],a [[cinema]] about the most brilliant neuro-physicist in [[story]] [[reinvent]] one pill to cure all [[illnesses]] ever known to man and [[obtains]] this, heres the clincher they have to be [[accomplished]] by Jessica [[Simpsons]] and [[Parisien]] Hilton. I knew you guys would love that. [[Deeply]] [[nevertheless]] you [[must]] me $7.50. --------------------------------------------- Result 2240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' is the best film ever made. Now, that I got your attention with that horribly inaccurate statement that should be a hanging offense if spoken, let me begin my short overview of this tacky, offensive, pretentious and boring hunk of junk I guess you could consider a movie. First of all, the low budget of this stinker is totally obvious based on the very poor and inexperienced direction of Christian Vuissa, and the tacky, overly preachy, whiny and stilted screenplay by F. Mathew Smith. I really despise the fact that it sends a very pro-Mormon, and sort of anti-every other religion message. Yes, the story is about a small town half full with Mormons and half full with Baptists. It shows all the main and role-model characters being Mormon, and being so nice and perfect, yet they are being picked on by the evil, conniving and very judgmental Baptists. It shows how beautiful Mormons are and how cold-hearted and ignorant Baptists are, instead of showing a little solidarity like would be appropriate and realistic. I'm a part of neither religion (I'm actually an atheist), but this offended me, along with another countless amount of Baptists most likely. It shows the Baptists as being very unopened and unwelcoming to the Mormons, and the Mormons being very accepting, when again, in reality there is a mutual like/dislike between them. Sorry, I didn't mean to go off on a rant.

Another aspect of 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' I didn't much care for, was the acting. The performances are very amateurish and unnatural, especially from the female lead Heather Beers. Miss Beers stumbles her way through her part without any passion or feeling for her role, and I wasn't too much impressed with Dan Merkley, who's the main character in this lackluster of a motion picture, but I have to say he's way more talented or shows more talent in this film then Heather Beers. Whoever played the town sheriff was awful also. Although there is maybe a tiny laugh deep within the film, it is full of clichés. For example, the main character, Tartan (Merkley), finds solace with a Native American who always gives him the best advice on things relating to a tribal way of life - how cliché is that? To make the situation even more of a pathetic cliché, Tartan buys the poor, lonely heathen a puppy dog. Ugghhh!

If you want my advice, stay as far away from 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' as you can. I saw it on the shelf and thought it would be a cute and interesting little indie about religion. All I got was a, well, piece of crap. Grade: D-

my ratings guide - A+ (absolutley flawless); A (a masterpiece, near-perfect); A- (excellent); B+ (great); B (very good); B- (good); C+ (a mixed bag); C (average); C- (disappointing); D+ (bad); D (very bad); D- (absolutley horrendous); F (not one redeeming quality in this hunk of Hollywood feces). --------------------------------------------- Result 2241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] tells the [[tender]] tale of a [[demented]] scientist who, after his [[fiance]] is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can [[find]] a [[suitable]] [[body]] to [[attach]] her noggin to. [[Everyone]] in this movie [[exudes]] more [[slime]] than a snail, [[particularly]] our [[protagonist]]. This [[filmmaking]] tells the [[tenders]] tale of a [[wacky]] scientist who, after his [[bride]] is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can [[unearth]] a [[appropriate]] [[agencies]] to [[herewith]] her noggin to. [[Anyone]] in this movie [[exude]] more [[phlegm]] than a snail, [[peculiarly]] our [[player]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This [[film]] is a bit reminiscent of the German [[film]], THE [[NEVERENDING]] [[STORY]] because a [[child]] is magically [[transported]] to a [[strange]] [[land]] in order to be a [[hero]]. [[However]], due to far superior modern technology, puppets and CGI are [[used]] to make an [[amazingly]] [[realistic]] [[looking]] world--one that will blow your socks off due to its [[realism]] and scope.

I [[enjoyed]] this [[film]], but [[boy]] was it a [[chore]] at first! [[Unfortunately]], for most Westerners, this [[film]] is one you [[might]] [[give]] up on very [[quickly]] or [[dismiss]] it since everything in the [[film]] [[seems]] so [[odd]]. [[However]], give it a chance. Don't think or [[try]] to [[understand]] everything you see--just allow the [[story]] to unfold and you will most [[likely]] enjoy the [[film]].

[[In]] [[many]] [[ways]], this is exactly the sort of [[advice]] I'd [[give]] to adults who watch Miyazaki's [[SPIRITED]] AWAY because it is very [[similar]] and [[features]] [[tons]] of Yokai (Japanese mythical spirits). The [[big]] [[differences]] between the two is that THE [[GREAT]] YOKAI WAR is live-action and [[SPIRITED]] AWAY is much more child-friendly. While I do [[think]] THE [[GREAT]] YOKAI [[WAR]] was [[intended]] [[mostly]] as a kids' [[movie]], in the [[USA]], most [[parents]] [[would]] not want to [[show]] this to younger kids because it's so violent, [[scary]] and [[features]] some [[adult]] [[behaviors]]. So who is the audience in the West? Well, [[older]] kids and [[adults]] who [[appreciate]] [[foreign]] [[films]] with non-Western [[themes]] and [[composition]]. This is a [[rather]] narrow [[audience]], indeed!

While you are [[watching]], [[look]] for all the [[strange]] [[little]] touches. [[In]] fact, you [[could]] watch the [[film]] dozens of [[times]] and notice [[different]] [[tiny]] things each [[time]]. A few of the funny references I [[liked]] were the [[comment]] about Gamera, the scene that came with the [[comment]] "[[KIDS]]: Don't Try This [[At]] [[Home]]" as well as the use of [[Kirin]] [[beer]] to [[allow]] a [[person]] to [[actually]] [[see]] the Yokai ([[hmm]],...[[perhaps]] that scene should have [[also]] [[contained]] this [[warning]])!

By the [[way]], director Takashi Miike is a [[hard]] one to [[pin]] down stylistically, other than to [[say]] that none of his [[stories]] I've seen have [[seemed]] "[[normal]]". Some of his [[films]] are [[rather]] disgusting and disturbing and I hated them ([[especially]] [[AUDITION]] and ICHI THE [[KILLER]])whereas some of them are magical and among the best films I've ever [[seen]] (THE HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS). One thing for sure, it's hard to watch one of his films and not have a strong reaction one way or the other. This [[movie]] is a bit reminiscent of the German [[movie]], THE [[INEXHAUSTIBLE]] [[TALE]] because a [[kids]] is magically [[transporting]] to a [[weird]] [[terra]] in order to be a [[superhero]]. [[Instead]], due to far superior modern technology, puppets and CGI are [[using]] to make an [[frighteningly]] [[realist]] [[researching]] world--one that will blow your socks off due to its [[realist]] and scope.

I [[liked]] this [[films]], but [[guys]] was it a [[task]] at first! [[Sadly]], for most Westerners, this [[movie]] is one you [[apt]] [[lend]] up on very [[faster]] or [[spurned]] it since everything in the [[movie]] [[looks]] so [[curious]]. [[Conversely]], give it a chance. Don't think or [[endeavour]] to [[understood]] everything you see--just allow the [[history]] to unfold and you will most [[probable]] enjoy the [[kino]].

[[Across]] [[myriad]] [[shapes]], this is exactly the sort of [[councils]] I'd [[lend]] to adults who watch Miyazaki's [[VIBRANT]] AWAY because it is very [[analogue]] and [[characters]] [[tonnes]] of Yokai (Japanese mythical spirits). The [[enormous]] [[disputes]] between the two is that THE [[AWESOME]] YOKAI WAR is live-action and [[PLUCKY]] AWAY is much more child-friendly. While I do [[thought]] THE [[WONDROUS]] YOKAI [[WARS]] was [[designed]] [[principally]] as a kids' [[film]], in the [[US]], most [[relatives]] [[ought]] not want to [[spectacle]] this to younger kids because it's so violent, [[awful]] and [[featuring]] some [[adults]] [[behaviour]]. So who is the audience in the West? Well, [[oldest]] kids and [[adult]] who [[thankful]] [[alien]] [[movie]] with non-Western [[item]] and [[makeup]]. This is a [[quite]] narrow [[spectators]], indeed!

While you are [[staring]], [[glance]] for all the [[inquisitive]] [[petite]] touches. [[Throughout]] fact, you [[wo]] watch the [[cinematography]] dozens of [[moments]] and notice [[various]] [[smallest]] things each [[moment]]. A few of the funny references I [[wished]] were the [[commentary]] about Gamera, the scene that came with the [[remarks]] "[[YOUTHS]]: Don't Try This [[Under]] [[Dwellings]]" as well as the use of [[Kieran]] [[casket]] to [[permitting]] a [[someone]] to [[indeed]] [[behold]] the Yokai ([[uh]],...[[probably]] that scene should have [[additionally]] [[containing]] this [[warnings]])!

By the [[route]], director Takashi Miike is a [[arduous]] one to [[pines]] down stylistically, other than to [[tell]] that none of his [[tales]] I've seen have [[looked]] "[[routine]]". Some of his [[movies]] are [[quite]] disgusting and disturbing and I hated them ([[specially]] [[TRYOUT]] and ICHI THE [[ASSASSIN]])whereas some of them are magical and among the best films I've ever [[noticed]] (THE HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS). One thing for sure, it's hard to watch one of his films and not have a strong reaction one way or the other. --------------------------------------------- Result 2243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go?

Schizophreniac [[relentlessly]] explores the world of the extreme with [[Harry]] [[Russo]].

Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict [[scumbag]] who will [[stop]] at [[nothing]] to [[destroy]] those who stand between him and [[insanity]]. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, [[Harry]] [[begins]] his killing spree.

From director Ron Atkins [[comes]] the 1st [[installment]] of the [[vilest]] [[story]] ever to be [[filmed]]

The only other [[movie]] I have seen [[similar]] to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac Necromaniac

This is a [[really]] low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are [[looking]] for something [[disturbing]], [[different]] and [[horrific]] then this would [[make]] a [[fine]] [[choice]].

DO NOT [[EXPECT]] ANYTHING LIKE [[MODERN]] DAY [[HORROR]] (Such as Scream)

Viewer discretion is advised Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go?

Schizophreniac [[ruthlessly]] explores the world of the extreme with [[Hare]] [[Rousseau]].

Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict [[shithead]] who will [[stops]] at [[none]] to [[destroyed]] those who stand between him and [[stupidity]]. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, [[Hari]] [[launched]] his killing spree.

From director Ron Atkins [[occurs]] the 1st [[instalments]] of the [[foulest]] [[storytelling]] ever to be [[videotaped]]

The only other [[kino]] I have seen [[akin]] to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac Necromaniac

This is a [[truthfully]] low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are [[quest]] for something [[worrying]], [[diversified]] and [[horrendous]] then this would [[deliver]] a [[fined]] [[chose]].

DO NOT [[HOPES]] ANYTHING LIKE [[TRENDY]] DAY [[TERROR]] (Such as Scream)

Viewer discretion is advised --------------------------------------------- Result 2244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I went to see this film at the cinemas and i was shocked when I got in the room. There was only me and my girlfriend! This shouted to me that this film is not very good.

Not to my surprise, the film was dire. Ben Affleck plays a guy who buys a family for Christmas. It is a very predictable narrative with him falling in love with the girl that hates him. His acting is OKish but for the comedy aspect of the film he is not very good. The plot line is poor and the comedy almost non-existent.

However, there are some good points. For example, the family is falling apart and the mother is very funny.

I hope this review stops other people wasting their money. I was very embarrassed when I came out of the room!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2245 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] An opium den, a [[dirty]] little boy (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a [[violent]] fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual [[shenanigans]], scantily clad babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a bar with Asians, Africans, and Anglos [[treated]] [[equally]], does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? [[Wrong]]. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.

The [[first]] half of "Footlight Parade" is [[preparation]] for a musical extravaganza which [[occupies]] the [[last]] half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to [[lose]] his [[job]] and does [[lose]] his playgirl [[wife]] as a [[result]] of talking [[pictures]] squeezing out [[live]] stage musicals. [[His]] producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in "The [[Big]] [[Trail]]." Before each [[showing]] of the flick, a dance number is [[presented]] as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and [[cartoons]] [[would]] [[later]] [[serve]] the purpose. [[Kent]] [[gets]] the idea that a prologue [[chain]] [[would]] be the [[road]] to salvation for the [[dwindling]] live musical [[business]]. Kent is basically an idea [[man]] along the lines of [[choreographer]] Busby Berkeley. [[Could]] it be that Cagney's [[character]] is patterned after Berkeley? [[Could]] be.

[[In]] [[preparation]] for the prologues, Kent [[learns]] that his [[ideas]] are being [[stolen]] by a rival. He [[uncovers]] the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a [[new]] [[leak]] is [[planted]] in the form a [[dazzling]] temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - [[soon]] to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas [[College]] shows up in the [[form]] of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a [[real]] find and is [[paired]] with Bea [[Thorn]] (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any [[cinema]] stage of the day, are as fresh and [[enjoyable]] today as they were over seventy years ago, "Honeymoon Hotel," "By a Waterfall," and "Shanghai Lil."

Of [[special]] note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred [[Astaire]] and Bill "Bojangles" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.

Most critics prefer the "Shanghai Lil" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of "By a Waterfall" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color.

Though not nearly as socially conscious as "Gold Diggers of 1933," "Footlight Parade" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen. An opium den, a [[soiled]] little boy (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a [[fierce]] fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual [[escapades]], scantily clad babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a bar with Asians, Africans, and Anglos [[addressed]] [[alike]], does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? [[Amiss]]. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.

The [[frst]] half of "Footlight Parade" is [[preparations]] for a musical extravaganza which [[occupied]] the [[final]] half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to [[wasting]] his [[jobs]] and does [[wasting]] his playgirl [[woman]] as a [[upshot]] of talking [[visuals]] squeezing out [[viva]] stage musicals. [[Her]] producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in "The [[Huge]] [[Pathway]]." Before each [[displayed]] of the flick, a dance number is [[lodged]] as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and [[caricatures]] [[should]] [[then]] [[serves]] the purpose. [[Teri]] [[got]] the idea that a prologue [[strings]] [[should]] be the [[path]] to salvation for the [[waning]] live musical [[enterprise]]. Kent is basically an idea [[bloke]] along the lines of [[choreography]] Busby Berkeley. [[Wo]] it be that Cagney's [[characters]] is patterned after Berkeley? [[Wo]] be.

[[Among]] [[prepare]] for the prologues, Kent [[learning]] that his [[idea]] are being [[shoplifted]] by a rival. He [[discloses]] the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a [[newer]] [[leaking]] is [[tanked]] in the form a [[breathless]] temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - [[promptly]] to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas [[Academics]] shows up in the [[shape]] of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a [[authentic]] find and is [[coupled]] with Bea [[Spina]] (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any [[theatre]] stage of the day, are as fresh and [[pleasant]] today as they were over seventy years ago, "Honeymoon Hotel," "By a Waterfall," and "Shanghai Lil."

Of [[particular]] note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred [[Esther]] and Bill "Bojangles" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.

Most critics prefer the "Shanghai Lil" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of "By a Waterfall" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color.

Though not nearly as socially conscious as "Gold Diggers of 1933," "Footlight Parade" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2246 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This [[sorry]] [[excuse]] for a [[film]] [[reminded]] me a great deal of what I heard about "Gigli", that Ben and Jen flop earlier this Summer. "The Order" was clearly edited to such an unconscionable degree that the scenes, rather than forming a cohesive and provoking film, appeared to be a collection of disconnected sequences that did [[little]] to [[forward]] any semblance of a unified plot. Now, I'm a Heath Ledger [[fan]] ("10 Things I hate About You", "A Knight's Tale" and particularly his supporting role in "Monster's Ball"), but my [[man]] needs to find himself a better agent. Keep accepting scripts like "The Order" and "Four Feathers" and he's going to be on the fast track to [[movie]] oblivion.

Here are the [[problems]] I had with the film. Firstly, the Director tried to make up for the inadequacies of his [[essential]] plot by introducing two other plot lines that seemingly had little if anything to do with, well, much of anything. Plot skeins involving the American trying to take over the Vatican and the Dark Pope, while mildly interesting, did nothing to reveal to the viewer anything about the main characters. The attempts to tie these [[threads]] together were [[pathetic]] at [[best]]. Secondly, please don't insult the intelligence of the viewer by inserting into the film scenes that are clearly obligatory. We had manufactured angst, [[manufactured]] love and most idiotically [[manufactured]] sex that seemed like a page right out of "Matrix Reloaded" with skull-numbing [[techno]] music. Rather than [[developing]] character, these [[elements]] seemed like the [[cheap]] [[devices]] they [[clearly]] were, a half-hearted [[attempt]] at putting popcorn-chewing [[adolescents]] in the seats. Thirdly, and most importantly, this movie seemed to ha ve an [[intriguing]] concept. We have scandal, we have [[religion]] and we have [[supernatural]] [[forces]] at play. Why then do we [[learn]] almost [[nothing]] about anyone's background? We [[learn]] a [[little]] about [[Alex]], but even he [[gives]] up the [[passion]] of the priesthood to sleep with a [[woman]] after two days, a [[woman]] who tried to [[kill]] him during an exorcism at some point in the [[past]]. And [[Alex]] is the most developed, if you can [[call]] it that, [[character]] in the [[entire]] [[film]].

As the cliche goes nowadays, if you're going to [[see]] one movie this year, make sure it's not this one. There's about ten interesting minutes out of the intolerable 101 minute affair. The only thing that saved me was going with a girl who I'm rather fond of.

1 out of 10. I'm disappointed. File this one firmly under -had potential but blew it on over editing and bad directing-. Heath my man, go back to Monster's Ball-like cameos. They really suit you. This [[apologise]] [[apologies]] for a [[filmmaking]] [[reminds]] me a great deal of what I heard about "Gigli", that Ben and Jen flop earlier this Summer. "The Order" was clearly edited to such an unconscionable degree that the scenes, rather than forming a cohesive and provoking film, appeared to be a collection of disconnected sequences that did [[small]] to [[forwards]] any semblance of a unified plot. Now, I'm a Heath Ledger [[groupie]] ("10 Things I hate About You", "A Knight's Tale" and particularly his supporting role in "Monster's Ball"), but my [[dude]] needs to find himself a better agent. Keep accepting scripts like "The Order" and "Four Feathers" and he's going to be on the fast track to [[movies]] oblivion.

Here are the [[hassles]] I had with the film. Firstly, the Director tried to make up for the inadequacies of his [[critical]] plot by introducing two other plot lines that seemingly had little if anything to do with, well, much of anything. Plot skeins involving the American trying to take over the Vatican and the Dark Pope, while mildly interesting, did nothing to reveal to the viewer anything about the main characters. The attempts to tie these [[cords]] together were [[unlucky]] at [[better]]. Secondly, please don't insult the intelligence of the viewer by inserting into the film scenes that are clearly obligatory. We had manufactured angst, [[manufacturing]] love and most idiotically [[fabricating]] sex that seemed like a page right out of "Matrix Reloaded" with skull-numbing [[tech]] music. Rather than [[drafting]] character, these [[element]] seemed like the [[inexpensive]] [[tools]] they [[apparently]] were, a half-hearted [[strive]] at putting popcorn-chewing [[teens]] in the seats. Thirdly, and most importantly, this movie seemed to ha ve an [[fascinating]] concept. We have scandal, we have [[religions]] and we have [[uncanny]] [[troop]] at play. Why then do we [[learns]] almost [[none]] about anyone's background? We [[learns]] a [[tiny]] about [[Xander]], but even he [[delivers]] up the [[enthusiasm]] of the priesthood to sleep with a [[wife]] after two days, a [[wife]] who tried to [[assassinated]] him during an exorcism at some point in the [[former]]. And [[Xander]] is the most developed, if you can [[calling]] it that, [[nature]] in the [[total]] [[filmmaking]].

As the cliche goes nowadays, if you're going to [[seeing]] one movie this year, make sure it's not this one. There's about ten interesting minutes out of the intolerable 101 minute affair. The only thing that saved me was going with a girl who I'm rather fond of.

1 out of 10. I'm disappointed. File this one firmly under -had potential but blew it on over editing and bad directing-. Heath my man, go back to Monster's Ball-like cameos. They really suit you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I purchased this film for $5 in a bargain bin at my local video store for one reason only, Chase Masterson, but I should have crumbled up the five, thrown it in a toilet and flushed. The film is about a bunch of twenty somethings that peaked in high school and reunite on the anniversary of their idiot friends death, who got drunk and wandered into the woods and died. There problem is a reptilian monster is hunting them down one by one. The acting is abysmal, these worthless people were apparently cast offs on shows like 90210 and Dawsons Creek. The directing was on par with a twelve year old and the script was probably done by a thirteen year old. The entire set looks like someone's backyard in Malibu. The people on here that have praised this film are obviously friends of the director and/or actors. Avoid this pile of garbage at ALL costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, the sixth installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street series and once again another [[bad]] sequel. I [[think]] this is [[tied]] up with the last sequel of the Dream [[Child]]. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] [[series]] box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to see all the sequels. [[May]] I say that I'm just [[getting]] more and more [[disappointed]] [[though]] with these sequels, at [[least]] the [[past]] two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the [[writers]] were [[trying]] to give Freddy a [[soul]] and they're just [[destroying]] it [[instead]] of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't [[needed]], [[sorry]] to [[Robert]] Englund, but this was very much below what [[Freddy]] Krueger represents.

[[Freddy]] is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a [[daughter]]. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her [[father]], but [[soon]] she [[finds]] out what his [[dark]] [[secrets]] are and he [[wants]] her [[help]]. She has to do her [[best]] to [[resist]] his powers, but it's [[hard]] with all the good [[memories]] she has of her loving [[father]]. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without [[manipulating]] her into his [[ways]].

Freddy's [[Dead]]: The [[Final]] Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the [[sarcasm]]. This is one of the [[worst]] sequels, it's tied up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd [[rather]] watch the second Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] to be honest. This just had [[bad]] acting, stupid [[editing]], and just over all a [[bad]] [[idea]] for a [[story]]. I didn't like the concept of it and it just [[ruined]] the whole [[idea]] of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death [[master]] of [[nightmares]], not [[Father]] Knows Best.

2/10 Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, the sixth installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street series and once again another [[unfavourable]] sequel. I [[thoughts]] this is [[connected]] up with the last sequel of the Dream [[Children]]. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] [[serials]] box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to see all the sequels. [[Maggio]] I say that I'm just [[obtain]] more and more [[frustrating]] [[if]] with these sequels, at [[lowest]] the [[previous]] two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the [[authors]] were [[try]] to give Freddy a [[alma]] and they're just [[demolished]] it [[alternatively]] of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't [[required]], [[apology]] to [[Roberto]] Englund, but this was very much below what [[Freddie]] Krueger represents.

[[Freddie]] is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a [[maid]]. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her [[fathers]], but [[rapidly]] she [[discoveries]] out what his [[darkened]] [[clandestine]] are and he [[wanting]] her [[aids]]. She has to do her [[better]] to [[resisting]] his powers, but it's [[tough]] with all the good [[memorabilia]] she has of her loving [[fathers]]. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without [[handling]] her into his [[mode]].

Freddy's [[Death]]: The [[Ultimate]] Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the [[satire]]. This is one of the [[meanest]] sequels, it's tied up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd [[quite]] watch the second Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] to be honest. This just had [[unfavourable]] acting, stupid [[edition]], and just over all a [[naughty]] [[ideals]] for a [[tales]]. I didn't like the concept of it and it just [[demolished]] the whole [[concept]] of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death [[masters]] of [[dreams]], not [[Pere]] Knows Best.

2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2249 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was the [[third]] remake of [[SLEEPING]] WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)

AGNISAKSHI was the only one which [[worked]] and was a [[better]] [[film]]

DARAAR is [[directed]] by Abbas Mustan who sadly failed in their attempt here

the story was good but the handling wasn't that good and the heroine was shown too regressive and the climax too was disappointing

[[Direction]] is [[bad]] Music is good

Rishi reprises his role of YAARANA([[strangely]] which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too hard in his debut and does [[manage]] in many scenes to [[chill]] the [[audiences]] but his voice was [[terrible]] Johny is too loud This was the [[terzi]] remake of [[SLEEPER]] WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)

AGNISAKSHI was the only one which [[cooperates]] and was a [[optimum]] [[filmmaking]]

DARAAR is [[aimed]] by Abbas Mustan who sadly failed in their attempt here

the story was good but the handling wasn't that good and the heroine was shown too regressive and the climax too was disappointing

[[Directorate]] is [[unfavourable]] Music is good

Rishi reprises his role of YAARANA([[oddly]] which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too hard in his debut and does [[administered]] in many scenes to [[chilling]] the [[viewers]] but his voice was [[frightful]] Johny is too loud --------------------------------------------- Result 2250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The "movie aimed at adults" is a rare thing these days, but Moonstruck does it well, and is still a better than average movie, which is aging very well. Although it's comic moments aim lower than the rest of it, the movie has a wonderful specificity (Italians in Brooklyn) that isn't used to shortchange the characters or the viewers. (i.e. Mobsters never appear in acomplication. It never becomes grotesque like My Big Fat Greek Wedding) The secondary story lines are economically told with short scenes that allow a break from the major thread. These are the scenes that are now missing in contemporary movies where their immediate value cannot be impressed upon producers and bigwigs. I miss these scenes. It also beautifully involves older characters. The movie takes it's own slight, quiet path to a conclusion. There isn't a poorly written scene included anywhere to make some executives sphincter relax. Cage and Cher do very nice work.

Moonstruck invokes old-school, ethnic, workaday New York much like 'Marty' except Moonstruck is way less sanctimonious. --------------------------------------------- Result 2251 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Presenting]] Lily Mars (MGM, 1943) is a cute [[film]], but in my opinion it [[could]] have been better. Judy [[Garland]] is [[great]] as [[always]], but some scenes in the [[film]] [[seem]] out of [[place]] and the romance between her and Van Heflin [[develops]] all too quickly.

I mean, one minute he's ready to [[beat]] her butt, but the next minute he [[falls]] in [[love]] with her. I [[believe]] that this production, the film editing, and the [[script]] ( [[even]] [[though]] the [[photography]] was [[great]], the scenery was [[nice]] and the [[costumes]] were [[nice]] as well) [[could]] have been a little [[better]]. It [[feels]] as though the production was too [[rushed]].

The [[supporting]] cast was good as well, especially [[little]] Janet Chapman as the second youngest daughter daughter Rosie. She at the age of 11, looks really cute and it's a shame that she didn't [[develop]] into a teenage [[comic]] [[actress]]. She's much better in this [[film]] than in her [[previous]] [[films]] as Warner [[Brothers]] in the [[late]] 1930's (except for Broadway Musketeers 1938, she's [[really]] good in that), when they [[tried]] to [[make]] her into a Shirley Temple/Sybil Jason hybrid. Overall, this [[film]] could [[better]], but in the end, Judy [[gave]] it her all. [[Introducing]] Lily Mars (MGM, 1943) is a cute [[flick]], but in my opinion it [[did]] have been better. Judy [[Wreath]] is [[awesome]] as [[permanently]], but some scenes in the [[movie]] [[looks]] out of [[placing]] and the romance between her and Van Heflin [[develop]] all too quickly.

I mean, one minute he's ready to [[defeat]] her butt, but the next minute he [[drops]] in [[loves]] with her. I [[think]] that this production, the film editing, and the [[screenplay]] ( [[yet]] [[albeit]] the [[picture]] was [[fantastic]], the scenery was [[enjoyable]] and the [[costume]] were [[enjoyable]] as well) [[did]] have been a little [[optimum]]. It [[deems]] as though the production was too [[harried]].

The [[aiding]] cast was good as well, especially [[tiny]] Janet Chapman as the second youngest daughter daughter Rosie. She at the age of 11, looks really cute and it's a shame that she didn't [[prepare]] into a teenage [[comical]] [[actor]]. She's much better in this [[films]] than in her [[anterior]] [[kino]] as Warner [[Plymouth]] in the [[tardy]] 1930's (except for Broadway Musketeers 1938, she's [[truthfully]] good in that), when they [[attempting]] to [[deliver]] her into a Shirley Temple/Sybil Jason hybrid. Overall, this [[cinematography]] could [[nicer]], but in the end, Judy [[yielded]] it her all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You already know how painful to watch this movie is. But I wonder why one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever should include one the most beautiful cars. Why the cars should be not only the victim of [[violation]], but [[also]] the only [[true]] actors and [[performers]] in it. So how on [[Earth]] you Porsche, Lamborghini or whatever could allow those people to get in touch with your [[cars]] and ruin you reputation for which you give millions.Stop the getting an advantage of the [[cars]] and [[earn]] money on their chests. It is painful for those who [[love]] [[cars]]. It is painful for those who [[love]] [[movies]].

I want my money back !!! You already know how painful to watch this movie is. But I wonder why one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever should include one the most beautiful cars. Why the cars should be not only the victim of [[offences]], but [[further]] the only [[truthful]] actors and [[artist]] in it. So how on [[Terrestrial]] you Porsche, Lamborghini or whatever could allow those people to get in touch with your [[car]] and ruin you reputation for which you give millions.Stop the getting an advantage of the [[carriages]] and [[earning]] money on their chests. It is painful for those who [[iove]] [[carriages]]. It is painful for those who [[adores]] [[movie]].

I want my money back !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed this film. I thought it was an excellent political thriller about something that's never happened before - a Secret Service agent going bad and involved in an assassination plot. Unfortunately, for Michael Douglas' character, "Pete Garrison," they think HE's the mole but he isn't.

He's just a morally-flawed agent having an affair with the First Lady! Since he's doing that, he's unable to give an acceptable polygraph exam and that makes him suspect number one when it's revealed there is a plot to kill the President.

"Garrison" is forced to go on the lam but at the same time he's still trying to do the right thing by protecting the President. Douglas does a fine job in this role. I don't always care the people he plays but he's an excellent actor. Keifer Sutherland ("David Breckinridge") is equally as good (at least in here) as the fellow SS boss who hunts down Douglas until convinced he has been telling the truth. When he does the two of them work together in the finale to discover and then stop, if they can, the plot. The crooks are interesting, too, by the way. Also, I have never - and never will, unfortunately - see a First Lady who looks as good as Kim Basinger

This is simply a slick action flick that entertains start-to-finish. Are there holes in it? Of course; probably a number of them, and a reason you see so many critical comments. However, it is unfairly bashed here. It just isn't intelligent enough for the geniuses here on this website. My advice: chill, just go along for the ride and enjoy all the action and intrigue. Yes, it gets a little Rambo-ish at the end but otherwise it gets high marks for entertainment.....which is what movies are all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 2254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Years ago many big studios promoted serial films that were shown in movie theaters's in between the actual features along with a Newsreel of current events, plus cartoons, especially on a Saturday afternoon. (The parents loved it mostly) "The Return of Chandu" was a 12 episode serial where Chandu,(Bela Lugosi),"The Mysterious Mr. Wong",'34 is a magician with super natural powers and travels to the island of Lemuria to rescue the kidnapped princess of Egypt,(Nadji)Maria Alba,"Dr. Terror's House of Horrors",'43. Princess Nadji is held captive by the black magic cult of Ubasti, who believe that she is a reincarnation of their long-dead goddess Ossana. These 12-episode serials take you way back in time and are very well produced, considering we are talking about 1934 ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2255 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gregory Peck's acting was excellent, as one would expect, and the cinematography quite stunning even when playing directly into some melodramatic "moment." But, the rest of the film was overacted and hard to watch, for me anyway. I tried to like it, but had to fast-forward through the last thirty minutes or so. I feel I wasted a couple of good hours. Had it not been for Gregory Peck, I wouldn't have lasted fifteen minutes. 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've always believed that David and Bathsheba was a film originally intended for Tyrone Power at 20th Century Fox, although Gregory Peck does give a good account of himself as King David, the monarch with a wandering eye.

A whole lot of biblical subjects get covered in this film, adultery, redemption, sin, punishment and generally what God expects from his followers.

When you're a king, even king in a biblically prophesied kingdom you certainly do have a lot perogatives not open to the rest of us. King David has many wives, including one really vicious one in Jayne Meadows who was the daughter of Saul, David's predecessor. But his eyes catch sight of Bathsheba out in her garden one evening. Turns out she's as unhappily married to Uriah the Hittite as David is to quite a few women. Uriah is one of David's army captains. David sends for Bathsheba and him being the King, she comes a runnin' because she's had her eye on him too.

What happens, an affair, a pregnancy, and a carefully arranged death for Uriah in a battle. But an all seeing and knowing Deity has caught all of this and is not only punishing David and Bathsheba, but the entire Kingdom of Israel is being punished with drought, disease, and pestilence.

The sexist law of the day calls for Bathsheba to have a stoning death. David shows weakness in his previous actions, but here he steps up to the plate and asks that the whole thing be put on him. He even lays hands on the Ark of the Covenant which was an instant death as seen in the film.

My interpretation of it is that God admires guts even if you're wrong and he lets up on David and forgives them both. Bathsheba becomes the mother of Solomon and she and David are the ancestors of several successors in the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah until they're both conquered.

Susan Hayward is a fetching Bathsheba caught in a loveless marriage with Uriah played by Kieron Moore. The only thing that gets Moore aroused is a good battle. I liked Kieron Moore's performance as a brave and rather stupid horse's rear.

No one can lay the law down like Raymond Massey. His Nathan the Prophet is in keeping with the John Brown character he played in two films, same intensity.

So when His own law called for death, why did God spare Bathsheba and keep David on the throne. Maybe it was the fact He just didn't want to train a third guy for the job. He'd replaced Saul with David already.

But I think the Christian interpretation might be that this was a hint of the New Testament forthcoming, that one might sin and receive mercy if one asks for it penitently. I'll leave it to the biblical scholars to submit interpretations.

Watch the film and you might come up with an entirely new theory. --------------------------------------------- Result 2257 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The second of the Why We Fight Series concentrates on Hitler's [[grab]] of the Sudetanland and beyond as he makes a [[chump]] out of [[Neville]] Chamberlain and embarks on his conquest of [[Europe]].

[[Clearly]] [[meant]] as propaganda in its day this series over the [[test]] of [[time]] has [[become]] an [[informative]] [[documentary]] as well with most of the "[[Allied]] bias" [[turning]] out to be historical [[fact]]. The [[Fuhrer]] hoists himself on his own petard with smug pronouncements before his people and the world as he says one [[thing]] and does another as his army moves East. The Czechs and Austrians [[quickly]] capitulate but the Poles put up an heroic [[struggle]] against overwhelming odds.

The disparity between Hitler's military might and Chamberlain waving the Munich treaty like a [[white]] flag, [[declaring]] "[[Peace]] in our time" to this day has [[durable]] propaganda [[qualities]]. Here in its original context it [[resonates]] [[even]] more [[powerfully]] as the [[darkness]] of World War ll sets in on [[Europe]] [[leaving]] the American [[viewer]] with two options, freedom or [[slavery]]. [[In]] 1943 there was no evading this [[simple]] truth and The Nazis [[Strike]] makes its point effectively. The second of the Why We Fight Series concentrates on Hitler's [[grabs]] of the Sudetanland and beyond as he makes a [[mater]] out of [[Nev]] Chamberlain and embarks on his conquest of [[Eu]].

[[Clara]] [[intend]] as propaganda in its day this series over the [[proof]] of [[moment]] has [[becoming]] an [[informational]] [[literature]] as well with most of the "[[Allies]] bias" [[turn]] out to be historical [[facto]]. The [[Leader]] hoists himself on his own petard with smug pronouncements before his people and the world as he says one [[stuff]] and does another as his army moves East. The Czechs and Austrians [[soon]] capitulate but the Poles put up an heroic [[battle]] against overwhelming odds.

The disparity between Hitler's military might and Chamberlain waving the Munich treaty like a [[bianca]] flag, [[announcing]] "[[Pacification]] in our time" to this day has [[sustainable]] propaganda [[qualifications]]. Here in its original context it [[resound]] [[yet]] more [[flatly]] as the [[obscurity]] of World War ll sets in on [[Eu]] [[let]] the American [[viewfinder]] with two options, freedom or [[servile]]. [[During]] 1943 there was no evading this [[mere]] truth and The Nazis [[Hitting]] makes its point effectively. --------------------------------------------- Result 2258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Life]] Stinks (1991) was a [[step]] below Mel [[Brooks]] other productions. He stars as a rich [[man]] who [[wages]] an insane [[wager]] with his "[[friends]]". [[Brooks]] [[claims]] that he can life like a [[homeless]] [[man]] for a month. His [[shocked]] and amused friends accept this [[unusual]] [[wager]]. [[During]] his "[[stay]]" in the Bowery, he meets a bunch of [[odd]] homeless people, one of them [[catches]] his fancy (Lesley-Ann Warren). They [[strike]] up a [[friendship]] as she teaches him the [[many]] [[tricks]] she [[learned]] whilst [[living]] on the street. Can Mr. Brooks survive on his own without the luxuries of being filthy [[rich]]? Will he [[win]] this [[unorthodox]] wager? Who are his [[true]] friends? Find out when you watch [[LIFE]] STINKS to find out!

This [[film]] has been slagged [[unfairly]]. Sure it's not a [[classic]] like his [[earlier]] [[films]] but it's [[still]] [[enjoyable]]. I [[liked]] the [[way]] Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film. If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent [[films]] then you'll get the [[humor]] as well.

[[Recommended]] for Mel Brooks fans. [[Vida]] Stinks (1991) was a [[steps]] below Mel [[Creek]] other productions. He stars as a rich [[dude]] who [[salary]] an insane [[wagers]] with his "[[buddies]]". [[Brook]] [[claiming]] that he can life like a [[sleepers]] [[males]] for a month. His [[horrified]] and amused friends accept this [[curious]] [[wagering]]. [[In]] his "[[remain]]" in the Bowery, he meets a bunch of [[bizarre]] homeless people, one of them [[catch]] his fancy (Lesley-Ann Warren). They [[hitting]] up a [[goodwill]] as she teaches him the [[several]] [[ploys]] she [[learning]] whilst [[inhabit]] on the street. Can Mr. Brooks survive on his own without the luxuries of being filthy [[wealthy]]? Will he [[victory]] this [[unconventional]] wager? Who are his [[authentic]] friends? Find out when you watch [[LIFETIME]] STINKS to find out!

This [[cinematic]] has been slagged [[inappropriately]]. Sure it's not a [[traditional]] like his [[ago]] [[movie]] but it's [[yet]] [[nice]]. I [[wished]] the [[pathways]] Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film. If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent [[movie]] then you'll get the [[comedy]] as well.

[[Suggested]] for Mel Brooks fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this movie about the relationships that sometimes developed between American servicemen and Japanese women in post-war Japan--as well as the obstacles that prejudices created for them. Brando goes from having contempt for the Japanese (which is natural considering WW2) to falling in love with a Japanese woman and wanting to marry her. His performance is okay (I am not a major fan of his acting style) and the movie is marvelous throughout. Red Buttons received an Oscar for his touching performance of another GI who falls in love in Japan (though the Japanese women who plays opposite him also did a remarkable job).

I don't want to spoil it but the movie is a good one to watch with a box of tissues.

This movie manages to say SOMETHING and be entertaining at the same time. A mostly underrated gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 2260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Family Affair" takes us back to a less complicated time in America. It's sobering to see how different everything was back then. It was a more innocent era in our country and we watch a 'functional' family dealing in things together. The film also marks the beginning of the series featuring the Hardy family.

The film, directed by George Seitz, is based on a successful play. Judge James Hardy, and his wife Emmily, are facing a domestic crisis that must be dealt with. Married daughter Joan comes home after she has committed a social blunder and her husband holds her responsible. At the same time, another daughter, Marion, brings home a beau, who is clear will clash with her father. The happy teen ager Andy, seems to be the only one without a problem until his mother makes him escort Polly to the dance, something he is reluctant to do.

Needless to say, Judge Hardy will prove why he knows best as he puts a plan into action to get everyone together again. After all, he is a man that understands, not only the law, but how to deal with those outside forces that threatens his standing in the community and what will make his family happy.

Lionel Barrymore plays Judge Hardy with conviction. He is the glue that holds everything together. Spring Byington is seen as Emily, the mother. Mickey Rooney has a small part in this film, but he is as always, fun to watch. Cecilia Parker and Julie Haydon appeared as the daughters, Marion and Joan. Sara Hayden and Margaret Marquis are also featured in the film as Aunt Milly and Polly, the girl that surprises Andy with her beauty.

"A Family Affair" is a good way to observe our past through the positive image painted of an American family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2261 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This movie is [[simply]] far too [[long]], far too repetitive, with the male nudity and sexuality being (as this is said as a gay with my own collection of adult titles) far too [[gratuitous]] and unnecessary. Much of the first third of the [[movie]] [[could]] have been cut down to ten minutes and been equally as [[effective]] without trying the patience (and stamina) of an audience.

I [[saw]] this movie on an early Saturday afternoon, with a film festival audience; the type of crowd that tends to be more adventuresome, interested in more experimental or atypical films, such as one without much dialog, shorts, foreign films. The near sell out crowd in an approximate 275 seat theater started to dribble out within the first half of the movie and while the great majority did stay for the "pay off" (which never actually arrived), I have never, in about 14 years of attending any number of film festivals, experimental, gay and otherwise, seen such a large number of people walk away from a film.

This movie could easily have been cut down by more than half and been as effective as it was. It also [[could]] have gone in different directions, still with a shorter running time, and been far more effective.

As it currently exists, this is not something that one can readily recommend or one I would have any desire to watch again. This movie is [[straightforward]] far too [[protracted]], far too repetitive, with the male nudity and sexuality being (as this is said as a gay with my own collection of adult titles) far too [[unfounded]] and unnecessary. Much of the first third of the [[filmmaking]] [[wo]] have been cut down to ten minutes and been equally as [[efficacious]] without trying the patience (and stamina) of an audience.

I [[noticed]] this movie on an early Saturday afternoon, with a film festival audience; the type of crowd that tends to be more adventuresome, interested in more experimental or atypical films, such as one without much dialog, shorts, foreign films. The near sell out crowd in an approximate 275 seat theater started to dribble out within the first half of the movie and while the great majority did stay for the "pay off" (which never actually arrived), I have never, in about 14 years of attending any number of film festivals, experimental, gay and otherwise, seen such a large number of people walk away from a film.

This movie could easily have been cut down by more than half and been as effective as it was. It also [[did]] have gone in different directions, still with a shorter running time, and been far more effective.

As it currently exists, this is not something that one can readily recommend or one I would have any desire to watch again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] RUN...do not walk away from this [[movie]]!!!!! [[Aimed]] at the very young [[kids]], this [[movie]] will [[bore]] you to [[tears]]. [[If]] the Gamera trilogy of the 90's raised the bar, this [[film]] just [[lowered]] it. It's [[slow]] paced and the [[monster]] fighting is good, but [[seldom]] seen. This movie had me dry heaving in the [[cat]] box. Just a very [[poor]] [[offering]] after a [[phenomenal]] 90's series.

SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!!! Here are the top 10 reasons Gamera fans of the 90's series will HATE this film.

10. This movie is a drama that follows a kid trying to cope with the death of his mother and fears losing baby Gamera to a fight after knowing his father saw the adult Gamera die.

9. You see the adult Gamera for maybe a minute at the beginning of the film. He gets his butt kicked by a few Gyaos and self destructs??? He looks old and lethargic. Plus he looks nothing like any gamera you've ever seen. His suit looked cheap and rushed.

8. The young Gamera you see through the rest of the film looks like a Pokemon. Big-eyed and cute...it will remind you of the baby Godzilla from Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla 2. Gamera is now too cute.

7. This movie has the pace of watching a NASCAR race during a 3 hour rain delay. I watched this movie with 2 other Gamera fans and [[nobody]] was happy with how slowly this film moved along. I've seen an SUV full of fat people going up a mountain road move faster.

6. Like Godzilla:Final Wars, this movie had very little kaiju time on screen. Final Wars had much more, actually, and better fights although short.

5. Kids take the title role. The friend of all children theme and poor [[writing]] killed the original Gamera series in the 1970's and history repeats itself in the 2000's. The most successful Gamera films abandoned the Sesame Street feel and went to a darker place. Why go back to a failed formula? This was to be a new trilogy and poor ticket sales killed any hope for this story to continue (thank god).

4. Gamera lost his iconic roar. He now sounds like an Elephant with strep throat.

3. This movie may produce a new Olympic event.....Imagine a relay race that involves sending very young children into harm's way. You have to see the ending to understand this point. Where were the parents? Oh yea..right there sending their kids into a kaiju battle zone.

2. The special effects were good, but sub-par for a Gamera movie. Legion and Iris had better effects. The best effect was showing the apple sized baby Gamera fly. Not too impressive.

1. This movie is just not what adult kaiju fans come to expect. The director was involved in Power Rangers and it shows. It comes off like a cross between ET, Always: Sunset on Third Street and TMNT. Kudos if you know all 3 references.

Rental at best or watch once if you buy it to complete the DVD series. RUN...do not walk away from this [[filmmaking]]!!!!! [[Objectives]] at the very young [[juvenile]], this [[filmmaking]] will [[boring]] you to [[tear]]. [[Though]] the Gamera trilogy of the 90's raised the bar, this [[filmmaking]] just [[diminished]] it. It's [[slows]] paced and the [[monsters]] fighting is good, but [[rarely]] seen. This movie had me dry heaving in the [[kitten]] box. Just a very [[poorest]] [[supplying]] after a [[sumptuous]] 90's series.

SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!!! Here are the top 10 reasons Gamera fans of the 90's series will HATE this film.

10. This movie is a drama that follows a kid trying to cope with the death of his mother and fears losing baby Gamera to a fight after knowing his father saw the adult Gamera die.

9. You see the adult Gamera for maybe a minute at the beginning of the film. He gets his butt kicked by a few Gyaos and self destructs??? He looks old and lethargic. Plus he looks nothing like any gamera you've ever seen. His suit looked cheap and rushed.

8. The young Gamera you see through the rest of the film looks like a Pokemon. Big-eyed and cute...it will remind you of the baby Godzilla from Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla 2. Gamera is now too cute.

7. This movie has the pace of watching a NASCAR race during a 3 hour rain delay. I watched this movie with 2 other Gamera fans and [[anyone]] was happy with how slowly this film moved along. I've seen an SUV full of fat people going up a mountain road move faster.

6. Like Godzilla:Final Wars, this movie had very little kaiju time on screen. Final Wars had much more, actually, and better fights although short.

5. Kids take the title role. The friend of all children theme and poor [[literary]] killed the original Gamera series in the 1970's and history repeats itself in the 2000's. The most successful Gamera films abandoned the Sesame Street feel and went to a darker place. Why go back to a failed formula? This was to be a new trilogy and poor ticket sales killed any hope for this story to continue (thank god).

4. Gamera lost his iconic roar. He now sounds like an Elephant with strep throat.

3. This movie may produce a new Olympic event.....Imagine a relay race that involves sending very young children into harm's way. You have to see the ending to understand this point. Where were the parents? Oh yea..right there sending their kids into a kaiju battle zone.

2. The special effects were good, but sub-par for a Gamera movie. Legion and Iris had better effects. The best effect was showing the apple sized baby Gamera fly. Not too impressive.

1. This movie is just not what adult kaiju fans come to expect. The director was involved in Power Rangers and it shows. It comes off like a cross between ET, Always: Sunset on Third Street and TMNT. Kudos if you know all 3 references.

Rental at best or watch once if you buy it to complete the DVD series. --------------------------------------------- Result 2263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Darius Goes [[West]] is an [[amazing]] documentary about a teenager (Weems) with Duchenne [[Muscular]] Dystrophy, and his 11 [[friends]] who [[take]] him on a cross-country [[trip]] to see if "Pimp My Ride" will pimp out his [[wheelchair]].

I recently [[watched]] this [[movie]] at the [[Sunscreen]] [[Film]] [[Festival]]. It [[played]] [[twice]] over the course of the [[festival]]. This movie is an amazing [[story]] about the human spirit, and the spirit of Weem's [[friends]]. I do not say this [[often]] about [[movies]], but after [[watching]] this [[movie]], I feel [[moved]] to do something towards the cause. [[Every]] [[festival]] this movie has taken part in, this [[movie]] has won an [[award]] of some [[kind]]. It is in the Tribeca [[Film]] [[Festival]], and it is [[going]] to London and [[Athens]], Greece. I [[would]] not be [[surprised]] if this [[movie]] went all the [[way]] to the Academy [[Awards]]. It is snowballing out of [[control]]. If [[anyone]] has a [[chance]] to [[see]] this [[movie]], [[wherever]] it is [[playing]], go! Take as [[many]] people as [[possible]], and go! It is heading to [[New]] Orleans for a [[film]] [[festival]], then on to Atlanta and [[Palm]] Beach, FL. [[Darius]] is from Georgia, so I [[expect]] the [[tickets]] for the [[Atlanta]] [[showing]] will be [[sold]] out [[quickly]], if they are not already. Please, [[go]] see this [[movie]]! DGW ([[talk]] about it)

-Kish Darius Goes [[Western]] is an [[wondrous]] documentary about a teenager (Weems) with Duchenne [[Muscles]] Dystrophy, and his 11 [[mates]] who [[taking]] him on a cross-country [[tour]] to see if "Pimp My Ride" will pimp out his [[armchair]].

I recently [[saw]] this [[cinematic]] at the [[Sunblock]] [[Movie]] [[Feast]]. It [[served]] [[double]] over the course of the [[feast]]. This movie is an amazing [[history]] about the human spirit, and the spirit of Weem's [[mates]]. I do not say this [[traditionally]] about [[movie]], but after [[staring]] this [[movies]], I feel [[shifted]] to do something towards the cause. [[Any]] [[celebratory]] this movie has taken part in, this [[kino]] has won an [[scholarship]] of some [[sort]]. It is in the Tribeca [[Kino]] [[Festivals]], and it is [[go]] to London and [[Greece]], Greece. I [[ought]] not be [[horrified]] if this [[cinematography]] went all the [[path]] to the Academy [[Prize]]. It is snowballing out of [[supervisory]]. If [[nobody]] has a [[chances]] to [[behold]] this [[cinematography]], [[nowhere]] it is [[gaming]], go! Take as [[several]] people as [[probable]], and go! It is heading to [[Nouveau]] Orleans for a [[kino]] [[celebratory]], then on to Atlanta and [[Palme]] Beach, FL. [[Dario]] is from Georgia, so I [[awaited]] the [[banknotes]] for the [[Atalanta]] [[displays]] will be [[sells]] out [[expeditiously]], if they are not already. Please, [[going]] see this [[kino]]! DGW ([[schmooze]] about it)

-Kish --------------------------------------------- Result 2264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Something surprised me about this movie - it was actually [[original]]. It was not the same old recycled crap that comes out of Hollywood every month.

I saw this movie on video because I did not even [[know]] about it before I saw it at my local video store. If you see this movie available - rent it - you will not regret it. The [[suspense]] builds throughout and the twist ending is [[excellent]].

Something surprised me about this movie - it was actually [[initial]]. It was not the same old recycled crap that comes out of Hollywood every month.

I saw this movie on video because I did not even [[savoir]] about it before I saw it at my local video store. If you see this movie available - rent it - you will not regret it. The [[wait]] builds throughout and the twist ending is [[wondrous]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] To be a Buster Keaton fan is to have your heart [[broken]] on a regular basis. Most of us first encounter Keaton in one of the brilliant feature films from his great period of independent production: 'The General', 'The Navigator', 'Sherlock Jnr'. We recognise him as the [[greatest]] figure in the entire history of film comedy, and we want to see more of his [[movies]]. Here the [[heartbreak]] [[begins]]. After '[[Steamboat]] Bill Jnr', Keaton's brother-in-law Joseph Schenck pressured him into signing a contract that put Keaton under the control of MGM. Keaton became just one more actor for hire, performing someone else's scripts. Then his alcoholism got worse. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton never again made a truly first-rate film. A couple of sources describe a would-be masterpiece comedy that Keaton claimed he *almost* got to make at MGM: a parody of 'Grand Hotel'. Biographer Tom Dardis has offered convincing evidence that Keaton made up this story.

The heartbreak [[increases]] because, among the many years of Keaton's long steady decline, he just [[occasionally]] came up with a good film ... such as his short comedy 'Grand Slam Opera'. I [[continue]] to search for the [[lost]] footage of Keaton's dramatic scene with Spencer Tracy in 'It's a Mad Mad World': a sequence in which embittered cop Tracy telephones an old retired crook (Keaton) and tries to recruit his assistance in stealing Smiler Grogan's cash. That footage is almost certainly gone forever, but I keep looking.

'Speak Easily', alas, is one of Keaton's films from the [[beginning]] of his decline. MGM were trying to build up Jimmy Durante (who, [[coincidentally]], played Smiler Grogan three decades later) as a new comedy star. Unfortunately, MGM tried to build up Durante by teaming him with Keaton, whose style of comedy was simply [[incompatible]] with Durante's. (I'm a fan of both.) Throughout his career, Durante was a [[merciless]] scene-stealer: commendably, he knew that he was being built up at Keaton's expense, and Keaton was the only co-star whom Durante never attempted to upstage.

Keaton was often [[cast]] as the victim of extremely cruel machinations. In 'Speak Easily', he plays a didactic and humourless Midwestern college professor named Post (because he's as wooden as one) who receives a letter informing him that he's inherited $750,000, which he must travel to New York City to claim. Does he make a 'phone call to verify this? Does he even check the postmark? No; he takes his life's savings out of the bank and rushes to New York. As soon as he's gone, Post's manservant confesses that he wrote the (fake) letter to jostle Professor Post out of his rut!

Post, who thinks he's a 3/4-millionaire, crosses paths with Jimmy Dodge (Durante), who's trying to produce a musical revue but hasn't any money. The characters which these two brilliant comedians are playing onscreen simply fail to intermesh. Keaton is playing one of those eggheads (like Mister Logic in 'Viz') who intellectualises everything. Durante plays one of those annoying hepcats who is incapable of making any straightforward statement because the script requires him always to speak in slang. There's a painfully unfunny dialogue scene in which Durante is trying to talk to Keaton about money, but - instead of coming straight out with it - Durante has to use increasingly contrived slang terms like 'kale', 'cartwheels' and so forth ... while Keaton of course has no idea what Durante's on about. I'll give Keaton credit: his own dry and dusty prairie voice, his flat Kansas accent, is absolutely perfect for the character he's playing here.

Sidney Toler, looking much leaner and more handsome here than he would be just a year later, is impressive as the excitable director of the revue bankrolled (on tick) by Professor Post. Henry Armetta, whom I've never found funny, is even less funny than usual here, offering a running gag with a stupid payoff. Thelma Todd impressed me here, in a more villainous version of the role she played in 'Horse Feathers' (a much funnier movie). Edward Brophy, one of my favourite character actors, is wasted.

Part of the problem with 'Speak Easily' is that supporting characters behave in completely inappropriate ways. Keaton's lawyer shows up at Durante's theatre with an urgent message for Keaton ... but he isn't there, so the lawyer proceeds to divulge Keaton's personal business to the first total stranger he meets. (Fire that lawyer, Buster!) In another scene, Professor Post - the guy who's perceived as bankrolling this musical - blunders into the chorus girls' changing room, and all the chorus girls immediately squeal and cover themselves. I know for a fact that *modern* chorus girls would never react this way, and I seriously doubt that chorus girls in 1932 behaved that way either ... certainly not in response to the 'angel' controlling their show's pursestrings.

SPOILERS COMING. About half an hour into the unfunny 'Speak Easily', the great Jimmy Durante seats himself at the piano, grins into the camera, and does that distinctive little shake of his head as he starts to play a tune. This is the moment when I thought that, at long last, this movie was finally going to settle down to its purpose of entertaining us. Alas, no. Most annoying of all is the ending of this film, which uses the single most hackneyed and implausible cliche in all of comedy: the one in which an utterly incompetent dimwit becomes a star comedian through his own ineptitude. (Keaton would be forced to replay this cliche in a 1955 episode of 'Screen Directors Playhouse'; Chaplin had already used it in 'The Circus'.)

I very nearly wept - in anger and sorrow - at the wasted opportunities in 'Speak Easily'. Mostly out of respect for the work that Keaton, Durante, Toler, Brophy and Miss Todd have done elsewhere, I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10.

To be a Buster Keaton fan is to have your heart [[ruptured]] on a regular basis. Most of us first encounter Keaton in one of the brilliant feature films from his great period of independent production: 'The General', 'The Navigator', 'Sherlock Jnr'. We recognise him as the [[hugest]] figure in the entire history of film comedy, and we want to see more of his [[filmmaking]]. Here the [[sadness]] [[initiates]]. After '[[Steamer]] Bill Jnr', Keaton's brother-in-law Joseph Schenck pressured him into signing a contract that put Keaton under the control of MGM. Keaton became just one more actor for hire, performing someone else's scripts. Then his alcoholism got worse. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton never again made a truly first-rate film. A couple of sources describe a would-be masterpiece comedy that Keaton claimed he *almost* got to make at MGM: a parody of 'Grand Hotel'. Biographer Tom Dardis has offered convincing evidence that Keaton made up this story.

The heartbreak [[raising]] because, among the many years of Keaton's long steady decline, he just [[sometime]] came up with a good film ... such as his short comedy 'Grand Slam Opera'. I [[nonstop]] to search for the [[outof]] footage of Keaton's dramatic scene with Spencer Tracy in 'It's a Mad Mad World': a sequence in which embittered cop Tracy telephones an old retired crook (Keaton) and tries to recruit his assistance in stealing Smiler Grogan's cash. That footage is almost certainly gone forever, but I keep looking.

'Speak Easily', alas, is one of Keaton's films from the [[begins]] of his decline. MGM were trying to build up Jimmy Durante (who, [[accidentally]], played Smiler Grogan three decades later) as a new comedy star. Unfortunately, MGM tried to build up Durante by teaming him with Keaton, whose style of comedy was simply [[irreconcilable]] with Durante's. (I'm a fan of both.) Throughout his career, Durante was a [[implacable]] scene-stealer: commendably, he knew that he was being built up at Keaton's expense, and Keaton was the only co-star whom Durante never attempted to upstage.

Keaton was often [[casting]] as the victim of extremely cruel machinations. In 'Speak Easily', he plays a didactic and humourless Midwestern college professor named Post (because he's as wooden as one) who receives a letter informing him that he's inherited $750,000, which he must travel to New York City to claim. Does he make a 'phone call to verify this? Does he even check the postmark? No; he takes his life's savings out of the bank and rushes to New York. As soon as he's gone, Post's manservant confesses that he wrote the (fake) letter to jostle Professor Post out of his rut!

Post, who thinks he's a 3/4-millionaire, crosses paths with Jimmy Dodge (Durante), who's trying to produce a musical revue but hasn't any money. The characters which these two brilliant comedians are playing onscreen simply fail to intermesh. Keaton is playing one of those eggheads (like Mister Logic in 'Viz') who intellectualises everything. Durante plays one of those annoying hepcats who is incapable of making any straightforward statement because the script requires him always to speak in slang. There's a painfully unfunny dialogue scene in which Durante is trying to talk to Keaton about money, but - instead of coming straight out with it - Durante has to use increasingly contrived slang terms like 'kale', 'cartwheels' and so forth ... while Keaton of course has no idea what Durante's on about. I'll give Keaton credit: his own dry and dusty prairie voice, his flat Kansas accent, is absolutely perfect for the character he's playing here.

Sidney Toler, looking much leaner and more handsome here than he would be just a year later, is impressive as the excitable director of the revue bankrolled (on tick) by Professor Post. Henry Armetta, whom I've never found funny, is even less funny than usual here, offering a running gag with a stupid payoff. Thelma Todd impressed me here, in a more villainous version of the role she played in 'Horse Feathers' (a much funnier movie). Edward Brophy, one of my favourite character actors, is wasted.

Part of the problem with 'Speak Easily' is that supporting characters behave in completely inappropriate ways. Keaton's lawyer shows up at Durante's theatre with an urgent message for Keaton ... but he isn't there, so the lawyer proceeds to divulge Keaton's personal business to the first total stranger he meets. (Fire that lawyer, Buster!) In another scene, Professor Post - the guy who's perceived as bankrolling this musical - blunders into the chorus girls' changing room, and all the chorus girls immediately squeal and cover themselves. I know for a fact that *modern* chorus girls would never react this way, and I seriously doubt that chorus girls in 1932 behaved that way either ... certainly not in response to the 'angel' controlling their show's pursestrings.

SPOILERS COMING. About half an hour into the unfunny 'Speak Easily', the great Jimmy Durante seats himself at the piano, grins into the camera, and does that distinctive little shake of his head as he starts to play a tune. This is the moment when I thought that, at long last, this movie was finally going to settle down to its purpose of entertaining us. Alas, no. Most annoying of all is the ending of this film, which uses the single most hackneyed and implausible cliche in all of comedy: the one in which an utterly incompetent dimwit becomes a star comedian through his own ineptitude. (Keaton would be forced to replay this cliche in a 1955 episode of 'Screen Directors Playhouse'; Chaplin had already used it in 'The Circus'.)

I very nearly wept - in anger and sorrow - at the wasted opportunities in 'Speak Easily'. Mostly out of respect for the work that Keaton, Durante, Toler, Brophy and Miss Todd have done elsewhere, I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Judy Davis shows us here why she is one of Australia's most respected and loved actors - her portrayal of a lonely, directionless nomad is first-rate. A teenaged Claudia Karvan also gives us a glimpse of what would make her one of this country's most popular actors in years to come, with future roles in THE BIG STEAL, THE HEARTBREAK KID, DATING THE ENEMY, RISK and the acclaimed TV series THE SECRET LIFE OF US. (Incidentally, Karvan, as a child, was a young girl whose toy Panda was stolen outside a chemist's shop in the 1983 drama GOING DOWN with Tracey Mann.) If this films comes your way, make sure you see it!! Rating: 79/100. See also: HOTEL SORRENTO, RADIANCE, VACANT POSSESSION, LANTANA. --------------------------------------------- Result 2267 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[movie]] was a real [[torture]] fest to [[sit]] through. Its first [[mistake]] is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it [[barely]] [[needs]] to [[convince]] the [[audience]] of it. [[When]] it does stoop to putting in its [[argument]], it has the [[participants]] breathlessly deliver [[barely]] [[substantiated]] [[facts]] ; all that's missing is [[someone]] crying "when is someone going to think of the [[children]]!". While watching this movie, I kept thinking "where'd you hear that?" or "that can't possibly be true" - yet little of the [[info]] was [[backed]] up by any [[reliable]] sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.

As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. [[James]] Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest "anthem" ever, "Stand and Fight", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, "Dance With Me" and "Still the One".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is [[supposedly]] life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number "We Almost Lost Detroit" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.

Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.

But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch "Rust Never Sleeps" or "The Last Waltz" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians.

So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline. This [[filmmaking]] was a real [[torturing]] fest to [[seated]] through. Its first [[mistaken]] is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it [[hardly]] [[require]] to [[persuade]] the [[spectators]] of it. [[Whenever]] it does stoop to putting in its [[controversy]], it has the [[attendees]] breathlessly deliver [[hardly]] [[backed]] [[truths]] ; all that's missing is [[anybody]] crying "when is someone going to think of the [[kid]]!". While watching this movie, I kept thinking "where'd you hear that?" or "that can't possibly be true" - yet little of the [[informational]] was [[substantiated]] up by any [[credible]] sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.

As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. [[Jacobo]] Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest "anthem" ever, "Stand and Fight", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, "Dance With Me" and "Still the One".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is [[reportedly]] life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number "We Almost Lost Detroit" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.

Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.

But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch "Rust Never Sleeps" or "The Last Waltz" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians.

So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline. --------------------------------------------- Result 2268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] last night and was a bit disappointed. A [[lot]] of the "time [[facts]]" were off. [[At]] the [[beginning]] of the movie, the [[grandfather]] [[made]] a [[comment]] to this [[grandson]] and his [[friends]] about how they felt when 9-11 hit. This [[movie]] was [[supposed]] to be [[taking]] place in 1994. Also, one of the [[grandsons]] [[friends]] was wearing an Eagles Donovan McNabb jersey. He hadn't even been [[drafted]] as of [[yet]]. The [[story]] line was good but the facts and [[actuality]] of the time frame was so far off [[base]] that it made the movie seem cheesy. My boyfriend is an avid reader of WWII books and memorabilia. I [[rented]] this movie [[hoping]] that it would be good. The acting was so-so. The [[dog]] was cute. But the way that this [[movie]] was carried out made me glad that I only paid 4 dollars to rent it as opposed to the 50 it would have taken me to watch it in a theater. I hope that who ever reads this understands that I mean no discontent to those who [[fought]] the [[war]] but the facts and time frame should have been a little more closely monitored. I [[saw]] this [[filmmaking]] last night and was a bit disappointed. A [[batch]] of the "time [[truths]]" were off. [[For]] the [[initiate]] of the movie, the [[grampa]] [[brought]] a [[observing]] to this [[grandsons]] and his [[freund]] about how they felt when 9-11 hit. This [[filmmaking]] was [[alleged]] to be [[adopting]] place in 1994. Also, one of the [[stepson]] [[homeys]] was wearing an Eagles Donovan McNabb jersey. He hadn't even been [[elaborated]] as of [[even]]. The [[tales]] line was good but the facts and [[reality]] of the time frame was so far off [[basis]] that it made the movie seem cheesy. My boyfriend is an avid reader of WWII books and memorabilia. I [[rent]] this movie [[waiting]] that it would be good. The acting was so-so. The [[canine]] was cute. But the way that this [[filmmaking]] was carried out made me glad that I only paid 4 dollars to rent it as opposed to the 50 it would have taken me to watch it in a theater. I hope that who ever reads this understands that I mean no discontent to those who [[struggled]] the [[warfare]] but the facts and time frame should have been a little more closely monitored. --------------------------------------------- Result 2269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this film so many times through my child hood that even to this day i can pretty much re-sight all of the dialogue. And when I watch it now it just makes me happy and surprisingly still laugh. I think it's amazing how they managed to train animals especially the cat to the extent that they are able to play the main role of a feature film. However watching it now I can also unfortunately notice that it isn't the masterpiece i once thought it was. But i prefer to remember how i felt about it when i was younger watching it on VHS on my fist TV that would cloud the image in yellow. And and bearing in mind it is a children's film, that is why i would still definitely give it 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This movie is hilarious. The [[problem]] is that it's not a [[comedy]]. One classic scene involves Kurt [[Thomas]] just happening to find a pommel-horse in the middle of a village square (which he uses to pummel the bad guys.) Another is the trek into the "Village of [[Crazies]]." Too bad this movie wasn't made to be a farce, or it may have gotten better [[ratings]]. This movie is hilarious. The [[issues]] is that it's not a [[charade]]. One classic scene involves Kurt [[Tomas]] just happening to find a pommel-horse in the middle of a village square (which he uses to pummel the bad guys.) Another is the trek into the "Village of [[Freaks]]." Too bad this movie wasn't made to be a farce, or it may have gotten better [[evaluations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie's heart was in the right place, no matter where its brain was.

"Attack" is [[basically]] a spoof a la "[[Airplane]]!" (two years before the fact - nice going.) of what happens when vegetables, or in this case fruits, attack.

Through all [[manner]] of film magic (stop motion, papier-mache tomatoes on skateboards, reverse filming, people watching off-screen tomatoes, people throwing basketball-sized tomatoes at the on-screen actors), the tomatoes do indeed [[attack]] everyone in their leafy grasp.

Then, it's up to Mason Dixon (Miller) and a group of [[spies]] I wouldn't wish on any government's side to save the day. Of [[course]] there's a meddling [[reporter]] (Taylor) who [[pops]] in at the [[worst]] times, [[dancing]] and [[singing]] Army soldiers, Japanese [[scientists]] with dubbed-in [[voices]], some [[guy]] [[dragging]] [[around]] a parachute and a samurai sword...and oh yeah, the [[San]] Diego Chicken before he [[made]] it [[big]].

The gags here aren't all that great. In fact, you [[could]] probably [[make]] up [[better]] yourself after watching these. Some of the [[dialogue]] is inutterably [[bad]] ("Please pass the ketchup" - not something to [[say]] in [[front]] of tomatoes.) and as far as "Puberty [[Love]]" goes...well, I can't [[blame]] the tomatoes for shriveling up on hearing it.

What's good about it? Well, I liked the theme song and the beginning credits, and there was a scene with four people on the phone at once that was pretty well executed. ...that's about it.

Three stars. Not a "[[Killer]]" comedy, but it [[tries]].

Rock on, Peace. This movie's heart was in the right place, no matter where its brain was.

"Attack" is [[mainly]] a spoof a la "[[Air]]!" (two years before the fact - nice going.) of what happens when vegetables, or in this case fruits, attack.

Through all [[modes]] of film magic (stop motion, papier-mache tomatoes on skateboards, reverse filming, people watching off-screen tomatoes, people throwing basketball-sized tomatoes at the on-screen actors), the tomatoes do indeed [[attacking]] everyone in their leafy grasp.

Then, it's up to Mason Dixon (Miller) and a group of [[espionage]] I wouldn't wish on any government's side to save the day. Of [[cours]] there's a meddling [[correspondents]] (Taylor) who [[pop]] in at the [[hardest]] times, [[danced]] and [[sing]] Army soldiers, Japanese [[scientist]] with dubbed-in [[voice]], some [[boys]] [[drag]] [[throughout]] a parachute and a samurai sword...and oh yeah, the [[Santo]] Diego Chicken before he [[introduced]] it [[vast]].

The gags here aren't all that great. In fact, you [[would]] probably [[deliver]] up [[optimum]] yourself after watching these. Some of the [[discussions]] is inutterably [[inclement]] ("Please pass the ketchup" - not something to [[tell]] in [[newsweek]] of tomatoes.) and as far as "Puberty [[Adores]]" goes...well, I can't [[guilt]] the tomatoes for shriveling up on hearing it.

What's good about it? Well, I liked the theme song and the beginning credits, and there was a scene with four people on the phone at once that was pretty well executed. ...that's about it.

Three stars. Not a "[[Callin]]" comedy, but it [[strives]].

Rock on, Peace. --------------------------------------------- Result 2272 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[EA]] have [[shown]] us that they can make a classic 007 [[agent]] and make you feel in the 60's world. The [[graphics]] of the game are [[outstanding]] and also the voice [[recording]] is very [[professional]]. I got this [[game]] April 2007 (two [[years]] after [[release]]), and I am [[still]] impressed with the gameplay. It's a [[shame]] that [[EA]] will no [[longer]] [[make]] 007 [[games]].

I give this [[game]] 10/10 for the levels it [[contains]], [[especially]] the "consulate" level. I would recommend this [[game]] to anyone from the age of 13 and over. The only [[thing]] I didn't like in the [[game]] is the Russian [[boat]] [[level]], it was too much pressure. [[On]] the [[whole]] I like the game A LOT!! [[AE]] have [[display]] us that they can make a classic 007 [[patrolman]] and make you feel in the 60's world. The [[erections]] of the game are [[wondrous]] and also the voice [[registration]] is very [[professions]]. I got this [[jeu]] April 2007 (two [[ages]] after [[frees]]), and I am [[yet]] impressed with the gameplay. It's a [[embarrassment]] that [[AE]] will no [[anymore]] [[deliver]] 007 [[jeux]].

I give this [[jeu]] 10/10 for the levels it [[consists]], [[concretely]] the "consulate" level. I would recommend this [[jeu]] to anyone from the age of 13 and over. The only [[stuff]] I didn't like in the [[jeu]] is the Russian [[boats]] [[levels]], it was too much pressure. [[Orn]] the [[entire]] I like the game A LOT!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really like this movie because in Australia, Chinese movies like these never get shown during prime time. I must say this is one of the best serious movies ever, which outlines the difference between the Hong Kong people, and mainland Chinese. It really shows that there's discomfort between the two, but can only get better as HK are learning Mandarin. It also showed me how in mainland China the indie rock scene exists, and that Chinese people do know how to strum the guitar and get the house funking! Whoever said China isn't ready for rock music? Daniel Wu is absolutely superb, with his clean and crisp voice, honest acting, and a total chick magnet. I recommend this movie to those who don't know much about Asian people to cleanse themselves from the typical Western stereotypes, and people who just love Chinese/Asian cinema like myself. Check it out! --------------------------------------------- Result 2274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] enjoyed the movie and efficient Confucian crime drama, the old order survives the threat posed by a brash young greedy man, no doubt representing modern society. I thought the final scene was strange and could not understand if we were to believe that big D was being punished for being greedy or it was part of the plan a long. I loved the scene and for once in a Chinese movie, the violence was not a choreographed martial arts fest. On thing that always amuses me about HK films is that the main influence the British seem to have had is to introduce 'yes sir' and 'sorry' into the local language and its amusing that long after we have gone, they are still there. --------------------------------------------- Result 2275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Considering the original [[film]] [[version]] of 'The Haunting" is in my [[top]] ten [[films]] of all time' I [[approached]] this adaption with [[trepidation]]. I was right to be [[cautious]] as this film is a poorly written and badly [[executed]] [[load]] of [[old]] tosh, all those involved should be ashamed. the original was terrifying to me as a child for one reason! you see nothing. [[Robert]] [[Wise]] [[used]] [[innovative]] camera-work and superb lighting to generate [[fear]] and this is why it work's. The [[shame]] of the [[new]] version is that it relies on [[clever]] special effects and [[pyrotechnics]] to get from A to B, sadder still is that the ingredients were there ([[actors]] such as Liam Neeson, [[Catherine]] Zeta Jones) to do something different. This [[film]] should only watched as an [[example]] of studio [[butchery]]! Considering the original [[movie]] [[stepping]] of 'The Haunting" is in my [[superior]] ten [[filmmaking]] of all time' I [[tackled]] this adaption with [[angst]]. I was right to be [[careful]] as this film is a poorly written and badly [[conducted]] [[loading]] of [[ancient]] tosh, all those involved should be ashamed. the original was terrifying to me as a child for one reason! you see nothing. [[Roberto]] [[Judicious]] [[employs]] [[revolutionary]] camera-work and superb lighting to generate [[angst]] and this is why it work's. The [[shamed]] of the [[newer]] version is that it relies on [[malin]] special effects and [[fireworks]] to get from A to B, sadder still is that the ingredients were there ([[protagonists]] such as Liam Neeson, [[Cathy]] Zeta Jones) to do something different. This [[filmmaking]] should only watched as an [[instances]] of studio [[slaughterhouse]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[New]] [[York]] I Love You just like its predecessor (Paris Je T'Aime) is a compound of [[various]] [[stories]] that [[reflects]] the [[different]] kinds and [[aspects]] of [[love]] but unlike it the [[rhythm]] is much [[faster]] and the [[stories]] [[much]] shorter. The [[movie]] [[offers]] a [[unique]] view of the city of [[New]] York with its [[various]] and [[different]] landscapes. [[New]] York, I [[Love]] You [[offers]] a first [[class]] cast, [[featuring]] such [[great]] [[actors]] like Shia LaBeouf, Natalie Portman, [[Ian]] McKellen, Hayden Christensen, Chistina Rcci and Orlando Bloom, Ethan Hawke, James Caan and Robin Wright Penn [[among]] [[others]] and some [[excellent]] writers and directors like [[Brett]] Ratner and Anthony Mingella. [[Novel]] [[Yorke]] I Love You just like its predecessor (Paris Je T'Aime) is a compound of [[several]] [[fairytales]] that [[reflecting]] the [[several]] kinds and [[things]] of [[adores]] but unlike it the [[pace]] is much [[speedily]] and the [[storytelling]] [[very]] shorter. The [[kino]] [[offered]] a [[sole]] view of the city of [[Newer]] York with its [[assorted]] and [[dissimilar]] landscapes. [[Newer]] York, I [[Amore]] You [[tender]] a first [[category]] cast, [[featured]] such [[wondrous]] [[actresses]] like Shia LaBeouf, Natalie Portman, [[Iain]] McKellen, Hayden Christensen, Chistina Rcci and Orlando Bloom, Ethan Hawke, James Caan and Robin Wright Penn [[between]] [[alia]] and some [[brilliant]] writers and directors like [[Broadly]] Ratner and Anthony Mingella. --------------------------------------------- Result 2277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

What an absolutely crappy film this is. How or why this movie was made and what the hell Billy Bob Thornton and Charlize Theron were doing signing up for this mediocre waste of time is beyond me. Strong advise for anyone sitting down to catch a flick: DO NOT waste your time on this 'film'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] CCCC is the [[first]] good [[film]] in Bollywood of 2001. When I first [[saw]] the [[trailer]] of the [[film]] I [[thought]] It would be a [[nice]] [[family]] [[movie]]. I was right. Salman Khan has [[given]] is [[strongest]] performance ever. My family weren't too [[keen]] on him but after [[seeing]] this [[film]] my [[family]] are very [[impressed]] with him. Rani and Preity are [[wonderful]]. The [[film]] is [[going]] to be a [[huge]] [[hit]] because of the three main stars.

It's about Raj (Salman Khan) and Priya [[meeting]] and [[falling]] in love. They [[get]] married and go to Switzerland for their honeymoon. When they come back Raj and Priya [[find]] out that Priya is pregnant. Raj's [[family]] are full of [[joy]] when they [[find]] out [[especially]] Raj's [[dada]] (Amrish Puri). Raj and his [[family]] are [[playing]] cricket one day and Priya has an accident which causes Priya to have a miscarriage. Raj has a very close family [[friend]] who is a doctor, Balraj Chopra (Prem Chopra). He [[tells]] Raj and Priya that she can no longer have [[anymore]] [[kids]]. Raj and Priya [[keep]] this quiet from the family. Raj and Priya [[decide]] to [[go]] for surrogacy. Surrogacy to them is that they will [[find]] a [[girl]] and Raj and that [[girl]] will have a [[baby]] together and then hand the [[baby]] over to Raj and Priya. Raj [[finds]] a [[girl]]. Her name is Madhubala (Preity Zinta). She is a [[dancer]] and a [[prostitute]]. Raj [[tells]] her the situation and bribes her with money and she agrees. Raj [[changes]] Madhubala completley. Raj [[tells]] Priya that he has [[found]] a [[girl]]. Madhubala and Priya [[meet]] and become [[friends]]. They [[go]] to Switzerland to do this so no one [[finds]] out. Priya [[spends]] the night in a church and Raj and Madhubala are all [[alone]] and they [[spend]] the [[night]] together. The [[doctor]] [[confirms]] that Madhubala is pregnant and they are all [[happy]]. Raj [[tells]] his [[family]] that Priya is pregnant. They are happy again. Madhubala [[comes]] to love Raj and she [[wants]] him. What happens [[next]]? Watch CCCC to [[find]] out.

The one thing I didn't like about the film is their [[idea]] of surrogacy. They should have [[done]] it the [[proper]] [[way]] in the film but it didn't [[ruin]] the [[film]]. It was still [[excellent]].

The songs of the film are great. My favourites are "Chori Chori Chupke Chupke", Dekhne Walon Ne", "Deewana Hai Yeh Mann" and "Mehndi". The song "Mehndi" is very colourful. In that song it shows the ghod bharai taking place and it is very colourful. The film deserves 10/10! CCCC is the [[frst]] good [[films]] in Bollywood of 2001. When I first [[noticed]] the [[caravan]] of the [[cinema]] I [[think]] It would be a [[delightful]] [[families]] [[cinematography]]. I was right. Salman Khan has [[awarded]] is [[stronger]] performance ever. My family weren't too [[ardent]] on him but after [[witnessing]] this [[movie]] my [[familia]] are very [[surprising]] with him. Rani and Preity are [[wondrous]]. The [[movie]] is [[gonna]] to be a [[formidable]] [[hitting]] because of the three main stars.

It's about Raj (Salman Khan) and Priya [[meetings]] and [[declining]] in love. They [[got]] married and go to Switzerland for their honeymoon. When they come back Raj and Priya [[finds]] out that Priya is pregnant. Raj's [[families]] are full of [[pleasure]] when they [[finds]] out [[notably]] Raj's [[daddy]] (Amrish Puri). Raj and his [[families]] are [[play]] cricket one day and Priya has an accident which causes Priya to have a miscarriage. Raj has a very close family [[boyfriend]] who is a doctor, Balraj Chopra (Prem Chopra). He [[told]] Raj and Priya that she can no longer have [[longer]] [[youths]]. Raj and Priya [[keeping]] this quiet from the family. Raj and Priya [[decided]] to [[going]] for surrogacy. Surrogacy to them is that they will [[unearthed]] a [[daughter]] and Raj and that [[daughter]] will have a [[honey]] together and then hand the [[babe]] over to Raj and Priya. Raj [[discoveries]] a [[daughter]]. Her name is Madhubala (Preity Zinta). She is a [[dancers]] and a [[hooker]]. Raj [[says]] her the situation and bribes her with money and she agrees. Raj [[modifications]] Madhubala completley. Raj [[told]] Priya that he has [[detected]] a [[daughter]]. Madhubala and Priya [[cater]] and become [[friend]]. They [[going]] to Switzerland to do this so no one [[discoveries]] out. Priya [[spent]] the night in a church and Raj and Madhubala are all [[merely]] and they [[expenditures]] the [[overnight]] together. The [[physician]] [[asserts]] that Madhubala is pregnant and they are all [[merry]]. Raj [[told]] his [[families]] that Priya is pregnant. They are happy again. Madhubala [[happens]] to love Raj and she [[wanted]] him. What happens [[imminent]]? Watch CCCC to [[unearthed]] out.

The one thing I didn't like about the film is their [[thoughts]] of surrogacy. They should have [[played]] it the [[adequate]] [[manner]] in the film but it didn't [[downfall]] the [[flick]]. It was still [[wondrous]].

The songs of the film are great. My favourites are "Chori Chori Chupke Chupke", Dekhne Walon Ne", "Deewana Hai Yeh Mann" and "Mehndi". The song "Mehndi" is very colourful. In that song it shows the ghod bharai taking place and it is very colourful. The film deserves 10/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] .... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. While the actors are all personable, the story is so [[trite]] and goes [[nowhere]]. I think [[Victor]] Rasuk has [[great]] [[charisma]], but deserves a real [[film]] from a real storyteller. .... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. While the actors are all personable, the story is so [[commonplace]] and goes [[everywhere]]. I think [[Viktor]] Rasuk has [[gorgeous]] [[seduction]], but deserves a real [[filmmaking]] from a real storyteller. --------------------------------------------- Result 2280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The [[movie]] is [[absolutely]] silly.

But were you [[expecting]] a high-brow intellectual [[film]] based on a [[comic]] called Slam [[Dunk]]? [[Really]]? Jay Chou's acting isn't [[exactly]] the most [[moving]] thing I've ever [[seen]], but I [[certainly]] enjoyed the [[movie]]. [[Was]] it [[somewhere]] near the [[level]] of [[awesome]] that someone like Jet Li or [[Stephen]] [[Chow]] can produce? No, not really. Was it [[thoroughly]] entertaining if you're just taking it at surface value? Absolutely. It's a movie about some Chinese eye-candy idols and musicians who can play basketball at an unreal level of expertise. There's an evil Triad-style dude and a wacky scheming guy who gets Jay Chou involved in all of this. A love interest. It's formulaic but really, suspend disbelief for a while. Come on. It's called Kung Fu Dunk. What do you really think you signed on for? Do yourself a favor if you watch it - I found myself a copy with some Engrish subtitles that made the movie nigh unintelligible conversation wise, but we [[got]] a [[great]] laugh out of it. They would appear to be extremely fixated on Jerusalem and the numbers 1, 10.

I laughed, I cried, I hurled. I'd watch it again.

Especially for that fight scene in the bar. Well choreographed and well shot. I [[especially]] [[enjoy]] the plexiglass lit pool table - I'd LOVE to play on one of those.

Slick enough for me, but I dig on trash cinema. The [[film]] is [[perfectly]] silly.

But were you [[wait]] a high-brow intellectual [[cinematic]] based on a [[humorous]] called Slam [[Soak]]? [[Genuinely]]? Jay Chou's acting isn't [[precisely]] the most [[displacement]] thing I've ever [[saw]], but I [[probably]] enjoyed the [[kino]]. [[Became]] it [[somehow]] near the [[grades]] of [[impressive]] that someone like Jet Li or [[Steven]] [[Weeks]] can produce? No, not really. Was it [[intently]] entertaining if you're just taking it at surface value? Absolutely. It's a movie about some Chinese eye-candy idols and musicians who can play basketball at an unreal level of expertise. There's an evil Triad-style dude and a wacky scheming guy who gets Jay Chou involved in all of this. A love interest. It's formulaic but really, suspend disbelief for a while. Come on. It's called Kung Fu Dunk. What do you really think you signed on for? Do yourself a favor if you watch it - I found myself a copy with some Engrish subtitles that made the movie nigh unintelligible conversation wise, but we [[get]] a [[wondrous]] laugh out of it. They would appear to be extremely fixated on Jerusalem and the numbers 1, 10.

I laughed, I cried, I hurled. I'd watch it again.

Especially for that fight scene in the bar. Well choreographed and well shot. I [[peculiarly]] [[enjoying]] the plexiglass lit pool table - I'd LOVE to play on one of those.

Slick enough for me, but I dig on trash cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 2281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] [[Let]] me [[start]] out by saying I can [[enjoy]] just about any [[bad]] Italian horror [[movie]] or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. [[Seriously]]. This one was downright [[awful]].

There are way too [[many]] [[elements]] that Martino [[tries]] to inject and none of them [[work]] (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant [[Westerners]], of course, who set up a resort in the jungle [[somewhere]]. I don't [[even]] [[remember]] where it [[takes]] place...how sad is that... [[Basically]], people [[come]] to the resort to see this native [[tribe]] and its' ceremonies but [[eventually]] they [[upset]] the 'Alligator God' of the river who then [[proceeds]] to go on a [[rampage]], [[killing]] said vacationers and some [[tribesmen]] as well. [[Sounds]] good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is [[minimal]] violence until the [[end]], the [[special]] [[effects]] are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the [[love]] [[story]] [[thrown]] in is [[laughable]].

There is seriously a few scenes where it [[appears]] they set up a [[camera]] underwater in a pool and [[threw]] a [[toy]] alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is [[supposed]] to be the [[gator]] [[attacking]]. I'm not [[kidding]]. [[In]] another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is [[targeted]] by the [[incredible]] [[sinking]] [[plastic]] gator, who all of a sudden is five [[times]] the [[size]] of a van. (A few minutes [[ago]], he was only big enough to [[eat]] a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size [[cargo]] van...) It is really [[pathetic]]. The only other flick I can [[think]] of where the [[effects]] were so [[bad]] I was [[pulled]] out of the [[story]] was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, "Rats," what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be [[terrified]].

Normally I'd [[say]] anything Sergio Martino was a [[solid]] must-see but this one is a must-pass. [[Waste]] of [[time]] and [[definitely]] not worth [[buying]] for the $15+ sticker [[price]] from No [[Shame]]. This one is a [[SHAME]].

2 out of 10, [[kids]]. [[Leave]] me [[commencement]] out by saying I can [[enjoying]] just about any [[negative]] Italian horror [[cinematographic]] or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. [[Profoundly]]. This one was downright [[abhorrent]].

There are way too [[several]] [[facets]] that Martino [[attempted]] to inject and none of them [[collaborating]] (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant [[Westerns]], of course, who set up a resort in the jungle [[nowhere]]. I don't [[yet]] [[recall]] where it [[pick]] place...how sad is that... [[Fundamentally]], people [[coming]] to the resort to see this native [[clan]] and its' ceremonies but [[lastly]] they [[annoyed]] the 'Alligator God' of the river who then [[receipts]] to go on a [[carnage]], [[homicide]] said vacationers and some [[clan]] as well. [[Sound]] good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is [[minor]] violence until the [[terminate]], the [[peculiar]] [[effect]] are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the [[amore]] [[saga]] [[hurled]] in is [[silly]].

There is seriously a few scenes where it [[appearing]] they set up a [[cameras]] underwater in a pool and [[tossed]] a [[toys]] alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is [[suspected]] to be the [[alligator]] [[onslaught]]. I'm not [[shitting]]. [[Onto]] another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is [[orientated]] by the [[unbelievable]] [[drowning]] [[plastics]] gator, who all of a sudden is five [[time]] the [[sized]] of a van. (A few minutes [[before]], he was only big enough to [[coma]] a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size [[freight]] van...) It is really [[unfortunate]]. The only other flick I can [[believe]] of where the [[effect]] were so [[naughty]] I was [[pull]] out of the [[tales]] was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, "Rats," what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be [[horrified]].

Normally I'd [[tell]] anything Sergio Martino was a [[solids]] must-see but this one is a must-pass. [[Wastes]] of [[times]] and [[conclusively]] not worth [[buys]] for the $15+ sticker [[prizes]] from No [[Ashamed]]. This one is a [[PITY]].

2 out of 10, [[youngsters]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2282 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It has been almost 5 years since the release of this stylish action flick.I have watched this movie almost 10 times and it a great effort by Gautham.From my perspective,I feel this movie is virtually flawless. Surya as ACP Anbuchelvan-no doubt..classy.Jyothika played her role as Maya very well.The character suits her very well.The character that caught movie-goers attention was Pandia.Jeevan played the role of Pandia very well.Brutal and fearsome.Jeevan deservedly received the Best Villain award in the ITFA 2004.The supporting cast of Daniel Balaji,Devadharshini and other performed well.

Racy screenplay,perfectly-timed dialogues and brilliant narration by Gautham.The soundtrack by Harris Jeyaraj are all chart-busters while the BGM suits the movie very well.Cinematography by R.D. Rajasekhar is rich.Peter Hein choreographed the stunts well.Anthony's editing is precise.Above all,Kaakha Kaakha is a perfect cop film filled with right doses of action and romance.

Even some Hollywood film cant compete with Kaakha Kaakha...undoubtedly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2283 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie is one of the most [[awful]] I've ever seen. Not only is the [[dialogue]] awful, it never ends. You'll think it's [[ending]], but it's not. How long is it, 140, 160 minutes? I don't even know. I do know that I'll never watch it again. It's like someone took a romantic comedy, took out the comedy, then decided to downplay the romance, leaving us with the pile of crap that managed to make its way to the screen. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourself how terrible this film is. This movie is one of the most [[abhorrent]] I've ever seen. Not only is the [[conversation]] awful, it never ends. You'll think it's [[terminated]], but it's not. How long is it, 140, 160 minutes? I don't even know. I do know that I'll never watch it again. It's like someone took a romantic comedy, took out the comedy, then decided to downplay the romance, leaving us with the pile of crap that managed to make its way to the screen. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourself how terrible this film is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A great British Indy movie! Fantastic chemistry between the 3 main characters make for some hilarious drug-fuelled set pieces that Cheech and Chong would be proud of. Great to see Phil Daniels back on the big screen (even if he has swapped sides since Quadrophenia!) and Gary Stretch is surprisingly good and a treat for the ladies! Loved the final fight scene with it's nod to Zulu and now I know what happened to Arthur Brown after he set himself on fire on Top of the Pops!...he's not acting....he really is a bona-fide British hippie!!! You don't have to be a biker to enjoy this and it's straight into my Friday night post-pub repeat viewing collection.

Give this film a go and you won't be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 2285 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] its a gem movie if [[anyone]] who hasn't seen movie sholey he cant [[understand]] what is [[going]] on there. a thakur [[call]] men for [[catching]] a [[big]] [[terrorist]] who is like [[god]] and [[even]] [[police]] don't know abut him but these ppl do.

[[biggest]] [[advantage]] of [[film]] is its [[speed]] u never know what is [[going]] on and the [[part]] is [[completed]]. [[actors]] are at there best of [[worst]] acting and [[actress]] is here for time-pass of songs. and what u cant forget is the cool dialouge which seems to come in very [[long]] [[time]] but u [[cant]] understand them so [[easily]] [[try]] [[hard]] for that and [[last]] word i haven't seen [[movie]] complete due to a brain roast so plz [[tell]] me ditz [[end]] if it have its a gem movie if [[person]] who hasn't seen movie sholey he cant [[understanding]] what is [[gonna]] on there. a thakur [[invitation]] men for [[captured]] a [[grande]] [[terrorism]] who is like [[lord]] and [[yet]] [[cops]] don't know abut him but these ppl do.

[[highest]] [[advantages]] of [[filmmaking]] is its [[acceleration]] u never know what is [[gonna]] on and the [[party]] is [[accomplished]]. [[protagonists]] are at there best of [[meanest]] acting and [[actor]] is here for time-pass of songs. and what u cant forget is the cool dialouge which seems to come in very [[protracted]] [[period]] but u [[thats]] understand them so [[comfortably]] [[attempted]] [[harsh]] for that and [[final]] word i haven't seen [[kino]] complete due to a brain roast so plz [[told]] me ditz [[terminates]] if it have --------------------------------------------- Result 2286 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a [[strong]] [[tribute]] to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a [[strong]] characterization of the [[man]], his [[genius]] as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many [[times]] they [[blended]].

The whole story of Douglas MacArthur would be a six [[hour]] [[film]] or a TV mini-series. It would [[cover]] him from his days on frontier [[posts]] with his family to his [[time]] at West Point where he [[still]] has the [[highest]] scholastic average ever [[achieved]] by a [[cadet]]. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend [[building]] [[bravery]] on the [[battlefields]] of [[World]] War I in France. It would [[also]] have to [[tell]] about him firing on the Bonus [[Marchers]] of World War I veterans in 1932, [[probably]] putting the final kabosh on any [[chances]] [[President]] Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. [[During]] MacArthur's [[last]] [[years]] he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in [[New]] York [[City]]. That [[must]] have been a [[subject]] they [[avoided]].

This [[film]] [[concentrates]] on the [[years]] 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The [[film]] [[opens]] with MacArthur [[addressing]] the [[student]] [[body]] in 1962. As he [[speaks]] the words of the [[famous]] [[Duty]] [[Honor]] [[Country]] speech, MacArthur's [[mind]] goes back to World War [[II]] and his [[desperate]] [[struggle]] against the [[advancing]] Japanese on the [[island]] of Corregidor and the [[fields]] of Bataan on [[Luzon]]. The [[film]] takes him through his [[struggle]] to [[win]] back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of [[command]] by [[President]] Truman.

MacArthur as a film [[would]] not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of [[Dan]] O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the [[part]] of the [[film]] I [[enjoyed]] the [[best]], [[seeing]] MacArthur and his [[relations]] with both these men.

FDR by O'Herlihy [[captures]] the aristocratic squire and [[exceptionally]] [[devious]] [[man]] that was our 32nd [[President]]. Roosevelt was a [[man]] who got his points [[across]] with [[unusual]] [[subtlety]] and [[cleverness]]. [[Sometimes]] he [[liked]] scheming a [[little]] too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. [[Note]] how he [[deals]] with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.

Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.

Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.

MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree. Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a [[vigorous]] [[eulogy]] to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a [[vigorous]] characterization of the [[guy]], his [[engineers]] as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many [[moments]] they [[mixed]].

The whole story of Douglas MacArthur would be a six [[hours]] [[cinematography]] or a TV mini-series. It would [[covering]] him from his days on frontier [[positions]] with his family to his [[period]] at West Point where he [[however]] has the [[biggest]] scholastic average ever [[accomplished]] by a [[cadets]]. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend [[build]] [[courage]] on the [[battleground]] of [[Global]] War I in France. It would [[apart]] have to [[telling]] about him firing on the Bonus [[Protesters]] of World War I veterans in 1932, [[presumably]] putting the final kabosh on any [[chance]] [[Chairs]] Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. [[At]] MacArthur's [[final]] [[ages]] he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in [[Novel]] York [[Ville]]. That [[owe]] have been a [[theme]] they [[avoid]].

This [[movie]] [[focused]] on the [[ages]] 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The [[movies]] [[inaugurated]] with MacArthur [[dealing]] the [[students]] [[bodies]] in 1962. As he [[spoke]] the words of the [[illustrious]] [[Obligations]] [[Honoured]] [[Countries]] speech, MacArthur's [[intellect]] goes back to World War [[SECONDLY]] and his [[distraught]] [[struggling]] against the [[promoting]] Japanese on the [[isla]] of Corregidor and the [[campos]] of Bataan on [[Lawson]]. The [[movie]] takes him through his [[fight]] to [[won]] back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of [[commands]] by [[Chairperson]] Truman.

MacArthur as a film [[should]] not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of [[Dana]] O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the [[parties]] of the [[movie]] I [[appreciated]] the [[bestest]], [[see]] MacArthur and his [[ties]] with both these men.

FDR by O'Herlihy [[catch]] the aristocratic squire and [[incredibly]] [[duplicitous]] [[dude]] that was our 32nd [[Presidency]]. Roosevelt was a [[guy]] who got his points [[during]] with [[odd]] [[sophistication]] and [[inventiveness]]. [[Occasionally]] he [[loved]] scheming a [[scant]] too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. [[Memo]] how he [[deal]] with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.

Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.

Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.

MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree. --------------------------------------------- Result 2287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ([[NOTE]]: I [[thought]] I'd be the only one writing what I did below, but I [[see]] the others here agree. I [[guess]] it was [[pretty]] [[obvious]] - this was overdoing the bait-the-cat bit. Anyway, here is what I had written:)

The [[owners]] have left on [[vacation]] for two weeks - a trip to California - leaving the cat (Sylvester) all alone and locked in the [[house]]. That means no milk, but the cat, to his relief, does [[find]] a bunch of canned tuna. [[However]], to his dismay, he can't find the opener.

It turns out the [[little]] [[mouse]] in the house has it...and baits the [[cat]] with it. This is a [[mean]] rodent who keeps [[teasing]] Sylvester with the opener and then yanking it away at the last [[second]]. Sylvester tries everything [[possible]] to open the can of tuna but can't do it.

This is a [[frustrating]] [[story]], and why they make the [[sadistic]] mouse the "good guy" is [[beyond]] me. It's like some of the Tom & Jerry cartoons where poor [[Tom]] always gets the worst of it even though many times the little mouse starts the conflict! ([[REMARK]]: I [[ideology]] I'd be the only one writing what I did below, but I [[seeing]] the others here agree. I [[imagine]] it was [[belle]] [[unmistakable]] - this was overdoing the bait-the-cat bit. Anyway, here is what I had written:)

The [[landlords]] have left on [[holidays]] for two weeks - a trip to California - leaving the cat (Sylvester) all alone and locked in the [[domicile]]. That means no milk, but the cat, to his relief, does [[finds]] a bunch of canned tuna. [[Conversely]], to his dismay, he can't find the opener.

It turns out the [[scant]] [[smile]] in the house has it...and baits the [[kitten]] with it. This is a [[meaning]] rodent who keeps [[bothering]] Sylvester with the opener and then yanking it away at the last [[secondly]]. Sylvester tries everything [[achievable]] to open the can of tuna but can't do it.

This is a [[depressing]] [[tales]], and why they make the [[vicious]] mouse the "good guy" is [[afterlife]] me. It's like some of the Tom & Jerry cartoons where poor [[Tum]] always gets the worst of it even though many times the little mouse starts the conflict! --------------------------------------------- Result 2288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[story]] is [[seen]] before, but that does'n matter if you can figure out to make a [[proper]] storyboard. It is [[clear]] that the director haven't [[spent]] his work on the storyboard. [[Alongside]] this, the cameraman [[spent]] far too much [[time]] leaning angles that do not match the message of the movie. The funniest is, however, if you take a look at the movie's website, you can read that it was on [[purpose]] that the director has [[chosen]] to [[make]] the [[film]] with [[bad]] [[camera]] angles. Because it [[remind]] us about [[hunting]]. But I have never [[heard]] of hunting with poor camera angles ;-) It will have 1 [[stars]] because the story is OK. It is a pity that Ti [[West]], has not spent more [[time]] to [[review]] his [[story]]. It is as if the [[movie]] was more [[important]] than the planning. [[Because]] you have a [[camera]] does not [[mean]] you should make a [[movie]] right away... [[come]]. Everyone can [[make]] a [[movie]], but not all will be just as good. [[So]] a word of [[advice]] to Ti West are: [[stop]] and labeling what you [[want]]. [[Use]] your [[time]] to [[start]] planning and not filming until everything has [[come]] down on a storyboard. You [[certainly]] have the [[ability]] and [[desire]] - so don't abuse your talent. The [[tales]] is [[watched]] before, but that does'n matter if you can figure out to make a [[suitable]] storyboard. It is [[lucid]] that the director haven't [[spends]] his work on the storyboard. [[Beside]] this, the cameraman [[spend]] far too much [[times]] leaning angles that do not match the message of the movie. The funniest is, however, if you take a look at the movie's website, you can read that it was on [[intention]] that the director has [[opted]] to [[deliver]] the [[filmmaking]] with [[negative]] [[cameras]] angles. Because it [[reminds]] us about [[chasing]]. But I have never [[hear]] of hunting with poor camera angles ;-) It will have 1 [[celebrity]] because the story is OK. It is a pity that Ti [[Westen]], has not spent more [[times]] to [[revising]] his [[tales]]. It is as if the [[filmmaking]] was more [[critical]] than the planning. [[Since]] you have a [[cameras]] does not [[imply]] you should make a [[filmmaking]] right away... [[coming]]. Everyone can [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]], but not all will be just as good. [[Therefore]] a word of [[tips]] to Ti West are: [[parada]] and labeling what you [[desiring]]. [[Utilise]] your [[times]] to [[booting]] planning and not filming until everything has [[coming]] down on a storyboard. You [[definitely]] have the [[dexterity]] and [[willingness]] - so don't abuse your talent. --------------------------------------------- Result 2289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well I don't know where to begin. Obviously this was a made for TV movie, so my expectations were low. I was pleasantly surprised by the overall direction of the second hour, but anything before or after that seemed to be a paint by the numbers sort of movie.

And talk about bad chemistry between the tow lovebird detectives. ..

I would go more in depth, but this movie doesn't really deserve it. Grade: D+ (IMDB rating 3/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie [[deserved]] a [[working]] over on Mystery Science [[Theater]]. Even though it has [[nothing]] whatever to do with King Solomon it's worth a watch because it is an unintentional laugh-riot. Really! It's worse than "Destroy All Monsters." [[Be]] sure to check out the following: the cheesy [[medallion]] ([[looks]] like the Shriners have been here), the obviously polyester Norfolk jacket on "Allan Quatermain," David MaCallum's badly [[done]] stutter (which does draw attention away from his even worse acting), the [[incredibly]] [[bad]] process [[work]] on all the "[[monsters]]," the monsters themselves - the hand puppet which menaces the [[little]] girl, the giant snake that menaces Macallum while he [[sinks]] in oatmeal, the red-lighted eyes on the motorized crabs, the amazingly hilarious [[boat]] (oh, brother!!) which appears to be [[made]] of plywood [[mounted]] on an [[old]] sand dredge and [[looks]] like a leftover from a Jr.Sr. [[prom]] ("[[Voyage]] into the [[Future]] with the [[class]] of '71"), the Phoenician city - where they wear Roman [[Imperial]] [[armor]] but which inexplicably has Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions -(the Phoenicians [[invented]] the alphabet-come on!),and worst of all, Macallum and Ekland (with her fright wig) playing smoochy-face -[[oh]] the [[horror]]! The best parts are that the intrepid explorers [[manage]] to [[lose]] the comic Frenchman ,and the African guy -Snuffleupagus or [[whatever]] - [[evidently]] [[chose]] to [[die]] [[heroically]] [[rather]] than be in any more scenes. This movie [[merits]] a [[works]] over on Mystery Science [[Theatrical]]. Even though it has [[none]] whatever to do with King Solomon it's worth a watch because it is an unintentional laugh-riot. Really! It's worse than "Destroy All Monsters." [[Are]] sure to check out the following: the cheesy [[locket]] ([[seem]] like the Shriners have been here), the obviously polyester Norfolk jacket on "Allan Quatermain," David MaCallum's badly [[doing]] stutter (which does draw attention away from his even worse acting), the [[unimaginably]] [[unfavourable]] process [[works]] on all the "[[monster]]," the monsters themselves - the hand puppet which menaces the [[tiny]] girl, the giant snake that menaces Macallum while he [[drowning]] in oatmeal, the red-lighted eyes on the motorized crabs, the amazingly hilarious [[vessels]] (oh, brother!!) which appears to be [[accomplished]] of plywood [[ascended]] on an [[ancient]] sand dredge and [[seem]] like a leftover from a Jr.Sr. [[promo]] ("[[Voyager]] into the [[Futur]] with the [[category]] of '71"), the Phoenician city - where they wear Roman [[Imperialism]] [[sonic]] but which inexplicably has Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions -(the Phoenicians [[coined]] the alphabet-come on!),and worst of all, Macallum and Ekland (with her fright wig) playing smoochy-face -[[ooh]] the [[abomination]]! The best parts are that the intrepid explorers [[administered]] to [[losing]] the comic Frenchman ,and the African guy -Snuffleupagus or [[whichever]] - [[notoriously]] [[selected]] to [[dying]] [[bravely]] [[somewhat]] than be in any more scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 2291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I [[hated]] this [[show]] when I was a [[kid]]. That was back in the day when [[kids]] [[show]] [[characters]] actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General [[American]] Dialect we're [[used]] to. [[Jack]] Wild had a British [[accent]] and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others [[mentioned]], though, I never [[quite]] [[understood]] what the [[deal]] was with the witch [[wanting]] the [[flute]]. That [[always]] seemed [[odd]] to me, [[probably]] because the flute just [[annoyed]] me and I wouldn't have [[gone]] to any [[trouble]] to [[take]] it away!

[[Just]] a [[comment]] on the similarity of Pufnstuf to [[early]] 70s [[McDonalds]] commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf [[ripped]] off McDonalds. [[At]] the height of [[McDonalds]] popularity, the [[TV]] show (or [[rather]], their creators) [[sought]] to [[license]] McDonalds characters for their [[show]], but when [[McDonalds]] [[declined]] the TV [[show]] changed the [[characters]] [[slightly]] and [[passed]] it as their own. They even [[hired]] [[former]] [[employees]] of [[McDonalds]] [[ad]] agency and the [[voice]] [[actors]] to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. [[Search]] for Pufnstuf McDonaldland [[lawsuit]] and you'll find plenty of articles about it. I [[hating]] this [[exhibitions]] when I was a [[infantile]]. That was back in the day when [[kid]] [[shows]] [[traits]] actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General [[Americans]] Dialect we're [[uses]] to. [[Jacque]] Wild had a British [[focus]] and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others [[mention]], though, I never [[altogether]] [[fathom]] what the [[treat]] was with the witch [[desiring]] the [[piper]]. That [[invariably]] seemed [[freaky]] to me, [[admittedly]] because the flute just [[enraged]] me and I wouldn't have [[missing]] to any [[problem]] to [[taking]] it away!

[[Righteous]] a [[commentaries]] on the similarity of Pufnstuf to [[quickly]] 70s [[mcdonald]] commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf [[buzzed]] off McDonalds. [[For]] the height of [[mcdonald]] popularity, the [[TELEVISION]] show (or [[comparatively]], their creators) [[strove]] to [[licensing]] McDonalds characters for their [[shows]], but when [[mcdonald]] [[declines]] the TV [[shows]] changed the [[traits]] [[somewhat]] and [[voted]] it as their own. They even [[contracted]] [[previous]] [[employee]] of [[mcdonald]] [[advertisements]] agency and the [[voices]] [[protagonists]] to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. [[Researching]] for Pufnstuf McDonaldland [[cases]] and you'll find plenty of articles about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a writer or an critic...I'M just a student that has seen this movie few minutes ago....AND I want to thank people that worked on creating this movie!It is not the best or the most.... but it touched my heart...why???i would like to understand it myself...it is easy and accessible..it is a movie that makes you feel good after a bad day without any regret about the time wasted on watching it!It is about love and caring, about the life that we have but we miss it sometimes because of material stuff .......Look at all the time that we have but we miss it....why a fu*k do we do that???We need to live like were dying ...care about every second and remember:if we do good things-good things come back to us!HAppiness is real...and it has a special taste in New York...i love this town and the world the we live in!!!!thank you very much for the movie and sorry for my mistakes(English is my second language)... --------------------------------------------- Result 2293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Galaxy Express 999 (Ginga tetsudô Three-Nine). [[Made]] in 1979. Directed by Rintaro. Based on the [[original]] [[work]] by Leiji Matsumoto.

What little I know of the [[history]] of GALAXY EXPRESS 999, it was [[first]] published as a popular manga in 1970's and was created by Leiji Matsumoto. GE999 is set in the same Star Wars-type of space [[universe]] as Matsumoto's other [[famous]] space manga: [[CAPTAIN]] HARLOCK. [[In]] fact space [[pirate]] Harlock and other [[characters]] from that [[manga]] ([[including]] [[Queen]] Emeraldas and Tochirô Oyama) make appearances in GE999. GE999 was a [[success]] as a [[manga]] and was [[soon]] followed by [[also]] popular anime [[series]] which [[included]] over 100 [[episodes]]. It was [[aired]] in 1978. A year [[later]] [[came]] this anime [[film]], which isn't a sequel to the series, but summaries the main [[points]] of the [[story]] in two hours [[long]] [[movie]].

The story is set in [[unidentified]] Star Wars-type of [[future]] where journeying to [[different]] planets has become a [[possibility]]. People of the future can have themselves mechanical bodies in which they can live hundreds of [[years]], [[maybe]] even forever. The [[protagonist]], Tetsurô Hoshino, is a young [[boy]] who witnesses how a cruel [[Count]] Mecha, whose entire [[body]] is [[made]] of mechanical parts, [[kills]] Tetsurô's [[mother]]. Tetsurô swears revenge and is [[convinced]] that he can only [[achieve]] it by having a mechanical [[body]]. To [[obtain]] it he [[must]] [[travel]] to a far-away [[planet]] with space train [[Galaxy]] [[Express]] 999. [[However]], [[since]] Tetsurô [[comes]] from [[poverty]], he has no money to [[obtain]] the expensive [[ticket]]. By a [[chance]] coincidence he meets a [[beautiful]] [[young]] [[woman]], Maetel, who bears a [[resemblance]] to his [[dead]] [[mother]]. Maetel [[offers]] a [[ticket]] for Tetsurô on a condition that she [[accompanies]] him on his [[journey]]. And so the [[journey]] [[begins]]…

I first [[saw]] this [[film]] last October, about six months from now, and again yesterday. I feel that I [[must]] first [[tell]] about the [[thing]] that bothered me the most in this [[film]]: it [[seems]] very [[rushed]]. [[Then]] again what can you [[expect]] from 2 hours [[long]] [[movie]] that [[tries]] to [[tell]] the main [[points]] of over 100 [[episodes]] [[long]] [[series]]? Whatever the [[case]], the [[situations]] [[change]] with a fast [[speed]] and Tetsurô meets other [[important]] [[characters]] in the [[story]] mostly by pure chance. I feel makers should have either left something out or include extra 30 minutes.

However, there's no arguing that GE999 has deserved its place as an anime classic. The animation itself, very faithful to the style of Matsumoto's manga, is detailed and beautiful to watch. Even after almost 30 years of its release the animation has not become "out of date" but puts many later anime films in shame. The music through out the film is enjoyable to listen even if somewhat "old" these day (it was the 70's after all). I have not heard any English dub of this film so I can only comment the Japanese audio which is good. Voice actors give life to their characters, most memorable ones being Masako Nozawa (mainly known as the voice of Goku through out the entire Dragon Ball saga) as the excited and young Tetsurô, and Masako Ikeda as the calm and mysterious Maetel. The supporting characters are not left in shadows, but also have a life of their own, most memorable to me being waitress Claire.

The story itself is suitable for both those who are looking for an entertainment for couple of hours, as well as for those who try to find deeper messages. GE999 is an entertaining adventure film but can also be seen as Tetsurô's journey from boyhood to manhood. The whole film is told from his point of view, so we are forced to feel what he feels. I think many people can relate to Tetsurô, for despite the fantasy elements, he is a very realistic character: young, hot headed, awkward and naive. We follow him as he starts to see differences between humans and machines and come to conclusion whether he wants the mechanical body or not. Maetel on the other hand stays as a mystery in the film and even in the end, when she reveals who and what she really is, it doesn't much answer to anything. Maetel can be seen as a dream of a growing young man, always close but just out of reach.

It's is the strange yet beautiful relationship between Tetsurô and Maetel that still awakes talking and questions, and fascinates after the decades. People have argued if their relationship is that of a two friends, of mother and son, or of two possible lovers (which wakes a lot of critique since Maetel's age is unknown and Tetsurô hasn't even reached his puberty yet). Without any means to sound deep, I think the best term to describe them is "soul mates". There is no question that the two feel devotion, caring and love for each others, yet it goes beyond that of friendship, family and lovers. I think that if their relationship would be stuffed in any of those categories, it would take something out of the whole film and of the characters. The ending scene, even if you already know what is going to happen, is still very touching and memorable.

All in all, despite the rushing of plot and some corny scenes, GALAXY EXPRESS 999 holds its place as an anime classic amongst the films like Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA (1988) and Mamoru Oshii's GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995). The film is directed by Rintaro, who had previous experience of Leiji Matsumoto's works as he had worked in CAPTAIN HARLOCK series. Later Rinatro directed a wonderful looking METROPOLIS (2001) that also questions the difference between humans and machines.

GALAXY EXPRESS 999 (1979) is a classic that should be seen at least once by every anime fan. Galaxy Express 999 (Ginga tetsudô Three-Nine). [[Introduced]] in 1979. Directed by Rintaro. Based on the [[preliminary]] [[collaborate]] by Leiji Matsumoto.

What little I know of the [[story]] of GALAXY EXPRESS 999, it was [[outset]] published as a popular manga in 1970's and was created by Leiji Matsumoto. GE999 is set in the same Star Wars-type of space [[cosmos]] as Matsumoto's other [[prestigious]] space manga: [[COMMANDANT]] HARLOCK. [[During]] fact space [[hacker]] Harlock and other [[features]] from that [[mana]] ([[comprises]] [[Quinn]] Emeraldas and Tochirô Oyama) make appearances in GE999. GE999 was a [[accomplishments]] as a [[mana]] and was [[rapidly]] followed by [[similarly]] popular anime [[serial]] which [[inscribed]] over 100 [[spells]]. It was [[distributed]] in 1978. A year [[thereafter]] [[became]] this anime [[cinema]], which isn't a sequel to the series, but summaries the main [[dotted]] of the [[history]] in two hours [[lang]] [[films]].

The story is set in [[undisclosed]] Star Wars-type of [[next]] where journeying to [[multiple]] planets has become a [[chance]]. People of the future can have themselves mechanical bodies in which they can live hundreds of [[ages]], [[possibly]] even forever. The [[actor]], Tetsurô Hoshino, is a young [[boys]] who witnesses how a cruel [[Tally]] Mecha, whose entire [[organs]] is [[accomplished]] of mechanical parts, [[killings]] Tetsurô's [[mothers]]. Tetsurô swears revenge and is [[persuaded]] that he can only [[obtain]] it by having a mechanical [[organs]]. To [[obtained]] it he [[needs]] [[voyages]] to a far-away [[planets]] with space train [[Galactic]] [[Expressing]] 999. [[Instead]], [[because]] Tetsurô [[arises]] from [[needy]], he has no money to [[obtained]] the expensive [[tickets]]. By a [[possibilities]] coincidence he meets a [[delightful]] [[youthful]] [[daughters]], Maetel, who bears a [[likeness]] to his [[deceased]] [[mummy]]. Maetel [[offerings]] a [[tickets]] for Tetsurô on a condition that she [[accompaniment]] him on his [[voyages]]. And so the [[trip]] [[starts]]…

I first [[noticed]] this [[cinema]] last October, about six months from now, and again yesterday. I feel that I [[ought]] first [[say]] about the [[stuff]] that bothered me the most in this [[cinematography]]: it [[looks]] very [[harried]]. [[Later]] again what can you [[awaited]] from 2 hours [[lengthy]] [[cinema]] that [[strives]] to [[telling]] the main [[dot]] of over 100 [[bouts]] [[longue]] [[serials]]? Whatever the [[instance]], the [[instances]] [[changed]] with a fast [[accelerates]] and Tetsurô meets other [[principal]] [[personages]] in the [[histories]] mostly by pure chance. I feel makers should have either left something out or include extra 30 minutes.

However, there's no arguing that GE999 has deserved its place as an anime classic. The animation itself, very faithful to the style of Matsumoto's manga, is detailed and beautiful to watch. Even after almost 30 years of its release the animation has not become "out of date" but puts many later anime films in shame. The music through out the film is enjoyable to listen even if somewhat "old" these day (it was the 70's after all). I have not heard any English dub of this film so I can only comment the Japanese audio which is good. Voice actors give life to their characters, most memorable ones being Masako Nozawa (mainly known as the voice of Goku through out the entire Dragon Ball saga) as the excited and young Tetsurô, and Masako Ikeda as the calm and mysterious Maetel. The supporting characters are not left in shadows, but also have a life of their own, most memorable to me being waitress Claire.

The story itself is suitable for both those who are looking for an entertainment for couple of hours, as well as for those who try to find deeper messages. GE999 is an entertaining adventure film but can also be seen as Tetsurô's journey from boyhood to manhood. The whole film is told from his point of view, so we are forced to feel what he feels. I think many people can relate to Tetsurô, for despite the fantasy elements, he is a very realistic character: young, hot headed, awkward and naive. We follow him as he starts to see differences between humans and machines and come to conclusion whether he wants the mechanical body or not. Maetel on the other hand stays as a mystery in the film and even in the end, when she reveals who and what she really is, it doesn't much answer to anything. Maetel can be seen as a dream of a growing young man, always close but just out of reach.

It's is the strange yet beautiful relationship between Tetsurô and Maetel that still awakes talking and questions, and fascinates after the decades. People have argued if their relationship is that of a two friends, of mother and son, or of two possible lovers (which wakes a lot of critique since Maetel's age is unknown and Tetsurô hasn't even reached his puberty yet). Without any means to sound deep, I think the best term to describe them is "soul mates". There is no question that the two feel devotion, caring and love for each others, yet it goes beyond that of friendship, family and lovers. I think that if their relationship would be stuffed in any of those categories, it would take something out of the whole film and of the characters. The ending scene, even if you already know what is going to happen, is still very touching and memorable.

All in all, despite the rushing of plot and some corny scenes, GALAXY EXPRESS 999 holds its place as an anime classic amongst the films like Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA (1988) and Mamoru Oshii's GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995). The film is directed by Rintaro, who had previous experience of Leiji Matsumoto's works as he had worked in CAPTAIN HARLOCK series. Later Rinatro directed a wonderful looking METROPOLIS (2001) that also questions the difference between humans and machines.

GALAXY EXPRESS 999 (1979) is a classic that should be seen at least once by every anime fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 2294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] My [[mother]] and I were on our way home from a [[trip]] up to the North [[East]] ([[mainly]] Massachusetts) when we decided to take a [[little]] [[detour]] a attend a film [[festival]] in Boston. Now, I don't know much about [[film]] so I thought this might be a bit educational. The [[first]] movie we [[saw]] was this one, THE ROMEO [[DIVISION]]. Now, I don't know about you but I [[thought]] this was [[great]]! I'm from Texas and where I come from we don't [[see]] too [[many]] motion [[pictures]] so this was a [[pleasant]] [[surprise]]. My [[mother]] [[insisted]] that it was too violent, but said that I didn't know much about what she was [[saying]] but this was a [[great]] [[picture]]. I was [[shocked]] by the [[fight]] [[sequences]] they were great. Also, I am a big fan when the good guys [[win]] so I was [[thrilled]] when Romeo [[ladies]] [[killed]] all of the [[bad]] guys. This was [[true]] [[brilliance]]. I'm not sure when it's getting released on video but if you [[get]] the chance you should [[check]] it out. I [[think]] you'll be [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. A word to the wise though, it is [[rather]] violent and there [[many]] cuss words so you may not want to let your [[children]] watch. It's more for adults. My [[mothers]] and I were on our way home from a [[travel]] up to the North [[Southeast]] ([[basically]] Massachusetts) when we decided to take a [[petite]] [[diversion]] a attend a film [[fest]] in Boston. Now, I don't know much about [[movie]] so I thought this might be a bit educational. The [[outset]] movie we [[noticed]] was this one, THE ROMEO [[SPLITTING]]. Now, I don't know about you but I [[figured]] this was [[wondrous]]! I'm from Texas and where I come from we don't [[seeing]] too [[various]] motion [[imagery]] so this was a [[nice]] [[amaze]]. My [[mom]] [[emphasized]] that it was too violent, but said that I didn't know much about what she was [[arguing]] but this was a [[huge]] [[image]]. I was [[shock]] by the [[wrestling]] [[sequence]] they were great. Also, I am a big fan when the good guys [[won]] so I was [[excited]] when Romeo [[madams]] [[assassinating]] all of the [[amiss]] guys. This was [[truthful]] [[luster]]. I'm not sure when it's getting released on video but if you [[got]] the chance you should [[verify]] it out. I [[believe]] you'll be [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. A word to the wise though, it is [[fairly]] violent and there [[countless]] cuss words so you may not want to let your [[kids]] watch. It's more for adults. --------------------------------------------- Result 2295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Harsh]], [[yes]], but I [[call]] 'em like I [[see]] 'em.

I [[saw]] this in the late 80's, and it was [[truly]] one of the most [[awful]], [[boring]] [[films]] I've ever [[forced]] myself to watch.

[[Yes]], the [[cinematography]] is [[lovely]]. The Czech [[settings]] are truly stunning. The political [[backdrop]] is enticing, but unlike [[similar]] "historically set" stories (e.[[g]]. _[[Dr]]. Zhivago_ (qv)), this one [[failed]] to [[make]] the politics relevant to the story, or even interesting.

[[Sure]], Olin and Binoche are [[beautiful]]. But this [[film]] manages to [[make]] even "erotic" scenes plodding and [[slow]]. I'm all for romance, but this movie was so boring, I started hoping the Russians would shoot them all and put an end to my misery.

I'm sure if I'd read the [[book]], the story would have made a bit more sense. [[However]], life's too short to expend any more [[time]] on this one. [[Stringent]], [[yeah]], but I [[invitation]] 'em like I [[consults]] 'em.

I [[sawthe]] this in the late 80's, and it was [[honestly]] one of the most [[scary]], [[dull]] [[filmmaking]] I've ever [[coerced]] myself to watch.

[[Yep]], the [[movie]] is [[loverly]]. The Czech [[setups]] are truly stunning. The political [[context]] is enticing, but unlike [[equivalent]] "historically set" stories (e.[[gram]]. _[[Doktor]]. Zhivago_ (qv)), this one [[faulted]] to [[deliver]] the politics relevant to the story, or even interesting.

[[Persuaded]], Olin and Binoche are [[sumptuous]]. But this [[filmmaking]] manages to [[deliver]] even "erotic" scenes plodding and [[slowing]]. I'm all for romance, but this movie was so boring, I started hoping the Russians would shoot them all and put an end to my misery.

I'm sure if I'd read the [[books]], the story would have made a bit more sense. [[Nonetheless]], life's too short to expend any more [[period]] on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2296 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] If Fassbinder has [[made]] a [[worse]] [[film]], I sure don't want to see it! Anyone who complains that his films are too talky and claustrophobic should be forced to view this, to learn to appreciate the more spare style he opted for in excellent [[films]] like "The Bitter Tears Of [[Petra]] von Kant". This [[film]] bogs down with so much [[arty]], quasi-symbolic [[images]] it looks like a parody of an "art-film". The scene in the slaughterhouse and the scene where Elvira's prostitute friend channel-surfs for what seems like ten minutes are just two of the most glaring examples of what makes this film a real [[test]] of the viewer's endurance. But what really angers me about it are the few scenes which feature just Elvira and her ex-wife and/or her daughter. These are the only [[moments]] that [[display]] any real human emotion, and [[prove]] that at the [[core]] of this [[horrible]] film, there was an excellent film struggling to free itself. What a waste. If Fassbinder has [[effected]] a [[worst]] [[filmmaking]], I sure don't want to see it! Anyone who complains that his films are too talky and claustrophobic should be forced to view this, to learn to appreciate the more spare style he opted for in excellent [[movie]] like "The Bitter Tears Of [[Petr]] von Kant". This [[filmmaking]] bogs down with so much [[artsy]], quasi-symbolic [[image]] it looks like a parody of an "art-film". The scene in the slaughterhouse and the scene where Elvira's prostitute friend channel-surfs for what seems like ten minutes are just two of the most glaring examples of what makes this film a real [[essays]] of the viewer's endurance. But what really angers me about it are the few scenes which feature just Elvira and her ex-wife and/or her daughter. These are the only [[times]] that [[illustrating]] any real human emotion, and [[proves]] that at the [[nub]] of this [[scary]] film, there was an excellent film struggling to free itself. What a waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 2297 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Knowing how old a film is, [[ought]] to [[prepare]] the viewer for a few things, and, with those things in mind, perhaps the movie'll be more [[tolerable]]. So it was when I watched [[Revolt]] of the [[Zombies]]. The heavy reliance on [[tedious]] [[dialogue]] and [[corny]] [[movements]] should be expected, as should the primitiveness (or [[absence]]) of special effects in those days. A [[great]] deal is asked from the imagination of the [[onlooker]] - maybe too much, in this case. And the plot isn't [[easy]] to follow: Some zombiefied [[southeast]] [[Asian]] soldiers in WWI [[performed]] very admirably. Although skeptical as to why, if [[true]], the explanation should [[stay]] out of the [[wrong]] hands, so, off goes a [[group]] to archaeologically [[investigate]]. The [[key]] to long-distance hypnosis is [[learned]] by a member of the [[expedition]], who uses it to, [[among]] other purposes, temporarily dispense with the beau of the gal for whom he has the hots. To prove his love for her, he gives up his hold on [[everybody]], which he shouldn't have done 'cause, once they're all unzombiefied, many want to kill him so that he'll never control them again. Below average, even with [[precautionary]] forethought. Recommended for only the [[extremely]] [[patient]]. Knowing how old a film is, [[owe]] to [[preparation]] the viewer for a few things, and, with those things in mind, perhaps the movie'll be more [[acceptable]]. So it was when I watched [[Rebel]] of the [[Walkers]]. The heavy reliance on [[monotonous]] [[dialog]] and [[mundane]] [[movement]] should be expected, as should the primitiveness (or [[lacks]]) of special effects in those days. A [[marvellous]] deal is asked from the imagination of the [[viewer]] - maybe too much, in this case. And the plot isn't [[uncomplicated]] to follow: Some zombiefied [[east]] [[Asiatic]] soldiers in WWI [[effected]] very admirably. Although skeptical as to why, if [[real]], the explanation should [[staying]] out of the [[flawed]] hands, so, off goes a [[groups]] to archaeologically [[investigates]]. The [[principal]] to long-distance hypnosis is [[learns]] by a member of the [[sent]], who uses it to, [[between]] other purposes, temporarily dispense with the beau of the gal for whom he has the hots. To prove his love for her, he gives up his hold on [[somebody]], which he shouldn't have done 'cause, once they're all unzombiefied, many want to kill him so that he'll never control them again. Below average, even with [[preemptive]] forethought. Recommended for only the [[insanely]] [[ill]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2298 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely wonderful drama and Ros is top notch...I highly recommend this movie. Her performance, in my opinion, was Academy Award material! The only real sad fact here is that Universal hasn't seen to it that this movie was ever available on any video format, whether it be tape or DVD. They are ignoring a VERY good movie. But Universal has little regard for its library on DVD, which is sad. If you get the chance to see this somewhere (not sure why it is rarely even run on cable), see it! I won't go into the story because I think most people would rather have an opinion on the film, and too many "reviewers" spend hours writing about the story, which is available anywhere.

a 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2299 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a very bad western mainly because it is historically inaccurate. It looks as if it were shot on a back lot in California instead of where Jack Slade lived and died, Idaho, Colorado Territories, and Montana. It fictionalizes everything that is known about this mysterious 'bad man,' 'good man.' The script is horrible; there is very little direction, and lousy acting. Dorothy Malone is completely wasted as his wife. Mark Steven never seems to know how to portray this mysterious Jack Slade. In real life, Jack Slade was a very good stage line superintendent. He was feared by his local townsmen for his hard drinking. When drunk he would start fights and cause other problems in Virginia City, Montana. To insure that he could never terrorize them again, vigilantes lynched Jack Slade after he ignored their warning to leave town immediately. This is a horrible movie. I can not recommend anyone to watch this movie other than to see how Hollywood butches history at will, even to this day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The first von Trier movie i've ever seen was [[breaking]] the [[waves]]. [[Sure]] a nice [[movie]] but it [[definitely]] stands in the shadow of europa. Europa [[tells]] a story of a [[young]] German-American who wants to experience Germany just after the second world war. He [[takes]] a [[job]] that his uncle has [[arranged]] for him as a purser on a luxues train. Because of his [[job]], he [[travels]] all through an [[almost]] [[totally]] destroyed germany, meeting with the [[killing]] of traitors, and hunt for former nazi party members. The society is suffering from corruption. His uncle has narrowed his conciousness by focussing on the [[job]] he has also as a purser on the train. By coincidence the [[main]] character [[get]] [[involved]] in bombing and [[terrorism]] by a group [[called]] 'werewolves' they put pressure on him to [[help]] them [[placing]] [[bombs]] on trains. The [[atmosphere]] is [[astounding]]. The [[viewer]] is taken from scene to scene by a [[man]] attempting to put the [[viewer]] under hypnosis and then counting to wake you up in a new scene. [[Just]] when you [[think]] you've [[seen]] a [[lot]]!!!!!!! [[europe]]!! The first von Trier movie i've ever seen was [[rupture]] the [[airwaves]]. [[Convinced]] a nice [[movies]] but it [[surely]] stands in the shadow of europa. Europa [[says]] a story of a [[youth]] German-American who wants to experience Germany just after the second world war. He [[pick]] a [[labour]] that his uncle has [[organise]] for him as a purser on a luxues train. Because of his [[labour]], he [[travelling]] all through an [[roughly]] [[fully]] destroyed germany, meeting with the [[killings]] of traitors, and hunt for former nazi party members. The society is suffering from corruption. His uncle has narrowed his conciousness by focussing on the [[employment]] he has also as a purser on the train. By coincidence the [[principal]] character [[obtain]] [[implicated]] in bombing and [[terrorists]] by a group [[termed]] 'werewolves' they put pressure on him to [[aid]] them [[mise]] [[bombings]] on trains. The [[mood]] is [[breathtaking]]. The [[viewfinder]] is taken from scene to scene by a [[dawg]] attempting to put the [[viewfinder]] under hypnosis and then counting to wake you up in a new scene. [[Mere]] when you [[believing]] you've [[watched]] a [[batches]]!!!!!!! [[eu]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Personally I think this show [[looks]] pretty cheaply [[made]]. Some of the [[actors]] are [[terrible]]. They over do it & [[seem]] [[fake]]. I can always [[tell]] how it's [[going]] to [[end]] within the first 10 minutes or [[less]] of watching because they make it so transparently [[clear]]. It's not very well written [[either]]. I love to watch it to [[laugh]] at it. You [[know]] the [[saying]] "It's so [[bad]] that it's good?" [[Well]], that saying applies to this show. I also [[like]] to watch just to [[see]] if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to [[end]]. [[So]] far I've been right [[every]] [[time]]. It's like a [[little]] [[game]] that I play. It's nice when you are [[bored]] & you feel like [[laughing]] at [[something]]. Personally I think this show [[seems]] pretty cheaply [[introduced]]. Some of the [[players]] are [[horrible]]. They over do it & [[appears]] [[untruthful]]. I can always [[say]] how it's [[go]] to [[ending]] within the first 10 minutes or [[fewest]] of watching because they make it so transparently [[definite]]. It's not very well written [[neither]]. I love to watch it to [[laughs]] at it. You [[savoir]] the [[arguing]] "It's so [[negative]] that it's good?" [[Good]], that saying applies to this show. I also [[adores]] to watch just to [[behold]] if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to [[ending]]. [[Thus]] far I've been right [[each]] [[times]]. It's like a [[scant]] [[gaming]] that I play. It's nice when you are [[drilled]] & you feel like [[kidding]] at [[anything]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A terrible [[film]] which is [[supposed]] to be an [[independent]] one. It [[needed]] some dependence on something.

This totally [[miserable]] film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the [[wonderful]] [[film]] "Crash?" If so, this film crashed [[entirely]].

There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running [[around]] and throwing [[rocks]] into buses and cars which [[obviously]] cause mayhem.

The [[film]] is just too [[choppy]] to [[work]]. One [[woman]] loses her husband after 14 years to another while her [[younger]] [[sister]] is [[ripped]] off by a [[suitor]]. This causes the former [[sister]] to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older [[sister]] also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.

Then, we have 3 losers who [[purchase]] masks to [[rob]] a bank. [[Obviously]], the robbery goes awry but there doesn't [[seem]] to be any [[punishment]] for the crooks. [[Perhaps]], the [[punishment]] should have been on the [[writers]] for [[failure]] to create a cohesive film. A terrible [[filmmaking]] which is [[presumed]] to be an [[autonomous]] one. It [[required]] some dependence on something.

This totally [[sorrowful]] film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the [[wondrous]] [[filmmaking]] "Crash?" If so, this film crashed [[altogether]].

There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running [[nearly]] and throwing [[jolts]] into buses and cars which [[manifestly]] cause mayhem.

The [[filmmaking]] is just too [[tumultuous]] to [[working]]. One [[daughters]] loses her husband after 14 years to another while her [[youngest]] [[sisters]] is [[torn]] off by a [[beau]]. This causes the former [[sisters]] to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older [[sisters]] also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.

Then, we have 3 losers who [[bought]] masks to [[stealing]] a bank. [[Manifestly]], the robbery goes awry but there doesn't [[appears]] to be any [[punishments]] for the crooks. [[Possibly]], the [[chastisement]] should have been on the [[authors]] for [[flaw]] to create a cohesive film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2303 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] [[When]] I was [[kid]] back in the 1970s a local [[theatre]] had Children's Matinees [[every]] [[Saturday]] and [[Sunday]] afternoon (anybody [[remember]] those?). They [[showed]] this [[thing]] one year around Christmas [[time]]. Me and some friends went to [[see]] it. I [[expected]] a cool Santa [[Claus]] movie. What I [[got]] was a [[terribly]] dubbed (you can [[tell]]) and truly creepy [[movie]].

Something about Santa Claus and Merlin the Magician (don't [[ask]] me what those two are doing in the same [[movie]]) fighting Satan (some joker in a silly devil [[costume]] complete with horns!). The images had me [[cringing]] in my [[seat]]. I [[always]] [[found]] Santa [[spooky]] to begin with so that didn't [[help]]. The [[guy]] in the Satan suit didn't help. But what [[REALLY]] horrified me were the [[wooden]] rein deers that [[pulled]] Santa's sled. When he [[wound]] them up and the creepy sound they [[made]] and the movements--I [[remember]] having nightmares about those [[things]]! All these years later I still [[remember]] walking out of that theatre more than a little disturbed by what I saw. My friends were sort of frightened by it too. I just saw an ad for it on TV and ALL those nightmares came roaring back. This is a creepy, disturbing little Christmas film that will probably scare the [[pants]] off any [[little]] [[kid]] who sees it. [[Avoid]] this one--unless you really want to [[punish]] your [[kids]]. This gets a 1. [[Whenever]] I was [[kids]] back in the 1970s a local [[cinema]] had Children's Matinees [[any]] [[Saturdays]] and [[Thursday]] afternoon (anybody [[remembering]] those?). They [[displayed]] this [[stuff]] one year around Christmas [[times]]. Me and some friends went to [[behold]] it. I [[projected]] a cool Santa [[Eaton]] movie. What I [[did]] was a [[surprisingly]] dubbed (you can [[told]]) and truly creepy [[cinema]].

Something about Santa Claus and Merlin the Magician (don't [[wondering]] me what those two are doing in the same [[filmmaking]]) fighting Satan (some joker in a silly devil [[costumes]] complete with horns!). The images had me [[wincing]] in my [[seats]]. I [[repeatedly]] [[discoveries]] Santa [[creepy]] to begin with so that didn't [[aids]]. The [[dude]] in the Satan suit didn't help. But what [[TRULY]] horrified me were the [[lumber]] rein deers that [[pulling]] Santa's sled. When he [[casualty]] them up and the creepy sound they [[accomplished]] and the movements--I [[remembers]] having nightmares about those [[items]]! All these years later I still [[remembering]] walking out of that theatre more than a little disturbed by what I saw. My friends were sort of frightened by it too. I just saw an ad for it on TV and ALL those nightmares came roaring back. This is a creepy, disturbing little Christmas film that will probably scare the [[shorts]] off any [[petit]] [[petit]] who sees it. [[Avoidance]] this one--unless you really want to [[flog]] your [[juvenile]]. This gets a 1. --------------------------------------------- Result 2304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A slasher flick, made in the early 80's, has a curse on it which has anyone who tries to finish it turning up dead. Years later, a group of film students attempted to complete the movie - also resurrecting the films deadly curse. Great idea for a film, but sadly 'Cut' is just another wasted opportunity.

Unfortunately Australia hasn't had the world's best track record when it comes to horror. 'Razorback' (1984) was an out and out dud as was 'Holwing III' (1987), which was half an American film anyway. As for our foray into comedy-horror, 'Body Melt' (1993) is best left forgotten. The problem with 'Cut' is that the makers trying to create a clever horror satire a la 'Scream' (1996) but have no insight into the genre or what makes it work. And although this sounds weird me saying this about a slasher film but what 'Cut' really lacks is any "heart". Sure it follows the basic "rules" established by 'Scream', but it doesn't want to play with the formula, instead it goes for a cardboard copy of the earlier.

The killer, Scarman, is probably one of the most boring and uncharismatic villains in horror movie history. His endless barrage awkwardly, lame one-liners would make the dialogue of a porno seem like Shakespeare. The cast never seem like their fully involved and look like their just waiting for a shoot to be over so they can collect their pay checks. And the feel of the film is like it's deliberately trying not to be creepy; looking more like an episode of 'Neighbors' or 'Heartbreak High'. By the way, those attempts at MTV style, hyper-cinema during the "research" sequence just look lame, dated and out of place.

If Australia ever gets a chance to do horror again (Which I hope we still do) maybe we should take a leaf from the 'Mad Max' (1979) book. Instead of trying to copy the U.S. we should be trying our own take on the genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 2305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really enjoyed this little movie. It's a moving film about struggle, sacrifice and especially the bonds of friendship between different peoples (the child actor who plays Miki is especially good). There's so many large scale impersonal films set around WW2, that this convincingly told little story is a real break from the norm, and an original one at that. I'll also add that this film is far from boring, very far!! Of course the Horses are wonderful and the scenery breathtaking. To anyone who really treats their animal as part of the family (I do), you'll find this film especially rewarding. Recommended to movie fans who look for something a little different. --------------------------------------------- Result 2306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very ordinary made-for-tv product, "Tyson" attempts to be a serious biopic while stretching the moments of angst for effect, fast forwarding through the esoterics of the corrupt sport of boxing, and muddling the sensationalistic stuff which is the only thing which makes Tyson even remotely interesting. A lukewarm watch at best which more likely to appeal to the general public than to boxing fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2307 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kenny Doughty as Jed Willis is sexier in this role than any male porn star, even though he keeps his pants on.

The movie tore at my heart reminding me of the intensity of the big explosive love of my life. I don't think I can think of another movie, except perhaps Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet that captures that giddy joy that well.

The other draw of the movie is the very English eccentric characters enjoying the scandal vicariously. In that sense it is much the same appeal as Midsomer Murder or a Miss Marple mystery, without the mayhem.

This is a great antidote to the mock horror currently popular in the USA an any relationships between people of different ages. --------------------------------------------- Result 2308 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A masterpiece.

Thus it is, possibly, not for everyone.

The camera work, acting, directing and everything else is unique, original, superb in every way - and very different from the trash we are sadly used to getting.

Summer Phoenix creates a deep, believable and intriguing Esther Kahn. As everything else in this film, her acting is unique - it is completely her own - neither "British" nor "American" nor anything else I have ever seen. There is something mesmerizing about it.

The lengthy, unbroken, natural shots are wonderful, reminding us that we have become too accustomed to a few restricted ways of shooting and editing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2309 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] a time of [[magic]], [[barbarians]] and [[demons]] [[abound]] a [[diabolical]] [[tyrant]] named Nekhron and his [[mother]] [[Queen]] Juliane who [[lives]] in the [[realm]] of [[ice]] and wants to [[conquer]] the [[region]] of fire ruled by the [[King]] Jerol but when his [[beautiful]] [[daughter]] Princess Teegra has been [[kidnapped]] by Nekhron's [[goons]], a warrior named Larn [[must]] [[protect]] her and [[must]] [[defeat]] Nekhron from [[taking]] over the world and the kingdom with the [[help]] of an avenger named Darkwolf.

A [[nicely]] [[done]] and [[excellent]] [[underrated]] animated [[fantasy]] [[epic]] that [[combines]] live [[actors]] with animation traced over them ( rotoscoping), it's [[Ralph]] Bakshi's second [[best]] [[movie]] only with "American [[Pop]]" being number one and "[[Heavy]] Traffic" being third and "Wizards" being fourth. It's [[certainly]] [[better]] than his "Cool [[World]]" or "[[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]", the artwork is [[designed]] by [[famed]] artist Frank Farzetta and the [[animation]] has good [[coloring]] and there's [[also]] a hottie for the [[guys]].

I [[highly]] recommend this [[movie]] to [[fantasy]] and animation lovers everywhere [[especially]] the [[new]] 2-Disc Limited Edition [[DVD]] from Blue Underground.

[[Also]] recommended: "The Black Cauldron", "The Dark Crystal", "Conan The Barbarian", "The Wizard of Oz", " Rock & Rule", "Wizards", "Heavy [[Metal]]", "Starchaser: Legend of Orin", "[[Fantastic]] [[Planet]]", " Princess Mononoke", " Nausicca: Valley of the [[Wind]]", " Conan The [[Destroyer]]", " Willow", " The Princess Bride", "[[Lord]] of the [[Rings]] ( 1978)", " The [[Sword]] in The Stone", " Excalibur", " Army of Darkness", " Krull", "Dragonheart", " [[King]] [[Arthur]]", " The Hobbit", " Return of the King ( 1980)", "Conquest", " American [[Pop]]", " [[Jason]] and The Argonauts", " [[Clash]] of the [[Titans]]", " The Last Unicorn", " The [[Secret]] of NIMH", "The [[Flight]] of [[Dragons]]", " Hercules (Disney)", " Legend", " The Chronicles of Narnia", " [[Harry]] Potter and The Goblet of Fire". [[During]] a time of [[hallucinogenic]], [[heathens]] and [[warlocks]] [[aplenty]] a [[satanic]] [[oppressive]] named Nekhron and his [[mum]] [[Quinn]] Juliane who [[iife]] in the [[sphere]] of [[icing]] and wants to [[defeat]] the [[zoning]] of fire ruled by the [[Emperor]] Jerol but when his [[wondrous]] [[fille]] Princess Teegra has been [[abducted]] by Nekhron's [[morons]], a warrior named Larn [[needs]] [[safeguards]] her and [[needs]] [[overpower]] Nekhron from [[adopting]] over the world and the kingdom with the [[supporting]] of an avenger named Darkwolf.

A [[kindly]] [[accomplished]] and [[brilliant]] [[underestimated]] animated [[utopia]] [[manas]] that [[amalgamated]] live [[actresses]] with animation traced over them ( rotoscoping), it's [[Ralf]] Bakshi's second [[nicest]] [[films]] only with "American [[Pappy]]" being number one and "[[Weighty]] Traffic" being third and "Wizards" being fourth. It's [[admittedly]] [[best]] than his "Cool [[Global]]" or "[[God]] of the [[Piercings]]", the artwork is [[destined]] by [[commemorated]] artist Frank Farzetta and the [[animate]] has good [[colouring]] and there's [[further]] a hottie for the [[grooms]].

I [[heavily]] recommend this [[films]] to [[fantasia]] and animation lovers everywhere [[primarily]] the [[novel]] 2-Disc Limited Edition [[DVDS]] from Blue Underground.

[[Similarly]] recommended: "The Black Cauldron", "The Dark Crystal", "Conan The Barbarian", "The Wizard of Oz", " Rock & Rule", "Wizards", "Heavy [[Minerals]]", "Starchaser: Legend of Orin", "[[Outstanding]] [[Planetary]]", " Princess Mononoke", " Nausicca: Valley of the [[Windmill]]", " Conan The [[Destroyers]]", " Willow", " The Princess Bride", "[[God]] of the [[Ringing]] ( 1978)", " The [[Sabres]] in The Stone", " Excalibur", " Army of Darkness", " Krull", "Dragonheart", " [[Emperor]] [[Arturo]]", " The Hobbit", " Return of the King ( 1980)", "Conquest", " American [[Dad]]", " [[Jas]] and The Argonauts", " [[Skirmish]] of the [[Giants]]", " The Last Unicorn", " The [[Confidentiality]] of NIMH", "The [[Airplane]] of [[Dragoons]]", " Hercules (Disney)", " Legend", " The Chronicles of Narnia", " [[Hari]] Potter and The Goblet of Fire". --------------------------------------------- Result 2310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

One of the best films I've ever seen. Robert Duvall's performance was excellent and outstanding. He did a wonderful job of making a character really come to life. His character was so convincing, it made me almost think I were in the theater watching it live, I give it 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 2311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm easily entertained. I enjoyed "[[Hot]] Shots" and "The [[Naked]] Gun" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even [[managed]] to [[enjoy]] most Pauly Shore [[movies]]. There is only one movie that I've [[seen]] that I can [[honestly]] [[say]] was [[bad]]...and this was it. It's been a while since I've [[seen]] it, but I do [[remember]] sitting in the [[theater]] [[thinking]], "This is a [[dumb]] [[movie]]. Why did I [[see]] this?" It's [[honestly]] the only [[movie]] that I cannot [[recommend]]. I'm easily entertained. I enjoyed "[[Caliente]] Shots" and "The [[Bare]] Gun" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even [[administered]] to [[enjoys]] most Pauly Shore [[kino]]. There is only one movie that I've [[saw]] that I can [[truthfully]] [[says]] was [[unfavorable]]...and this was it. It's been a while since I've [[saw]] it, but I do [[reminisce]] sitting in the [[movies]] [[think]], "This is a [[stupid]] [[filmmaking]]. Why did I [[consults]] this?" It's [[candidly]] the only [[filmmaking]] that I cannot [[recommended]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I screamed my head off because seeing this movie was my first movie going experience ever at some 13 months old. I remember it being incredibly bloody and it made me angry. I watched it again on tv a few years ago. Big mistake -- the acting is wooden, the plot non-existent and the movie lacks merit unless 23 year-old T & A is what gets you going... 0/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 2313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Recap]]: Something mysteriously dense that transmits radio signals is [[discovered]] in the ice of [[Antarctica]]. The mysterious block is dug out and brought to a research station on Antarctica. [[Julian]] [[Rome]], a former SETI-worker, is brought in to decipher the message. Problem is that one of the [[researchers]] is a [[old]] girlfriend of his, and the situation quickly turns awkward, especially since the other [[female]] researchers [[practically]] throw themselves at him. And the [[block]] of ice with the thing [[inside]] is melting [[unnaturally]] quickly. Soon the object is in the open. The mystery continues though as the object generates a huge amount of electricity. It is decided to open the object, but just before that is done, Julian decodes the signal. "Do not open". But too late, and the object explodes as it is finally breached, and two things unleashed on earth. The first is an alien, that had been dormant in the object, and the other is a virus that instantly kills the research staff. And Washington, that is suspiciously updated on this historic event, decides that those things can not be unleashed upon the earth. So a Russian nuclear submarine, carrying nuclear weapons is sent to Antarctica.

Comments: The movie holds a few surprises. One is Carl Lewis who surprisingly puts in a good acting performance, and the other is that the special effects that are beautiful, well worked through and a lot better than expected. [[Unfortunately]] the story holds a lot of surprises of its own, and this time not in a good way. Actually it is so full of plot holes that sometimes the movies seem to consist of almost randomly connected scenes. It is never really explained why Washington know so much, why Washington is able to command Russian submarines, why the object is in the Antarctic and has woken up now. It is really puzzling that the alien pod is transmitting in understandable English. Some might want to explain this with that the alien had been to Earth before and knew the language (and obviously chose English, why?). But then it is very confusing why the nice aliens that apparently want to save the Earth from the virus, send their "Do not open" message encoded! And finally the end is as open as an end can be.

The movie is a [[little]] entertaining but too much energy (from me) [[must]] be diverted to fill in the voids in the plot. Therefore the total impression of the [[movie]] is not too good.

3/10 [[Summarize]]: Something mysteriously dense that transmits radio signals is [[discovering]] in the ice of [[Antarctic]]. The mysterious block is dug out and brought to a research station on Antarctica. [[Juliana]] [[Romany]], a former SETI-worker, is brought in to decipher the message. Problem is that one of the [[scholar]] is a [[former]] girlfriend of his, and the situation quickly turns awkward, especially since the other [[daughters]] researchers [[almost]] throw themselves at him. And the [[bloc]] of ice with the thing [[inland]] is melting [[unusually]] quickly. Soon the object is in the open. The mystery continues though as the object generates a huge amount of electricity. It is decided to open the object, but just before that is done, Julian decodes the signal. "Do not open". But too late, and the object explodes as it is finally breached, and two things unleashed on earth. The first is an alien, that had been dormant in the object, and the other is a virus that instantly kills the research staff. And Washington, that is suspiciously updated on this historic event, decides that those things can not be unleashed upon the earth. So a Russian nuclear submarine, carrying nuclear weapons is sent to Antarctica.

Comments: The movie holds a few surprises. One is Carl Lewis who surprisingly puts in a good acting performance, and the other is that the special effects that are beautiful, well worked through and a lot better than expected. [[Regretfully]] the story holds a lot of surprises of its own, and this time not in a good way. Actually it is so full of plot holes that sometimes the movies seem to consist of almost randomly connected scenes. It is never really explained why Washington know so much, why Washington is able to command Russian submarines, why the object is in the Antarctic and has woken up now. It is really puzzling that the alien pod is transmitting in understandable English. Some might want to explain this with that the alien had been to Earth before and knew the language (and obviously chose English, why?). But then it is very confusing why the nice aliens that apparently want to save the Earth from the virus, send their "Do not open" message encoded! And finally the end is as open as an end can be.

The movie is a [[scant]] entertaining but too much energy (from me) [[owes]] be diverted to fill in the voids in the plot. Therefore the total impression of the [[filmmaking]] is not too good.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2314 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Most college [[students]] find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the [[communities]] in which they [[study]] and live. Their [[conversations]] are held with their fellow [[students]] and the [[college]] faculty. Steven Greenstreet's [[documentary]] is a prime [[example]] of a [[disillusioned]] college student who judges the entire community based on [[limited]] [[contact]] with a [[small]] number of its [[members]].

The [[documentary]] [[focused]] on a [[small]] group of individuals who were [[portrayed]] as representing [[large]] [[groups]] of the [[population]]. As is usual, the people who scream the most [[get]] the most media attention. Other than its [[misrepresentation]] of the community in which the [[film]] was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.

Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is [[ridiculous]] to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals. Most college [[schoolchildren]] find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the [[community]] in which they [[investigating]] and live. Their [[conversation]] are held with their fellow [[pupil]] and the [[academia]] faculty. Steven Greenstreet's [[literature]] is a prime [[case]] of a [[frustrated]] college student who judges the entire community based on [[curtailed]] [[liaise]] with a [[petite]] number of its [[lawmakers]].

The [[documentation]] [[centered]] on a [[petite]] group of individuals who were [[depicted]] as representing [[gros]] [[panel]] of the [[populace]]. As is usual, the people who scream the most [[gets]] the most media attention. Other than its [[deception]] of the community in which the [[filmmaking]] was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.

Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is [[farcical]] to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals. --------------------------------------------- Result 2315 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, [[teenager]] Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the surrogate parent in charge. The Hamilton's move house a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The [[fact]] that his brother's & sister [[kidnap]], imprison & [[murder]] people in the basement doesn't [[help]] [[relax]] or calm Francis' nerves either. Francis know's something just isn't right & when he eventually finds out the truth things will never be the same again...

Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, [[enough]] said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've [[seen]] I thought The Hamiltons was complete [[total]] & [[utter]] [[crap]]. I [[found]] the character's really poor, very unlikable & the [[slow]] [[moving]] [[story]] [[failed]] to [[capture]] my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really [[big]] sustained build up to what's inside a [[cupboard]] thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The [[boring]] [[plot]] plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their [[money]] from to buy new [[houses]] since [[none]] of them seem to [[work]] (except David in a [[slaughterhouse]] & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been [[caught]] before now. The script tries to [[mix]] in every day drama with potent [[horror]] & it just does a [[terrible]] job of [[combining]] the two to the [[extent]] that [[neither]] aspect is [[memorable]] or effective. A really [[bad]] [[film]] that I am [[struggling]] to say [[anything]] good about.

Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.

Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.

The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all. The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, [[adolescence]] Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the surrogate parent in charge. The Hamilton's move house a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The [[facto]] that his brother's & sister [[kidnapping]], imprison & [[killings]] people in the basement doesn't [[aided]] [[mellow]] or calm Francis' nerves either. Francis know's something just isn't right & when he eventually finds out the truth things will never be the same again...

Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, [[suffice]] said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've [[saw]] I thought The Hamiltons was complete [[overall]] & [[total]] [[shit]]. I [[unearthed]] the character's really poor, very unlikable & the [[sluggish]] [[relocating]] [[saga]] [[faulted]] to [[caught]] my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really [[grande]] sustained build up to what's inside a [[closet]] thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The [[dull]] [[intrigue]] plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their [[cash]] from to buy new [[home]] since [[nos]] of them seem to [[collaborated]] (except David in a [[slaughterhouses]] & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been [[captured]] before now. The script tries to [[blended]] in every day drama with potent [[abomination]] & it just does a [[appalling]] job of [[merging]] the two to the [[magnitude]] that [[either]] aspect is [[unforgettable]] or effective. A really [[unfavourable]] [[cinematographic]] that I am [[combating]] to say [[something]] good about.

Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.

Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.

The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] [[Rachel]], [[Jo]], Hannah, Tina, [[Bradley]] and [[John]] are all on [[top]] [[form]] here. They [[deserve]] [[oscar]] [[nominations]] for their performances. I am a [[great]] fan of the tv [[show]] aswell. Their [[music]] [[rocks]] and they're all so [[talented]]! I am [[also]] a great [[exponent]] of [[SARCASM]]!!!!!!

[[IF]] YOU'RE AN S CLUB FAN DO NOT READ THIS!!!!!

The performances are [[terribly]] weak, the [[dialogue]] is [[terrible]] and the jokes are not even executed [[properly]] (i feel [[sorry]] for the [[director]]). The jokes are so [[unbelievably]] [[bad]] that 8 [[little]], passionate S Club fans weren't [[laughing]]. They [[thought]] they [[could]] do it better. And they did. They conquered the [[world]]. They [[became]] S Club Juniors. [[Paul]], "the fat, ugly one who [[started]] a mosh band" must be [[thanking]] his lucky [[stars]] that he left when he did. One of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. [[BEWARE]] OF THIS [[MOVIE]]! DO NOT [[GO]] [[AND]] [[SEE]] IT! YOU WON'T [[LAUGH]]! YOU WILL [[CRY]]! 0/10 RJT [[Rache]], [[Jojo]], Hannah, Tina, [[Bernardo]] and [[Giovanni]] are all on [[supreme]] [[forms]] here. They [[deserves]] [[oskar]] [[appoint]] for their performances. I am a [[prodigious]] fan of the tv [[spectacle]] aswell. Their [[musicians]] [[shakes]] and they're all so [[prodigy]]! I am [[further]] a great [[exhibitor]] of [[SATIRE]]!!!!!!

[[THOUGH]] YOU'RE AN S CLUB FAN DO NOT READ THIS!!!!!

The performances are [[surprisingly]] weak, the [[dialogues]] is [[horrific]] and the jokes are not even executed [[sufficiently]] (i feel [[apologies]] for the [[headmaster]]). The jokes are so [[freakishly]] [[unfavourable]] that 8 [[petit]], passionate S Club fans weren't [[giggling]]. They [[think]] they [[did]] do it better. And they did. They conquered the [[globe]]. They [[was]] S Club Juniors. [[Paolo]], "the fat, ugly one who [[starts]] a mosh band" must be [[thank]] his lucky [[celebrity]] that he left when he did. One of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]]. [[ATTENTION]] OF THIS [[FILMMAKING]]! DO NOT [[GOING]] [[UND]] [[SEEING]] IT! YOU WON'T [[GIGGLING]]! YOU WILL [[OUTCRY]]! 0/10 RJT --------------------------------------------- Result 2317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i am totally addicted to this show. i can't wait till the week goes by to see the next showing. it's a great story line and it has the best actors and actresses on the show. i will tune in every week to watch it even if i am not home i always have my vcr set to tape monarch cove. simon rex is the best actor on the show. it is suspenseful and exciting. i think this show should stay on the air and i believe everyone should tune in to watch it. i saw the very first episode and actually i wasn't going to watch it but i was watching lifetime one day and i decided to watch it because it was on and i absolutely love it and right now it's my favorite show. i am really mean it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm no fan of newer movies, but this one was a real pleasure to watch. Adults and children could watch it together - how unusual! My aunt liked it, too. It had laughter, tears, love, adventure, special effects, good actors - and a talking parrot. It reminded me of a favourite, The Wizard of Oz. The hero, Paulie, an intelligent parrot, is separated from his home and family and goes through many adventures, temptations and disappointments, always keeping in mind his resolution to find his friend, Marie. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Comes this heartwarming tale of hope. Hope that you'll never have to endure anything this awful again. *cough* Razzie award *cough*

I disliked this movie because it was unfunny, predictable and inane. While watching I felt like I was in a psychology experiment to determine how low movie standards could get before people complained. When I requested my money back at the end of the movie I was informed that because I watched the whole thing 'I wasn't entitled to reimbursement'. I was told by the assistant manager that several people had complained and gotten refunds already though.

The movie summary is pretty basic. The midget thief steals a diamond and the poses as a baby to elude police. Underneath this clever outline however, lies a repertoire of original, fresh and hilarious skits. Or not.

Ask yourself the following: Do you like to see people getting hit by pans? Do you like fart jokes? Do you like to see midgets posing as babies threatened with a thermometer in the anus? Do you like tired racial jokes? Do you think babies say 'goo goo goo goo goo gaa gaa'? Do you drool?

If you answered 'yes' to any of the above then this movie is definitely for you. Although it has been billed in some places as 'The Worst Movie of the Decade', there is probably a movie or 2 that are worse...somewhere. I can't say for sure. I gave this movie 2 stars because we all know a review with only one star would indicate bias on the part of the reviewer and then the review wouldn't be taken seriously.

This lowbrow comedy is intended for a less intelligent audience and I cannot in good conscience recommend it to anyone. Save your money for something funny.

Respect --------------------------------------------- Result 2320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] What's with all the [[negative]] [[comments]]? [[After]] having seen this film for the first time [[tonight]], I can only say that this is a good holiday [[comedy]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day. When I [[saw]] that Drew (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the [[holidays]] alone, I wanted to cry. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. [[Also]], even though I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and [[Alicia]] (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me [[smile]] and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. [[Now]], in [[conclusion]], I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this good holiday [[comedy]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it. What's with all the [[injurious]] [[observations]]? [[Upon]] having seen this film for the first time [[sunday]], I can only say that this is a good holiday [[charade]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day. When I [[noticed]] that Drew (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the [[festivals]] alone, I wanted to cry. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. [[Moreover]], even though I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and [[Alice]] (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me [[smirk]] and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. [[Presently]], in [[conclusions]], I [[immeasurably]] [[recommending]] this good holiday [[comedian]] that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[William]] H. Macy is at his most [[sympathetic]] and compelling here as a hit-man and loving [[father]] who wants to [[step]] out of the family [[business]] without angering his overbearing [[parents]]. [[Treads]] [[much]] of the same territory as TV's "The Sopranos" in terms of the mid-life crisis of a criminal [[theme]] (here too he [[visits]] a [[shrink]]) but is [[still]] worth watching thanks to some [[taut]] direction from Brommel (I [[look]] forward to what this guy directs next), an [[excellent]] script, and all [[around]] [[great]] performances. Macy is excellent as [[always]]. This is [[probably]] his [[best]] role [[since]] "Fargo." Donald Sutherland is at his creepy [[best]] as the domineering father. Tracy Ullman [[gives]] a [[surprisingly]] [[riveting]] [[dramatic]] turn as Macy's wife. [[Young]] David Dorfman is [[excellent]] as Macy's [[bright]] and sensitive son ([[many]] of his lines sound ad-libbed and are [[wonderful]]). [[Even]] Neve Campell (who I [[usually]] find [[abhorrent]]) is [[compelling]] as the [[troubled]] young [[woman]] who [[captures]] Macy's [[eye]]. [[All]] of this is punctuated by a [[moving]] [[score]] and [[crisp]] [[pace]] that lead up to a predictable but [[still]] [[powerful]] climax and [[meaningful]] and [[touching]] aftermath. This film deserved a much wider [[release]], as I [[suspect]] it [[would]] have connected with audiences. [[Williams]] H. Macy is at his most [[likeable]] and compelling here as a hit-man and loving [[pere]] who wants to [[stride]] out of the family [[entrepreneurial]] without angering his overbearing [[parent]]. [[Caterpillars]] [[very]] of the same territory as TV's "The Sopranos" in terms of the mid-life crisis of a criminal [[subjects]] (here too he [[visitation]] a [[psychologist]]) but is [[yet]] worth watching thanks to some [[fraught]] direction from Brommel (I [[peek]] forward to what this guy directs next), an [[wondrous]] script, and all [[roughly]] [[wondrous]] performances. Macy is excellent as [[perpetually]]. This is [[potentially]] his [[nicest]] role [[because]] "Fargo." Donald Sutherland is at his creepy [[better]] as the domineering father. Tracy Ullman [[affords]] a [[incredibly]] [[exciting]] [[impressive]] turn as Macy's wife. [[Youths]] David Dorfman is [[awesome]] as Macy's [[shiny]] and sensitive son ([[several]] of his lines sound ad-libbed and are [[fantastic]]). [[Yet]] Neve Campell (who I [[fluently]] find [[hateful]]) is [[convincing]] as the [[choppy]] young [[girl]] who [[caught]] Macy's [[eyes]]. [[Entire]] of this is punctuated by a [[shifting]] [[scoring]] and [[crunchy]] [[rhythm]] that lead up to a predictable but [[nonetheless]] [[forceful]] climax and [[valid]] and [[affects]] aftermath. This film deserved a much wider [[frees]], as I [[suspicious]] it [[ought]] have connected with audiences. --------------------------------------------- Result 2322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a child I preferred the first Care Bear movie since this one seemed so dark. I always sat down and watched the first one. As I got older I learned to prefer this one. What I do think is that this film is too dark for infants, but as you get older you learn to treasure it since you understand it more, it doesn't seem as dark as it was back when you were a child.

This movie, in my opinion, is better than the first one, everything is so much deeper. It may contradict the first movie but you must ignore the first movie to watch this one. The cubs are just too adorable, I rewind that 'Flying My Colors' scene. I tend to annoy everyone by singing it.

The sound track is great! A big hand to Carol and Dean Parks. I love every song in this movie, I have downloaded them all and is all I am listening to, I'm listening to 'Our beginning' also known as 'Recalling' at the moment. I have always preferred this sound track to the first one, although I just totally love Carol Kings song in the first movie 'Care-A-Lot'.

I think the animation is great, the animation in both movies are fantastic. I was surprised when I sat down and watched it about 10 years later and saw that the animation for the time was excellent. It was really surprising.

There is not a lot of back up from other people to say that this movie is great, but it is. I do not think it is weird/strange. I think it is a wonderful movie.

Basically, this movie is about how the Care Bears came about and to defeat the Demon, Dark Heart. The end is surprising and again, beats any 'Pokemon Movie' with the Care Bears Moral issues. It leaves an effect on you. Again this movie can teach everyone at all ages about morality. --------------------------------------------- Result 2323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Ashley]] Judd, in an [[early]] role and I think her first [[starring]] role, [[shows]] her real-life [[rebellious]] nature in this slow-moving [[feminist]] soap opera. [[Wow]], is this a [[vehicle]] for [[political]] [[correctness]] and [[extreme]] Liberalism or what?

[[Being]] a [[staunch]] [[feminist]] in [[real]] [[life]], she [[must]] have [[cherished]] this [[script]]. [[No]] wonder Left Wing critic [[Roger]] Ebert [[loved]] this [[movie]]; it's right up his [[political]] [[alley]], too.

Unlike the reviewers here, I am [[glad]] Judd elevated herself from this [[moronic]] fluff to [[better]] [[roles]] in [[movies]] that [[entertained]], not [[preached]] the heavy-handed [[Liberal]] [[agenda]]. [[Ashlee]] Judd, in an [[swift]] role and I think her first [[featuring]] role, [[show]] her real-life [[insurgent]] nature in this slow-moving [[feminists]] soap opera. [[Ruff]], is this a [[vehicles]] for [[politician]] [[propriety]] and [[utmost]] Liberalism or what?

[[Ongoing]] a [[fervent]] [[feminism]] in [[veritable]] [[lives]], she [[owe]] have [[treasured]] this [[screenplay]]. [[None]] wonder Left Wing critic [[Roget]] Ebert [[worshiped]] this [[filmmaking]]; it's right up his [[politician]] [[alleyway]], too.

Unlike the reviewers here, I am [[gratified]] Judd elevated herself from this [[silly]] fluff to [[optimum]] [[functions]] in [[movie]] that [[distracted]], not [[preach]] the heavy-handed [[Liberalism]] [[programme]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Larry Burrows has the distinct feeling he's missing out on something. Ever since he missed a crucial baseball shot at school that cost the championship, he's been convinced his life would have turned out better had he made that shot. Then one night his car breaks down again. Walking into the nearest bar to wait for the tow truck, Larry happens upon barman Mike, who unbeknown to Larry is about to change his life for ever.......

The alternate life premise in cinema is hardly a new thing, stretching back to the likes of It's A Wonderful Life and showing no signs of abating with the quite recent Sandler vehicle that was Click. It's a genre that has produced very mixed results. Back in 1990 was this James Belushi led production, rarely mentioned when the said topic arises, it appears that it has largely been forgotten. Which is a shame since it oozes charm and is not short in the humour department. We know that we are being led to its ultimate message come the end, but it's a fun and enjoyable path to be led down. The film also serves notice to what a fine comedy actor James Belushi was. I mean if his style of smart quipping and larking exasperation isn't your thing,? then chances are you would avoid this film anyway. But for those engaged by the likes of Red Heat, K-9 and Taking Care of Business, well Mr. Destiny is right up your street. Along for the ride are Linda Hamilton, Michael Caine, Jon Lovitz, Hart Bochner, Jay O. Sanders, Rene Russo and Courteney Cox.

Mr. Destiny, pure escapist fun with a kicker of a message at its heart. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I read [[John]] Everingham's story [[years]] ago in Reader's Digest, and I remember thinking what a great [[movie]] it [[would]] [[make]]. And it probably would have been had [[Michael]] Landon never [[got]] his hands on it. As far as I'm [[concerned]], Landon was one of the [[worst]] [[actors]] on [[earth]], and his artistic [[license]] went way over the [[top]], similar to his [[massacre]] of the "[[Little]] [[House]]" [[book]] series is proof. The acting, for [[lack]] of a [[better]] word, is [[atrocious]], the [[screenplay]] sloppy, and there are more close-ups of Landon's [[puss]] than should be allowed.

This [[movie]] [[reflects]] Everingham's story as much as "[[Little]] [[House]] On The [[Prairie]]" [[reflects]] the [[books]] is was "[[based]]" on. It's just another [[vehicle]] to [[show]] off Landons [[horrendous]] [[hair]]. I read [[Jon]] Everingham's story [[ages]] ago in Reader's Digest, and I remember thinking what a great [[filmmaking]] it [[could]] [[deliver]]. And it probably would have been had [[Michel]] Landon never [[ai]] his hands on it. As far as I'm [[preoccupied]], Landon was one of the [[meanest]] [[protagonists]] on [[terra]], and his artistic [[permitting]] went way over the [[topped]], similar to his [[carnage]] of the "[[Petit]] [[Haus]]" [[cookbook]] series is proof. The acting, for [[scarcity]] of a [[optimum]] word, is [[outrageous]], the [[screenplays]] sloppy, and there are more close-ups of Landon's [[chickie]] than should be allowed.

This [[filmmaking]] [[reflect]] Everingham's story as much as "[[Petite]] [[Habitation]] On The [[Cimarron]]" [[reflecting]] the [[book]] is was "[[founded]]" on. It's just another [[automobiles]] to [[demonstrating]] off Landons [[awful]] [[hairdresser]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] The Last [[Hard]] Men [[finds]] [[James]] Coburn an outlaw doing a long [[sentence]] [[breaking]] free from a [[chain]] gang. Do he and his [[friends]] head for the Mexican [[border]] from [[jail]] and safety. [[No]] they don't because Coburn has a [[mission]] of revenge. To [[kill]] the [[peace]] [[officer]] who [[brought]] him in and in the process [[killed]] his [[woman]].

That peace [[officer]] is Charlton Heston who is now retired and he knows what Coburn is after. As he explains it to his daughter, [[Barbara]] Hershey, Coburn was holed up in a shack and was [[involved]] in a Waco like standoff. His Indian [[woman]] was [[killed]] in the hail of bullets [[fired]]. It's not something he's proud of, she was a [[collateral]] [[casualty]] in a manhunt.

Lest we feel sorry for Coburn he [[lets]] us [[know]] full well what an [[evil]] [[man]] he [[truly]] is. Heston is his usual stalwart [[hero]], but the acting [[honors]] in The Last [[Hard]] [[Men]] [[go]] to James Coburn. He [[blows]] everyone [[else]] off the screen when he's on.

Coburn [[gets]] the [[bright]] [[idea]] of making sure Heston trails him by kidnapping Hershey and taking her to an Indian [[reservation]] where the white [[authorities]] can't touch him. He knows that Heston has to [[make]] it personal then.

Coburn's gang [[includes]], [[Morgan]] Paull, Thalmus Rasulala, John Quade, Larry Wilcox, and [[Jorge]] Rivero. Heston has [[Chris]] Mitchum along who is his son-in-law to be.

The Last Hard Men is one [[nasty]] and [[brutal]] western. Andrew McLaglen directed it and I'm thinking it may have been a project originally [[intended]] for Sam Peckinpaugh. It sure [[shows]] a [[lot]] of his [[influence]] with the liberal use of [[slow]] motion to accentuate the violence. Of which there is a lot.

[[For]] a [[little]] Peckinpaugh [[lite]], The Last [[Hard]] [[Men]] is your film. The Last [[Dur]] Men [[discovers]] [[Jacques]] Coburn an outlaw doing a long [[condemnation]] [[breaching]] free from a [[string]] gang. Do he and his [[friend]] head for the Mexican [[boundary]] from [[brig]] and safety. [[Nos]] they don't because Coburn has a [[delegation]] of revenge. To [[killings]] the [[pacification]] [[officials]] who [[introduced]] him in and in the process [[assassinated]] his [[wife]].

That peace [[agent]] is Charlton Heston who is now retired and he knows what Coburn is after. As he explains it to his daughter, [[Barbarian]] Hershey, Coburn was holed up in a shack and was [[engaged]] in a Waco like standoff. His Indian [[women]] was [[assassinated]] in the hail of bullets [[sacked]]. It's not something he's proud of, she was a [[guaranty]] [[accidents]] in a manhunt.

Lest we feel sorry for Coburn he [[allow]] us [[savoir]] full well what an [[baleful]] [[dude]] he [[honestly]] is. Heston is his usual stalwart [[superhero]], but the acting [[honoring]] in The Last [[Stiff]] [[Man]] [[going]] to James Coburn. He [[strokes]] everyone [[further]] off the screen when he's on.

Coburn [[receives]] the [[glossy]] [[concept]] of making sure Heston trails him by kidnapping Hershey and taking her to an Indian [[reservations]] where the white [[administrations]] can't touch him. He knows that Heston has to [[deliver]] it personal then.

Coburn's gang [[involves]], [[Morgana]] Paull, Thalmus Rasulala, John Quade, Larry Wilcox, and [[Georges]] Rivero. Heston has [[Chrissy]] Mitchum along who is his son-in-law to be.

The Last Hard Men is one [[nauseating]] and [[barbarous]] western. Andrew McLaglen directed it and I'm thinking it may have been a project originally [[conceived]] for Sam Peckinpaugh. It sure [[exposition]] a [[lots]] of his [[repercussions]] with the liberal use of [[slower]] motion to accentuate the violence. Of which there is a lot.

[[During]] a [[petite]] Peckinpaugh [[leyte]], The Last [[Difficult]] [[Man]] is your film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2327 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One is tempted to define the genre of Gert de Graaff's movie as `event of the thought' following the example of Merab Mamardashvili. The nominal storyline is a certain Bart Klever's torturous quest for that ephemeral substance which constitutes the essence of personality. The script for his new movie is taking shape simultaneously on his computer and in his own imagination. This film-monologue originated as a response to Fellini's `8 ½' and cost Gert de Graaff 13 years of work. Excitedly playing with real and fictional characters as well as with the audience, it reveals the whimsical interconnection of the real and imaginary, the paradoxical co-existence in two different galaxies: that of Guttenberg and that of MacLhuen. For some time we are apt to side with the script writer, who believes that the cause of all misfortune is the damned stereotypes of mass mentality (`man', `catholic', `window washer'). And together with him we fall into a trap when the author-creator is finally faced with the insoluble dilemma: how can one eliminate from the future movie. Bart Klever? Just five minutes before the finale thanks to the common petty reproaches of the wife of the creator, who is deeply immersed in work, we realize that together with the main character we have again been `framed'. Really, what is the price of the art for the sake of which it is acceptable to renounce one's own name and the day-to-day care for the young daughter?

So who is he, this Bart Klever? Is he a brilliant prophet or someone possessed like Frenhoffer from Balzac's masterpiece (just like the latter the script writer in the end erases from the computer memory everything has written)? Gert de Graaff suggests that we answer this question ourselves.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2328 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The trailers for this [[film]] were better than the [[movie]]. What waste of talent and [[money]]. Wish I would've [[waited]] for this [[movie]] to come on DVD because at [[least]] I wouldn't be out $9. The [[movie]] [[totally]] [[misses]] the mark. What could have been a [[GREAT]] movie for all actors, turned out to be a B-movie at [[best]]. [[Movie]] moved VERY [[slow]] and just when I thought it was going [[somewhere]], it [[almost]] did but then it didn't. [[In]] this day and age, we [[need]] unpredictable plot twists and [[closures]] in [[film]], and this film [[offered]] [[neither]]. The [[whole]] [[thing]] about how everyone is a [[suspect]] is good, [[however]], not sure if it was the [[way]] it was [[directed]], the lighting, the delivery of lines, the [[writing]] or what, but nothing [[came]] from it. Lot of [[hype]] for [[nothing]]. I was [[VERY]] [[disappointed]] in this [[film]], and I'm [[telling]] everyone NOT to see it. The cheesy [[saxophone]] [[music]] [[throughout]] [[made]] the [[film]] [[worse]] as well. And the [[ending]] had [[NOTHING]] to do with the [[rest]] of the [[film]]. What a [[disappointment]]. The trailers for this [[filmmaking]] were better than the [[flick]]. What waste of talent and [[cash]]. Wish I would've [[expected]] for this [[filmmaking]] to come on DVD because at [[lowest]] I wouldn't be out $9. The [[movies]] [[completely]] [[lack]] the mark. What could have been a [[LARGE]] movie for all actors, turned out to be a B-movie at [[better]]. [[Flick]] moved VERY [[sluggish]] and just when I thought it was going [[anywhere]], it [[hardly]] did but then it didn't. [[Onto]] this day and age, we [[gotta]] unpredictable plot twists and [[closure]] in [[filmmaking]], and this film [[providing]] [[either]]. The [[overall]] [[stuff]] about how everyone is a [[suspects]] is good, [[nevertheless]], not sure if it was the [[route]] it was [[aimed]], the lighting, the delivery of lines, the [[handwriting]] or what, but nothing [[became]] from it. Lot of [[fanfare]] for [[anything]]. I was [[MUCH]] [[disappointing]] in this [[filmmaking]], and I'm [[saying]] everyone NOT to see it. The cheesy [[clarinet]] [[musician]] [[in]] [[introduced]] the [[kino]] [[pire]] as well. And the [[terminated]] had [[NOTHIN]] to do with the [[repose]] of the [[movies]]. What a [[displeasure]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like plot turns, this is your movie. It is impossible at any moment to predict what will happen next. Nothing is as it appears or ends as you think it will. The characters are all gritty and engaging. Cage is at his best. Dennis Hopper again shows his delightfully sinister side. JT Walsh is perfect in his last performance. Laura Boyle sizzles. Dwight Yoakum makes a film debut superbly in a cameo. I categorize this movie as "I am having a really, really, really bad day" film. Not a slow minute in this film. A real sleeper. This movie is underrated and, sadly, overlooked. --------------------------------------------- Result 2330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] If you want to see a movie that [[terribly]] [[mixes]] up one Latin country with any other Latin country, "The Celestine [[Prophecy]]" is a good [[example]]: 1. Perú, not even in its most violent times, has not shown polices or soldiers as much as in this film. This showed a country like El Salvador when Civil War. Since I'm a Peruvian who lives in Lima (the capital of Perú), it was too [[funny]] to me [[seeing]] the police guards here, there and everywhere. 2. If you have a car in Perú, and you want (or need) to be a taxi driver, just post a sticker with the word "Taxi" on the front glass of your car and you can drive freely in Peruvian streets (there are taxi companies, but their rates are quite expensive). No need of yellow or a black/white squared band on the doors of your car. Well, taxis in this [[film]] have that band, somethin that you will never see in Perú. 3. Peruvian people are not Caribbean styled clothing. For example, when a taxi driver comes out, he was wearing a "Guayabera" (Cuban shirt), a white hat, and 40's [[mustaches]], like Clark Gable. Not one Peruvian man looks like that, please! Perú is not the Caribbeans! 4. A scene shows a woman on a street with a quite long skirt, like the typical folklore dresses in Latin America. Take a walk anywhere in Perú, and you'll never find a woman wearing like that, unless you are watching a typical dance. 5. Cast could've been better: I can not deny Héctor Elizondo is a great actor, but he's not a Latin actor (his father was Basque and his mother from Puerto Rico, but he was born in New York) and his Spanish is not fluent. It's notorious Spanish is not his first language. There are dozens of very good Latin actors who could've performed as Cardinal Sebastián. Petrus Antonius (General Rodríguez) was also a [[bad]] [[choice]] for a "Latin Police officer". It was so funny [[seeing]] Elizondo and Petronius in General Rodríguez's office. They looked like two English or American students in a Spanish class, making their best effort in order to pronounce Spanish. Unsuccessfully, of course. Castulo Guerra was better in his Spanish. A "Peruvian" officer, who announced Cardinal Sebastián, spoke a quite funny Spanish too. There are very good Peruvian actors, like Augusto Alvarez-Calderón and Christian Meier (just to mention two out of many Peruvian actors), who could've performed with excellence. 6. I admit that a fictional movie can let itself a license inventing cities or, even, countries. But, please, when creating a name, be careful when using a foreign language: The town portrayed in this movie should've been called "Vicente" and not "Viciente". Vicente is a male name, and Viciente has never been used. 7. I disagree one user, who says that this movie was filmed on locations in Perú. Not one location is Peruvian, although the production has used in excess posters showing "Inca Kola", the Peruvian soda. As not few American films, this one must have used any Latin country. After all, for American producers or directors, a Latin place is identical to any other Latin place. 8. In the first scenes, when John (Matthew Settle) flies to Perú, he's supposed to arrive to the only one international airport in Perú: Jorge Chávez Airport (in Lima, the capital). Actually, believe me, it must be any airport in the world, but Peruvian airport. And, of course, in Peruvian airports there are no military or police guards. 9. When this John takes a room in a Peruvian hotel, this one has a fan and, obviously has no air conditioner. Please, this doesn't happen in no hotel in Perú(and other Latin countries), unless you get a 1 star hotel! 10. The rebels who fight against the government are... ¡Colombians! Their accent was, with no doubt, from Colombia. For casting them, the producers should've hired Peruvian actors. In few words, it would've been cheaper filming in Perú.

I could go on with more examples out of this film, that led me to give it a "1" (awful) vote, but I fell asleep after about 20 minutes from its beginning. But dear producers: It's not a tragedy: There are many worse movies with not few mistakes. Just let's remember "Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal skull" and indescribable Disney's "The Emperor's new groove". The list of bad films could be endless... If you want to see a movie that [[surprisingly]] [[blending]] up one Latin country with any other Latin country, "The Celestine [[Prophecies]]" is a good [[instances]]: 1. Perú, not even in its most violent times, has not shown polices or soldiers as much as in this film. This showed a country like El Salvador when Civil War. Since I'm a Peruvian who lives in Lima (the capital of Perú), it was too [[droll]] to me [[see]] the police guards here, there and everywhere. 2. If you have a car in Perú, and you want (or need) to be a taxi driver, just post a sticker with the word "Taxi" on the front glass of your car and you can drive freely in Peruvian streets (there are taxi companies, but their rates are quite expensive). No need of yellow or a black/white squared band on the doors of your car. Well, taxis in this [[filmmaking]] have that band, somethin that you will never see in Perú. 3. Peruvian people are not Caribbean styled clothing. For example, when a taxi driver comes out, he was wearing a "Guayabera" (Cuban shirt), a white hat, and 40's [[moustaches]], like Clark Gable. Not one Peruvian man looks like that, please! Perú is not the Caribbeans! 4. A scene shows a woman on a street with a quite long skirt, like the typical folklore dresses in Latin America. Take a walk anywhere in Perú, and you'll never find a woman wearing like that, unless you are watching a typical dance. 5. Cast could've been better: I can not deny Héctor Elizondo is a great actor, but he's not a Latin actor (his father was Basque and his mother from Puerto Rico, but he was born in New York) and his Spanish is not fluent. It's notorious Spanish is not his first language. There are dozens of very good Latin actors who could've performed as Cardinal Sebastián. Petrus Antonius (General Rodríguez) was also a [[unfavourable]] [[picks]] for a "Latin Police officer". It was so funny [[witnessing]] Elizondo and Petronius in General Rodríguez's office. They looked like two English or American students in a Spanish class, making their best effort in order to pronounce Spanish. Unsuccessfully, of course. Castulo Guerra was better in his Spanish. A "Peruvian" officer, who announced Cardinal Sebastián, spoke a quite funny Spanish too. There are very good Peruvian actors, like Augusto Alvarez-Calderón and Christian Meier (just to mention two out of many Peruvian actors), who could've performed with excellence. 6. I admit that a fictional movie can let itself a license inventing cities or, even, countries. But, please, when creating a name, be careful when using a foreign language: The town portrayed in this movie should've been called "Vicente" and not "Viciente". Vicente is a male name, and Viciente has never been used. 7. I disagree one user, who says that this movie was filmed on locations in Perú. Not one location is Peruvian, although the production has used in excess posters showing "Inca Kola", the Peruvian soda. As not few American films, this one must have used any Latin country. After all, for American producers or directors, a Latin place is identical to any other Latin place. 8. In the first scenes, when John (Matthew Settle) flies to Perú, he's supposed to arrive to the only one international airport in Perú: Jorge Chávez Airport (in Lima, the capital). Actually, believe me, it must be any airport in the world, but Peruvian airport. And, of course, in Peruvian airports there are no military or police guards. 9. When this John takes a room in a Peruvian hotel, this one has a fan and, obviously has no air conditioner. Please, this doesn't happen in no hotel in Perú(and other Latin countries), unless you get a 1 star hotel! 10. The rebels who fight against the government are... ¡Colombians! Their accent was, with no doubt, from Colombia. For casting them, the producers should've hired Peruvian actors. In few words, it would've been cheaper filming in Perú.

I could go on with more examples out of this film, that led me to give it a "1" (awful) vote, but I fell asleep after about 20 minutes from its beginning. But dear producers: It's not a tragedy: There are many worse movies with not few mistakes. Just let's remember "Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal skull" and indescribable Disney's "The Emperor's new groove". The list of bad films could be endless... --------------------------------------------- Result 2331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is really bad, with a script full of 'memorable' lines and incredibly bad performances. The special effects are also bad (not the worst ones I have seen, either) and the music is so bad that you have to listen to it to believe it. Just two short themes (30 seconds long or so) are repeated constantly throughout the whole film.

All in all, one of the worst films I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Watched]] this on DVD in original language with [[English]] subs. Either the [[subtitling]] was very poor or the [[actual]] [[dialog]] doesn't make much of story and give any character [[development]]. There are quite a few HK stars in this but the [[movie]] doesn't need their presence to make it better or worse. It's just [[bad]]. The bright and colorful scenes done in CG are [[attractive]] for the sheer colors and [[brilliance]] but it can get overwhelming before long. If [[anything]] this makes me [[think]] of a child's movie with its nonstop barrage of cg, fight scenes, and crap plot. I'm certain I [[grasped]] what took place in the film but the whole delivery of the story was rather [[lousy]]. [[Observed]] this on DVD in original language with [[Francais]] subs. Either the [[caption]] was very poor or the [[real]] [[dialogue]] doesn't make much of story and give any character [[evolution]]. There are quite a few HK stars in this but the [[filmmaking]] doesn't need their presence to make it better or worse. It's just [[unfavourable]]. The bright and colorful scenes done in CG are [[seductive]] for the sheer colors and [[splendor]] but it can get overwhelming before long. If [[nothing]] this makes me [[thinking]] of a child's movie with its nonstop barrage of cg, fight scenes, and crap plot. I'm certain I [[mastered]] what took place in the film but the whole delivery of the story was rather [[rotten]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2333 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The word "1st" in the title has more ominous [[meaning]] for the viewers of this film than for its crime victims. At least they don't have to [[stick]] around and watch this [[interminable]] film reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a [[script]]; 1st takes [[used]] in each performance in the final [[film]]; 1st edit in post [[production]]; etcetera, etcetera.

The [[movie]] is not [[cast]] too badly, it's just that everything about the [[film]] come off as [[worse]] than third [[rate]], from the goofy [[script]], to the wooden performances. And while [[suffering]] through this cobbled [[together]] [[film]], by the 2 [[hour]] [[mark]] you want to be put out of your [[misery]]. At 160 [[minutes]] [[long]] it is [[readily]] [[apparent]] that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details [[concerning]] the lame [[script]] and acting [[serves]] [[little]] [[purposes]]. Even in the [[equally]] [[awful]], [[Lake]] [[Placid]], at [[least]] the performances Bill Pullman and Bridget Fonda [[constructed]] out of an [[extremely]] [[weak]] [[script]], were nuanced enough to make you laugh at the [[movie]]. [[In]] 1st to [[Die]], one [[ends]] up grieving only for the time lost in [[waiting]] to [[see]] what [[happens]] after the [[opening]] scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never [[introduced]] to one of the main [[characters]], who I [[think]] (were never [[quite]] [[told]]) is a D.A. She just [[appears]] in one scene in the middle of a conversation. [[Obviously]] the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was [[dropped]] on the editor's [[floor]]. And no one realized that a [[character]] [[appearing]] out of nowhere was an [[unusual]] [[film]] [[ploy]].

In a word, don't [[waste]] your [[time]] with this one. My [[wife]] and I [[wish]] we didn't. But at [[least]] we [[created]] our own diversions by commenting in [[various]] places in the film like it was [[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theater]]. "[[Meanwhile]], in Cleveland . . . ." !!!! The word "1st" in the title has more ominous [[meanings]] for the viewers of this film than for its crime victims. At least they don't have to [[wand]] around and watch this [[inexhaustible]] film reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a [[hyphen]]; 1st takes [[utilizing]] in each performance in the final [[cinematic]]; 1st edit in post [[productivity]]; etcetera, etcetera.

The [[filmmaking]] is not [[casting]] too badly, it's just that everything about the [[filmmaking]] come off as [[worst]] than third [[rates]], from the goofy [[screenplay]], to the wooden performances. And while [[suffer]] through this cobbled [[jointly]] [[cinematography]], by the 2 [[hours]] [[brands]] you want to be put out of your [[privation]]. At 160 [[mins]] [[lengthy]] it is [[easily]] [[visible]] that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details [[regarding]] the lame [[screenplay]] and acting [[contributes]] [[scant]] [[target]]. Even in the [[similarly]] [[abominable]], [[Lakes]] [[Tranquility]], at [[less]] the performances Bill Pullman and Bridget Fonda [[builds]] out of an [[exceptionally]] [[feeble]] [[screenplay]], were nuanced enough to make you laugh at the [[filmmaking]]. [[During]] 1st to [[Died]], one [[terminates]] up grieving only for the time lost in [[expecting]] to [[seeing]] what [[comes]] after the [[open]] scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never [[lodged]] to one of the main [[character]], who I [[ideas]] (were never [[perfectly]] [[say]]) is a D.A. She just [[emerges]] in one scene in the middle of a conversation. [[Definitely]] the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was [[slid]] on the editor's [[storey]]. And no one realized that a [[characters]] [[appears]] out of nowhere was an [[exceptional]] [[flick]] [[stratagem]].

In a word, don't [[wastes]] your [[period]] with this one. My [[femme]] and I [[wants]] we didn't. But at [[less]] we [[generated]] our own diversions by commenting in [[many]] places in the film like it was [[Conundrum]] [[Veda]] [[Movies]]. "[[Moreover]], in Cleveland . . . ." !!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2334 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] "[[Shore]] [[Leave]]" is mostly an average Star [[Trek]] adventure. [[Nothing]] wrong with the episode, though. I simply [[think]] that this is not the best [[representation]] of what the [[show]] had to offer to fans. It is lightweight entertaining, nothing more. [[However]], I'm glad to see that a TV show of this type had [[enough]] good sense to take a [[break]] from serious intergalactic conflicts. In this episode, [[Kirk]] decides to grant his crew some time off, and a landing party is beamed down to a planet that looks like the [[perfect]] place for a vacation. As [[usual]], the planet is not as peaceful as it appears to be. There are some action and [[tense]] moments, but most of the [[story]] is [[played]] for laughs. [[Good]], but unexceptional. "[[Shoreline]] [[Letting]]" is mostly an average Star [[Hiking]] adventure. [[Nada]] wrong with the episode, though. I simply [[thought]] that this is not the best [[representative]] of what the [[illustrating]] had to offer to fans. It is lightweight entertaining, nothing more. [[Conversely]], I'm glad to see that a TV show of this type had [[adequately]] good sense to take a [[blackout]] from serious intergalactic conflicts. In this episode, [[Shatner]] decides to grant his crew some time off, and a landing party is beamed down to a planet that looks like the [[impeccable]] place for a vacation. As [[routine]], the planet is not as peaceful as it appears to be. There are some action and [[strained]] moments, but most of the [[tale]] is [[done]] for laughs. [[Alright]], but unexceptional. --------------------------------------------- Result 2335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Picked up the movie at the flea market for 4 bucks, sure did get my moneys worth!. Could care-less about the hot babes but the [[animation]] just [[blew]] me away after a steady diet of [[Simpsons]] (Sorry [[Mr]]. Groening). The best part, facial expressions. [[Recommend]] [[multiple]] viewings with some cool [[tunes]], good [[friends]] and a couple of [[cold]] ones! Picked up the movie at the flea market for 4 bucks, sure did get my moneys worth!. Could care-less about the hot babes but the [[animate]] just [[farted]] me away after a steady diet of [[Simpson]] (Sorry [[Mister]]. Groening). The best part, facial expressions. [[Recommends]] [[several]] viewings with some cool [[hymns]], good [[freund]] and a couple of [[frigid]] ones! --------------------------------------------- Result 2336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I read the [[book]] and the [[book]] was [[fascinating]].

This movie, it's direction, the screenplay, and the acting were totally insufferable. I cringed at the [[lack]] of a screenplay that [[could]] not follow the novel, a [[novel]] that has all the action, simplicity, and courage to illustrate a temerity of a great possibly fact based story.

I can see why this movie was not released to the [[general]] public in most cities. [[Would]] not ever [[recommend]] this film to anyone I know.

[[Simply]], one of he [[worst]] [[adaptations]] I have seen transformed into a plot [[less]] exploration of heaven on [[earth]].

The [[cinematography]] was indeed the only [[highlight]]. But, how [[could]] that fail when filmed in an [[beautiful]] country such as Peru.

To [[prospective]] [[viewers]], do not waste your [[time]] or energy on this flop. I read the [[ledger]] and the [[books]] was [[mesmerizing]].

This movie, it's direction, the screenplay, and the acting were totally insufferable. I cringed at the [[shortage]] of a screenplay that [[would]] not follow the novel, a [[newer]] that has all the action, simplicity, and courage to illustrate a temerity of a great possibly fact based story.

I can see why this movie was not released to the [[overall]] public in most cities. [[Ought]] not ever [[recommends]] this film to anyone I know.

[[Simple]], one of he [[meanest]] [[adjustments]] I have seen transformed into a plot [[lowest]] exploration of heaven on [[land]].

The [[filmmaking]] was indeed the only [[stress]]. But, how [[wo]] that fail when filmed in an [[sumptuous]] country such as Peru.

To [[potential]] [[audiences]], do not waste your [[times]] or energy on this flop. --------------------------------------------- Result 2337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I ran [[across]] this [[several]] years [[ago]] while channel surfing on a Sunday [[afternoon]]. [[Though]] it was [[obviously]] a cheesy [[TV]] [[movie]] from the 70s, the direction and [[score]] were well [[done]] [[enough]] that it [[grabbed]] my attention, and indeed I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the [[opportunity]] to buy a [[foreign]] DVD of this film (oops, didn't notice a [[domestic]] one had finally [[come]] out a couple [[months]] [[prior]]), and was very pleased to be able to watch it again (and in its [[entirety]]).

I don't [[wholly]] [[understand]] the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s [[seem]] to have a [[lock]] on [[horror]] [[movies]] that are actually [[scary]]. The decades prior to the 70s produced some [[beautifully]] shot [[films]] and the [[bulk]] of our enduring [[horror]] [[icons]], but are they actually [[scary]]? No, not very. [[Likewise]] in the years [[since]] the 70s we've gotten [[horror]] movies that are cooler, more exciting, have much better production [[values]] and [[sophisticated]] special effects, are more [[fun]], funnier, have effective "[[jump]]" [[moments]], and some very [[creative]] [[uses]] of gore, but again... they aren't [[really]] [[scary]]! There's just [[something]] about the [[atmosphere]] of the 70s horror films. The grainy film quality. The spookily dark scenes unilluminated by [[vast]] high-tech lighting rigs. The "edge of dreamland" [[muted]] quality of the dialogue and the [[weird]] and stridently EQ'd [[scores]]. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. [[Everything]] that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, [[works]] in its favor.

Specifically, in this film, the [[quiet]], [[intense]] shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly unnerving. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile ("Cujo"?). The filmmakers [[wisely]] save that for when the [[dog]] appears in its full-on supernatural [[form]]. The effects when that [[occurs]], while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally [[gave]] me [[chills]]. The [[bizarre]], vaguely-defined, "I'm not [[quite]] [[sure]] what I'm [[looking]] at" look intuitively [[strikes]] me as more like how a [[real]] supernatural vision [[would]] be, [[rather]] than the hyper-real, crystal [[clear]] [[optical]] printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror [[films]].

While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the "Witch Mountain" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.

The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.

Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about "Blade Runner". :-) I ran [[throughout]] this [[assorted]] years [[prior]] while channel surfing on a Sunday [[evening]]. [[If]] it was [[unmistakably]] a cheesy [[TELEVISION]] [[cinematographic]] from the 70s, the direction and [[punctuation]] were well [[played]] [[adequate]] that it [[caught]] my attention, and indeed I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the [[opportunities]] to buy a [[alien]] DVD of this film (oops, didn't notice a [[interior]] one had finally [[coming]] out a couple [[month]] [[previously]]), and was very pleased to be able to watch it again (and in its [[totality]]).

I don't [[totally]] [[understanding]] the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s [[appears]] to have a [[locking]] on [[terror]] [[cinematography]] that are actually [[awful]]. The decades prior to the 70s produced some [[surprisingly]] shot [[cinematography]] and the [[wholesale]] of our enduring [[terror]] [[symbols]], but are they actually [[dreadful]]? No, not very. [[Moreover]] in the years [[because]] the 70s we've gotten [[terror]] movies that are cooler, more exciting, have much better production [[value]] and [[complex]] special effects, are more [[entertaining]], funnier, have effective "[[leaping]]" [[times]], and some very [[imaginative]] [[use]] of gore, but again... they aren't [[truly]] [[terrible]]! There's just [[anything]] about the [[atmospheric]] of the 70s horror films. The grainy film quality. The spookily dark scenes unilluminated by [[gigantic]] high-tech lighting rigs. The "edge of dreamland" [[silencing]] quality of the dialogue and the [[bizarre]] and stridently EQ'd [[dozens]]. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. [[Any]] that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, [[collaborate]] in its favor.

Specifically, in this film, the [[silent]], [[ferocious]] shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly unnerving. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile ("Cujo"?). The filmmakers [[intelligently]] save that for when the [[pooch]] appears in its full-on supernatural [[shape]]. The effects when that [[comes]], while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally [[handed]] me [[willies]]. The [[freaky]], vaguely-defined, "I'm not [[very]] [[convinced]] what I'm [[researching]] at" look intuitively [[bombardments]] me as more like how a [[actual]] supernatural vision [[ought]] be, [[quite]] than the hyper-real, crystal [[unequivocal]] [[optic]] printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror [[cinema]].

While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the "Witch Mountain" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.

The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.

Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about "Blade Runner". :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Considering John Doe apparently inspired Kyle XY's creator I was expecting its [[pilot]] to be quite interesting. [[However]] I probably had too high expectations because I was [[quite]] [[disappointed]] by it. [[First]] they turned the protagonist into a freak who had the crazy idea of showing off his amazing knowledge in front of an audience, in a public area. So after that scene I began to worry that it was just entertainment. But the problem is that it [[got]] worse as [[none]] of the other characters were [[properly]] introduced. They focused too much on [[John]] Doe which made the [[story]] far less [[intriguing]]. I was also slightly disappointed by [[Dominic]] Purcell's performance because I [[found]] he didn't make a [[believable]] [[John]] Doe. An other problem was the police story. It really felt like déjà vu and it wasn't a pleasant [[sensation]]. It [[leads]] us to the [[worst]] [[issue]] in the bunch, the episodic format. I [[could]] already see the fillers coming one after an other.

So [[overall]] I was very [[disappointed]] by it and don't [[recommend]] it to anyone. Considering how [[bad]] it was I [[better]] [[understand]] now why the [[show]] got [[canceled]]. [[In]] some [[way]] I have the [[impression]] that it missed its target, [[developing]] [[characters]] to [[help]] the [[protagonist]] find his own identity. It's sad because there was potential, like the people he [[met]] at the club. The [[production]] quality was also quite good and the casting correct. But I'll never know if it got [[better]], probably not, because I don't plan to watch the next episode. Considering John Doe apparently inspired Kyle XY's creator I was expecting its [[experimental]] to be quite interesting. [[Instead]] I probably had too high expectations because I was [[rather]] [[disappointing]] by it. [[Outset]] they turned the protagonist into a freak who had the crazy idea of showing off his amazing knowledge in front of an audience, in a public area. So after that scene I began to worry that it was just entertainment. But the problem is that it [[ai]] worse as [[nos]] of the other characters were [[satisfactorily]] introduced. They focused too much on [[Giovanni]] Doe which made the [[saga]] far less [[mesmerizing]]. I was also slightly disappointed by [[Dominick]] Purcell's performance because I [[discovered]] he didn't make a [[reliable]] [[Giovanni]] Doe. An other problem was the police story. It really felt like déjà vu and it wasn't a pleasant [[feeling]]. It [[leeds]] us to the [[hardest]] [[issues]] in the bunch, the episodic format. I [[did]] already see the fillers coming one after an other.

So [[aggregate]] I was very [[frustrating]] by it and don't [[recommends]] it to anyone. Considering how [[unfavorable]] it was I [[best]] [[realise]] now why the [[displayed]] got [[overturned]]. [[Throughout]] some [[routing]] I have the [[printing]] that it missed its target, [[drafting]] [[character]] to [[succour]] the [[actor]] find his own identity. It's sad because there was potential, like the people he [[fulfilled]] at the club. The [[productivity]] quality was also quite good and the casting correct. But I'll never know if it got [[best]], probably not, because I don't plan to watch the next episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 2339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very good movie. A classic sci-fi film with humor, action and everything. This movie offers a greater number of aliens. We see the Rebel Alliance leaders and much of the Imperial forces. The Emperor is somewhat an original character. I liked the Ewoks representing somehow the indigenous savages and the Vietnamese. (Excellent references) I loved the duel between Vader and Luke which is the best of the saga. In Return of the Jedi the epilogue of the first trilogy is over and the Empire finally falls. I also appreciated the victory celebration where it fulfills Vader's redemption and returns hi into Anakin Skywalker spirit along with Yoda and Obi-Wan. It gives a sadness and a tear. The greatest scenes in Star Wars are among this movie: When Vader turns on the Emperor. Luke watches and finds comfort in seeing Obi-Wan, Yoda and...his father (1997 version not Hayden Christenssen). The next best scene is when Luke rushes to strike back Darth Vader to protect Leia. There is a deep dark side of this film despite there is a good ending. I felt there was much more than meets the eye. And as always the John William's music will bring the classicism into Star Wars universe. --------------------------------------------- Result 2340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yesterday I watched this movie for the third time. It was recommended to me by a fried several weeks ago. I never watched or even noticed it before, because it falls (so typically) in the category "Swedish Movie" and those who rose up (like me) with Hollywood productions tend to be sceptical of any foreign movies. Hell what a paradigm shift! The film touches me, because it just keeps up my hope, that mankind can change to a better way. The Swedish village is just a pattern for all areas on earth where people live together - controlled by religion, misunderstandings, lack of courage, predictions, disguised brutality, but also the ability to have fun, to meet, to sing... It takes a trigger from outside to rip off the masks of everyone (who keeps one) and to let them feel that we all are just human beings with the desire to live our own lives. I can never stop to see stories like this, because, that keeps up my hope as described above. The five minutes containing the story of Gabriella's song including her performance is one of my movie-highlights ever! Thank you Kay Pollak just for these 5 minutes, which made me happy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Erich Rohmer's "L'Anglaise et le duc" makes a [[perfect]] [[companion]] piece to [[Peter]] Watkins' "[[La]] Commune (Paris 1871)." Both films -screened at this year's Toronto [[International]] [[Film]] Festival- [[ironically]] [[illustrate]] how [[history]] is [[shaped]] to by the tellers of the [[tale]]. [[Ironic]], [[given]] the tragic [[events]] that were [[taking]] place in the U.S. during the [[festival]].

Set in Paris during the French Revolution, the [[movie]], [[based]] on Grace Elliott's (Lucy [[Russell]]) "[[Memoirs]]," is a first-hand [[account]] of how she survived those heady but [[dangerous]] days. She [[also]] details her relationship with The Duke of Orleans (played by Jean-Claude Dreyfus), who, in contrast to herself, is a [[supporter]] of the Revolution.

[[True]] to form, you don't know whose side of [[history]] Rohmer is going to [[come]] down on. One of the earliest of the French "[[New]] [[Wave]]" filmmakers, Rohmer has often been [[criticized]] for being too [[conservative]]. [[After]] all, in the [[midst]] of the rebelling-youth-Viet-Nam days of the late 60s and 70s, he was filming [[romantic]] [[little]] confections like "Claire's Knee." But don't [[sell]] the old [[boy]] short, folks, he's [[always]] been a student of human nature, not an ideologue, and "L'Anglaise et [[le]] duc" [[continues]] to [[bear]] this out.

Rohmer's [[characters]] are never the "[[bad]] [[guys]]" nor the "good guys'; they are first and foremost human beings who are capable of [[exhibiting]] a full [[range]] of human [[potentialities]] -and [[limitations]]. That's why his [[movies]] are [[always]] [[provocative]], and this [[film]] is no [[exception]].

Now for the [[technological]] nuts and [[bolts]].

Rohmer, [[though]] making his way into his 80s, is [[still]] on the cutting-edge of cinematic innovation. The [[look]] of "L'Anglaise" is like [[something]] you've never [[seen]] before. You guessed it, the [[old]] [[guy]] -like [[several]] of the festival's [[directors]] this year- has [[gone]] digital.

All of the movie's exterior scenes look as [[though]] they are taking place in their [[original]] 1780s Parisian [[settings]]. As a [[matter]] of fact, you may get so distracted from marveling at the authenticity of the film's look you may have to go back for a second screening to catch the subtleties of the film's psychological -and yes, I'll say it- political insights.

Toronto features some of the world's edgiest young filmmakers this year, as well as some of the world's oldest. And the old masters are standing there on cinema's cutting-edges right alongside the young ones.

Long live youth. Long live old age. And long live Erich Rohmer.

Erich Rohmer's "L'Anglaise et le duc" makes a [[consummate]] [[mate]] piece to [[Pedro]] Watkins' "[[Angeles]] Commune (Paris 1871)." Both films -screened at this year's Toronto [[Global]] [[Movie]] Festival- [[mockingly]] [[demonstrates]] how [[stories]] is [[fashioned]] to by the tellers of the [[story]]. [[Ironical]], [[granted]] the tragic [[phenomena]] that were [[picked]] place in the U.S. during the [[feast]].

Set in Paris during the French Revolution, the [[cinematographic]], [[founded]] on Grace Elliott's (Lucy [[Russel]]) "[[Briefs]]," is a first-hand [[accounts]] of how she survived those heady but [[risky]] days. She [[apart]] details her relationship with The Duke of Orleans (played by Jean-Claude Dreyfus), who, in contrast to herself, is a [[defender]] of the Revolution.

[[Genuine]] to form, you don't know whose side of [[stories]] Rohmer is going to [[arrive]] down on. One of the earliest of the French "[[Novel]] [[Waves]]" filmmakers, Rohmer has often been [[slammed]] for being too [[tory]]. [[Upon]] all, in the [[medium]] of the rebelling-youth-Viet-Nam days of the late 60s and 70s, he was filming [[sentimental]] [[tiny]] confections like "Claire's Knee." But don't [[sells]] the old [[dude]] short, folks, he's [[repeatedly]] been a student of human nature, not an ideologue, and "L'Anglaise et [[lai]] duc" [[persisted]] to [[bears]] this out.

Rohmer's [[character]] are never the "[[rotten]] [[guy]]" nor the "good guys'; they are first and foremost human beings who are capable of [[illustrating]] a full [[ranges]] of human [[potential]] -and [[confines]]. That's why his [[movie]] are [[continually]] [[inflammatory]], and this [[films]] is no [[exemption]].

Now for the [[technical]] nuts and [[bolt]].

Rohmer, [[if]] making his way into his 80s, is [[however]] on the cutting-edge of cinematic innovation. The [[glance]] of "L'Anglaise" is like [[algo]] you've never [[watched]] before. You guessed it, the [[elderly]] [[boy]] -like [[different]] of the festival's [[administrators]] this year- has [[faded]] digital.

All of the movie's exterior scenes look as [[if]] they are taking place in their [[upfront]] 1780s Parisian [[configure]]. As a [[topic]] of fact, you may get so distracted from marveling at the authenticity of the film's look you may have to go back for a second screening to catch the subtleties of the film's psychological -and yes, I'll say it- political insights.

Toronto features some of the world's edgiest young filmmakers this year, as well as some of the world's oldest. And the old masters are standing there on cinema's cutting-edges right alongside the young ones.

Long live youth. Long live old age. And long live Erich Rohmer.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know what this movie is about, really. It's like a student's art school project. They never say why the world is dark, but it is always darkness except for seconds a day. There are long, interrupting shots of insects of all sorts for no reason. What little dialogue there is in the movie is as inane and nonsensical as the images. A black woman enters the main character's apartment. Somehow she becomes pregnant overnight, then gets shot in the head. The main character takes care of the body until it becomes a cocoon after which a white naked woman emerges. I have never been so blown away by how bad and pointless a movie can be. Honestly, I would like someone to watch it so they can tell me what they think it's about. But I wouldn't wish this level of hell on anybody else. --------------------------------------------- Result 2343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Re: Pro Jury

Although the lead actress is [[STRIKINGLY]] beautiful, the plot stands little chance of acceptance because too many distracting details face the audience during the unfolding of the story.

One may believe that middle-class teen-age school girls in the 1950's easily gave away their virginity without thought of marriage to 30-year-old's they barely know, but I doubt it.

"EASILY GIVE AWAY VIRGINITY"? WHAT A [[SHREWD]] REMARK ABOUT THIS FILM. TRULY.

One may believe that young high school teens are highly self-confident and self-assured as they interact with their elders in complex social situations, but my experience has been, more often than not, teenagers feel very awkward and act clumsy as they experiment in the adult world.

YOU JUST AREN'T AT ALL ABLE TO SEE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH YOUR OWN EYES? THAT'S SAD.

One may believe that a experienced medical doctor would not know the pungent oder of Stroptomycin -- the smelly fermenting byproduct of busy earth microbes -- and not detect that some lifeless bland powder is fake, but I think not.

AND ANOTHER "EXPERT" OPINION DRAWN FROM EXPERIENCE. DANDY.

One may believe that 30-something-year-old troublemakers can enter into, and hang around inside, a public school rec hall during a school social and make trouble, but I think that school socials are traditionally a protected environment and parents, chaparones and school staff would be around to prevent this.

NOW BE A GOOD SPORT AND TELL US AT WHICH INSTITUTION YOU GREW UP.

One final nit, throughout Hey Babu Riba the five teenage friends referred to themselves as the foursome. There is probably an explanation why the FIVE were the FOURsome, but because it was never detailed, each reference distracts from each scene.

OF COURSE THERE'S PROBABLY AN EXPLANATION. GOOD JOB FIGURING THAT OUT! NOW I'LL BE GENEROUS AND WILL HELP YOU OUT OF YOUR MISERY: ALTHOUGH IT WAS TRANSLATED AS A GENERAL "FOURSOME", THE WORD "čETVORKA" HAS ANOTHER MEANING: IT'S A SPORTS TERM USED TO DESIGNATE A 4M OR 4W SETUP - A ROWING CREW CONSISTING OF 5 PERSONS: 4 ROWERS AND A COXSWAIN.

This movie did not ring true for me.

WE SHOULD ALL HEED TO YOUR COMPETENT AND PRAISEWORTHY OPINION. DUDE. Re: Pro Jury

Although the lead actress is [[UNBELIEVABLY]] beautiful, the plot stands little chance of acceptance because too many distracting details face the audience during the unfolding of the story.

One may believe that middle-class teen-age school girls in the 1950's easily gave away their virginity without thought of marriage to 30-year-old's they barely know, but I doubt it.

"EASILY GIVE AWAY VIRGINITY"? WHAT A [[MALIN]] REMARK ABOUT THIS FILM. TRULY.

One may believe that young high school teens are highly self-confident and self-assured as they interact with their elders in complex social situations, but my experience has been, more often than not, teenagers feel very awkward and act clumsy as they experiment in the adult world.

YOU JUST AREN'T AT ALL ABLE TO SEE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH YOUR OWN EYES? THAT'S SAD.

One may believe that a experienced medical doctor would not know the pungent oder of Stroptomycin -- the smelly fermenting byproduct of busy earth microbes -- and not detect that some lifeless bland powder is fake, but I think not.

AND ANOTHER "EXPERT" OPINION DRAWN FROM EXPERIENCE. DANDY.

One may believe that 30-something-year-old troublemakers can enter into, and hang around inside, a public school rec hall during a school social and make trouble, but I think that school socials are traditionally a protected environment and parents, chaparones and school staff would be around to prevent this.

NOW BE A GOOD SPORT AND TELL US AT WHICH INSTITUTION YOU GREW UP.

One final nit, throughout Hey Babu Riba the five teenage friends referred to themselves as the foursome. There is probably an explanation why the FIVE were the FOURsome, but because it was never detailed, each reference distracts from each scene.

OF COURSE THERE'S PROBABLY AN EXPLANATION. GOOD JOB FIGURING THAT OUT! NOW I'LL BE GENEROUS AND WILL HELP YOU OUT OF YOUR MISERY: ALTHOUGH IT WAS TRANSLATED AS A GENERAL "FOURSOME", THE WORD "čETVORKA" HAS ANOTHER MEANING: IT'S A SPORTS TERM USED TO DESIGNATE A 4M OR 4W SETUP - A ROWING CREW CONSISTING OF 5 PERSONS: 4 ROWERS AND A COXSWAIN.

This movie did not ring true for me.

WE SHOULD ALL HEED TO YOUR COMPETENT AND PRAISEWORTHY OPINION. DUDE. --------------------------------------------- Result 2344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Once in a while, a film comes along that raises the bar for every other film in its genre. A film of this caliber will influence many films following its release for years to come. `A Chinese Ghost Story' falls in this category. It is arguably one of the best horror films made during the 1980's; possibly one of the best ever made.

The filmmakers have crafted a movie that appeals to every horror fan. The story is engrossing and original. The villains are appropriately menacing and frightening. The sets are creepy and atmospheric. There is even a little blood and gore to satisfy the splatter fan of the house. But don't let the `horror' label scare you off, if you're not a fan of the genre. This film easily fits into many different categories.

The screenwriter has deftly blended the drama, comedy, horror, kung fu, and romance genres into a delicious deluxe cinematic pizza. `A Chinese Ghost Story' is a beautiful epic love story told, thankfully, without the gratuitous nudity and/or explicit sex scenes that have ruined many Hollywood `love stories'. Those put off by the romantic elements of the story can sit back and revel in the fast-paced swordplay and `wire-fu'. If that's not enough, actors Leslie Cheung and Wu Ma provide enough humorous situations to satiate your appetite for comedy. This film offers something for every film fan.

Director Siu-Tung Ching and Producer Tsui Hark assembled a truly amazing cast for this film. Leslie Cheung proves that he is not only a gifted actor, but also a talented singer and a charming physical comedian. I cannot possibly think of a performer other than Cheung who could have portrayed Ling Choi Sin better (except maybe Chow Yun Fat). Joey Wang is enchanting as Lit Su Seen, the enslaved spirit who steals the heart of Cheung's character. Her portrayal of the title character is truly haunting and memorable. Wu Ma is hilarious as the cantankerous Taoist who aids the young lovers.

On technical level, this film is very impressive, even by today's standards. The direction is superb. I wish that today's Hollywood executives would seek out talented artists like Siu-Tung Ching rather falling back on the usual MTV video or Pepsi commercial `directors'. The cinematography is gorgeous. You have to commend any cinematographer who can make a film look good when most of its pivotal scenes take place in the dead of night. The special effects make-up is top-notch. In fact, most of the creature effects in this film blow away the shoddy CGI ghouls and goblins that have become commonplace in modern horror films.

Since its release, "A Chinese Ghost Story" has spawned two worthy sequels, a full-length animated movie, and countless imitations. None of the films that followed it or copied it were able to capture the magic of this classic, however. This film is required viewing for any horror fan or just anyone looking for great way to spend 95 minutes of your time. 10 out 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2345 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I found this [[film]] to be quite an [[oddity]]. From the very [[get]] go I found it [[extremely]] [[hard]] to [[like]] this movie, and now after a little thinking about it I can pretty much pinpoint the [[reason]] why. Jean-Marc Barr, although I love him to bits (I think Zentropa is one of the best movies ever made) is quite miscast here, and although I can't [[figure]] for the life of me who would be better, I am sure someone could have taken his place quite easily and make this film work. Everything else is fine, except for the [[stabs]] at weak [[comedy]] (A Meet The Parents Joke is not really needed, filmmakers!) and I really like Richard E. Grant as the British Major. It just suffers from one thing.. Jean-Marc. I found this [[filmmaking]] to be quite an [[peculiarity]]. From the very [[obtain]] go I found it [[uncommonly]] [[laborious]] to [[iike]] this movie, and now after a little thinking about it I can pretty much pinpoint the [[motives]] why. Jean-Marc Barr, although I love him to bits (I think Zentropa is one of the best movies ever made) is quite miscast here, and although I can't [[silhouette]] for the life of me who would be better, I am sure someone could have taken his place quite easily and make this film work. Everything else is fine, except for the [[wipes]] at weak [[charade]] (A Meet The Parents Joke is not really needed, filmmakers!) and I really like Richard E. Grant as the British Major. It just suffers from one thing.. Jean-Marc. --------------------------------------------- Result 2346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] 'Ninteen Eighty-Four' is a film about a futuristic society in which the [[government]] [[controls]] everything and no one can be [[trusted]]. It is a very dark film, and it is one that will not make you feel good about yourself. It is about a [[romance]] taking place in this [[society]] and the [[betrayal]] of the lovers and about human nature being self-centred. The [[film]] has some very [[good]] ideas and is [[done]] well in portraying this [[society]] with the dark tones in colours (contrasting with happiness and bright colours in the dreams) and a general feeling of loneliness through objects and people and places. [[However]], despite the film's [[cleverness]] at [[portraying]] this idea, the [[film]] was very slow and did not [[seem]] to quite get the [[idea]] [[across]]. It [[seemed]] to spend too much [[time]] being [[clever]] rather than telling a story. 'Ninteen Eighty-Four' is a film about a futuristic society in which the [[goverment]] [[audits]] everything and no one can be [[trusting]]. It is a very dark film, and it is one that will not make you feel good about yourself. It is about a [[romanticism]] taking place in this [[societal]] and the [[disloyalty]] of the lovers and about human nature being self-centred. The [[filmmaking]] has some very [[alright]] ideas and is [[effected]] well in portraying this [[societal]] with the dark tones in colours (contrasting with happiness and bright colours in the dreams) and a general feeling of loneliness through objects and people and places. [[Conversely]], despite the film's [[ingenuity]] at [[detailing]] this idea, the [[filmmaking]] was very slow and did not [[looks]] to quite get the [[ideals]] [[during]]. It [[looked]] to spend too much [[period]] being [[malin]] rather than telling a story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an very good movie. This is one that I would rent over and over again. It is not like your normal superhero movie. This movie blends comedy, action and great special effects. It even has a person in it that does a lot of voices on The Simpsons. William H. Macy is the bomb. --------------------------------------------- Result 2348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] We [[often]] [[see]] movies about [[undesirable]] things going on in [[politics]], but I [[still]] [[recommend]] "City Hall". [[In]] a role he was [[born]] to [[play]], Al Pacino stars as New York's mayor who has to [[deal]] with the [[shooting]] of a boy. But it turns out that [[nothing]] that he does will really have any effect. In this movie, the [[characters]] are as gritty as we would expect of anyone involved in a political scandal. No matter how much you trust any [[given]] politician, you [[may]] have your [[doubts]] after [[watching]] this movie.

I [[understand]] that I can't name any specific example of something [[similar]] to what this movie portrays, but that's not the point. [[If]] we had [[idealistic]] [[impressions]] of those at the top, this [[movie]] tears such ideas down. Certainly one that I encourage you to see. Also starring John Cusack, Bridget [[Fonda]], Danny Aiello, Anthony Franciosa and David Paymer. We [[normally]] [[consults]] movies about [[unsolicited]] things going on in [[policies]], but I [[nonetheless]] [[recommending]] "City Hall". [[Among]] a role he was [[birthed]] to [[gaming]], Al Pacino stars as New York's mayor who has to [[address]] with the [[gunfire]] of a boy. But it turns out that [[nada]] that he does will really have any effect. In this movie, the [[character]] are as gritty as we would expect of anyone involved in a political scandal. No matter how much you trust any [[gave]] politician, you [[maggio]] have your [[qualms]] after [[staring]] this movie.

I [[understood]] that I can't name any specific example of something [[akin]] to what this movie portrays, but that's not the point. [[Unless]] we had [[ideal]] [[printouts]] of those at the top, this [[cinematography]] tears such ideas down. Certainly one that I encourage you to see. Also starring John Cusack, Bridget [[Fund]], Danny Aiello, Anthony Franciosa and David Paymer. --------------------------------------------- Result 2349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i love bed knobs and broomsticks so much that it makes me cry a thousand tears of joy every time i have the magnificent pleasure of seeing it. i would also like to reiterate the simple fact that i love it so much.too much some have said. i have 27 copies on video and i love them all equally. i also love anyone else who loves it. i love you. my favourite scene is the dance scene at portobello road. i have learned the dance moves and practice it everyday. i have some audio recordings of myself singing the song. if anyone can play the drums or guitar i am thinking of forming a bed knobs and broomsticks band.i hope to call it 'the knobs'. love me (liz) --------------------------------------------- Result 2350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[In]] Mexico this [[movie]] was [[aired]] only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's [[life]], is a true example about a good German and [[specially]], about a good [[man]]. The [[conversations]] between Tukur's [[character]] and the [[Nazi]] [[prosecutor]] are [[specially]] interesting. A true ideas' war: two [[different]] [[Germans]], both with [[faith]] in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very [[complex]] [[person]]: [[man]], [[freedom]] fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a [[great]] intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is [[outstanding]] as Bonhoeffer. I [[recommended]] this [[film]] a lot, [[specially]] in this [[difficult]] [[times]] for the [[planet]]. [[In]] Mexico we don't know a lot about Pastor Bonhoeffer [[life]] and legacy, this is a [[great]] [[work]] for rescue a [[forgotten]] [[hero]]. [[At]] Mexico this [[cinematography]] was [[broadcast]] only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's [[iife]], is a true example about a good German and [[concretely]], about a good [[dawg]]. The [[interviews]] between Tukur's [[characters]] and the [[Nazis]] [[procurator]] are [[especially]] interesting. A true ideas' war: two [[assorted]] [[Germany]], both with [[creed]] in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very [[complicate]] [[persona]]: [[dawg]], [[svoboda]] fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a [[wondrous]] intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is [[unpaid]] as Bonhoeffer. I [[suggested]] this [[movies]] a lot, [[concretely]] in this [[problematic]] [[dates]] for the [[planets]]. [[Onto]] Mexico we don't know a lot about Pastor Bonhoeffer [[iife]] and legacy, this is a [[wondrous]] [[jobs]] for rescue a [[ignored]] [[heroin]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Actually, I never [[bought]] into the [[metal]] was satanic and [[stuff]], but this movie kind of played on that [[idea]]. Though certainly not a movie to take seriously or to rate really [[high]], it does serve its [[purpose]] in that it entertains while it is [[playing]]. The story has a [[metal]] band burned to death in their hotel, one of their fans has a dream to this effect and said band starts to go on a kill [[spree]] from beyond the grave. So [[yes]], a [[bit]] of "Nightmare on Elm [[Street]]" plot going on here. [[Granted]] [[Freddy]] never molested a [[girl]] in a [[car]] before. There was another [[movie]] [[featuring]] a heavy metal band in it, but it was very [[different]] in how it [[played]] out as it had a [[band]] that kind of [[took]] over a town of kids and made them crazy. This one simply has the one fan of the band kind of helping the killer spirit at first then trying to stop him. [[Nothing]] to [[gruesome]] in it as I do not remember all that [[many]] gory kills. Quite frankly, the scene I do remember most is the scene of the [[girl]] wearing the [[headphones]] and then being molested by some creature incarnation of the band. Nothing [[great]], but a nice [[time]] filler. Actually, I never [[acquiring]] into the [[minerals]] was satanic and [[thing]], but this movie kind of played on that [[concept]]. Though certainly not a movie to take seriously or to rate really [[higher]], it does serve its [[intents]] in that it entertains while it is [[gaming]]. The story has a [[minerals]] band burned to death in their hotel, one of their fans has a dream to this effect and said band starts to go on a kill [[frenzy]] from beyond the grave. So [[yep]], a [[bite]] of "Nightmare on Elm [[Thoroughfare]]" plot going on here. [[Conferred]] [[Freddie]] never molested a [[female]] in a [[vehicles]] before. There was another [[flick]] [[starring]] a heavy metal band in it, but it was very [[several]] in how it [[done]] out as it had a [[bands]] that kind of [[picked]] over a town of kids and made them crazy. This one simply has the one fan of the band kind of helping the killer spirit at first then trying to stop him. [[Anything]] to [[abhorrent]] in it as I do not remember all that [[various]] gory kills. Quite frankly, the scene I do remember most is the scene of the [[girls]] wearing the [[earphone]] and then being molested by some creature incarnation of the band. Nothing [[remarkable]], but a nice [[moment]] filler. --------------------------------------------- Result 2352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[love]] watching early [[colour]] [[films]] - you [[mean]] those 40s [[clothes]] weren't all grey?

[[Margaret]] Rutherford dominates this [[movie]]. Her "eccentric" garb is [[actually]] [[rather]] [[attractive]] and [[yes]], she has an [[amazing]] hourglass [[figure]]. But I feel she was [[given]] her head rather too much. She [[probably]] [[developed]] this characterisation over many performances, and nobody [[told]] her "If it gets a [[laugh]], leave it out." She does too much [[deranged]] [[fooling]] about when she's [[supposed]] to be surprisingly down to [[earth]]. The Madame Arcati [[joke]] is that [[mediums]] were usually portrayed as wispy [[females]] in long drapery. Arcati behaves like a retired headmistress (We'll really put our backs into it!). The contrast between her breezy, commonplace manner and her wacky beliefs isn't really brought out.

Just because all the actors are English (apart from Cummings), the Americans feel they have to use the words "Brit", "stiff", "lip" and "upper". Oh, give it a [[rest]]! The three main characters lose their tempers constantly and make risqué remarks (Did he make love to you? Yes, but very discreetly - he was in the cavalry!). I [[amore]] watching early [[colors]] [[filmmaking]] - you [[imply]] those 40s [[garment]] weren't all grey?

[[Margarita]] Rutherford dominates this [[film]]. Her "eccentric" garb is [[genuinely]] [[comparatively]] [[seductive]] and [[oui]], she has an [[unbelievable]] hourglass [[silhouette]]. But I feel she was [[awarded]] her head rather too much. She [[assuredly]] [[crafted]] this characterisation over many performances, and nobody [[say]] her "If it gets a [[giggling]], leave it out." She does too much [[bothered]] [[deluding]] about when she's [[alleged]] to be surprisingly down to [[terra]]. The Madame Arcati [[travesty]] is that [[medias]] were usually portrayed as wispy [[femmes]] in long drapery. Arcati behaves like a retired headmistress (We'll really put our backs into it!). The contrast between her breezy, commonplace manner and her wacky beliefs isn't really brought out.

Just because all the actors are English (apart from Cummings), the Americans feel they have to use the words "Brit", "stiff", "lip" and "upper". Oh, give it a [[remainder]]! The three main characters lose their tempers constantly and make risqué remarks (Did he make love to you? Yes, but very discreetly - he was in the cavalry!). --------------------------------------------- Result 2353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Liongate has yet to [[prove]] itself. Every single [[movie]] from lionsgate has been [[abysmal]]. i've tried and [[tried]] to give them more [[opportunities]] and they just [[keep]] slapping me over and over again. And [[Cabin]] Fever is [[definitely]] no exception.

I couldn't even [[pay]] attention to most of this [[movie]] it was so [[frustrating]] and [[bad]].

here's the plot. [[Guy]] cuts up [[dead]] [[dog]] for some [[reason]]. [[Gets]] [[infected]] by random [[virus]], transfers it to [[kids]] at a camp, [[kids]] [[start]] to [[get]] infected and die, town finds out about it and rather than [[help]] them, [[kills]] them. then the water is infected and [[everyone]] [[dies]]. the end.

Seriously, that's the [[whole]] [[movie]].

all the [[characters]] are [[completely]] retarded, you don't care for any of them, and the one [[kid]] should have [[stuck]] with [[boy]] meets world. Me and my [[friend]] found that [[talking]] about how [[fat]] and bitchy our one classmate was to be far more [[enjoyable]] than paying attention to this [[movie]]. We did manage to make it all the [[way]] to the end while [[screaming]] bulls$@t, because this [[film]] will [[make]] you do that.

and i'm [[still]] [[confused]] by the random slow motion karate moves of the one random [[kid]] and how [[apparently]] everybody out in the [[country]] is [[completely]] [[retarded]] and hickish. And again, why did this dog [[attack]] the girl? why did the [[kid]] the hicks were [[trying]] to [[kill]] [[sit]] in a [[chair]] [[waiting]] for them to [[kill]] him? that was [[part]] of the two of their's [[plan]]? wow. [[best]] [[plan]] ever. i cannot believe this [[movie]] [[got]] a theatrical release. i [[could]] [[barely]] stomach the DVD, [[let]] [[alone]] have to [[sit]] in a [[theater]] not moving for an hour and a half. It wasn't scary, or funny, or cool, or [[anything]]. it's just a waste of 90 [[minutes]] that you [[could]] be [[using]] to...i don't know, plant a tree or [[something]]. it's more [[productive]] than this piece of [[garbage]]. The acting, [[special]] [[effects]], and script are a [[joke]]. don't ever pick this up.

Cabin fever gets one [[nasty]] leg [[shaving]] scene, out of 10 Liongate has yet to [[proven]] itself. Every single [[filmmaking]] from lionsgate has been [[awful]]. i've tried and [[try]] to give them more [[chances]] and they just [[maintain]] slapping me over and over again. And [[Cabana]] Fever is [[admittedly]] no exception.

I couldn't even [[payroll]] attention to most of this [[flick]] it was so [[depressing]] and [[unfavorable]].

here's the plot. [[Buddy]] cuts up [[die]] [[puppy]] for some [[reasons]]. [[Got]] [[polluted]] by random [[viruses]], transfers it to [[juvenile]] at a camp, [[kiddies]] [[initiating]] to [[got]] infected and die, town finds out about it and rather than [[helps]] them, [[killed]] them. then the water is infected and [[everybody]] [[died]]. the end.

Seriously, that's the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]].

all the [[nature]] are [[totally]] retarded, you don't care for any of them, and the one [[petit]] should have [[cornered]] with [[guy]] meets world. Me and my [[friends]] found that [[speaks]] about how [[greasy]] and bitchy our one classmate was to be far more [[nice]] than paying attention to this [[filmmaking]]. We did manage to make it all the [[manner]] to the end while [[howling]] bulls$@t, because this [[cinematography]] will [[deliver]] you do that.

and i'm [[again]] [[disconcerted]] by the random slow motion karate moves of the one random [[petit]] and how [[clearly]] everybody out in the [[nationals]] is [[abundantly]] [[nutcase]] and hickish. And again, why did this dog [[attacks]] the girl? why did the [[petit]] the hicks were [[attempting]] to [[killing]] [[sits]] in a [[president]] [[awaited]] for them to [[killed]] him? that was [[party]] of the two of their's [[scheme]]? wow. [[optimum]] [[programmes]] ever. i cannot believe this [[filmmaking]] [[gets]] a theatrical release. i [[wo]] [[hardly]] stomach the DVD, [[allowing]] [[lonely]] have to [[sitting]] in a [[cinemas]] not moving for an hour and a half. It wasn't scary, or funny, or cool, or [[somethings]]. it's just a waste of 90 [[mins]] that you [[did]] be [[used]] to...i don't know, plant a tree or [[somethings]]. it's more [[fruitful]] than this piece of [[trash]]. The acting, [[peculiar]] [[influences]], and script are a [[giggle]]. don't ever pick this up.

Cabin fever gets one [[disgusting]] leg [[flatten]] scene, out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2354 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] CONTAINS SPOILERS!

I [[saw]] an advert for this on a [[video]].Then my sister [[discovered]] that we had the book so I read it.I rented the [[video]] on the same day I [[finished]] the book.I [[thought]] it was very memorable as was the book. The [[cast]] was brilliant.Tara Fitzgerald was [[excellent]] as [[Helen]] and Rupert Graves was hateful as [[Arthur]].The costumes,music and settings are [[stunningly]] beautiful.

WARNING!DON`T READ ANY [[MORE]] IF [[YOU]] HAVEN`T [[WATCHED]] THIS

On the [[downside]] there are some sex scenes that have been [[added]] in and some violence.This is why the [[video]] is rated 15. There are some other things that have been thrown in.After the [[first]] part,I felt that the accuracy went downhill. [[While]] the [[book]] is better than this,I am glad I have seen it and would reccomend it to people who have read the book,are fans of Bronte or like costume dramas(I am all 3!)as [[long]] as you fastforward through the sex scenes. The [[book]] is [[rather]] underated.[[Anne]] Brontes books don`t seem to be that widely read or well known as [[Jane]] Erye or Wuthering [[Heights]] which have [[made]] it into [[television]] and [[film]] [[several]] [[times]]. Another thing.When I read the [[book]] ,I was surprised at how much religion ther was in it,but here they had axed that all out!

7\10 CONTAINS SPOILERS!

I [[watched]] an advert for this on a [[videos]].Then my sister [[discovering]] that we had the book so I read it.I rented the [[videos]] on the same day I [[complete]] the book.I [[figured]] it was very memorable as was the book. The [[casting]] was brilliant.Tara Fitzgerald was [[brilliant]] as [[Hackett]] and Rupert Graves was hateful as [[Arturo]].The costumes,music and settings are [[terribly]] beautiful.

WARNING!DON`T READ ANY [[GREATER]] IF [[THEE]] HAVEN`T [[OBSERVED]] THIS

On the [[drawback]] there are some sex scenes that have been [[adds]] in and some violence.This is why the [[videos]] is rated 15. There are some other things that have been thrown in.After the [[outset]] part,I felt that the accuracy went downhill. [[Despite]] the [[ledger]] is better than this,I am glad I have seen it and would reccomend it to people who have read the book,are fans of Bronte or like costume dramas(I am all 3!)as [[longer]] as you fastforward through the sex scenes. The [[ledger]] is [[quite]] underated.[[Anna]] Brontes books don`t seem to be that widely read or well known as [[Jin]] Erye or Wuthering [[Altitudes]] which have [[accomplished]] it into [[tv]] and [[films]] [[numerous]] [[period]]. Another thing.When I read the [[ledger]] ,I was surprised at how much religion ther was in it,but here they had axed that all out!

7\10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I saw this movie with a bunch of [[friends]] and although only two of us walked out of the [[cinema]] [[thinking]] how cool it was, the others just laughed and [[commented]] on how stupid it was. Well that was because it isn't [[supposed]] to be taken so seriously, basically it is a a [[movie]] that mocks horror flicks and does a [[damn]] good job.. There [[seems]] to be another movie coming out like that too, umm... Scary Movie?? Well this is Aussie, and [[original]]!!! [[Jessica]] Napier does a surperb performance and Sarah Kants has a definate bright future in acting! I hope to see more of them. Molly Ringwald was a good move, and [[Kylie]] was an [[even]] better move. The [[Impossible]] Princess was Queen of the screen!! I [[recommend]] seeing this [[flick]], as you'll be [[guessing]] until the very [[end]] the connection with Raffy, [[Hilary]] and The movie that never [[got]] finished 20 [[years]] [[ago]]. I saw this movie with a bunch of [[buddies]] and although only two of us walked out of the [[film]] [[thoughts]] how cool it was, the others just laughed and [[noted]] on how stupid it was. Well that was because it isn't [[alleged]] to be taken so seriously, basically it is a a [[kino]] that mocks horror flicks and does a [[jesus]] good job.. There [[looks]] to be another movie coming out like that too, umm... Scary Movie?? Well this is Aussie, and [[upfront]]!!! [[Jennifer]] Napier does a surperb performance and Sarah Kants has a definate bright future in acting! I hope to see more of them. Molly Ringwald was a good move, and [[Kaili]] was an [[yet]] better move. The [[Unable]] Princess was Queen of the screen!! I [[recommending]] seeing this [[gesture]], as you'll be [[guess]] until the very [[ceases]] the connection with Raffy, [[Hillary]] and The movie that never [[gets]] finished 20 [[yrs]] [[prior]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I have [[seen]] the film a few days back on a video [[tape]] and [[even]] [[though]] it was [[hard]] to swallow it at one take (because of its length and [[story]]), I liked it very much. I was [[impressed]] first, by the [[script]] and then, by the [[realization]] of this script. The film takes you on a ride, but that is not an [[easy]], [[joyful]] ride; it goes through time and different political regimes and [[shows]] the influence of them to ordinary people's lives. What I [[loved]] was the [[inner]] logic the film followed; logic, which just like logic in life, was [[rather]] [[illogical]] and confusing at [[times]] but in the end, when I thought about it, all the [[events]] and twists made sense. It makes no sense [[though]] to try to re-tell the story as it spreads in more than 50 years of time. I [[also]] [[liked]] very much Nikita Mikhalkov's character Aleksei and the way he played it, as some critics would saw, with restless abandon. What I didn't like about it, was that I [[think]] he [[later]] [[played]] [[characters]] that [[remind]] me of Aleksei in [[films]] like "[[Cruel]] Romance" (Zhestokij romans, which I [[actually]] [[love]]) and to some [[extent]] in "The Insulted and the [[Injured]]" ("Unizhennye i oskorblyonnye"). "Sibiriada" [[shows]], I [[think]], what a [[great]] film-maker [[Andrei]] Konchalovski was before he went to Hollywood and made forgettable films like "Tango and Cash" and [[less]] forgettable like "[[Runaway]] train". I would prefer "Kurochka Ryaba" to them... I have [[watched]] the film a few days back on a video [[tapes]] and [[yet]] [[if]] it was [[harsh]] to swallow it at one take (because of its length and [[tale]]), I liked it very much. I was [[surprising]] first, by the [[screenplay]] and then, by the [[fulfillment]] of this script. The film takes you on a ride, but that is not an [[simple]], [[happier]] ride; it goes through time and different political regimes and [[displayed]] the influence of them to ordinary people's lives. What I [[cared]] was the [[indoor]] logic the film followed; logic, which just like logic in life, was [[quite]] [[incoherent]] and confusing at [[moments]] but in the end, when I thought about it, all the [[incidents]] and twists made sense. It makes no sense [[although]] to try to re-tell the story as it spreads in more than 50 years of time. I [[apart]] [[enjoyed]] very much Nikita Mikhalkov's character Aleksei and the way he played it, as some critics would saw, with restless abandon. What I didn't like about it, was that I [[thought]] he [[then]] [[served]] [[features]] that [[reminded]] me of Aleksei in [[cinematography]] like "[[Savage]] Romance" (Zhestokij romans, which I [[indeed]] [[amour]]) and to some [[magnitude]] in "The Insulted and the [[Wounds]]" ("Unizhennye i oskorblyonnye"). "Sibiriada" [[demonstrates]], I [[thought]], what a [[huge]] film-maker [[Andrea]] Konchalovski was before he went to Hollywood and made forgettable films like "Tango and Cash" and [[lesser]] forgettable like "[[Runoff]] train". I would prefer "Kurochka Ryaba" to them... --------------------------------------------- Result 2357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was so surprised by how great The Man In The Moon truly was.I mean at first I was kinda expecting a cheesy, and predictable film, but I decided to put that aside when watching.Well, when it was over I was just left stunned(mainly in tears), by how great The Man In The Moon turned out to be.This movie is so entertaining and is so aware of its tone, and its just a fabulous film.The acting was great especially from Reece Witherspoon(who was so cute and lovable), and everyone else.There wasn't anything that really bothered me, I felt the ending kinda predictable, but very well done at that.Also I felt some things to be plain or as if it had been done before, but still a great film.Overall I must say I don't to much to say about this film, not that it was bad, its just a film you either like or don't like.I would however recommend this to any and everyone, even if you don't like these type of films, its still an enjoyable film.

8.7 out of 10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 2358 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] My [[comments]] on this [[movie]] have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so [[ill]] change my comment completely.

I think this is a really [[bad]] movie for several reasons.

Subject: one should be very careful in [[making]] a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.

Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.

Secondly, it is well over-acted.

3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.

4th, facts are way off.

And so on. Its a waste of celluloid. My [[sightings]] on this [[filmmaking]] have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so [[iil]] change my comment completely.

I think this is a really [[unfavourable]] movie for several reasons.

Subject: one should be very careful in [[doing]] a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.

Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.

Secondly, it is well over-acted.

3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.

4th, facts are way off.

And so on. Its a waste of celluloid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I don't know why some guys from [[US]], Georgia or even from [[Bulgaria]] have the [[courage]] to [[express]] [[feelings]] about something they don't understand at all. [[For]] those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't [[expect]] too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the [[movie]] without [[prejudice]], try to [[understand]] the [[whole]] [[humor]] inside - people of Serbia [[DID]] actually getting married while Bil Clinton [[bomb]] their villages, gypsies in all Balkans are [[ALWAYS]] [[try]] to f*ck you up in any [[way]] they can, [[LOVE]] is [[always]] [[unexpected]], [[pure]] and [[colorful]], and Balkans are [[extremely]] [[creative]]. For those who claims this is a bad [[movie]] I can [[see]] only that the American's sh*t (like [[Meet]] [[Dave]], [[Get]] [[Smart]] etc) are much [[much]] [[worse]] than a [[pure]], frank Balkan humoristic love [[story]] [[movie]] as [[Promise]] me. The [[comment]] should be [[useful]] and on [[second]] place should [[represent]] the personal [[view]] of the writer. I [[think]] the movie is [[great]] and people watch it [[must]] [[give]] their respects to the director and [[story]] [[told]] inside. It is simple, but [[true]]. It is [[brutal]], but [[gentle]] and makes you laugh to [[dead]]. I don't know why some guys from [[AMERICANS]], Georgia or even from [[Bulgarian]] have the [[bravery]] to [[expressed]] [[sentiments]] about something they don't understand at all. [[During]] those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't [[hopes]] too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the [[movies]] without [[prejudices]], try to [[fathom]] the [[ensemble]] [[comedy]] inside - people of Serbia [[GOT]] actually getting married while Bil Clinton [[bombing]] their villages, gypsies in all Balkans are [[CONTINUOUSLY]] [[endeavour]] to f*ck you up in any [[pathways]] they can, [[LIKES]] is [[perpetually]] [[unintended]], [[pur]] and [[picturesque]], and Balkans are [[unbelievably]] [[inventive]]. For those who claims this is a bad [[cinema]] I can [[behold]] only that the American's sh*t (like [[Respond]] [[Davey]], [[Obtain]] [[Intelligent]] etc) are much [[very]] [[worst]] than a [[unadulterated]], frank Balkan humoristic love [[stories]] [[cinematography]] as [[Promises]] me. The [[commentary]] should be [[helpful]] and on [[secondly]] place should [[representing]] the personal [[opinion]] of the writer. I [[thought]] the movie is [[wondrous]] and people watch it [[owe]] [[lend]] their respects to the director and [[history]] [[say]] inside. It is simple, but [[truthful]]. It is [[brutish]], but [[temperate]] and makes you laugh to [[decedent]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is the best [[film]] the [[Derek]] [[couple]] has ever made and if you [[think]] this is a [[recommendation]] then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the [[usual]] [[ingredients]]: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch [[Bo]] disrobing or auditioning for [[wet]] T-shirt [[contests]] [[quite]] [[frequently]], the [[story]] is just laughably [[idiotic]], and the film takes itself much too [[seriously]]. And then: Orang Utans in [[Africa]]?

But it has a few [[things]] going for it. Bo looks great, the [[production]] values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp [[value]]. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be [[serious]] and fails so [[badly]]. This is the best [[films]] the [[Derrick]] [[matches]] has ever made and if you [[thinking]] this is a [[recommends]] then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the [[accustomed]] [[component]]: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch [[Pu]] disrobing or auditioning for [[wetter]] T-shirt [[contest]] [[pretty]] [[often]], the [[tales]] is just laughably [[witless]], and the film takes itself much too [[profoundly]]. And then: Orang Utans in [[Afrika]]?

But it has a few [[aspects]] going for it. Bo looks great, the [[productivity]] values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp [[values]]. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be [[grievous]] and fails so [[desperately]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is even worse than the [[original]] Game of Death. A jumbled, [[incoherent]] storyline leads to "[[Billy]] [[Lo]]" falling from a [[helicopter]] to the [[ground]] below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we [[start]] out following some Bruce Lee clone, the [[film]] kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The main reason to watch this one is when [[Bobby]] Lo fights a lion, which is [[quite]] [[obviously]] a [[guy]] in a lion [[costume]]. [[Jang]] [[Lee]] Hwang is also the villain, who is [[usually]] pretty [[awesome]] but his screen time is [[significantly]] [[small]]. Mainly [[watched]] this and the original [[Game]] of [[Death]] because they're a [[part]] of the [[Bruce]] Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's [[finished]] works. No one [[would]] [[buy]] them otherwise. This is even worse than the [[initial]] Game of Death. A jumbled, [[incongruous]] storyline leads to "[[Billie]] [[Oscillator]]" falling from a [[chopper]] to the [[terra]] below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we [[commences]] out following some Bruce Lee clone, the [[filmmaking]] kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The main reason to watch this one is when [[Bubi]] Lo fights a lion, which is [[utterly]] [[definitely]] a [[man]] in a lion [[standup]]. [[Cheung]] [[Rhee]] Hwang is also the villain, who is [[routinely]] pretty [[sumptuous]] but his screen time is [[heavily]] [[scant]]. Mainly [[seen]] this and the original [[Games]] of [[Muerte]] because they're a [[parties]] of the [[Bros]] Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's [[finishing]] works. No one [[ought]] [[buying]] them otherwise. --------------------------------------------- Result 2362 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most boring movies I have ever seen, its horrible. Christopher Lee is good but he is hardly in it, the only the good part is the opening scene.

Don't be fooled by the title. "End of the World" is truly a bad movie, I stopped watching it close to the end it was so bad, only for die hard b-movie fans that have the brain to stand this vomit. --------------------------------------------- Result 2363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, what to say...

Having seen the film I still have to wonder what the hell the point of it all really was?? V.Dodgy camera moves in the courtyard at one point... I had to look away from the screen, I was feeling physically sick... Round and Round and Round.... You get the idea...

VERY VERY Strange accents at many points.... "Those that should know, know"

Unless your getting in for free, or being paid to watch it, or your partner is about to make you paint the house or something.. then forget it... --------------------------------------------- Result 2364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Towards the end of this thriller Ally Sheedy's gaunt latter-day image is used creatively to [[make]] up more than one hauntingly evil image. She convinces one that, if a nasty Bette Davis-type role were to come her way, she [[could]] carry it off brilliantly. Unfortunately, I can't find many other reasons for seeing this. If you've wondered what Sheedy looks like in a pair of old-fashioned glasses (but why should anyone?) then here's your answer. For the [[rest]], Sally Kirkland's sex-starved crazy [[woman]] is really [[tiresome]], and [[even]] if you like this [[sort]] of thing more than I do you'll have to [[admit]] that the [[tension]] sags [[badly]] during these scenes. Savage's [[drunken]] [[brute]] of an insurance [[agent]] is [[equally]] [[distasteful]] but at [[least]] it's a [[small]] role. Of the leading [[actors]], [[Nicholas]] Walker [[inspires]] no [[sympathy]] at all for [[Paul]] Keller's plight and his acting is [[wooden]]. Dara Tomanovich is better and during her scenes with Sheedy the level [[rises]] a [[little]]. Sheedy's meticulous, [[understated]] performance (though she [[often]] [[seems]] to be on [[automatic]] pilot) is admirable in itself but out of [[context]] with the [[rest]]. The sets are [[drab]], the camera-work undistinguished. Towards the end of this thriller Ally Sheedy's gaunt latter-day image is used creatively to [[deliver]] up more than one hauntingly evil image. She convinces one that, if a nasty Bette Davis-type role were to come her way, she [[wo]] carry it off brilliantly. Unfortunately, I can't find many other reasons for seeing this. If you've wondered what Sheedy looks like in a pair of old-fashioned glasses (but why should anyone?) then here's your answer. For the [[stays]], Sally Kirkland's sex-starved crazy [[femme]] is really [[exhausting]], and [[yet]] if you like this [[kind]] of thing more than I do you'll have to [[acknowledged]] that the [[tensions]] sags [[sorely]] during these scenes. Savage's [[drunk]] [[brutal]] of an insurance [[officers]] is [[alike]] [[tasteless]] but at [[lowest]] it's a [[scant]] role. Of the leading [[players]], [[Nicolas]] Walker [[inspiring]] no [[sympathies]] at all for [[Poul]] Keller's plight and his acting is [[wood]]. Dara Tomanovich is better and during her scenes with Sheedy the level [[ascent]] a [[scant]]. Sheedy's meticulous, [[underrated]] performance (though she [[frequently]] [[appears]] to be on [[automated]] pilot) is admirable in itself but out of [[backdrop]] with the [[remainder]]. The sets are [[uninspiring]], the camera-work undistinguished. --------------------------------------------- Result 2365 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i would have given this movie a 1 out of 10 if it weren't for ms. Claudine Barretto's performance. and i will take this time to overlook that Kris Aquino's here. and... end.

i really AVOID watching Pinoy horror movies because stories lack originality and i really think that (some) writers don't give enough attention to the characters (and their progression) in their stories (redundant??). it was as if they 'pushed' the movie onwards when their storytelling stank. and my goodness, creative exhaustion led them to rip-off other movies. why?? why did this movie get a good review?? i wouldn't give it that much merit. the movie was KIND OF scary, but the movie seemed more freaky as it deals with Filipino folklore... it goes into my list of 'most likely to happen' category. i just wished they spent more time improving the story lines and fix those flash back sequences, never mind if the lighting sucked, it wouldn't matter much if the content would blow you away.. SAYANG. --------------------------------------------- Result 2366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have never read the Bradbury [[novel]] that this movie is [[based]] on but from what I've [[gathered]], it will be interesting (when I finally do read it and I will). My comments will be based purely on the film. As soon as I saw the trailer I knew I had to see it and was so excited but when I finally did, I was so [[disappointed]] it [[hurt]]. This is because the [[movie]] itself [[felt]] so amateurish. The [[actors]] were not well [[cast]] ([[though]] Robards and Pryce are both [[good]] [[actors]] - just not here). The [[kid]] [[actors]], it seemed, were [[merely]] asked to [[show]] up, [[get]] in the characters' [[clothes]], say the lines and make the faces. The set and [[props]] were cheap and unrealistic. The direction was [[surprisingly]] [[bad]]. I was so [[surprised]] at the awfulness of it that I had to [[go]] online and [[check]] who [[directed]] it, just to [[see]] the kind of [[work]] he had [[done]]. The [[editing]] was [[cut]] and paste and the plot ([[screenplay]]) was just that as well (even [[though]] the author had been [[involved]] himself, [[irony]]?). The [[building]] up of the tension, fear and [[suspense]] was so [[mild]] it was [[ineffective]] when the [[climax]] finally [[came]].

I've read some of the comments on this [[movie]] and find it [[hard]] to believe people actually like it. What [[hurts]] the most is that the content is interesting and [[fun]] and [[intriguing]]. It had so much [[potential]]. [[Unfortunately]], the [[film]] was so technically [[bad]] it [[takes]] away from the [[brilliance]] of the [[story]]. I have never read the Bradbury [[newer]] that this movie is [[groundwork]] on but from what I've [[flocked]], it will be interesting (when I finally do read it and I will). My comments will be based purely on the film. As soon as I saw the trailer I knew I had to see it and was so excited but when I finally did, I was so [[frustrated]] it [[harmed]]. This is because the [[flick]] itself [[deemed]] so amateurish. The [[protagonists]] were not well [[casting]] ([[if]] Robards and Pryce are both [[alright]] [[players]] - just not here). The [[petit]] [[players]], it seemed, were [[only]] asked to [[shows]] up, [[obtains]] in the characters' [[outfits]], say the lines and make the faces. The set and [[fittings]] were cheap and unrealistic. The direction was [[marvellously]] [[rotten]]. I was so [[surprises]] at the awfulness of it that I had to [[going]] online and [[audited]] who [[oriented]] it, just to [[behold]] the kind of [[cooperate]] he had [[effected]]. The [[editorial]] was [[chopped]] and paste and the plot ([[scenario]]) was just that as well (even [[while]] the author had been [[embroiled]] himself, [[satire]]?). The [[build]] up of the tension, fear and [[waiting]] was so [[temperate]] it was [[ineffectual]] when the [[apogee]] finally [[arrived]].

I've read some of the comments on this [[filmmaking]] and find it [[arduous]] to believe people actually like it. What [[stings]] the most is that the content is interesting and [[droll]] and [[captivating]]. It had so much [[potentialities]]. [[Regrettably]], the [[filmmaking]] was so technically [[unfavourable]] it [[pick]] away from the [[splendour]] of the [[conte]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This film, which is based on a [[true]] [[story]], comes from first time director and long time actor, Denzel Washington. Denzel Washington has given us some of the [[best]] performances of the last decade, as a black soldier in the Civil War in Glory, and a lawyer in the acclaimed Philadelphia. And of course, he made special notoriety last year when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Training Day, in which Denzel Washington became the first African American to receive the award for Best Actor. I guess Denzel [[wanted]] a change of pace, so he chose to direct Antwone Fisher, in which he also stars. Fisher is played by Derek Luke, who is new to the silver screen, but has made some guest appearances on such television shows as King of Queens, and he will be appearing in the upcoming film release of Biker Boyz.

This is a [[truly]] well [[done]] [[film]] from Denzel Washington, considering it was his first time directing. Undoubtedly, Denzel felt some [[kind]] of [[commitment]] and believed in the real life story of Antwone Fisher. Antwone [[Fisher]] is about a [[young]] African American [[man]] in the Navy who [[constantly]] gets into [[fights]], and after one particular [[brawl]] he is [[sent]] to [[see]] a [[Navy]] [[psychiatrist]] named [[Jerome]] Davenport, played by Denzel Washington. Davenport [[helps]] Antwone to [[deal]] with his [[troubled]] [[past]] and [[learn]] to move on with his life, by finding his birth [[mother]] who had to give him up at birth because she was in [[prison]]. What makes this film good is the [[fact]] that it's not overly [[melodramatic]]. I was [[expecting]] [[something]] a little more like Good Will Hunting, with a lot of swearing, [[fighting]] and vulgarity. Not that I didn't like Good Will Hunting, or the [[swearing]], [[fighting]] and vulgarity of the film were out of place. [[Quite]] the [[contrary]]! However, Antwone [[Fisher]] is a true [[story]], and I don't [[think]] that Washington [[wanted]] to sensationalize the story for [[dramatic]] affect in the [[film]]. Don't get me wrong, there are moments when we see Antwone [[fighting]], carrying on and having moments when it [[seems]] like the [[world]] is closing in on him. [[After]] all, in his first session with his [[psychiatrist]], the character played by Washington, Devenport [[asks]] [[Fisher]] where he was born, and Fisher's [[response]] is, `from under a rock,' an obvious jab at the [[pressures]] waning on Antwone Fisher's [[soul]]. But I had to [[appreciate]] the fact that this film wasn't sensationalized for dramatic affect. I think it shows real character on the part of Denzel Washington to deliver a more realistic story and to avoid the typical clichés that are common in Hollywood films, even those based on true stories. One other point that I would like to bring up about Antwone Fisher is the acting. Over all, performances were good in the film, but not great. At times, I think it was a bit obvious that the main characters were actors, but overall, to complain about performances in this film would be ludicrous. One actress that I would like to point out in this film is Viola Davis. She plays Antwone's mother, but she says barely two sentences in the movie at all, but not so much because she [[appears]] at the end of the film, but more because she in shock that her long lost son, Antwone has found her. What I would like to point out about her as an actress in the lack of use of her. She in basically a character actress, and I haven't seen her play any really elaborate roles. She made appearances in Traffic, Out Of Sight, Kate & Leopold, and two recent films: Far From Heaven and Solaris. In Steven Soderberg's remake of Solaris, she played a scientist on a doomed space craft orbiting a planet. In that film, she is confronted by George Clooney's character and she drawn to tears by what Clooney tells her in a particular scene. When I first saw Solaris, I remember seeing her tear up in the scene and thinking, wow, this woman can act. It was as if you could feel the character's grief. In that brief shot of her face, she gave so much expression and I honestly felt very sorry for her character's sadness and trouble in the film. I think she has definite potential as an actress and should be used more often perhaps in leading roles, rather than just as a character driven actress. Nonetheless, Antwone Fisher is a very good movie. Denzel Washington, as always, pulls off a great performance and he gives us a great directorial debut. Also, Derek Luke is a very talented actor. I think that Antwone Fisher will bring his immense critical fame for his portrayal of the troubled man, but I think that his public popularity will increase with the release of Biker Boyz, which also stars Lawrence Fishburn. Antwone Fisher is based on the book `Finding Fish: A Memoir,' by Antwone Quenton Fisher. *** This film, which is based on a [[real]] [[tale]], comes from first time director and long time actor, Denzel Washington. Denzel Washington has given us some of the [[better]] performances of the last decade, as a black soldier in the Civil War in Glory, and a lawyer in the acclaimed Philadelphia. And of course, he made special notoriety last year when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Training Day, in which Denzel Washington became the first African American to receive the award for Best Actor. I guess Denzel [[wants]] a change of pace, so he chose to direct Antwone Fisher, in which he also stars. Fisher is played by Derek Luke, who is new to the silver screen, but has made some guest appearances on such television shows as King of Queens, and he will be appearing in the upcoming film release of Biker Boyz.

This is a [[genuinely]] well [[played]] [[films]] from Denzel Washington, considering it was his first time directing. Undoubtedly, Denzel felt some [[type]] of [[dedication]] and believed in the real life story of Antwone Fisher. Antwone [[Fisherman]] is about a [[youth]] African American [[guy]] in the Navy who [[regularly]] gets into [[fighting]], and after one particular [[quarrel]] he is [[sending]] to [[behold]] a [[Armada]] [[analyst]] named [[Gideon]] Davenport, played by Denzel Washington. Davenport [[assisting]] Antwone to [[addresses]] with his [[disturbed]] [[preceding]] and [[learning]] to move on with his life, by finding his birth [[mummy]] who had to give him up at birth because she was in [[jail]]. What makes this film good is the [[facto]] that it's not overly [[operatic]]. I was [[waiting]] [[anything]] a little more like Good Will Hunting, with a lot of swearing, [[struggle]] and vulgarity. Not that I didn't like Good Will Hunting, or the [[inauguration]], [[struggles]] and vulgarity of the film were out of place. [[Pretty]] the [[opposite]]! However, Antwone [[Fishermen]] is a true [[history]], and I don't [[believe]] that Washington [[wanna]] to sensationalize the story for [[noteworthy]] affect in the [[movies]]. Don't get me wrong, there are moments when we see Antwone [[struggling]], carrying on and having moments when it [[looks]] like the [[globe]] is closing in on him. [[Upon]] all, in his first session with his [[psychologist]], the character played by Washington, Devenport [[requesting]] [[Fishermen]] where he was born, and Fisher's [[reply]] is, `from under a rock,' an obvious jab at the [[presses]] waning on Antwone Fisher's [[alma]]. But I had to [[grateful]] the fact that this film wasn't sensationalized for dramatic affect. I think it shows real character on the part of Denzel Washington to deliver a more realistic story and to avoid the typical clichés that are common in Hollywood films, even those based on true stories. One other point that I would like to bring up about Antwone Fisher is the acting. Over all, performances were good in the film, but not great. At times, I think it was a bit obvious that the main characters were actors, but overall, to complain about performances in this film would be ludicrous. One actress that I would like to point out in this film is Viola Davis. She plays Antwone's mother, but she says barely two sentences in the movie at all, but not so much because she [[appear]] at the end of the film, but more because she in shock that her long lost son, Antwone has found her. What I would like to point out about her as an actress in the lack of use of her. She in basically a character actress, and I haven't seen her play any really elaborate roles. She made appearances in Traffic, Out Of Sight, Kate & Leopold, and two recent films: Far From Heaven and Solaris. In Steven Soderberg's remake of Solaris, she played a scientist on a doomed space craft orbiting a planet. In that film, she is confronted by George Clooney's character and she drawn to tears by what Clooney tells her in a particular scene. When I first saw Solaris, I remember seeing her tear up in the scene and thinking, wow, this woman can act. It was as if you could feel the character's grief. In that brief shot of her face, she gave so much expression and I honestly felt very sorry for her character's sadness and trouble in the film. I think she has definite potential as an actress and should be used more often perhaps in leading roles, rather than just as a character driven actress. Nonetheless, Antwone Fisher is a very good movie. Denzel Washington, as always, pulls off a great performance and he gives us a great directorial debut. Also, Derek Luke is a very talented actor. I think that Antwone Fisher will bring his immense critical fame for his portrayal of the troubled man, but I think that his public popularity will increase with the release of Biker Boyz, which also stars Lawrence Fishburn. Antwone Fisher is based on the book `Finding Fish: A Memoir,' by Antwone Quenton Fisher. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 2368 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I loved this film. I first saw it when I was 20 ( which was only four years ago) and I enjoyed it so much, I brought my own copy the next day. The comedy is well played by all involved. I always have to rewind and rewatch the scene where Mr. Tsanders explains why he found water at 6 ft in one area and 227 feet in another area. Also look for Jason Robards father who plays Mr. Retch. Talent ran in that family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2369 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[If]] you [[want]] to watch a good film about how women can fight back against sexual assault, then this [[film]] is not the film that you [[want]] to watch. It was a social [[commentary]] about a woman who was victimized and fights back. [[Spoiler]]: Rosario Dawson turns the tables on her assailant. Instead of using the criminal justice system, the victim resorts to using vigilantism. She in essence nullifies the judicial system. The film "The Accused" was a much better film because the victim uses the judicial system and wins. What the "Descent" does is telling victims of assault that they should resort to violence? Is victim any better that the accuser? No!!! [[Though]] you [[wanna]] to watch a good film about how women can fight back against sexual assault, then this [[filmmaking]] is not the film that you [[wanting]] to watch. It was a social [[comments]] about a woman who was victimized and fights back. [[Deflectors]]: Rosario Dawson turns the tables on her assailant. Instead of using the criminal justice system, the victim resorts to using vigilantism. She in essence nullifies the judicial system. The film "The Accused" was a much better film because the victim uses the judicial system and wins. What the "Descent" does is telling victims of assault that they should resort to violence? Is victim any better that the accuser? No!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I will start this off by saying I couldn't get all the way through it. I picked it up on a rainy day from WalMart like the rest of the reviewers on this site. I figured there wasn't any way I would regret my purchase. Was I wrong or what? Seriously now, who approved this project? They need to be forced to watch this movie over and over until the end of eternity. That's the only fitting punishment I can think of for releasing something this bad. The shooting reminds me of the movies I used to make for class projects on a big old VHS cam. The acting isnt much better. I think the only difference is that there are a few cool cameos. Yay, who cares... Shecky Moskowitz is unfunny, and the ships comedian is an even bigger loser. That's about as much of the plot as I understood.

Overall it's the worst movie I've ever seen. I own it on DVD and have given it to many co-workers to watch. Each comes back and laughs and says "Wow I didnt think I'd ever say I shut off an Adam Sandler movie 15 minutes in...."

My response is always "Well now you can"

--------------------------------------------- Result 2371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked this a lot. In fact, if I see it again(and I plan to) I just may love it. I'll echo other reviewers in saying that this movie really does grow on you as you watch. It starts kind of slowly but the way in enfolds is very natural and has a mood to it. You just get into it.

I really liked the summery atmosphere to the movie and thought the movie was very touching as a whole. The characters have a strong element of realism and the movie very slowly and gently weaves a spell as you get involved in the various interactions between them all and want to know how it will ultimately turn out and what paths the characters will choose to take.

I am very surprised that there are less then a dozen comments on this-there are obscure TV movies that have more comments then Rich In Love.

One thing that I will say is I missed the ending which is driving me crazy and I HAVE to watch it again to see that. This is a movie that may not be for everybody but that I feel is strongly underrated(even some of my most film buff purist friends who have seen almost every movie there is haven't seen this) and it doesn't even seem to have much of a message board but I liked it a lot and to all those who like family dramas that are warm on scenery, atmosphere and an unhurried languid pace should probably take a look at this. Especially note worthy is that it takes place in South Carolina so for those (like me) who love the south, and movies that take place there, this is a gem. I'll add my vote to the woefully few comments and recommend this little known flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I never heard of this film til it played as part of a [[Robert]] Mitchum retrospective at the National Film Theatre in London. Almost 60 years on the [[cast]] list looked tasty to say the [[least]] with seven [[names]] - in [[addition]] to top-billed Mitchum - in the public domain; Charles McGraw, not long off The Killers, Barbara Bel Geddes, long before Dallas and arguably still better known as the [[daughter]] of Theatre Set Designer Norman, Walter Brennan, who needed no introduction, Frank Faylen, the [[sadistic]] male nurse in The Lost Weekend and the much nicer small-town mensch in It's A Wonderful Life, Robert Preston still a decade away from Harold Hill in The Music Man with Tom Tully and Phyllis Thaxter making up the numbers. Alas, most of them were [[wasting]] their time. I looked in [[vain]] for any 'signature' scenes given that it was Robert Wise on bullhorn. By this time he'd made around a half dozen films and had still to find a style. The story is our old friend the range [[war]] and Mitchum must have thought it was [[barely]] a cut above the Hopalong Cassidy oaters on which he'd cut his teeth. There are no new [[twists]] - if you don't count the unbelievable scene when Mitchum accuses Preston of sleeping with Thaxter to gain information about her father's plans to move his cattle. This is perfectly true but how did Mitchum KNOW? We've [[seen]] or heard [[nothing]] to indicate how he discovered it. On balance not a lot to be [[said]] for this. I never heard of this film til it played as part of a [[Roberta]] Mitchum retrospective at the National Film Theatre in London. Almost 60 years on the [[casting]] list looked tasty to say the [[fewer]] with seven [[name]] - in [[addendum]] to top-billed Mitchum - in the public domain; Charles McGraw, not long off The Killers, Barbara Bel Geddes, long before Dallas and arguably still better known as the [[girlie]] of Theatre Set Designer Norman, Walter Brennan, who needed no introduction, Frank Faylen, the [[vicious]] male nurse in The Lost Weekend and the much nicer small-town mensch in It's A Wonderful Life, Robert Preston still a decade away from Harold Hill in The Music Man with Tom Tully and Phyllis Thaxter making up the numbers. Alas, most of them were [[lose]] their time. I looked in [[fruitless]] for any 'signature' scenes given that it was Robert Wise on bullhorn. By this time he'd made around a half dozen films and had still to find a style. The story is our old friend the range [[warfare]] and Mitchum must have thought it was [[hardly]] a cut above the Hopalong Cassidy oaters on which he'd cut his teeth. There are no new [[spins]] - if you don't count the unbelievable scene when Mitchum accuses Preston of sleeping with Thaxter to gain information about her father's plans to move his cattle. This is perfectly true but how did Mitchum KNOW? We've [[noticed]] or heard [[nada]] to indicate how he discovered it. On balance not a lot to be [[indicated]] for this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I picked this [[movie]] on the cover [[alone]] thinking that i was in for an adventure to the level of "Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom". [[Unfortunately]] I was in for a virtual yawn. Not like any yawn i have had before though. This yawn was so [[large]] that i [[could]] barely find [[anything]] of quality in this movie. The cover described [[amazing]] special [[effects]]. There were [[none]]. The movie was so lightweight that even the [[stereotypes]] were [[awfully]] [[portrayed]]. It does give the [[idea]] that you can [[solve]] [[problems]] with violence. Good if you [[want]] to teach your kids that. I don't. [[Keep]] away from this one. [[If]] you are [[looking]] for [[family]] entertainment then you [[might]] [[find]] [[something]] that is more [[inspiring]] [[elsewhere]]. I picked this [[filmmaking]] on the cover [[only]] thinking that i was in for an adventure to the level of "Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom". [[Tragically]] I was in for a virtual yawn. Not like any yawn i have had before though. This yawn was so [[prodigious]] that i [[wo]] barely find [[nada]] of quality in this movie. The cover described [[unbelievable]] special [[consequences]]. There were [[nos]]. The movie was so lightweight that even the [[stereotype]] were [[horribly]] [[depicted]]. It does give the [[thinking]] that you can [[dissipating]] [[problem]] with violence. Good if you [[wants]] to teach your kids that. I don't. [[Conserving]] away from this one. [[Though]] you are [[quest]] for [[families]] entertainment then you [[apt]] [[unearth]] [[algo]] that is more [[inspirational]] [[else]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2374 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A sweet-natured young mountain man with a sad past (Henry Thomas) comes upon an abandoned baby girl in the woods and instantly falls in love with her. The town elders generally support him in keeping the child, though a local temptress (Cara Seymour) thinks little of the new family. A determined little girl on a long walk and a sinister travelling salesman (David Strathairn at his creepiest) have parallel stories which converge in a fateful way. This is a charming slice-of-life in the Ozarks in the same vein as "Where The Lillies Bloom" & "The Dollmaker". All three were shot on location in those beautiful hills and cover the lives of simple-living -- but not simple-minded -- American folk. A minimum of strong language and brief but pointed violence make this fairly-safe family viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2375 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[While]] I have a [[great]] respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I [[would]] [[call]] "must-see". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first [[movie]] [[poster]] and trailer, and [[thankfully]] lived up to my [[expectations]].

Atlantis is a more "[[mature]]" Disney film in the [[sense]] that it lacks [[songs]] (a very [[unusual]] [[trait]] for a Disney [[film]] indeed), and is [[focused]] more on action and [[discovery]] than any other [[recent]] Disney [[offering]]. The [[world]] of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's [[core]], is [[fantastic]], [[presented]] as desolate caverns with ruins, and then [[slowly]] developing into actual ecosystems, which, while [[usually]] containing some reminder of [[harshness]], [[become]] more and more [[intriguing]] until the [[tropical]] paradise itself is [[reached]]. The [[presentation]] of [[simply]] Atlantis' [[landscape]] and setting, without some expendable cheery song, [[gave]] the kingdom a much more [[beautiful]] and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean [[language]], as well as [[attempts]] to [[connect]] it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations [[adds]] to this, and [[works]] fairly well.

[[Also]], with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's [[practical]] jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a "childish" [[element]] that I [[usually]] associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the [[struggle]] to [[get]] to Atlantis, and the [[constant]] discovery that [[occurred]] at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was [[able]] to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by [[helping]] the Atlanteans [[discover]] parts of their own [[history]] that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean "[[weaponry]]", which is [[used]] in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a [[better]] word, [[quite]] exciting.

[[Granted]], not all of the [[story]] makes full [[sense]], and the [[film]] doesn't feature any [[amazing]] [[new]] computer-generated visual [[effects]], but, aside from the [[Toy]] Story [[movies]], this is the most [[entertaining]] Disney [[film]] I've [[seen]] in [[years]]. [[Despite]] I have a [[wondrous]] respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I [[ought]] [[invitation]] "must-see". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first [[film]] [[placard]] and trailer, and [[hopefully]] lived up to my [[predictions]].

Atlantis is a more "[[grownup]]" Disney film in the [[feeling]] that it lacks [[tunes]] (a very [[strange]] [[character]] for a Disney [[films]] indeed), and is [[concentrating]] more on action and [[detect]] than any other [[freshly]] Disney [[offers]]. The [[worldwide]] of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's [[nuclei]], is [[spectacular]], [[submitted]] as desolate caverns with ruins, and then [[softly]] developing into actual ecosystems, which, while [[generally]] containing some reminder of [[toughness]], [[gotten]] more and more [[exciting]] until the [[equatorial]] paradise itself is [[totaled]]. The [[submissions]] of [[merely]] Atlantis' [[scenery]] and setting, without some expendable cheery song, [[provided]] the kingdom a much more [[funky]] and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean [[linguistics]], as well as [[tries]] to [[linking]] it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations [[added]] to this, and [[working]] fairly well.

[[Moreover]], with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's [[realistic]] jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a "childish" [[components]] that I [[typically]] associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the [[wrestling]] to [[obtain]] to Atlantis, and the [[sustained]] discovery that [[arose]] at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was [[capable]] to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by [[aiding]] the Atlanteans [[discovery]] parts of their own [[historical]] that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean "[[armament]]", which is [[using]] in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a [[improved]] word, [[utterly]] exciting.

[[Ascribed]], not all of the [[narratives]] makes full [[feeling]], and the [[cinematography]] doesn't feature any [[noteworthy]] [[novo]] computer-generated visual [[implications]], but, aside from the [[Pawn]] Story [[cinematography]], this is the most [[amusing]] Disney [[movie]] I've [[noticed]] in [[yr]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I [[could]] give this movie the lowest possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and [[incompetence]], of [[high]] intentions and [[failure]].

Mira Sorvino is [[horribly]] cast as the princess, but [[entirely]] unbelievable as Phocion, a young [[boy]]. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining [[character]], but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the [[insipid]] French [[play]] that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).

To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a [[brilliant]], [[passionate]] philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and [[uninspired]] re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).

Aside from the [[atrocious]] [[plot]] and [[dialogue]], there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.

-Matthew McGuire Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I [[did]] give this movie the lowest possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and [[impotence]], of [[higher]] intentions and [[imperfection]].

Mira Sorvino is [[unimaginably]] cast as the princess, but [[altogether]] unbelievable as Phocion, a young [[laddie]]. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining [[personages]], but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the [[tacky]] French [[gaming]] that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).

To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a [[sumptuous]], [[vehement]] philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and [[unimaginative]] re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).

Aside from the [[frightful]] [[intrigue]] and [[discussions]], there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.

-Matthew McGuire --------------------------------------------- Result 2377 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes it may be goofy and may not seem as funny as many high budget comedies out there, but this movie is truly hilarious if you really watch it. Tim Meadows has always struck me as being funny off of the Saturday Night Live show. Whenever he would do this character on the show I would crack up laughing. So after I saw this was going to be playing on Comedy Central one night I decided to check it out. All in all I was farily impressed with this movie, because it wasn't meant to win any Oscars or become comedy of the year, but it did entertain the Saturday Night Live fans that love the Ladies Man character. This movie is also packed with some highly quotable lines that can be recited for years to come. --------------------------------------------- Result 2378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] its too [[bad]] that no one knows anything about this [[movie]], and it [[gets]] [[old]] telling people it's rap's version of spinal tap. and you know, im sorry i dont have any better [[comments]], but damnit, go get the [[movie]] and watch it, and then make all your [[friends]] watch it too, just like im [[gonna]]. its too [[amiss]] that no one knows anything about this [[kino]], and it [[receives]] [[ancient]] telling people it's rap's version of spinal tap. and you know, im sorry i dont have any better [[commentary]], but damnit, go get the [[cinema]] and watch it, and then make all your [[buddies]] watch it too, just like im [[going]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this because I thought there were going to be a lot of car chases and cool cars to gawk at. Guess I was lied to. This movie is very boring.

The movie starts out Kip Raines(Giovanni Ribisi) sitting outside a Porsche dealership checking to see if they have the right car. When they confirm it's the right one, Kip gets a brick out of the trunk and chucks it at the window, shattering it. He gets the Porsche while his friend gets the keys. They start up the car and take off into the night. They deliver it to a warehouse only to have been followed by the police. So, the whole crew ditches all the cars and go their separate ways. Then, we get a glimpse of Memphis Raines. He is giving a little speech to a bunch of kids at a go-kart track. Then, he is confronted by Atlee Jackson(Will Patton). Atlee tells Memphis that his brother Kip is in deep *bleep*. Memphis is known as one of the most notorious car thieves in Los Angeles. Memphis heads to a junkyard and meets Raymond Calitri(Christopher Ecclesten). This guy threatens to kill Kip if Memphis doesn't deliver 50 cars within 72 hours.

There are a few problems with this film:

1.Story: The first 48 in-movie hours take place when Cage and Duvall are looking for a crew and planning everything out. The last 12 in-movie hours are a waste!

2. The Cars: You see maybe 10 cars out of the 50 as the movie advertises. So, where are the other 40 cars? Why don't we get to see them?

3. The Chase: The chase at the end of the movie was a joke. It was not suspenseful at all.

4. The Dog: Somewhere in the movie, the dog eats the burgers and swallows three keys as well. This is impossible. The keys were flipped open. The keys would have severely damaged the dog's esophagus, stomach, and large intestines. The guys suggest giving the dog laxatives to help him poop it out. This won't work. The dog will get a lot of diarrhea but no keys. It was stated in Jackass after Ryan Dunne stuck a toy car up his rectum. Take laxatives, lots of diarrhea, but no car. Same case with the dog.

5. The Cop During The Chase: When Eleanor breaks down for a few minutes, Nicholas Cage tries desperately to start up the car. You see a police cruiser behind him who isn't looking at his car at all. But, right when Nicholas Cage starts the engine up again, the police officer jerks his head to the right, sees the car, and immediately begins to chase after him. It is stupid. So, right when he heard the engine start, and saw the car, he knew that was the car he was looking for. How does he know it's the right car? He only sees the back of it.

Overall, the movie is boring. There is no action. There are very few cars. The movie is stupid. I have never seen the original but I plan to.

I give this movie 1 star out of 10. Get The Fast and Furious instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 2380 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] Run away from this movie. [[Even]] by B-movie [[standards]] this movie is [[dreadful]]. It is also [[insidious]] in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are [[cool]] and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the [[disenfranchised]] a lot [[better]] than this movie, see it instead.

No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not [[work]] as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.

Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction [[presents]] [[nothing]] new or interesting. Run away from this movie. [[Yet]] by B-movie [[norms]] this movie is [[horrific]]. It is also [[sneaky]] in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are [[groovy]] and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the [[disadvantaged]] a lot [[optimum]] than this movie, see it instead.

No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not [[collaboration]] as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.

Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction [[exposes]] [[anything]] new or interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 2381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I have [[seen]] [[every]] episode of this [[spin]] off. I thought the first season was a [[decent]] [[effort]] [[considering]] the [[expectations]] of following such a [[success]] that is Grey's [[Anatomy]]. Thus i have [[continued]] to watch. I'm afraid the second season [[lacks]] the [[charm]], the [[chemistry]] and more importantly the drama of it's [[predecessor]] Grey's [[Anatomy]]. The [[relationships]] seem contrived and the acting is so-so. The [[writing]] [[lacks]] the [[intelligence]] and comedic hints [[seen]] in GA. There are [[shows]] that a formulaic but do not feel formulaic and contrived, [[unfortunately]] PP is not so. I loved Kate Walsh's presence in GA. I'm afraid Kate Walsh's life in LA is [[simply]] not interesting. I have [[noticed]] [[each]] episode of this [[revolve]] off. I thought the first season was a [[presentable]] [[endeavors]] [[reviewing]] the [[outlook]] of following such a [[accomplishments]] that is Grey's [[Postmortem]]. Thus i have [[incessant]] to watch. I'm afraid the second season [[lack]] the [[seduction]], the [[chemical]] and more importantly the drama of it's [[forerunner]] Grey's [[Autopsy]]. The [[relations]] seem contrived and the acting is so-so. The [[handwriting]] [[lacked]] the [[intelligentsia]] and comedic hints [[watched]] in GA. There are [[exhibited]] that a formulaic but do not feel formulaic and contrived, [[sadly]] PP is not so. I loved Kate Walsh's presence in GA. I'm afraid Kate Walsh's life in LA is [[straightforward]] not interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 2382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[In]] the [[beginning]] and [[throughout]] the [[movie]], it was [[great]]. It was suspenseful and [[thrilling]]. [[Yet]] in the [[end]] it [[gave]] no [[answer]] to what had [[happened]]. They mysteriously turned into [[zombies]] by a [[raven]] or [[crow]]? It did not answer the [[questions]] that we all had and therefore, was not as good a [[movie]] as I [[thought]] that it was going to be. [[Onto]] the [[initiate]] and [[across]] the [[flick]], it was [[awesome]]. It was suspenseful and [[riveting]]. [[However]] in the [[ceases]] it [[handed]] no [[replies]] to what had [[transpired]]. They mysteriously turned into [[walkers]] by a [[crow]] or [[corneille]]? It did not answer the [[subjects]] that we all had and therefore, was not as good a [[filmmaking]] as I [[ideology]] that it was going to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I have to [[admit]] that Holly was not on my watch list for the Edinburgh [[Film]] [[Festival]]. [[However]], after the Artistic Director of the Festival [[specifically]] [[recommended]] this [[film]] to an [[audience]] of over 200 people [[prior]] to the screening of another [[film]], I decided to go to [[see]] it. Wow!

This film is dealing with the very [[difficult]] [[issue]] of child prostitution and does so without any compromise. I have [[found]] myself [[crying]] a number of [[times]] during the movie and laughing at others. [[Speaking]] about an [[emotional]] roller coaster.

The lead actor ([[Thuy]] Nguyen) is a Vietnamese [[newcomer]] (who was only 14 at the time of filming) and had to tackle this [[incredibly]] [[complex]] and [[difficult]] role. She [[reminded]] me of Keisha Castle-Hughes from [[Whale]] [[Rider]] but the role here is much more demanding as she has to play a [[child]] [[prostitute]]. [[Chances]] are that she will win [[numerous]] awards.

The [[main]] story is about a [[girl]] who was sold to prostitution by her family and held as a sex-slave in a brothel in Cambodia. She meets an American (played by Ron [[Livingston]] in a [[strong]] dramatic role that we are not [[used]] to see from him), who after spending some [[time]] with her decides to [[help]] her. By that time [[however]], she is [[sold]] again and he is [[going]] on a [[search]] for her [[around]] Cambodia. The story turns and [[twists]] and the [[audience]] can never [[predict]] what will [[happen]] [[next]].

The acting was [[strong]] [[across]] the board with a very interesting international cast. Udo Kier (very [[convincing]] as a sex tourist), Virgine Ledoyen ([[touching]] as a social [[worker]]) and [[Chris]] [[Penn]] (one of his [[last]] movies). The Asian cast was [[also]] [[superb]].

Although the [[film]] [[deals]] with this [[difficult]] subject matter it focuses successfully on telling a [[compelling]], [[powerful]] [[story]]. It was shot in Cambodia (some scenes in [[real]] [[operating]] brothels) which [[adds]] to the [[feeling]] that you are [[almost]] watching a [[documentary]]. It seems that the DP used a [[lot]] of hand held camera and close-ups and [[overall]] it [[made]] you feel like you are right there as [[part]] of the [[story]].

After the screening, I was listening to other [[members]] of the audience as they [[left]] and it seemed that they were all stunned. This is not an [[easy]] film to watch and I [[salute]] the filmmakers for not making a "Hollywood Film."

It is by far the best film I have seen in the Edinburgh Film Festival. Opinion shared by my husband and a couple of other friends. I have to [[accepted]] that Holly was not on my watch list for the Edinburgh [[Cinematography]] [[Feast]]. [[Yet]], after the Artistic Director of the Festival [[notably]] [[recommend]] this [[cinematography]] to an [[audiences]] of over 200 people [[anterior]] to the screening of another [[cinematography]], I decided to go to [[seeing]] it. Wow!

This film is dealing with the very [[complex]] [[issuing]] of child prostitution and does so without any compromise. I have [[discovered]] myself [[whining]] a number of [[moments]] during the movie and laughing at others. [[Discussing]] about an [[sentimental]] roller coaster.

The lead actor ([[Shui]] Nguyen) is a Vietnamese [[newcomers]] (who was only 14 at the time of filming) and had to tackle this [[impossibly]] [[complicate]] and [[troublesome]] role. She [[remembered]] me of Keisha Castle-Hughes from [[Whales]] [[Mustang]] but the role here is much more demanding as she has to play a [[kids]] [[skank]]. [[Possibilities]] are that she will win [[multiple]] awards.

The [[principal]] story is about a [[women]] who was sold to prostitution by her family and held as a sex-slave in a brothel in Cambodia. She meets an American (played by Ron [[Livingstone]] in a [[vigorous]] dramatic role that we are not [[employs]] to see from him), who after spending some [[times]] with her decides to [[support]] her. By that time [[yet]], she is [[sells]] again and he is [[go]] on a [[researching]] for her [[about]] Cambodia. The story turns and [[spins]] and the [[audiences]] can never [[forecasting]] what will [[arise]] [[future]].

The acting was [[forceful]] [[during]] the board with a very interesting international cast. Udo Kier (very [[cogent]] as a sex tourist), Virgine Ledoyen ([[affects]] as a social [[workers]]) and [[Kris]] [[Pennsylvania]] (one of his [[final]] movies). The Asian cast was [[moreover]] [[wondrous]].

Although the [[films]] [[deal]] with this [[problematic]] subject matter it focuses successfully on telling a [[convincing]], [[influential]] [[history]]. It was shot in Cambodia (some scenes in [[authentic]] [[functioning]] brothels) which [[added]] to the [[impression]] that you are [[practically]] watching a [[literature]]. It seems that the DP used a [[batch]] of hand held camera and close-ups and [[whole]] it [[brought]] you feel like you are right there as [[portions]] of the [[stories]].

After the screening, I was listening to other [[member]] of the audience as they [[exited]] and it seemed that they were all stunned. This is not an [[simple]] film to watch and I [[greeted]] the filmmakers for not making a "Hollywood Film."

It is by far the best film I have seen in the Edinburgh Film Festival. Opinion shared by my husband and a couple of other friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 2384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have read the [[novel]] Reaper of Ben Mezrich a fews [[years]] ago and last [[night]] I [[accidentally]] came to [[see]] this adaption.

Although it's been [[years]] since I read the [[story]] the [[first]] [[time]], the differences between the novel and the [[movie]] are [[humongous]]. Very important [[elements]], which [[made]] the whole thing plausible are just [[written]] out or [[changed]] to [[bad]].

If the [[plot]] [[sounds]] interesting to you: go and [[get]] the novel. Its much, much, much better.

Still 4 out of 10 since it was [[hard]] to [[stop]] watching because of the [[great]] basic plot by Ben Mezrich. I have read the [[newer]] Reaper of Ben Mezrich a fews [[yr]] ago and last [[nighttime]] I [[coincidentally]] came to [[consults]] this adaption.

Although it's been [[olds]] since I read the [[tale]] the [[frst]] [[moment]], the differences between the novel and the [[filmmaking]] are [[mammoth]]. Very important [[ingredient]], which [[introduced]] the whole thing plausible are just [[authored]] out or [[modified]] to [[negative]].

If the [[intrigue]] [[noises]] interesting to you: go and [[got]] the novel. Its much, much, much better.

Still 4 out of 10 since it was [[tough]] to [[parada]] watching because of the [[marvellous]] basic plot by Ben Mezrich. --------------------------------------------- Result 2385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The [[film]] belongs to Inventor - Underdog genre. Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Dern and Chris Cooper [[bring]] a [[little]] acting verve to story with several standard [[elements]]. Well filmed, well edited, with plenty of well acted secondary [[roles]].

Some have [[declared]] this [[movie]] to be classic American hokey. It is that and more. I agree with those who [[say]] "The [[movie]] [[celebrates]] the thrill of [[youthful]] inspiration."

The [[film]] is a [[pleasant]] [[reminder]] that [[achievement]] may be born of [[ordinary]] [[roots]].

The [[cinematography]] belongs to Inventor - Underdog genre. Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Dern and Chris Cooper [[brings]] a [[tiny]] acting verve to story with several standard [[ingredients]]. Well filmed, well edited, with plenty of well acted secondary [[duties]].

Some have [[proclaimed]] this [[film]] to be classic American hokey. It is that and more. I agree with those who [[told]] "The [[kino]] [[celebrating]] the thrill of [[juvenile]] inspiration."

The [[kino]] is a [[nice]] [[reminders]] that [[realization]] may be born of [[banal]] [[racine]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A [[bad]] rip-off attempt on "Seven", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked [[story]] and strong aftertaste of lame [[propaganda]]. Yeah, them "sex offenders", they [[live]] next [[door]] and you're gonna get raped, really.

No surprises from the vice-terminatrix [[woman]], she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.

The [[singer]] [[woman]] with the [[crazy]] eyes is [[best]] when she's dead in bed; and even the [[wolf]] was sub-par ([[although]] she was the [[best]] [[performer]] in the [[movie]]) -- [[maybe]] they [[fed]] her before the [[shots]], or something.

Unlike "Seven", which had a ([[made]] up, but interesting) [[story]], to which one [[could]] [[relate]] more or [[less]] [[regardless]] of the [[country]], this [[movie]] [[seems]] to focus on a US-only [[obsession]]. [[If]] one doesn't care much about "[[sex]] [[offenders]]" -- and the [[statistics]] are that [[lack]] of [[exercise]] and [[bad]] diet [[cause]] more [[pain]], [[suffering]] and [[death]] -- there is [[little]] [[reason]] to [[see]] it, or to be [[afraid]].

There are some [[body]] part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and [[fails]] both as artistic [[device]] (because it is [[pointless]]) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.

Don't waste [[time]] on this one. A [[unfavourable]] rip-off attempt on "Seven", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked [[histories]] and strong aftertaste of lame [[publicity]]. Yeah, them "sex offenders", they [[vivo]] next [[wears]] and you're gonna get raped, really.

No surprises from the vice-terminatrix [[femme]], she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.

The [[diva]] [[femme]] with the [[mad]] eyes is [[optimum]] when she's dead in bed; and even the [[lair]] was sub-par ([[whereas]] she was the [[finest]] [[virtuoso]] in the [[flick]]) -- [[conceivably]] they [[nurtured]] her before the [[punches]], or something.

Unlike "Seven", which had a ([[introduced]] up, but interesting) [[conte]], to which one [[did]] [[pertain]] more or [[fewest]] [[separately]] of the [[nations]], this [[flick]] [[seem]] to focus on a US-only [[mania]]. [[Though]] one doesn't care much about "[[sexuality]] [[criminals]]" -- and the [[stats]] are that [[insufficiency]] of [[exercises]] and [[unhealthy]] diet [[reason]] more [[heartache]], [[hardship]] and [[dies]] -- there is [[scant]] [[reasons]] to [[seeing]] it, or to be [[fearful]].

There are some [[agencies]] part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and [[fail]] both as artistic [[instruments]] (because it is [[superfluous]]) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.

Don't waste [[times]] on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is overblown, predictable, pretentious, and hollow to its core. The settings are faithful to the era but self-conscious in their magnification by prolonged exposure. The lingering over artifacts stops the action and cloys almost as much as the empty dialogue. Tom Hanks seems to be sleepwalking much as Bruce Willis did in Hart's War. Tom, you can't give depth to a character simply by making your face blank! The content did not warrant the histrionic acting by Paul Newman. This is a dud wrapped in an atomic bomb casing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I [[saw]] this feature as part of the Asian American Film [[Festival]] in New York and was [[horrified]] by the graphic, sado-masochistic, child pornography that I witnessed. The story line is [[hidden]] beneath [[way]] too many graphic sex scenes - and, not one is in the [[least]] bit erotic - sick is the more the feeling. The director seemed to be going for shock value rather the exploring the various levels of why these characters are like this. See it if you can stomach it - I still have [[flashbacks]]. I [[watched]] this feature as part of the Asian American Film [[Feast]] in New York and was [[surprised]] by the graphic, sado-masochistic, child pornography that I witnessed. The story line is [[stealth]] beneath [[camino]] too many graphic sex scenes - and, not one is in the [[less]] bit erotic - sick is the more the feeling. The director seemed to be going for shock value rather the exploring the various levels of why these characters are like this. See it if you can stomach it - I still have [[reminiscences]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2389 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When i saw the preview for this on TV i was thinking, "ok its gonna be a good werewolf movie" but it was not. it was not scary at all! acting was good, plot was horrible, the military bid was just plain stupid. I think the SCI-FI channel could of done better than this piece of crap. The movie made it sound like Arron was going to turn into a werewolf, instead he turned psycho and bit some doctor's throat out. If you have read some of my other reviews on other movies, there all positive, but this one is not simply because the story was terrible. One out of 10 max. Im sure you all were expecting some werewolf flick, but i bet you didn't expect this. Beyond Loch Nes was way better than this movie, heck, any movie thats on the sci-fi channel is better than this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] [[Basically]] what we have here is little more than a [[remake]] of the hilarious 1970's [[classic]] kitsch horror '[[Death]] Line' which [[ironically]] was like this [[cobblers]], [[also]] partly filmed at the disused Aldwych [[underground]] station.

Making [[good]] use of the now disused Jubilee Line [[platforms]] at Charing [[Cross]] as well as the [[aforementioned]] Aldwych, this [[film]] [[contains]] [[basically]] the same plot - [[dodgy]] [[murdering]] [[mad]] zombie in the tunnels [[preying]] on the lost [[passengers]] who have [[missed]] the [[last]] train - originality is not this film's strong point.

Indeed strong points are [[sadly]] [[lacking]]. The [[gore]] [[ranges]] from the poor to the [[unnecessarily]] over gory [[whilst]] the sub-Gollum [[nutter]] is never [[really]] [[fully]] [[explained]] as seems [[little]] more than an under [[developed]] plot [[device]].

Franke Polente has little to do with a thin [[script]] than [[run]] down a lot of [[tunnels]] and [[scream]] [[every]] so [[often]], [[indeed]] she was like [[pretty]] much everyone [[else]] in this film, out-acted by a small [[dog]] and a [[pack]] of [[tame]] rats.

If [[creepy]] [[films]] set on the London [[Underground]] are your [[bag]], or you just [[want]] to [[play]] '[[spot]] the [[tube]] location' them [[pick]] this up on [[DVD]] when it hits a [[bargain]] [[bin]]. [[If]] you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a [[copy]] of [[Death]] Line (aka Raw Meat).

If you are looking for a quality well [[written]] and [[acted]] [[film]], you will [[need]] to [[change]] trains..... [[Broadly]] what we have here is little more than a [[redo]] of the hilarious 1970's [[typical]] kitsch horror '[[Die]] Line' which [[sarcastically]] was like this [[shoemakers]], [[furthermore]] partly filmed at the disused Aldwych [[metro]] station.

Making [[alright]] use of the now disused Jubilee Line [[platform]] at Charing [[Croix]] as well as the [[above]] Aldwych, this [[filmmaking]] [[encompasses]] [[broadly]] the same plot - [[murky]] [[killed]] [[furious]] zombie in the tunnels [[preyed]] on the lost [[travelers]] who have [[miss]] the [[final]] train - originality is not this film's strong point.

Indeed strong points are [[unfortunately]] [[lacked]]. The [[gora]] [[ranging]] from the poor to the [[senselessly]] over gory [[while]] the sub-Gollum [[wacko]] is never [[genuinely]] [[completely]] [[explains]] as seems [[petite]] more than an under [[elaborated]] plot [[devices]].

Franke Polente has little to do with a thin [[hyphen]] than [[running]] down a lot of [[tunnel]] and [[screams]] [[all]] so [[routinely]], [[actually]] she was like [[quite]] much everyone [[further]] in this film, out-acted by a small [[puppy]] and a [[packed]] of [[cultivated]] rats.

If [[scary]] [[movie]] set on the London [[Metro]] are your [[baggage]], or you just [[wanting]] to [[playing]] '[[stain]] the [[pipes]] location' them [[select]] this up on [[DVDS]] when it hits a [[negotiation]] [[ibn]]. [[Unless]] you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a [[copied]] of [[Deaths]] Line (aka Raw Meat).

If you are looking for a quality well [[typed]] and [[behaved]] [[filmmaking]], you will [[gotta]] to [[amend]] trains..... --------------------------------------------- Result 2391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[amazed]] at the improvements [[made]] in an animated [[film]]. [[If]] you [[sit]] close to the screen, you will [[see]] the detail in the grass and surface [[structures]]. The [[detail]], [[colors]], and shading are at [[least]] an [[order]] of [[magnitude]] better than [[Toy]] Story. How they were [[able]] to pull off the shading, I will never [[know]]. I do [[hope]] that PIXAR will [[provide]] a [[documentary]] on how the film was produced so I can [[find]] out how all this was [[accomplished]]. [[Based]] on this [[film]], I [[think]] [[animated]] [[films]] of the [[future]] will be [[judged]] on the [[basis]] of this [[film]]. I was [[appalled]] at the improvements [[accomplished]] in an animated [[movies]]. [[Unless]] you [[sitting]] close to the screen, you will [[seeing]] the detail in the grass and surface [[edifice]]. The [[details]], [[dye]], and shading are at [[fewest]] an [[edict]] of [[extent]] better than [[Pawn]] Story. How they were [[capable]] to pull off the shading, I will never [[savoir]]. I do [[esperanza]] that PIXAR will [[affords]] a [[documentation]] on how the film was produced so I can [[unearth]] out how all this was [[doing]]. [[Founded]] on this [[kino]], I [[thought]] [[animate]] [[movies]] of the [[forthcoming]] will be [[deemed]] on the [[bases]] of this [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a [[great]] [[entertaining]] [[action]] [[film]] in my [[opinion]], with cool [[characters]], lots of [[action]], and an [[amazing]] performance from Dolph Lundgren, [[however]] Alex Karzis is awful as the [[villain]]!. The story is very good, and i found the [[kids]] to be likable for the most part, plus Dolph Lundgren is [[simply]] amazing in this!. The action scenes are [[excellent]], and it's almost like [[Die]] [[Hard]] except it's set in a [[school]]!, plus Kata Dobó is very [[menacing]] and sexy as the sidekick!. The finale is very exciting, and it has a couple of cool emotional [[moments]] as well!, however i just wished it had another villain, because Alex Karzis just didn't [[cut]] it as the villain [[way]] too OTT, and laughable for my tastes. This should be [[higher]] then 4.1 in my opinion, as i [[thought]] it was a [[great]] [[action]] [[film]], and while the [[kids]], were very [[stupid]] at [[times]], they [[got]] [[quite]] [[resourceful]] as the movie went along!, plus the shootouts were pretty cool as well!. The [[ending]] is very amusing,and [[Corey]] Sevier's character was my [[favorite]] [[student]]!, plus Dolph has [[still]] got it!. This is a [[great]] [[entertaining]] [[action]] [[film]] in my [[opinion]], with cool [[characters]], lots of [[action]], and an [[amazing]] performance from Lundgren!, but Alex Karzis is awful as the villain, [[still]] i [[highly]] [[recommend]] this one!. The Direction is very good!. [[Sidney]] J. Furie does a very good [[job]] here with [[great]] [[camera]] [[work]], good angles, and [[keeping]] the [[film]] at a very [[fast]] pace!. There is a [[bit]] of blood and violence. We get [[lots]] of [[extremely]] [[bloody]] gunshot [[wounds]],[[knife]] in the side of the head, bloody arrow hits, an impaling, and other [[minor]] [[stuff]]. The Acting is [[fantastic]]!. Dolph Lundgren is [[amazing]] as [[always]], and is [[amazing]] here, he is [[extremely]] [[likable]], [[kicks]] that [[ass]] as [[usual]], had [[great]] [[chemistry]] with the [[kids]], had an [[awesome]] [[character]], is very charismatic, and he [[may]] not have [[shown]] a [[great]] emotional rage, he still was a [[hell]] of a [[lot]] of fun to watch!, he is one of my [[favorite]] [[actors]]! (Lundgren [[Rules]]!!!!!). Alex Karzis is [[god]] [[awful]] as the [[villain]], he is laughably OTT, was [[boring]], and not menacing at all, he [[also]] annoyed the [[crap]] out of me. Kata Dobó is very sexy as the side kick and did fine with what she had to do, she was the real villain in my opinion!. Corey Sevier is funny as Mick, he was my favorite student, and i really started to warm up to him in the 2nd half, i liked him a lot!, he had good chemistry with Dolph too. Dov Tiefenbach(Willy),Chris Collins(Hogie),Mpho Koaho(Jay Tee),Danielle Hampton(Alicia),Nicole Dicker(Charlee) all do great as the students. Jennifer Baxter is very cute and is good as The fiancée. rest of the cast do fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5 This is a [[fantastic]] [[amusing]] [[efforts]] [[movie]] in my [[view]], with cool [[traits]], lots of [[efforts]], and an [[awesome]] performance from Dolph Lundgren, [[still]] Alex Karzis is awful as the [[hoodlum]]!. The story is very good, and i found the [[juvenile]] to be likable for the most part, plus Dolph Lundgren is [[merely]] amazing in this!. The action scenes are [[wondrous]], and it's almost like [[Dead]] [[Stiff]] except it's set in a [[teaching]]!, plus Kata Dobó is very [[threatens]] and sexy as the sidekick!. The finale is very exciting, and it has a couple of cool emotional [[times]] as well!, however i just wished it had another villain, because Alex Karzis just didn't [[clipping]] it as the villain [[pathways]] too OTT, and laughable for my tastes. This should be [[upper]] then 4.1 in my opinion, as i [[ideology]] it was a [[huge]] [[efforts]] [[movie]], and while the [[children]], were very [[foolish]] at [[moments]], they [[ai]] [[utterly]] [[inventive]] as the movie went along!, plus the shootouts were pretty cool as well!. The [[terminated]] is very amusing,and [[Cory]] Sevier's character was my [[favored]] [[pupils]]!, plus Dolph has [[yet]] got it!. This is a [[huge]] [[amusing]] [[measures]] [[cinematographic]] in my [[viewing]], with cool [[traits]], lots of [[efforts]], and an [[noteworthy]] performance from Lundgren!, but Alex Karzis is awful as the villain, [[however]] i [[heavily]] [[recommended]] this one!. The Direction is very good!. [[Sid]] J. Furie does a very good [[employment]] here with [[super]] [[cameras]] [[jobs]], good angles, and [[maintaining]] the [[cinematography]] at a very [[rapids]] pace!. There is a [[bitten]] of blood and violence. We get [[batch]] of [[terribly]] [[murderous]] gunshot [[lesions]],[[stabbing]] in the side of the head, bloody arrow hits, an impaling, and other [[marginal]] [[thing]]. The Acting is [[unbelievable]]!. Dolph Lundgren is [[fantastic]] as [[permanently]], and is [[dazzling]] here, he is [[terribly]] [[sympathetic]], [[karate]] that [[butt]] as [[customary]], had [[huge]] [[chemicals]] with the [[children]], had an [[brilliant]] [[traits]], is very charismatic, and he [[maggio]] not have [[demonstrated]] a [[formidable]] emotional rage, he still was a [[dammit]] of a [[lots]] of fun to watch!, he is one of my [[preferred]] [[actresses]]! (Lundgren [[Regulation]]!!!!!). Alex Karzis is [[deus]] [[terrible]] as the [[hoodlum]], he is laughably OTT, was [[bored]], and not menacing at all, he [[further]] annoyed the [[shitty]] out of me. Kata Dobó is very sexy as the side kick and did fine with what she had to do, she was the real villain in my opinion!. Corey Sevier is funny as Mick, he was my favorite student, and i really started to warm up to him in the 2nd half, i liked him a lot!, he had good chemistry with Dolph too. Dov Tiefenbach(Willy),Chris Collins(Hogie),Mpho Koaho(Jay Tee),Danielle Hampton(Alicia),Nicole Dicker(Charlee) all do great as the students. Jennifer Baxter is very cute and is good as The fiancée. rest of the cast do fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 2393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This [[movie]] has so [[many]] [[wonderful]] elements to it! The [[debut]] performance of Reese Witherspoon is, of course, [[marvelous]], but so too is her [[chemistry]] with Jason London. The score is [[remarkable]], breezy and pure. [[James]] Newton Howard [[enhances]] the quality of any film he composes for tenfold. He [[also]] [[seems]] to have a knack for lost-days-of-youth [[movies]], be sure to catch his score for the [[recent]] "Peter Pan" and the haunting [[Gothic]] [[music]] of "The Village." I first [[saw]] this film at about 13 or 14 and now I don't just [[cry]] at the [[ending]], I [[shed]] a [[tear]] or two for the [[nostalgia]]. Show this movie to your [[daughters]]. It will [[end]] up becoming a lifetime [[comfort]] film. This [[film]] has so [[myriad]] [[wondrous]] elements to it! The [[premiere]] performance of Reese Witherspoon is, of course, [[awesome]], but so too is her [[chemical]] with Jason London. The score is [[wondrous]], breezy and pure. [[Jacques]] Newton Howard [[reinforces]] the quality of any film he composes for tenfold. He [[further]] [[looks]] to have a knack for lost-days-of-youth [[theater]], be sure to catch his score for the [[freshly]] "Peter Pan" and the haunting [[Goth]] [[musical]] of "The Village." I first [[watched]] this film at about 13 or 14 and now I don't just [[cries]] at the [[terminated]], I [[hangar]] a [[torn]] or two for the [[homesickness]]. Show this movie to your [[girl]]. It will [[ceases]] up becoming a lifetime [[consolation]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is [[absurd]] - aside from the fellow [[Australian]] who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a [[review]] so far was some way involved in the production of [[Elektra]], [[considering]] how generous they were with their praise.

Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie [[conversions]] so I didn't go in with many [[expectations]], yet still I found Elektra to be [[incredibly]] underwhelming. The thing that [[irked]] me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by unexplained, that left you thinking "huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?" or "so how did that aspect of the character come about?" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.

Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by unexplained.

If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic [[locations]] in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained [[little]] enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're [[supposed]] to suspend our [[disbelief]] for fantasy/[[action]] [[films]], but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action [[film]] [[standards]]) that it [[simply]] frustrated me.

Well, hell, at [[least]] Jennifer Garner looks damn [[good]]. This is [[senseless]] - aside from the fellow [[Australia]] who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a [[examine]] so far was some way involved in the production of [[Electra]], [[examine]] how generous they were with their praise.

Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie [[translations]] so I didn't go in with many [[forecast]], yet still I found Elektra to be [[surprisingly]] underwhelming. The thing that [[outraged]] me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by unexplained, that left you thinking "huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?" or "so how did that aspect of the character come about?" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.

Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by unexplained.

If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic [[placements]] in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained [[scant]] enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're [[suspected]] to suspend our [[atheism]] for fantasy/[[measures]] [[filmmaking]], but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action [[filmmaking]] [[standard]]) that it [[straightforward]] frustrated me.

Well, hell, at [[fewer]] Jennifer Garner looks damn [[alright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, I had seen "They all laughed" when it came out in

Europe around 1982 and had kept a vague but dear souvenir of it. I 've just seen it again on tape, almost twenty years after... Bogdanovich has a true heartfelt tenderness over his characters and a kind sympathy which is difficult not to feel also. Excellent comedians and actors, good lines all over and for everyone and pretty good editing, too. I laughed and smiled all the time. Just as we all do, at times. Go get it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] as it was the [[second]] feature on a disc containing the previously banned Video [[Nasty]] 'Blood Rites'. As Blood [[Rites]] was entirely awful, I really wasn't expecting much from this film; but actually, it would seem that trash director Andy Milligan has outdone himself this [[time]] as Seeds of [[Sin]] tops [[Blood]] [[Rites]] in [[style]] and stands tall as a more than adequate slice of sick sixties sexploitation. The plot is actually quite similar to Blood Rites, as we focus on a dysfunctional family unit, and of course; there is an [[inheritance]] at stake. The film is shot in black and [[white]], and the look and feel of it reminded me a lot of the trash classic 'The Curious Dr Humpp'. There's barely any gore on display, and the director seems keener to focus on sex, with themes of incest and hatred seeping through. The acting is [[typically]] trashy, but most of the women get to appear nude at some point and despite a poor reputation, director Andy Milligan actually seems to have an eye for this sort of thing, as many of the sequences in this film are actually quite [[beautiful]]. The plot is paper thin, and most of the film is filler; but the music is catchy, and the director also does a surprisingly good job with the sex scenes themselves, as most are somewhat erotic. [[Overall]], this is not a [[great]] [[film]]; but it's likely to appeal to the cult fan, and gets a much higher recommendation than the better known and lower quality 'Blood Rites'. I [[observed]] this [[kino]] as it was the [[secondly]] feature on a disc containing the previously banned Video [[Horrid]] 'Blood Rites'. As Blood [[Rituals]] was entirely awful, I really wasn't expecting much from this film; but actually, it would seem that trash director Andy Milligan has outdone himself this [[moment]] as Seeds of [[Oin]] tops [[Transfusion]] [[Ceremonial]] in [[styles]] and stands tall as a more than adequate slice of sick sixties sexploitation. The plot is actually quite similar to Blood Rites, as we focus on a dysfunctional family unit, and of course; there is an [[heredity]] at stake. The film is shot in black and [[bianchi]], and the look and feel of it reminded me a lot of the trash classic 'The Curious Dr Humpp'. There's barely any gore on display, and the director seems keener to focus on sex, with themes of incest and hatred seeping through. The acting is [[fluently]] trashy, but most of the women get to appear nude at some point and despite a poor reputation, director Andy Milligan actually seems to have an eye for this sort of thing, as many of the sequences in this film are actually quite [[wondrous]]. The plot is paper thin, and most of the film is filler; but the music is catchy, and the director also does a surprisingly good job with the sex scenes themselves, as most are somewhat erotic. [[Totals]], this is not a [[wondrous]] [[films]]; but it's likely to appeal to the cult fan, and gets a much higher recommendation than the better known and lower quality 'Blood Rites'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I do miss the company Vestron, they sure had their finger on the pulse of unique and unusual cinema back in the 1980s. This is very apparent with the astonishing Paperhouse, a film that touches me deeply each and every time I watch it.

The idea of a girl manipulating a dream world with her drawings (thusly the dream world manipulating reality), and also connecting with and affecting the life of a boy she's never actually met, is fascinating and never disappoints. Charlotte Burke at first seems quite precocious and yet you warm up to her because by being a bit of a mischievous child, it makes it hard for the adults to believe what she is experiencing. She becomes very self aware and strong towards the end, even finding she doesn't "hate boys" as she so defiantly claimed at first. Through this we are treated to many touching moments and some immensely scary ones, all visually stunning with a grand score from Hans Zimmer. I'm quite proud to be an owner of the soundtrack on CD when it was released in the United States on RCA Victor. At the time of this writing there is no DVD of Paperhouse yet available in the U.S. (only in Europe), here's hoping one of my wishes will come true as I truly cherish this beautiful film and a DVD of it would be very welcome!

It's satisfying watching the girl work out her thoughts like a puzzle game trying to make the dream world work for her and her newfound friend Marc (Elliot Spiers). Both Charlotte Burke and Elliot Spiers do a magnificent job throughout, I find the editorial comment on Amazon.com about it being "hammy acting" quite perplexing -- I found every aspect of Paperhouse to be exhilarating. Even in minor scenes of brilliance like when Charlotte and the girl in the classroom are staring at each other through the glass on a door, it's quite powerful.

You don't have to be an arthouse type to enjoy Paperhouse, just be a person that enjoys a film that stimulates and has you wanting more. There is enough in this film to invite repeated viewings and I'm still in awe of the cinematography and sets. For me, it's never like watching the same film twice, as there are so many details to absorb and savor. A very emotional experience indeed.

While there are many films I adore, there are only a few specific ones that strike a great emotional chord in me: films like Paperhouse, Static, Resurrection, and Donnie Darko. When I see so much drek out there passing as films that will easily be forgotten and in bargain bins, all I have to do is watch Paperhouse and my faith in wondrous storytelling is renewed. --------------------------------------------- Result 2398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the better comedies that has ever been on television. Season one was hilarious as were most of the following seasons. The only reason that I give this show a 9/10 is because of the unfortunate final season. The only good part of the final season was the finale. My favorite part of this show was the scenes that cut to people's imaginations, often depicting the characters in famous TV shows or movies from the 70's. It is a rare show in that i liked every character (with the exception of the final season...too late to try to develop a new character and fez wasn't nearly as funny). Red's foot in your ass comments never got old, nor did Kelso's stupidity. Bravo to fox for keeping such a good show so long, too long even. --------------------------------------------- Result 2399 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't know the stars, or modern Chinese teenage music - but I do know a thoroughly entertaining movie when I see one.

Kung Fu Dunk is pure Hollywood in its values - it's played for laughs, for love, and is a great blend of Kung Fu and basketball.

Everybody looks like they had a lot of fun making this - the production values are excellent - and modern China looks glossier than Los Angeles here.

The plot of the abandoned orphan who grows up in a kung fu school only to be kicked out and then discover superstardom as a basketball play (and love and more etc;) is great - this is fresh, fun, and immensely entertaining.

With great action and good dialogue this is one simply to enjoy - for all ages - and for our money was one of the best family movies we're seen in a long time.

Please ignore the negative reviews and give Dunk a chance - we were really glad we did - a GOOD sports comedy movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As long as you go into this movie knowing that it's terrible: bad acting, bad "effects," bad story, bad... everything, then you'll love it. This is one of my favorite "goof on" movies; watch it as a comedy and have a dozen good laughs! --------------------------------------------- Result 2401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] On this 4th of [[July]] weekend it's heartening to see the [[spirit]] of the [[Declaration]] of Independence alive and well in the film "War, Inc." Just as our founding fathers [[gave]] the back of their [[collective]] hand to King George III, this [[film]] exposes in [[hilarious]] fashion the craven war-profiteering by the [[current]] [[crop]] of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the [[government]], to [[include]] privatizing [[war]] itself.

The cast in this [[satire]] absolutely [[shines]]. [[John]] Cusack is [[wonderful]] as a droll, conflicted corporate assassin, and the [[beautiful]] Marisa Tomei is [[superb]] as his love interest. (My [[gosh]], "[[George]] Costanza" was right. Marisa Tomei is so [[attractive]]!) But it is John's [[sister]] Joan Cusack who really [[steals]] the [[film]]. Her [[portrayal]] of a bossy, [[yet]] [[simultaneously]] sycophantic, personal [[assistant]] is [[priceless]], and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the [[brilliance]] of her performance. She not only [[possesses]] [[fantastic]] [[comic]] [[timing]], her [[face]] is as expressive as one [[could]] ever [[wish]] for in an [[actor]]. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very [[effective]], cameo in the [[film]] as the [[head]] of the [[company]] which is [[running]] the [[war]], the Tamerlane [[Corporation]]. Sitting on a "throne" with his [[pants]] down around his ankles, Ackroyd even [[looks]] like the arse clown who [[currently]] [[occupies]] one of our [[real]] thrones of power. You won't have to think too [[hard]] to [[recognize]] that [[person]]. Much of this [[movie]] was [[filmed]] in [[Bulgaria]], which is why we are able to [[see]] so much [[real]] military equipment. (You just know that the [[US]] military [[would]] never have [[cooperated]] in [[making]] this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I [[especially]] [[enjoyed]] the [[character]] of "[[Omar]] Sharif" as [[played]] by the Bulgarian [[actor]] Lyubomir Neikov. [[In]] one scene in which he is on the dance [[floor]] with [[Marisa]] Tomei he has a [[couple]] of lines that could [[summarize]] our [[entire]] foreign [[policy]] [[attitude]] [[toward]] the foreign [[leaders]] we [[install]] - and uninstall - in power.

[[Naturally]], this [[film]] won't [[appeal]] to [[everyone]]. If you [[believe]] that the on-going [[privatization]] of our [[foreign]] [[policy]], the [[military]], intelligence [[collection]] and analysis, [[prisons]] and the corrections system, public [[health]], and a [[myriad]] of other [[government]] services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be. On this 4th of [[June]] weekend it's heartening to see the [[esprit]] of the [[Statement]] of Independence alive and well in the film "War, Inc." Just as our founding fathers [[supplied]] the back of their [[communal]] hand to King George III, this [[kino]] exposes in [[comic]] fashion the craven war-profiteering by the [[underway]] [[crops]] of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the [[council]], to [[incorporate]] privatizing [[wars]] itself.

The cast in this [[sarcasm]] absolutely [[glows]]. [[Johannes]] Cusack is [[wondrous]] as a droll, conflicted corporate assassin, and the [[lovely]] Marisa Tomei is [[handsome]] as his love interest. (My [[jeez]], "[[Jorge]] Costanza" was right. Marisa Tomei is so [[tempting]]!) But it is John's [[sisters]] Joan Cusack who really [[itches]] the [[flick]]. Her [[depiction]] of a bossy, [[again]] [[meanwhile]] sycophantic, personal [[assistants]] is [[precious]], and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the [[luster]] of her performance. She not only [[owns]] [[excellent]] [[comedian]] [[timetable]], her [[confront]] is as expressive as one [[would]] ever [[desire]] for in an [[protagonist]]. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very [[effectiveness]], cameo in the [[films]] as the [[leader]] of the [[corporations]] which is [[implementing]] the [[warfare]], the Tamerlane [[Companies]]. Sitting on a "throne" with his [[panties]] down around his ankles, Ackroyd even [[seem]] like the arse clown who [[presently]] [[occupied]] one of our [[actual]] thrones of power. You won't have to think too [[stiff]] to [[recognised]] that [[someone]]. Much of this [[flick]] was [[shot]] in [[Bulgarian]], which is why we are able to [[behold]] so much [[actual]] military equipment. (You just know that the [[USA]] military [[should]] never have [[cooperating]] in [[doing]] this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I [[mostly]] [[liked]] the [[trait]] of "[[Umar]] Sharif" as [[served]] by the Bulgarian [[actress]] Lyubomir Neikov. [[For]] one scene in which he is on the dance [[storey]] with [[Marissa]] Tomei he has a [[pair]] of lines that could [[summed]] our [[total]] foreign [[politics]] [[stance]] [[into]] the foreign [[chiefs]] we [[installing]] - and uninstall - in power.

[[Obviously]], this [[movies]] won't [[appealing]] to [[anyone]]. If you [[think]] that the on-going [[privatizing]] of our [[overseas]] [[politics]], the [[serviceman]], intelligence [[collate]] and analysis, [[prison]] and the corrections system, public [[hygiene]], and a [[multiple]] of other [[govt]] services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] Decent [[enough]] with some [[stylish]] imagery [[however]] the [[tiny]] budget [[hampers]] [[things]].

I [[also]] [[get]] the [[impression]] they were [[trying]] to [[shock]] you with some of the graphic weirdo [[perv]] website stuff.

if you [[like]] anime in [[particular]] stuff like cyber [[city]] and the [[AD]] [[police]] then this [[might]] up your street.

but [[basically]] its low budget matrix cash in however not [[totally]] devoid of its own [[style]].

[[Great]] soundtrack by some unheard of grunge/[[punk]]/post [[grunge]] bands. Worth [[checking]] out if only for the soundtrack. Decent [[adequate]] with some [[elegant]] imagery [[instead]] the [[little]] budget [[impeding]] [[items]].

I [[similarly]] [[gets]] the [[printing]] they were [[seek]] to [[shocked]] you with some of the graphic weirdo [[pervert]] website stuff.

if you [[fond]] anime in [[peculiar]] stuff like cyber [[ville]] and the [[ADVERTISEMENTS]] [[policeman]] then this [[apt]] up your street.

but [[largely]] its low budget matrix cash in however not [[fully]] devoid of its own [[styling]].

[[Resplendent]] soundtrack by some unheard of grunge/[[thug]]/post [[grungy]] bands. Worth [[controls]] out if only for the soundtrack. --------------------------------------------- Result 2403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I always tell people that "Enchanted April" is an adult movie with no cussing, no sex, and no violence. One might think of it as "the ultimate chick flick", but I bet there are one or two enlightened men out there who love it too. Don't invite the kids, though. This movie is very low-key.

Seeing "Enchanted April" is a very healing experience. The sound track and gorgeous scenery, along with the ladies' gentle manners, bring to mind the peace and beauty of a pre-Raphaelite painting.

Lest anyone think yours truly only watches one kind of movie, I will paraphrase a line I heard once on "Saturday Night Live" and say that my two favorite movies are "The Deer Hunter" and "Enchanted April". --------------------------------------------- Result 2404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] And I don't [[say]] it in a [[bad]] way.

I watched this movie at the [[cinema]] when I was 6 or 7. [[For]] me and my cousins it was magical, beautiful and scary at the same time. When we left the theatre, Michael was our best friend even though we knew he had no idea about it.

Over the [[years]], I saw this movie being aired a few times but I always changed the channel. Even [[seeing]] a few seconds of it would bring back that feeling of magic and warm my heart. And I [[liked]] it that [[way]].

So I've only seen this movie once and I believe it was a good decision not to watch it again. [[If]] I saw it today, I know I couldn't [[help]] but [[criticise]] MJ's acting, the plot (if there was one) and this and that. For me this is a [[childhood]] [[memory]], so my [[feelings]] [[towards]] it are those of a [[child]] from 20 [[years]] ago.

I see my [[adult]] self [[intervenes]] in my rating and [[gives]] it an 8 for the [[memories]] and [[wonderful]] [[music]]. [[For]] that little kid who watched it in awe 20 years ago though, this is [[definitely]] [[worthy]] of a 10. And I don't [[said]] it in a [[unhealthy]] way.

I watched this movie at the [[theatre]] when I was 6 or 7. [[During]] me and my cousins it was magical, beautiful and scary at the same time. When we left the theatre, Michael was our best friend even though we knew he had no idea about it.

Over the [[olds]], I saw this movie being aired a few times but I always changed the channel. Even [[see]] a few seconds of it would bring back that feeling of magic and warm my heart. And I [[enjoyed]] it that [[manner]].

So I've only seen this movie once and I believe it was a good decision not to watch it again. [[Though]] I saw it today, I know I couldn't [[assisting]] but [[criticizing]] MJ's acting, the plot (if there was one) and this and that. For me this is a [[preschool]] [[mem]], so my [[passions]] [[toward]] it are those of a [[children]] from 20 [[yrs]] ago.

I see my [[adults]] self [[interferes]] in my rating and [[offers]] it an 8 for the [[memorabilia]] and [[super]] [[musician]]. [[During]] that little kid who watched it in awe 20 years ago though, this is [[obviously]] [[creditable]] of a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Virile, but naive, big Joe Buck leaves his home in Big Spring, Texas, and hustles off to the Big Apple in search of women and big bucks. In NYC, JB meets up with frustration, and with "Ratso" Rizzo, a scruffy but cordial con artist. Somehow, this mismatched pair manage to survive each other which in turn helps both of them cope with a gritty, sometimes brutal, urban America, en route to a poignant ending.

Both funny and depressing, our "Midnight Cowboy" rides head-on into the vortex of cyclonic cultural change, and thus confirms to 1969 viewers that they, themselves, have been swept away from the 1950's age of innocence, and dropped, Dorothy and Toto like, into the 1960's Age of Aquarius.

The film's direction is masterful; the casting is perfect; the acting is top notch; the script is crisp and cogent; the cinematography is engaging; and the music enhances all of the above. Deservedly, it won the best picture Oscar of 1969, and I would vote it as one of the best films of that cyclonic decade. --------------------------------------------- Result 2406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Possible spoilers.

Although there was some good acting - particularly Chloe Sevigny, and Radha Mitchell in the comedy half - this simply was not an engaging film. The segues between the comedy part and the tragedy part were awkward or sometimes not obvious. This viewer was initially confused by the fact that the supporting cast differs in the two halves; I thought with the way things were laid out in the opening scene that the people surrounding Melinda would be the same people, just reacting differently (more of a "He Said, She Said" premise). However, what we have is two totally different stories and two totally different women, both of whom happen to be played by Radha Mitchell.

The two playwrights in the opening scene - the comedian and the tragedian - supposedly take the same premise and go from there, but the two stories are only tenuously related. They do little to support the topic of discussion, which is that almost anything can be looked at as either comedy or tragedy. Nice cast, but a disappointing film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2407 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I'm not sure if users [[ought]] to be allowed to [[review]] films after only sitting through half, but I'm [[afraid]] I just couldn't [[stand]] another minute.

If this abject [[excuse]] for a [[film]] doesn't have the late, great GP spinning like a wheel in his [[grave]], then I doubt anything will.

The excellent review above 'Not a film for Parsons fans' sums up most of my feelings. [[How]] dare a (second rate) [[director]] and writer attempt [[something]] to which they're so [[clearly]] [[incapable]] of [[delivering]]. What were they thinking? Where to start?

THE SCRIPT: I thought I'd be getting a slice of bittersweet Americana. What I got was poorly [[executed]] slapstick with no cliché left unturned. Stupid hippy? [[Check]]. Stupid fat cop? Check. Awful plot contrivances? [[Check]]. Embarrassingly written female characters? [[Double]] check. [[Total]] [[disregard]] for the [[story]] which you're trying to portray? [[Check]].

After a while, you realize that what you're [[watching]] is a soap and not a very well written one at that. Scene with [[Knoxville]]. Scene with Ex girlfriend. Scene with [[Knoxville]] which hasn't [[moved]] on much. Scene with Ex girlfriend which was a bit like the [[last]] one. And so on...

THE DIRECTION: My friends and I [[decided]], after some [[consideration]], that [[watching]] this was like [[watching]] a bad episode of Quincy, or maybe a particularly poor Dukes of Hazzard. That's how bad the direction was. [[Terrible]] jump cuts, [[awful]] camera [[work]], clunky ins and outs to scenes. God, it was cringeworthy. And then I discovered the director was an [[Irishman]] who's most noteworthy recent work is a really [[lousy]] BBC Sunday night drama [[called]] Monarch of the [[Glen]] (trust me, it's [[lowest]] common denominator TV). And then it all made sense...

THE ACTING: Are we now so [[critical]] that when some random guy from the [[TV]] decides to give acting a go, if he's not so [[bad]], he [[stinks]], we applaud his [[efforts]]? Knoxville [[JUST]] [[ABOUT]] manages to [[get]] through [[every]] scene. Poor [[Christina]] [[A]]. has no such luck. Her performance is a car [[crash]] (though what you do with those lines, I don't know). The 'hippy' in the hearse: oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Have we not moved on since Cheech and Chong?

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. What I would say is that, as other reviews have mentioned, no one on this film clearly gives a flying damn for The Byrds, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Gram's solo work. They knew nothing about the American road movie and they certainly give a damn about trying to do anything with an admittedly decent story from rock mythology. This film was shallow, failed to explore anything and was jaw droppingly unfunny from beginning to...oh wait, I didn't quite make the end. And I suggest you stay away too. I'm not sure if users [[owe]] to be allowed to [[scrutinize]] films after only sitting through half, but I'm [[apprehensive]] I just couldn't [[standing]] another minute.

If this abject [[alibis]] for a [[filmmaking]] doesn't have the late, great GP spinning like a wheel in his [[tombs]], then I doubt anything will.

The excellent review above 'Not a film for Parsons fans' sums up most of my feelings. [[Mode]] dare a (second rate) [[superintendent]] and writer attempt [[algo]] to which they're so [[naturally]] [[unable]] of [[supplying]]. What were they thinking? Where to start?

THE SCRIPT: I thought I'd be getting a slice of bittersweet Americana. What I got was poorly [[conducted]] slapstick with no cliché left unturned. Stupid hippy? [[Checked]]. Stupid fat cop? Check. Awful plot contrivances? [[Verified]]. Embarrassingly written female characters? [[Dual]] check. [[Whole]] [[defiance]] for the [[tales]] which you're trying to portray? [[Verified]].

After a while, you realize that what you're [[staring]] is a soap and not a very well written one at that. Scene with [[Chattanooga]]. Scene with Ex girlfriend. Scene with [[Chattanooga]] which hasn't [[shifted]] on much. Scene with Ex girlfriend which was a bit like the [[final]] one. And so on...

THE DIRECTION: My friends and I [[decides]], after some [[examining]], that [[staring]] this was like [[staring]] a bad episode of Quincy, or maybe a particularly poor Dukes of Hazzard. That's how bad the direction was. [[Scary]] jump cuts, [[scary]] camera [[cooperation]], clunky ins and outs to scenes. God, it was cringeworthy. And then I discovered the director was an [[Ier]] who's most noteworthy recent work is a really [[rotten]] BBC Sunday night drama [[drew]] Monarch of the [[Glenn]] (trust me, it's [[fewer]] common denominator TV). And then it all made sense...

THE ACTING: Are we now so [[essential]] that when some random guy from the [[TELEVISION]] decides to give acting a go, if he's not so [[unhealthy]], he [[sucks]], we applaud his [[action]]? Knoxville [[ONLY]] [[AROUND]] manages to [[gets]] through [[each]] scene. Poor [[Cristina]] [[una]]. has no such luck. Her performance is a car [[accident]] (though what you do with those lines, I don't know). The 'hippy' in the hearse: oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Have we not moved on since Cheech and Chong?

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. What I would say is that, as other reviews have mentioned, no one on this film clearly gives a flying damn for The Byrds, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Gram's solo work. They knew nothing about the American road movie and they certainly give a damn about trying to do anything with an admittedly decent story from rock mythology. This film was shallow, failed to explore anything and was jaw droppingly unfunny from beginning to...oh wait, I didn't quite make the end. And I suggest you stay away too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2408 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] OK, it's very rare that I complain [[something]] I [[got]] for [[FREE]]. [[So]] I guess this [[movie]] pushed me over that [[limit]]. I saw it at the Hollywood Cemetery for FREE and walked away very very [[disappointed]]. One [[audience]] member's question to the director about using the Native American references just as "bookends" instead of being weaved into the [[movie]] better, basically says everything that this [[movie]] [[FAILED]] on.

NATIVE American REFERENCES--- The Native American references felt really out of place and contrived. It's [[obvious]] that this [[director]] and writer tried tackling an arena they never played in before. They should have [[stuck]] to the [[old]] [[adage]] of "write about something you know". IF they are in [[fact]] versed in this it [[certainly]] did not show on the movie or the beauty of this [[unique]] [[culture]] was not [[given]] [[proper]] justice.

Clichés and ON THE NOSE--- I agreed to [[see]] this film on the [[basis]] that it was an [[indie]]. So I held it to higher expectations. "[[Little]] [[Miss]] Sunshine" was an [[indie]] and saw it before it [[became]] so [[popular]]. [[Before]] it even [[came]] out to [[wide]] [[release]] I was already raving how it's going to be a hit. [[UNFORTUNATELY]] I could not say the same about "[[Expiration]] [[Date]]". "Sunshine" took us to cliché incidents but the filmmakers were so [[clever]] at their approach that the [[outcome]] [[would]] take us to a [[different]] [[direction]] avoiding the [[trap]] of being a "cliche". This movie on the other hand had no way of not falling in the trap because it was already [[TRAPPED]] from the start. The psycho mom's antics, the Hendrix couple, etc.

I hate to [[say]] it, but the best and [[WORST]] movie I've seen this year were both indies. "[[Little]] [[Miss]] Sunshine" being the best and this [[movie]] being the [[worst]]. I [[wish]] I [[could]] [[say]] otherwise.

But I do [[congratulate]] the filmmakers for having such a good turn out from their [[family]] members at the cemetery. OK, it's very rare that I complain [[somethings]] I [[get]] for [[LIBRE]]. [[Hence]] I guess this [[filmmaking]] pushed me over that [[restrictions]]. I saw it at the Hollywood Cemetery for FREE and walked away very very [[disappoint]]. One [[audiences]] member's question to the director about using the Native American references just as "bookends" instead of being weaved into the [[filmmaking]] better, basically says everything that this [[filmmaking]] [[FAULTED]] on.

NATIVE American REFERENCES--- The Native American references felt really out of place and contrived. It's [[observable]] that this [[headmaster]] and writer tried tackling an arena they never played in before. They should have [[trapped]] to the [[elderly]] [[proverb]] of "write about something you know". IF they are in [[facto]] versed in this it [[probably]] did not show on the movie or the beauty of this [[peculiar]] [[civilisations]] was not [[granted]] [[appropriate]] justice.

Clichés and ON THE NOSE--- I agreed to [[seeing]] this film on the [[basics]] that it was an [[andy]]. So I held it to higher expectations. "[[Scant]] [[Mademoiselle]] Sunshine" was an [[andy]] and saw it before it [[was]] so [[folk]]. [[Ago]] it even [[became]] out to [[extensive]] [[freeing]] I was already raving how it's going to be a hit. [[SADLY]] I could not say the same about "[[Expires]] [[Dating]]". "Sunshine" took us to cliché incidents but the filmmakers were so [[ingenious]] at their approach that the [[conclusions]] [[could]] take us to a [[disparate]] [[directions]] avoiding the [[traps]] of being a "cliche". This movie on the other hand had no way of not falling in the trap because it was already [[CORNERED]] from the start. The psycho mom's antics, the Hendrix couple, etc.

I hate to [[told]] it, but the best and [[PIRE]] movie I've seen this year were both indies. "[[Scant]] [[Mademoiselle]] Sunshine" being the best and this [[kino]] being the [[hardest]]. I [[desire]] I [[did]] [[says]] otherwise.

But I do [[welcome]] the filmmakers for having such a good turn out from their [[families]] members at the cemetery. --------------------------------------------- Result 2409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As the story in my family goes, my dad, Milton Raskin, played the piano for the Dorsey band. After Sinatra joined the band, my dad practiced with him for hours on end. Then, at a point in time, my dad told Sinatra that he was actually to good to be tied up with such a small group (band), and that he should venture off on his own. By that time Sinatra had enough credits 'under his belt' to do just that! Dorsey never forgave my dad, and the rest, as they say, is history.

I have some pictures and records to that effect, and so does Berkley University in California.

I have seen just about every Sinatra movie more times than I wish to say, and his movies never get old . . . Thank you Frank --------------------------------------------- Result 2410 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Contains [[spoilers]].

The British director J. Lee Thompson made some [[excellent]] films, notably 'Ice Cold in Alex' and 'Cape Fear', but 'Country Dance' is one of his more [[curious]] offerings. The story is set among the upper classes of [[rural]] Scotland, and details the strange triangular relationship between Sir Charles Ferguson, an eccentric aristocratic landowner, his sister Hilary, and Hilary's estranged husband Douglas, who is hoping for a reconciliation with her. We learn that during his career as an Army officer, Charles was regarded as having 'low moral fibre'. This appears to have been an accurate diagnosis of his condition; throughout the film he displays an attitude of gloomy disillusionment with the world, and his main sources of emotional support seem to be Hilary and his whisky bottle. The film ends with his committal to an upper-class lunatic asylum.

Peter O'Toole was, when he was at his best as in 'Lawrence of Arabia', one of Britain's leading actors, but the quality of his work was very uneven, and 'Country Dance' is not one of his better films. He overacts frantically, [[making]] Charles into a caricature of the useless inbred aristocrat, as though he were auditioning for a part in the Monty Python 'Upper-Class Twit of the Year' sketch. Susannah York as Hilary and Michael Craig as Douglas are rather better, but there is no [[really]] [[outstanding]] acting performance in the [[film]]. There is also [[little]] in the way of [[coherent]] plot, beyond the tale of Charles's inexorable downward slide.

The [[main]] problem with the film, however, is neither the acting nor the plot, but rather that of the Theme That Dare Not Speak Its Name. There are half-hearted hints of an incestuous relationship between Charles and Hilary, or at least of an incestuous attraction towards her on his part, and that his dislike of Douglas is motivated by sexual jealousy. Unfortunately, even in the swinging sixties and early seventies (the date of the film is variously given as either 1969 or 1970) there was a limit to what the British Board of Film Censors was willing to allow, and a film with an explicitly incestuous theme was definitely off-limits. (The American title for the film was 'Brotherly Love', but this was not used in Britain; was it too suggestive for the liking of the BBFC?) These hints are therefore never developed and we never get to see what motivates Charles or what has caused his moral collapse, resulting in a hollow film with a hole at its centre. 4/10 Contains [[troublemakers]].

The British director J. Lee Thompson made some [[sumptuous]] films, notably 'Ice Cold in Alex' and 'Cape Fear', but 'Country Dance' is one of his more [[peculiar]] offerings. The story is set among the upper classes of [[agrarian]] Scotland, and details the strange triangular relationship between Sir Charles Ferguson, an eccentric aristocratic landowner, his sister Hilary, and Hilary's estranged husband Douglas, who is hoping for a reconciliation with her. We learn that during his career as an Army officer, Charles was regarded as having 'low moral fibre'. This appears to have been an accurate diagnosis of his condition; throughout the film he displays an attitude of gloomy disillusionment with the world, and his main sources of emotional support seem to be Hilary and his whisky bottle. The film ends with his committal to an upper-class lunatic asylum.

Peter O'Toole was, when he was at his best as in 'Lawrence of Arabia', one of Britain's leading actors, but the quality of his work was very uneven, and 'Country Dance' is not one of his better films. He overacts frantically, [[doing]] Charles into a caricature of the useless inbred aristocrat, as though he were auditioning for a part in the Monty Python 'Upper-Class Twit of the Year' sketch. Susannah York as Hilary and Michael Craig as Douglas are rather better, but there is no [[truthfully]] [[phenomenal]] acting performance in the [[filmmaking]]. There is also [[small]] in the way of [[coherence]] plot, beyond the tale of Charles's inexorable downward slide.

The [[primary]] problem with the film, however, is neither the acting nor the plot, but rather that of the Theme That Dare Not Speak Its Name. There are half-hearted hints of an incestuous relationship between Charles and Hilary, or at least of an incestuous attraction towards her on his part, and that his dislike of Douglas is motivated by sexual jealousy. Unfortunately, even in the swinging sixties and early seventies (the date of the film is variously given as either 1969 or 1970) there was a limit to what the British Board of Film Censors was willing to allow, and a film with an explicitly incestuous theme was definitely off-limits. (The American title for the film was 'Brotherly Love', but this was not used in Britain; was it too suggestive for the liking of the BBFC?) These hints are therefore never developed and we never get to see what motivates Charles or what has caused his moral collapse, resulting in a hollow film with a hole at its centre. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[caught]] Evening in the [[cinema]] with a [[lady]] [[friend]]. Evening is a chick [[flick]] with no [[apologies]] for being such, but I can say with some relief that it's not so infused with estrogen that it's painful for a red-blooded male to watch. [[Except]] for a single instance at the very end of the movie, I [[watched]] with interest and did not have to turn away or roll my eyes at any self-indulgent melodrama. Ladies, for their [[part]], will [[absolutely]] love this movie.

Ann Lord is elderly, bed-ridden and spending her last few days on Earth as [[comfortably]] as possible in her own home with her two grown daughters at her side. Discomfited by the memories of her past, Ann suddenly calls out a man's name her daughters have never heard before: Harris. [[While]] both of her daughters silently [[contemplate]] the significance of their mother's strong urge to recall and redress her ill-fated affair with this mysterious man at this of all times, Ann lapses back in her head to the fateful day she met Harris - and in doing so, lost the youthful optimism for the future that we all inevitably part ways with.

Both Ann and her two daughters - one married with children, one a serial "commitophobe" - struggle with the central question of whether true love really exists, and perhaps more importantly, if true love can endure the test of time. Are we all one day fated to realize that love never lasts forever? [[Will]] we all [[realize]] that [[settling]] for the imperfect is the only realistic outcome? The subtle fact that the aged Ann is still wrestling with an answer to these questions on her deathbed is not lost on her two daughters.

The cinematography for Evening is interesting - most of the film is spent in Ann's mind as she recalls the past, and for that reason I think the film was shot as if it was all deliberately overexposed, to give everyone an ethereal glow (and thus make it very obvious that all of this is not real, but occurred in the past). Claire [[Danes]] is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, [[though]] just 5' 5" in reality), and is [[absolutely]] [[captivating]] in one climactic scene where her [[singing]] talents are [[finally]] put to the [[test]].

You can't really talk [[trash]] about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close [[fill]] out the other [[major]] and minor roles in the film.

I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss. Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.

In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening. Catch it in theatres or grab it as a rental to trade off for points for when you want to be accompanied to a viewing of Die Hard 4 or the upcoming Rambo flick. It'll be your little secret that this viewing didn't really cost you much at all. I [[grabbed]] Evening in the [[film]] with a [[ladies]] [[boyfriend]]. Evening is a chick [[movie]] with no [[excuse]] for being such, but I can say with some relief that it's not so infused with estrogen that it's painful for a red-blooded male to watch. [[Salvo]] for a single instance at the very end of the movie, I [[seen]] with interest and did not have to turn away or roll my eyes at any self-indulgent melodrama. Ladies, for their [[parties]], will [[perfectly]] love this movie.

Ann Lord is elderly, bed-ridden and spending her last few days on Earth as [[easily]] as possible in her own home with her two grown daughters at her side. Discomfited by the memories of her past, Ann suddenly calls out a man's name her daughters have never heard before: Harris. [[Despite]] both of her daughters silently [[envisage]] the significance of their mother's strong urge to recall and redress her ill-fated affair with this mysterious man at this of all times, Ann lapses back in her head to the fateful day she met Harris - and in doing so, lost the youthful optimism for the future that we all inevitably part ways with.

Both Ann and her two daughters - one married with children, one a serial "commitophobe" - struggle with the central question of whether true love really exists, and perhaps more importantly, if true love can endure the test of time. Are we all one day fated to realize that love never lasts forever? [[Willingness]] we all [[reaching]] that [[solved]] for the imperfect is the only realistic outcome? The subtle fact that the aged Ann is still wrestling with an answer to these questions on her deathbed is not lost on her two daughters.

The cinematography for Evening is interesting - most of the film is spent in Ann's mind as she recalls the past, and for that reason I think the film was shot as if it was all deliberately overexposed, to give everyone an ethereal glow (and thus make it very obvious that all of this is not real, but occurred in the past). Claire [[Denmark]] is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, [[if]] just 5' 5" in reality), and is [[completely]] [[riveting]] in one climactic scene where her [[sung]] talents are [[eventually]] put to the [[tests]].

You can't really talk [[junk]] about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close [[filled]] out the other [[big]] and minor roles in the film.

I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss. Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.

In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening. Catch it in theatres or grab it as a rental to trade off for points for when you want to be accompanied to a viewing of Die Hard 4 or the upcoming Rambo flick. It'll be your little secret that this viewing didn't really cost you much at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I rated this film 7/10 which is an [[average]] of 8/10 for screenplay, [[direction]] and 1944 production values and 6/10 for acting.My acting rating in turn was calculated at 4/10 for all the screen characters except for that played by heroine Ella Raines as Carol Richman who was [[excellent]] at 8/10.Also I [[commend]] Thomas Gomez as Inspector Burgess whose character convinces that he personally does not think the guilty verdict on Scott Henderson ([[Alan]] [[Curtis]]) was just in [[view]] of his naive alibi.These two then form an alliance to prove Scott's [[alibi]].

I have this film on a "Suevia [[Film]] [[Noir]] [[Cine]] Negro" [[DVD]] in [[Spanish]] as "[[La]] Dama Desconocida" with the [[original]] soundtrack "Ingles" as an alternative [[language]], since [[despite]] [[searching]] I [[could]] not [[find]] a [[wholly]] English version.I was [[however]] anxious to see another performance by Ella Raines after being impressed with her performance as a heroine in "Impact" playing a sole female garage proprietor.Here Ella [[performs]] another [[heroic]] role believing in the innocence of her engineer boss and refuses [[several]] suggestions that she should return to her home in Kansas (her boss's pet name for her) before solving the missing alibi.The fact that she is secretly in love with her boss is a [[little]] hard to believe since he formally just seemed to have had a formal business relationship with her.He had however designed children's homes and playgrounds so I suppose "family man" had lit up in Carol's brain.

In the 1940s with "the film code" in operation, producers could only portray sex through metaphors and here it is done in the form of furious drumming played by Elisha Cooke jnr.Carol dolls herself up as a girl of easy virtue in an attempt to lure the drummer into giving her information about "The Phantom Lady" alibi.The other main character, Jack Marlow (an associate of Scott Henderson) is played by Franchot Tone whose performance I found too theatrical and wondered why Carol, for [[instance]], did not [[notice]] him constantly and strangely admiring his hands.Here the screenplay should have been improved and provided more [[suspense]] as these [[theatrical]] moves telegraphed the plot far too early to the audience. I rated this film 7/10 which is an [[medium]] of 8/10 for screenplay, [[orientation]] and 1944 production values and 6/10 for acting.My acting rating in turn was calculated at 4/10 for all the screen characters except for that played by heroine Ella Raines as Carol Richman who was [[wondrous]] at 8/10.Also I [[praising]] Thomas Gomez as Inspector Burgess whose character convinces that he personally does not think the guilty verdict on Scott Henderson ([[Alain]] [[Curtiss]]) was just in [[views]] of his naive alibi.These two then form an alliance to prove Scott's [[pretence]].

I have this film on a "Suevia [[Kino]] [[Negro]] [[Cinema]] Negro" [[DVDS]] in [[Spaniard]] as "[[Angeles]] Dama Desconocida" with the [[preliminary]] soundtrack "Ingles" as an alternative [[vocabulary]], since [[albeit]] [[researching]] I [[would]] not [[unearthed]] a [[perfectly]] English version.I was [[though]] anxious to see another performance by Ella Raines after being impressed with her performance as a heroine in "Impact" playing a sole female garage proprietor.Here Ella [[conducts]] another [[gutsy]] role believing in the innocence of her engineer boss and refuses [[different]] suggestions that she should return to her home in Kansas (her boss's pet name for her) before solving the missing alibi.The fact that she is secretly in love with her boss is a [[petit]] hard to believe since he formally just seemed to have had a formal business relationship with her.He had however designed children's homes and playgrounds so I suppose "family man" had lit up in Carol's brain.

In the 1940s with "the film code" in operation, producers could only portray sex through metaphors and here it is done in the form of furious drumming played by Elisha Cooke jnr.Carol dolls herself up as a girl of easy virtue in an attempt to lure the drummer into giving her information about "The Phantom Lady" alibi.The other main character, Jack Marlow (an associate of Scott Henderson) is played by Franchot Tone whose performance I found too theatrical and wondered why Carol, for [[lawsuits]], did not [[advices]] him constantly and strangely admiring his hands.Here the screenplay should have been improved and provided more [[wait]] as these [[teatro]] moves telegraphed the plot far too early to the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no [[creativity]]. I'm sure the [[writers]] were on something other than oxygen when they [[wrote]] this one. Based on the previews, I thought that this would be a [[funny]] movie. But if you are not up on the [[latest]] stupid [[pop]] culture then you'll miss most of the [[silly]] humor in this [[movie]]. Why waste your [[time]]. You can sit on a [[log]] doing [[nothing]] and have more [[fun]] than this movie will [[provide]].

Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no [[imagination]]. I'm sure the [[screenwriters]] were on something other than oxygen when they [[texted]] this one. Based on the previews, I thought that this would be a [[hilarious]] movie. But if you are not up on the [[recent]] stupid [[papa]] culture then you'll miss most of the [[absurd]] humor in this [[filmmaking]]. Why waste your [[period]]. You can sit on a [[registers]] doing [[nada]] and have more [[droll]] than this movie will [[provides]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Bela Lugosi is an evil botanist who sends brides poisoned orchids on their wedding day, steals the body in his fake ambulance/hearse and takes it home for his midget assistant to extract the glandular juices in order to keep Bela's wife eternally young. Some second rate actors playing detectives try to solve the terrible, terrible mystery. Bela Lugosi [[hams]] it up nicely, but you can tell he needed the money.

This film is thoroughly [[awful]], and most of the actors would have been better off sticking to waiting tables, but the plot is wonderfully [[ridiculous]]. Tell anyone what happens in it and they tend to laugh quite a lot and demand to see the film. I got the DVD in a discount store 2 for £1, which I think is a pretty accurate valuation, anyone paying more for this would be out of their mind. Bela Lugosi is an evil botanist who sends brides poisoned orchids on their wedding day, steals the body in his fake ambulance/hearse and takes it home for his midget assistant to extract the glandular juices in order to keep Bela's wife eternally young. Some second rate actors playing detectives try to solve the terrible, terrible mystery. Bela Lugosi [[hamas]] it up nicely, but you can tell he needed the money.

This film is thoroughly [[gruesome]], and most of the actors would have been better off sticking to waiting tables, but the plot is wonderfully [[farcical]]. Tell anyone what happens in it and they tend to laugh quite a lot and demand to see the film. I got the DVD in a discount store 2 for £1, which I think is a pretty accurate valuation, anyone paying more for this would be out of their mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 2415 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] By no means a masterpiece, and far from Errol Flynn's best, Istanbul still has much going for it. The locations and beautiful technicolour cinematography, bring us back to a time long since past. Errol Flynn does show moments of his past glory, and is OK as Jim Brennan, a pilot who's past comes back to haunt him. The picture is actually a remake of 1947's "Singapore", and the story seems awfully contrived and cliche' by today's standards. Also many of the supporting cast seem to be simply "going through the motions" in this picture. Many people have also compared it to one of the all time greats, CASABLANCA. While watching the film, I could see many of the similarities, but hey, Casablanca has inspired countless imitators, so take that for what it's worth. In closing, if you are a fan of Flynn, or old fashioned love stories, you might want to give this film a look. Otherwise, I'd recommend Casablanca, or The Maltese Falcon, as a good introduction to some of Hollywood's classics.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2416 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[understand]] this [[film]] to be a [[debut]] feature and as such, it is very [[impressive]]. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and serve to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon [[deliver]] a story that has [[much]] more depth and lyricism than [[typical]] "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a story that needs [[Judd]] Hirsch caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the [[beautiful]] Susan [[Floyd]]. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was [[able]] to coax nuance out of the young [[actor]] in a role that could have been [[easily]] devalued by stereotype or overreach. [[Anyway]], I [[found]] the [[film]] [[refreshing]] and [[entertaining]]. I [[fathom]] this [[movies]] to be a [[premiere]] feature and as such, it is very [[wondrous]]. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and serve to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon [[delivering]] a story that has [[very]] more depth and lyricism than [[emblematic]] "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a story that needs [[Jude]] Hirsch caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the [[leggy]] Susan [[Freud]]. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was [[capable]] to coax nuance out of the young [[actress]] in a role that could have been [[conveniently]] devalued by stereotype or overreach. [[Anyhoo]], I [[find]] the [[kino]] [[freshen]] and [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Okay]], you have:

Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this [[show]] has no [[backbone]]!

Peter O'Toole as Ol' Colonel Cricket from The First War and now the emblazered Lord of the Manor.

Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered Lady of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)

David McCallum as said toy-boy, equally as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.

and finally:

Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant [[advice]] for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her [[best]] [[bit]] of [[advice]]: "I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I thought it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real [[world]]." Well, we can't [[say]] they didn't [[warn]] us.

Ah, Susan - [[time]] was, your [[character]] would have been [[running]] the [[whole]] show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.

[[So]] - with a cast and setting like this, you have the re-makings of "Brideshead [[Revisited]]," right?

[[Wrong]]! They took these 1-dimensional [[supporting]] [[roles]] because they [[paid]] so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)

First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - "hey, it's just the sunlight!"

Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is "dewy-eyed."

Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.

Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)

And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is "Mrs." She's either "Miss" or "Lady."

When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.

To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.

OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a "meanwhile,") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be "whisked away" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)

Great drama. [[Alright]], you have:

Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this [[exhibition]] has no [[mainstay]]!

Peter O'Toole as Ol' Colonel Cricket from The First War and now the emblazered Lord of the Manor.

Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered Lady of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)

David McCallum as said toy-boy, equally as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.

and finally:

Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant [[counseling]] for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her [[optimum]] [[bite]] of [[counsels]]: "I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I thought it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real [[monde]]." Well, we can't [[said]] they didn't [[warning]] us.

Ah, Susan - [[times]] was, your [[characteristics]] would have been [[execute]] the [[entire]] show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.

[[Consequently]] - with a cast and setting like this, you have the re-makings of "Brideshead [[Scrutinized]]," right?

[[Awry]]! They took these 1-dimensional [[supportive]] [[functions]] because they [[salaried]] so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)

First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - "hey, it's just the sunlight!"

Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is "dewy-eyed."

Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.

Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)

And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is "Mrs." She's either "Miss" or "Lady."

When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.

To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.

OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a "meanwhile,") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be "whisked away" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)

Great drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 2418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I downloaded this movie yesterday through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high [[expectations]] (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a [[villain]].I though at least actors like him [[would]] have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this [[proved]] that [[nobody]] can [[compete]] AMJAD KHAN's [[magic]] Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the [[old]] one is a milestone in Indian [[cinema]] with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a [[hit]] with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's [[TALENTS]] [[ARE]] wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the [[worst]] actresses we have I don't [[know]] how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no [[excitement]] and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this [[movie]] It was a [[Total]] [[carnage]] of the original Sholay I downloaded this movie yesterday through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high [[prognosis]] (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a [[scoundrel]].I though at least actors like him [[should]] have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this [[proven]] that [[anyone]] can [[competing]] AMJAD KHAN's [[wizardry]] Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the [[archaic]] one is a milestone in Indian [[filmmaking]] with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a [[struck]] with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's [[TALENT]] [[BE]] wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the [[meanest]] actresses we have I don't [[savoir]] how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no [[ferment]] and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this [[cinematography]] It was a [[Whole]] [[rampage]] of the original Sholay --------------------------------------------- Result 2419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Not as bad as some are making it out to be, [[though]] [[obviously]] [[pathetic]] compared to the [[original]]. In my opinion Amitabh was [[great]] as the villain Babban Singh - try not to compare to [[Gabbar]] in the [[original]] as they were [[clearly]] not [[going]] for the same [[effect]]. Other than some [[mediocre]] [[action]] scenes however, the [[rest]] of the film is [[flawed]]. [[Character]] development was poor and the development of the [[story]] was [[hopeless]], with many [[loopholes]], and [[missing]] [[pieces]] of [[information]] which i wouldn't have [[known]] if i hadn't read the back of the DVD case. The [[worst]] part of the [[movie]] was the support roles from Nisha Kothari and especially this [[new]] [[dude]] [[called]] Prashant Raj. Nisha is just [[plain]] annoying from the time her [[lips]] first open. As for Prashant Raj - seriously who is this [[guy]]? where is he from and why on [[earth]] was he present in the [[film]] studio for anything other than to serve [[drinks]]?. His acting [[ability]] is zero and he has the same tone, [[dialog]] delivery and staunch [[expression]] in [[every]] scene, whether it be action, [[comedy]], or even a scene when [[someone]] has just [[died]]. Ajay Devgan was average, at least his [[expressions]] [[changed]] which is more than i can [[say]] for his [[mistake]] of a companion. overall, RGV's Aag is worth watching for Amitabh's solid performance, and [[also]] a very sexy Urmilla Matondkar in a [[special]] [[appearance]]. Not as bad as some are making it out to be, [[although]] [[clearly]] [[pitiable]] compared to the [[initial]]. In my opinion Amitabh was [[resplendent]] as the villain Babban Singh - try not to compare to [[Jabbar]] in the [[initial]] as they were [[definitely]] not [[go]] for the same [[effects]]. Other than some [[lackluster]] [[measures]] scenes however, the [[resting]] of the film is [[misguided]]. [[Personages]] development was poor and the development of the [[storytelling]] was [[incorrigible]], with many [[foibles]], and [[gone]] [[segments]] of [[info]] which i wouldn't have [[renowned]] if i hadn't read the back of the DVD case. The [[hardest]] part of the [[filmmaking]] was the support roles from Nisha Kothari and especially this [[nuevo]] [[man]] [[drew]] Prashant Raj. Nisha is just [[lowland]] annoying from the time her [[lip]] first open. As for Prashant Raj - seriously who is this [[buddy]]? where is he from and why on [[tierra]] was he present in the [[filmmaking]] studio for anything other than to serve [[beverage]]?. His acting [[proficiency]] is zero and he has the same tone, [[dialogue]] delivery and staunch [[expressions]] in [[all]] scene, whether it be action, [[humour]], or even a scene when [[person]] has just [[decease]]. Ajay Devgan was average, at least his [[phrase]] [[modifying]] which is more than i can [[says]] for his [[wrong]] of a companion. overall, RGV's Aag is worth watching for Amitabh's solid performance, and [[further]] a very sexy Urmilla Matondkar in a [[especial]] [[apparition]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Whether it's three [[guys]] in their tighty-whiteys rapping to a [[dude]] bound in twine or a [[girl]] saying "What up, [[dog]]?" to a lump of roadkill, there's something please everyone in Knuckleface [[Jones]]. It is strange and [[surreal]] and not [[altogether]] a [[completely]] [[comprehensible]] yarn... [[yet]] it never [[loses]] you. The [[first]] time I [[saw]] it, I [[nearly]] laughed myself sick. And every [[night]] after I would come [[home]] and watch it again. [[Forget]] [[Coyote]] [[Ugly]]... this is the movie that cemented my crush on Piper Perabo. See it... before it's too [[late]]! Whether it's three [[guy]] in their tighty-whiteys rapping to a [[bloke]] bound in twine or a [[women]] saying "What up, [[hound]]?" to a lump of roadkill, there's something please everyone in Knuckleface [[Jonesy]]. It is strange and [[unreal]] and not [[quite]] a [[altogether]] [[readable]] yarn... [[even]] it never [[forfeits]] you. The [[outset]] time I [[watched]] it, I [[approximately]] laughed myself sick. And every [[soir]] after I would come [[dwelling]] and watch it again. [[Forgotten]] [[Smuggler]] [[Horrible]]... this is the movie that cemented my crush on Piper Perabo. See it... before it's too [[tard]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In "Anne of Green Gables" (1934), Marilla Cuthbert (Helen Westley) and Matthew Cuthbert (O.P. Heggie), middle-aged siblings who live together at Green Gables, a farm in Avonlea, on Prince Edward Island, decide to adopt a boy from distant orphanage to help on their farm. But the orphan sent to them is a precocious girl of 14 named Anne Shirley (Dawn Evelyn Paris-a veteran of Disney's series of "Alice" shorts who later would adopt her character's name).

Anne was only 11 in Lucy Maude Montgomery's source novel but the same actress could not credibly go from 11 to college age during the course of the story. The movie suffers somewhat from this concession, as many of Anne's reactions and much of what she says are more entertaining coming from an eleven-year-old that from a teenager. As in the book, Anne is bright and quick, eager to please but dissatisfied with her name, her build, her freckles, and her long red hair. Being a child of imagination, however, Anne takes much joy in life, and adapts quickly to her new family and the environment of Prince Edward Island.

In fact Anne is the original "Teenage Drama Queen" and the film's screenwriter elected to focus on this aspect of her character. Which transformed the basic genre from mildly amusing family drama to comedy. A change that delighted audiences and that continues to frustrate reader purists.

Since the comedy is very much in the spirit of the Montgomery's story I can see no reason to take issue with the changes, but let this serve as fair warning to anyone expecting a totally faithful adaptation. The comedy element is the strength of the film as it is one of the earliest self-reflexive parodies of Hollywood conventions. The actress Anne Shirley was one of Hollywood's all- time beauties and the film is in black and white. So much of the amusement is in seeing the title character's endless laments about her appearance and hair color contradicted by what is appearing on the screen. Anne regularly regales her no nonsense rural companions with melodramatic lines like: "If you refuse it will be a lifelong sorrow to me". Perhaps the funniest moment is when she corrects the spelling of her name on the classroom blackboard.

Tom Brown does a nice job as Anne's love interest Gilbert Blythe and Sara Haden steals all the scenes in which she appears as the Cuthbert's pompous neighbor.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child. --------------------------------------------- Result 2422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] some people think that the [[second]] series was where scooby was ruined..i disagree totally.the shows quality did not go up or down and scrappy ,[[win]] my [[opinion]],as a very good chrecter.i looked at a [[poll]] on jumpedtheshark.com and 72% of people said scrappys second series was scoobys downfall.OK so loads [[said]] [[yes]] but 28%[[still]] [[cant]] be [[wrong]].I do like the [[way]] most of the [[episodes]] focused on [[comedy]].i [[believe]] the [[show]] [[would]] have [[gone]] rubbish if it was the same 5 people/[[dog]] solving mystery in same formula.[[scrappy]] was a breath of fresh air to the show.sure,some people tuned out but when scrappy was introduced viewing figures DOUBLED.Back to the show.All the episodes and segments were very [[funny]].i was Intriguded by the yabba shorts and .But at the end of the day its a matter of opinion if you like scrappy or not is a matter of opinion,there is certainly no fact involved.But in my OPINION this was a [[superb]] [[series]] that gave a beginning to tire [[show]] a new formula and lease of [[life]].Nuff [[said]]. some people think that the [[secondly]] series was where scooby was ruined..i disagree totally.the shows quality did not go up or down and scrappy ,[[earning]] my [[vista]],as a very good chrecter.i looked at a [[voting]] on jumpedtheshark.com and 72% of people said scrappys second series was scoobys downfall.OK so loads [[say]] [[yea]] but 28%[[however]] [[dunno]] be [[amiss]].I do like the [[camino]] most of the [[spells]] focused on [[parody]].i [[think]] the [[showings]] [[should]] have [[faded]] rubbish if it was the same 5 people/[[pooch]] solving mystery in same formula.[[combative]] was a breath of fresh air to the show.sure,some people tuned out but when scrappy was introduced viewing figures DOUBLED.Back to the show.All the episodes and segments were very [[humorous]].i was Intriguded by the yabba shorts and .But at the end of the day its a matter of opinion if you like scrappy or not is a matter of opinion,there is certainly no fact involved.But in my OPINION this was a [[wondrous]] [[serial]] that gave a beginning to tire [[demonstrate]] a new formula and lease of [[iife]].Nuff [[avowed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] As has been [[noted]], this [[formula]] has been [[filmed]] several times, most recently as "You've [[Got]] Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"[[Trout]] Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my [[least]] favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars [[charisma]], which doesn't quite cut it here.

The [[chemistry]] betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no [[real]] [[sparks]]. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the [[leads]] are boring the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] can only follow. Judy in particular is [[disappointing]]. She [[looks]] like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks like a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was [[getting]] so hot about. I [[would]] have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great [[either]]. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood [[leading]] man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that [[image]] here.

If you're a fan of the stars or the early 1900's then you [[might]] like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining [[romantic]] comedies out there, and they [[offer]] you much more than a [[mouthful]] of [[stale]] confection. As has been [[commented]], this [[formulas]] has been [[videotaped]] several times, most recently as "You've [[Ai]] Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"[[Fontaine]] Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my [[lowest]] favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars [[charm]], which doesn't quite cut it here.

The [[chemical]] betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no [[actual]] [[ignites]]. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the [[leeds]] are boring the [[stays]] of the [[filmmaking]] can only follow. Judy in particular is [[depressing]]. She [[seems]] like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks like a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was [[obtain]] so hot about. I [[ought]] have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great [[nor]]. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood [[culminating]] man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that [[photographs]] here.

If you're a fan of the stars or the early 1900's then you [[apt]] like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining [[sentimental]] comedies out there, and they [[furnishes]] you much more than a [[bitten]] of [[archaic]] confection. --------------------------------------------- Result 2424 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As a Turkish man now living in Sweden I must confess I often watch Scandinavian movies. Most if them I never understand. I think actors from Scandinavia work best in Hollywood. Last week I watched a film called "The Polish Wedding" together with a polish friend of mine and we both said it was the worst movie we ever watched. Unfortunately I was wrong this movie " House of Angels" is even worse. None of the actors can act, absolutely not the female so called star Helen Bergstrom. The plot is so silly nobody can believe it.I think the whole thing is a mess from the start. lots of bad acting except from Selldal and Wollter. Ahmed Sellam --------------------------------------------- Result 2425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] His first movie after longtime friend John Belushi's death, Aykroyd [[shows]] much [[fatigue]] trying to pull off a character that would have been a snap for Belushi.

Instead, "Doctor Detroit" gives us bookish professor Aykroyd masquerading as a weird, violent pimp to ward off a rival known only as Mom. That's bad enough, but he also has classes to teach, a school dinner to host, four ladies of the evening to protect and a Pimp's Dinner (or something like that) to attend. No wonder Aykroyd seems stupefied most of the time. Why should the viewer be alone?

It was on this film that Aykroyd met future wife Donna Dixon. At least some good came out of this chaotic mess.

One and a half stars. You want good Aykroyd, see "The Blues Brothers". You want bad, see "Doctor Detroit". His first movie after longtime friend John Belushi's death, Aykroyd [[demonstrating]] much [[weary]] trying to pull off a character that would have been a snap for Belushi.

Instead, "Doctor Detroit" gives us bookish professor Aykroyd masquerading as a weird, violent pimp to ward off a rival known only as Mom. That's bad enough, but he also has classes to teach, a school dinner to host, four ladies of the evening to protect and a Pimp's Dinner (or something like that) to attend. No wonder Aykroyd seems stupefied most of the time. Why should the viewer be alone?

It was on this film that Aykroyd met future wife Donna Dixon. At least some good came out of this chaotic mess.

One and a half stars. You want good Aykroyd, see "The Blues Brothers". You want bad, see "Doctor Detroit". --------------------------------------------- Result 2426 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] First off, I have to say that I loved the [[book]] Animal Farm. I read it with my 9th grade class, and it was great. We also decided that watching the movie [[would]] be [[beneficial]]. The movie was so [[disappointing]] to me. The movie cuts out some [[characters]], and misses a lot of the main points of the [[book]]. It [[skips]] around a lot, and doesn't explain [[anything]] in [[detail]]. If [[someone]] was [[watching]] this [[movie]] without having first read the book, they [[would]] be confused. The most [[disappointing]] thing in this movie to me, was the [[ending]]. The ending in the book was the most [[powerful]], and in the [[movie]], they [[changed]] it! It was supposed to be the [[pigs]] and [[men]] in an alliance and [[sort]] of "[[melting]]" [[together]], but [[instead]], the [[movie]] [[made]] it [[seem]] [[like]] the [[animals]] were [[going]] to [[rebel]] against the [[pigs]]. To [[sum]] up, I don't [[think]] that this [[movie]] [[captured]] the [[real]] [[meaning]] that Orwell portrayed in his [[book]]. First off, I have to say that I loved the [[ledger]] Animal Farm. I read it with my 9th grade class, and it was great. We also decided that watching the movie [[could]] be [[affirmative]]. The movie was so [[depressing]] to me. The movie cuts out some [[hallmarks]], and misses a lot of the main points of the [[books]]. It [[salta]] around a lot, and doesn't explain [[nada]] in [[particulars]]. If [[everybody]] was [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] without having first read the book, they [[should]] be confused. The most [[depressing]] thing in this movie to me, was the [[ended]]. The ending in the book was the most [[emphatic]], and in the [[flick]], they [[alter]] it! It was supposed to be the [[hogg]] and [[man]] in an alliance and [[sorting]] of "[[thawing]]" [[jointly]], but [[conversely]], the [[film]] [[introduced]] it [[seems]] [[iike]] the [[animal]] were [[go]] to [[revolutionaries]] against the [[pig]]. To [[somme]] up, I don't [[reckon]] that this [[filmmaking]] [[captures]] the [[veritable]] [[mean]] that Orwell portrayed in his [[ledger]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of Disney's best films that I can enjoy watching often. you may easily guess the outcome, but who cares? its just plain fun escape for 1 hour forty-two minutes. and after all wasn't movies meant to get away from reality for just a short time anyway? The cast sparkles with delight. -magictrain --------------------------------------------- Result 2428 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] This [[film]] has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad [[yarn]], and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second unit stuff is [[endless]], and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very [[good]] indeed as a sophisticated [[Egyptian]]. He should [[take]] it up as a sideline. The [[film]] is essentially [[ruined]] by one of the world's most [[irritating]] [[actresses]], Lesley [[Anne]] Down, who plays the lead. She [[spends]] the whole [[film]] [[wondering]] how she [[looks]], are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the [[fellas]] [[lust]] after her, etc. Having [[started]] [[life]] as a [[model]] at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most [[revolting]] about [[female]] [[vanity]] and dim-witted inanity. And to [[think]] that this [[film]] was [[directed]] by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He [[allows]] this [[terrible]] [[actress]] to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom [[eyes]], it [[matters]] not. She is supposed to be a [[young]] Egyptologist. But she has never been to [[Egypt]] before! She [[takes]] a [[taxi]] to Giza and [[catching]] her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' [[Barf]]! [[OK]], so that was the script, but she takes to the [[banality]] too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a [[serious]] problem about a black market in [[antiquities]] there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was [[fun]] to [[see]] the name of Cyril Swern as [[sound]] recordist on the [[film]], as I [[knew]] him [[pretty]] well long [[ago]]. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is [[described]] as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That [[would]] not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good. This [[filmmaking]] has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad [[fil]], and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second unit stuff is [[inexhaustible]], and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very [[buena]] indeed as a sophisticated [[Cairo]]. He should [[taking]] it up as a sideline. The [[filmmaking]] is essentially [[devastated]] by one of the world's most [[irksome]] [[actors]], Lesley [[Anna]] Down, who plays the lead. She [[spent]] the whole [[filmmaking]] [[asked]] how she [[seem]], are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the [[grooms]] [[craving]] after her, etc. Having [[initiating]] [[lives]] as a [[modelling]] at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most [[sickening]] about [[girl]] [[courtesy]] and dim-witted inanity. And to [[ideas]] that this [[filmmaking]] was [[aimed]] by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He [[permitting]] this [[scary]] [[actor]] to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom [[eye]], it [[topics]] not. She is supposed to be a [[youthful]] Egyptologist. But she has never been to [[Cairo]] before! She [[pick]] a [[cab]] to Giza and [[captures]] her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' [[Yuck]]! [[ALRIGHT]], so that was the script, but she takes to the [[triviality]] too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a [[grievous]] problem about a black market in [[antiques]] there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was [[droll]] to [[behold]] the name of Cyril Swern as [[audible]] recordist on the [[kino]], as I [[knowed]] him [[belle]] well long [[previously]]. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is [[outlining]] as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That [[could]] not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I rented this [[movie]], [[thinking]] it [[looked]] like a [[wonderfully]] [[delightful]] historical piece. What I got was a [[piece]] of [[pure]] [[garbage]]. This movie was [[confusing]] in most spots, choppy in almost every spot and [[dreadful]] in all spots. Mira Sorvino's [[portrayal]] of a queen playing a young male [[scholar]] was [[depressing]] at best. [[Ben]] Kingsley should have been [[stripped]] of his knighthood for [[even]] [[considering]] this film as one of his projects. Fiona Shaw should definitely [[stick]] to playing Petunia Dursley; at least the Harry Potter movies are more [[entertaining]] than this thing they [[call]] a [[play]] within a [[movie]].

The [[cinematography]] [[looks]] like some [[college]] kid [[took]] a [[class]] in [[Cinematography]] 101 and failed [[miserably]]. Almost every scene in the [[movie]] is [[chopped]] up for some [[sort]] of effect; the end [[result]] of course being the cheesiest [[bit]] of editing I've ever seen. Jay Rodan was [[almost]] good as Agis; too bad he had such a [[bad]] script to [[work]] with. Rachael Stirling [[gives]] her [[best]] effort as the almost gullible [[lady]] in waiting. [[In]] the end, I really wish [[Blockbuster]] [[Video]] [[gave]] refunds. I'm so [[glad]] I didn't [[spend]] 10 bucks [[watching]] this [[fiasco]] in the [[theater]]. If they've been [[performing]] this Marivaux play [[since]] the 18th century, it makes me wonder how many people over the [[ages]] have had their [[best]] naps during this [[work]]. [[If]] I had been there, they wouldn't have [[hear]] the [[play]] over the snoring. [[Thank]] goodness for the [[modern]] convenience of [[DVD]] players; you can [[skip]] past the [[boring]] or [[awful]] scenes. Guess that [[means]] I only [[watched]] the [[beginning]] and the [[end]]! I rented this [[film]], [[think]] it [[seemed]] like a [[terrifically]] [[nice]] historical piece. What I got was a [[slice]] of [[pur]] [[trash]]. This movie was [[disconcerting]] in most spots, choppy in almost every spot and [[shocking]] in all spots. Mira Sorvino's [[portrait]] of a queen playing a young male [[researcher]] was [[somber]] at best. [[Ibn]] Kingsley should have been [[deprived]] of his knighthood for [[yet]] [[reviewing]] this film as one of his projects. Fiona Shaw should definitely [[wand]] to playing Petunia Dursley; at least the Harry Potter movies are more [[amusing]] than this thing they [[invitation]] a [[playing]] within a [[movies]].

The [[movie]] [[seems]] like some [[campus]] kid [[taken]] a [[classes]] in [[Cinematographic]] 101 and failed [[spectacularly]]. Almost every scene in the [[filmmaking]] is [[cutting]] up for some [[kinds]] of effect; the end [[results]] of course being the cheesiest [[bite]] of editing I've ever seen. Jay Rodan was [[virtually]] good as Agis; too bad he had such a [[negative]] script to [[collaborated]] with. Rachael Stirling [[donne]] her [[optimum]] effort as the almost gullible [[ladies]] in waiting. [[Among]] the end, I really wish [[Blockbusters]] [[Videos]] [[yielded]] refunds. I'm so [[pleased]] I didn't [[expended]] 10 bucks [[staring]] this [[bust]] in the [[teatro]]. If they've been [[perform]] this Marivaux play [[because]] the 18th century, it makes me wonder how many people over the [[years]] have had their [[optimum]] naps during this [[cooperation]]. [[Though]] I had been there, they wouldn't have [[overheard]] the [[playing]] over the snoring. [[Thanks]] goodness for the [[trendy]] convenience of [[DVDS]] players; you can [[jumping]] past the [[dull]] or [[scary]] scenes. Guess that [[modes]] I only [[seen]] the [[initiation]] and the [[ceases]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Utter dreck. I got to the 16 minute/27 second point, and gave up. I'd have given it a negative number review if that were possible (although 'pissible' is a more fitting word...). Unlike the sizzle you could see and practically feel between MacMurray and Stanwyck in the original, the chemistry between dumb ol' Dicky Crenna and whats-her-face here is just non-existent. The anklet becomes an unattractive chunky bracelet? There's no ciggy-lighting-by-fingertip? And I thought I'd be SICK when they have a mortified-looking (and rightly so, believe you me) Lee J. Cobb as Keyes practically burping/upchucking his way through the explanation of his "Little Man" to Mr. Garloupis. No offence to the non-sighted, but it looks as though a posse of blind men ran amuck with the set design of both the Dietrichson and Neff houses. The same goes for those horrid plaid pants that Phyllis wears. And crikey, how much $$ does Neff make, that he lives overlooking a huge marina? This, folks, again, all takes place in the first 16 and a half minutes. If you can get through more of it, you have a much stronger constitution than me, or you are a masochist. But please, take some Alka-Seltzer first, or you WILL develop a "little man" of your own that may never go away. Proceed with caution, obviously. --------------------------------------------- Result 2431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Four [[stories]] written by Robert Bloch about various people who live in a [[beautiful]], old mansion and what happens to them. The first has Denholm Elliott as a novelist who sees the killer he's writing about come to life. Some [[spooky]] moments and the twist at the end was good. The second has [[Peter]] Cushing becoming [[obsessed]] with a wax figure resembling his dead wife. The third has Christopher Lee who has a child (Chloe Franks) and is scared of her. It all leads up to a pretty scary ending ([[although]] the ending in the story was MUCH [[worse]]). The [[last]] is an out and out comedy with Jon Petwee and Ingrid Pitt (both chewing the [[scenery]]) and a cape that turns people into vampires! There's also a cute line about Christopher Lee [[playing]] Dracula.

This is a good [[horror]] anthology--nothing [[terrifying]] but the first one and the ending of the third [[gave]] me a few [[pleasurable]] little [[chills]]. [[Also]] the fourth one is actually very [[funny]] and [[Pitt]] makes a [[VERY]] [[sexy]] [[vampire]]! [[Also]] the [[house]] itself [[looks]] [[beautiful]]...and very creepy. It's well-directed with some nice atmospheric touches. A very good and [[unusual]] [[movie]] score too. [[All]] in all a good [[little]] [[horror]] anthology well worth [[seeking]] out. [[Try]] to [[see]] it on DVD--the Lions [[Gate]] one [[looks]] [[fantastic]] with [[strong]] [[colors]] and [[great]] sound. Four [[narratives]] written by Robert Bloch about various people who live in a [[wondrous]], old mansion and what happens to them. The first has Denholm Elliott as a novelist who sees the killer he's writing about come to life. Some [[grisly]] moments and the twist at the end was good. The second has [[Peters]] Cushing becoming [[oversexed]] with a wax figure resembling his dead wife. The third has Christopher Lee who has a child (Chloe Franks) and is scared of her. It all leads up to a pretty scary ending ([[albeit]] the ending in the story was MUCH [[lousiest]]). The [[final]] is an out and out comedy with Jon Petwee and Ingrid Pitt (both chewing the [[landscaping]]) and a cape that turns people into vampires! There's also a cute line about Christopher Lee [[play]] Dracula.

This is a good [[abomination]] anthology--nothing [[awful]] but the first one and the ending of the third [[supplied]] me a few [[enjoyable]] little [[shivers]]. [[Moreover]] the fourth one is actually very [[droll]] and [[Beit]] makes a [[QUITE]] [[hot]] [[vampires]]! [[Similarly]] the [[households]] itself [[seems]] [[awesome]]...and very creepy. It's well-directed with some nice atmospheric touches. A very good and [[strange]] [[movies]] score too. [[Every]] in all a good [[tiny]] [[terror]] anthology well worth [[searching]] out. [[Endeavour]] to [[seeing]] it on DVD--the Lions [[Porte]] one [[seems]] [[admirable]] with [[forceful]] [[colouring]] and [[wondrous]] sound. --------------------------------------------- Result 2432 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Carlito [[Way]], the original is a [[brilliant]] [[story]] about an ex-drug dealer who hopes to [[leave]] his criminal [[past]] and so he [[invests]] in a club and the [[deals]] with the [[trouble]] that [[comes]] with it.

This [[film]] was....

I [[saw]] the [[trailer]] and knew instantly it was going to be bad..But after dismissing [[films]] in the [[past]] and finding out they were [[great]]( Lucky Number Slevin, Tokyo [[Drift]])...I gave this a [[shot]] and it [[failed]] [[within]] the first five minutes...

The [[script]] is something a [[teenager]] would [[come]] up with if [[given]] five minutes to [[prepare]]...It was weak, with [[weaker]] [[dialogue]]. It seems there is an [[instant]] [[need]] for romance in a gangster [[movie]]. So Brigante decides to [[beat]] a [[guy]] up for the girl....and she say's 'Yes!' And if you [[need]] to [[act]] bad just throw racism [[around]]...As we [[learn]] from the 'Italian mobsters'...

The acting was [[terrible]] to say the least...I [[found]] 'Hollywood Nicky', hilarious.

I [[absolutely]] [[hate]] all these musicians [[turning]] to movies. Lets face it the only [[reason]] P [[Diddy]] did this [[movie]] was so he could play a [[gangsters]]...The [[actress]] who plays [[Leticia]] was weak but beautiful. The [[sex]] scene was weak but we got to see her..which was [[okay]]...

But overall I [[expected]] it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the [[horrendous]] movie that is...

Carlito's Way: Rise to Power.. Carlito [[Route]], the original is a [[terrific]] [[saga]] about an ex-drug dealer who hopes to [[walkout]] his criminal [[preceding]] and so he [[invested]] in a club and the [[treats]] with the [[problems]] that [[occurs]] with it.

This [[filmmaking]] was....

I [[noticed]] the [[trailers]] and knew instantly it was going to be bad..But after dismissing [[filmmaking]] in the [[preceding]] and finding out they were [[large]]( Lucky Number Slevin, Tokyo [[Drifting]])...I gave this a [[offed]] and it [[faulted]] [[inside]] the first five minutes...

The [[hyphen]] is something a [[adolescents]] would [[coming]] up with if [[gave]] five minutes to [[formulate]]...It was weak, with [[lowest]] [[dialogues]]. It seems there is an [[snaps]] [[necessity]] for romance in a gangster [[film]]. So Brigante decides to [[beats]] a [[pal]] up for the girl....and she say's 'Yes!' And if you [[needs]] to [[acts]] bad just throw racism [[almost]]...As we [[learned]] from the 'Italian mobsters'...

The acting was [[horrific]] to say the least...I [[detected]] 'Hollywood Nicky', hilarious.

I [[perfectly]] [[hatred]] all these musicians [[turn]] to movies. Lets face it the only [[cause]] P [[Didi]] did this [[filmmaking]] was so he could play a [[bandits]]...The [[actor]] who plays [[Letitia]] was weak but beautiful. The [[sexuality]] scene was weak but we got to see her..which was [[allright]]...

But overall I [[predicted]] it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the [[abysmal]] movie that is...

Carlito's Way: Rise to Power.. --------------------------------------------- Result 2433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Disney might just be on to something here. First, they had "Remember the Titans" with Denzel, a story based on truth involving sports and a small town in middle America. Now, with Quaid and The Rookie... yet another sports story based on truth.

Both movies move you to tears at times, and both make you smile and feel all warm after seeing them. My wife and I took in The Rookie and we expected it to be a great feel good type movie. We were not let down, when asked if we'd be buying this on DVD when it comes out, it was a no-brainer. Most definately. --------------------------------------------- Result 2434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just finished watching American Pie: Beta House and I gotta say, this was such a garbage pile of crap. The first 3 American Pies were hilarious, the last 3 were a joke and should not have been called American Pie.

As you figured out from the title of the movie, Beta House, is about a fraternity, freshmen, girls and, the most original part of them all, falling in love. Of course, the guy that has his way with the chicks is Stifler, who, along with his mates, tries to complete another apparently impossible task. It was unrealistic and super fake. Its just really predictable and the plot is so weak. Both sides of the college battle to see who gets the whole thing (something like that) To sum it up: awful acting + dull script + wrong use of the American Pie franchise = total waste of time! This movie is unbearable. I give it a two out of ten, although most of it sucked there were lots of nudity and pretty girls, like 2 funny scenes :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The Korean War has been dubbed Americas's forgotten war. So many unanswered questions were buried along with the 50 thousand men who died there. Occasionally, we are treated to a play or movie which deals with that far-off, ghostly frozen graveyard. Here is [[perhaps]] one of the [[finest]]. It's called " Sergeant Ryker. " The story is of an American soldier named Sgt. Paul Ryker (Lee Marvin) who is selected for a top secret mission by his commanding officer. His task is to defect to the North Koreans and offer his services against United Nations forces. So successful is his cover, he proves invaluable to the enemy and given the rank of Major. However, he is thereafter captured by the Americans, put on trial as a traitor and spy. Stating he was ordered to defect, he sadly learns his commanding officer has been killed and has no evidence or proof of his innocence. He is convicted and sentenced to hang. However, his conviction is doubted by Capt. Young (Bradford Dillman), his prosecutor. Convincing commanding Gen. Amos Baily, (Lloyd Nolan) of his doubts, he is granted a new trial and if found guilty will be executed. The courtroom drama is top notch as is the cast which includes Peter Graves, Murray Hamilton and Norman Fell as Sgt. Max Winkler. Korea was a far off place but the possibility of convicting a Communist and hanging him hit very close to home in the 1950's. Due to its superior script and powerful message, this drama has become a courtroom Classic. Excellent viewing and recommended to all. **** The Korean War has been dubbed Americas's forgotten war. So many unanswered questions were buried along with the 50 thousand men who died there. Occasionally, we are treated to a play or movie which deals with that far-off, ghostly frozen graveyard. Here is [[conceivably]] one of the [[meanest]]. It's called " Sergeant Ryker. " The story is of an American soldier named Sgt. Paul Ryker (Lee Marvin) who is selected for a top secret mission by his commanding officer. His task is to defect to the North Koreans and offer his services against United Nations forces. So successful is his cover, he proves invaluable to the enemy and given the rank of Major. However, he is thereafter captured by the Americans, put on trial as a traitor and spy. Stating he was ordered to defect, he sadly learns his commanding officer has been killed and has no evidence or proof of his innocence. He is convicted and sentenced to hang. However, his conviction is doubted by Capt. Young (Bradford Dillman), his prosecutor. Convincing commanding Gen. Amos Baily, (Lloyd Nolan) of his doubts, he is granted a new trial and if found guilty will be executed. The courtroom drama is top notch as is the cast which includes Peter Graves, Murray Hamilton and Norman Fell as Sgt. Max Winkler. Korea was a far off place but the possibility of convicting a Communist and hanging him hit very close to home in the 1950's. Due to its superior script and powerful message, this drama has become a courtroom Classic. Excellent viewing and recommended to all. **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Once upon a time some evil people made a movie about a guy that got shot into space, [[supposedly]] to go to Saturn, but [[really]] only to some stock footage of solar flares, and then he gets a nose bleed, and before you know it, he's laying in a hospital bandaged head to [[foot]], and then an overweight nurse with an ill-fitting uniform comes in and gets [[eaten]] by the guy, whose supposed to be melting all over the place but never seems to lose any mass, and then NASA, or at least one guy at NASA, gets upset about it and calls one other guy in to hunt him down, but the guy they sent to hunt the melting [[guy]] has to go home and have soup first, and his oddly-shaped wife forgot the crackers, so he can't have crackers, and then he has to go out and look for the [[melting]] guy with a geiger counter, and that doesn't [[really]] [[work]], so he really only follows the trail of half-eaten corpses, and then there's something about a sheriff, and two ugly [[old]] people in a lemon grove, and a women with a meat cleaver, and some kind of industrial plant with trigger-happy security guards, and since I can't tell you how the movies ends, all I can say is Jonathan Demme is in it somewhere with some guy with the [[stupid]] [[name]] of Burr DeBenning, and if there's any justice in the world everyone connected with this movie died a [[hideous]], [[violent]] death and was [[unable]] to [[make]] more [[movies]], and the world [[lived]] [[HAPPILY]] EVER [[AFTER]] - THE END! Once upon a time some evil people made a movie about a guy that got shot into space, [[presumably]] to go to Saturn, but [[genuinely]] only to some stock footage of solar flares, and then he gets a nose bleed, and before you know it, he's laying in a hospital bandaged head to [[feet]], and then an overweight nurse with an ill-fitting uniform comes in and gets [[eat]] by the guy, whose supposed to be melting all over the place but never seems to lose any mass, and then NASA, or at least one guy at NASA, gets upset about it and calls one other guy in to hunt him down, but the guy they sent to hunt the melting [[buddy]] has to go home and have soup first, and his oddly-shaped wife forgot the crackers, so he can't have crackers, and then he has to go out and look for the [[fusion]] guy with a geiger counter, and that doesn't [[truly]] [[cooperate]], so he really only follows the trail of half-eaten corpses, and then there's something about a sheriff, and two ugly [[elderly]] people in a lemon grove, and a women with a meat cleaver, and some kind of industrial plant with trigger-happy security guards, and since I can't tell you how the movies ends, all I can say is Jonathan Demme is in it somewhere with some guy with the [[dumb]] [[behalf]] of Burr DeBenning, and if there's any justice in the world everyone connected with this movie died a [[gruesome]], [[ferocious]] death and was [[impossible]] to [[deliver]] more [[filmmaking]], and the world [[resided]] [[JOYFULLY]] EVER [[SUBSEQUENTLY]] - THE END! --------------------------------------------- Result 2437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Wealthy psychiatrist Lindsay Crouse has just published her first novel and is feeling down about her profession feeling that it's hopeless to help her patients. A young gambling junkie client asks her to help him pay off his debts if he truly wants to help him get better. Here she gets involved with Joe Mantegna. To reveal any more of the plot would spoil one hell of a fun movie and 'House of Games' may very well be the best con movie I've seen. David Mamet wrote and directed this gem that's full of snappy dialogue, great one-liners, and enough twists to keep you guessing til the end. Crouse is perfect as the uptight psychiatrist needing a change and Mantegna tops her as the devilishly sly con-man. And with the exception of a coincidence in the last quarter of the movie, the film is in utter control of it's audience; and we are loving the con.

*** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Hey Babu Riba" is a film about a young woman, Mariana (nicknamed "Esther" after a famous American movie star), and four young men, Glenn, Sacha, Kicha, and Pop, all perhaps 15-17 years old in 1953 Belgrade, Yugoslavia. The five are committed friends and crazy about jazz, blue jeans, or anything American it seems.

The very close relationship of the teenagers is poignant, and ultimately a sacrifice is willingly made to try to help one of the group who has fallen on unexpected difficulties. In the wake of changing communist politics, they go their separate ways and reunite in 1985 (the year before the film was made).

I enjoyed the film with some reservations. The subtitles for one thing were difficult. Especially in the beginning, there were a number of dialogues which had no subtitles at all. Perhaps the conversational pace required it, but I couldn't always both read the text and absorb the scene, which caused me to not always understand which character was involved. I watched the movie (a video from our public library) with a friend, and neither of us really understood part of the story about acquiring streptomycin for a sick relative.

This Yugoslavian coming of age film effectively conveyed the teenagers' sense of invulnerability, idealism, and strong and loyal bonds to each other. There is a main flashforward, and it was intriguing, keeping me guessing until the end as to who these characters were vis-a-vis the 1953 cast, and what had actually happened.

I would rate it 7 out of 10, and would like to see other films by the director, Jovan Acin (1941-1991). --------------------------------------------- Result 2439 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked ZB1. Really, I did. I have no problem with extremely low-budget movies, and I have enjoyed movies with worse production values than ZB3 (if you can imagine such a thing. check out 'wiseguys vs. zombies,' if you're interested). Indeed, I prefer lower budget zombie films, because I am suspicious that Hollywood directors do not understand what zombies are 'about.'

But ZB3 was just so bad. It was retarded. I don't want to bother being dignified in my criticism. I want my 90 minutes back, etc. Except that it really only took ~80 minutes, because partway through I put it into 1.4X fast forward.

Okay, here's some criticism.

1. The pacing was TERRIBLE. Everyone talked in monologues. Even when someone just had a single line, the camera work and the editing and the insertion of a bunch of F-bombs into every sentence made the line FEEL like a monologue. At first I was excited about the 90 minute running time compared to ZB1's 70 minutes, but there were actually fewer 'events' in ZB3. It's all talking.

2. The gore effects got stupider. Just glop rubbed around on people's tummies.

3. Despite the epic exposition, there really wasn't a plot. And the exposition is indeed epic! I won't spoil it, if you're going to watch it. (Don't watch it.) But then, it's just a bunch of lame characters walking around and bickering for ~80 minutes. or fewer, if you so choose. --------------------------------------------- Result 2440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is one of the oddest films of the Zatôichi series due to its very [[unusual]] pacing and the role that Ichi plays in the film. Interestingly enough, this was the first Zatôichi film made by Shintaro Katsu's new production company. Now, instead of just playing the blind swordsman, Katsu is in [[charge]] of making the films. This could easily explain why this film seems so different in style to the previous 15 [[films]]. As far as Ichi's role, the film is very different because he isn't in the film as much as usual. He's also easy to fool and actually, for a while, does a lot to harm people instead of helping!

"Zatôichi Rôyaburi" begins with Ichi talking with an old lady who tries to take advantage of his blindness. Oddly, in this scene, Ichi says that he's been blind since a toddler, though in an earlier film he says his blindness set in when he was 8. This is a minor mistake, and only a crazed fan like myself would have noticed.

This film takes place over a period of at least six months and is more likely to have taken a year--so you can see what I said about odd pacing. Most films in the series take place over a few days or weeks. Ichi comes to a town where there is a boss (Asagoro) who tries very hard to be nice to Ichi because he knows of the blind man's reputation. The boss is quite charming and surprisingly Ichi is [[totally]] taken in by the evil man. At the same time, he meets another boss (Shushui)--a sort of guru to the poor. Shushui admonishes the people to forsake all violence and even Ichi falls under his teaching--giving up his blade for many months. Shushui's teachings are very similar to Daoist teachings from China--non-violence and acceptance of life as it is (for good or for bad).

Months after leaving this town and thinking all was well, Ichi learns that as soon as he left, Asagoro showed his true colors--enslaving women, oppressing the poor and being an all-around jerk. In a way, Ichi is responsible for this, as he helped Asagoro and counted him as a friend. Now, Asagoro has captured Shushui and several innocent people have killed themselves due to the evil boss' actions.

When Ichi returns, he doesn't accept automatically that Asagoro is good or evil but tests him cleverly. This bit with a scarecrow is inspired and leads to a finale where, what else, Ichi kills the baddies and frees Shushui. This finale was very good and occurred in the rain. Then final scene with Asagoro and the rocks is great, though the beheading is a tad cheesy by today's special effects standards.

Pluses for the film are that although poorly paced, it is different and cannot be mistaken for the previous 15 (which often seem very similar). Additionally, it does end very well. Minuses (aside from pacing) are that some might dislike seeing Ichi so fallible and the scenes with Ichi and the other blind men that are included for comic relief fall flat...very, very, very flat. They are tacky and unfunny...that's the sort of flat that it is. This is one of the oddest films of the Zatôichi series due to its very [[strange]] pacing and the role that Ichi plays in the film. Interestingly enough, this was the first Zatôichi film made by Shintaro Katsu's new production company. Now, instead of just playing the blind swordsman, Katsu is in [[burdens]] of making the films. This could easily explain why this film seems so different in style to the previous 15 [[cinematography]]. As far as Ichi's role, the film is very different because he isn't in the film as much as usual. He's also easy to fool and actually, for a while, does a lot to harm people instead of helping!

"Zatôichi Rôyaburi" begins with Ichi talking with an old lady who tries to take advantage of his blindness. Oddly, in this scene, Ichi says that he's been blind since a toddler, though in an earlier film he says his blindness set in when he was 8. This is a minor mistake, and only a crazed fan like myself would have noticed.

This film takes place over a period of at least six months and is more likely to have taken a year--so you can see what I said about odd pacing. Most films in the series take place over a few days or weeks. Ichi comes to a town where there is a boss (Asagoro) who tries very hard to be nice to Ichi because he knows of the blind man's reputation. The boss is quite charming and surprisingly Ichi is [[downright]] taken in by the evil man. At the same time, he meets another boss (Shushui)--a sort of guru to the poor. Shushui admonishes the people to forsake all violence and even Ichi falls under his teaching--giving up his blade for many months. Shushui's teachings are very similar to Daoist teachings from China--non-violence and acceptance of life as it is (for good or for bad).

Months after leaving this town and thinking all was well, Ichi learns that as soon as he left, Asagoro showed his true colors--enslaving women, oppressing the poor and being an all-around jerk. In a way, Ichi is responsible for this, as he helped Asagoro and counted him as a friend. Now, Asagoro has captured Shushui and several innocent people have killed themselves due to the evil boss' actions.

When Ichi returns, he doesn't accept automatically that Asagoro is good or evil but tests him cleverly. This bit with a scarecrow is inspired and leads to a finale where, what else, Ichi kills the baddies and frees Shushui. This finale was very good and occurred in the rain. Then final scene with Asagoro and the rocks is great, though the beheading is a tad cheesy by today's special effects standards.

Pluses for the film are that although poorly paced, it is different and cannot be mistaken for the previous 15 (which often seem very similar). Additionally, it does end very well. Minuses (aside from pacing) are that some might dislike seeing Ichi so fallible and the scenes with Ichi and the other blind men that are included for comic relief fall flat...very, very, very flat. They are tacky and unfunny...that's the sort of flat that it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2441 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Invisible Maniac starts as a young Kevin Dornwinkle (Kris Russell) is caught by his strict mother (Marilyn Adams) watching a girl (Tracy Walker) strip through his telescope... Cut to 'Twenty Years Later' & Kevin Dornwinkle (Noel Peters) is now a physics professor who claims to have discovered a way to turn things invisible using a 'mollecular reconstruction' serum. However during a demonstration in front of his fellow scientists it fails & they all laugh at him, Dornwinkle goes mad kills a few of them & is locked away in a mental institute from which he escapes. Jump forward 'Two Weeks Later' & a group of summer college students discuss the tragic death of their physics teacher when the headmistress Mrs. Cello (Stephanie Blake as Stella Blalack) says that she has hired a replacement, yes you've guessed it it's Dornwinkle. The student don't take to him & treat him like dirt, however Dornwinkle has perfected his invisibility serum & uses it to satisfy his perverted sexual urges & his desire for revenge...

Co-written & directed by Adam Rifkin wisely hiding under the pseudonym Rif Coogan (I wouldn't want my name to be associated with this turd of a film either) The Invisible Maniac is real bottom of the barrel stuff. The script by Rifkin, sorry Coogan & Tony Markes is awful. It tries to be a teenage sex/comedy/horror hybrid that just fails in every department. For a start the sex is nothing more than a few female shower scenes & a few boob shots, not much else I'm afraid & the birds in The Invisible Maniac aren't even that good looking. The comedy is lame & every joke misses by the proverbial mile, this is the kind of film that thinks someone fighting an invisible man or having Henry (Jason Logan) a mute man trying to make a phone call is funny. The Invisible Maniac makes the Police Academy (1984 - 1994) series of films look like the pinnacle of sophistication! As for the horror aspect that too is lame. It's also an incredibly slow (it takes over half an hour before Dornwinkles even becomes invisible), dull, predictable, boring & has highly annoying & unlikable teenage character's.

Director Rifkin or Coogan or whatever does absolutely nothing to try & make The Invisible Maniac an even slightly enjoyable experience. There's no scares, tension or atmosphere & as a whole the film is a real chore to sit through. He does nothing with the invisibility angle, just a few doors opening on their own is as adventurous as it gets. There is very little gore or violence, a bit of splashing blood, a few strangulations & the only decent bit in the whole film when someone has their head blown off with a shotgun, unfortunately he was invisible at the time & we only get to see the headless torso afterwards.

The budget must have been low, & I mean really low because this is one seriously cheap looking film. Dornwinkles laboratory is basically two jars on his bedside cabinet! When he escapes from the mental institution he has all of one dog sent after him & the entire school has about a dozen pupils & two teachers. The Invisible Maniac is a poorly made film throughout it's 85 minute duration, I spotted the boom mike on at least one occasion... Lets just say the acting is of a low standard & leave it at that.

The Invisible Maniac is crap, plain & simple. I found no redeeming features in it at all, there are so many more better films out there you can watch so there is no reason whatsoever to waste your time on this rubbish. Definitely one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I had [[lost]] faith in Sooraj R. Barjatya after the movie [[Main]] Prem Ki Deewani [[hoon]], then a year back now I [[saw]] [[promos]] for Vivah which looked good. But I didn't [[want]] to waste my hard [[earned]] money watching it in [[cinema]]. When the [[film]] [[first]] came out on DVD I rented it and [[watched]] and I [[loved]] the [[movie]] and [[took]] back my [[words]] for Sooraj. I just finished [[watching]] it yesterday again and this time I thought I have to [[review]] this [[movie]]. Sooraj [[R]]. BarjatyaGot it right this [[time]], okay I was not a [[huge]] [[fan]] of [[Hum]] App Ke [[Hai]] Kaun. But I have [[always]] loved Manie Pyar kiya, after Manie Pyar kiya to me I think Vivah is Barjatyas best [[work]]. I [[hardly]] ever [[cry]] in a movie but this [[movie]] made me feel like [[crying]]. If you have ever been in love before then there will be many moments that will touch you in this movie, the movie is just too sweet and will have you falling in love with it, my view a much [[underrated]] movie.

The story of this movie you might call desi and very old times, but to me it seemed modern because the two couples which are getting an arrange marriage are aware it's an old tradition. It's done in present times, lots of people don't believe in this arrange marriage, but I do. The journey between the engagement and wedding which will always be special and this movie shows it clearly. When Prem meets Poonam for the first time, they show it how it is and that's reality and my parents where saying that's how they got married and it showed it in a way which is so real yes people the way Prem and Poonam meet in this movie is how most marriages happen. It was a very sweet, you feel nervous yet excited, the song "Do Ajnabe" shows that very well. Getting back to the story yes it's a journey which you soon get glued to between Prem and Poonam (Shahid [[Kapoor]] and Amrita Rao) and there families. A twist occurs in this movie which is really good, the last 30mins you all will be reaching for the tissue box.

What makes this film so amazing is the chemistry between Prem and Poonam, how they fall for each other is too sweet. Simple boy and Simple Girl, when they first meet during and after the song "Do Anjane Ajnabe" It's very sweet to watch, She hardly says anything and Prem does all the talking being honest with her about his past and the girl he liked and him smoking. Then it leads on to them all having a family trip and then that's when they really do fall for each other. It makes you just want to watch the couple and watch all the sweet moments they have. Another factor is that Poonam chichi is really mean to her and you feel sorry for Poonam because she has been treated bad and makes you want to see her happy and when she finally finds happiness, you too start feeling happy with her the movie basically makes you fall in love with Poonam more then just Prem. When she finds happiness through Prem you want her to stay happy and also hope nothing goes wrong because the character is shown as a sweet simple girl. Which brings me to performances and Amrita Roa as Poonam is amazing in the movie, her best work till date you will fall in love with this innocent character and root her on to find happiness. Shahid Kapoor as Prem is amazing too, he is Poonam support in the film, he is her happiness the movie, together they share an amazing chemistry and I have never seen a cuter couple since SRK and Kajol. If Ishq Vishk didn't touch you to telling you how cute they are together this surely will. "Mujhe Haq hai" the song and before that is amazing chemistry they show. Scenes which touched me was when Prem takes Poonam to his room and shows her that's where they will be staying and he opens her up and they have a moment between them which is too sweet. Again if you have ever been in love with someone that much these scenes you can defiantly connect to. The film is just the sweetest thing you will see ever.

The direction is spot on, to me a good movie is basically something that can pull me in and stop me believe for this hours what is being seen here is fake and there is a camera filing them. To me this film pulled me in and for those three hours I felt really connected to the movie. The songs you will only truly like when you have seen the movie as they are songs placed in the situation after I saw the movie I been playing the songs non stop! The music is amazing, the story is simply amazing too what more can I ask for?

What I can finally say it, rarely do we get a movie that makes us feel good, this movie after you have seen it will make you feel really good and make you want to be a better person. Its basically the sweetest journey ever, its basically showing you they journey between engagement and marriage and many people say it's the bestest part of your life…Well this movie actually shows you way do people actually say that? Why do people actually say that the journey is just that amazing! Watch this movie and you will find out why the journey is amazing! I had [[forfeited]] faith in Sooraj R. Barjatya after the movie [[Principal]] Prem Ki Deewani [[xun]], then a year back now I [[noticed]] [[promotions]] for Vivah which looked good. But I didn't [[wanted]] to waste my hard [[obtained]] money watching it in [[theaters]]. When the [[cinema]] [[firstly]] came out on DVD I rented it and [[observed]] and I [[enjoyed]] the [[movies]] and [[picked]] back my [[mots]] for Sooraj. I just finished [[staring]] it yesterday again and this time I thought I have to [[revisit]] this [[movies]]. Sooraj [[rs]]. BarjatyaGot it right this [[period]], okay I was not a [[whopping]] [[groupie]] of [[Ahem]] App Ke [[Sea]] Kaun. But I have [[repeatedly]] loved Manie Pyar kiya, after Manie Pyar kiya to me I think Vivah is Barjatyas best [[jobs]]. I [[practically]] ever [[cries]] in a movie but this [[movies]] made me feel like [[sobbing]]. If you have ever been in love before then there will be many moments that will touch you in this movie, the movie is just too sweet and will have you falling in love with it, my view a much [[underestimated]] movie.

The story of this movie you might call desi and very old times, but to me it seemed modern because the two couples which are getting an arrange marriage are aware it's an old tradition. It's done in present times, lots of people don't believe in this arrange marriage, but I do. The journey between the engagement and wedding which will always be special and this movie shows it clearly. When Prem meets Poonam for the first time, they show it how it is and that's reality and my parents where saying that's how they got married and it showed it in a way which is so real yes people the way Prem and Poonam meet in this movie is how most marriages happen. It was a very sweet, you feel nervous yet excited, the song "Do Ajnabe" shows that very well. Getting back to the story yes it's a journey which you soon get glued to between Prem and Poonam (Shahid [[Sonam]] and Amrita Rao) and there families. A twist occurs in this movie which is really good, the last 30mins you all will be reaching for the tissue box.

What makes this film so amazing is the chemistry between Prem and Poonam, how they fall for each other is too sweet. Simple boy and Simple Girl, when they first meet during and after the song "Do Anjane Ajnabe" It's very sweet to watch, She hardly says anything and Prem does all the talking being honest with her about his past and the girl he liked and him smoking. Then it leads on to them all having a family trip and then that's when they really do fall for each other. It makes you just want to watch the couple and watch all the sweet moments they have. Another factor is that Poonam chichi is really mean to her and you feel sorry for Poonam because she has been treated bad and makes you want to see her happy and when she finally finds happiness, you too start feeling happy with her the movie basically makes you fall in love with Poonam more then just Prem. When she finds happiness through Prem you want her to stay happy and also hope nothing goes wrong because the character is shown as a sweet simple girl. Which brings me to performances and Amrita Roa as Poonam is amazing in the movie, her best work till date you will fall in love with this innocent character and root her on to find happiness. Shahid Kapoor as Prem is amazing too, he is Poonam support in the film, he is her happiness the movie, together they share an amazing chemistry and I have never seen a cuter couple since SRK and Kajol. If Ishq Vishk didn't touch you to telling you how cute they are together this surely will. "Mujhe Haq hai" the song and before that is amazing chemistry they show. Scenes which touched me was when Prem takes Poonam to his room and shows her that's where they will be staying and he opens her up and they have a moment between them which is too sweet. Again if you have ever been in love with someone that much these scenes you can defiantly connect to. The film is just the sweetest thing you will see ever.

The direction is spot on, to me a good movie is basically something that can pull me in and stop me believe for this hours what is being seen here is fake and there is a camera filing them. To me this film pulled me in and for those three hours I felt really connected to the movie. The songs you will only truly like when you have seen the movie as they are songs placed in the situation after I saw the movie I been playing the songs non stop! The music is amazing, the story is simply amazing too what more can I ask for?

What I can finally say it, rarely do we get a movie that makes us feel good, this movie after you have seen it will make you feel really good and make you want to be a better person. Its basically the sweetest journey ever, its basically showing you they journey between engagement and marriage and many people say it's the bestest part of your life…Well this movie actually shows you way do people actually say that? Why do people actually say that the journey is just that amazing! Watch this movie and you will find out why the journey is amazing! --------------------------------------------- Result 2443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This two-part TV mini-series isn't as good as the original from 1966 but it's solid. The original benefited from a huge number of things---it was all in black and white, it had a great jazz score and it was filmed at the real locations, including the home of the doomed Clutter family. That was important because in the book and in the original movie the home is very much a character itself.

This remake was filmed in Canada which I guess doubles okay for Kansas. The story tries to be as sympathetic to Perry as it dares to and Eric Roberts plays him as a somewhat fey person, his homosexuality barely hidden. The gentler take by Roberts doesn't quite work in the end though because it's hard to believe that his version of Perry Smith would just finally explode in a spasm of murder. Whereas Robert Blake's take on Smith left you no doubt that his Perry Smith was an extremely dangerous character.

Anthony Edwards was excellent as the bombastic, big-mouthed and ultimately cowardly Dick Hickcock, the brains of the outfit. His performance compares very well to Scott Wilson's role in the original movie.

Since this is a longer movie it allows more time to develop the Clutter family and in this regard I think the 1996 movie has an advantage. The Clutters are just an outstanding, decent family. They've never harmed another soul and it is just inexplicable that such a decent family is ultimately massacred in such a horrifying way. It still boggles my mind that, after the Clutters were locked in the bathroom, that Herb Clutter didn't force out the window so at least his children would have a chance to escape. This movie has the thought occur to him, but too late. From what I read about the real home, which is still standing, the way the bathroom is configured they could've opened the counter drawers and effectively barricaded the door which would've forced the killers to blast their way in. But it might've bought time for some of the Clutters to escape. Why the Clutters didn't try this, I have no idea.

Fans of the book will recognize that this movie takes a lot of liberties with how the crime is committed but not too serious. Still, it's distracting to viewers like me who have read tons about the case. The actors playing the cops, led by Sam Neill and Leo Rossi, are uniformly excellent, much better, I think, as a group, than the actors in the original movie. They know that to secure the noose around the necks of both of them they have to get them to confess. And the officers come to the interview impeccably prepared. They had already discovered the likely alibi the phony story of going to Fort Scott, and had debunked every jot of it. The officers then let Smith & Hickcock just walk into their trap. Hickcock is a b.s. artist who figures he can convince anyone of anything and the officers respectfully let him tell his cover story. But when they lower the boom on him, he shatters very quickly. It's very well filmed and acted and very gratifying to watch because the viewer naturally should loath Hickcock in particular by this point, a cowardly con-man who needs the easily manipulated Smith to do his killing for him. Supposedly Hickcock later stated that the real reason for the crime wasn't to steal money from the Clutters but to rape Nancy Clutter. At least she was spared that degradation.

The actors playing the Clutters are very good, Kevin Tighe as Herb Clutter in particular. The story sensitively deals with Mrs. Clutter's emotional problems, most likely clinical depression, and Mrs. Clutter displays remarkable inner strength when she firmly and strongly demands that the killers leave her daughter alone. From what I've read the Clutters' surviving family was particularly bothered by how Bonnie Clutter was portrayed in the book, claiming it was entirely untrue. But as an aside, both of the killers related to the police how Mr. Clutter asked them to not bother his wife because of her long illness. Capote might make up that fiction to make the character of Bonnie more interesting but certainly the killers had no reason to falsely portray Mrs. Clutter and no doubt much of the conversation in the book (duplicated in the movies) is right off the taped confessions of the killers. So it would've been nonsensical for Herb to have said that and not have it be true. --------------------------------------------- Result 2444 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Back in the forties, when [[movies]] touched on [[matters]] not [[yet]] admissible in "polite" [[society]], they resorted to [[codes]] which [[supposedly]] floated over the heads of most of the [[audience]] while alerting those in the know to just what was up. [[Probably]] no [[film]] of the decade was so freighted with innuendo as the [[oddly]] [[obscure]] Desert [[Fury]], set in a [[small]] [[gambling]] [[oasis]] called Chuckawalla somewhere in the California desert. Proprietress of the [[Purple]] Sage saloon and [[casino]] is the [[astonishing]] Mary Astor, in slacks and sporting a cigarette holder; into town drives her handful-of-a-daughter, Lizabeth Scott, looking, in Technicolor, like 20-million bucks. But listen to the dialogue between them, which suggests an older Lesbian and her young, restless companion (one can only wonder if A.I. Bezzerides' [[original]] script made this [[relationship]] explicit). Even more blatant are John Hodiak as a gangster and Wendell Corey as his insanely jealous torpedo. Add Burt Lancaster as the town sheriff, [[stir]], and sit back. Both Lancaster and (surprisingly) Hodiak fall for Scott. It seems, however, that Hodiak not only has a past with Astor, but had a wife who died under suspicious circumstances. The desert sun heats these [[ingredients]] up to a [[hard]] boil, with face-slappings aplenty and empurpled [[exchanges]]. Don't pass up this hothouse melodrama, chock full of creepily exotic blooms, if it comes your way; it's a [[remarkable]] [[movie]]. Back in the forties, when [[theater]] touched on [[issues]] not [[again]] admissible in "polite" [[societal]], they resorted to [[ciphers]] which [[presumably]] floated over the heads of most of the [[audiences]] while alerting those in the know to just what was up. [[Assuredly]] no [[cinematographic]] of the decade was so freighted with innuendo as the [[paradoxically]] [[unclear]] Desert [[Anger]], set in a [[petite]] [[betting]] [[haven]] called Chuckawalla somewhere in the California desert. Proprietress of the [[Violet]] Sage saloon and [[betting]] is the [[uncanny]] Mary Astor, in slacks and sporting a cigarette holder; into town drives her handful-of-a-daughter, Lizabeth Scott, looking, in Technicolor, like 20-million bucks. But listen to the dialogue between them, which suggests an older Lesbian and her young, restless companion (one can only wonder if A.I. Bezzerides' [[initial]] script made this [[relation]] explicit). Even more blatant are John Hodiak as a gangster and Wendell Corey as his insanely jealous torpedo. Add Burt Lancaster as the town sheriff, [[agitate]], and sit back. Both Lancaster and (surprisingly) Hodiak fall for Scott. It seems, however, that Hodiak not only has a past with Astor, but had a wife who died under suspicious circumstances. The desert sun heats these [[ingredient]] up to a [[dur]] boil, with face-slappings aplenty and empurpled [[shares]]. Don't pass up this hothouse melodrama, chock full of creepily exotic blooms, if it comes your way; it's a [[wondrous]] [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Dark comedy? Gallows [[humor]]? How does one [[make]] a [[comedy]] out of [[murder]]? It can be risky business as the viewer is [[required]] to let go of their moral values and laugh at the antics of a man who kills people. [[So]], the story has be [[rock]] solid with a good [[dash]] of [[suspended]] [[reality]] in order to make it [[work]]. So, Pierce Brosnan, the Irishman's answer to 007 is now cast as a chain-smoking, sex-addicted [[alcoholic]] who [[kills]] people for a [[living]] and is having a [[life]] crisis. He meets a struggling businessman, Greg Kinnear, and after a rocky [[beginning]], he learns that he needs a [[friend]]. But, Greg's happily married to Hope Davis and Brosnan sees in him the basic things he doesn't have, love, home and a [[life]]. Add character actor, [[Philip]] Baker Hall as the hit-man's manager and we're off to the [[races]]. Brosnan is [[wonderfully]] crass and crude as the anti-hero and Kinnear [[delightful]] as his counterpart, the very human businessman. Hope Davis adds a sparkle as Kinnear's very conventional wife who is fascinated with this derelict who drifts into their lives. The ending is [[delightful]] and with some surprise to it. You should leave the theater feeling, at least, partly good-- if you're able to suspend being aghast at killing people. Dark comedy? Gallows [[comedy]]? How does one [[deliver]] a [[parody]] out of [[kill]]? It can be risky business as the viewer is [[obliged]] to let go of their moral values and laugh at the antics of a man who kills people. [[Therefore]], the story has be [[rocks]] solid with a good [[hyphen]] of [[terminated]] [[realistic]] in order to make it [[collaborate]]. So, Pierce Brosnan, the Irishman's answer to 007 is now cast as a chain-smoking, sex-addicted [[alcohol]] who [[murdering]] people for a [[iife]] and is having a [[vie]] crisis. He meets a struggling businessman, Greg Kinnear, and after a rocky [[startup]], he learns that he needs a [[boyfriend]]. But, Greg's happily married to Hope Davis and Brosnan sees in him the basic things he doesn't have, love, home and a [[iife]]. Add character actor, [[Philipp]] Baker Hall as the hit-man's manager and we're off to the [[careers]]. Brosnan is [[stunningly]] crass and crude as the anti-hero and Kinnear [[charmer]] as his counterpart, the very human businessman. Hope Davis adds a sparkle as Kinnear's very conventional wife who is fascinated with this derelict who drifts into their lives. The ending is [[wondrous]] and with some surprise to it. You should leave the theater feeling, at least, partly good-- if you're able to suspend being aghast at killing people. --------------------------------------------- Result 2446 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this [[commonplace]] movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the [[direction]] is extremely boring and the story is [[NOT]] so interesting and [[original]]. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!! Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this [[mundane]] movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the [[orientation]] is extremely boring and the story is [[NOPE]] so interesting and [[upfront]]. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] About the baby: Why wasn't [[big]] brother assuming he'd be hungry for a [[bottle]] or some [[nourishment]] or a [[diaper]] change? He should have been [[screaming]] non-stop after that many hours without [[care]]. [[Definitely]] stupid to [[take]] the baby from a safe place when he didn't [[need]] to.

And why was the [[road]] miraculously clear [[whenever]] [[anyone]] [[wanted]] to drive [[somewhere]]? Didn't any uprooted trees [[fall]] on the [[roads]] and [[block]] them?

I can't [[imagine]] the [[cops]] at the [[roadblock]] not [[immediately]] following after any young [[person]] who would [[crash]] it, [[especially]] when they [[said]] it was [[dangerous]] to go there.

That being said, it was [[nice]] to have a [[movie]] [[children]] [[could]] safely watch, for a [[change]]. About the baby: Why wasn't [[grand]] brother assuming he'd be hungry for a [[vial]] or some [[food]] or a [[layer]] change? He should have been [[yelling]] non-stop after that many hours without [[healthcare]]. [[Decidedly]] stupid to [[taking]] the baby from a safe place when he didn't [[needed]] to.

And why was the [[estrada]] miraculously clear [[where]] [[nobody]] [[wanting]] to drive [[anywhere]]? Didn't any uprooted trees [[fallen]] on the [[boulevards]] and [[obstructing]] them?

I can't [[imagining]] the [[nypd]] at the [[barrera]] not [[directly]] following after any young [[persona]] who would [[crashes]] it, [[notably]] when they [[told]] it was [[unsafe]] to go there.

That being said, it was [[pleasurable]] to have a [[film]] [[enfant]] [[did]] safely watch, for a [[altering]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] of the films of the young republic few in number as they are The Buccaneer (1958)stands out as a finely crafted film. Charleton Heston excels in his portrayal of Old Hickory's defence of New Orleans with a thrown together force of militia, regulars and pirates promised a reprieve.

after Christmas 1814 peninsula veterans led by sir edward packenham, the duke of wellington's brother in law bore down on the city of new orleans. andy jackson had a day to draw together a scratch force to defend the city behind bales of hay.

Charlton Heston projects Jackson's terrifying presence and awe inspiring power of command. Yet there are a few colorful comic relief. With the might of the English lioness about to pounce, a young blond haired voluteer from New Orleans asks: I guess the ruckus is about to start.

the battle was about to rage but not for long. true to form the British marched straight into withering American fire. in less than a few minutes an attempt to reconquer lost north American territories had been foiled.

the battle scene in this movies lasts slightly longer than the actual battle itself.

there are colorful side stories in this film of the young volunteer at his first dance to celebrate the victory. --------------------------------------------- Result 2449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The 60s (1999) D: Mark Piznarski. Josh Hamilton, [[Julia]] Stiles, Jerry O'Connell, Jeremy Sisto, Jordana Brewster, Leonard [[Roberts]], [[Bill]] Smitrovich, Annie Corley, Charles S. Dutton. NBC mini-series (later released to video/DVD as full length feature film) about the treacherous 1960s, as seen through the eyes of both a [[white]] [[family]] and a black [[family]]. The film's first half is driven by the [[excellent]] performance of Dutton as [[Reverend]] Willie Taylor and evenly spreads the storyline between the families. However, Dutton's character is killed halfway through and the black family is completely [[forgotten]] in a dull, [[incoherent]], and downright [[awful]] 2nd half. [[RATING]]: 4 out of 10. Not rated ([[later]] rated PG-13 for [[video]]/DVD [[release]]). The 60s (1999) D: Mark Piznarski. Josh Hamilton, [[Yulia]] Stiles, Jerry O'Connell, Jeremy Sisto, Jordana Brewster, Leonard [[Stevens]], [[Invoice]] Smitrovich, Annie Corley, Charles S. Dutton. NBC mini-series (later released to video/DVD as full length feature film) about the treacherous 1960s, as seen through the eyes of both a [[bianchi]] [[familia]] and a black [[familial]]. The film's first half is driven by the [[sumptuous]] performance of Dutton as [[Pasteur]] Willie Taylor and evenly spreads the storyline between the families. However, Dutton's character is killed halfway through and the black family is completely [[omitted]] in a dull, [[counterintuitive]], and downright [[gruesome]] 2nd half. [[ASSESSMENTS]]: 4 out of 10. Not rated ([[subsequently]] rated PG-13 for [[videotape]]/DVD [[releasing]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 2450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] [[In]] my life I have [[seen]] [[many]] [[great]] and [[awful]] [[movies]]. I am not an expert in professional [[reviews]], but I have definitely something to [[say]] about this one. [[Firstly]], these actors are the [[worst]] I have [[seen]]... [[Their]] acting is so [[unreal]] that you even [[want]] to [[throw]] away the DVD in the first 2 minutes. I think that these [[actors]] were not interested in the quality.

Another [[awful]] [[thing]] is about these dialogs - they are so lame. You sometimes feel uncomfortable when you [[hear]] them. It seems that your 14 year old [[son]] [[could]] act better. I feel that this [[movie]] had a budget similar to the [[cost]] of my 14 year old European [[car]]...

Please, if my message [[reaches]] you - [[save]] your [[time]] and money. [[Across]] my life I have [[noticed]] [[various]] [[super]] and [[frightful]] [[filmmaking]]. I am not an expert in professional [[reviewed]], but I have definitely something to [[told]] about this one. [[Initially]], these actors are the [[meanest]] I have [[noticed]]... [[Leur]] acting is so [[surreal]] that you even [[wanted]] to [[toss]] away the DVD in the first 2 minutes. I think that these [[actresses]] were not interested in the quality.

Another [[scary]] [[stuff]] is about these dialogs - they are so lame. You sometimes feel uncomfortable when you [[listen]] them. It seems that your 14 year old [[sons]] [[did]] act better. I feel that this [[filmmaking]] had a budget similar to the [[price]] of my 14 year old European [[motors]]...

Please, if my message [[achieves]] you - [[rescued]] your [[times]] and money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Paul Hennessy and his [[wife]], Cate [[must]] deal with their two [[teenage]] daughters and [[weird]] son...But after the untimely passing of [[John]] [[Ritter]], the show became more about [[coping]] with the loss of a [[loved]] one...

I found this [[show]], [[passing]] through the channels one [[afternoon]] and I have to [[say]] I was laughing myself till my ribs ached, [[simply]] at the [[range]] of characters; the witty lines and the situation Paul would [[find]] himself [[dealing]] [[mostly]] with his [[daughters]]...From then on, I [[caught]] the rest of the [[show]] when I was [[free]] and I have to say the writing was very good..But then I read about John Ritter's [[death]]...[[Shortly]] afterwards I watched 'Goodbye' [[part]] 2 and I have to say I was [[nearly]] in [[tears]], [[watching]] the [[emotions]] of the characters, [[losing]] a [[loved]] one...[[How]] Rory [[punches]] a wall in [[anger]] and frustration...How [[Cate]] deals with having to sleep in her [[bed]] all [[alone]]....Briget and Kerry [[talking]] about what they should have [[done]].

But the [[show]] does [[move]] on, bringing with it Jim Egan and CJ Barnes who [[provide]] [[great]] [[laughs]], as Cate's [[father]] [[tries]] to [[protect]] his [[family]] and give '[[man]] issue talks' to Rory...But the [[true]] gem is CJ...who is [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]] as the wild [[cousin]].

It will [[always]] be [[John]] Ritter's [[masterpiece]]. Paul Hennessy and his [[woman]], Cate [[ought]] deal with their two [[adolescent]] daughters and [[bizarre]] son...But after the untimely passing of [[Johannes]] [[Knight]], the show became more about [[adapting]] with the loss of a [[enjoyed]] one...

I found this [[displaying]], [[passerby]] through the channels one [[evening]] and I have to [[told]] I was laughing myself till my ribs ached, [[straightforward]] at the [[ranging]] of characters; the witty lines and the situation Paul would [[finds]] himself [[addresses]] [[basically]] with his [[females]]...From then on, I [[capturing]] the rest of the [[exposition]] when I was [[libre]] and I have to say the writing was very good..But then I read about John Ritter's [[killings]]...[[Soon]] afterwards I watched 'Goodbye' [[party]] 2 and I have to say I was [[practically]] in [[rip]], [[staring]] the [[sentiments]] of the characters, [[wasting]] a [[worshipped]] one...[[Mode]] Rory [[beatings]] a wall in [[ire]] and frustration...How [[Kate]] deals with having to sleep in her [[bedside]] all [[merely]]....Briget and Kerry [[schmooze]] about what they should have [[performed]].

But the [[illustrates]] does [[budge]] on, bringing with it Jim Egan and CJ Barnes who [[affords]] [[wondrous]] [[laughing]], as Cate's [[fathers]] [[attempts]] to [[safeguard]] his [[families]] and give '[[bloke]] issue talks' to Rory...But the [[truthful]] gem is CJ...who is [[perfectly]] [[fun]] as the wild [[kinsman]].

It will [[perpetually]] be [[Johannes]] Ritter's [[centerpiece]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] in 1976 i had just moved to the us from ceylon. i was 23, and had been married for a little over three years, and was [[beginning]] to come out as a lesbian. i saw this movie on an [[old]] black and white TV, with terrible [[reception]], alone, and uninterrupted, in an [[awakening]] that seemed like an echo of the story. i was living in a small house in tucson arizona, and it was summertime... like everyone else here, i never [[forgot]] the [[feelings]] the images of this story called forth, and its residue of fragile [[magic]], and i have treasured a hope that i would [[see]] it again someday. i'll keep checking in. i also wish that someone [[would]] make a movie of shirley verel's 'the other side of venus'. it [[also]] has some of the same delicacy and [[persistent]] poignancy... in 1976 i had just moved to the us from ceylon. i was 23, and had been married for a little over three years, and was [[launching]] to come out as a lesbian. i saw this movie on an [[archaic]] black and white TV, with terrible [[homepage]], alone, and uninterrupted, in an [[woken]] that seemed like an echo of the story. i was living in a small house in tucson arizona, and it was summertime... like everyone else here, i never [[forgotten]] the [[moods]] the images of this story called forth, and its residue of fragile [[witchcraft]], and i have treasured a hope that i would [[behold]] it again someday. i'll keep checking in. i also wish that someone [[ought]] make a movie of shirley verel's 'the other side of venus'. it [[similarly]] has some of the same delicacy and [[uninterrupted]] poignancy... --------------------------------------------- Result 2453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This one is a [[little]] better than the first one. It still relies on a lot of its humor which basically keeps saying that the old Bond movies were not realistic. That [[wears]] thin after so many parodies. The girls were more interesting in this one.

There is a [[tremendous]] amount of [[total]] gross out humor. Hopefully one day real comedy will come back. This one is a [[scant]] better than the first one. It still relies on a lot of its humor which basically keeps saying that the old Bond movies were not realistic. That [[door]] thin after so many parodies. The girls were more interesting in this one.

There is a [[prodigious]] amount of [[whole]] gross out humor. Hopefully one day real comedy will come back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] as always this is an [[inaccurate]] picture of the homeless. TV told a lot of lies about panhandlers in the early 1990s and made everyone look bad, and claimed we all made over $100 a day when $20-40 a day was much closer to reality. when someone drove by where i held up a sign offering to work, and offered me work, i actually went and took the work if i was physically able.and if i would been offered the $100,000 id damned sure invested in in apt prepaid for at least 2 years, and kept most in the bank and still left myself $10-20000 for NL $1-2 and $2-5 cash games at the casinos. i usually always win and could win decent if i just had a bankroll. instead i win about $1000 a month is all playing in always minimum buying in due to not wanting to risk losing it all. i was only homeless cause i didn't wanna risk spending all my money and going broke, sometimes i had over $1000-2000 in my sock while i slept outside. anyone wanting to talk contact sevencard2003 on yahoo messenger.i admit i was different than most homeless people though, due to the fact i never drank smoke or took drugs. im no longer homeless, am now in govt housing for $177 a month and getting SSI and spend most of my time winning at online poker. mom and sunflower diversified worked hard to get me SSI. glad my days of hiding in under the stage in the convention center of the casino at night sleeping, worrying about getting caught by security are finally over. had this TV crew picked me theyd been over a lot sooner. its a shame how they don't better select who they pick. as always this is an [[fallacious]] picture of the homeless. TV told a lot of lies about panhandlers in the early 1990s and made everyone look bad, and claimed we all made over $100 a day when $20-40 a day was much closer to reality. when someone drove by where i held up a sign offering to work, and offered me work, i actually went and took the work if i was physically able.and if i would been offered the $100,000 id damned sure invested in in apt prepaid for at least 2 years, and kept most in the bank and still left myself $10-20000 for NL $1-2 and $2-5 cash games at the casinos. i usually always win and could win decent if i just had a bankroll. instead i win about $1000 a month is all playing in always minimum buying in due to not wanting to risk losing it all. i was only homeless cause i didn't wanna risk spending all my money and going broke, sometimes i had over $1000-2000 in my sock while i slept outside. anyone wanting to talk contact sevencard2003 on yahoo messenger.i admit i was different than most homeless people though, due to the fact i never drank smoke or took drugs. im no longer homeless, am now in govt housing for $177 a month and getting SSI and spend most of my time winning at online poker. mom and sunflower diversified worked hard to get me SSI. glad my days of hiding in under the stage in the convention center of the casino at night sleeping, worrying about getting caught by security are finally over. had this TV crew picked me theyd been over a lot sooner. its a shame how they don't better select who they pick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] i am a [[big]] [[fan]] of karishma [[Kapoor]] and Govinda. I watched this film after i had seen Fiza, which was absolutley [[brilliant]].

There are [[films]] that are [[bad]], and there are [[films]] that are cr*p. but this [[film]] just [[takes]] the biscuit.

We were so [[annoyed]] that we were [[conned]] out of paying our [[money]] [[expecting]] a decent [[film]].

avoid at all [[cost]], [[dont]] even [[rent]] it.

1/10 i am a [[overwhelming]] [[breather]] of karishma [[Ranbir]] and Govinda. I watched this film after i had seen Fiza, which was absolutley [[sumptuous]].

There are [[kino]] that are [[mala]], and there are [[movies]] that are cr*p. but this [[filmmaking]] just [[pick]] the biscuit.

We were so [[infuriated]] that we were [[swindled]] out of paying our [[cash]] [[awaited]] a decent [[filmmaking]].

avoid at all [[prices]], [[becuase]] even [[lease]] it.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Collusion Course is even [[worse]] than the typical "evil white male corporate capitalist" movie of the week. This movie is [[less]] pleasant than a toothache. Jay Leno can act. He's good in his underrated debut movie, The Silverbears, in which he gives a performance consist with the demands of his character. This movie is so [[bad]] Leno's character, a [[sanctimonious]] buffoon, is less annoying than Morita's character, a sanctimonious fool. Collusion Course is even [[pire]] than the typical "evil white male corporate capitalist" movie of the week. This movie is [[lowest]] pleasant than a toothache. Jay Leno can act. He's good in his underrated debut movie, The Silverbears, in which he gives a performance consist with the demands of his character. This movie is so [[rotten]] Leno's character, a [[hypocrite]] buffoon, is less annoying than Morita's character, a sanctimonious fool. --------------------------------------------- Result 2457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] As others have mentioned, all the [[women]] that go nude in this [[film]] are [[mostly]] [[absolutely]] [[gorgeous]]. The plot very [[ably]] [[shows]] the hypocrisy of the female libido. [[When]] [[men]] are [[around]] they [[want]] to be [[pursued]], but when no "[[men]]" are [[around]], they [[become]] the pursuers of a 14 year old [[boy]]. And the [[boy]] [[becomes]] a [[man]] [[really]] fast (we should all be so lucky at this [[age]]!). He then [[gets]] up the [[courage]] to [[pursue]] his [[true]] [[love]]. As others have mentioned, all the [[daughters]] that go nude in this [[films]] are [[essentially]] [[utterly]] [[wondrous]]. The plot very [[skilfully]] [[displayed]] the hypocrisy of the female libido. [[Whenever]] [[males]] are [[roundabout]] they [[wanted]] to be [[pursuing]], but when no "[[males]]" are [[about]], they [[gotten]] the pursuers of a 14 year old [[guy]]. And the [[kiddo]] [[become]] a [[males]] [[truthfully]] fast (we should all be so lucky at this [[aged]]!). He then [[got]] up the [[boldness]] to [[pursuing]] his [[truthful]] [[iike]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much in the same way Frank Miller and his Sin City comics used black and white to express itself (and its film noir influences), so does Christian Volckman with Renaissance.

It is the year 2054, in Paris. In the tradition of science fiction, the future is a bright, sparkling multi-teared jewel. This is a jewel in a setting of misery, inequity and darkness; bright and beautiful on top with a dark underbelly beneath. One of these "bright" people at the top, a research scientist from a very large and influential global company (Avalon), is kidnapped. The well known and efficient, Captain Karas (voiced by the new James Bond himself - Daniel Craig), is assigned the task to find her.

The plot and layout is not overly original. It is heavily influenced by film noir, Gibson's Neuromancer and other detective stories, along with movies like Blade Runner, Sin City, Fritz Lang's Metropolis and Minority Report. There is the main plot, surrounded by other possible sub-plots that all connect at the end. It is not hard to figure it all out.

The movie's strength and originality is in its intense visual presentation. Paris is an intricate array of levels and sub-levels. At its base is the more primitive industrial infrastructure. As the city rises, so does its architectural complexity and luminescence. Yet in this structure, the top does not equate with elevation of human ideals and behavior. Paris has been intricately animated and laid out in brilliant black and white. The movie is closer in spirit with Sin City (the comics) then Sin City the movie was with its source material. This is done all the more easy, because it is still remaining in relatively the same medium; animation. Much in the same way as a Scanner Darkly pushed the visual aspects of story telling, so does this. The light and dark, black and white creates an atmosphere of contrasts, as well as visual ambiguity. Right and wrong, black and white can lose all meaning at the same time it is right in front of us. The movie proves how black and white can be both ambiguous and obvious at the same time.

In keeping with the spirit of the movie, I can be both critic and fan. I can love and loath in the same light. It is definitely an experience I recommend for lovers of the visual arts. So pour another Black and Tan, enter the void and enjoy the ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 2459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there has ever been a worse comedy than 'Gray Matters' I am unaware of it. The New York Jewish comedy's 'funny' premise is that siblings Sam & Gray are mistaken for a couple and so decide to fix Sam up with a girlfriend, only to find that Gray is equally attracted to their target - Charlie. The revelation that Gray is secretly gay is apparently only a surprise to her. There is a deeply offensive wedding sequence, a deeply embarrassing 'drunk act' from Moynahan and Graham, and a performance that would embarrass forests everywhere for its woodenness from Tom Cavanagh. Sissy Spacek demonstrates a complete inability to do comedy and will want this excised from her resume. Molly Shannon plays the homely friend with lumpen insouciance. Only Alan Cumming emerges with any credit but is seriously under-employed and given nothing with which to work. The whole disaster is cemented by Graham's bizarre eye-rolling performance culminating with the penultimate scene where she wears a comedy hat and an overcoat despite the scene being set in a lesbian bar. It is astonishing that this film was ever released it has no redeeming feature and should be avoided at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This [[picture]] for me [[scores]] very highly as it is a [[hugely]] [[enjoyable]] and [[amusing]] spoof of Alien Invaders taking over a town and many of its' men folk.

The town and the players are all decked out in sort of 1950's style and the whole movie has a deliberate tacky and kitschy feel to it. Some of the scenes are hilarious like with the birth of an alien creature.

All the actors give full blooded and [[serious]] performances which makes the film even funnier and the special effects and Aliens are at [[least]] it seems to me intentionally 3rd rate to add to the amusement.

These type of films often deserve a cult following:

8/10. This [[visuals]] for me [[dozens]] very highly as it is a [[terribly]] [[nice]] and [[fun]] spoof of Alien Invaders taking over a town and many of its' men folk.

The town and the players are all decked out in sort of 1950's style and the whole movie has a deliberate tacky and kitschy feel to it. Some of the scenes are hilarious like with the birth of an alien creature.

All the actors give full blooded and [[gravest]] performances which makes the film even funnier and the special effects and Aliens are at [[lowest]] it seems to me intentionally 3rd rate to add to the amusement.

These type of films often deserve a cult following:

8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm Italian and when I've recently looked again this film I astonished for its beauty: the first time I was 10 years old and I liked it, but today I can appreciate it with adult mind and feelings. Now I can understand it was a masterpiece of a special season of the Italian cinema (Pasolini etc.), by that time gone.

The Hollywood epic films are good...for fun. Perhaps this 'Odyssey' had no English version because is not enough funny... not suitable for pop-corn and coke audience. However suitable for Homer pathos and existentialist reflections.

In Italy was recently released a very good DVD version: INTEGRAL, with excellent colors. You can find it in some file sharing, but it's Italian only, and without subtitles. Too bad: also the dialogs and the voices of this film are remarkable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This made-for-TV film is a brilliant one. This is probably the best and favourite role by BAFTA winning John Thaw (Kavanagh Q.C. and Inspector Morse). Tom Oakley (Thaw) widowed man has lived in a village alone for a while since his wife and son died, and now he has been landed with an evacuee called Willaim Beech (Nick Robinson). As he gets to know this child he starts to develop a friendship. Until Willaim's Mum (Annabelle Apsion) wants him back. After Tom gets worried about William not contacting him he goes to London to find him. In the end Willaim gets his home with a loving family (or Dad). Set during the Second World War this is an excellent film. It was nominated the BAFTA Lew Grade Award, and it won the National Television Award for Most Popular Drama. John Thaw was number 3 on TV's 50 Greatest Stars. Very good! --------------------------------------------- Result 2463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] I haven't watched the movie [[yet]], but can't [[wait]] to [[see]] it! It seems very interesting and inspirational. It was one of the most interesting trailers I've ever [[seen]]: the [[questions]] it posed [[really]] stopped me and made me think, the [[unique]] [[approach]] to the [[sport]] of boxing as a metaphor for the "battle [[within]]"... thank god [[somebody]] is hitting another angle with the boxing thing. This film looks so fresh and [[smart]]. And the actor is [[really]] [[hot]]. I [[especially]] enjoyed the short clip with the [[actor]] from the Rocky [[movies]], [[really]] [[clever]]. I [[thought]] that the topic selected-overcoming adversities and [[childhood]] traumas-is [[timeless]], and [[god]] knows a lot of people [[need]] it. Bring it on. I haven't watched the movie [[however]], but can't [[sufferance]] to [[consults]] it! It seems very interesting and inspirational. It was one of the most interesting trailers I've ever [[noticed]]: the [[issues]] it posed [[truly]] stopped me and made me think, the [[exclusive]] [[approaching]] to the [[sportsmen]] of boxing as a metaphor for the "battle [[inside]]"... thank god [[person]] is hitting another angle with the boxing thing. This film looks so fresh and [[artful]]. And the actor is [[genuinely]] [[sexier]]. I [[mostly]] enjoyed the short clip with the [[actress]] from the Rocky [[films]], [[truthfully]] [[brainy]]. I [[brainchild]] that the topic selected-overcoming adversities and [[children]] traumas-is [[undying]], and [[lawd]] knows a lot of people [[required]] it. Bring it on. --------------------------------------------- Result 2464 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Bradford Dillman plays a scientist who wakes up one morning in the middle of a bloody crime scene; having partial amnesia (or "global amnesia", which one character claims to define as elective loss of memory), the scientist finds a private detective in the phone book in the hopes of piecing his life back together. Abhorrent concoction very loosely based on Walter Ericson's [[book]] "Fallen Angel" (filmed in 1965 as "Mirage" with [[Gregory]] Peck). It was probably too racy for television--what with [[drugs]] and hippies [[added]] to the mix--that NBC [[initially]] refused to [[air]] it, which is how this low-budgeter wound up in [[theaters]]. [[Director]] James Goldstone gets [[freaky]] with the hyperkinetic [[visuals]] and camera-tricks, while editor [[Edward]] A. Biery goes [[wild]] with the zig-zag cuts. Unfortunately, their admittedly-colorful [[gimmicks]] cannot [[cover]] up the [[weaknesses]] of this [[updated]] plot, and the acting is [[woefully]] overripe. Dillman, under pressure to [[recall]] the events of the [[night]] in question, goes through an Actor's Seminar of tics, [[stammers]], nose-wipes, and [[crazy]] half-laughs while spitting out [[dialogue]] like, "Dream...a [[dream]]...drugs...[[yeah]], [[drugs]]...that [[SOUND]]...bells...[[help]]!" As a villainous fellow [[scientist]] with a Cheshire [[Cat]] [[smile]], [[Pat]] Hingle [[nearly]] upstages Dillman in the [[Grand]] Thespian [[department]] by [[continually]] [[addressing]] everyone in baby-talk, strutting about like a middle-aged peacock and [[twisting]] his mouth around in [[agony]]. Hope Lange's [[scientist]]/love-interest is given the short shrift, but not before she [[screams]] at indifferent-lover Dillman: "What do I have to do, [[talk]] [[Ape]] Man? Me want You!" This is one [[frantic]] "Jigsaw"! *1/2 from **** Bradford Dillman plays a scientist who wakes up one morning in the middle of a bloody crime scene; having partial amnesia (or "global amnesia", which one character claims to define as elective loss of memory), the scientist finds a private detective in the phone book in the hopes of piecing his life back together. Abhorrent concoction very loosely based on Walter Ericson's [[cookbook]] "Fallen Angel" (filmed in 1965 as "Mirage" with [[Grigori]] Peck). It was probably too racy for television--what with [[medications]] and hippies [[addendum]] to the mix--that NBC [[firstly]] refused to [[midair]] it, which is how this low-budgeter wound up in [[cinema]]. [[Superintendent]] James Goldstone gets [[weird]] with the hyperkinetic [[pictures]] and camera-tricks, while editor [[Eduard]] A. Biery goes [[feral]] with the zig-zag cuts. Unfortunately, their admittedly-colorful [[tricks]] cannot [[covers]] up the [[faults]] of this [[modernized]] plot, and the acting is [[unfortunately]] overripe. Dillman, under pressure to [[remembered]] the events of the [[overnight]] in question, goes through an Actor's Seminar of tics, [[stutters]], nose-wipes, and [[loca]] half-laughs while spitting out [[talks]] like, "Dream...a [[nightmares]]...drugs...[[yup]], [[meds]]...that [[AUDIBLE]]...bells...[[pomoc]]!" As a villainous fellow [[investigators]] with a Cheshire [[Kitten]] [[laughter]], [[Patricia]] Hingle [[almost]] upstages Dillman in the [[Prodigious]] Thespian [[ministries]] by [[incessantly]] [[solve]] everyone in baby-talk, strutting about like a middle-aged peacock and [[twist]] his mouth around in [[grief]]. Hope Lange's [[researchers]]/love-interest is given the short shrift, but not before she [[howl]] at indifferent-lover Dillman: "What do I have to do, [[speaking]] [[Monkeys]] Man? Me want You!" This is one [[frenetic]] "Jigsaw"! *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] i was [[intrigued]] to see how a little-seen 2008 [[film]] had somehow won the [[Oscar]] for [[best]] [[picture]] of 2009 and [[thus]] went to [[see]] The [[Hurt]] Locker. sadly, all i got for the two hours invested was the [[grim]] confirmation that this film had won [[awards]] [[purely]] for off-the-screen reasons.

the direction and [[visual]] [[style]] of this film is some of the [[weakest]] you will ever [[see]]. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity [[homage]] with dire, [[annoying]] "[[shaky]] cam" [[visuals]], it shows off all the [[hallmarks]] of a second rate daytime soap [[opera]] in terms of lensing.

the "plot" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as [[rejected]] Beetle Bailey comic strip [[ideas]] and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being "minimalist" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the [[worst]] ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not [[enough]] to obscure how [[bad]] the [[project]] is.

the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of "mockumentary" that they clocked was [[bereft]] of [[humour]] and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.

if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life. i was [[puzzled]] to see how a little-seen 2008 [[flick]] had somehow won the [[Oskar]] for [[optimum]] [[imagery]] of 2009 and [[accordingly]] went to [[seeing]] The [[Harmed]] Locker. sadly, all i got for the two hours invested was the [[somber]] confirmation that this film had won [[prix]] [[only]] for off-the-screen reasons.

the direction and [[optic]] [[elegance]] of this film is some of the [[fewer]] you will ever [[behold]]. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity [[commendation]] with dire, [[irritating]] "[[volatile]] cam" [[photos]], it shows off all the [[characteristics]] of a second rate daytime soap [[drama]] in terms of lensing.

the "plot" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as [[repudiated]] Beetle Bailey comic strip [[thoughts]] and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being "minimalist" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the [[meanest]] ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not [[sufficiently]] to obscure how [[unfavorable]] the [[projects]] is.

the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of "mockumentary" that they clocked was [[devoid]] of [[humor]] and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.

if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 2466 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hello. I am Paul Raddick, a.k.a. Panic Attack of WTAF, Channel 29 in Philadelphia. Let me tell you about this god awful movie that powered on Adam Sandler's film career but was digitized after a short time.

Going Overboard is about an aspiring comedian played by Sandler who gets a job on a cruise ship and fails...or so I thought. Sandler encounters babes that like History of the World Part 1 and Rebound. The babes were supposed to be engaged, but, actually, they get executed by Sawtooth, the meanest cannibal the world has ever known. Adam Sandler fared bad in Going Overboard, but fared better in Big Daddy, Billy Madison, and Jen Leone's favorite, 50 First Dates. Man, Drew Barrymore was one hot chick. Spanglish is red hot, Going Overboard ain't Dooley squat! End of file. --------------------------------------------- Result 2467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I watched the Canadian [[videotape]] of this [[movie]] as "The Witching" which somehow made its [[way]] to [[New]] York State. [[Audio]] was [[quite]] bad, I had to raise it to about 7/8 just to [[hear]] it and the soundtrack often was [[overwhelming]] the dialog. [[Orson]] Welles was a mumbler, worse than usual, and some of his dialog and of others was [[run]] through an echo [[chamber]]. A ghostly figure who keeps reappearing had her voice distorted. Some closed captions would really have helped!

A group of witches or satanists (the end credits say the [[group]] was not meant to represent any real [[group]]!) have a ritual in which they get naked and cause a miscarriage by stabbing a doll. The woman who had the miscarriage and her husband move to a town named "Lilith," where he's been offered a job at a toy factory. Despite one of the AKAs of this movie apparently being "The Toy Factory," we never see it, and it's only occasionally referred to at all.

On the way to Lilith, her husband gets impatient with some of her [[questions]] about what his new boss Mr. Cato wanted to know about their religious persuasion. He drives [[aggressively]], and causes another [[car]] to go off the [[road]] and blow up. [[After]] the police arrive, she takes a doll that [[fell]] out of the car, the [[second]] of [[many]] handmade dolls in the movie.

It [[turns]] out [[Mr]]. Cato and all the townspeople are witches, and that they are the ones who caused her miscarriage, [[though]] she doesn't [[realize]] it. They want her because she has an [[innate]] talent for necromancy, of which she was not really aware.

Some images in the movie have some impact, but on the whole the movie is not very [[involving]]. The [[movie]] does [[seem]] a bit of a mess, and this is no doubt largely due to its re- editing and the addition of [[new]] footage. The [[original]] version, according to the end credits, was called Necromancy - A Life for a Life. The [[magic]] of [[DVD]] could let us see both versions on one disc, but re-releasing this movie probably isn't a [[priority]]. I watched the Canadian [[video]] of this [[filmmaking]] as "The Witching" which somehow made its [[route]] to [[Novel]] York State. [[Acoustic]] was [[rather]] bad, I had to raise it to about 7/8 just to [[overheard]] it and the soundtrack often was [[colossal]] the dialog. [[Welles]] Welles was a mumbler, worse than usual, and some of his dialog and of others was [[running]] through an echo [[bedroom]]. A ghostly figure who keeps reappearing had her voice distorted. Some closed captions would really have helped!

A group of witches or satanists (the end credits say the [[groups]] was not meant to represent any real [[groups]]!) have a ritual in which they get naked and cause a miscarriage by stabbing a doll. The woman who had the miscarriage and her husband move to a town named "Lilith," where he's been offered a job at a toy factory. Despite one of the AKAs of this movie apparently being "The Toy Factory," we never see it, and it's only occasionally referred to at all.

On the way to Lilith, her husband gets impatient with some of her [[subjects]] about what his new boss Mr. Cato wanted to know about their religious persuasion. He drives [[vigorously]], and causes another [[vehicle]] to go off the [[route]] and blow up. [[Upon]] the police arrive, she takes a doll that [[dipped]] out of the car, the [[seconds]] of [[various]] handmade dolls in the movie.

It [[revolves]] out [[Herr]]. Cato and all the townspeople are witches, and that they are the ones who caused her miscarriage, [[despite]] she doesn't [[realising]] it. They want her because she has an [[congenital]] talent for necromancy, of which she was not really aware.

Some images in the movie have some impact, but on the whole the movie is not very [[implicate]]. The [[filmmaking]] does [[appears]] a bit of a mess, and this is no doubt largely due to its re- editing and the addition of [[nuevo]] footage. The [[preliminary]] version, according to the end credits, was called Necromancy - A Life for a Life. The [[hallucinogenic]] of [[DVDS]] could let us see both versions on one disc, but re-releasing this movie probably isn't a [[precedence]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I would not [[hesitate]] to put this [[adaptation]] of 'Death Trap" in a [[top]] 5 list of the [[best]] stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and "Superman") [[play]] off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I [[normally]] don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.

I'm not sure that comparisons of "Deathtrap" with "Sleuth" - another [[brilliant]] stage-to-screen adaptation [[featuring]] [[Michael]] Caine - are valid, or even fair. Yes, the two [[stories]] have a [[lot]] in common. But "Sleuth" is as much about [[class]] warfare as the [[battle]] of wits, and the [[house]] in "Sleuth" is set is at least as much a character in the movie as the two actors - the house doesn't really have an equivalent in "Deathtrap". And "Deathtrap" isn't so much a battle of wits as it is a [[pointed]] vignette about how people are no damned good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they get. I'll just [[say]] that both movies are [[superb]] [[examples]] of the [[genre]], and well worth your [[time]] and money. This is [[America]], after all. You don't have to choose!

I won't [[give]] away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a [[dozen]] years, and [[still]] enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go "all pear shaped". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.

Anyone who likes black-hearted comedy and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy "Deathtrap" immensely. I would not [[dither]] to put this [[coping]] of 'Death Trap" in a [[topped]] 5 list of the [[better]] stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and "Superman") [[gaming]] off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I [[generally]] don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.

I'm not sure that comparisons of "Deathtrap" with "Sleuth" - another [[shiny]] stage-to-screen adaptation [[starring]] [[Michel]] Caine - are valid, or even fair. Yes, the two [[story]] have a [[batch]] in common. But "Sleuth" is as much about [[categories]] warfare as the [[struggling]] of wits, and the [[dwellings]] in "Sleuth" is set is at least as much a character in the movie as the two actors - the house doesn't really have an equivalent in "Deathtrap". And "Deathtrap" isn't so much a battle of wits as it is a [[stressed]] vignette about how people are no damned good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they get. I'll just [[told]] that both movies are [[wondrous]] [[instances]] of the [[gender]], and well worth your [[period]] and money. This is [[Americas]], after all. You don't have to choose!

I won't [[lend]] away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a [[twelve]] years, and [[yet]] enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go "all pear shaped". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.

Anyone who likes black-hearted comedy and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy "Deathtrap" immensely. --------------------------------------------- Result 2469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Drawing Restraint 9. dir: [[Matthew]] Barney.

How do you know when you're in the middle of a [[pretentious]] art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of dialogue in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a giant furry [[pita]] on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth [[turds]] and spinal columns are used in a whale [[blubber]] experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and still [[annoying]], version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is [[among]] the most [[pretentious]] of the modern art [[movies]]. At 135 minutes, it [[adds]] to its [[pretension]] by being boring to boot. I would call the [[use]] of [[color]] [[stunning]], and the [[opening]] sequence interesting, but the [[rest]] of the movie [[looked]] like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up [[later]].

Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and [[Matthew]] Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head [[shaving]] (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. [[Then]] there is [[mutual]] evisceration, cannibalism, and [[lets]] not forget the [[giant]] [[turd]].

[[Matthew]] Barney has [[written]] that this is about "the relationship between self-imposed resistance and creativity." That's [[almost]] like saying, "if you don't [[get]] it, then you're not creative in your [[interpretation]], so [[sod]] off because I'm an [[artist]]." Oh, [[wait]], that's the POST-modern [[interpretation]] of that [[sentence]] and what the [[movie]] [[would]] be about if it was POST-modern. But, its [[supposed]] to be [[Modern]] art. Which is about the [[art]] itself.

So, let's [[start]] this [[whole]] interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 serious and should not be [[taken]] as any [[realistic]] [[attempt]] to [[interpret]] the [[movie]].

The [[first]] half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.

On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the "important" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.

Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was trying to quit smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who tells them that the ship is scarred from when another ship hit it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.

Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.

Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.

So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.

D+ Drawing Restraint 9. dir: [[Mathieu]] Barney.

How do you know when you're in the middle of a [[conceited]] art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of dialogue in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a giant furry [[flip]] on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth [[idiots]] and spinal columns are used in a whale [[bacon]] experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and still [[exasperating]], version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is [[between]] the most [[cocky]] of the modern art [[filmmaking]]. At 135 minutes, it [[summing]] to its [[pretext]] by being boring to boot. I would call the [[employs]] of [[colors]] [[terrific]], and the [[opens]] sequence interesting, but the [[remaining]] of the movie [[seemed]] like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up [[subsequently]].

Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and [[Mathew]] Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head [[shave]] (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. [[Thus]] there is [[bilateral]] evisceration, cannibalism, and [[enables]] not forget the [[monumental]] [[poo]].

[[Mathieu]] Barney has [[typed]] that this is about "the relationship between self-imposed resistance and creativity." That's [[approximately]] like saying, "if you don't [[gets]] it, then you're not creative in your [[explanations]], so [[turf]] off because I'm an [[entertainer]]." Oh, [[suspense]], that's the POST-modern [[interpretive]] of that [[punishments]] and what the [[filmmaking]] [[should]] be about if it was POST-modern. But, its [[presumed]] to be [[Modernity]] art. Which is about the [[artistry]] itself.

So, let's [[beginnings]] this [[ensemble]] interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 serious and should not be [[picked]] as any [[pragmatic]] [[seek]] to [[construe]] the [[filmmaking]].

The [[outset]] half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.

On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the "important" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.

Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was trying to quit smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who tells them that the ship is scarred from when another ship hit it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.

Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.

Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.

So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.

D+ --------------------------------------------- Result 2470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Only on a very rare occasion does an episode of the x-files fail to generate any excitement or does the episode contain anything which is just totally boring to watch.A detective and his former partner both die in unexplained circumstances.The deaths are linked to the presence of a little girl who was there when the deaths took place.Mulder has devised a theory that a policeman murdered by his colleagues has come back reincarnated as the little girl and is exacting revenge.Now for the bizarre bit.The little girl has no connection at all and seems to just a random person chosen as the reincarnation.I think this was slightly lazy writing by the writers and this episode ranks as one of the worst in x-files history! --------------------------------------------- Result 2471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the great classic comedies. Not a slapstick comedy, not a heavy drama. A fun, satirical film, a buyers beware guide to a new home.

Filled with great characters all of whom, Cary Grant is convinced, are out to fleece him in the building of a dream home.

A great look at life in the late 40's.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Actually this [[movie]] was not so [[bad]]. It contains action, [[comedy]] and [[excitement]]. There are good actors in this film, for instance Doug Hutchison (Percy from "The Green Mile"), who plays Bristol. Another well known actor is Jamie Kennedy, from "Scream" and "Three Kings". The main characters are played by Jamie Foxx as Alvin, who was pretty good and also funny, but the one who most [[surprised]] me, was David Morse as Edgar Clenteen. He plays a different character than he usually does, because in other films like "The Green Mile", "Indian Runner", "The Negotiator" or "The Langoliers" he plays a very sympathetic person, and in "Bait" the plays almost the opposite, a man without any emotions, which was nice to see. The only really [[negative]] thing about this film, are the several pictures of the World Trade Center, which makes this film perhaps look a little dated. Overall I thought this was a pretty good little [[film]]! Actually this [[film]] was not so [[inclement]]. It contains action, [[comedian]] and [[agitation]]. There are good actors in this film, for instance Doug Hutchison (Percy from "The Green Mile"), who plays Bristol. Another well known actor is Jamie Kennedy, from "Scream" and "Three Kings". The main characters are played by Jamie Foxx as Alvin, who was pretty good and also funny, but the one who most [[dumbfounded]] me, was David Morse as Edgar Clenteen. He plays a different character than he usually does, because in other films like "The Green Mile", "Indian Runner", "The Negotiator" or "The Langoliers" he plays a very sympathetic person, and in "Bait" the plays almost the opposite, a man without any emotions, which was nice to see. The only really [[counterproductive]] thing about this film, are the several pictures of the World Trade Center, which makes this film perhaps look a little dated. Overall I thought this was a pretty good little [[cinematography]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] More like [[psychological]] analysis of [[movies]], but [[Psycho]] does sound better as a header. The [[man]] in charge of the movie (the [[narrator]] if you will) does [[depict]] movies here in his own [[way]]. Most of them are classics, but all of them are listed here at IMDb and I'd [[strongly]] advise you to see them ([[especially]] the Hitchcock [[movies]], Solyaris, [[Conversation]] & and the Lynch movies), because Slavoj Zizek will reference them!

[[Or]] in other words, he might [[spoil]] them for you. I don't [[remember]] if he spoiled more than those I've listed (I think the Chaplin movies too), but as I wrote it'd be best if you watch them all beforehand! In the IMDb listing there is a movie missing, that I did report to them, so it might get up there pretty soon. It's a Meg Ryan movie, but it's a only a brief snippet not [[big]] of a deal anyways.

Zizek views and [[opinions]] are crazy and fun to [[listen]] to, if you're open minded to [[see]] [[things]] through another [[perspective]] ([[even]] if that does [[destroy]] your [[favorite]] [[movie]] a [[bit]] for you ... it doesn't [[mean]] it will do that, but it [[could]])! More like [[mental]] analysis of [[movie]], but [[Psychotic]] does sound better as a header. The [[fella]] in charge of the movie (the [[announcer]] if you will) does [[describe]] movies here in his own [[camino]]. Most of them are classics, but all of them are listed here at IMDb and I'd [[flatly]] advise you to see them ([[concretely]] the Hitchcock [[kino]], Solyaris, [[Schmooze]] & and the Lynch movies), because Slavoj Zizek will reference them!

[[Oder]] in other words, he might [[wrack]] them for you. I don't [[rember]] if he spoiled more than those I've listed (I think the Chaplin movies too), but as I wrote it'd be best if you watch them all beforehand! In the IMDb listing there is a movie missing, that I did report to them, so it might get up there pretty soon. It's a Meg Ryan movie, but it's a only a brief snippet not [[prodigious]] of a deal anyways.

Zizek views and [[opinion]] are crazy and fun to [[heed]] to, if you're open minded to [[behold]] [[items]] through another [[standpoint]] ([[yet]] if that does [[ruining]] your [[preferred]] [[kino]] a [[bite]] for you ... it doesn't [[signify]] it will do that, but it [[wo]])! --------------------------------------------- Result 2474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This movie is directed by Renny Harlin the finnish [[miracle]]. Stallone is Gabe Walker. Cat and Mouse on the mountains with ruthless terrorists. Renny Harlin knows how to direct actionmovie. Stallone needed this role to get back on [[track]]. Snowy mountain is very good place for [[action]] movie and who is better to direct [[movie]] where is snow, ice, [[cold]] and bad [[weather]] than [[finnish]] man. Action is good! [[Music]] in the [[film]] is [[spectacular]]. The [[bad]] [[guy]] is John Litghow, other stars Micheal [[Rooker]] ( The [[portrait]] of serialkiller), Janine Turner ( Strong Medicine). The is placed in [[beautiful]] [[place]] and it is very [[exciting]] [[movie]]. [[Overall]] good [[movie]] ****/*****

Remember Extreme ääliöt: [[special]] [[collectors]] edition, with good extras. Comig [[soon]] in [[Finland]] straight to video. This movie is directed by Renny Harlin the finnish [[miracles]]. Stallone is Gabe Walker. Cat and Mouse on the mountains with ruthless terrorists. Renny Harlin knows how to direct actionmovie. Stallone needed this role to get back on [[trajectory]]. Snowy mountain is very good place for [[efforts]] movie and who is better to direct [[kino]] where is snow, ice, [[colder]] and bad [[weatherman]] than [[finns]] man. Action is good! [[Musician]] in the [[movies]] is [[wondrous]]. The [[amiss]] [[dawg]] is John Litghow, other stars Micheal [[Brooker]] ( The [[portrayal]] of serialkiller), Janine Turner ( Strong Medicine). The is placed in [[belle]] [[placing]] and it is very [[excite]] [[films]]. [[Entire]] good [[cinematography]] ****/*****

Remember Extreme ääliöt: [[specific]] [[gatherers]] edition, with good extras. Comig [[early]] in [[Finns]] straight to video. --------------------------------------------- Result 2475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was rather a disappointment. After the very slow, very intense (and quite gory) beginning the film begins to lose it. Too much plot leaves too little time for explanation, and coming out of the theater I wondered what this was all about. The characters remain shallow, the story is not convincing at all, most of it is déja vù stuff without hints of parody, and there are some very cheesy parts... Like, the young cop has to do dig up a body. Of course it's night AND it rains AND he has to do it alone... yawn! Or The Manifestation of the Evil being "nazis" plus "genetic manipulation"... Wow, that's really original. There are some nice bits, though, like the fistfight scene, mountain views and some (running) gags, but (though Reno and Vincent Cassel do what they can) that's definitely not worth it. (3 out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only reason I didn't score this a one is that Sibrel does show that he is adept at the technical aspects of making a film. It is a technically adept film.

That having been said, this is a film based on lies and distortions that are quite easily disproven. Most of the documentary is spent using propaganda techniques to bash the space program, rather than actual fact. And Sibrel's "irrefutable proof" that the landings were faked is easily refuted if you know anything about orbital mechanics.

I do not recommend watching this, but if you do, see it at google video for free. Don't let Bart Sibrel profit from your curiosity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2477 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Unless the title is supposed to be some [[kind]] of [[spoiler]] for the wife's transformation (the [[fiends]]! [[ruining]] it for us). Anycase, if this movie wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so [[remarkably]] low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits [[every]] 70's cliche except disco. [[Nobody]] is likeable, and you [[could]] [[careless]] what happens to [[anyone]] in this one. Eminently forgetable except for the [[bad]], [[bad]] performances. Unless the title is supposed to be some [[type]] of [[baffle]] for the wife's transformation (the [[freaks]]! [[spoiling]] it for us). Anycase, if this movie wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so [[marvellously]] low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits [[any]] 70's cliche except disco. [[Anyone]] is likeable, and you [[wo]] [[reckless]] what happens to [[nobody]] in this one. Eminently forgetable except for the [[unfavourable]], [[unfavourable]] performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 2478 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So when i was little i got this movie as a present and my sister and i loved it. we would watch it all the time. when our friends came over we would have sleepovers and we'd watch big rock candy mountain and grandpa's magical toys. I'm 21 now and i still love this movie, some old friends and i recently got together and watched it, we knew all the songs and we danced and talked about how much we hated Profster when we were little. One friend actually bought this movie and grandpa's magical toys for her 2 year old daughter because she wants to pass on our love of this movie. This really is a movie you can let your kids watch and feel safe, no violence, no bad language, just lots of great songs and important lessons. --------------------------------------------- Result 2479 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Screenwriter Lisa Lutz began writing the screenplay at the age of 21 in 1991

Is she even in [[business]]? [[If]] [[someone]] [[gave]] her another [[chance]] after this piece of [[crap]], she's up for the most [[Fortunate]] Person Of Ever award.This [[movie]] [[sucks]] to no [[END]]...It never ceases to [[amaze]] me what the turn into [[movies]]...and the fact that they made this [[writer]] put it off for a bit? Seriously? I can [[write]] [[better]] [[crap]] than this in my [[sleep]].

OK, so how [[many]] lines to I have to [[type]]? I don't get this at all. I [[guess]] I"m a newbie. I [[guess]] I don't [[understand]] why there should ever be a [[limit]] to what [[anyone]] has to [[say]]...or a [[quota]]? [[Seriously]], I don't [[care]] if you have a one word [[sentence]]...or even a one word [[response]]. I mean, c'mon?

Thanks...is this [[enough]], finally?

This movie is [[worthless]]. Screenwriter Lisa Lutz began writing the screenplay at the age of 21 in 1991

Is she even in [[companies]]? [[Though]] [[person]] [[yielded]] her another [[luck]] after this piece of [[shitty]], she's up for the most [[Lucky]] Person Of Ever award.This [[cinematography]] [[stinks]] to no [[TERMINATE]]...It never ceases to [[surprise]] me what the turn into [[film]]...and the fact that they made this [[screenwriter]] put it off for a bit? Seriously? I can [[handwriting]] [[optimum]] [[shit]] than this in my [[slept]].

OK, so how [[countless]] lines to I have to [[genre]]? I don't get this at all. I [[reckon]] I"m a newbie. I [[reckon]] I don't [[understands]] why there should ever be a [[limitations]] to what [[everybody]] has to [[told]]...or a [[quotas]]? [[Conscientiously]], I don't [[healthcare]] if you have a one word [[condemnation]]...or even a one word [[reply]]. I mean, c'mon?

Thanks...is this [[adequate]], finally?

This movie is [[superfluous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Why has this not been released? I kind of thought it must be a bit rubbish since it hasn't been. How wrong can a girl be! This film is, in a word, enthralling.

You will be captivated. It holds your attention from the start and its pace never slows.

The final part of the film, the "episode" as it were (not giving anything away, you saw that in the trailer) is also unmissable. You will chose a favourite, you will be shocked, you wont be able to go and make a cup of coffee because you need to find out what happens. The adrenalin rises and you cant not watch. Cudos to the actors, it's very believable. And it doesn't stop there, they have a final shock for you.

It also makes you question reality TV and if you would watch. And how far away from this are we, really? Endemol (who make big brother) made a TV show in Holland last year offering a dying woman's kidney to patients in need of a transplant. The show was revealed at the end to be a hoax, ostensibly to raise awareness of organ donation, but are we getting too close for comfort? --------------------------------------------- Result 2481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Timberlake's performance almost made attack the screen. It wasn't all bad, I just think the reporters role was wrong for him.

LL Cool J played the typical rapper role, toughest,baddest guy around. I don't think the cracked a smile in the whole movie, not even when proposed to his girlfriend.

Morgan Freeman pretty much carried the whole movie. He was has some funny scenes which are the high point of the movie.

Kevin Spacey wasn't good or bad he was just "there".

Overall it's a Dull movie. bad plot. a lot of bad acting or wrong roles for actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 2482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I don't like this [[film]], but then I didn't think much of the [[book]] either which, [[although]] lauded by [[many]] as a "masterpiece", I found lacking in character [[development]] and disjointed and [[illogical]] in [[plot]], [[although]] it was far more [[readable]] than Fante's [[dreadful]] first [[effort]] "[[Road]] to Los [[Angeles]]" not [[published]] until Fante [[became]] [[fashionable]] in the mid 80s.

I was [[intrigued]] to [[see]] what [[sort]] of [[soup]] Towne would make with such [[meager]] [[ingredients]]. He has [[worked]] hard script-wise to [[repair]] the [[many]] [[shortcomings]] of the book but for my [[money]] didn't [[rescue]] it. There was never a [[movie]] in [[Ask]] the Dust while ever he tried to stay [[faithful]] to the book. I [[consider]] this film Towne's folly.

In a word: forgettable. I don't like this [[filmmaking]], but then I didn't think much of the [[books]] either which, [[while]] lauded by [[several]] as a "masterpiece", I found lacking in character [[evolution]] and disjointed and [[nonsensical]] in [[intrigue]], [[nevertheless]] it was far more [[intelligible]] than Fante's [[scary]] first [[endeavors]] "[[Paths]] to Los [[Las]]" not [[publicized]] until Fante [[came]] [[modern]] in the mid 80s.

I was [[fascinated]] to [[consults]] what [[kinds]] of [[soups]] Towne would make with such [[meagre]] [[element]]. He has [[works]] hard script-wise to [[remedy]] the [[various]] [[flaws]] of the book but for my [[cash]] didn't [[bailout]] it. There was never a [[filmmaking]] in [[Asks]] the Dust while ever he tried to stay [[trusty]] to the book. I [[reviewing]] this film Towne's folly.

In a word: forgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Cradle of [[Fear]]

This isn't a [[movie]] where [[intricate]] [[delicate]] [[little]] [[narrative]] [[nuances]] [[occupy]] our [[attention]]. This is not a [[film]] where the [[special]] [[effects]] are [[supposed]] to [[leave]] us slack-jacked uttering that sense of [[whoa]]. What it is though is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which leaves little to the [[imagination]], created in the [[eyes]] of the [[director]], [[Alex]] Chandon, as "a throwback to sleazy '70s and '80s horror".

This is a very visceral [[experience]] for 2 hours, where four plot lines are [[connected]] through [[lots]] of watery blood, reams of [[dismembered]] body parts and innards, tied by an [[intestinal]] [[thread]] of [[revenge]].

The purveyor of such [[horrific]] violence is [[Dani]] Filth, lead-singer of the metal band [[Cradle]] of Filth, [[executing]] a role he was [[destined]] to [[play]].

As other's have said, there is nothing [[new]] about [[wanting]] to carryout occultist [[revenge]]. [[In]] this [[particular]] context a convicted sexual [[predator]] and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.

What this provides for the Chandon, who should be [[congratulated]] on also penning and [[editing]] this piece, is the [[opportunity]] to [[let]] his sick [[mind]] [[run]] free. He seems to take [[delight]] in the [[idea]] of splattering blood into the [[orifices]] of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being [[crushed]], demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to [[engage]] those who [[relish]] getting up close and personal to their [[horror]]. And for some of those who [[closely]] follow these type of films, there is the [[odd]] [[sequence]] which may have you thinking, "[[Did]] I just [[see]] what I [[thought]] I did", because of course Pretty [[Woman]] this '[[aint]]. It [[reminds]] me of some of the gore-fests [[created]] out of Italian [[horror]] some 20 to 30 [[years]] [[ago]], and a number of other [[works]] where disgusting images have [[left]] their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.

Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the "Sick Room", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins [[also]] adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, [[intestines]], occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is. Cradle of [[Angst]]

This isn't a [[filmmaking]] where [[tortuous]] [[tricky]] [[scant]] [[descriptive]] [[overtones]] [[occupies]] our [[beware]]. This is not a [[filmmaking]] where the [[especial]] [[repercussions]] are [[alleged]] to [[walkout]] us slack-jacked uttering that sense of [[woah]]. What it is though is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which leaves little to the [[fantasy]], created in the [[eye]] of the [[superintendent]], [[Xander]] Chandon, as "a throwback to sleazy '70s and '80s horror".

This is a very visceral [[experiences]] for 2 hours, where four plot lines are [[tied]] through [[batch]] of watery blood, reams of [[mutilated]] body parts and innards, tied by an [[digestive]] [[threaded]] of [[retaliatory]].

The purveyor of such [[scary]] violence is [[Dany]] Filth, lead-singer of the metal band [[Birthplace]] of Filth, [[implementing]] a role he was [[aimed]] to [[gaming]].

As other's have said, there is nothing [[novo]] about [[wanted]] to carryout occultist [[retaliation]]. [[Throughout]] this [[unique]] context a convicted sexual [[predatory]] and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.

What this provides for the Chandon, who should be [[applauded]] on also penning and [[edit]] this piece, is the [[opportunities]] to [[letting]] his sick [[intellect]] [[running]] free. He seems to take [[jubilation]] in the [[thoughts]] of splattering blood into the [[keyholes]] of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being [[squashed]], demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to [[engaging]] those who [[delight]] getting up close and personal to their [[terror]]. And for some of those who [[tightly]] follow these type of films, there is the [[freaky]] [[sequencing]] which may have you thinking, "[[Got]] I just [[seeing]] what I [[think]] I did", because of course Pretty [[Girl]] this '[[givin]]. It [[recalls]] me of some of the gore-fests [[engendered]] out of Italian [[terror]] some 20 to 30 [[ages]] [[before]], and a number of other [[work]] where disgusting images have [[exited]] their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.

Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the "Sick Room", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins [[additionally]] adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, [[bowels]], occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Having [[grown]] up in Texas, and less than 15 [[miles]] from what [[used]] to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is [[nauseating]]. The majority of [[Texans]] do not [[live]] like this [[movie]] indicates. The plot is [[weak]], and the fake accents are [[amusing]], and it reinforces the stereotypical [[image]] that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The [[horribly]] [[fake]] Texas accents is what [[kills]] it for me. [[True]], there is a certain Texas twang to most Texans' accents, but these people overdo it. You can't get [[someone]] from [[New]] [[Jersey]] and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't [[work]]. John Travolta should have [[stuck]] to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more [[convincing]] as Wonder Girl than she is as a [[Texan]]. Having [[increased]] up in Texas, and less than 15 [[km]] from what [[utilize]] to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is [[disgusting]]. The majority of [[Steelers]] do not [[vivo]] like this [[filmmaking]] indicates. The plot is [[puny]], and the fake accents are [[entertaining]], and it reinforces the stereotypical [[photographing]] that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The [[frightfully]] [[fakes]] Texas accents is what [[mata]] it for me. [[Veritable]], there is a certain Texas twang to most Texans' accents, but these people overdo it. You can't get [[everybody]] from [[Nuevo]] [[Jerzy]] and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't [[collaborate]]. John Travolta should have [[sandwiched]] to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more [[compelling]] as Wonder Girl than she is as a [[Texas]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The film opens with Bill Coles (Melvyn Douglas) telling a story about how his best friend--make that client--Jim Blandings (Cary Grant) and his family are tightly packed into a small New York apartment, with not enough closet space and way too few bathrooms. When Jim's wife, Muriel (Myrna Loy), wants to renovate the apartment, advertising exec Jim falls in love with (or falls for!) an ad for a house. Once he's purchased the house, bills and frustration pile up incessantly as everything that can go wrong with the building of Jim's 'dream house' goes wrong.

One of three collaborations between Grant and Loy, this is a charming little comedy--not very taxing, with no real great message, but a great way to spend an hour or two. The laughs are there right from the start, when the alarm clock goes off and Jim tries to shut it off, only to be thwarted at every turn by Muriel. The timing and delivery of the comedic lines and situations can only be given by a couple of seasoned pros, and that's just what Grant and Loy give us: polished performances, simple chemistry, and a lot of fun. Myrna Loy is in a pretty thankless role (it's evident that Grant's character Jim gets the lion share of the lines and the acting, and Grant, as always, pulls both off with remarkable aplomb), but she gives Muriel a colour, life and bite that only Myrna Loy can give a character. Melvyn Douglas plays wry amusement to perfection as well, never hitting a single wrong note.

One of my favourite scenes has definitely got to be when Bill gets himself locked in the 'store room', and Jim goes to 'save' him... only to get everyone trapped inside! Every little problem that pops up for the Blandings renovation project--including petty jealousy and an ad campaign for 'Wham'--seems to bring together everything that *could* go wrong with building a new house but makes it believable and an enjoyable watch. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd have to say this is one of the best animated films I've ever seen. I liked it the first time but really appreciated it on the second viewing, just a few weeks ago. I can see why sequel is doing such great business at the box office. Apparently, a lot of people liked this movie.

A gorgeous color palette (man, this looks good) and a lot of good adult (but clean) humor make this a big winner. The opening 3-4-minute scene with "Scat," is excellent as are subsequent interludes with him. "Sid" the sloth (voiced by John Leguizano), however, provides the main humor in the movie. He usually has something funny to say throughout the movie.

Ray Romano is the voice of the mammoth, the big character of the film, literally, while Denis Leary is the ferocious bad-guy-turned-good sabertooth tiger

This isn't just humor and pretty colors but a nice, sentimental story of how a little baby softens up a couple of tough characters. This isn't interrupted with a lot of songs, either: one only brief one and there is nothing offensive, language-wise.

If more animated movies were this good, I'd own more. --------------------------------------------- Result 2487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I took my 10-year-old daughter to see Nancy Drew over the weekend and found myself thoroughly entertained. First off, it was clean, and I mean by my standards. The majority of kids' movies today are full of crude toilet humor and gross-out jokes to elicit cheap laughter from the pre-teen crowd. Nancy Drew is smarter than that, however, and the humor is subtle and clever.

The title role is played with a refreshing vivaciousness by Emma Roberts, who is perky and polite without ever becoming annoying. Unlike The Brady Bunch Movie, where the anachronistic characters are jeered and ridiculed, Nancy's style is treated with respect and dignity. It's a great moment when the LA "style-conscious" girls with their Paris Hilton streetwalker attire are dismissed by the boutique owner, while Nancy, in her penny loafers and homemade Butterick pattern dress, is embraced. This movie shuns the we-need-to-enlighten-this-wholesome-girl tack so many Hollywood movies take. Nancy remains true to herself and her values throughout.

The mystery is just tense enough at times to be engaging. There were several suspenseful moments where my daughter nervously grabbed my arm, but there were no gratuitous shock scenes. It's all based on tension and mood and is a lot of fun. The supporting cast is good, particularly Marshall Bell as the creepy caretaker. There are some great cameos by Eddie Jemison, Chris Kattan and Bruce Willis and many moments that will make adults smile.

This film deserves better ratings than some have given it. Not only was I glad not to be dragged to yet another computer animated film where talking animals burp and pass gas all over the place, but I was also very entertained. Had I been there without a child, I still would've enjoyed the movie. This is one DVD that will have my daughter's name on it under the Christmas tree. --------------------------------------------- Result 2488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The plot is tight. The acting is flawless. The directing, script, scenery, casting are all well done. I watch this movie frequently, though I don't know what it is about the whole thing that grabs me. See it and drop me a line if you can figure out why I like it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 2489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] On the [[surface]], "[[Written]] on the Wind" is a lurid, [[glossy]] soap [[opera]] about the [[sexual]] dysfunctions of a Texas [[oil]] family. But [[underneath]] it all is a [[deep]], social [[commentary]] on 1950's life. [[Director]] Douglas Sirk [[scores]] again with another Univeral sudser. Robert [[Stack]] [[falls]] in [[love]] with [[Lauren]] Bacall. The problem is that Stack's best [[pal]], [[Rock]] Hudson, [[loves]] her too. When [[Stack]] [[finds]] out he's [[sterile]] and Bacall [[ends]] up pregnant, the [[fireworks]] [[fly]]. And, the all-too-good Dorothy Malone won an [[Oscar]] for her portrayl of Texas' biggest nympho who is [[shunned]] by Hudson. [[Good]] [[epic]] soap [[opera]]. On the [[surfaces]], "[[Wrote]] on the Wind" is a lurid, [[bright]] soap [[drama]] about the [[sexually]] dysfunctions of a Texas [[petrol]] family. But [[below]] it all is a [[profound]], social [[feedback]] on 1950's life. [[Headmaster]] Douglas Sirk [[dozens]] again with another Univeral sudser. Robert [[Stacked]] [[slumps]] in [[likes]] with [[Loren]] Bacall. The problem is that Stack's best [[boyfriend]], [[Boulder]] Hudson, [[adores]] her too. When [[Heap]] [[discovers]] out he's [[barren]] and Bacall [[end]] up pregnant, the [[pyrotechnics]] [[steal]]. And, the all-too-good Dorothy Malone won an [[Oskar]] for her portrayl of Texas' biggest nympho who is [[dodged]] by Hudson. [[Well]] [[manas]] soap [[oprah]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Canadian director [[Vincenzo]] Natali took the art-house [[circuit]] by [[storm]] with the [[intriguing]] and [[astonishingly]] [[intelligent]] Cube, which is my personal favourite SF [[film]] of the 90s. It framed the [[basic]] conceit of a group of [[strangers]] [[trapped]] in a maze [[shaped]] like a giant cube, shot entirely on one set, and [[took]] this idea in [[fascinating]] [[directions]].

I've been [[eagerly]] awaiting Natali's follow-up, and although its taken five years for him to mount another project, I'm [[delighted]] to say it was worth the wait. Cypher is a fascinating [[exploration]] of one man's [[place]] in the world, and how through a completely logical [[chain]] of events, [[finds]] himself in a situation [[beyond]] his control.

I don't want to [[reveal]] too much about the plot, because one of the joys of [[Cypher]] is the different avenues it takes us down. It is so [[refreshing]] in this day and age to see a SF film that has more than one idea in it's head. [[Cypher]] is such a [[film]].

Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), one of the blandest people to ever walk the planet, is hired by the company DigiCorp. They [[send]] him to different parts of America to record different seminars. To his bewilderment, they are unbelievably boring. [[Covering]] topics as mundane as shaving cream and cheese.

While Morgan is waiting for one seminar, he runs into Rita Foster (an impeccably cast Lucy [[Liu]]), the definition of an ice maiden. She gives him the brush-off, but there is something to her he finds irresistible. That's not too [[surprising]] considering the [[dry]] [[marriage]] he is in.

When Rita [[turns]] up at another one of Morgan's seminars, she tells him his [[life]] is not what it appears. And I'm not saying anything more about the plot. To do so [[would]] cheapen the impact the rest of the film has on us, as well as the [[tortuous]] [[path]] that's so much fun to follow.

As with [[Cube]], Natali [[shows]] [[quite]] a talent for [[encompassing]] [[seemingly]] [[ordinary]] people, [[taking]] them out of the familiar, and basically [[seeing]] what will happen when they're thrust into the unknown. And Cypher follows similar patterns. But it's not a carbon copy of Cube. It has it's own inspiration.

Cypher is a film that has more in common with conspiracy thrillers and paranoia stories. One of the great things about Cypher is the way these themes creep into the story without your knowledge. When Morgan realises his false identity is a piece of a much larger puzzle, it's as much of a shock to us as it is to him.

One thing that distinguishes Cypher from Cube is how much more polished it is. Where Cube was confined to a minimalist setting and a shoestring budget with a cast of unknowns, Cypher is also on a low budget, but Natali economises it as much as he can, allowing him to broaden the horizon, and launching Morgan on an amazing journey through the labyrinth of his own identity.

Natali's direction is exceptional, with a deft hand on the reins. There are some amazing camera angles from above, such as the enormity of the DigiCorp building as a vast, robust office block in conjunction to the insignificant speck that is Morgan standing outside. All the colour appears to have been bled out of the picture, which compliments the tone of the film perfectly as a modern day film-noir.

The acting is uniformly excellent throughout. Jeremy Northam is a sympathetic figure from his loveless marriage to questioning his own identity. His performance is excellent because it's so modulated. He literally seems to transform right before our very eyes. From a clinical, spineless wimp to a confident man who will do anything to preserve his new identity.

David Hewlett puts in a welcome appearance who made such an impact in Cube. He resides in a [[secret]] silo that looks like it was borrowed from Men in Black. His scene is one of the best because it's an exercise in carefully calculated suspense and paranoia. He is a supposed expert in identifying double-agents, and it's a fantastic piece of writing, brilliantly acted by Hewlett. All he has to do is look at Morgan, and we're drawn into his complex mind game.

But it's Lucy Liu who's the scene stealer here. Too often she is cast in films where her potential is not utilised to full effect. But in Cypher, she is finally given a character that fits her like a glove. Rita is an aloof, guarded femme fatale that Liu inhabits with relish. I perked up every time she appeared because she is always in control, and can reduce a room to silence by the power of her icy stare alone.

Things come to a very gratifying end, that doesn't conclude on an ambiguous note the way Cube did. But Morgan deserves his happy ending. After he's been put through the ringer like this, I cheered for him in the final scene. It's a perfect final moment because it comes as a ray of sunshine after a gloomy 90 minutes.

Cypher succeeds on all counts. Engaging, shocking, always entertaining, it's everything that Total Recall wanted to be but wasn't. And it comes as a refreshing antidote to the overwhelming and inexplicable Matrix.

A fine follow-up from Natali. And now I'm a committed fan of the man. Superb stuff! Canadian director [[Vinnie]] Natali took the art-house [[circuitry]] by [[rainstorm]] with the [[exciting]] and [[insanely]] [[smarter]] Cube, which is my personal favourite SF [[movies]] of the 90s. It framed the [[fundamental]] conceit of a group of [[aliens]] [[wedged]] in a maze [[modeled]] like a giant cube, shot entirely on one set, and [[taken]] this idea in [[exciting]] [[guidelines]].

I've been [[impatiently]] awaiting Natali's follow-up, and although its taken five years for him to mount another project, I'm [[contented]] to say it was worth the wait. Cypher is a fascinating [[explorer]] of one man's [[placing]] in the world, and how through a completely logical [[strings]] of events, [[find]] himself in a situation [[afterlife]] his control.

I don't want to [[reveals]] too much about the plot, because one of the joys of [[Encryption]] is the different avenues it takes us down. It is so [[freshen]] in this day and age to see a SF film that has more than one idea in it's head. [[Encryption]] is such a [[movies]].

Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), one of the blandest people to ever walk the planet, is hired by the company DigiCorp. They [[sent]] him to different parts of America to record different seminars. To his bewilderment, they are unbelievably boring. [[Comprising]] topics as mundane as shaving cream and cheese.

While Morgan is waiting for one seminar, he runs into Rita Foster (an impeccably cast Lucy [[Lio]]), the definition of an ice maiden. She gives him the brush-off, but there is something to her he finds irresistible. That's not too [[impressive]] considering the [[dried]] [[marrying]] he is in.

When Rita [[revolves]] up at another one of Morgan's seminars, she tells him his [[vida]] is not what it appears. And I'm not saying anything more about the plot. To do so [[ought]] cheapen the impact the rest of the film has on us, as well as the [[convoluted]] [[way]] that's so much fun to follow.

As with [[Cubes]], Natali [[denotes]] [[rather]] a talent for [[consisting]] [[supposedly]] [[banal]] people, [[take]] them out of the familiar, and basically [[see]] what will happen when they're thrust into the unknown. And Cypher follows similar patterns. But it's not a carbon copy of Cube. It has it's own inspiration.

Cypher is a film that has more in common with conspiracy thrillers and paranoia stories. One of the great things about Cypher is the way these themes creep into the story without your knowledge. When Morgan realises his false identity is a piece of a much larger puzzle, it's as much of a shock to us as it is to him.

One thing that distinguishes Cypher from Cube is how much more polished it is. Where Cube was confined to a minimalist setting and a shoestring budget with a cast of unknowns, Cypher is also on a low budget, but Natali economises it as much as he can, allowing him to broaden the horizon, and launching Morgan on an amazing journey through the labyrinth of his own identity.

Natali's direction is exceptional, with a deft hand on the reins. There are some amazing camera angles from above, such as the enormity of the DigiCorp building as a vast, robust office block in conjunction to the insignificant speck that is Morgan standing outside. All the colour appears to have been bled out of the picture, which compliments the tone of the film perfectly as a modern day film-noir.

The acting is uniformly excellent throughout. Jeremy Northam is a sympathetic figure from his loveless marriage to questioning his own identity. His performance is excellent because it's so modulated. He literally seems to transform right before our very eyes. From a clinical, spineless wimp to a confident man who will do anything to preserve his new identity.

David Hewlett puts in a welcome appearance who made such an impact in Cube. He resides in a [[concealed]] silo that looks like it was borrowed from Men in Black. His scene is one of the best because it's an exercise in carefully calculated suspense and paranoia. He is a supposed expert in identifying double-agents, and it's a fantastic piece of writing, brilliantly acted by Hewlett. All he has to do is look at Morgan, and we're drawn into his complex mind game.

But it's Lucy Liu who's the scene stealer here. Too often she is cast in films where her potential is not utilised to full effect. But in Cypher, she is finally given a character that fits her like a glove. Rita is an aloof, guarded femme fatale that Liu inhabits with relish. I perked up every time she appeared because she is always in control, and can reduce a room to silence by the power of her icy stare alone.

Things come to a very gratifying end, that doesn't conclude on an ambiguous note the way Cube did. But Morgan deserves his happy ending. After he's been put through the ringer like this, I cheered for him in the final scene. It's a perfect final moment because it comes as a ray of sunshine after a gloomy 90 minutes.

Cypher succeeds on all counts. Engaging, shocking, always entertaining, it's everything that Total Recall wanted to be but wasn't. And it comes as a refreshing antidote to the overwhelming and inexplicable Matrix.

A fine follow-up from Natali. And now I'm a committed fan of the man. Superb stuff! --------------------------------------------- Result 2491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most hillarious and funny Brooks movie I ever seen. I can watch and re-watch the tape 100 times. I laugh my a** off and I cry on some moments. It is really good and funny movie, and if you like Brooks - this is a must! In short - Brooks (billionare) gets to the streets as homeless for 30 days in order to win the entire poor district from his competitor. The reality bites, but in the end - it is about warm relations between humans... Hightly recommend! --------------------------------------------- Result 2492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The movie is a [[fantasy]]. The story line is thin but serves as the structure upon which some wonderful songs are sung and sung beautifully. (I still cannot believe that such handsome and attractive people could sing this well.) Some of the dialog is [[wonderfully]] clever. The costumes made me feel as though I was watching a haute couture fashion show from 1942.

[[Movies]] are designed to serve [[various]] purposes. This one is designed to [[entertain]] and it certainly does. If I have one [[negative]] comment it would be that Nelson Eddy was a little too old to be the handsome dashing Count. Some of the closeups made me uncomfortable. But he could still sing and sing magnificently. However, [[Jeanette]] MacDonald was just as dazzling as ever. She makes a spectacular angel.

This genre is well before my time, and I an new to the Jeanette MacDonald/[[Nelson]] [[Eddy]] films and related conversation. The music in this movie is beautiful. As much as I love the classic rock music which fills most modern movies, there is no question in my mind that this music is simply and clearly more memorable, more delightful, better constructed. The stars in this movie are more talented than the stars I see in the movie theaters today. And Jeanette MacDonald, without the benefit of Beverly Hills plastic surgeons, was more beautiful than the stars I see today. I am unclear as to why so many other posters are apologetic about liking this movie and more generally this group of movies. They say it is dated and try to explain why it is the way it is. And those that do not like it say that it is not very good but compared to what? I think this movie will doubtless still be entertaining people when so many other movie are long forgotten. There is just too much quality in every way in this movie for it not to be remembered and enjoyed. I [[recommend]] this movie without [[reservation]] to anyone who appreciates great talent, great beauty and great music. The movie is a [[utopia]]. The story line is thin but serves as the structure upon which some wonderful songs are sung and sung beautifully. (I still cannot believe that such handsome and attractive people could sing this well.) Some of the dialog is [[strikingly]] clever. The costumes made me feel as though I was watching a haute couture fashion show from 1942.

[[Kino]] are designed to serve [[sundry]] purposes. This one is designed to [[distract]] and it certainly does. If I have one [[untoward]] comment it would be that Nelson Eddy was a little too old to be the handsome dashing Count. Some of the closeups made me uncomfortable. But he could still sing and sing magnificently. However, [[Jeannette]] MacDonald was just as dazzling as ever. She makes a spectacular angel.

This genre is well before my time, and I an new to the Jeanette MacDonald/[[Nielsen]] [[Whirlpool]] films and related conversation. The music in this movie is beautiful. As much as I love the classic rock music which fills most modern movies, there is no question in my mind that this music is simply and clearly more memorable, more delightful, better constructed. The stars in this movie are more talented than the stars I see in the movie theaters today. And Jeanette MacDonald, without the benefit of Beverly Hills plastic surgeons, was more beautiful than the stars I see today. I am unclear as to why so many other posters are apologetic about liking this movie and more generally this group of movies. They say it is dated and try to explain why it is the way it is. And those that do not like it say that it is not very good but compared to what? I think this movie will doubtless still be entertaining people when so many other movie are long forgotten. There is just too much quality in every way in this movie for it not to be remembered and enjoyed. I [[recommending]] this movie without [[reserves]] to anyone who appreciates great talent, great beauty and great music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's not just that this is a [[bad]] [[movie]]; it's not only that four of the "[[best]]" Mexican movie makers are in this [[film]]; and it's not only that the [[script]] is terrible. It's just that...this [[movie]] [[sucks]]...[[big]] [[time]]. This people are [[wasting]] [[money]] in [[terrible]] scripts. It's supposed to make a [[criticism]] about Mexican [[society]] but we're [[fed]] up with this [[kind]] of [[films]]. Is [[bad]] [[language]] supposed to be [[funny]]? I don't get it. [[Mexican]] [[cinema]] is in big [[trouble]] if this [[kind]] of movies are going to [[continue]] playing (and being [[written]] and [[produced]]).

Please, don't [[think]] this [[kind]] of [[movies]] are well received in Mexico: We [[hate]] them and they don't reflect us. It's not just that this is a [[naughty]] [[filmmaking]]; it's not only that four of the "[[nicest]]" Mexican movie makers are in this [[movie]]; and it's not only that the [[scripts]] is terrible. It's just that...this [[movies]] [[stinks]]...[[large]] [[times]]. This people are [[losing]] [[cash]] in [[scary]] scripts. It's supposed to make a [[criticise]] about Mexican [[societal]] but we're [[fueled]] up with this [[type]] of [[filmmaking]]. Is [[unfavorable]] [[linguistics]] supposed to be [[hilarious]]? I don't get it. [[Mexico]] [[filmmaking]] is in big [[problem]] if this [[genus]] of movies are going to [[continues]] playing (and being [[handwritten]] and [[generated]]).

Please, don't [[thinks]] this [[genus]] of [[movie]] are well received in Mexico: We [[dislikes]] them and they don't reflect us. --------------------------------------------- Result 2494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "The Last Big Thing" is a wonderful satirical film that sardonically whips pop culture to the point of humorous self-desctruction. The characters are so interesting and fun to laugh at/sympathize with. Which brings me to an introduction to the characters I liked best...

Simon Geist is a man in his late 30s/early 40s who creates a pop-culture driven editorial magazine called "The Next Big Thing". Thing is, this magazine doesnt really exist, and it is only an excuse for Simon to get close to actors by interviewing them, only to bitch-slap them silly, insulting their way of buying into pop culture. His live-in female friend, Darla, is also writing a magazine (which is real), which mainly has to do with her and Simon, as well as her and her father. Darla is a genuinely loveable (or loathable) character, depending on how you view her muted neurotic behavior. Magda is a prostitute, the character i liked the best. Brent is a flat character with not much to him, as is Tedra, the music-video queen for a bunch of B-rated rock bands. Still, these characters weave a very interesting web together. And this movie questions all the motivations that people have for what they do and why they do it. Its a wonderful film and I suggest you see it if you're in the indie/art house crowd. Mark my words!

--------------------------------------------- Result 2495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Taking]] a [[break]] from his escapist run in the early '80s, Steven Spielberg directed Whoopi [[Goldberg]] in an [[adaptation]] of Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", about about the desperate existence of an African-American woman in the 1930s. Watching Goldberg play Celie, it's incredible that this is the same [[woman]] who starred in movies like "Sister Act". This is the sort of movie that could easily be - no, make that SHOULD BE - part of the curriculum in Black Studies and Women's Studies. There's one scene that may be the most [[magnificent]] editing job that's ever been on screen (you'll know it when you see it). I can't believe that this didn't win a single Oscar; it may be Spielberg's second [[best]] [[movie]] behind "Schindler's List" (maybe even tied with it). Also starring Danny Glover, Adolph Caesar, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Willard E. Pugh, Akosua Busia, and Laurence Fishburne. [[Picked]] a [[intermission]] from his escapist run in the early '80s, Steven Spielberg directed Whoopi [[Tucker]] in an [[coping]] of Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", about about the desperate existence of an African-American woman in the 1930s. Watching Goldberg play Celie, it's incredible that this is the same [[dame]] who starred in movies like "Sister Act". This is the sort of movie that could easily be - no, make that SHOULD BE - part of the curriculum in Black Studies and Women's Studies. There's one scene that may be the most [[wondrous]] editing job that's ever been on screen (you'll know it when you see it). I can't believe that this didn't win a single Oscar; it may be Spielberg's second [[nicest]] [[kino]] behind "Schindler's List" (maybe even tied with it). Also starring Danny Glover, Adolph Caesar, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Willard E. Pugh, Akosua Busia, and Laurence Fishburne. --------------------------------------------- Result 2496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Never even knew this movie existed until I found an old VHS copy of it, hidden deep in my dusty horror closet. The title on the box said "Insect" and the illustrations on the back made clear that it is just another insignificant and poorly produced 80's horror movie. They can surely be fun, of course, as long as don't expect an intelligent scenario and as long as you're not irritated by seeing a giant amount of cheesy make-up effects. Just about every important aspect that makes a horror movie worthy viewing is substandard here in "Blue Monkey"! The plot is ridiculous and highly unoriginal, the acting performances are painful to observe and there's a total lack of suspense. Following the always-popular trend of "big-bug" movies, "Blue Monkey" handles about a new and unknown insect species that wipes out the doctors and patients of a remote hospital. The makers couldn't be more evasive about the actual origin of this gigantically over-sized critter! All we know is that it's not from outer space and it initially crawled out of a tropical plant. Other than this, there's absolutely no explanation for where this new type of insect all of a sudden comes from! Like I said, don't get your hopes up for an intelligent screenplay. The first half of the film is entertaining enough, with some nice gore and the introduction of a couple deranged characters (an 80-year-old blind and alcoholic lady!) but the second half (when the entire hospital is put to quarantine) is dreadfully boring. It is also near the end that "Blue Monkey" begins to exaggeratedly rip-off older (and better) films. Approaching the climax, they apparently ran out of budget as well, since the lighting becomes very poor and the guy in the monster suit isn't very well camouflaged anymore. "Blue Monkey" is worth a peek in case you're really bored or if you really want to see every 80's horror movie ever made. Fans of B-cinema may recognize John Vernon ("Killer Klowns from Outer Space", "Curtains") in the small and meaningless role of Roger, who's in charge of the clinic. --------------------------------------------- Result 2497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] Doctor Feinstone is a [[dentist]].He has a [[beautiful]] wife and a [[huge]] [[house]] with a pool.Suddenly he [[discovers]] that his wife is [[making]] out with the pool attendant-he realises that [[behind]] everything clean,there is [[decay]].He [[starts]] to [[torture]] his patients...[[Corbin]] Bernsen is [[brilliant]] as the [[deranged]] dentist-he is [[completely]] [[believable]].There is [[surprisingly]] little gore but the scenes of [[dental]] torture are [[quite]] [[nasty]] and [[grotesque]].Highly [[recommended]]."The Dentist 2" is also worth checking out! Doctor Feinstone is a [[dental]].He has a [[fabulous]] wife and a [[sizeable]] [[dwellings]] with a pool.Suddenly he [[finds]] that his wife is [[doing]] out with the pool attendant-he realises that [[posterior]] everything clean,there is [[decomposition]].He [[outset]] to [[tortured]] his patients...[[Furey]] Bernsen is [[remarkable]] as the [[unhinged]] dentist-he is [[perfectly]] [[credible]].There is [[unbelievably]] little gore but the scenes of [[teeth]] torture are [[pretty]] [[soiled]] and [[preposterous]].Highly [[suggested]]."The Dentist 2" is also worth checking out! --------------------------------------------- Result 2498 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] My personal [[vision]] of [[hell]] is being locked in a room without the ability to close my eyes or block my ears and have this [[movie]] [[play]] for eternity on every [[available]] [[surface]] in that room. The whole [[notion]] that Streisand plays a boy/man only [[begins]] to scratch the surface of how [[ridiculous]] a premise this movie is. The [[single]] most [[important]] thing about watching any movie is the [[concept]] of "[[willing]] [[suspension]] of disbelief" . . . it is impossible to do that in this [[movie]]. My personal [[insight]] of [[hellfire]] is being locked in a room without the ability to close my eyes or block my ears and have this [[filmmaking]] [[playing]] for eternity on every [[accessible]] [[surfaces]] in that room. The whole [[concepts]] that Streisand plays a boy/man only [[startup]] to scratch the surface of how [[farcical]] a premise this movie is. The [[exclusive]] most [[essential]] thing about watching any movie is the [[idea]] of "[[desirous]] [[hiatus]] of disbelief" . . . it is impossible to do that in this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2499 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] ***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers

There are bad movies and then there are [[movies]] which are so [[awful]] that they [[become]] affectionately [[comical]] in their ineptness. Such is the case with [[Columbia]] Pictures' 'The Grudge.' This [[cinematic]] atrocity [[began]] when an [[otherwise]] well intentioned American [[saw]] a Japanese [[made]] for TV [[film]] 'Ju-on' and was inspired to remake the [[movie]] in English. This began a virtual [[tsunami]] of [[bad]] decisions which circumnavigated the [[globe]] until it washed ashore in Orlando on [[October]] 21, 2004.

The [[premise]], and I use the word loosely, involves a house in Tokyo haunted by a [[skinny]] Momma ghost who looks like a cross between Margaret Cho and Alanis Morrisette, along with her ghastly sidekick a chubby, rambunctious but evil second grader. Is there anything scarier than a creepy 8 year old Japanese boy? Sure there is! Count Chocula [[comes]] to mind. With this whimsical bunch we must add a mysterious black cat who I have affectionately named Chim Chim. (Remember Speed Racer?) As you have already guessed, they were murdered in this domicile of doom and now desire to kill everyone who enters the premises. You see, as explained by a Japanese detective, when someone dies in a rage their ghost seeks revenge on everyone who steps on the property lines as defined by the county commissioner or something like that, I forget.

The story begins innocently enough with acclaimed thespian Bill Pullman leaping to his death from a balcony. My guess is Bill Pullman got this job because of his kids begged him for a trip to Tokyo Disneyland. [[Next]] we endure the mildly interesting saga of Nurse Yoko, 'oh no don't go in there' screams the audience, but alas she heeds not the dire warnings and is predictably snuffed out like a magic lantern. About 30 minutes into the movie we finally see its American heroine Sarah Michelle Gellar as Karen. Sarah Michelle Gellar might be a competent actress but I could not help thinking of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so [[much]] so that it was distracting. It is the equivalent to having Jennifer Anniston star in a movie about the adventures of six friends in New York. Try as you may, you just can't stop thinking about the other project which made her famous. But I digress, Karen, the nurse is hired as a replacement for the original care giver who disappeared at spooks r us.

She snoops around, meets the ghosts, coma lady dies, and some other stuff happens. Watching the fair haired vixen searching for clues I half expected her to find the ghost and pull its mask off to reveal it was actually old man Gower who owned the abandoned amusement park! 'I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids and that dog of yours!'

Director Takashi Shimizu, who is vying to be the Ed Wood of Asia, made two unfortunate decisions involving sound. First, he choose to use a soundtrack only when someone is about to be killed. This is an excellent devise for obliterating any suspense because the audience gets a two minute warning to prepare for another miserably predictable murder. Second, he gave the ghosts a bizarre guttural noise that sounds like a gargling gopher. After the movie, I heard several people exiting the theatre making the sound and laughing.

Sarah Michelle Gellar ends up being the sole survivor. And of course we learn that the fire she set to burn down the house was extinguished in time for the obligatory next chapter. However, considering the humorous reactions of the audience, they did not want a sequel but an apology. 'The Grudge' could be easily re-edited into a comedy, perhaps then it will be appreciated for its camp value. Baring that, this will go down as the greatest cinematic thriller since 'Godzilla vs. Megalon.' I would suggest waiting until the movie comes to your local discount theatre where it can receive the public ridicule it so richly deserves. ***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers

There are bad movies and then there are [[film]] which are so [[gruesome]] that they [[gotten]] affectionately [[hilarious]] in their ineptness. Such is the case with [[Colombia]] Pictures' 'The Grudge.' This [[filmmaking]] atrocity [[initiated]] when an [[alternatively]] well intentioned American [[witnessed]] a Japanese [[effected]] for TV [[flick]] 'Ju-on' and was inspired to remake the [[filmmaking]] in English. This began a virtual [[tsunamis]] of [[negative]] decisions which circumnavigated the [[globo]] until it washed ashore in Orlando on [[December]] 21, 2004.

The [[assumption]], and I use the word loosely, involves a house in Tokyo haunted by a [[lean]] Momma ghost who looks like a cross between Margaret Cho and Alanis Morrisette, along with her ghastly sidekick a chubby, rambunctious but evil second grader. Is there anything scarier than a creepy 8 year old Japanese boy? Sure there is! Count Chocula [[occurs]] to mind. With this whimsical bunch we must add a mysterious black cat who I have affectionately named Chim Chim. (Remember Speed Racer?) As you have already guessed, they were murdered in this domicile of doom and now desire to kill everyone who enters the premises. You see, as explained by a Japanese detective, when someone dies in a rage their ghost seeks revenge on everyone who steps on the property lines as defined by the county commissioner or something like that, I forget.

The story begins innocently enough with acclaimed thespian Bill Pullman leaping to his death from a balcony. My guess is Bill Pullman got this job because of his kids begged him for a trip to Tokyo Disneyland. [[Future]] we endure the mildly interesting saga of Nurse Yoko, 'oh no don't go in there' screams the audience, but alas she heeds not the dire warnings and is predictably snuffed out like a magic lantern. About 30 minutes into the movie we finally see its American heroine Sarah Michelle Gellar as Karen. Sarah Michelle Gellar might be a competent actress but I could not help thinking of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so [[very]] so that it was distracting. It is the equivalent to having Jennifer Anniston star in a movie about the adventures of six friends in New York. Try as you may, you just can't stop thinking about the other project which made her famous. But I digress, Karen, the nurse is hired as a replacement for the original care giver who disappeared at spooks r us.

She snoops around, meets the ghosts, coma lady dies, and some other stuff happens. Watching the fair haired vixen searching for clues I half expected her to find the ghost and pull its mask off to reveal it was actually old man Gower who owned the abandoned amusement park! 'I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids and that dog of yours!'

Director Takashi Shimizu, who is vying to be the Ed Wood of Asia, made two unfortunate decisions involving sound. First, he choose to use a soundtrack only when someone is about to be killed. This is an excellent devise for obliterating any suspense because the audience gets a two minute warning to prepare for another miserably predictable murder. Second, he gave the ghosts a bizarre guttural noise that sounds like a gargling gopher. After the movie, I heard several people exiting the theatre making the sound and laughing.

Sarah Michelle Gellar ends up being the sole survivor. And of course we learn that the fire she set to burn down the house was extinguished in time for the obligatory next chapter. However, considering the humorous reactions of the audience, they did not want a sequel but an apology. 'The Grudge' could be easily re-edited into a comedy, perhaps then it will be appreciated for its camp value. Baring that, this will go down as the greatest cinematic thriller since 'Godzilla vs. Megalon.' I would suggest waiting until the movie comes to your local discount theatre where it can receive the public ridicule it so richly deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I wasn't at all a fan of the 2005 gore fest [[hit]] "[[Hostel]]", and most of these lame [[ass]] knock-offs are just as [[bad]] or worse - [[yet]] "[[Live]] Feed" managed to keep me [[somewhat]] [[entertained]] for about the [[first]] 30 minutes. [[Started]] off with plenty of [[sex]] and [[sleazy]] settings, followed by some [[good]] [[death]] scenes [[involving]] the Chinese [[Organized]] [[Crime]] Squad and a 7-foot, leather-aproned butcher... What put me out of the [[movie]] was the tough 'hero' with the guns and a [[grudge]] saving the day... I [[would]] call this movie mediocre, at best, since a [[premise]] mainly involving [[obnoxious]] [[young]] people being slaughtered in a seedy porno theater, [[doubling]] as a hideout for the mafia, is appealing to me. If only the torture was prolonged enough to be thoroughly effective, then my rating [[would]] have differed greatly. Unfortunately, most of the gruesomeness is heaped together in one scene, leaving the rest of the movie to conclude as a revenge-type scenario. So, basically, it IS just a low-budget "Hostel" rip-off with the redeeming [[use]] of [[gratuitous]] sex, almost [[constant]] during the first half of the film... Overall, I would say don't bother with this one. I wasn't at all a fan of the 2005 gore fest [[pummeled]] "[[Dormitory]]", and most of these lame [[backside]] knock-offs are just as [[negative]] or worse - [[nevertheless]] "[[Vive]] Feed" managed to keep me [[rather]] [[distracted]] for about the [[frst]] 30 minutes. [[Launching]] off with plenty of [[sexuality]] and [[dirty]] settings, followed by some [[alright]] [[killings]] scenes [[encompassing]] the Chinese [[Arranged]] [[Crimes]] Squad and a 7-foot, leather-aproned butcher... What put me out of the [[filmmaking]] was the tough 'hero' with the guns and a [[resentment]] saving the day... I [[could]] call this movie mediocre, at best, since a [[supposition]] mainly involving [[despicable]] [[youthful]] people being slaughtered in a seedy porno theater, [[twofold]] as a hideout for the mafia, is appealing to me. If only the torture was prolonged enough to be thoroughly effective, then my rating [[could]] have differed greatly. Unfortunately, most of the gruesomeness is heaped together in one scene, leaving the rest of the movie to conclude as a revenge-type scenario. So, basically, it IS just a low-budget "Hostel" rip-off with the redeeming [[utilizing]] of [[unsubstantiated]] sex, almost [[steady]] during the first half of the film... Overall, I would say don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2501 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Released in 1956,and considered [[quite]] racy at the time, Douglas Sirk's over the top candy [[colored]] melodrama is still a [[wonderful]] thing. The plot concerns the [[goings]] on in an [[oil]] [[rich]] dysfunctional Texas [[family]] that [[includes]] [[big]] [[brother]] Kyle, who is insecure, weak, wounded & very [[alcoholic]], [[played]] by Robert [[Stack]] in a very [[touching]] & vulneable performance and his sluty [[sister]] Marylee [[played]] in an extreme [[manner]] by Dorothy Malone. Ms. Malone's performance is telegraphed to us via her eyes, which she uses to show us her [[emotions]], which mostly consist of lust (for Rock Hudson) and jealousy (for Lauren Bacall). Malone is the only actress I've ever seen in movies who enters a room eyes first. Now don't get me wrong, her performance to say the least is an absolute hoot, and is one of the supreme camp acting [[jobs]] of the 1950's. But it is also terrible, because as likeable and attractive as Malone is,she's not a very good actress, and she's not capable of subtly or shading. Her performace is of one note. She does get to do a wicked Mambo,and in a great montage, as unloving daddy played by the always good Robert Keith falls to his death climbing a staircase, Sirk mixes it up with an almost mad Malone doing a orgasmic dance as she undresses. Stack,(who should have won an Oscar) & Malone, (who won the award, but shouldn't have) are the real stars of the film, the ones who set all the hysteria, both sexual & otherwise in motion, while the "real stars" of the film, Hudson & Bacall fade to grey & brown,which are the colors that they are mainly costumed in. Hudson who was a better actor then given credit for plays the childhood & best friend of Stack's, and the stalked love interest of Malone's who moans & groans over Rock through most of the film. But Hudson wants no part of her,and instead is in love with Bacall who is married to Stack. No one is very happy & no one is happy for very long. The Stack-Bacall [[marriage]] falls apart big time after a year, and Stack pretty much drinks himself into oblivion because he thinks he is sterile, and can't give Bacall a baby to prove that he's a man. Sirk who was a very intelligent man, and had a long & fascinating career both in films and theatre in Germany, ended his Hollywood career at Universal in the mid 1950's with a series of intense vividly colored "women's movies" or melodramas. Although they were mainly adapted from medicore or trashy source material,in Sirk's hands they became masterpieces of the genre. Sirk had a wonderful sense of color & design which he brought to play in these films filling his wide screen spaces with characters who played out their emotional lives among weird color combinations & lighting, make believe shadows, and lots of mirroed reflections. In "Written" the characters are always peeking out of windows, listening at doors or sneaking around. So in the end, after much violence, an accidental murder, a miscarriage & more Sirk ends the movie with a final & startling scene of a "reborn" and reformed Malone in a man-tailored suit, sitting at a desk foundling a miniature oilwell. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Released in 1956,and considered [[abundantly]] racy at the time, Douglas Sirk's over the top candy [[stained]] melodrama is still a [[wondrous]] thing. The plot concerns the [[separations]] on in an [[petroleum]] [[richer]] dysfunctional Texas [[familia]] that [[comprises]] [[grand]] [[sibling]] Kyle, who is insecure, weak, wounded & very [[alcohol]], [[served]] by Robert [[Heap]] in a very [[touch]] & vulneable performance and his sluty [[sisters]] Marylee [[done]] in an extreme [[fashion]] by Dorothy Malone. Ms. Malone's performance is telegraphed to us via her eyes, which she uses to show us her [[feelings]], which mostly consist of lust (for Rock Hudson) and jealousy (for Lauren Bacall). Malone is the only actress I've ever seen in movies who enters a room eyes first. Now don't get me wrong, her performance to say the least is an absolute hoot, and is one of the supreme camp acting [[labor]] of the 1950's. But it is also terrible, because as likeable and attractive as Malone is,she's not a very good actress, and she's not capable of subtly or shading. Her performace is of one note. She does get to do a wicked Mambo,and in a great montage, as unloving daddy played by the always good Robert Keith falls to his death climbing a staircase, Sirk mixes it up with an almost mad Malone doing a orgasmic dance as she undresses. Stack,(who should have won an Oscar) & Malone, (who won the award, but shouldn't have) are the real stars of the film, the ones who set all the hysteria, both sexual & otherwise in motion, while the "real stars" of the film, Hudson & Bacall fade to grey & brown,which are the colors that they are mainly costumed in. Hudson who was a better actor then given credit for plays the childhood & best friend of Stack's, and the stalked love interest of Malone's who moans & groans over Rock through most of the film. But Hudson wants no part of her,and instead is in love with Bacall who is married to Stack. No one is very happy & no one is happy for very long. The Stack-Bacall [[marry]] falls apart big time after a year, and Stack pretty much drinks himself into oblivion because he thinks he is sterile, and can't give Bacall a baby to prove that he's a man. Sirk who was a very intelligent man, and had a long & fascinating career both in films and theatre in Germany, ended his Hollywood career at Universal in the mid 1950's with a series of intense vividly colored "women's movies" or melodramas. Although they were mainly adapted from medicore or trashy source material,in Sirk's hands they became masterpieces of the genre. Sirk had a wonderful sense of color & design which he brought to play in these films filling his wide screen spaces with characters who played out their emotional lives among weird color combinations & lighting, make believe shadows, and lots of mirroed reflections. In "Written" the characters are always peeking out of windows, listening at doors or sneaking around. So in the end, after much violence, an accidental murder, a miscarriage & more Sirk ends the movie with a final & startling scene of a "reborn" and reformed Malone in a man-tailored suit, sitting at a desk foundling a miniature oilwell. --------------------------------------------- Result 2502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Despite the gravity of the [[subject]] and [[probably]] the [[good]] intentions of the filmmakers to make a film addressing white supremacy, the [[inconsistencies]] of its main character, Bronson Green, aspiring New York actor easily turned L.A. phony, makes it [[hard]] to [[take]] the story seriously. Green, who is constantly rejected by Los Angeles casting agents for being obsolete (i.e. too New York when the 80s is looking for big, blonde, and dumb), he finds [[success]] comes [[easily]] when he's willing to [[succumb]] to [[falsifying]] his [[image]]. Unfortunately, the new hair dye and pacified "surfer" attitude lands him an acting [[opportunity]] with the Jericho Church, which subscribes white supremacist teaching of the Aryan nation. [[Green]] is willing to easily forget his past, and particularly turning his back on his young black friend of ten years, in order to be the Church's new spokesman. This makes no sense, seeing as how principled our character initially is. It is this sudden, and loose change in character, coupled with an abrupt reversion back to the hardened, DeNiro-obsessed (as his Taxi Driver character) form who is able to battle the villains. A noble attempt on the filmmakers, but one that ultimately reveals itself as anything but serious.

The other characters, too, are quite [[annoying]] and what we are forced to recognize in them comes too easily -- the psychotic paranoia of the Church leader, the self-interested actress girlfriend (the first girlfriend Bronson has when he's in L.A.), and the new blonde girlfriend who's character lacks so much development, she is, for the most part, just a walking, talking void. We are just supposed to see them in fleeting moments in which something random forces us to draw assumptions about the characters. But there is really [[little]] development of any of them.

The other problem with this [[film]] is the [[ungodly]] amount of time the characters are involved in very little important action. Much of the beginning concerns introducing the characters, obviously, and later we see Bronson's difficulties with breaking into the L.A. acting scene and the frustrations which stem from constant rejection. But after he does willingly change his looks and personality in order to become accepted, there is at least a good twenty minutes to thirty minutes of wasted [[film]] in which very little of anything happens.

For films that seek to draw attention to the irrational fears behind racism, this was not one done with enough credibility. Despite the gravity of the [[themes]] and [[undeniably]] the [[buena]] intentions of the filmmakers to make a film addressing white supremacy, the [[incompatibility]] of its main character, Bronson Green, aspiring New York actor easily turned L.A. phony, makes it [[laborious]] to [[taking]] the story seriously. Green, who is constantly rejected by Los Angeles casting agents for being obsolete (i.e. too New York when the 80s is looking for big, blonde, and dumb), he finds [[accomplishments]] comes [[comfortably]] when he's willing to [[succumbing]] to [[forged]] his [[photo]]. Unfortunately, the new hair dye and pacified "surfer" attitude lands him an acting [[chances]] with the Jericho Church, which subscribes white supremacist teaching of the Aryan nation. [[Greene]] is willing to easily forget his past, and particularly turning his back on his young black friend of ten years, in order to be the Church's new spokesman. This makes no sense, seeing as how principled our character initially is. It is this sudden, and loose change in character, coupled with an abrupt reversion back to the hardened, DeNiro-obsessed (as his Taxi Driver character) form who is able to battle the villains. A noble attempt on the filmmakers, but one that ultimately reveals itself as anything but serious.

The other characters, too, are quite [[exasperating]] and what we are forced to recognize in them comes too easily -- the psychotic paranoia of the Church leader, the self-interested actress girlfriend (the first girlfriend Bronson has when he's in L.A.), and the new blonde girlfriend who's character lacks so much development, she is, for the most part, just a walking, talking void. We are just supposed to see them in fleeting moments in which something random forces us to draw assumptions about the characters. But there is really [[scant]] development of any of them.

The other problem with this [[filmmaking]] is the [[sinful]] amount of time the characters are involved in very little important action. Much of the beginning concerns introducing the characters, obviously, and later we see Bronson's difficulties with breaking into the L.A. acting scene and the frustrations which stem from constant rejection. But after he does willingly change his looks and personality in order to become accepted, there is at least a good twenty minutes to thirty minutes of wasted [[filmmaking]] in which very little of anything happens.

For films that seek to draw attention to the irrational fears behind racism, this was not one done with enough credibility. --------------------------------------------- Result 2503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Love]] hurts. That, I [[think]], is the main message Mike Binder's [[newest]] [[film]] Reign Over Me [[brings]] [[across]]. Whether that [[love]] has [[caused]] your [[relationship]] to [[become]] stagnant, or has [[brought]] anger from the one you [[love]] cheating for [[years]], or has [[broken]] your heart to the point of being [[unable]] to [[open]] yourself up to the [[world]], [[love]] [[hurts]]. The [[great]] [[thing]] about this [[film]], however, is not in its [[portrayal]] of these lost [[souls]] [[trying]] to [[let]] their [[past]] heartbreaks [[go]], but in the eventual [[restart]] of [[new]] bonds for the future. [[No]] one in this [[drama]] is [[perfect]]; they are all at some [[degree]] [[trapped]] [[emotionally]] in relationships that they can't free themselves from [[alone]]. There is some heavy subject material here and I [[credit]] Binder for never [[making]] the [[story]] turn into a political diatribe, but [[instead]] infusing the serious moments with some [[real]] nice comedic bits [[allowing]] the tale to [[stay]] character-based and [[small]] in [[scale]] compared to the epic [[event]] that [[looms]] overhead. What [[could]] have [[become]] a [[trite]] vehicle for [[opinions]] on how 9-11 effected us all, [[ends]] up being a [[story]] about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can [[save]] their [[lives]] from a [[life]] of [[depression]] and [[regret]].

This is a [[new]] [[career]] performance for Adam Sandler. I like to [[think]] that my [[favorite]] director Paul Thomas [[Anderson]] was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his [[stupid]] comedies as [[something]] to use [[dramatically]]. The juvenility of a [[character]] like Billy Madison [[allows]] for laughs and [[potty]] [[humor]], but [[also]] can be [[used]] to [[show]] a repressed [[man]], shy and shutout to the world [[around]] him—a [[man]] with no confidence that needs an [[event]] of [[compassion]] to [[break]] him from his shell. [[Anderson]] let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk [[Love]] and [[Mike]] Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays [[former]] [[dentist]] Charlie Fineman whose [[wife]] and three [[kids]] were [[killed]] in one of the [[planes]] that [[took]] down the [[World]] [[Trade]] [[Center]] on 9-11. That one moment crushed any [[life]] that he had and as a [[result]], he [[became]] reclusive and [[started]] to [[believe]] he couldn't [[remember]] [[anything]] that [[happened]] before that day. He [[really]] [[delivers]] a [[moving]] [[portrait]] of a [[man]] [[trying]] to keep up the [[charade]] in his head while those [[around]] him, those that [[love]] him, [[try]] and [[open]] him up to the [[reality]] of what [[happened]] and what the future [[holds]]. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished [[family]], he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.

Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.

The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best [[friend]] and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.

Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope. [[Loved]] hurts. That, I [[ideas]], is the main message Mike Binder's [[new]] [[films]] Reign Over Me [[puts]] [[in]]. Whether that [[amour]] has [[generated]] your [[relationships]] to [[becomes]] stagnant, or has [[made]] anger from the one you [[loves]] cheating for [[olds]], or has [[raped]] your heart to the point of being [[incapable]] to [[opening]] yourself up to the [[globe]], [[adore]] [[stings]]. The [[grand]] [[stuff]] about this [[cinematography]], however, is not in its [[portrait]] of these lost [[ames]] [[attempting]] to [[allowing]] their [[former]] heartbreaks [[going]], but in the eventual [[restarted]] of [[nouveau]] bonds for the future. [[Nope]] one in this [[tragedy]] is [[impeccable]]; they are all at some [[diploma]] [[stuck]] [[excitedly]] in relationships that they can't free themselves from [[mere]]. There is some heavy subject material here and I [[credits]] Binder for never [[doing]] the [[narratives]] turn into a political diatribe, but [[however]] infusing the serious moments with some [[actual]] nice comedic bits [[allowed]] the tale to [[remain]] character-based and [[little]] in [[scales]] compared to the epic [[incident]] that [[loom]] overhead. What [[wo]] have [[becoming]] a [[banal]] vehicle for [[views]] on how 9-11 effected us all, [[terminates]] up being a [[narratives]] about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can [[saved]] their [[vie]] from a [[vida]] of [[slump]] and [[sorrow]].

This is a [[novo]] [[quarry]] performance for Adam Sandler. I like to [[thought]] that my [[preferred]] director Paul Thomas [[Andersson]] was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his [[silly]] comedies as [[anything]] to use [[drastically]]. The juvenility of a [[nature]] like Billy Madison [[allowed]] for laughs and [[loopy]] [[comedy]], but [[similarly]] can be [[using]] to [[display]] a repressed [[males]], shy and shutout to the world [[about]] him—a [[guy]] with no confidence that needs an [[incident]] of [[pity]] to [[blackout]] him from his shell. [[Andersen]] let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk [[Loves]] and [[Mick]] Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays [[past]] [[dentistry]] Charlie Fineman whose [[woman]] and three [[child]] were [[murdering]] in one of the [[aircraft]] that [[taken]] down the [[Globe]] [[Commercial]] [[Centers]] on 9-11. That one moment crushed any [[living]] that he had and as a [[conclusions]], he [[was]] reclusive and [[starts]] to [[believing]] he couldn't [[rember]] [[something]] that [[arrived]] before that day. He [[genuinely]] [[offerings]] a [[shifting]] [[portraits]] of a [[men]] [[attempts]] to keep up the [[parody]] in his head while those [[about]] him, those that [[amour]] him, [[trying]] and [[opening]] him up to the [[realities]] of what [[arrived]] and what the future [[possesses]]. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished [[familia]], he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.

Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.

The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best [[amie]] and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.

Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2504 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Having read [[many]] of the other [[reviews]] for this [[film]] on the IMDb there is ostensibly a consensus amongst purists that this film is [[nothing]] like the books upon which it is based. [[Upon]] this point I cannot [[comment]], having never [[actually]] read any of the [[protagonists]] [[adventures]] [[previously]]. [[However]], what I can say with certainty, is that it [[strikes]] me that [[many]] of the said [[reviewers]] [[must]] have [[surely]] [[undergone]] a sense of [[humour]] bypass; Let's be [[honest]] here - this [[film]] is just so much fun!

[[OK]]…..so I [[must]] [[concede]] the point that the [[film]] [[apparently]] is not representative of the [[character]]/s but let's put this into a [[clear]] [[perspective]]…..do the same individuals who are carping on about this [[film]] [[also]] bemoan the fact that the classic 1960's Batman [[series]] does not remain faithful to the [[original]] DC [[comic]] [[book]] [[character]]? Or [[perhaps]] is there STILL unrest in same [[persons]] that the 1980 [[film]] version of Flash Gordon was too much of a departure from the [[original]] [[series]]?

The point is, [[yes]] this [[film]] is [[incredibly]] camp but that's [[precisely]] its [[charm]]!

[[Former]] Tarzan, Ron Ely plays the eponymous hero in this (and [[bears]] more than a passing [[resemblance]] to [[Gary]] Busey to boot!) and is backed up by a [[great]] supporting cast who all look to be having a ball with their respective roles. [[Also]] [[look]] out for a very [[brief]] but [[highly]] [[welcome]] appearance by [[horror]] [[movie]] favourite [[Michael]] Berryman.

[[Best]] scene? Far too [[many]] to [[choose]] from but [[check]] out the [[hilarious]] facial [[expressions]] [[adopted]] by the waiter when Savage and his men commit the [[ultimate]] [[faux]] pas of ordering coke, lemonade and milk at a formal occasion! [[Also]] the [[often]] [[noted]] scene [[near]] the [[end]] of the [[film]] wherein [[Savage]] tackles his [[nemesis]] [[Captain]] [[Seas]] utilising [[various]] martial [[arts]] disciplines which are labelled on screen! – [[Priceless]]!

Simply put, the [[film]] doesn't [[take]] itself at all seriously and is all the more [[fun]] for it. [[Great]] fun from [[start]] to [[finish]]! (and you'll be [[singing]] the [[John]] Phillip [[Sousa]] [[adapted]] [[theme]] song for days afterwards [[guaranteed]]!) Having read [[innumerable]] of the other [[reviewing]] for this [[cinematography]] on the IMDb there is ostensibly a consensus amongst purists that this film is [[anything]] like the books upon which it is based. [[After]] this point I cannot [[commentary]], having never [[indeed]] read any of the [[actors]] [[shenanigans]] [[ago]]. [[Instead]], what I can say with certainty, is that it [[bombardments]] me that [[several]] of the said [[reviewer]] [[should]] have [[undeniably]] [[experienced]] a sense of [[humorous]] bypass; Let's be [[truthful]] here - this [[flick]] is just so much fun!

[[OKAY]]…..so I [[ought]] [[recognising]] the point that the [[films]] [[visibly]] is not representative of the [[characters]]/s but let's put this into a [[definite]] [[viewpoint]]…..do the same individuals who are carping on about this [[cinema]] [[furthermore]] bemoan the fact that the classic 1960's Batman [[serial]] does not remain faithful to the [[preliminary]] DC [[hilarious]] [[books]] [[characters]]? Or [[potentially]] is there STILL unrest in same [[individuals]] that the 1980 [[cinema]] version of Flash Gordon was too much of a departure from the [[initial]] [[serials]]?

The point is, [[yeah]] this [[cinematography]] is [[extremely]] camp but that's [[accurately]] its [[charisma]]!

[[Antigua]] Tarzan, Ron Ely plays the eponymous hero in this (and [[carry]] more than a passing [[likeness]] to [[Garry]] Busey to boot!) and is backed up by a [[large]] supporting cast who all look to be having a ball with their respective roles. [[Apart]] [[glance]] out for a very [[writ]] but [[heavily]] [[greet]] appearance by [[terror]] [[films]] favourite [[Michele]] Berryman.

[[Better]] scene? Far too [[numerous]] to [[selected]] from but [[verify]] out the [[funny]] facial [[expression]] [[passed]] by the waiter when Savage and his men commit the [[final]] [[false]] pas of ordering coke, lemonade and milk at a formal occasion! [[Moreover]] the [[normally]] [[pointed]] scene [[nearer]] the [[terminating]] of the [[cinema]] wherein [[Cruel]] tackles his [[foe]] [[Capt]] [[Oceans]] utilising [[diversified]] martial [[humanities]] disciplines which are labelled on screen! – [[Cherish]]!

Simply put, the [[cinematography]] doesn't [[taking]] itself at all seriously and is all the more [[amusing]] for it. [[Wondrous]] fun from [[begins]] to [[conclude]]! (and you'll be [[singer]] the [[Giovanni]] Phillip [[Souza]] [[adapting]] [[subjects]] song for days afterwards [[ensure]]!) --------------------------------------------- Result 2505 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie set out to be better than the [[average]] action movie and in that regard they [[succeeded]].This movie had [[spectacular]] [[cinematography]] featuring spectacular [[mountain]] snow and heights,a very [[fit]] Stallone putting in a good performance as well,an [[exciting]] plot,and a [[great]] performance from it's [[main]] villain [[becouse]] he will [[really]] [[shock]] you with his evil [[ways]].The movie does not rank an all [[time]] great becouse of the [[weak]] screen [[play]].The plot and [[story]] cries for this [[movie]] to make Stallone an extra [[special]] human,much like the Rambo or Rocky or [[Bond]] movie [[characters]].They chose to humanise Stallone's character in this one which is ok but [[considering]] the plot's style,weakens the [[excitement]] factor.[[Also]],the dialogue was cheesy and carelessly condescending at [[times]].The script should have been more [[realistic]] and less "talky".Another [[weak]] point was the unrealistic shooting scenes.The [[movie]] [[makers]] should have been more carefull how they hadled the shooting hits and misses.They should have [[continued]] the quality of the scenes of the shooting [[sequences]] during the [[plane]] hijacking early in the [[movie]].Instead,they decided to water down a lot of the shooting sequences (ala "A-Team" TV [[series]]) as [[soon]] as the villains set foot on the mountain tops.This movie had a lot of all time [[great]] potential.Crisper action sequences,better dialogue and more Rambo/Rocky style emotion/determination from Stallone would have taken this movie to a higher level.I know this was not Stallone's fault.I [[sense]] the movie's [[director]] [[wanted]] to tone down Stallone's character and [[try]] to [[steal]] the movie by taking credit for his direction which was not all that [[great]] if not for his cinematographer.Sill a good movie though........ This movie set out to be better than the [[medium]] action movie and in that regard they [[successes]].This movie had [[wondrous]] [[films]] featuring spectacular [[shan]] snow and heights,a very [[fitted]] Stallone putting in a good performance as well,an [[excite]] plot,and a [[excellent]] performance from it's [[principal]] villain [[eventhough]] he will [[truthfully]] [[shocked]] you with his evil [[manner]].The movie does not rank an all [[moment]] great becouse of the [[breakable]] screen [[gaming]].The plot and [[histories]] cries for this [[kino]] to make Stallone an extra [[specific]] human,much like the Rambo or Rocky or [[Bonded]] movie [[characteristics]].They chose to humanise Stallone's character in this one which is ok but [[examining]] the plot's style,weakens the [[arousal]] factor.[[Similarly]],the dialogue was cheesy and carelessly condescending at [[time]].The script should have been more [[practical]] and less "talky".Another [[breakable]] point was the unrealistic shooting scenes.The [[cinema]] [[builders]] should have been more carefull how they hadled the shooting hits and misses.They should have [[incessant]] the quality of the scenes of the shooting [[sequencing]] during the [[airline]] hijacking early in the [[cinema]].Instead,they decided to water down a lot of the shooting sequences (ala "A-Team" TV [[serial]]) as [[rapidly]] as the villains set foot on the mountain tops.This movie had a lot of all time [[wondrous]] potential.Crisper action sequences,better dialogue and more Rambo/Rocky style emotion/determination from Stallone would have taken this movie to a higher level.I know this was not Stallone's fault.I [[sensing]] the movie's [[superintendent]] [[desired]] to tone down Stallone's character and [[tried]] to [[vole]] the movie by taking credit for his direction which was not all that [[remarkable]] if not for his cinematographer.Sill a good movie though........ --------------------------------------------- Result 2506 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I LOVED this movie! I am biased seeing as I am a huge Disney fan, but I really enjoyed myself. The action takes off running in the beginning of the film and just keeps going! This is a bit of a departure for Disney, they don't spend quite as much time on character development (my husband pointed this out)and there are no musical numbers. It is strictly action adventure. I thoroughly enjoyed it and recommend it to anyone who loves Disney, be they young or old. --------------------------------------------- Result 2507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A must see movie for anyone who ever went to camp, or wanted to. This film captures the absolute essence of what summer camp is all about. It is funny, it is compassionate it makes you want to watch more about the characters once the credits begin to role. If you have not seen this movie..what are you doing? get off you butt and run the video store. Have a great summer :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] Seeing as the world [[snooker]] championship final finished in a premature and disappointing [[manner]] with [[Ronnie]] O`Sullivan [[defeating]] Greame Dott by 18 frames to 8 BBC 2 found a [[gap]] in their [[schedule]] and so decided to broadcast A [[WALK]] [[ON]] THE [[MOON]] a [[movie]] I had [[absolutely]] no [[knowledge]] off

I missed a few seconds of the title credits so had no idea Viggo Mortensen starred in it and thought possibly it might be a cheap TVM , certainly the opening with the mawkish Pearl and Marty taking their kids to a Summer camp has that sort of made for TV feel though the brightly lit ( Too brightly lit ) cinematography seemed to suggest this was a cinematic film and it wasn`t until the appearence of Viggo Mortensen as hippy guy Walker that I realised this was a cinema release , after all someone of Mortensen`s stature wouldn`t star in a TVM , I mean that`s like a legend like Robert DeNiro appearing in a straight to video film . Wait a minute , didn`t Bob .... ?

Some people on this site have mentioned that Pearl and Marty are an unconvincing on-screen couple and I agree . I can understand why Pearl would be attracted to exciting hippy guy but have no idea why Walker would be attracted to plain house wife Pearl . The sixties was before my time but surely if you`ve got the choice between hippy chicks and [[bored]] house wives it`s not really a choice at all . Mind you a lot of people took LSD in those days so I guess that explains it

I feel the major problem of A WALK ON THE MOON comes down to the fact it`s a romantic drama at heart ( Just like you`d expect in a TVM ) with several cloying coming of age scenes so why include a fairly explicit sex scene ? It [[jars]] with the rest of the [[movie]] and is possibly off putting to the menopuasal women who were 20 something in 1969 . I say possibly because the movie also seems to aim at a teeenage market with the coming of age scenes and those teenagers will probably be bored with the historical and social context of man walking on the moon and Woodstock . In other words A WALK ON THE MOON tries to attract many types of audience but will probably appeal to none of them Seeing as the world [[billiard]] championship final finished in a premature and disappointing [[way]] with [[Rooney]] O`Sullivan [[beating]] Greame Dott by 18 frames to 8 BBC 2 found a [[loopholes]] in their [[deadline]] and so decided to broadcast A [[STROLL]] [[REGARDING]] THE [[LUNA]] a [[filmmaking]] I had [[entirely]] no [[acquaintance]] off

I missed a few seconds of the title credits so had no idea Viggo Mortensen starred in it and thought possibly it might be a cheap TVM , certainly the opening with the mawkish Pearl and Marty taking their kids to a Summer camp has that sort of made for TV feel though the brightly lit ( Too brightly lit ) cinematography seemed to suggest this was a cinematic film and it wasn`t until the appearence of Viggo Mortensen as hippy guy Walker that I realised this was a cinema release , after all someone of Mortensen`s stature wouldn`t star in a TVM , I mean that`s like a legend like Robert DeNiro appearing in a straight to video film . Wait a minute , didn`t Bob .... ?

Some people on this site have mentioned that Pearl and Marty are an unconvincing on-screen couple and I agree . I can understand why Pearl would be attracted to exciting hippy guy but have no idea why Walker would be attracted to plain house wife Pearl . The sixties was before my time but surely if you`ve got the choice between hippy chicks and [[drilled]] house wives it`s not really a choice at all . Mind you a lot of people took LSD in those days so I guess that explains it

I feel the major problem of A WALK ON THE MOON comes down to the fact it`s a romantic drama at heart ( Just like you`d expect in a TVM ) with several cloying coming of age scenes so why include a fairly explicit sex scene ? It [[bottles]] with the rest of the [[filmmaking]] and is possibly off putting to the menopuasal women who were 20 something in 1969 . I say possibly because the movie also seems to aim at a teeenage market with the coming of age scenes and those teenagers will probably be bored with the historical and social context of man walking on the moon and Woodstock . In other words A WALK ON THE MOON tries to attract many types of audience but will probably appeal to none of them --------------------------------------------- Result 2509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This 1947 film stars and was directed and written by Orson Welles (with a funky Irish accent) and also stars the gorgeous Rita Hayworth with less appealing short blonde hair. So, I've hung out with Orson before in Touch of Evil and Citizen Kane and the Third Man etc. but this was my first Rita Hayworth interaction. Our first meeting went well, she does a superb job playing the frightened/cagey Elsa, married to a crippled millionaire lawyer. Mike (Welles) and Elsa fall for each other. He wants to run away with her, she doesn't know if she can live without the things money can buy. Elsa, her husband, and his partner bicker and bite, just like the sharks Mike describes attacking each other and his foretelling proves just too true. Several twists and turns follow in this murder mystery as we come to the climax in the fun house. (Think the ending shootout in The Man with the Golden Gun, which borrowed heavily from this scene). I wasn't sure who the murderer was until the end.

This movie is like shrimp in garlic and lemon. The dish centers on the sea, it is subtle, sour, and pungent, all to great effect. These might not be the best, fresh shrimp, but good quality frozen shrimp from Costco. The flavorful sauce adds to the naturalness of the pink shrimp as you fill up on a healthy, but filling alternative to more mundane, common fare. 7/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies --------------------------------------------- Result 2510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A meteor hit's Crater [[Lake]] (hence our title), awakening a Plesiosaur, who proceed's to snack on the hick population (in California, that hick capital of the world.)

There's [[bad]] [[movies]], and then there's "The Crater Lake Monster", which somehow managed to [[escape]] MST3K. [[Featuring]] grating acting, a [[decent]] stop-motion beast, and more, this is a [[dreadful]] piece of 1970's low budget [[exploitation]]/monster [[movie]] dreck.

[[While]] the [[movie]] is guilty of many [[crimes]], the [[biggest]] one is Arnie and Mitch, two [[obnoxious]] rednecks who [[serve]] as our comic [[relief]]. They bumble around, fight to [[stock]] "[[banjo]] [[music]]",ogle women, and [[act]] like [[pathetic]] [[excuses]] of [[humanity]]. The [[characters]] are so [[bad]], they should count as a [[crime]] against [[humanity]]. A meteor hit's Crater [[Lakes]] (hence our title), awakening a Plesiosaur, who proceed's to snack on the hick population (in California, that hick capital of the world.)

There's [[negative]] [[filmmaking]], and then there's "The Crater Lake Monster", which somehow managed to [[flee]] MST3K. [[Featured]] grating acting, a [[dignified]] stop-motion beast, and more, this is a [[gruesome]] piece of 1970's low budget [[operate]]/monster [[film]] dreck.

[[Though]] the [[filmmaking]] is guilty of many [[criminality]], the [[greatest]] one is Arnie and Mitch, two [[detestable]] rednecks who [[serves]] as our comic [[succour]]. They bumble around, fight to [[stocks]] "[[mandolin]] [[musica]]",ogle women, and [[acts]] like [[unlucky]] [[pretenses]] of [[humane]]. The [[characteristic]] are so [[rotten]], they should count as a [[misdemeanor]] against [[humane]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.

Weird [[casting]], but the movie plays serious mindf** with the audience. (don't read if you ever [[intend]] to [[seriously]] watch this film or to ever watch this [[film]] [[seriously]] due to the spoilers) [[First]] of all, I felt myself [[rolling]] my eyes [[repeatedly]] at the Liberal stereotypes: the [[cops]] are all sadistic and frame this [[black]] [[guy]] with no [[evidence]]. The coroner, witnesses and even the [[lawyer]] of the [[accused]] [[collaborate]] against him (he is [[accused]] of the [[rape]] and [[murder]] of a [[young]] [[girl]]) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard [[law]] [[prof]] who [[gives]] impassioned [[speeches]] about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous [[death]] [[penalty]]. He is [[approached]] by the convicted man's [[grandmother]] to [[defend]] him and re-open the [[trial]].

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...) by the [[small]] [[town]] [[officials]] and the good IL' boys club but [[finds]] that the [[case]] against Blair, the [[alleged]] [[killer]], now on death row, was all fabricated. The [[main]] [[evidence]] was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The [[beating]] was administered by a [[black]] [[cop]] (!) who even [[played]] Russian roulette to [[get]] the confession out of him. Connery [[finds]] out that another [[inmate]] on [[death]] row actually did the [[murder]] and after a few tete a tetes with a [[seriously]] overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris [[hid]] the murder weapon.

He [[gets]] a re-trial and Blair is [[freed]].

I [[think]]... [[film]] over....

Then [[suddenly]]! It turns out that Blair IS a [[psychotic]] [[psycho]] and that he [[used]] "white guilt" to [[enlist]] Connery. He concocted the [[story]] with Ed Harris in [[return]] for Blair [[carrying]] out a few [[murders]] for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, [[thanks]] to Connery's deluded PC principles! The [[final]] 30 min. are a weird [[action]] movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level! The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down. Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something. JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.

Weird [[pouring]], but the movie plays serious mindf** with the audience. (don't read if you ever [[intention]] to [[severely]] watch this film or to ever watch this [[filmmaking]] [[harshly]] due to the spoilers) [[Frst]] of all, I felt myself [[roll]] my eyes [[always]] at the Liberal stereotypes: the [[nypd]] are all sadistic and frame this [[negro]] [[man]] with no [[testimony]]. The coroner, witnesses and even the [[jurist]] of the [[charged]] [[works]] against him (he is [[charged]] of the [[violating]] and [[slain]] of a [[youthful]] [[female]]) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard [[legislation]] [[professor]] who [[provides]] impassioned [[rhetoric]] about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous [[muerte]] [[punishments]]. He is [[tackled]] by the convicted man's [[gran]] to [[advocating]] him and re-open the [[trials]].

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...) by the [[minor]] [[ciudad]] [[official]] and the good IL' boys club but [[found]] that the [[examples]] against Blair, the [[supposed]] [[slayer]], now on death row, was all fabricated. The [[primary]] [[proof]] was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The [[defeating]] was administered by a [[negro]] [[constable]] (!) who even [[done]] Russian roulette to [[gets]] the confession out of him. Connery [[discovers]] out that another [[inmates]] on [[mortality]] row actually did the [[assassinating]] and after a few tete a tetes with a [[gravely]] overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris [[masked]] the murder weapon.

He [[got]] a re-trial and Blair is [[freeing]].

I [[believe]]... [[movies]] over....

Then [[unexpectedly]]! It turns out that Blair IS a [[psycho]] [[crazy]] and that he [[utilized]] "white guilt" to [[enrol]] Connery. He concocted the [[storytelling]] with Ed Harris in [[comeback]] for Blair [[ferrying]] out a few [[assassinate]] for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, [[appreciation]] to Connery's deluded PC principles! The [[definitive]] 30 min. are a weird [[actions]] movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level! The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down. Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something. --------------------------------------------- Result 2512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This was actually my [[favorite]] [[series]] of Scooby Doo when I was younger. I [[thought]] each episode had more of an edge to it and the villains had a [[lot]] of [[creative]] [[thought]] put into them (and even very [[scary]] and believable as well). Some of the [[best]] [[episodes]] were "I Left My Neck [[In]] [[San]] Francisco", "Twenty Thousand [[Screams]] [[Under]] The Sea", "The Ghoul, The Bat And The Ugly" and "When You [[Wish]] Upon A Star Creature". If you have never seen these [[episodes]] please do. This series was a bit of a [[mixed]] [[bag]] though as there were other [[episodes]] which didn't seem to have the same kind of edge to them such as "Rocky Mountain YIIII!" and "The Ransom Of Scooby Chief". As like the series before it, it was very well put together, interesting storyline and [[brilliantly]] drawn. As [[everyone]] [[says]] though, it would have been so much better without Scrappy Doo. The character was tiresome and distracting to the story that was being told. This was actually my [[preferable]] [[serials]] of Scooby Doo when I was younger. I [[brainchild]] each episode had more of an edge to it and the villains had a [[lots]] of [[inventive]] [[idea]] put into them (and even very [[awful]] and believable as well). Some of the [[better]] [[spells]] were "I Left My Neck [[For]] [[Saint]] Francisco", "Twenty Thousand [[Cree]] [[At]] The Sea", "The Ghoul, The Bat And The Ugly" and "When You [[Wants]] Upon A Star Creature". If you have never seen these [[bouts]] please do. This series was a bit of a [[blended]] [[rucksack]] though as there were other [[spells]] which didn't seem to have the same kind of edge to them such as "Rocky Mountain YIIII!" and "The Ransom Of Scooby Chief". As like the series before it, it was very well put together, interesting storyline and [[beautifully]] drawn. As [[anyone]] [[alleges]] though, it would have been so much better without Scrappy Doo. The character was tiresome and distracting to the story that was being told. --------------------------------------------- Result 2513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This horrendously bad piece of trash manages to be racist, sexist and homophobic all at once, while pretending to be terribly chic and sophisticated. Atrocious performances, a cliche ridden screenplay, and boring direction make this movie one to steer clear of. Two scenes were especially offensive - the one in which Schaech scrubs his tongue after being kissed by another man (could it really have been that gross), and the scene where Eastwood is kissed by Schaech's best friend, who is pretending to be Russian. After he leaves the room she exclaims "f**king foreigners"! So much for her being a cultured artist who dreams of living in Paris!?!

Jonathon Schaech can be a likeable actor on screen, and is astonishingly good-looking. It's a shame he didn't learn more from working with cutting edge gay director Gregg Araki on an earlier film, and try to salvage this film from descending into a string of gay stereotypes and a mire of homophobia. --------------------------------------------- Result 2514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i just watched the movie i was afraid it's gonna disappoint me. i was rather surprised at the end though. The American pie franchise is still in my favorite franchise movies of all times. yes, it won't be true if i say that i enjoyed it as mush as i enjoyed the original ones. beta house along with the previous two pies definitely lost something that the first two pies had.it is not gonna become a classic as the first two already did. but what the hell-it is still funny with a lot of good moments and i think it should be the first movie to pick if you wanna have fun and relax after a hard day at work or school. beta house deserves 6/10 but i gave it 7/10 just for being another slice of PIE. --------------------------------------------- Result 2515 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Don't read [[anything]] about this [[movie]] ([[especially]] nothing that could contain any spoilers). Just watch this [[awesome]] [[movie]] without knowing [[anything]] about it - and you'll have a really [[great]] experience. If you [[like]] to see an intelligent, [[twisted]] [[story]]: [[Go]], [[get]] the DVD and you'll [[truly]] not be [[disappointed]]. "Cypher" is not [[really]] a sci-fi [[movie]], more a [[psycho]] thriller [[settled]] in the environment of globalized [[business]]. It's about corporate [[secrets]], how [[big]] [[companies]] [[spy]] each others research departments and the [[methods]] [[used]] by them. The actors do a great performance and the [[overall]] [[visual]] [[style]] of the [[movie]] [[provides]] a [[perfect]] [[mode]] of [[coldness]]. [[Cypher]] is much deeper, more [[complex]] and - what belongs the [[story]] and the ending - [[also]] much, much more [[satisfying]] than Vincenzo Natali's other movies "Cube" and "[[Nothing]]". Actually it's one of the [[best]] [[movies]] I've ever [[seen]] (and that's [[something]] I really don't say this about [[every]] fifth well-made [[flick]]). Sorry, can't [[tell]] you anything more about this [[movie]] without [[risking]] to [[hurt]] your [[experience]]. Just give it a [[chance]]. ;-) Don't read [[something]] about this [[kino]] ([[mainly]] nothing that could contain any spoilers). Just watch this [[wondrous]] [[cinematographic]] without knowing [[something]] about it - and you'll have a really [[excellent]] experience. If you [[loves]] to see an intelligent, [[deformed]] [[tale]]: [[Going]], [[gets]] the DVD and you'll [[genuinely]] not be [[frustrating]]. "Cypher" is not [[truthfully]] a sci-fi [[cinematographic]], more a [[lunatic]] thriller [[liquidated]] in the environment of globalized [[enterprise]]. It's about corporate [[clandestine]], how [[massive]] [[business]] [[spying]] each others research departments and the [[methodology]] [[using]] by them. The actors do a great performance and the [[whole]] [[optic]] [[styles]] of the [[kino]] [[delivers]] a [[faultless]] [[means]] of [[coolness]]. [[Cipher]] is much deeper, more [[tricky]] and - what belongs the [[narratives]] and the ending - [[apart]] much, much more [[gratifying]] than Vincenzo Natali's other movies "Cube" and "[[Anything]]". Actually it's one of the [[nicest]] [[kino]] I've ever [[watched]] (and that's [[somethin]] I really don't say this about [[each]] fifth well-made [[film]]). Sorry, can't [[say]] you anything more about this [[cinematography]] without [[jeopardizing]] to [[injure]] your [[experiences]]. Just give it a [[chances]]. ;-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I gave this film 8 out of 10, reserving 10 for e.g Amadeus, and 9 for Slumdog Millionaire most recently. This film is close to Slumdog, but it is difficult to judge on such film without understanding Balkan life, mentality and a soul which Kusturica presents masterfully. To understand it you really need to be one of Balkan. This is an amazing movie, much better and more contemporary of his previous films, which are boring at this time, I think Kusturica is moving forward with this movie. I like humour (Balkan humour), photography is an art itself, each scene is artistic to the limit. Plot is probably a fairy tale , don't recall it now, but remember reading to my daughter-going-to sleep a similar story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2517 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just as Tom Berenger put you into the soul of Sgt. Barnes, he has done it again with Thomas Beckett. If I thought his world was folding in on him in the first scenes, it was nothing compared to how much more I felt during the last scenes. Great movie, even for a girl. --------------------------------------------- Result 2518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Well, here's another [[terrific]] example of awkward 70's film-making! The rudimentary premise of "What's the matter with Helen?" is quite shocking and disturbing, but it's presented in such a stylish and sophisticated fashion! In the hands of any other movie crew, this certainly [[would]] have become a nasty and gritty exploitation tale, but with director Curtis Harrington ("Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?") and scriptwriter Henry Farrell ("Hush…Hush…[[Sweet]] Charlotte") in charge, it became a [[beautiful]] and almost [[enchanting]] [[mixture]] of themes and genres. The basic plot of the film is definitely horrific, but there's a lot more to experience, like love stories, a swinging 1930's atmosphere and a whole lot of singing and tap-dancing! The setting is [[unquestionably]] what makes this movie so unique. We're literally catapulted back to the 1930's, with a [[sublime]] depiction of that era's music, religion, theatrical business and wardrobes. Following the long and exhausting trial that sentenced their sons to life-imprisonment for murder, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shelley Winters) flee to California and attempt to start a new life running a dance school for young talented girls. Particularly Adelle adapts herself perfectly to the new environment, as she falls in love with a local millionaire, but poor old Helen continues to sink in a downwards spiral of insanity and paranoia. She only listens to the ramblings of a radio-evangelist, fears that she will be punished for the crimes her son committed and slowly develops violent tendencies. The script, although not entirely without flaws, is well written and the film is adequately paced. There's never a [[dull]] moment in "What's the matter with Helen", although the singing, tap-dancing and tango sequences are quite extended and much unrelated to the actual plot. But the atmosphere is continuously ominous and the film definitely benefices from the terrific acting performance of Shelley Winters. She's downright scary as the unpredictable and introvert lady who's about to snap any second and, especially during the last ten minutes or so, she looks more petrifying than all the Freddy Kruegers, Jason Voorhees' and Michael Myers' combined! There are several terrific supportive characters who are, sadly, a little underdeveloped and robbed from their potential, like Michéal MacLiammóir as the cocky elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as the creepy priestess and Timothy Carey as the obtrusive visitor to the ladies' house. There are a couple of surprisingly gruesome scenes and moments of genuine shock to enjoy for the Grand Guignol fanatics among us, but particularly the set pieces and costume designs (even nominated for an Oscar!) are breathtaking. Well, here's another [[wondrous]] example of awkward 70's film-making! The rudimentary premise of "What's the matter with Helen?" is quite shocking and disturbing, but it's presented in such a stylish and sophisticated fashion! In the hands of any other movie crew, this certainly [[could]] have become a nasty and gritty exploitation tale, but with director Curtis Harrington ("Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?") and scriptwriter Henry Farrell ("Hush…Hush…[[Sugary]] Charlotte") in charge, it became a [[leggy]] and almost [[belle]] [[amalgam]] of themes and genres. The basic plot of the film is definitely horrific, but there's a lot more to experience, like love stories, a swinging 1930's atmosphere and a whole lot of singing and tap-dancing! The setting is [[surely]] what makes this movie so unique. We're literally catapulted back to the 1930's, with a [[phenomenal]] depiction of that era's music, religion, theatrical business and wardrobes. Following the long and exhausting trial that sentenced their sons to life-imprisonment for murder, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shelley Winters) flee to California and attempt to start a new life running a dance school for young talented girls. Particularly Adelle adapts herself perfectly to the new environment, as she falls in love with a local millionaire, but poor old Helen continues to sink in a downwards spiral of insanity and paranoia. She only listens to the ramblings of a radio-evangelist, fears that she will be punished for the crimes her son committed and slowly develops violent tendencies. The script, although not entirely without flaws, is well written and the film is adequately paced. There's never a [[uninspiring]] moment in "What's the matter with Helen", although the singing, tap-dancing and tango sequences are quite extended and much unrelated to the actual plot. But the atmosphere is continuously ominous and the film definitely benefices from the terrific acting performance of Shelley Winters. She's downright scary as the unpredictable and introvert lady who's about to snap any second and, especially during the last ten minutes or so, she looks more petrifying than all the Freddy Kruegers, Jason Voorhees' and Michael Myers' combined! There are several terrific supportive characters who are, sadly, a little underdeveloped and robbed from their potential, like Michéal MacLiammóir as the cocky elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as the creepy priestess and Timothy Carey as the obtrusive visitor to the ladies' house. There are a couple of surprisingly gruesome scenes and moments of genuine shock to enjoy for the Grand Guignol fanatics among us, but particularly the set pieces and costume designs (even nominated for an Oscar!) are breathtaking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I [[hate]] this movie! It was [[NOTHING]] like the [[book]], and just [[thinking]] about it makes me [[mad]]. [[If]] you watch the [[movie]] before reading the [[book]], then [[yeah]], it's a good [[movie]]. But King's [[book]] was AMAZING and this [[movie]] was nothing like it. I mean, the general [[meaning]] might be [[sort]] of similar but most [[aspects]] of the [[movie]] are [[completely]] different. The [[ending]] for [[example]]! [[So]] in the book it is [[extremely]] intense and [[Danny]] and Wendy [[escape]] seconds before the hotel [[explodes]]. but in this [[horrible]] [[movie]] version [[jack]] like takes them through a [[stupid]] maze... [[yeah]], there is no [[maze]] in the book and there is no [[reason]] for it. Another [[part]] that [[made]] me angry was that [[jack]] just [[kills]] Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the [[hero]] of the book and they just [[kill]] him off like he wasn't [[important]]. [[Overall]], it was just [[bad]] that the [[movie]] was so [[extremely]] off. I [[hating]] this movie! It was [[NADA]] like the [[workbook]], and just [[think]] about it makes me [[pissed]]. [[Though]] you watch the [[film]] before reading the [[ledger]], then [[yep]], it's a good [[filmmaking]]. But King's [[books]] was AMAZING and this [[movies]] was nothing like it. I mean, the general [[meanings]] might be [[kinds]] of similar but most [[facets]] of the [[film]] are [[fully]] different. The [[terminated]] for [[instances]]! [[Accordingly]] in the book it is [[terribly]] intense and [[Dany]] and Wendy [[elope]] seconds before the hotel [[explosions]]. but in this [[scary]] [[film]] version [[jacque]] like takes them through a [[dumb]] maze... [[yep]], there is no [[labyrinth]] in the book and there is no [[cause]] for it. Another [[portion]] that [[accomplished]] me angry was that [[jacques]] just [[killed]] Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the [[superhero]] of the book and they just [[whack]] him off like he wasn't [[momentous]]. [[Whole]], it was just [[unfavourable]] that the [[filmmaking]] was so [[exceptionally]] off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I am [[decidedly]] not in the target audience for this film. I am a man [[nearly]] 50 who has only recently stumbled across the world of independent film. This happened quite by accident, with the discovery of a movie [[called]] Clerks late one night on television. The first two things I noticed about that film were that it was 1) technically [[amateurish]] and 2) [[brilliantly]] written. When I read an interview with the director in the local paper and he said that one of his influences was Clerks, I [[started]] to [[get]] interesting. When he said his main influence was The Station Agent, a movie I'd seen on DVD a week prior, I decided I had to go and check it out. The result could be described along the same lines as Clerks, although the two films are nothing alike content wise. Both films suffer from technical gaffes that are overcome through amazing writing. Whereas Clerks is a day in the life of a man who has nothing in his [[life]] at all and is afraid to ask tough questions about himself and his situation, Less Like Me is about a man who seemingly forces himself to be constantly busy, he's always running one way or another, filling his life with little things so that he will never have to deal with the big ones. The [[themes]] and [[ideas]] of this [[film]] are strong and poignant. I can [[tell]] from watching it that not much has [[changed]] since I was [[growing]] up, young [[men]] still have the same [[problems]] they always have. The writer [[dresses]] up these [[problems]] and [[themes]] in the modern vernacular, crafts wonderfully honest [[characters]], and has them do [[completely]] [[believable]] [[things]]. As far as indie cinema goes, this may not be perfect from a [[technical]] [[standpoint]], but from an artistic one, it is very [[close]]. I am [[definitely]] not in the target audience for this film. I am a man [[roughly]] 50 who has only recently stumbled across the world of independent film. This happened quite by accident, with the discovery of a movie [[drew]] Clerks late one night on television. The first two things I noticed about that film were that it was 1) technically [[unprofessional]] and 2) [[beautifully]] written. When I read an interview with the director in the local paper and he said that one of his influences was Clerks, I [[embark]] to [[obtain]] interesting. When he said his main influence was The Station Agent, a movie I'd seen on DVD a week prior, I decided I had to go and check it out. The result could be described along the same lines as Clerks, although the two films are nothing alike content wise. Both films suffer from technical gaffes that are overcome through amazing writing. Whereas Clerks is a day in the life of a man who has nothing in his [[living]] at all and is afraid to ask tough questions about himself and his situation, Less Like Me is about a man who seemingly forces himself to be constantly busy, he's always running one way or another, filling his life with little things so that he will never have to deal with the big ones. The [[item]] and [[idea]] of this [[cinematography]] are strong and poignant. I can [[say]] from watching it that not much has [[amended]] since I was [[widening]] up, young [[hombre]] still have the same [[trouble]] they always have. The writer [[skirts]] up these [[trouble]] and [[matters]] in the modern vernacular, crafts wonderfully honest [[attribute]], and has them do [[perfectly]] [[reliable]] [[matters]]. As far as indie cinema goes, this may not be perfect from a [[technological]] [[view]], but from an artistic one, it is very [[nears]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2521 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Two old buddies are sent to Japan to get back results of a genetic research containing videotape, which is stolen by the black suited ninjas at the beginning of the movie. First they just have to learn some ninja skill, because "only ninja can beat the ninja."

Sakura killers tries hard to be enjoyable ninja-flick but fails that badly. The whole movie is just so hollow and predictable that is hard to say anything good about it: Same plot has been seen in different variations dozens of times before, characters are too briefly drawn, direction is dull and script doesn't offer anything surprising, even in the ending scene, which by itself reduced movie's (trash)value.

Even 80's ninja-flick-fan, who understands the esthetic of trash-movies, is hard to find this movie even barely enjoyable. It simply doesn't offer anything new to viewer, neither in visual level nor in plot. Shurikens are thrown and katanas are swinging, but it's not enough to lead the movie direction it meant to be and recurred similar fighting scenes numbs even the most calloused viewer after the first 30 minutes.

It's hard to recommend movie to anyone. Even Franco Nero's clumsy performance in "Enter the Ninja" falls behind Sakura killer's American-ninjas. Even in visual level movie doesn't have any balls and it's waste of time to try to find any great fighting scenes in this movie: There isn't any. In all, one of the most futile ninja-flicks, I've ever seen. Doesn't interest even in curiosity. Trust me on this one.

½ out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Maximally manipulative Anabel Sims (Betsy Drake) sets out to trap her ideal man, aided by her co-worker, Julie. Esteemed pediatrician Madison Brown (Cary Grant) goes from bemused to betrothed in the space of 90 minutes on film, but to the viewer it's all eternity. Can a movie receive less than one star? This one is a prime candidate. --------------------------------------------- Result 2523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the history of movies based on comic books, "Mystery Men" is one of the most underrated ones. This is no regular comic superhero movie! It follows the exploits of a motley crew of well-meaning wannabes, which include Mr. Furious (played by Ben Stiller), the Bowler (Janeane Garofalo), the Shoveller (William H. Macy), the Blue Rajah (Hank Azariah) and the Spleen (Paul Reubens). "Mystery Men" spoofs several aspects of superhero movies like "Superman" or "Batman," such as the pithy sayings, and the questions about secret identities. Most of the superheroes aren't billionaires like Bruce Wayne, but blue-collar types with menial jobs and neurotic home lives. So it looks as if director Kinka Usher is making the heroes into something the average viewer can relate to. I found "Mystery Men" to be visually stimulating and very funny. Even if it doesn't turn into a franchise, it's still a joy to watch! --------------------------------------------- Result 2524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I [[caught]] this [[film]] late on a sat [[night]]/ [[Sunday]] morning with my brother. We had been [[drinking]]. This is one of the [[best]] [[films]] for ripping [[apart]] I have ever [[seen]]. From the 'luxury' ocean liner [[actually]] being a 'roll on, roll off' ferry, complete with cast iron everything to the doors with [[adhesive]] [[stickers]] saying [[staff]], then [[seeing]] the same door being used for [[something]] else in another scene - this [[film]] [[rocks]]!! The continuity is so [[poor]] you [[cant]] [[help]] but [[notice]] it, it slaps you in the [[face]] with the holes. [[In]] the final scene he [[jumps]] off a [[life]] boat with the ferry in the distance. Cut to his [[son]] and [[new]] girlfriend (The ships PR [[director]] who knows kung-fu and used to be in the [[police]] but was [[dismissed]] for doing [[things]] her way - true)on the ferry going very [[fast]] away from the explosion. ......Then the [[dad]] is there hugging them. [[HoW]]???? Who cares, its magic. There is not one redeeming feature to this film. The [[casino]] is the [[size]] of a [[large]] [[bedroom]] with one [[casino]] table. when being [[chased]] by the [[villains]] there is only One place to [[hide]], you've guessed it. [[Enter]] the [[villains]] who, instead of checking under the One table, proceed to shoot up four [[fruit]] [[machines]] and a [[little]] corner bar (a corner [[bar]] in the casino - [[fantastic]]). They walk straight past the only [[hiding]] place [[thus]] [[allowing]] our [[Casper]] to get around them and '[[take]] them out'.

[[Get]] some [[mates]] over, get a few [[drinks]] in, put this film on and howl. I [[capture]] this [[cinematography]] late on a sat [[nighttime]]/ [[Yesterday]] morning with my brother. We had been [[drink]]. This is one of the [[bestest]] [[film]] for ripping [[additionally]] I have ever [[noticed]]. From the 'luxury' ocean liner [[indeed]] being a 'roll on, roll off' ferry, complete with cast iron everything to the doors with [[gummed]] [[labels]] saying [[personnel]], then [[see]] the same door being used for [[anything]] else in another scene - this [[kino]] [[rattles]]!! The continuity is so [[pauper]] you [[theres]] [[helping]] but [[noticing]] it, it slaps you in the [[confront]] with the holes. [[Among]] the final scene he [[leaps]] off a [[living]] boat with the ferry in the distance. Cut to his [[sons]] and [[novo]] girlfriend (The ships PR [[superintendent]] who knows kung-fu and used to be in the [[policing]] but was [[sacked]] for doing [[items]] her way - true)on the ferry going very [[quicker]] away from the explosion. ......Then the [[pope]] is there hugging them. [[mode]]???? Who cares, its magic. There is not one redeeming feature to this film. The [[gambling]] is the [[calibre]] of a [[monumental]] [[chamber]] with one [[casinos]] table. when being [[hunted]] by the [[thugs]] there is only One place to [[camouflage]], you've guessed it. [[Intro]] the [[thugs]] who, instead of checking under the One table, proceed to shoot up four [[fruition]] [[computers]] and a [[tiny]] corner bar (a corner [[solicitor]] in the casino - [[unbelievable]]). They walk straight past the only [[hides]] place [[then]] [[permits]] our [[Caspar]] to get around them and '[[taking]] them out'.

[[Got]] some [[boyfriends]] over, get a few [[intoxicating]] in, put this film on and howl. --------------------------------------------- Result 2525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Refreshing `lost' gem! Featuring effective dialog combined with excellent acting to establish the characters and involve you enough to care what happens to them. The Douglas and Widmark characters are realistic heroes. Palance is his usual evil presence. Widmark win the fisticuffs fight scene, a car chase of less than 60 seconds with a `logical' end, and a lengthy chase on foot that shames the overdone chase sequences of contemporary Hollywood. You know how it will likely end, but the suspense and interest are sustained throughout. The end of the chase is one of the most realistic you will ever see. The film seems to slow a little past the middle, but stay with it for the rewarding conclusion. --------------------------------------------- Result 2526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I hope whoever coached these losers on their accents was fired. The only high points are a few of the supporting characters, 3 of 5 of my favourites were killed off by the end of the season (and one of them was a cat, to put that into perspective).

The whole storyline is centered around sex, and nothing else. Sex with vampires, gay sex with gay vampires, gay sex with straight vampires, sex to score vampire blood, sex after drinking vampire blood, sex in front of vampires, vampire sex, non-vampire sex, sex because we're scared of vampires, sex because we're mad at vampires, sex because we just became a vampire, etc.

Nothing against sex, it would just be nice if it were a little more subtle with being peppered into the storyline. Perhaps HAVE a storyline and then shoehorn some sex into it. But they didn't even bother to do that... and Anna Paquin is a dizzy gap-tooth bitch. Either she sucks or her character sucks, I can't figure out which.

Another part of the storyline that I find highly implausible is why 150 year old vampire Bill who seems to have his things together would be interested in someone like Sookie. She's constantly flying off the handle at him for things he can't control. He leaves for two days and she already decides that he's "not coming back" and suddenly has feelings for dog-man? Give me a break. She's supposed to be a 25 year old woman, not a 14 year old girl. People close to her are dying all over, and she's got the brightest smile on her face because she just gave away her V-card to some dude because she can't read his mind? As the main character of the story, I would've hoped the show would do a little more to make her understandable and someone to invest your interest in, not someone you keep secretly hoping gets killed off or put into a coma. I can't find anything about her character that I like and even the fact that she can read minds is impressively uninspiring and not the least bit interesting.

I will not be wasting my time with watching Season 2 come June. --------------------------------------------- Result 2527 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] A [[CRY]] IN THE [[DARK]]

A CRY [[IN]] THE DARK was a film that I [[anticipated]] would offer a [[phenomenal]] performance from [[Meryl]] Streep and a solid, if [[unremarkable]] film. This assumption came from the fact that aside from Streep's Best Actress nomination, the [[movie]] received little attention from major awards groups.

Little did I [[anticipate]] that A CRY IN THE DARK would be such a [[riveting]] drama, well-constructed on [[every]] level. If you ask me, this is an under-appreciatted [[classic]].

The film opens rather slowly, letting the audience settle into the Chamberlain's at a relaxed pace and really notice that, at the core, they are an incredibly loving, simple family. Fred Schepisi (the director) selects random moments to capture of a family on vacation that give a looming sense of the oncoming tragedy, while also showing the [[attentive]] bliss with which Lindy (Streep) and Michael (Sam Neill) Chamberlain care for their children.

While the famous line "A Dingo Took My Baby!" has become somewhat of a punchline these days, the movie never even comes close to [[laughable]]. The actual death of Azaria is horrifyingly [[captured]]. It is subtle and [[realistic]], leaving the audience horrified and asking questions.

The majority of the film takes place in [[courtrooms]] and focuses on the Chamberlain's [[continuous]] [[fight]] to [[prove]] their innocence to the [[press]] and the [[court]], which [[suspects]] Lindy of [[murder]].

The [[fact]] that it is [[clear]] to us from the [[beginning]] that they are innocent makes the [[tense]] [[trials]] all the more gripping. As an audience [[member]], I was [[fully]] [[invested]] in the Chamberlain's plight... and was [[genuinely]] angered and hurt and saddened when they were [[made]] to [[look]] so [[terrible]] by the [[media]]. But at the same, the [[media]]/public opinion is [[understandable]]. I loved the way the [[media]] was by no [[means]] made to be sympathetic, but they [[always]] had [[valid]] [[reasons]] to hold their [[views]].

The [[final]] line of the [[film]] is very [[profound]] and [[captures]] [[perfectly]] the central [[element]] that makes this [[film]] so much [[different]] from other courtroom [[dramas]].

[[In]] terms of performances, the only ones that really matter in this film are those of Streep and Neill... and they deliver in every way. For me, this ranks as one of (if not #1) Meryl Streep's best performances. For all her mastery of different accents (which of course are very impressive in their own right), Streep never loses the central heart and soul of her characters. I find this to be one of Streep's more subtle performances, and she hits it out of the park. And Neill, an actor who has never impressed me beyond being charismatic and appealing in JURASSIC PARK, is a perfect counterpoint to Streep's performance. From what I've seen, this is undoubtedly Neill's finest work to date. It's a shame he wasn't recognized by the Academy with a Leading Actor nomination to match Streep's... b/c the two of them play of each other brilliantly.

More emotionally gripping than most films, and also incredibly suspenseful... A CRY IN THE DARK far exceeded my expectations. I highly recommend that people who only know of the movie as the flick where Meryl screams "The dingo took my baby!" watch the film and see just how much more there is to A CRY IN THE DARK then that one line.

... A ... A [[CLAMOUR]] IN THE [[DARKNESS]]

A CRY [[ONTO]] THE DARK was a film that I [[waited]] would offer a [[wondrous]] performance from [[Streep]] Streep and a solid, if [[banal]] film. This assumption came from the fact that aside from Streep's Best Actress nomination, the [[flick]] received little attention from major awards groups.

Little did I [[predict]] that A CRY IN THE DARK would be such a [[captivating]] drama, well-constructed on [[any]] level. If you ask me, this is an under-appreciatted [[conventional]].

The film opens rather slowly, letting the audience settle into the Chamberlain's at a relaxed pace and really notice that, at the core, they are an incredibly loving, simple family. Fred Schepisi (the director) selects random moments to capture of a family on vacation that give a looming sense of the oncoming tragedy, while also showing the [[cautious]] bliss with which Lindy (Streep) and Michael (Sam Neill) Chamberlain care for their children.

While the famous line "A Dingo Took My Baby!" has become somewhat of a punchline these days, the movie never even comes close to [[grotesque]]. The actual death of Azaria is horrifyingly [[caught]]. It is subtle and [[practical]], leaving the audience horrified and asking questions.

The majority of the film takes place in [[rooms]] and focuses on the Chamberlain's [[unbroken]] [[fought]] to [[demonstrating]] their innocence to the [[pressing]] and the [[courthouse]], which [[accusing]] Lindy of [[slain]].

The [[facto]] that it is [[definite]] to us from the [[started]] that they are innocent makes the [[strained]] [[trial]] all the more gripping. As an audience [[members]], I was [[entirely]] [[investing]] in the Chamberlain's plight... and was [[actually]] angered and hurt and saddened when they were [[brought]] to [[peek]] so [[scary]] by the [[medium]]. But at the same, the [[medium]]/public opinion is [[comprehensible]]. I loved the way the [[medium]] was by no [[signifies]] made to be sympathetic, but they [[repeatedly]] had [[legitimate]] [[motifs]] to hold their [[opinion]].

The [[last]] line of the [[cinematography]] is very [[deepest]] and [[caught]] [[utterly]] the central [[ingredient]] that makes this [[films]] so much [[several]] from other courtroom [[opera]].

[[Onto]] terms of performances, the only ones that really matter in this film are those of Streep and Neill... and they deliver in every way. For me, this ranks as one of (if not #1) Meryl Streep's best performances. For all her mastery of different accents (which of course are very impressive in their own right), Streep never loses the central heart and soul of her characters. I find this to be one of Streep's more subtle performances, and she hits it out of the park. And Neill, an actor who has never impressed me beyond being charismatic and appealing in JURASSIC PARK, is a perfect counterpoint to Streep's performance. From what I've seen, this is undoubtedly Neill's finest work to date. It's a shame he wasn't recognized by the Academy with a Leading Actor nomination to match Streep's... b/c the two of them play of each other brilliantly.

More emotionally gripping than most films, and also incredibly suspenseful... A CRY IN THE DARK far exceeded my expectations. I highly recommend that people who only know of the movie as the flick where Meryl screams "The dingo took my baby!" watch the film and see just how much more there is to A CRY IN THE DARK then that one line.

... A ... --------------------------------------------- Result 2528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I can [[remember]] [[seeing]] this movie as a [[kid]] in 1977 or 1978. HBO [[would]] [[show]] it late at night back when they were they one and only [[movie]] pay [[channel]] in existence. Back then it was UNRATED and was the only movie of its [[kind]] ever [[shown]] on [[pay]] [[television]]...[[especially]] back then. I would [[love]] to [[see]] it now as an adult where I [[would]] be more [[apt]] to understand the adult [[theme]] of it. It was [[probably]] the [[closest]] thing I had ever [[seen]] to pornography at the [[young]] [[age]] of 7 or 8. [[Luckily]] I had [[stupid]] [[babysitters]] and party-going [[parents]] on the weekends. [[Most]] of my memory of this [[movie]] was the [[completely]] [[erratic]] sexual [[behavior]] of these two [[guys]]. [[Breaking]] into [[houses]] to [[sniff]] underwear, feeding on a stranger's breast milk on a public [[bus]], and fornicating in a cab at the request of one of their female [[subjects]] were just a few of the whacked escapades these guys were pulling off. A very racy film for the early '70s. Until I checked IMDb, I had no [[idea]] this movie had such a following. [[Most]] people I [[talk]] to have never [[heard]] of it. I can [[remind]] [[see]] this movie as a [[kids]] in 1977 or 1978. HBO [[should]] [[demonstrate]] it late at night back when they were they one and only [[films]] pay [[channels]] in existence. Back then it was UNRATED and was the only movie of its [[genera]] ever [[showed]] on [[payrolls]] [[televisions]]...[[concretely]] back then. I would [[amour]] to [[seeing]] it now as an adult where I [[ought]] be more [[likely]] to understand the adult [[subject]] of it. It was [[presumably]] the [[nearer]] thing I had ever [[saw]] to pornography at the [[youths]] [[aged]] of 7 or 8. [[Gladly]] I had [[preposterous]] [[nannies]] and party-going [[parenting]] on the weekends. [[More]] of my memory of this [[cinematic]] was the [[altogether]] [[irregular]] sexual [[behavioral]] of these two [[guy]]. [[Violating]] into [[households]] to [[sniffing]] underwear, feeding on a stranger's breast milk on a public [[buses]], and fornicating in a cab at the request of one of their female [[items]] were just a few of the whacked escapades these guys were pulling off. A very racy film for the early '70s. Until I checked IMDb, I had no [[notions]] this movie had such a following. [[More]] people I [[schmooze]] to have never [[listened]] of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Some [[time]] in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American [[West]], several [[cowboys]] in [[need]] of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that [[buffaloes]] are too [[numerous]] for the [[hunting]] to have any [[impact]], but the more experienced [[hunter]] has seen how [[quickly]] the [[population]] can [[collapse]], and he isn't so [[sure]]. Featuring buffalo herds [[living]] in South Dakota and showing [[film]] of actual [[hunting]] (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary [[thinning]] of the herd), the movie does an [[excellent]] [[job]] of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.

The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his "brother", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's "wife" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.

Charlie is clearly the most interesting [[figure]]. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.

This is all very similar to the classic "Red River", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie [[suffers]] by [[comparison]]. The plot is not as [[focused]] on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to [[keep]] all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of "Red River". As a result, "The Last Hunt" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic. Some [[period]] in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American [[Western]], several [[texans]] in [[needs]] of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that [[bison]] are too [[myriad]] for the [[hunts]] to have any [[effects]], but the more experienced [[hunting]] has seen how [[quicker]] the [[populace]] can [[collapses]], and he isn't so [[convinced]]. Featuring buffalo herds [[live]] in South Dakota and showing [[movies]] of actual [[hunted]] (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary [[exhaustion]] of the herd), the movie does an [[wondrous]] [[labour]] of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.

The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his "brother", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's "wife" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.

Charlie is clearly the most interesting [[silhouette]]. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.

This is all very similar to the classic "Red River", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie [[suffering]] by [[comparisons]]. The plot is not as [[focusing]] on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to [[retain]] all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of "Red River". As a result, "The Last Hunt" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 2530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Good [[movies]] are [[original]], some leave a [[message]] or [[touch]] you in a certain way, but sometimes you're not in the mood for that.

I wanted something simple, no thinking just [[plain]] action when I watched this one. It [[started]] of good and was quite [[entertaining]], so why a bad review. Well in the [[end]] the movie lost it's credibility. The storyline wasn't that cheesy at all, the action was not too special but overall good, acting was OK, so more than enough to satisfy my needs. But all got [[ruined]] because things happened that were over the top, and it left me with a bad feeling. They should have put a little more effort in making everything credible and would have gotten a 7 in the "no thinking just plain action" category. So in conclusion if you know you'll get irritated because things are happening that seem completely illogical: don't watch! otherwise I'd say go ahead... Good [[filmmaking]] are [[upfront]], some leave a [[messaging]] or [[toque]] you in a certain way, but sometimes you're not in the mood for that.

I wanted something simple, no thinking just [[lowland]] action when I watched this one. It [[commencing]] of good and was quite [[fun]], so why a bad review. Well in the [[ceases]] the movie lost it's credibility. The storyline wasn't that cheesy at all, the action was not too special but overall good, acting was OK, so more than enough to satisfy my needs. But all got [[obliterated]] because things happened that were over the top, and it left me with a bad feeling. They should have put a little more effort in making everything credible and would have gotten a 7 in the "no thinking just plain action" category. So in conclusion if you know you'll get irritated because things are happening that seem completely illogical: don't watch! otherwise I'd say go ahead... --------------------------------------------- Result 2531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This film [[reminded]] me of The Sopranos, and not in a good way.

David Chase's seminal mob [[opera]] only ever put its foot wrong [[twice]], the most jarring and inexplicable [[instance]] of which [[took]] [[place]] in its fourth season, when [[Junior]] Soprano went on trial for his [[life]]. Rather than [[pursue]] this [[riveting]] (and [[pivotal]]) plot line, the writers [[instead]] [[chose]] to [[completely]] [[ignore]] it, focusing instead on Bobby Baccalieri's constant whimpering over his [[recently]] [[deceased]] wife's frozen pasta dish.

When something of [[genuine]] interest happens in Notorious - for example that first, [[mysterious]] [[assassination]] attempt on Tupac Shakur that ignited the [[whole]] East Coast/West [[Coast]] feud in the first place, and [[ended]] up leading to the deaths of both Tupac and Christopher Wallace - the [[film]] treats it as just another bit of plot to plod through. Why [[exactly]] was Tupac so convinced that he was [[sold]] out by his own people? [[Did]] he [[alone]] nurture his [[subsequent]] affiliation with Suge [[Knight]]? And was Lil' Kim's transformation from prim office drone into sex-obsessed, vampish diva really as banal as it [[appears]] here?

None of these [[questions]] are even fleetingly [[addressed]] by the film's screenwriters, who are far more interested in [[depicting]] Wallace's [[turbulent]] love life to zero compelling [[dramatic]] [[avail]]. These [[sequences]] ([[including]] a brain-frazzlingly [[clichéd]] groupie indescretion in a [[hotel]] room) are so toothless and bruisingly manipulative that the only [[real]] comparison to be [[made]] is with a network [[TV]] movie.

The [[storytelling]], in both [[structure]] and content, is [[simplistic]] and trite. But more fundamentally, as a biopic; as [[something]] [[designed]] to celebrate its [[subject]] and educate the uninitiated on the [[intricacies]] of their [[life]] and [[work]]; the [[film]] is almost [[entirely]] [[worthless]]. The reliance on meat-and-potatoes genre [[plotting]], [[coupled]] with the [[lifeless]] musical performances (an [[area]] in which a film like this should [[soar]], [[surely]]) [[result]] in a [[film]] that appears to have been [[designed]] only to [[satisfy]] the [[whims]] and [[demands]] of those [[involved]], [[leaving]] Wallace's [[questionable]] status as a [[giant]] in his [[field]] as the [[preserve]] of the easily persuaded and [[previously]] [[converted]] only.

And the [[final]] twenty minutes, in which Wallace's posthumous cultural identity is broadly painted as being akin to that of a latter day saint, quite frankly made me feel like throwing up.

On that score, much as with any other, Notorious is crass, calculating and compromised. This film [[recall]] me of The Sopranos, and not in a good way.

David Chase's seminal mob [[dramas]] only ever put its foot wrong [[doubly]], the most jarring and inexplicable [[lawsuit]] of which [[taken]] [[placing]] in its fourth season, when [[Menial]] Soprano went on trial for his [[lives]]. Rather than [[pursuing]] this [[mesmerizing]] (and [[imperative]]) plot line, the writers [[however]] [[chosen]] to [[entirely]] [[omit]] it, focusing instead on Bobby Baccalieri's constant whimpering over his [[newly]] [[departed]] wife's frozen pasta dish.

When something of [[true]] interest happens in Notorious - for example that first, [[cryptic]] [[murders]] attempt on Tupac Shakur that ignited the [[overall]] East Coast/West [[Shore]] feud in the first place, and [[finalized]] up leading to the deaths of both Tupac and Christopher Wallace - the [[filmmaking]] treats it as just another bit of plot to plod through. Why [[accurately]] was Tupac so convinced that he was [[selling]] out by his own people? [[Got]] he [[only]] nurture his [[later]] affiliation with Suge [[Ritter]]? And was Lil' Kim's transformation from prim office drone into sex-obsessed, vampish diva really as banal as it [[seems]] here?

None of these [[subjects]] are even fleetingly [[treated]] by the film's screenwriters, who are far more interested in [[describing]] Wallace's [[stormy]] love life to zero compelling [[spectacular]] [[success]]. These [[sequence]] ([[containing]] a brain-frazzlingly [[clichés]] groupie indescretion in a [[motel]] room) are so toothless and bruisingly manipulative that the only [[true]] comparison to be [[brought]] is with a network [[TELEVISION]] movie.

The [[story]], in both [[edifice]] and content, is [[facile]] and trite. But more fundamentally, as a biopic; as [[somethings]] [[destined]] to celebrate its [[themes]] and educate the uninitiated on the [[subtleties]] of their [[lifetime]] and [[cooperating]]; the [[filmmaking]] is almost [[completely]] [[futile]]. The reliance on meat-and-potatoes genre [[conspiring]], [[matched]] with the [[lackluster]] musical performances (an [[domains]] in which a film like this should [[surging]], [[definitely]]) [[consequence]] in a [[filmmaking]] that appears to have been [[destined]] only to [[meet]] the [[frills]] and [[demand]] of those [[entangled]], [[exiting]] Wallace's [[suspicious]] status as a [[mammoth]] in his [[campo]] as the [[retains]] of the easily persuaded and [[formerly]] [[transforms]] only.

And the [[ultimate]] twenty minutes, in which Wallace's posthumous cultural identity is broadly painted as being akin to that of a latter day saint, quite frankly made me feel like throwing up.

On that score, much as with any other, Notorious is crass, calculating and compromised. --------------------------------------------- Result 2532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[If]] I write a [[review]] about a [[movie]], maybe it will stick with me... but generally I expect that I will have forgotten I've seen this one a [[mere]] two [[weeks]] from now. [[So]] why bother? Because again I find myself [[watching]] a low-rated [[movie]] that was [[fun]] to watch. I didn't expect I'd to be able to stay in the room while it was on.

It wasn't great, but at [[least]] it was not [[unbearable]]... not a [[comedy]] of errors which always makes me cringe. It was just sweet fluff... and if you can't [[take]] it, [[stay]] in the locker room boys. I agree with those who defend this movie because it is sure to please its [[targeted]] demographic, and won't be a [[total]] [[bore]] to an adult.

It [[offers]] a few good [[chuckles]] here and there, but nary a side [[splitter]]. Sure it is silly and only mildly [[entertaining]], but at [[least]] it doesn't suck (as so [[many]] have said it does). [[Maybe]] those folks are [[afraid]] of their sensitive sides?

I have a tendency to [[grade]] on the bell [[curve]], so a 4,5 or 6 is actually an [[okay]] all-around [[rating]] in my [[book]]. Giving it a 4 makes sense and will bolster its [[rating]] at the time of this writing. Giving it a 1 or a 10, as most have [[done]] [[thus]] far, makes the [[rating]] numbers [[meaningless]]. I cannot believe how [[strongly]] people feel one [[way]] or the other about this forgettable [[fluff]] (or that I am [[even]] [[bothering]] to [[write]] about it). Am I missing something?

Anyway, it should be noted that Emma [[Roberts]] [[performs]] her role as Clairedycat quite convincingly. Ariell Kebbel often written into b*ch roles does not disappoint when her character gets her due. You might also recognize Bruce Spence [[playing]] Leonard, [[though]] his role is ancillary.

[[Surely]] you can miss this one if you are an [[adult]]. But, if there is a pre-teen [[girl]] in your life, [[rent]] this [[movie]] for her... and be [[prepared]] NOT to hate it (you [[might]] even enjoy it). [[Though]] I write a [[scrutinize]] about a [[filmmaking]], maybe it will stick with me... but generally I expect that I will have forgotten I've seen this one a [[simple]] two [[zhou]] from now. [[Consequently]] why bother? Because again I find myself [[staring]] a low-rated [[filmmaking]] that was [[amusing]] to watch. I didn't expect I'd to be able to stay in the room while it was on.

It wasn't great, but at [[lowest]] it was not [[intolerable]]... not a [[travesty]] of errors which always makes me cringe. It was just sweet fluff... and if you can't [[taking]] it, [[staying]] in the locker room boys. I agree with those who defend this movie because it is sure to please its [[oriented]] demographic, and won't be a [[whole]] [[boring]] to an adult.

It [[offerings]] a few good [[laughter]] here and there, but nary a side [[divider]]. Sure it is silly and only mildly [[fun]], but at [[lowest]] it doesn't suck (as so [[various]] have said it does). [[Perhaps]] those folks are [[fearful]] of their sensitive sides?

I have a tendency to [[grading]] on the bell [[curvature]], so a 4,5 or 6 is actually an [[alrighty]] all-around [[ratings]] in my [[workbook]]. Giving it a 4 makes sense and will bolster its [[appraisals]] at the time of this writing. Giving it a 1 or a 10, as most have [[doing]] [[thereby]] far, makes the [[valuation]] numbers [[fruitless]]. I cannot believe how [[emphatically]] people feel one [[camino]] or the other about this forgettable [[grope]] (or that I am [[yet]] [[teasing]] to [[handwriting]] about it). Am I missing something?

Anyway, it should be noted that Emma [[Stevens]] [[conducts]] her role as Clairedycat quite convincingly. Ariell Kebbel often written into b*ch roles does not disappoint when her character gets her due. You might also recognize Bruce Spence [[play]] Leonard, [[nonetheless]] his role is ancillary.

[[Obviously]] you can miss this one if you are an [[mature]]. But, if there is a pre-teen [[female]] in your life, [[rents]] this [[filmmaking]] for her... and be [[authored]] NOT to hate it (you [[probability]] even enjoy it). --------------------------------------------- Result 2533 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Vampires, sexy guys, guns and some blood. Who could ask for more? Moon Child delivers it all in one nicely packaged flick! Gackt is the innocent Sho - who befriends a Vampire Kei (HYDE), their relationship grows with time but as Sho ages, Kei's immortality breaks his heart. It doesn't help that they both fall in love with the same woman. The special effects are pretty good considering the small budget. It's a touching story ripe with human emotions. You will laugh, cry, laugh, then cry some more. Even if you are not a fan of their music, SEE THIS FILM. It works great as a stand alone Vampire movie.

9 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2534 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Footlight Parade" is just one of several wonderfully jaunty musicals that Warner Bros. produced in the early 1930's to ward off the Depression. "42nd Street" and the Golddiggers series were also produced during this era, and they made literally, millions of Americans forget their troubles for a little while, and enjoy themselves.

While most of the films produced had the great talents of Joan Blondell, Ruby Keeler, and Dick Powell, only Foolight Parade had the incomparable James Cagney. Almost ten years prior to his most well-known musical, "Yankee Doodle Dandy". Here he dances in that most original of dance styles, with his arms usually lowered at his side, and his legs doing all types of undulations and kicks. It's easy to see that he is enjoying himself, and that makes us enjoy him all the more.

While almost all of the musical sequences appear at the end of the film, they are well worth the wait. I believe that this film was made just prior to the installation of the production code, so some of the costumes and scenes are a bit risqué. But it's all in fun.

It doesn't matter what the plot of the film is, just know that there are plenty of laughs and a superlative cast. Besides those already mentioned, Guy Kibbee is at his flustered best here.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a [[forgotten]] 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an [[idiot]]. Wargames: The Dead Code [[joins]] the long running [[list]] of [[unnecessary]] sequels that the DVD [[market]] has filled so [[easily]]. Movies [[like]] this don't need spoilers, because YOU already know them.

The "[[plot]]" for this "[[film]]", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; [[nerd]] [[likes]] [[girl]]; nerd gets [[accidentally]] involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other [[country]]; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at [[key]] point in the "film"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret [[Government]] computer gets crazy; nerd is [[hired]] to [[beat]] Top Secret [[Government]] Computer; nerd beats Top [[Secret]] Computer by using the same old [[Top]] [[Secret]] Computer from the first Wargames "film"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid.

The end.

The acting, script, effects, score, and [[cinematography]] are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should [[avoid]] this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like cheap looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.

Sadly, [[Mathew]] Broderick was too involved with some "masterpiece", that he couldn't even do a five second cameo in this one. But can you [[blame]] him? Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a [[overlooked]] 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an [[dumb]]. Wargames: The Dead Code [[engages]] the long running [[lists]] of [[dispensable]] sequels that the DVD [[mercado]] has filled so [[conveniently]]. Movies [[iike]] this don't need spoilers, because YOU already know them.

The "[[intrigue]]" for this "[[filmmaking]]", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; [[geek]] [[loves]] [[chick]]; nerd gets [[coincidentally]] involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other [[nationals]]; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at [[essential]] point in the "film"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret [[Administrations]] computer gets crazy; nerd is [[incurred]] to [[beating]] Top Secret [[Administrations]] Computer; nerd beats Top [[Secrets]] Computer by using the same old [[Supreme]] [[Confidentiality]] Computer from the first Wargames "film"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid.

The end.

The acting, script, effects, score, and [[filmmaking]] are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should [[preventing]] this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like cheap looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.

Sadly, [[Mathews]] Broderick was too involved with some "masterpiece", that he couldn't even do a five second cameo in this one. But can you [[guilt]] him? --------------------------------------------- Result 2536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I have [[seen]] some [[bad]] [[movies]] ([[Austin]] Powers - The [[Spy]] Who [[Shagged]] Me, Batman Forever), but this [[film]] is so [[awful]], so BORING, that I [[got]] about half [[way]] through and [[could]] not [[bear]] [[watching]] the [[rest]]. A [[pity]]. Boasting [[talent]] such as Kenneth Branagh, Embeth Davitz and Robert Duvall and a [[story]] by [[John]] Grisham, what went [[wrong]]? Branagh is a big-time [[lawyer]] who has a one-night [[fling]] with Davitz. Her father (Duvall) is a [[psychopath]] who [[hanged]] her cat, etc, etc, so Branagh has him [[sent]] to a [[nuthouse]], and he [[promptly]] escapes. Somehow (I couldn't figure out how) Robert Downey jr, [[Daryl]] Hannah, Famke Janssen and [[Tom]] Berenger are all mixed into the [[story]] which [[moves]] [[slower]] than stationary. I [[wanted]] to like this, and, being a [[huge]] Grisham [[fan]], have read all about this [[movie]] and I ([[foolishly]]) [[expected]] something interesting. This is [[honestly]] the [[WORST]] [[film]] I've [[seen]] to date and I wish I [[could]] have my [[money]] [[refunded]]. * out of *****. I have [[noticed]] some [[negative]] [[films]] ([[Austen]] Powers - The [[Spies]] Who [[Shafted]] Me, Batman Forever), but this [[filmmaking]] is so [[scary]], so BORING, that I [[gets]] about half [[route]] through and [[would]] not [[bears]] [[staring]] the [[stays]]. A [[compassion]]. Boasting [[talents]] such as Kenneth Branagh, Embeth Davitz and Robert Duvall and a [[storytelling]] by [[Jon]] Grisham, what went [[mistaken]]? Branagh is a big-time [[attorney]] who has a one-night [[adventure]] with Davitz. Her father (Duvall) is a [[loony]] who [[hung]] her cat, etc, etc, so Branagh has him [[sends]] to a [[madhouse]], and he [[immediatly]] escapes. Somehow (I couldn't figure out how) Robert Downey jr, [[Darryl]] Hannah, Famke Janssen and [[Thom]] Berenger are all mixed into the [[tales]] which [[shift]] [[slow]] than stationary. I [[wished]] to like this, and, being a [[prodigious]] Grisham [[admirer]], have read all about this [[films]] and I ([[naively]]) [[awaited]] something interesting. This is [[truly]] the [[PIRE]] [[cinematographic]] I've [[noticed]] to date and I wish I [[would]] have my [[cash]] [[repay]]. * out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[must]] [[say]], I was [[surprised]] with the quality of the [[movie]]. It was far better than I [[expected]]. [[Scenario]] and acting is [[quite]] good. The [[director]] [[made]] a good [[job]] as well. [[Although]] some scenes [[look]] a [[bit]] clumsy, it is a decent [[movie]] [[overall]]. The idea was [[definitely]] [[brilliant]] and the truth did not [[reveal]] itself till the very end. The [[mental]] hospital [[atmosphere]] was [[given]] [[quite]] good. The plot was clear, consistent and well [[thought]]. Some people [[may]] [[find]] it a bit [[boring]] [[though]] [[since]] the story line is very [[focused]] and they take their [[time]] for [[character]] and [[story]] development. [[Moral]] of the story, it is a decent [[movie]] for its [[genre]] and it is [[astonishingly]] good. I [[ought]] [[tell]], I was [[horrified]] with the quality of the [[movies]]. It was far better than I [[waited]]. [[Scenarios]] and acting is [[pretty]] good. The [[headmaster]] [[brought]] a good [[employment]] as well. [[Though]] some scenes [[peek]] a [[bite]] clumsy, it is a decent [[films]] [[whole]]. The idea was [[definitively]] [[wondrous]] and the truth did not [[unveils]] itself till the very end. The [[spiritual]] hospital [[atmospheric]] was [[bestowed]] [[rather]] good. The plot was clear, consistent and well [[brainchild]]. Some people [[maggio]] [[finds]] it a bit [[bored]] [[while]] [[because]] the story line is very [[focussed]] and they take their [[moment]] for [[characters]] and [[narratives]] development. [[Morales]] of the story, it is a decent [[cinematography]] for its [[genera]] and it is [[impossibly]] good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the very best Three Stooges shorts ever. A spooky house full of evil guys and "The Goon" challenge the Alert Detective Agency's best men. Shemp is in top form in the famous in-the-dark scene. Emil Sitka provides excellent support in his Mr. Goodrich role, as the target of a murder plot. Before it's over, Shemp's "trusty little shovel" is employed to great effect. This 16 minute gem moves about as fast as any Stooge's short and packs twice the wallop. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Silent Night, Deadly [[Night]] 5 is the very last of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed [[horror]] flick.

Except to the oblivious, there's some [[obvious]] things going on here...Mickey [[Rooney]] plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little [[boy]] named Derek [[heard]] a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it [[said]] "don't open till [[Christmas]]", he [[begins]] to [[open]] it anyway but is [[stopped]] by his [[dad]], who scolds him and [[sends]] him to bed, and [[opens]] the gift himself. [[Inside]] is a [[little]] red ball that sprouts Santa [[arms]] and a [[head]], and proceeds to [[kill]] dad. Oops, [[maybe]] he should have left well-enough [[alone]]. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the [[incident]] since he watched it from the [[stairs]], but he doesn't grow up to be some [[killer]] Santa, he just [[stops]] [[talking]].

There's a [[mysterious]] [[stranger]] lurking [[around]], who [[seems]] very interested in the [[toys]] that Joe Petto makes. We [[even]] see him [[buying]] a bunch when Derek's [[mom]] takes him to the [[store]] to [[find]] a [[gift]] for him to [[bring]] him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this [[guy]] doing? [[Well]], we're not sure but he does seem to be [[taking]] these toys [[apart]] to [[see]] what makes them tick. He does [[keep]] his [[landlord]] from [[evicting]] him by promising him to [[pay]] him in [[cash]] the [[next]] day and [[presents]] him with a "Larry the Larvae" [[toy]] for his [[kid]], but of [[course]] "Larry" is not a [[good]] [[toy]] and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't [[pretty]].

Anyway, [[eventually]] what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the [[old]] [[story]], Pino is not a "real boy". Pino is probably even more agitated and [[naughty]] because he suffers from "Kenitalia" (a smooth [[plastic]] crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.

A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5. Silent Night, Deadly [[Nuit]] 5 is the very last of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed [[monstrosity]] flick.

Except to the oblivious, there's some [[palpable]] things going on here...Mickey [[Roni]] plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little [[laddie]] named Derek [[hear]] a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it [[told]] "don't open till [[Navidad]]", he [[start]] to [[openings]] it anyway but is [[stopping]] by his [[pere]], who scolds him and [[sent]] him to bed, and [[inaugurated]] the gift himself. [[Inland]] is a [[petite]] red ball that sprouts Santa [[armas]] and a [[chief]], and proceeds to [[murder]] dad. Oops, [[presumably]] he should have left well-enough [[sole]]. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the [[incidents]] since he watched it from the [[escalators]], but he doesn't grow up to be some [[slayer]] Santa, he just [[stopped]] [[debating]].

There's a [[enigmatic]] [[foreigner]] lurking [[throughout]], who [[looks]] very interested in the [[toy]] that Joe Petto makes. We [[yet]] see him [[purchasing]] a bunch when Derek's [[mother]] takes him to the [[boutique]] to [[found]] a [[don]] for him to [[bringing]] him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this [[man]] doing? [[Good]], we're not sure but he does seem to be [[adopting]] these toys [[also]] to [[behold]] what makes them tick. He does [[preserving]] his [[proprietors]] from [[deporting]] him by promising him to [[salary]] him in [[money]] the [[forthcoming]] day and [[introduces]] him with a "Larry the Larvae" [[pawn]] for his [[petit]], but of [[cours]] "Larry" is not a [[alright]] [[pawn]] and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't [[quite]].

Anyway, [[lastly]] what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the [[longtime]] [[history]], Pino is not a "real boy". Pino is probably even more agitated and [[rotten]] because he suffers from "Kenitalia" (a smooth [[plastics]] crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.

A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 2540 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Being the prototype of the classical Errol Flynn adventure movie and having a good story as well as two more brilliant co-stars in Maureen O'Hara (what an exquisite beauty!) and Anthony Quinn, I can only recommend this movie to all those having even the slightest liking for romance and adventure.

Hollywood at its best! --------------------------------------------- Result 2541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An unfunny, unworthy picture which is an undeserving end to Peter Sellers' career. It is a pity this movie was ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 2542 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Let's just say I had to suspend my disbelief less for Spiderman than I did for [[Hooligans]]. That is, to say, I have less of a problem believing [[Toby]] McGuire can stick to buildings than I do Elija Wood throwing down with toughs in Manchester. I won't get into specifics, as I don't want to write a spoiler, but the idea of grown, professional, British men getting into near death scraps every weekend is, well... funny. And this film is not. The fighting, the idea of fighting, is taken far too [[seriously]]. The [[gravity]] of the pugilism, the reverence with which the [[subject]] matter is treated becomes irritating, as it [[neither]] establishes or [[resolves]] the conflict. It seems as though the plot, with holes big enough to drive a Guiness truck through, has been slapped together with a [[contrived]] "fish out of water" theme so that viewers can gaze into Woods teary eyes as he learns how to become a man ie. hitting other young men of opposing football tastes with blunt objects and then running away as fast as he can. The characters are cartoonish, especially the [[Americans]] at Harvard. The character development and story line are telegraphed to the viewer throughout the picture. Unfortunately, the [[absurdity]] of the [[film]] doesn't reach its height until nearly the end, which by then you'll have spent nearly two hours of your life you are never getting back. Pick up "The Football Factory" or "Fight Club" instead of this [[corny]], and disappointing dud. It doesn't waste [[time]] with empty melodrama, the tired old "Yankee in King Aurthur's Court," or weepy, parables of coming of age bullsh*t. They're just pure, dark, and [[clever]] fun; the way violence is supposed to be. Let's just say I had to suspend my disbelief less for Spiderman than I did for [[Punks]]. That is, to say, I have less of a problem believing [[Topi]] McGuire can stick to buildings than I do Elija Wood throwing down with toughs in Manchester. I won't get into specifics, as I don't want to write a spoiler, but the idea of grown, professional, British men getting into near death scraps every weekend is, well... funny. And this film is not. The fighting, the idea of fighting, is taken far too [[deeply]]. The [[seriousness]] of the pugilism, the reverence with which the [[themes]] matter is treated becomes irritating, as it [[either]] establishes or [[solving]] the conflict. It seems as though the plot, with holes big enough to drive a Guiness truck through, has been slapped together with a [[artificial]] "fish out of water" theme so that viewers can gaze into Woods teary eyes as he learns how to become a man ie. hitting other young men of opposing football tastes with blunt objects and then running away as fast as he can. The characters are cartoonish, especially the [[Us]] at Harvard. The character development and story line are telegraphed to the viewer throughout the picture. Unfortunately, the [[foolishness]] of the [[cinematography]] doesn't reach its height until nearly the end, which by then you'll have spent nearly two hours of your life you are never getting back. Pick up "The Football Factory" or "Fight Club" instead of this [[mundane]], and disappointing dud. It doesn't waste [[times]] with empty melodrama, the tired old "Yankee in King Aurthur's Court," or weepy, parables of coming of age bullsh*t. They're just pure, dark, and [[shrewd]] fun; the way violence is supposed to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2543 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] hello boys and girls... this isn't your regular movie review, because this is going to be the cold. hard. truth. are you serious? this movie sucked so many balls i couldn't keep them out of my mouth! they might as well have sprayed me in the eye with monkey semen. you'd need one seriously large douche to pump out all the vaginal fluid from this movie.

the plot was very lacking. the actors were terrible. i rewound the dance number several times and had to pause it even more because i was choking on my own spit. do boys, everyone!

peace R&H besties4lyf --------------------------------------------- Result 2544 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] As a [[huge]] [[fan]] or the [[Cracker]] series, I have been waiting 7 years for the next addition. This Episode I'm [[afraid]] just does not [[live]] up to the legend.

Fitz returns to [[Manchester]] after 7 [[years]] for his [[daughters]] wedding and [[gets]] involved in a [[murder]] [[investigation]] were a soldier, [[tormented]] by flash backs from his [[tour]] of [[duty]] in [[Northern]] Irland, goes on a [[killing]] [[spree]].

What I did not like about this episode is the [[extremely]] [[convenient]] [[way]] it is all set up and how fitz is [[led]] to the [[murderer]]. It is all [[fat]] to far-fetched.

There are however some [[good]] scenes in flash backs from Northern Irland which are [[filmed]] great. As a [[whopping]] [[breather]] or the [[Cookie]] series, I have been waiting 7 years for the next addition. This Episode I'm [[affraid]] just does not [[vivo]] up to the legend.

Fitz returns to [[Liverpool]] after 7 [[ages]] for his [[girl]] wedding and [[got]] involved in a [[kills]] [[investigating]] were a soldier, [[troubled]] by flash backs from his [[trips]] of [[duties]] in [[Norden]] Irland, goes on a [[homicide]] [[frenzy]].

What I did not like about this episode is the [[eminently]] [[handy]] [[path]] it is all set up and how fitz is [[culminated]] to the [[killer]]. It is all [[tallow]] to far-fetched.

There are however some [[alright]] scenes in flash backs from Northern Irland which are [[videotaped]] great. --------------------------------------------- Result 2545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his [[mother]] and experiences some [[sort]] of Oedepus [[complex]] [[afterward]].

It is something like 95 minutes long but [[would]] be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing [[climbing]] practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is [[much]] less [[sympathetic]]).

There's a strange love [[story]] [[involved]] which doesn't have [[anything]] to do with [[anything]]. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first [[ten]] minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending [[together]] and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a [[guy]] that stuff happens to. The only active [[choice]] he has in the whole middle of the [[movie]] is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this [[MacKenzie]] director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten [[theories]] back into our [[memories]]! You really dug! What a Wallraff! [[Okay]] so now I realized this [[film]] is [[based]] on some [[random]] [[book]], but anyway..

Photowise it is boring. A lot of [[talking]] [[heads]]. Plus the [[editor]] has [[changed]] the colors from scene to scene, you know [[cold]] and warm etc.. why? [[maybe]] "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliché indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliché. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine. Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his [[mothers]] and experiences some [[genre]] of Oedepus [[tortuous]] [[thereafter]].

It is something like 95 minutes long but [[could]] be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing [[soaring]] practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is [[very]] less [[likeable]]).

There's a strange love [[saga]] [[participating]] which doesn't have [[nothing]] to do with [[nothing]]. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first [[tio]] minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending [[jointly]] and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a [[boy]] that stuff happens to. The only active [[electing]] he has in the whole middle of the [[filmmaking]] is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this [[mckenzie]] director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten [[doctrines]] back into our [[reminiscences]]! You really dug! What a Wallraff! [[Verywell]] so now I realized this [[filmmaking]] is [[predicated]] on some [[indiscriminate]] [[ledger]], but anyway..

Photowise it is boring. A lot of [[debating]] [[leaders]]. Plus the [[editorial]] has [[alteration]] the colors from scene to scene, you know [[frigid]] and warm etc.. why? [[perhaps]] "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliché indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliché. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] After a brief prologue [[showing]] a [[masked]] man stalking and then [[slashing]] the [[throat]] of an [[older]] gentleman on a [[deserted]], urban, [[turn]] of the century Australian street, we meet Julie (Rebecca Gibney) and Peter ([[John]] Adam) as they go out house [[hunting]]. They manage to get a loan for a fixer-upper on a posh Sydney street, but it [[turns]] out that physical disrepair is not the only problem with their [[new]] home. It just may be haunted.

13 Gantry Row [[combines]] a memorable if [[somewhat]] [[clichéd]] story with good to average direction by [[Catherine]] Millar into a [[slightly]] above [[average]] shocker.

The biggest [[flaws]] [[seem]] [[partially]] due to budget, but not [[wholly]] excusable to that hurdle. A [[crucial]] problem [[occurs]] at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. The [[opening]] "thriller scene" [[features]] some wonky [[editing]]. [[Freeze]] [[frames]] and [[series]] of [[stills]] are [[used]] to cover up the fact that there's not much [[action]]. Suspense should be created from staging, not fancy "fix it in the [[mix]]" techniques. There is [[great]] atmosphere in the scene from the [[location]], the lighting, the [[fog]] and such, but the [[camera]] should be slowly following the [[killer]] and the victim, [[cutting]] back and forth from one to the other as we [[track]] down the street, showing their [[increasing]] [[proximity]]. The [[tracking]] and the cuts [[need]] to be [[slow]]. The attack needed to be [[longer]], clearer and [[better]] blocked. As it [[stands]], the scene has a [[strong]] "made for television" feel, and a low budget one at that.

After this scene we [[move]] to the present and the [[flow]] of the [[film]] [[greatly]] [[improves]]. The [[story]] has a lot of similarities to The Amityville Horror (1979), though the [[budget]] [[forces]] a much subtler [[approach]]. Millar and scriptwriter Tony Morphett effectively [[create]] a [[lot]] of slyly creepy [[scenarios]], [[often]] dramatic in nature instead of [[special]] effects-oriented, such as the [[mysterious]] [[man]] who arrives to take away the [[old]] slabs of [[iron]], which had been [[bizarrely]] affixed to an interior [[wall]].

For some [[horror]] [[fans]], the [[first]] section of the film might be a little heavy on [[realist]] drama. At [[least]] the [[first]] half [[hour]] of the film is [[primarily]] about [[Julie]] and [[Peter]] [[trying]] to [[arrange]] [[financing]] for the [[house]] and then [[trying]] to [[settle]] in. But Morphett writes [[fine]], [[intelligent]] [[dialogue]]. The material is done well enough that it's [[often]] as suspenseful as the more [[traditional]] thriller aspects that arise later--especially if you've gone through similar travails while trying to buy your own house.

Once they get settled and things begin to get weirder, even though the special effects often leave much to be desired, the ideas are good. The performances help create tension. There isn't an abundance of death and destruction in the film--there's more of an abundance of home repair nightmares. But neither menace is really the point.

The point is human relationships. There are a number of character arcs that are very interesting. The house exists more as a metaphor and a catalyst for stress in a romantic relationship that can make it go sour and possibly [[destroy]] it. That it's in a posh neighborhood, and that the relationship is between two successful yuppies, [[shows]] that these problems do not only afflict those who can place blame with some external woe, such as money or health problems. Peter's character evolves from a striving corporate employee with "normal" work-based friendships to someone with more desperation as he becomes subversive, scheming to attain something more liberating and meaningful. At the same time, we learn just how shallow those professional friendships can be. Julie goes through an almost literal nervous breakdown, but finally [[finds]] liberation when she liberates herself from her failing romantic relationship.

Although 13 Gantry Row never quite transcends its made-for-television clunkiness, as a TV movie, this is a pretty good one, with admirable ambitions. Anyone fond of haunted house films, psycho films or horror/thrillers with a bit more metaphorical depth should find plenty to enjoy. It certainly isn't worth spending $30 for a DVD (that was the price my local PBS station was asking for a copy of the film after they showed it (factoring in shipping and handling)), but it's worth a rental, and it's definitely worth watching for free. After a brief prologue [[exhibiting]] a [[obscured]] man stalking and then [[cutback]] the [[larynx]] of an [[oldest]] gentleman on a [[uninhabited]], urban, [[transforming]] of the century Australian street, we meet Julie (Rebecca Gibney) and Peter ([[Johannes]] Adam) as they go out house [[chasing]]. They manage to get a loan for a fixer-upper on a posh Sydney street, but it [[revolves]] out that physical disrepair is not the only problem with their [[novel]] home. It just may be haunted.

13 Gantry Row [[merging]] a memorable if [[rather]] [[clichés]] story with good to average direction by [[Cathy]] Millar into a [[mildly]] above [[medium]] shocker.

The biggest [[deficiency]] [[seems]] [[partly]] due to budget, but not [[fully]] excusable to that hurdle. A [[fundamental]] problem [[comes]] at the [[initiating]] of the [[flick]]. The [[initiation]] "thriller scene" [[traits]] some wonky [[editorial]]. [[Frost]] [[frame]] and [[serials]] of [[photos]] are [[using]] to cover up the fact that there's not much [[activities]]. Suspense should be created from staging, not fancy "fix it in the [[mixing]]" techniques. There is [[huge]] atmosphere in the scene from the [[locations]], the lighting, the [[mist]] and such, but the [[cameras]] should be slowly following the [[murderer]] and the victim, [[chopped]] back and forth from one to the other as we [[rails]] down the street, showing their [[rose]] [[vicinity]]. The [[tracks]] and the cuts [[needs]] to be [[slows]]. The attack needed to be [[plus]], clearer and [[best]] blocked. As it [[standing]], the scene has a [[forceful]] "made for television" feel, and a low budget one at that.

After this scene we [[budge]] to the present and the [[flows]] of the [[movie]] [[radically]] [[improvements]]. The [[history]] has a lot of similarities to The Amityville Horror (1979), though the [[budgets]] [[troop]] a much subtler [[approaches]]. Millar and scriptwriter Tony Morphett effectively [[creating]] a [[lots]] of slyly creepy [[scripts]], [[routinely]] dramatic in nature instead of [[particular]] effects-oriented, such as the [[cryptic]] [[men]] who arrives to take away the [[ancient]] slabs of [[railway]], which had been [[interestingly]] affixed to an interior [[wail]].

For some [[terror]] [[followers]], the [[firstly]] section of the film might be a little heavy on [[realistic]] drama. At [[slightest]] the [[fiirst]] half [[hora]] of the film is [[predominantly]] about [[Jolly]] and [[Pieter]] [[tempting]] to [[organising]] [[finance]] for the [[dwellings]] and then [[attempt]] to [[resolution]] in. But Morphett writes [[alright]], [[smart]] [[conversation]]. The material is done well enough that it's [[commonly]] as suspenseful as the more [[classic]] thriller aspects that arise later--especially if you've gone through similar travails while trying to buy your own house.

Once they get settled and things begin to get weirder, even though the special effects often leave much to be desired, the ideas are good. The performances help create tension. There isn't an abundance of death and destruction in the film--there's more of an abundance of home repair nightmares. But neither menace is really the point.

The point is human relationships. There are a number of character arcs that are very interesting. The house exists more as a metaphor and a catalyst for stress in a romantic relationship that can make it go sour and possibly [[annihilate]] it. That it's in a posh neighborhood, and that the relationship is between two successful yuppies, [[demonstrate]] that these problems do not only afflict those who can place blame with some external woe, such as money or health problems. Peter's character evolves from a striving corporate employee with "normal" work-based friendships to someone with more desperation as he becomes subversive, scheming to attain something more liberating and meaningful. At the same time, we learn just how shallow those professional friendships can be. Julie goes through an almost literal nervous breakdown, but finally [[deems]] liberation when she liberates herself from her failing romantic relationship.

Although 13 Gantry Row never quite transcends its made-for-television clunkiness, as a TV movie, this is a pretty good one, with admirable ambitions. Anyone fond of haunted house films, psycho films or horror/thrillers with a bit more metaphorical depth should find plenty to enjoy. It certainly isn't worth spending $30 for a DVD (that was the price my local PBS station was asking for a copy of the film after they showed it (factoring in shipping and handling)), but it's worth a rental, and it's definitely worth watching for free. --------------------------------------------- Result 2547 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] This movie stinks! You will [[want]] back the two-plus [[hours]] it [[takes]] to [[get]] through it. Sliding [[Doors]], w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and [[directed]] by [[Peter]] Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda [[tries]] to do [[much]] much [[MUCH]] better. That movie was [[clever]], [[witty]], and well-acted. I [[cared]] about what [[happened]] to both Gwyenths -- or [[rather]] the characters she played -- and the performances by [[supporting]] cast were fantastic.

Where as Melinda & Melinda is [[tiresome]], the [[dialogue]] is contrived and I could have [[cared]] less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so [[dysfunctional]] -- her first [[glass]] of [[wine]] is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is [[laughable]], and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is [[fine]], but forgettable.

Woody Allen's previous ensemble [[movies]] [[worked]] because, I'm guessing, he [[spent]] [[time]] on the [[screenplay]] and the [[actors]] were [[talented]]. One [[piece]] of trivia for this [[movie]] is that he [[wrote]] this screenplay in two months: you can [[tell]]. And while [[Chloe]] Sevigny is [[talented]] -- those [[around]] her are not, not enough to be a [[whole]] [[presence]]. The [[movie]] [[ends]] up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've [[seen]] in other [[movies]] but can't [[quite]] remember which ones.

Sad, very sad. This movie stinks! You will [[wanted]] back the two-plus [[hour]] it [[pick]] to [[obtain]] through it. Sliding [[Floodgates]], w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and [[oriented]] by [[Petr]] Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda [[strive]] to do [[very]] much [[VERY]] better. That movie was [[skilful]], [[spiritual]], and well-acted. I [[adored]] about what [[transpired]] to both Gwyenths -- or [[quite]] the characters she played -- and the performances by [[aiding]] cast were fantastic.

Where as Melinda & Melinda is [[boring]], the [[dialogues]] is contrived and I could have [[adored]] less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so [[dysfunction]] -- her first [[luna]] of [[wines]] is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is [[farcical]], and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is [[alright]], but forgettable.

Woody Allen's previous ensemble [[filmmaking]] [[acted]] because, I'm guessing, he [[spend]] [[times]] on the [[scenarios]] and the [[protagonists]] were [[gifted]]. One [[slice]] of trivia for this [[filmmaking]] is that he [[authored]] this screenplay in two months: you can [[told]]. And while [[Vivienne]] Sevigny is [[gifted]] -- those [[roundabout]] her are not, not enough to be a [[overall]] [[involvements]]. The [[cinematographic]] [[culminates]] up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've [[noticed]] in other [[movie]] but can't [[very]] remember which ones.

Sad, very sad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2548 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Man, what a [[scam]] this turned out to be! Not because it wasn't any good (as I wasn't really expecting [[anything]] from it) but because I was [[misled]] by the DVD sleeve which ignorantly [[paraded]] its "[[stars]]" as being Stuart Whitman, Stella Stevens and Tony [[Bill]]. Sure enough, their names did not appear in the film's [[opening]] [[credits]], much [[less]] themselves in the [[rest]] of it!! As it turned out, the only [[movie]] which [[connects]] those three [[actors]] together is the equally [[obscure]] [[LAS]] VEGAS LADY (1975) – but what that one has to do with THE CRATER LAKE [[MONSTER]] is anybody's guess…

Even so, since I [[paid]] $1.50 for its rental and I was in a monster-movie [[mood]] anyhow, I [[elected]] to watch the [[movie]] regardless and, yup, it stunk! [[Apart]] from the fact that it had a no-name cast and an anonymous crew, an unmistakably [[amateurish]] air was [[visible]] from miles away and the most I [[could]] do with it is [[laugh]] at the JAWS-like [[pretensions]] and, [[intentionally]] so, at the resistible antics of two [[moronic]] layabouts-cum-boat [[owners]] who [[frequently]] squabble [[among]] themselves with the [[bemused]] local sheriff [[looking]] on. The [[creature]] itself – a plesiosaur i.e. half-dinosaur/half-fish – is imperfectly realized (naturally) but, as had been the [[case]] with THE [[GIANT]] CLAW (1957) which I've [[also]] just [[seen]], this didn't [[seem]] to bother the film-makers [[none]] as they flaunt it as [[much]] as they can, [[especially]] during the movie's second half! Man, what a [[hustle]] this turned out to be! Not because it wasn't any good (as I wasn't really expecting [[algo]] from it) but because I was [[deluded]] by the DVD sleeve which ignorantly [[parade]] its "[[star]]" as being Stuart Whitman, Stella Stevens and Tony [[Invoices]]. Sure enough, their names did not appear in the film's [[opens]] [[credit]], much [[fewer]] themselves in the [[remainder]] of it!! As it turned out, the only [[film]] which [[binds]] those three [[protagonists]] together is the equally [[indistinct]] [[ANGELES]] VEGAS LADY (1975) – but what that one has to do with THE CRATER LAKE [[MONSTERS]] is anybody's guess…

Even so, since I [[salaried]] $1.50 for its rental and I was in a monster-movie [[ambience]] anyhow, I [[elects]] to watch the [[filmmaking]] regardless and, yup, it stunk! [[Irrespective]] from the fact that it had a no-name cast and an anonymous crew, an unmistakably [[unprofessional]] air was [[recognizable]] from miles away and the most I [[did]] do with it is [[laughs]] at the JAWS-like [[pretences]] and, [[voluntarily]] so, at the resistible antics of two [[witless]] layabouts-cum-boat [[homeowner]] who [[often]] squabble [[in]] themselves with the [[disconcerted]] local sheriff [[researching]] on. The [[creatures]] itself – a plesiosaur i.e. half-dinosaur/half-fish – is imperfectly realized (naturally) but, as had been the [[lawsuit]] with THE [[TITAN]] CLAW (1957) which I've [[additionally]] just [[noticed]], this didn't [[appears]] to bother the film-makers [[nos]] as they flaunt it as [[very]] as they can, [[peculiarly]] during the movie's second half! --------------------------------------------- Result 2549 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Two [[sisters]], their perverted [[brother]], and their [[cousin]] have [[car]] [[trouble]]. They then [[happen]] about the [[home]] of Dr. Hackenstein whom [[conveniently]] needs the [[body]] parts of three nubile young [[women]] to [[use]] in an experiment to [[bring]] his [[deceased]] lover back to [[life]]. He [[tells]] them that he'll [[help]] them [[get]] [[home]] in the morning, so they [[spend]] the [[night]]. [[Then]] the good [[doctor]] gets down to [[work]] in this low-budget horror-comedy.

I found this to be [[mildly]] amusing, nothing at all to [[actually]] [[go]] out of your way for (I [[stumbled]] across it on Netflix instant [[view]] & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired [[film]]. Most of the humor doesn't [[work]], but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a [[small]] part and she was [[always]] a treat to watch.

[[Eye]] Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker [[got]] [[topless]]

My [[Grade]]: D+ Two [[siblings]], their perverted [[sibling]], and their [[cousins]] have [[vehicles]] [[difficulty]]. They then [[emerge]] about the [[dwelling]] of Dr. Hackenstein whom [[readily]] needs the [[agency]] parts of three nubile young [[girl]] to [[employs]] in an experiment to [[brings]] his [[departed]] lover back to [[lifetime]]. He [[told]] them that he'll [[helps]] them [[obtain]] [[households]] in the morning, so they [[expenditure]] the [[nighttime]]. [[Later]] the good [[doktor]] gets down to [[cooperate]] in this low-budget horror-comedy.

I found this to be [[modestly]] amusing, nothing at all to [[indeed]] [[going]] out of your way for (I [[slipped]] across it on Netflix instant [[viewing]] & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired [[movie]]. Most of the humor doesn't [[collaboration]], but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a [[scant]] part and she was [[incessantly]] a treat to watch.

[[Ocular]] Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker [[ai]] [[bikini]]

My [[Octane]]: D+ --------------------------------------------- Result 2550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Whale-hunters [[pick]] on the [[wrong]] [[freaking]] [[whale]].

A [[group]] of yahoo whale exploitists capture a [[female]] and string her up by her tail-fin. The whale's [[mate]] sees the whole thing including the moment the female's unborn [[baby]] slips out and slops [[onto]] the deck. '[[Captain]] Nolan' ([[Richard]] Harris) could tell that the big male is [[really]] mad by the [[way]] it stared him down as if to say, "Get out of town before high-tide."

This story of [[revenge]] has Harris' presence and Bo's beauty, but not much else. This was Bo's first 'released' [[film]], [[though]] her [[first]] acting [[job]] was four [[years]] previous in 'And [[Once]] Upon a Love' [[released]] in 1981 as 'Fantasies' ([[directed]] by [[John]] Derek).

P.S. Today, the [[date]] of this review (November 20), is [[Bo]] Derek's birthday. I [[hope]] [[Bo]] has a 'whale' of a [[good]] [[time]]..... [[get]] it?..... [[whale]]?..... hee-hee. Whale-hunters [[choice]] on the [[improper]] [[friggin]] [[whales]].

A [[groups]] of yahoo whale exploitists capture a [[femmes]] and string her up by her tail-fin. The whale's [[mating]] sees the whole thing including the moment the female's unborn [[babe]] slips out and slops [[during]] the deck. '[[Capitan]] Nolan' ([[Richie]] Harris) could tell that the big male is [[truly]] mad by the [[camino]] it stared him down as if to say, "Get out of town before high-tide."

This story of [[vendetta]] has Harris' presence and Bo's beauty, but not much else. This was Bo's first 'released' [[movies]], [[while]] her [[fiirst]] acting [[workplace]] was four [[ages]] previous in 'And [[Upon]] Upon a Love' [[releases]] in 1981 as 'Fantasies' ([[geared]] by [[Jon]] Derek).

P.S. Today, the [[dates]] of this review (November 20), is [[Pu]] Derek's birthday. I [[amal]] [[Pu]] has a 'whale' of a [[alright]] [[moment]]..... [[got]] it?..... [[whaler]]?..... hee-hee. --------------------------------------------- Result 2551 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Holes, originally a novel by Louis Sachar, was successfully transformed into an entertaining and well-made film. Starring Sigourney Weaver as the warden, Shia Labeouf as Stanley, and Khleo Thomas as Zero, the roles were very well casted, and the actors portrayed their roles well.

The film had inter-weaving storylines that all led up to the end. The main storyline is about Stanley Yelnats and his punishment of spending a year and a half at Camp Greenlake. The second storyline is about Sam and Kate Barlow. This plot deals with racism and it is the more deep storyline to the movie. The third is about Elya Yelnats and Madame Zeroni, which explains the 100-year curse on the Yelnats family. In my opinion, these storylines were weaved together very well.

Contrary to many people's beliefs, I think that you do not have to have read the book to understand the movie. The film is reasonably easy to understand.

The acting in the film was well done, especially Shia Labeouf (Stanley), Khleo Thomas (Zero), Sigourney Weaver (the warden), and Jon Voight (Mr. Sir). The other members of D-Tent, Jake Smith (Squid), Max Kasch (Zig-Zag), Miguel Castro (Magnet), Byron Cotton (Armpit), and Brenden Jefferson (X-Ray), enhanced the comic relief of the movie. However, the best parts were with Zero and Stanley, who made a great team together.

Although Holes is a Disney movie, it deals with some serious issues such as racism, shootings, and violence. The film's dramatization at some points is very well done.

I would suggest this movie to people of all ages, whether they have read the book or not. You shouldn't miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this last night on TV (HBO). I have to admit, that the tension in this movie was unsurpassed by most other FN era movies. I loved the way Chip would be all calm one moment and then VIOLENT the very next moment. It was classic. Ahh yes. The dames, the villians, the cigars and thuggish cops! It has it all. This movie delivered all the goods to me. I especially loved the way they mixed communism into the plot, very common for this era of movie. Very daring also since blacklisting was popular in those days. I rate this movie one of the best I have seen in the FN genre! --------------------------------------------- Result 2553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[Working]] with one of the [[best]] Shakespeare sources, this film manages to be [[creditable]] to it's [[source]], [[whilst]] still [[appealing]] to a wider audience.

Branagh steals the film from under Fishburne's nose, and there's a talented [[cast]] on good form. [[Cooperating]] with one of the [[optimum]] Shakespeare sources, this film manages to be [[admirable]] to it's [[origins]], [[whereas]] still [[alluring]] to a wider audience.

Branagh steals the film from under Fishburne's nose, and there's a talented [[casting]] on good form. --------------------------------------------- Result 2554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] After seeing the movie [[last]] [[night]] I was left with a sense of the [[hopelessness]] [[faced]] by [[organisations]] [[trying]] to tackle the problem the film [[portrays]]. The scale of the prostitution seems so [[large]] that it's hard to [[see]] how it can be defeated without [[major]] governmental changes in Cambodia.

[[Anyway]], on with the review.

Although it is a sombre movie with an [[uncomfortable]] central [[relationship]] this is a very [[compelling]] [[film]], and I'd [[even]] [[go]] so far as to say it was enjoyable. The [[film]] was well edited for the [[running]] [[time]] and the performance by [[Thuy]] [[Nguyen]] was [[excellent]]. I also [[felt]] Ron [[Livingston]] [[played]] a very difficult role well.

It [[would]] have been nice to have a little more insight into why Patrick [[feels]] he has to [[help]] Holly, but maybe the [[reason]] is a [[simple]] as he [[explains]] to Chris Penn's [[character]]. I won't [[explain]] it here - [[go]] [[see]] the [[movie]].

This is a good, thought-provoking film with [[obviously]] good intentions. I [[hope]] it [[gets]] a [[wide]] [[enough]] [[release]] to [[reach]] a decent sized audience and gain more [[support]] for the K-11 Project. After seeing the movie [[final]] [[nighttime]] I was left with a sense of the [[powerlessness]] [[braved]] by [[organization]] [[tempting]] to tackle the problem the film [[denotes]]. The scale of the prostitution seems so [[enormous]] that it's hard to [[seeing]] how it can be defeated without [[principal]] governmental changes in Cambodia.

[[Writ]], on with the review.

Although it is a sombre movie with an [[embarrassing]] central [[ties]] this is a very [[conclusive]] [[kino]], and I'd [[yet]] [[going]] so far as to say it was enjoyable. The [[movie]] was well edited for the [[executing]] [[moment]] and the performance by [[Shui]] [[Juan]] was [[wondrous]]. I also [[smelled]] Ron [[Livingstone]] [[accomplished]] a very difficult role well.

It [[could]] have been nice to have a little more insight into why Patrick [[thinks]] he has to [[assisting]] Holly, but maybe the [[motif]] is a [[mere]] as he [[explaining]] to Chris Penn's [[nature]]. I won't [[clarified]] it here - [[going]] [[seeing]] the [[flick]].

This is a good, thought-provoking film with [[surely]] good intentions. I [[expectancy]] it [[receives]] a [[large]] [[adequately]] [[liberate]] to [[accomplish]] a decent sized audience and gain more [[succour]] for the K-11 Project. --------------------------------------------- Result 2555 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Released on DVD in the UK as Axe, The Choke is a teen slasher that fails in pretty much every department: the story is almost non-existent, resulting in a film which comprises mostly of people wandering around a dark building; with the exception of two characters (who are quite obviously destined to be the film's survivors), everyone is thoroughly objectionable, meaning that the viewer couldn't care less when they get slaughtered; the deaths aren't gory enough (unless a brief shot of a pound of minced beef covered in fake blood turns your stomach); and the gratuitous sex scene features next to no nudity (an unforgivable mistake to make in a slasher flick!).

The wafer-thin plot sees members of a punk band locked inside what appears to be the world's largest nightclub (there are endless abandoned corridors and rooms, unlike any club I've ever seen) where they are picked off by an unseen assailant. For a low budget effort, the production values are okay, and the cast are all seem to be fairly capable actors, but with not nearly enough genuine scares, a reluctance to get really messy (this is a slasher, so where's the graphic splatter?), way too much dreadful dialogue (particularly from the not-dead-soon-enough drummer) and some ill advised use of tacky video techniques in an attempt to add some style, the movie quickly becomes extremely boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 2556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] first, i'd like to say that, while i know my share about star wars, i am not a fanatic. i do not know how many chromosomes a Wamp Rat has or the extended family of TK427. what i know is this: Star wars, all the movies(less so with episode 2 though), captured something [[magical]]. it's [[hard]] to say what, what [[button]] [[Lucas]] has [[found]] and [[boldly]] pressed, but it [[works]]. [[Star]] [[Wars]] is more than a [[movie]]. it's an idea.

[[How]], may you ask? i shall explain. [[star]] wars [[touches]] on the most universal of stereotypes, good [[vs]] evil. it does this so obviously, so [[profoundly]], that literally any person from any environment can understand. Episode VI does the very well, concluding the epic struggle between a son and his used and manipulated father, yet also, with the addition of the prequels, reveals [[even]] more to the hinted back story. suddenly, it's Darth Vader at the front, and viewers realize that it's the story about Anakin, not just Luke. but [[even]] before 1-3, there was [[amazing]] [[depth]] to it all. it felt [[real]], as if capsule fell from the [[sky]] into Lucas's lap, [[detailing]] a historical account of a galaxy far, far away.

[[Star]] [[Wars]] is [[definitely]] [[something]] far above the norm, and i [[must]] admit, whenever i see them, [[particularly]] this one, i feel very small. i feel as though i've been thrust into a world where good and [[evil]] are so [[clearly]] [[defined]]. i [[get]] a [[tingling]] feeling when i [[see]] them, a feeling that something, somehow, has [[touched]] me more than any [[physical]] thing could ever hope. first, i'd like to say that, while i know my share about star wars, i am not a fanatic. i do not know how many chromosomes a Wamp Rat has or the extended family of TK427. what i know is this: Star wars, all the movies(less so with episode 2 though), captured something [[quadrant]]. it's [[strenuous]] to say what, what [[pimple]] [[Lukas]] has [[unearthed]] and [[defiantly]] pressed, but it [[collaborated]]. [[Superstar]] [[Warfare]] is more than a [[kino]]. it's an idea.

[[Mode]], may you ask? i shall explain. [[superstar]] wars [[afflicts]] on the most universal of stereotypes, good [[v]] evil. it does this so obviously, so [[seriously]], that literally any person from any environment can understand. Episode VI does the very well, concluding the epic struggle between a son and his used and manipulated father, yet also, with the addition of the prequels, reveals [[yet]] more to the hinted back story. suddenly, it's Darth Vader at the front, and viewers realize that it's the story about Anakin, not just Luke. but [[yet]] before 1-3, there was [[striking]] [[depths]] to it all. it felt [[true]], as if capsule fell from the [[heavens]] into Lucas's lap, [[describing]] a historical account of a galaxy far, far away.

[[Superstar]] [[War]] is [[certainly]] [[anything]] far above the norm, and i [[ought]] admit, whenever i see them, [[concretely]] this one, i feel very small. i feel as though i've been thrust into a world where good and [[satanic]] are so [[unmistakably]] [[identified]]. i [[got]] a [[tickle]] feeling when i [[behold]] them, a feeling that something, somehow, has [[poked]] me more than any [[physique]] thing could ever hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Bo is [[Jane]] Parker, [[whose]] long-lost anthropologist father (Richard Harris, in the [[worst]] role of a very [[inconsistent]] [[career]]) is in Africa [[studying]] something or another. She [[tracks]] him down (how?) and he tells her of the natives' [[stories]] of a [[giant]] monster [[whose]] nightly [[howling]] can be [[heard]] throughout the jungle. [[Turns]] out to be the Ape [[Man]] himself ([[Miles]] O'Keeffe, who has the film's best dialogue), who [[rescues]] her from bad [[guys]] and [[falls]] in love with her, [[leaving]] them just enough [[time]] in this [[agonizing]] two hours to romp naked while a horny [[monkey]] [[looks]] on and cheers. [[Normally]] I'm very open-minded to [[varying]] [[opinions]] about any [[film]], but this is the [[sole]] [[exception]]. This is the [[worst]] film ever made. [[If]] you don't agree, you haven't seen it. ([[Notes]]: Newsday [[called]] it "unendurable," which is the best one-word [[summary]] I can [[think]] of. The Maltin [[Movie]] [[Guide]] comments that they [[almost]] had to [[think]] of a rating [[lower]] than [[BOMB]].) Bo is [[Jeanne]] Parker, [[who]] long-lost anthropologist father (Richard Harris, in the [[gravest]] role of a very [[incompatible]] [[professions]]) is in Africa [[explores]] something or another. She [[trails]] him down (how?) and he tells her of the natives' [[story]] of a [[gigantic]] monster [[whom]] nightly [[screams]] can be [[hear]] throughout the jungle. [[Revolves]] out to be the Ape [[Men]] himself ([[Klicks]] O'Keeffe, who has the film's best dialogue), who [[ransoms]] her from bad [[bloke]] and [[waterfalls]] in love with her, [[walkout]] them just enough [[moment]] in this [[distressing]] two hours to romp naked while a horny [[chimpanzee]] [[seem]] on and cheers. [[Commonly]] I'm very open-minded to [[differing]] [[view]] about any [[filmmaking]], but this is the [[singular]] [[exemption]]. This is the [[gravest]] film ever made. [[Though]] you don't agree, you haven't seen it. ([[Noting]]: Newsday [[drew]] it "unendurable," which is the best one-word [[synthesis]] I can [[believe]] of. The Maltin [[Filmmaking]] [[Guidebook]] comments that they [[roughly]] had to [[believing]] of a rating [[weakest]] than [[BOMBARD]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 2558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Not long enough to be feature length and not abrupt enough to a short, this thing exists for one reason, to have a lesbian three-way. There are worse reasons to exist. One sad thing is that this could have made a decent feature length movie. Misty fits snuggly into her outfit and is a very cocky girl and when people are so infatuated with a game character, like Lara Croft, that they make nude calenders of her, you know that a soft-core flick is set to explode. Unfortunately, this is pretty pathetic. Especially the painfully fake sex scene between Darian and Misty, where you can see her hand is fingering air. Watch this if you just can't get enough of Misty or Ruby, who makes a nice blonde and has zee verst jerman akcent ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 2559 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] save your money. i have been a fan of fullmoon productions for a long time and i have never seen them make a movie as bad as this. the casting is terrible, the story is even worse and the special affects are worse than any movie iv'e seen sence the 80's. this movie is so bad i cant even suggest renting it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] this [[yet]], I [[say]] just move on, take a walk in the park, don't [[waste]] your [[time]]. [[Neither]] the scenario nor the acting is worth your [[money]]. *Spoilers*- I can't [[decide]] which was worse: The [[movie]] itself or Baldwin's hairstyle? Ellen Pompeo's acting [[talent]] is very [[questionable]] I hope she can [[improve]] it over [[time]]. The storyline is just [[unbelievable]]. Loose cannon American [[cop]] [[fighting]] [[criminals]] in [[Europe]] on his own?? Infamous [[Slavic]] mafiosi protected by only two hunks??? An [[emotional]] art [[teacher]] [[leading]] a ruthless gang??? Spanish [[police]] executive [[dumber]] than a sack of hammers??? Give me a [[break]]. There's only one good thing about this [[movie]], though: [[At]] [[least]], the production [[costs]] [[must]] be lower than "Ocean's 12"'s which was as [[meaningless]] and over the top as this one. [[Unless]] you haven't [[noticed]] this [[still]], I [[says]] just move on, take a walk in the park, don't [[wastes]] your [[times]]. [[Either]] the scenario nor the acting is worth your [[cash]]. *Spoilers*- I can't [[deciding]] which was worse: The [[movies]] itself or Baldwin's hairstyle? Ellen Pompeo's acting [[talents]] is very [[shady]] I hope she can [[enhance]] it over [[moment]]. The storyline is just [[unimaginable]]. Loose cannon American [[cops]] [[struggles]] [[culprits]] in [[Europa]] on his own?? Infamous [[Slav]] mafiosi protected by only two hunks??? An [[affective]] art [[maestro]] [[culminating]] a ruthless gang??? Spanish [[nypd]] executive [[stupider]] than a sack of hammers??? Give me a [[intermission]]. There's only one good thing about this [[filmmaking]], though: [[During]] [[lowest]], the production [[pricing]] [[gotta]] be lower than "Ocean's 12"'s which was as [[fruitless]] and over the top as this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2561 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Heartland" is a wonderful depiction of what it was really like to live on the frontier. The hard work and individual strength that were needed to survive the hardships of the climate and the lack of medical care are blended with the camaraderie and the interdependence of the settlers. The drama was especially meaningful because the story is based on the diaries of real people whose descendants still live there. It was also nice to see the west inhabited by real people. No one was glamorous or looked as if they had just spent a session with the makeup or costume department. Conchatta Ferrell is just wonderful. She is an example of the strong, persevering people who came to Wyoming in the early 20th century and let no hardship stand in their way of a new life in a new land. --------------------------------------------- Result 2562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] this movie is awesome. sort of. it dosent really say much, or do much, but it is an awesome movie to watch because of how stupid it is. the high [[school]] is taken over by evil ms.togar that hates the one thing that all the students love, rock& roll. riff randle [[get]] everyone tickets for the ramones show, and this movie peaks with a take over of the school led my riff randle & the ramones. this movie has everything, a bad [[script]], [[questionable]] directing, bad actors(ie clint howard & p.j. soles), an [[awesome]] soundtrack,[[extreme]] campyness, these [[elements]] & much more come [[together]] to make this what it is,a [[classic]].

note - during the live ramones set, notice that darby crash of the germs is in the front of the crowd. neat-o. this movie is awesome. sort of. it dosent really say much, or do much, but it is an awesome movie to watch because of how stupid it is. the high [[teaching]] is taken over by evil ms.togar that hates the one thing that all the students love, rock& roll. riff randle [[gets]] everyone tickets for the ramones show, and this movie peaks with a take over of the school led my riff randle & the ramones. this movie has everything, a bad [[hyphen]], [[debatable]] directing, bad actors(ie clint howard & p.j. soles), an [[wondrous]] soundtrack,[[abject]] campyness, these [[components]] & much more come [[jointly]] to make this what it is,a [[conventional]].

note - during the live ramones set, notice that darby crash of the germs is in the front of the crowd. neat-o. --------------------------------------------- Result 2563 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Playing out as a sort of pre runner to The Great Escape some 13 years later, this smashing little British film plays it straight with no thrills and dare do well overkill. First part of the movie is the set up and subsequent escape of our protagonists, whilst the second part concentrates on their survival whilst on the run as they try to reach Sweden. The film relies on pure characters with simple, effective, and yes, believable dialogue to carry it thru, and it achieves its aims handsomely. No little amount of suspense keeps the film ticking along, and as an adventure story it works perfectly for the time frame it adheres to, so a big thumbs to the film that may well be the first of its type ?.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Cure uses voice over to create an intense mood. Although the VO accounts for all of the film's lines it amazingly does not take away from the visual story. The use of multiple film stocks add a lot of texture to the story. The choice of combining b & w and color worked nicely to enhance the leaps in time. The ending will make you jump despite being able to anticipate the result. I was especially enjoyed the thrill of the film's suspense. The close-ups for the love scene are also lovely and reflect a tasteful eye. The piece is quite short but accomplishes a lot. The tight editing really helps to show off what a short film can do. Worth watching more than once! --------------------------------------------- Result 2565 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen romantic comedies and this is one of the easiest/worst attempts at one. A lot of the scenes work in a plug-and-play manner inserted strictly to conform to the romantic-comedy genre. Usually this is okay because we're dealing with a genre, but the challenge generally resides in making it original, new and inventive. This movie fails to do so.

There is no sense of who the characters really are, apart from Sylvie Moreau's (who is the real star of this movie, not Isabelle Blais). They fit into this one-dimensional cliché and they become nothing more than simple puppets serving the purpose of a very light narrative.

The pacing of the movie can become annoying, rhythm lacks, and the editing is filled with unnecessary close-ups. I should also mention the overly stylized decors making some scenes devoid of any naturally, or rather, making the attempt at naturally seem too obvious. Of course, along with that, you have the right-on-cue sappy music which unfortunately often sounds mismatched.

I can't believe that a movie who makes obvious Woody Allen allusions ends up being this deceptive. If you expect a good light-hearted romantic comedy, this is not it. Or rather, this a poor attempt at it. You will only leave the theater wondering why this film has been getting such praise when cinema is now more than 100 years old and there are far superior Quebecois directors making better flicks.

Les Aimants is a good movie for what it is. But it's a bad one if you regard cinema as an art and directors as auteur's. --------------------------------------------- Result 2566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's a lot of movies that have set release dates, only to get pulled from distribution due to a legal snafu of some kind, and then put in limbo for a long time. You can only wish a film as rotten as "Slackers" remained in a coma for what it's worth, which is [[miniscule]]. Release [[dates]] were [[continually]] shifted around for this truly [[awful]] [[movie]] that is so much a [[bleep]] on the [[radar]] like it deserves. The [[premise]] kicks off under the guise of Ethan, a creepy nerd with a scary obsession for the campus bombshell Angela. Ethan devilishly enlists the aid of David and his friends who have been scamming the school for their entire run with blackmail to help win Angela. I don't like to give spoilers out, but for a piece of crap like this I can make an exception. Angela falls for David, Ethan intentionally screws everything up, the good guys win. That's what happens in a nutshell for another tired retread of the teen gross out genre. Gross humor is funny, it always has been dating back to the days of the immortal classic "Animal House", to the likes of contemporaries like "There's Something About Mary" and "Road Trip" amongst dozens of others of which there are too many to mention. But when you use it as a plot point you can only get so far, case in point, Ethan has an Angela doll composed of her individual strands of hair of which he does god knows what with it. No one wants to take witness to watch Ethan urinating in the shower while singing to himself. No one wants to watch a young man singing "She'll be coming around the mountain" with a sock on his penis. But nothing can prepare you for the full visual assault of seeing 50's bombshell Mamie Van Doren bare her breasts at 71 years old. I don't know if it's the story's lack of coherence, which cuts to scenes that make absolutely no sense. Director Dewey Nicks was a former fashion photographer, and after reviewing this film, you can only wish he'll go back to the profession. The worst thing you can do on any film, is to make it look like you're having fun, because you detract from your objectives, just like "Slackers" does, by burying it's plot outline under a pile of gross out gags, pointless vignettes, and lack of construction. It's like a bunch of college students got drunk, took one's camcorder, and shot a bunch of random crap and compiled it together. If you want to see a teen gross out comedy that's actually good, then I suggest "American Pie" and "Animal House", or "Road Trip", just something that's entertaining, and not dreadfully bad like "Slackers". Coincidentally Cameron Diaz makes a cameo in this film, just as she did in another bad film such as "The Sweetest Thing" where the story treats gross humor like another plot, instead of a device much like this disaster.. If you pass by "Slackers" at your local video store, just keep on walking, and let it end up at the bottom of the shelf like it deserves. There's a lot of movies that have set release dates, only to get pulled from distribution due to a legal snafu of some kind, and then put in limbo for a long time. You can only wish a film as rotten as "Slackers" remained in a coma for what it's worth, which is [[small]]. Release [[date]] were [[incessantly]] shifted around for this truly [[scary]] [[filmmaking]] that is so much a [[beep]] on the [[radars]] like it deserves. The [[prerequisite]] kicks off under the guise of Ethan, a creepy nerd with a scary obsession for the campus bombshell Angela. Ethan devilishly enlists the aid of David and his friends who have been scamming the school for their entire run with blackmail to help win Angela. I don't like to give spoilers out, but for a piece of crap like this I can make an exception. Angela falls for David, Ethan intentionally screws everything up, the good guys win. That's what happens in a nutshell for another tired retread of the teen gross out genre. Gross humor is funny, it always has been dating back to the days of the immortal classic "Animal House", to the likes of contemporaries like "There's Something About Mary" and "Road Trip" amongst dozens of others of which there are too many to mention. But when you use it as a plot point you can only get so far, case in point, Ethan has an Angela doll composed of her individual strands of hair of which he does god knows what with it. No one wants to take witness to watch Ethan urinating in the shower while singing to himself. No one wants to watch a young man singing "She'll be coming around the mountain" with a sock on his penis. But nothing can prepare you for the full visual assault of seeing 50's bombshell Mamie Van Doren bare her breasts at 71 years old. I don't know if it's the story's lack of coherence, which cuts to scenes that make absolutely no sense. Director Dewey Nicks was a former fashion photographer, and after reviewing this film, you can only wish he'll go back to the profession. The worst thing you can do on any film, is to make it look like you're having fun, because you detract from your objectives, just like "Slackers" does, by burying it's plot outline under a pile of gross out gags, pointless vignettes, and lack of construction. It's like a bunch of college students got drunk, took one's camcorder, and shot a bunch of random crap and compiled it together. If you want to see a teen gross out comedy that's actually good, then I suggest "American Pie" and "Animal House", or "Road Trip", just something that's entertaining, and not dreadfully bad like "Slackers". Coincidentally Cameron Diaz makes a cameo in this film, just as she did in another bad film such as "The Sweetest Thing" where the story treats gross humor like another plot, instead of a device much like this disaster.. If you pass by "Slackers" at your local video store, just keep on walking, and let it end up at the bottom of the shelf like it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[watched]] the [[show]] 10 [[years]] [[ago]] and [[loved]] it!!! [[Am]] now in [[possession]] of the DVD and was watching the [[series]], and [[waiting]] for scenes I [[knew]] were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his [[house]])and [[realized]] it was missing - all of a sudden I was [[watching]] the [[seduction]] without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the [[comments]] about the [[shows]] being out of [[order]]. [[Thank]] You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some [[comments]] state "Strangler number 19 then [[Triangle]] 20, when another had them around the other [[way]]. And [[also]] [[Potato]] [[Boy]] 5, and Dead to the [[World]] 6, were [[reversed]] as well. Can someone clarify????? I [[saw]] the [[exhibit]] 10 [[olds]] [[beforehand]] and [[cared]] it!!! [[Suis]] now in [[ownership]] of the DVD and was watching the [[serials]], and [[hoping]] for scenes I [[overheard]] were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his [[household]])and [[performed]] it was missing - all of a sudden I was [[staring]] the [[attraction]] without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the [[remark]] about the [[showcase]] being out of [[orders]]. [[Thanks]] You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some [[remark]] state "Strangler number 19 then [[Triangular]] 20, when another had them around the other [[path]]. And [[furthermore]] [[Starch]] [[Guys]] 5, and Dead to the [[International]] 6, were [[overturned]] as well. Can someone clarify????? --------------------------------------------- Result 2568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] My brother [[brought]] this movie home from the rental store and I [[remember]] [[expecting]] it to be such a bore. I think the title especially put me off. I can't ever [[remember]] starting a [[movie]] with such low [[expectations]] and being so [[completely]] won over. I watched the movie twice before I let my brother take it back to the store. It is very infrequent that a movie speaks to me the way this one did. I was completely [[caught]] up in Ruby's situation as she tries to make her way through her [[life]]. The bad thing about this movie is that it seems to end so quickly. I could have kept watching for hours. Another downside is that I have been unsatisfied with everything Ashley [[Judd]] has done since. She is so perfect in this movie. This film is easily in my top ten favorites of all time. My brother [[lodged]] this movie home from the rental store and I [[rember]] [[waiting]] it to be such a bore. I think the title especially put me off. I can't ever [[rember]] starting a [[kino]] with such low [[outlook]] and being so [[perfectly]] won over. I watched the movie twice before I let my brother take it back to the store. It is very infrequent that a movie speaks to me the way this one did. I was completely [[capturing]] up in Ruby's situation as she tries to make her way through her [[iife]]. The bad thing about this movie is that it seems to end so quickly. I could have kept watching for hours. Another downside is that I have been unsatisfied with everything Ashley [[Jude]] has done since. She is so perfect in this movie. This film is easily in my top ten favorites of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2569 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Six degrees had me hooked. I looked forward to it coming on and was totally disappointed when [[Men]] in Trees replaced it's time spot. I thought it was just on [[hiatus]] and would be back early in 2007. What happened? All my friends were really surprised it [[ended]]. We could relate to the [[characters]] who had real problems. We talked about each episode and had our [[favorite]] [[characters]]. There wasn't anybody on the show I didn't like and felt the acting was [[superb]]. I [[alway]] like seeing programs being taped in cities where you can identify the local areas. I for one would like to [[protest]] the canceling of this show and ask you to bring it back and give it another chance. Give it a good time [[slot]], don't keep moving it from this day to that day and advertise it so people will know it is on. Six degrees had me hooked. I looked forward to it coming on and was totally disappointed when [[Male]] in Trees replaced it's time spot. I thought it was just on [[interruption]] and would be back early in 2007. What happened? All my friends were really surprised it [[terminated]]. We could relate to the [[features]] who had real problems. We talked about each episode and had our [[preferred]] [[features]]. There wasn't anybody on the show I didn't like and felt the acting was [[wondrous]]. I [[allways]] like seeing programs being taped in cities where you can identify the local areas. I for one would like to [[demonstration]] the canceling of this show and ask you to bring it back and give it another chance. Give it a good time [[slit]], don't keep moving it from this day to that day and advertise it so people will know it is on. --------------------------------------------- Result 2570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Let's just say it in simple words so that even the makers of this film might have a chance to understand: This is a very dumb film with an even dumber script, lame animation, and a story that's about as original as thumbtacks. Don't bother -- unless you need to find some way to entertain a group of mentally retarded adults or extremely slow children. They might laugh, especially if they're off their meds. There's a special kind of insult in a film this ridiculous -- not only do the filmmakers apparently think that children are brainless idiots who can be entertained with claptrap that cost approximately zero effort, but they don't even bother to break a sweat inserting a gag here and there that an adult might find amusing. This film, frankly, ticked me off royally. Shame on you for stooping so low. --------------------------------------------- Result 2571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A lot has been said about Shinjuku [[Triad]] [[Society]] as the first [[true]] "Miike" [[film]] and I thought this sort of description might have been a cliché. But, like all clichés, it is [[based]] on the truth. All the Miike [[trademarks]] are here, the violence, the black [[humour]], the homosexuality, the taboo [[testing]] and the [[difficult]] to like central [[character]]. Shinjuku is however, one of Miike's most [[perfectly]] formed [[films]]. He says in an [[interview]] that if he [[made]] it again it [[would]] be different, but not necessarily better. I think what he [[means]] is that the [[film]] [[possesses]] a [[truly]] [[captivating]] [[energy]] and raw edge which seems so fresh that [[although]] he might be able to [[capture]] a more visually or technically [[complex]] [[movie]] he [[could]] not [[replicate]] or better the purity of this [[film]].

As you might expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty beatings are supplemented by a [[fantastic]] scene in which a [[woman]] has a [[chair]] smashed over her face. (Only a Miike [[film]] could [[let]] you get away with a sentence like that.) The [[film]] has a [[fantastic]] [[pace]], unlike Dead or Alive which [[begins]] and [[ends]] [[strongly]] and [[dips]] in the middle. [[Dead]] or [[Alive]] also [[deals]] with similar [[issues]], Miike is [[clearly]] concerned about the [[relations]] between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar [[period]] and this emotive subject is [[handled]] well here, the central [[character]] really coming to life when you [[begin]] to [[understand]] his [[past]].

I cannot sing Shinjuku's praises enough. I do not [[want]] to [[give]] away too much. This is Miike before he [[began]] to [[use]] CGI to animate his [[films]] and is [[almost]] [[reminiscent]] of [[something]] like Kitano's Sonatine. The central [[characters]] are [[superbly]] [[realized]] and the [[final]] twist [[guarantees]] that as [[soon]] as the [[film]] has [[finished]] you'll be popping it back on again to [[work]] it all out. A lot has been said about Shinjuku [[Trilogy]] [[Societal]] as the first [[authentic]] "Miike" [[movie]] and I thought this sort of description might have been a cliché. But, like all clichés, it is [[founded]] on the truth. All the Miike [[marques]] are here, the violence, the black [[comedy]], the homosexuality, the taboo [[essays]] and the [[troublesome]] to like central [[nature]]. Shinjuku is however, one of Miike's most [[wholly]] formed [[movie]]. He says in an [[interviews]] that if he [[brought]] it again it [[should]] be different, but not necessarily better. I think what he [[methods]] is that the [[movies]] [[possessed]] a [[really]] [[engrossing]] [[energies]] and raw edge which seems so fresh that [[while]] he might be able to [[captured]] a more visually or technically [[sophisticated]] [[cinematic]] he [[did]] not [[replication]] or better the purity of this [[cinematography]].

As you might expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty beatings are supplemented by a [[unbelievable]] scene in which a [[women]] has a [[chairperson]] smashed over her face. (Only a Miike [[movies]] could [[leave]] you get away with a sentence like that.) The [[cinematic]] has a [[wondrous]] [[cadence]], unlike Dead or Alive which [[starts]] and [[terminates]] [[flatly]] and [[tumbles]] in the middle. [[Die]] or [[Vibrant]] also [[treats]] with similar [[problem]], Miike is [[apparently]] concerned about the [[relationships]] between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar [[deadline]] and this emotive subject is [[manipulated]] well here, the central [[trait]] really coming to life when you [[launch]] to [[realise]] his [[former]].

I cannot sing Shinjuku's praises enough. I do not [[wanna]] to [[lend]] away too much. This is Miike before he [[launches]] to [[utilizing]] CGI to animate his [[film]] and is [[hardly]] [[evocative]] of [[anything]] like Kitano's Sonatine. The central [[character]] are [[beautifully]] [[performed]] and the [[latter]] twist [[assurances]] that as [[quickly]] as the [[movie]] has [[finalized]] you'll be popping it back on again to [[collaborated]] it all out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]]

This is [[definitely]] a '[[must]] see' for those who [[occasionally]] smoke a reefer in their [[secret]] hide-out, [[trying]] to [[avoid]] being [[caught]] by parents, [[teachers]], the [[police]], etc... The [[protagonist]] is a [[lady]] in her [[forties]], [[living]] in her [[mansion]], [[breeding]] orchids, and [[absolutely]] unaware of the [[fact]] that her so-called rich and [[truthful]] husband is [[actually]] broke and cheating on her. When he all of the [[sudden]] dies, she is [[confronted]] with the truth. The [[bailiff]] comes by to [[tell]] her that she is in a [[huge]] debt. She doesn't know what to do, until her gardener [[tells]] her about the [[recent]] [[success]] of marijuana in Britain. She decides after some [[long]] [[thinking]] to [[get]] rid of her flowers and [[start]] breeding pot [[instead]]... The story is [[quite]] [[original]], the performances [[outstanding]]! I can [[think]] of only a few [[movies]] that made me laugh more than this one. [[Still]], the melodramatic [[touch]] is present. The [[film]] is [[typical]] British: the jokes aren't [[vulgar]], there is no violence [[involved]]. It shouldn't be mentioned that it is recommended to have [[taken]] a few [[draughts]] before [[watching]] '[[Saving]] grace'. It will be so [[much]] more fun! [[Especially]] the scene with the 2 [[old]] [[ladies]] in their [[tea]] [[shop]] is [[hilarious]]. I [[thought]] my jawbones would [[burst]]. 9/10

This is [[obviously]] a '[[ought]] see' for those who [[sometimes]] smoke a reefer in their [[ulterior]] hide-out, [[tempting]] to [[evade]] being [[captured]] by parents, [[professors]], the [[policing]], etc... The [[actor]] is a [[ladies]] in her [[thirties]], [[residing]] in her [[manor]], [[reproduction]] orchids, and [[altogether]] unaware of the [[facto]] that her so-called rich and [[veritable]] husband is [[indeed]] broke and cheating on her. When he all of the [[abrupt]] dies, she is [[encountered]] with the truth. The [[beadle]] comes by to [[telling]] her that she is in a [[sizable]] debt. She doesn't know what to do, until her gardener [[says]] her about the [[freshly]] [[succeeded]] of marijuana in Britain. She decides after some [[prolonged]] [[ideology]] to [[obtain]] rid of her flowers and [[commenced]] breeding pot [[alternatively]]... The story is [[rather]] [[preliminary]], the performances [[unpaid]]! I can [[reckon]] of only a few [[cinematic]] that made me laugh more than this one. [[However]], the melodramatic [[touches]] is present. The [[kino]] is [[classic]] British: the jokes aren't [[crass]], there is no violence [[engaged]]. It shouldn't be mentioned that it is recommended to have [[took]] a few [[gusts]] before [[staring]] '[[Rescuing]] grace'. It will be so [[very]] more fun! [[Notably]] the scene with the 2 [[ancient]] [[lady]] in their [[shai]] [[stores]] is [[comical]]. I [[figured]] my jawbones would [[blast]]. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2573 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I sat down to watch a [[documentary]] about Puerto Rico, and I [[ended]] up [[watching]] one about Nuyoricans. [[When]] I [[go]] to Puerto Rico, I fail to see the 50% that live in poverty. [[When]] I do see struggling people, they are usually Haitians, [[Dominicans]], or [[Cubans]] that have recently arrived to the island. There is no such thing as spanglish... either you speak Spanish, or you don't.... and from what I [[heard]]... you don't. [[Pedro]] Albizo [[Campos]] IS NOT MLK to me. MLK was a [[great]] [[man]]. Campos is a [[great]] [[man]] to those that [[want]] [[independence]] which is 1%. To the [[rest]] he as loco as Osama [[Bin]] Laden. Puertoricans that [[want]] [[independence]] are a bunch of fools. If you want any [[proof]] to all of you dreamers of an [[independent]] Puerto [[Rico]] [[see]] Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, all of [[South]] and Central America, and Mexico. Its worked wonders for them. This documentary is not about [[Puerto]] [[Rico]], this documentary was about the Nuyoricans and their [[struggles]].

To the [[person]] that complaint that not [[enough]] of [[Africa]] was on the [[show]]... it was [[suppose]] to be about [[Puerto]] [[Rico]]... not Africa. Denzel will make one shortly just for you.

[[In]] [[conclusion]]... to all those [[ignorant]] [[white]] people that [[think]] we [[need]] [[green]] [[cards]] to come to the [[US]], and want to [[learn]] how the prime minister [[runs]] [[things]], this is not a [[good]] [[documentary]] about Puertorican culture. [[Tell]] your [[kids]] to [[pay]] attention in [[Geography]], and [[History]] [[class]].

***Update***

Bocabonita... "doc." was about Nuyoricans. She promoted it as if its how we all feel. [[Should]] have been [[titled]]... "yo soy nuyorican... lunche...can't speak Spanish." [[PLEASE]] [[STOP]] [[USING]] PUERTO RICO, RICAN, BORICUA, [[OR]] [[ANYTHING]] ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH PR WITH THIS NUYORICAN HISTORICAL LESSON. [[God]] [[forbid]] they play this on the island. I sat down to watch a [[documentaries]] about Puerto Rico, and I [[finished]] up [[staring]] one about Nuyoricans. [[Whenever]] I [[going]] to Puerto Rico, I fail to see the 50% that live in poverty. [[Whenever]] I do see struggling people, they are usually Haitians, [[Dominican]], or [[Cuban]] that have recently arrived to the island. There is no such thing as spanglish... either you speak Spanish, or you don't.... and from what I [[listened]]... you don't. [[Pierre]] Albizo [[Camps]] IS NOT MLK to me. MLK was a [[whopping]] [[fella]]. Campos is a [[terrific]] [[guy]] to those that [[wanting]] [[autonomy]] which is 1%. To the [[stays]] he as loco as Osama [[Ibn]] Laden. Puertoricans that [[wanting]] [[autonomy]] are a bunch of fools. If you want any [[prove]] to all of you dreamers of an [[autonomous]] Puerto [[Puerto]] [[seeing]] Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, all of [[Southern]] and Central America, and Mexico. Its worked wonders for them. This documentary is not about [[Porto]] [[Port]], this documentary was about the Nuyoricans and their [[struggling]].

To the [[individuals]] that complaint that not [[sufficiently]] of [[Continents]] was on the [[exposition]]... it was [[imagine]] to be about [[Port]] [[Port]]... not Africa. Denzel will make one shortly just for you.

[[For]] [[conclude]]... to all those [[ignorance]] [[bianca]] people that [[ideas]] we [[require]] [[greene]] [[card]] to come to the [[USA]], and want to [[learnt]] how the prime minister [[manages]] [[aspects]], this is not a [[alright]] [[documentation]] about Puertorican culture. [[Say]] your [[youngsters]] to [[pays]] attention in [[Geographic]], and [[Stories]] [[categories]].

***Update***

Bocabonita... "doc." was about Nuyoricans. She promoted it as if its how we all feel. [[Ought]] have been [[entitled]]... "yo soy nuyorican... lunche...can't speak Spanish." [[INVITE]] [[PARADA]] [[USAGE]] PUERTO RICO, RICAN, BORICUA, [[ODER]] [[NADA]] ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH PR WITH THIS NUYORICAN HISTORICAL LESSON. [[Seigneur]] [[aban]] they play this on the island. --------------------------------------------- Result 2574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Playwright Sidney Bruhl (a wonderfully over-the-top Michael Caine) would kill for a hit play. Enter young wonder kid (a solid Reeve) who's just written such a play. Weave into this Bruhl's overly hysterical wife (superbly played by Cannon) and a German psychic (a very funny Irene Worth) and you've got yourself a wonderfully funny suspense flick.

While not up to "Sleuth" standards, "Deathtrap" is none the less a very capable, twist filled comical suspense ride based on a terrific play by Ira Levin. The performers are obviously having a field day with the material, with Caine in particular delivering top notch lines with gusto.

The film loses a bit of steam midway through and the ending is a lot less satisfying than the hilarious one in the original play but overall "Deathtrap" is solid, well acted and suspenseful fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 2575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[wanted]] so much to [[enjoy]] this [[movie]]. It moved very [[slowly]] and was just boring. [[If]] it had been on [[TV]], it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, [[maybe]]. What happened to the [[story]]? A great [[cast]] and [[photographer]] were working on a faulty [[foundation]]. [[If]] this is [[loosely]] based on the life of the [[director]], why didn't he [[get]] [[someone]] to [[see]] that the writing itself was "loose". Then he [[directed]] it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a [[different]] [[film]], not this one....for soap [[opera]] [[saga]] [[possibly]]. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller [[Stahl]] was [[speaking]]. I was not alone, because I [[heard]] a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make [[better]] movies? This one had the nugget of a great [[story]], but was just poorly [[executed]]. I [[wished]] so much to [[enjoying]] this [[movies]]. It moved very [[softly]] and was just boring. [[Though]] it had been on [[TELEVISION]], it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, [[presumably]]. What happened to the [[history]]? A great [[casting]] and [[cameraman]] were working on a faulty [[basis]]. [[Though]] this is [[lightly]] based on the life of the [[superintendent]], why didn't he [[got]] [[everybody]] to [[behold]] that the writing itself was "loose". Then he [[geared]] it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a [[dissimilar]] [[filmmaking]], not this one....for soap [[teatro]] [[tale]] [[arguably]]. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller [[Steel]] was [[speaks]]. I was not alone, because I [[audition]] a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make [[best]] movies? This one had the nugget of a great [[storytelling]], but was just poorly [[implemented]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She gives her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette Midler moves her audience. If you can't see it live (which is the best way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to look at is how incredible her voice has changed and matured over the years but never lost its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never loses anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will treasure this concert for a very long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2577 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were [[times]] when I thought it was a comedy. I [[loved]] how the government's plan to [[capture]] the terrorist [[leader]] is to [[air]] [[drop]] in one [[man]], who is [[unarmed]], and [[expect]] him to [[capture]] him and escape with a [[rocket]] [[pack]]. [[If]] only it were [[really]] that easy. I've finally [[found]] a [[movie]] worse than "Plan 9 From [[Outer]] Space". Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were [[period]] when I thought it was a comedy. I [[worshiped]] how the government's plan to [[capturing]] the terrorist [[head]] is to [[midair]] [[autumn]] in one [[men]], who is [[helpless]], and [[hopes]] him to [[captured]] him and escape with a [[missiles]] [[packed]]. [[Unless]] only it were [[genuinely]] that easy. I've finally [[find]] a [[flick]] worse than "Plan 9 From [[Outside]] Space". --------------------------------------------- Result 2578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Le Locataire"("The Tenant")is without a doubt one of the most important horror movies ever made.Polanski stars as a Trelkovsky,a timid file clerk living in Paris,who answers an advertisement for an apartment,only to find that the previous tenant attempted suicide by leaping from the apartment window.Trelkovsky is compelled to visit her in the hospital and there he meets Stella(Isabelle Adjani).Trelkovsky immediately moves in when the previous tenant dies and,at first,is quite pleased with having found such a nice apartment.His happiness is soon replaced by waves of paranoia as he becomes increasingly suspicious of his neighbours,who seem to be trying to provoke Trelkovsky into repeating the previous tenant's suicide.This film is great.Polanski manages to create a surreal atmosphere of dread and paranoia.Plenty of brilliant moments such as the classic scene where Trelkovsky discovers the previous tenant's tooth in a hole in the wall,or the fever dream where he wanders into the building's bathroom to find the walls covered with hieroglyphics.The photography by Sven Nykvist is truly beautiful."The Tenant" is a neglected gem.It may be difficult to track down,but it is more than worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 2579 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] No reason to bother renting this [[flick]]. From the [[opening]] [[credits]] on, I knew I was in [[trouble]].

It was [[filmed]] as [[though]] it was a soft porn [[movie]], but there [[really]] isn't [[anything]] erotic about it. The [[look]] into the world of [[sex]] [[addiction]] is [[intriguing]], but only to a point.

[[Boring]] sex scenes, bad plot, and cameos by Ed Begley Jr. and Rosanna Arquette aren't enough to [[save]] this [[film]]. No reason to bother renting this [[film]]. From the [[opens]] [[credit]] on, I knew I was in [[difficulty]].

It was [[videotaped]] as [[despite]] it was a soft porn [[flick]], but there [[truthfully]] isn't [[algo]] erotic about it. The [[glance]] into the world of [[sexuality]] [[addictions]] is [[enthralling]], but only to a point.

[[Dull]] sex scenes, bad plot, and cameos by Ed Begley Jr. and Rosanna Arquette aren't enough to [[savings]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2580 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] European Vacation (aka National Lampoon's European Vacation) is the weakest of the Vacation films (the first and third one the most superior of the films). While Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo return as Clark and Ellen Griswold (with new actors in the roles of Russ and Audrey Griswold), this time they are given a weaker script with very bad dialogue. This causes the pacing to suffer, with the jokes not very funny at all. To be more specific, what really causes this film to suffer is the fact that the "jokes" as they are, are just pasted together into a cobbled-together script), rather than serving a central plot as the other 3 Vacation films have. Oh well, they can't win them all. 4 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this movie was very well put together. The voice-overs were also great. I liked how they all overcame their conflicts and reached their goals. I would recommend this movie to anyone. It was definitely worth the time and money to watch it. Atlantis has some comic scenes that made me laugh. Other scenes made me sad. And others made me glad. It is a movie any age can enjoy. From the moment Milo is the crazy "profesor" or until he gathers the crew up for the fantastic voyage under the sea. After I watched the movie, I read the book. It was good as well, but the movie puts better pictures in your mind. It is just like the book. But go ahead and watch this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 2582 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I have a two year old son who suffers from the same condition as Jonny [[Kennedy]]. I never [[got]] the [[chance]] to [[meet]] him but I have never [[heard]] [[anybody]] say a [[bad]] word about him. I hope he knows how much the making of this [[programme]] has helped his fellow sufferers by raising awareness of this [[terrible]] condition. This [[man]] has [[touched]] people in a [[way]] that a [[million]] charity [[leaflets]] [[could]] not. I believe that this should be compulsory viewing in schools. I [[also]] [[agree]] with other comments - what have I got to [[moan]] about? He took everything that life could throw at him and [[still]] managed to [[retain]] a sense of [[humour]]. God Bless. I couldn't watch the part that [[showed]] his [[dressings]] being [[changed]]. I have enough trouble with my son's. I have a two year old son who suffers from the same condition as Jonny [[Jfk]]. I never [[did]] the [[likelihood]] to [[respond]] him but I have never [[audition]] [[someone]] say a [[unhealthy]] word about him. I hope he knows how much the making of this [[programs]] has helped his fellow sufferers by raising awareness of this [[abominable]] condition. This [[fella]] has [[impacted]] people in a [[pathway]] that a [[billion]] charity [[booklets]] [[wo]] not. I believe that this should be compulsory viewing in schools. I [[additionally]] [[concur]] with other comments - what have I got to [[whine]] about? He took everything that life could throw at him and [[however]] managed to [[conserve]] a sense of [[humor]]. God Bless. I couldn't watch the part that [[evidenced]] his [[condiments]] being [[amend]]. I have enough trouble with my son's. --------------------------------------------- Result 2583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Amongst]] the standard one [[liner]] type [[action]] [[films]], where acting and logic are [[checked]] at the [[door]], this [[movie]] is at the top of the [[class]]. [[If]] the person in [[charge]] of [[casting]] were to have put "good" [[actors]] in this [[flick]], it [[would]] have been [[worse]](excepting [[Richard]] Dawson who [[actually]] did act well, if you can call [[playing]] yourself "acting"). I [[love]] this [[movie]]! The [[Running]] [[Man]] is in all likelihood God's gift to [[man]](okay maybe just [[men]]). [[Definitely]] the most quotable movie of our [[time]] so I'll [[part]] you with my [[favorite]] line: "It's all part of life's [[rich]] pattern [[Brenda]], and you better F*****g [[get]] [[used]] to it." [[Ahh]], more people have been [[called]] "Brenda" for the sake of [[quoting]] this [[film]] than I can [[possibly]] [[imagine]]. [[Between]] the standard one [[stuntman]] type [[activity]] [[cinematography]], where acting and logic are [[ticked]] at the [[doorway]], this [[film]] is at the top of the [[classroom]]. [[Unless]] the person in [[onus]] of [[pouring]] were to have put "good" [[protagonists]] in this [[gesture]], it [[could]] have been [[lousiest]](excepting [[Richards]] Dawson who [[indeed]] did act well, if you can call [[gaming]] yourself "acting"). I [[loved]] this [[movies]]! The [[Execution]] [[Guy]] is in all likelihood God's gift to [[males]](okay maybe just [[males]]). [[Obviously]] the most quotable movie of our [[period]] so I'll [[portions]] you with my [[preferred]] line: "It's all part of life's [[richest]] pattern [[Cynthia]], and you better F*****g [[obtain]] [[employs]] to it." [[Aw]], more people have been [[phoned]] "Brenda" for the sake of [[quoted]] this [[cinematography]] than I can [[conceivably]] [[guess]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] To start off with, since this movie is a remake of a classic, the rating has to be lowered already. Since this version stars Viggo Mortensen in the lead role of Kowalski, it helps.

Isn't this just like the United States government though, to terrorize one of its own citizens. Sounds like Jason Priestley's character from the movie! But it is the truth, the government would do anything possible to destroy a man's life for trying to get home to his wife. A wife, who is in labor no less, and may not make it.

"There was a time in this country that the police would escort a man to his pregnant wife." The words of the Disc Jockey.

There were some great shots of scenery in this film, and great car chases and a lot of spirituality. After much consideration, I gave this film a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 2585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] xica da Silva is one of the best Brazilians opera soap ever! the a black slave's story that becomes queen of a small villa when conquering the most powerful man's of the area love, in the colonial period of the brazil dominated by Portugal, that explored its diamonds. The largest xica enemy, violante, bride that it was changed by xica, is a woman of big it influences the Portugal king close to and does to take revenge of the slave of everything. Very religious person, she is a picture of the hypocritical society and religious of the time, she dedicates its life the morality of the villa that was committed by xica, that is a woman full of lusts that it faces the society of the time to preach and it helps the slaves of the area. The story also bill with forbidden loves, sorceries and vampires and religious fervor. Xica da Silva does with that you don't want to lose a I only surrender, from beginning to end! --------------------------------------------- Result 2586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (Spoilers)

I was very curious to see this film, after having heard that it was clever and witty. I had to stop halfway because of the unbearable boredom I felt.

The idea behind the film would have been acceptable: depicting the way the relationship between a man and a woman evolves, through all the problems and difficulties that two people living in a big city can experience. What made me dislike the whole film were two things.

First of all, the film was so down-to-earth that it looked as if, by describing the problems that a couple must solve on a day-to-day basis, it became itself ordinary and dull.

Secondly, the overall sloppiness of the production, with dialogues that were barely understandable.

Too bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was utterly disappointed by this movie. I had read some of the other reviews here and had much higher expectations. I expected a drama with more intense character development. But that never happens in the movie. Daniel-Day Lewis is a good actor, but not as good as some reviewers here would have us believe. I tought he repeated the same set of 4 or 5 movements in the movie. I would rate his performance 6 out of 10.

Acting: 6 out of 10 Direction is 5 out of 10. Script is the worst: 2 out of 10.

I deleted the movie from my DVR at 70 mins. into the movie. Much better movies out there than this... --------------------------------------------- Result 2588 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] There's more to offer in the opening of The [[Odd]] [[Couple]] than in the entirety of most [[films]]. Felix Unger (the poor guy's monogram even curses him) checks into a New York hotel. A [[cleaning]] lady says "Good night." "Goodbye," he answers back. In his [[room]] he empties his pockets, then struggles to take off his wedding ring only to put the objects neatly into an envelope, addressed to his wife and beloved children. When the viewer [[finally]] [[puts]] it [[together]] — aha, he's going to off himself — we watch him struggle to open the [[window]] — oh no, he's going to jump — The poor guy injures his lower back. This is all you need to know about Felix Unger — his wife has left him, he's a compulsive cleaner and he's a hypochondriac. And all in one scene. This is the particular [[genius]] of Neil Simon's comedy — it's about situation and character. There are few obvious physical jokes — no kicks to the groin, no cheap gags — just funny characters in uncomfortable [[situations]]. And, of course, he is a master of manipulating the audience's expectations. Coming from the Swingers era, imagine what I thought in the date scene when Felix starts lamenting about the breakup of his marriage to the girls his roommate Oscar has worked so hard to get into his apartment. He's blowing it, right? Think again. The girls love his sensitivity, his ability to cry in front of them. They invite him back to their place since his meatloaf has burned because Oscar wasn't paying enough attention to it. He's in like Flynn, right? Uh, yes, but he doesn't want to go with the girls because he's feeling vulnerable. [[Great]] stuff. And it's made even [[greater]] with a style that minimizes editing and maximizes the wonderful eight-room apartment set. You've got Jack Lemmon and the slouchy, pouchy Walter Matthau for Chrissakes, why mess it up? The visual style reminded me of Breakfast at Tiffany's, in that great [[effect]] is made from a large depth of field and the interplay between the various planes of action. Particularly [[memorable]] is the scene in which Felix, fleeing from Oscar, closes a partition only to realize the partition doesn't cover the side where Oscar is coming from. You get a real sense of the layout of the apartment, and thus the proximity in which the two divorcées live. The twist here is that these two are really married — to each other. So the observations about married life that might be ignored in an ordinary romantic comedy are made all the more poignant since they are two guys. There's more to offer in the opening of The [[Bizarre]] [[Coupling]] than in the entirety of most [[kino]]. Felix Unger (the poor guy's monogram even curses him) checks into a New York hotel. A [[cleanup]] lady says "Good night." "Goodbye," he answers back. In his [[salle]] he empties his pockets, then struggles to take off his wedding ring only to put the objects neatly into an envelope, addressed to his wife and beloved children. When the viewer [[ultimately]] [[poses]] it [[jointly]] — aha, he's going to off himself — we watch him struggle to open the [[luna]] — oh no, he's going to jump — The poor guy injures his lower back. This is all you need to know about Felix Unger — his wife has left him, he's a compulsive cleaner and he's a hypochondriac. And all in one scene. This is the particular [[engineers]] of Neil Simon's comedy — it's about situation and character. There are few obvious physical jokes — no kicks to the groin, no cheap gags — just funny characters in uncomfortable [[instances]]. And, of course, he is a master of manipulating the audience's expectations. Coming from the Swingers era, imagine what I thought in the date scene when Felix starts lamenting about the breakup of his marriage to the girls his roommate Oscar has worked so hard to get into his apartment. He's blowing it, right? Think again. The girls love his sensitivity, his ability to cry in front of them. They invite him back to their place since his meatloaf has burned because Oscar wasn't paying enough attention to it. He's in like Flynn, right? Uh, yes, but he doesn't want to go with the girls because he's feeling vulnerable. [[Huge]] stuff. And it's made even [[larger]] with a style that minimizes editing and maximizes the wonderful eight-room apartment set. You've got Jack Lemmon and the slouchy, pouchy Walter Matthau for Chrissakes, why mess it up? The visual style reminded me of Breakfast at Tiffany's, in that great [[effects]] is made from a large depth of field and the interplay between the various planes of action. Particularly [[landmark]] is the scene in which Felix, fleeing from Oscar, closes a partition only to realize the partition doesn't cover the side where Oscar is coming from. You get a real sense of the layout of the apartment, and thus the proximity in which the two divorcées live. The twist here is that these two are really married — to each other. So the observations about married life that might be ignored in an ordinary romantic comedy are made all the more poignant since they are two guys. --------------------------------------------- Result 2589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Yes, this [[gets]] the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this [[fill]] is [[genius]]. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, [[wonderfully]] strange [[man]] one day and Harris [[caught]] him on [[tape]], in all that true misfit [[glory]] that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in [[tragedy]] for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean [[Penn]] and Crispin [[Glover]] in the roles of the young men, respectively. The [[world]] is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a [[broader]] glimpse into [[growing]] up weird in vanilla [[America]]. [[Recommended]] for anyone and everyone! Yes, this [[attains]] the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this [[filling]] is [[engineers]]. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, [[fantastically]] strange [[males]] one day and Harris [[apprehended]] him on [[cassettes]], in all that true misfit [[stardom]] that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in [[drama]] for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean [[Pennsylvania]] and Crispin [[Grover]] in the roles of the young men, respectively. The [[monde]] is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a [[extensive]] glimpse into [[augmented]] up weird in vanilla [[American]]. [[Suggested]] for anyone and everyone! --------------------------------------------- Result 2590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] A number of posters have commented on the unsatisfactory conclusion. This is always a problem with [[long]], [[complex]] [[dramas]]. [[Crime]] is essentially [[banal]], so the [[pay]] off is always anti-climactic, whilst detailed exposition detracts from the human drama. The writer has [[used]] a number of clever devices to try and [[get]] [[round]] this, but has not been [[entirely]] successful. Answers to [[precisely]] what happened and why may have been supplied, but if so they are well [[buried]]. The [[viewer]] inevitably [[feels]] a [[little]] cheated.

But in a sense this is unimportant. The [[drama]] was never about the crime, or even the investigation, it was about the impact of events on the [[lives]] of those involved; the [[family]], the investigators, the witnesses, the press. And as such it was gripping. The writing was a [[significant]] cut above the [[run]] of the [[mill]] for prime-time drama, and the performances [[uniformly]] good. In an [[ensemble]] piece it is invidious to focus on [[individuals]], but Penelope [[Wilton]] deserves [[special]] mention for an [[extraordinary]] tour de force as the mother-wife-daughter, and Janet McTeer was in cracking [[form]] as a hard-bitten old cop.

One of the most interesting aspects of the drama is the [[handling]] of [[race]], as the elephant in the room that no-one is prepared to mention. Subtle, [[powerful]] stuff. A number of posters have commented on the unsatisfactory conclusion. This is always a problem with [[lengthy]], [[tricky]] [[theatrical]]. [[Delinquency]] is essentially [[trite]], so the [[payroll]] off is always anti-climactic, whilst detailed exposition detracts from the human drama. The writer has [[utilizing]] a number of clever devices to try and [[got]] [[redondo]] this, but has not been [[downright]] successful. Answers to [[exactly]] what happened and why may have been supplied, but if so they are well [[burying]]. The [[bystander]] inevitably [[believes]] a [[petite]] cheated.

But in a sense this is unimportant. The [[theatrical]] was never about the crime, or even the investigation, it was about the impact of events on the [[life]] of those involved; the [[families]], the investigators, the witnesses, the press. And as such it was gripping. The writing was a [[cannot]] cut above the [[running]] of the [[factory]] for prime-time drama, and the performances [[evenly]] good. In an [[whole]] piece it is invidious to focus on [[person]], but Penelope [[Willi]] deserves [[specific]] mention for an [[noteworthy]] tour de force as the mother-wife-daughter, and Janet McTeer was in cracking [[shape]] as a hard-bitten old cop.

One of the most interesting aspects of the drama is the [[treat]] of [[races]], as the elephant in the room that no-one is prepared to mention. Subtle, [[influential]] stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 2591 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Yet]] again, Madhur Bhandarkar takes you on a ride to the [[wild]] side. And a [[remarkable]] one it is, literally and figuratively.

[[Mumbai]] hi-society -- stars and starlets, glam dolls and witch [[doctors]], [[business]] tycoons and [[broker]] [[types]], [[yep]] the whole stinking [[lot]] -- are in [[sharp]] [[focus]] here. In [[typical]] tabloid fashion, their [[worlds]] unfold, with [[every]] [[colorful]] story a [[clever]] sub-plot in itself.

A [[struggling]] starlet dumped by the [[producer]] after [[getting]] her pregnant, the stewardess and her high-profile husband, the [[pedophile]] [[businessman]] and his neurotic [[wife]], the reporters and the [[police]] captain; all [[shades]] on [[display]] and countless hues in between.

Bhandarkar does a swell [[job]] of digging up the dirt on the [[drama]] kings, the [[dancing]] [[queens]] and the [[living]] dead. Atul Kulkarni packs a punch, as does Boman Irani and Sandhya Mrudul. Konkona Sen [[Sharma]] is [[effective]] as the ex-crime [[beat]] [[reporter]], but she could have been dolled up a [[little]] in keeping with the [[job]] [[change]] and the [[party]] [[circuit]].

[[Highly]] [[focused]] ([[running]] [[time]] 140 min) and [[refreshingly]] [[different]] [[film]], well worth the money. [[However]] again, Madhur Bhandarkar takes you on a ride to the [[feral]] side. And a [[wondrous]] one it is, literally and figuratively.

[[Bangalore]] hi-society -- stars and starlets, glam dolls and witch [[physician]], [[firms]] tycoons and [[intermediaries]] [[genera]], [[yeah]] the whole stinking [[batch]] -- are in [[sharpe]] [[concentration]] here. In [[symptomatic]] tabloid fashion, their [[mundos]] unfold, with [[any]] [[scenic]] story a [[artful]] sub-plot in itself.

A [[wrestling]] starlet dumped by the [[producers]] after [[obtaining]] her pregnant, the stewardess and her high-profile husband, the [[paedophile]] [[trader]] and his neurotic [[women]], the reporters and the [[policeman]] captain; all [[sunglasses]] on [[displays]] and countless hues in between.

Bhandarkar does a swell [[labour]] of digging up the dirt on the [[theater]] kings, the [[danse]] [[fags]] and the [[inhabit]] dead. Atul Kulkarni packs a punch, as does Boman Irani and Sandhya Mrudul. Konkona Sen [[Mishra]] is [[efficient]] as the ex-crime [[defeat]] [[reporters]], but she could have been dolled up a [[tiny]] in keeping with the [[labor]] [[amendments]] and the [[part]] [[circuits]].

[[Vastly]] [[concentrating]] ([[implementing]] [[period]] 140 min) and [[cheerfully]] [[several]] [[movies]], well worth the money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2592 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This masterpiece of lesbian horror comes from exploitation master Joseph W.Sarno.It features plenty of soft core sex,really hot lesbian sequences plus a lot of naked women.The acting is pretty good and the film is quite atmospheric and well-made.Marie Forsa is one of the hottest chicks I have ever seen in a horror movie-it's a visual pleasure to see her wonderful body.Sarno really knows how to pick up hot looking ladies.A must see for fans of sexploitation! --------------------------------------------- Result 2593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The movie had a cute [[opening]], I truly believed I was in for one of the best [[romantic]] comedies i've seen in a while... there was [[something]] particular "foreign" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat [[abstract]] and [[mystical]]. But then the story line started becoming more and more [[unrealistic]]. To say that the ending was [[CORNY]] and [[PREDICTABLE]] would [[almost]] be an understatement... The most [[typical]] romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character [[realises]] that he has [[made]] a mistake and [[chases]] the "[[woman]] of his [[dreams]]" only to [[confess]] his [[love]] for her in front of a [[sympathetic]] crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the [[end]], the 'good guys' [[win]], '[[bad]] guys' loose... You get the [[picture]]. A [[WASTE]] of a [[potentially]] interesting [[movie]]. The movie had a cute [[commencement]], I truly believed I was in for one of the best [[sentimental]] comedies i've seen in a while... there was [[anything]] particular "foreign" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat [[recap]] and [[mystic]]. But then the story line started becoming more and more [[impractical]]. To say that the ending was [[DORKY]] and [[FORESEEABLE]] would [[about]] be an understatement... The most [[emblematic]] romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character [[understands]] that he has [[introduced]] a mistake and [[haunts]] the "[[femme]] of his [[daydream]]" only to [[recognise]] his [[loves]] for her in front of a [[empathy]] crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the [[termination]], the 'good guys' [[earn]], '[[rotten]] guys' loose... You get the [[image]]. A [[SQUANDER]] of a [[maybe]] interesting [[movies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 5 minutes into this movie I was hyperventilating, shaking, and writhing in pain. And not in the good way. The story is about a troupe of idiotic children making prank phone calls to a psycho which is always a good idea. Turns out psychos don't like prank phone calls because in 2 minutes time he's at their door killing poor Williams mom and dad. Well skip ahead 15 years and guess what? Still prank phone calling people. Yep you would of thought that a horrible murder would of deterred them from doing that ever again but no. So after about two hours later and way too many scream ripoffs I realized that this movie gave me nothing but a terrible taste in my mouth and a severe urge to take my own life. This piece of crap isn't even worth laughing at the shoddy production, the "acting", or Rutger haurs dwindling career. I love crappy horror movies but this is the most unsatisfying piece I've ever seen. Just don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 2595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] First of all i'd just like to [[say]] this [[movie]] rawked more than any of the [[recent]] crap that hollywood has [[cooked]] up out of its bowels. McBain is a [[true]] [[action]] film with more violence than most [[viewers]] can [[handle]]. It has all of the [[classic]] [[elements]] of a late 80's/early 90's [[action]] [[film]]....the [[random]] [[gratuitous]] [[acts]] of violence ([[ie]]. when Walken and crew [[go]] in to [[confront]] the [[drug]] [[dealers]] to [[get]] money they just [[show]] up and [[kill]] them [[rather]] than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the [[guys]] on fire, the [[guys]] that [[get]] [[blown]] off buildings, and of course the [[guys]] who are on fire that [[get]] [[blown]] off of buildings. Walken is at his [[finest]] in this picture delivering [[memorable]] lines such as, "let's [[go]] sit..........out on the deck." and [[others]] that make this [[film]] a [[top]] [[buy]] off of the clearence rack at the local video [[store]]. if you have a bloodlust for [[unnecessary]] random [[acts]] of violence [[rent]] this [[movie]] [[today]] and [[satisfy]] your thirst. First of all i'd just like to [[tell]] this [[film]] rawked more than any of the [[freshly]] crap that hollywood has [[cooks]] up out of its bowels. McBain is a [[truthful]] [[efforts]] film with more violence than most [[listeners]] can [[handled]]. It has all of the [[conventional]] [[ingredients]] of a late 80's/early 90's [[activity]] [[cinematography]]....the [[haphazard]] [[unprovoked]] [[act]] of violence ([[ci]]. when Walken and crew [[going]] in to [[tackle]] the [[medicines]] [[traders]] to [[gets]] money they just [[displays]] up and [[murdering]] them [[comparatively]] than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the [[lads]] on fire, the [[lads]] that [[got]] [[molten]] off buildings, and of course the [[lads]] who are on fire that [[obtains]] [[melted]] off of buildings. Walken is at his [[meanest]] in this picture delivering [[landmark]] lines such as, "let's [[going]] sit..........out on the deck." and [[alia]] that make this [[cinema]] a [[supreme]] [[buys]] off of the clearence rack at the local video [[storage]]. if you have a bloodlust for [[worthless]] random [[act]] of violence [[leases]] this [[kino]] [[hoy]] and [[fulfill]] your thirst. --------------------------------------------- Result 2596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] So Angela has grown up and gotten therapy and an operation to turn her into a real life daughter, rather than the son that she was born, and now holds a job as - wait for it - a camp counselor! [[How]] [[appropriate]], right? I know, I love it. [[Anyway]], the first sequel to the Sleepaway Camp franchise obeys all the [[rules]] of horror sequels - more blood, more imaginative killings (which aren't [[imaginative]], but still more so than the original), more nudity, a more elaborate plot, and generally worse than the original.

It is entertaining in the same [[way]] as the original was, in that the [[characters]] and wardrobes are so goofy and so authentically 80's that you can't [[help]] getting a [[good]] [[laugh]]. [[At]] one point, a [[guy]] [[asks]] Angela out, and she [[says]] "I'll call you," and then [[quickly]] [[walks]] away. The [[guy]] [[says]] to himself, "[[How]] is she gonna call me? I don't have a [[phone]]!" and then he sniffs his armpits, [[wondering]] what [[turned]] her off (it's the hair, [[dude]]!!).

It is a well-known [[fact]] that in 80s slasher movies, the murdered [[teenagers]] were more [[often]] than not being [[punished]] by their [[killer]] for some [[kind]] of [[bad]] [[behavior]], [[usually]] for being too promiscuous. When I first [[started]] [[getting]] into [[horror]] [[movies]] and [[saw]] the [[Friday]] the 13th [[movies]] for the first time in the mid 90s, I didn't realize this. I [[learned]] it in a [[film]] [[class]] a year or two later and was [[amazed]] that their was some [[method]] to the [[madness]]. I was pretty impressed, not only that the [[movies]] were passing on some [[kind]] of message, albeit a morbid one, but that there was [[actually]] some [[thought]] put into it.

But not in this [[movie]]! [[At]] one point just before Angela [[kills]] one of her [[victims]], she [[says]] "Let this be a lesson to you. [[Say]] no to drugs!" [[Real]] subtle screen writing there, guys. [[Then]] again, the [[dialogue]] is the most entertaining [[thing]] in the movie. Angela (who, by the [[way]], went through all that therapy and those [[operations]] and all that [[trouble]] to clean up her [[past]] and reinvent herself as a normal and well-developed [[person]] and then [[changed]] her name from Angela to, [[umm]], Angela), [[says]] at one point, "I don't like being the wicked witch of the west, but I know what happens when things get out of control." (People start getting killed...by me! HA!)

Then later, she demands that one of the counselors, Mare, make an apology, to which the girl replies, "I'd rather die!" Sorry, Mare, but you really walked into that one...

Two years ago I was a camp counselor at a sleepaway camp similar to the one portrayed in this movie (except the camp that I taught at had more than three kids to the 15 or 20 counselors and it also had rules, which the one in the movie doesn't). This [[made]] me notice the myriad of discrepancies in the movie from what camp life is really like.

That's okay though, you can hardly make a movie like this with a lot of 9 year olds running around, although there were some 10 or 11 year old kids killed in this movie. I hadn't seen that kind of thing much before.

Definitely bad taste, even for a cheesy 80s slasher movie.... So Angela has grown up and gotten therapy and an operation to turn her into a real life daughter, rather than the son that she was born, and now holds a job as - wait for it - a camp counselor! [[Mode]] [[adequate]], right? I know, I love it. [[Writ]], the first sequel to the Sleepaway Camp franchise obeys all the [[regulations]] of horror sequels - more blood, more imaginative killings (which aren't [[innovative]], but still more so than the original), more nudity, a more elaborate plot, and generally worse than the original.

It is entertaining in the same [[ways]] as the original was, in that the [[traits]] and wardrobes are so goofy and so authentically 80's that you can't [[helps]] getting a [[alright]] [[chuckles]]. [[During]] one point, a [[buddy]] [[asked]] Angela out, and she [[contends]] "I'll call you," and then [[faster]] [[walking]] away. The [[buddy]] [[tells]] to himself, "[[Mode]] is she gonna call me? I don't have a [[tel]]!" and then he sniffs his armpits, [[request]] what [[transformed]] her off (it's the hair, [[homeboy]]!!).

It is a well-known [[facto]] that in 80s slasher movies, the murdered [[youngsters]] were more [[generally]] than not being [[sanctioned]] by their [[assassin]] for some [[type]] of [[unfavourable]] [[demeanor]], [[normally]] for being too promiscuous. When I first [[initiating]] [[obtain]] into [[terror]] [[movie]] and [[noticed]] the [[Yesterday]] the 13th [[cinematic]] for the first time in the mid 90s, I didn't realize this. I [[learns]] it in a [[movie]] [[category]] a year or two later and was [[flabbergasted]] that their was some [[mode]] to the [[craziness]]. I was pretty impressed, not only that the [[movie]] were passing on some [[sorts]] of message, albeit a morbid one, but that there was [[genuinely]] some [[figured]] put into it.

But not in this [[filmmaking]]! [[During]] one point just before Angela [[killings]] one of her [[fatalities]], she [[said]] "Let this be a lesson to you. [[Tell]] no to drugs!" [[Veritable]] subtle screen writing there, guys. [[Thus]] again, the [[conversation]] is the most entertaining [[stuff]] in the movie. Angela (who, by the [[camino]], went through all that therapy and those [[operation]] and all that [[difficulty]] to clean up her [[former]] and reinvent herself as a normal and well-developed [[persona]] and then [[altering]] her name from Angela to, [[um]], Angela), [[said]] at one point, "I don't like being the wicked witch of the west, but I know what happens when things get out of control." (People start getting killed...by me! HA!)

Then later, she demands that one of the counselors, Mare, make an apology, to which the girl replies, "I'd rather die!" Sorry, Mare, but you really walked into that one...

Two years ago I was a camp counselor at a sleepaway camp similar to the one portrayed in this movie (except the camp that I taught at had more than three kids to the 15 or 20 counselors and it also had rules, which the one in the movie doesn't). This [[accomplished]] me notice the myriad of discrepancies in the movie from what camp life is really like.

That's okay though, you can hardly make a movie like this with a lot of 9 year olds running around, although there were some 10 or 11 year old kids killed in this movie. I hadn't seen that kind of thing much before.

Definitely bad taste, even for a cheesy 80s slasher movie.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this is the first time I'm writing a comment on a movie on IMDb. but i had to write it for this one. its 3 hrs of unadulterated torture. from the starting u get the idea that the movie is gonna be bad. the acting is pathetic. I'm a big fan of Ajay devgan (loved him in bhagat singh) but he is at his worst in this movie. amitabh seems to have worked hard for this one, but somehow the fear is missing. prashant raj is a non actor. and the most irritating part of the movie is nisha kothari. i have no clue why the director took her in this movie. the background score is repetitive. somehow i felt that ramu tried to repeat a sarkar, the color theme, the background score, the camera angles, but it didn't work. PLEASE Don't WATCH IT --------------------------------------------- Result 2598 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the worst movies I've seen shoddy camera work, crappy filter usage, film was grainy, script was terrible, i mean come on, how predictable was the big battle at the end.....

some of the fight scenes were okay i guess....

some scenes were so bad it was comical ...like Sorbo getting the horse and riding at the end...LOL i mean really ..a horse? Oh cant forget how the bad assassins roll around in the same vehicle throughout the entire movie..one would think that after killling key witness and federal agents, they woulda been tracked down..ETC, ETC really don't bother watching it... --------------------------------------------- Result 2599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watching this movie was a waste of time. I was tempted to leave in the middle of the movie, but I resisted. I don't know what Ridley Scott intended, but I learned that in the army, women get as stupid as men. They learn to spit, to insult and to fight in combat, and that's also a waste of time (in my opinion). And, anyway, what the hell was that final scene in Lybia? Are they still fighting Gadafi or is it that it's easy for everyone to believe islamic people are always a danger? --------------------------------------------- Result 2600 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] The only redeeming quality of this [[movie]] is that it was [[bad]] enough to be [[comedic]]. Everyone in this [[movie]] [[looks]] like a porn industry [[drop]] out. I have actually [[seen]] better acting in low budget porn. I [[though]] I had [[actually]] [[rented]] some [[kind]] of [[gay]] porn after this classic scene: Jim: Watch your ass [[Nick]]: You watch yours (together): I wont [[leave]] you behind!

The [[first]] action [[sequence]] [[shows]] how [[awful]] the [[production]] is, but its really kind of [[funny]]: [[Good]] [[guys]] have [[transformer]] [[weapons]]! [[In]] one scene, they all have [[fake]] [[HK]] MP5 sub-machine [[guns]]. Next scene, AK-47 replicas! And then, to [[top]] it all off, they do some [[weapon]] swapping between scenes with a couple of M-16s!! I [[think]] they had a budget [[shortage]] for [[guns]], not enough to go around between the [[good]] guys and [[bad]] guys. [[Fight]] scenes are poorly coordinated and [[fake]] as all [[hell]]. You have to [[remove]] the pin/[[spoon]] from a [[grenade]] for it to [[explode]] on its own. You can't fire a shoulder [[launched]] [[missile]] of any [[kind]] while riding inside a [[helicopter]]. Weapons that you throw away don't [[suddenly]] re-appear. When a [[gun]] is out of bullets, throwing it away is [[still]] [[pretty]] [[stupid]]. Unless you have no [[idea]] how to reload them.. [[Big]] slow trucks driving around in first gear [[make]] for [[awkward]] [[action]] scenes. I really cant [[believe]] movies like this are [[actually]] [[produced]]. This [[movie]] [[would]] be [[hilarious]] on nitrous [[oxide]] or [[maybe]] just [[drunk]]. The only redeeming quality of this [[filmmaking]] is that it was [[unfavorable]] enough to be [[slapstick]]. Everyone in this [[cinema]] [[seems]] like a porn industry [[fall]] out. I have actually [[noticed]] better acting in low budget porn. I [[while]] I had [[genuinely]] [[leases]] some [[genus]] of [[homo]] porn after this classic scene: Jim: Watch your ass [[Nicky]]: You watch yours (together): I wont [[let]] you behind!

The [[firstly]] action [[sequences]] [[denotes]] how [[horrific]] the [[productivity]] is, but its really kind of [[humorous]]: [[Buena]] [[boys]] have [[processor]] [[arms]]! [[For]] one scene, they all have [[counterfeit]] [[HONG]] MP5 sub-machine [[shotgun]]. Next scene, AK-47 replicas! And then, to [[topped]] it all off, they do some [[weapons]] swapping between scenes with a couple of M-16s!! I [[ideas]] they had a budget [[imperfection]] for [[shotgun]], not enough to go around between the [[alright]] guys and [[unfavorable]] guys. [[Battles]] scenes are poorly coordinated and [[forged]] as all [[brothel]]. You have to [[abolition]] the pin/[[scoop]] from a [[grenada]] for it to [[blasting]] on its own. You can't fire a shoulder [[inaugurated]] [[rockets]] of any [[genre]] while riding inside a [[copter]]. Weapons that you throw away don't [[unexpectedly]] re-appear. When a [[shotgun]] is out of bullets, throwing it away is [[however]] [[belle]] [[dumb]]. Unless you have no [[ideas]] how to reload them.. [[Prodigious]] slow trucks driving around in first gear [[deliver]] for [[tricky]] [[actions]] scenes. I really cant [[think]] movies like this are [[indeed]] [[generated]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[could]] be [[comic]] on nitrous [[rust]] or [[potentially]] just [[drunken]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The [[Master]] Blackmailer, based off of [[Sir]] Arthur Conan Doyle's short story, "the [[Adventure]] of Charles [[Augustus]] Milverton," is the [[first]] [[feature]] [[length]] Sherlock Holmes [[story]] with Jeremy [[Brett]] that I have seen. The [[story]] is interesting and [[dark]]. The [[film]] has a [[somewhat]] [[dreary]], sad feel to it, but it is [[quite]] entertaining (with some [[especially]] funny scenes).

*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one way or another, destroy their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an "art dealer," after the few tragic consequences for victims that could not pay up. Our heroes must next help Lady Eva Blackwell, who must pay a sum that is beyond her means or else her upcoming [[marriage]] will most definitely be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's house are [[intense]]. Although the film has an essentially happy ending, the tone is sad and regretful.

[[Outstanding]] performances by Jeremy [[Brett]] and Edward Hardwicke (as [[usual]]), and Robert [[Hardy]] as the notorious villain (most [[audiences]] probably [[recognize]] him [[today]] as [[Cornelius]] [[Fudge]] in Harry Potter), [[Serena]] Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, [[Norma]] [[West]] as Lady Swinstead and [[Sophie]] Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only complaint is that there wasn't [[enough]] [[Inspector]] Lestrade. (I wish they [[would]] have added in the scene at the [[end]] of the short [[story]] where he gives the [[description]] of the two [[burglars]], one of which [[matches]] Watson.) The [[Maestro]] Blackmailer, based off of [[Monsieur]] Arthur Conan Doyle's short story, "the [[Adventurer]] of Charles [[Augusto]] Milverton," is the [[frst]] [[featuring]] [[lengths]] Sherlock Holmes [[tale]] with Jeremy [[Extensively]] that I have seen. The [[histories]] is interesting and [[darkened]]. The [[cinematography]] has a [[rather]] [[boring]], sad feel to it, but it is [[rather]] entertaining (with some [[namely]] funny scenes).

*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one way or another, destroy their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an "art dealer," after the few tragic consequences for victims that could not pay up. Our heroes must next help Lady Eva Blackwell, who must pay a sum that is beyond her means or else her upcoming [[marriages]] will most definitely be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's house are [[intensive]]. Although the film has an essentially happy ending, the tone is sad and regretful.

[[Wondrous]] performances by Jeremy [[Extensively]] and Edward Hardwicke (as [[ordinary]]), and Robert [[Robust]] as the notorious villain (most [[spectators]] probably [[confess]] him [[yesterday]] as [[Rupert]] [[Chocolate]] in Harry Potter), [[Calmly]] Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, [[Norm]] [[Westerly]] as Lady Swinstead and [[Sofie]] Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only complaint is that there wasn't [[adequately]] [[Inspectors]] Lestrade. (I wish they [[ought]] have added in the scene at the [[ceases]] of the short [[history]] where he gives the [[descriptions]] of the two [[robbers]], one of which [[couple]] Watson.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Really no reason to examine this much further because of a few very glaring and bias misleading statements.

A perfect example is when the filmmaker claims "Saul" or Paul of Tarus (the writer of The Book of Hebrews He asserts) has no idea Jesus is or was a human being, this assertion is either purposely false as he accuses others of presenting, or he is ignorant of what "The Bible" says.

first we can examine his misleading claim about Hebrews 8.4; which he shows a quote "If Jesus was on earth, he would not be a priest", hence right here He sets up the ignorant and unlearned viewer to accept his false premise.. why? He does what most so called Bible believing people he accuses of doing, the same.. That is TAKING things out of context.

verse one of Hebrews 8 is; 1.."Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens" The context above is CLEARLY speaking of a Jesus who was on earth and ASCENDED into heaven after his alleged resurrection.

It has nothing to do with how the filmmaker wants the viewer to take his out of context scripture. Here he offers a foundation, that "Paul was not aware of a HUMAN Jesus, but only one in "heaven"

follow?

lets see if the filmmaker is being honest; Hebrews 7; 14. "For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood."

heh, didn't the filmmaker just quote from the writer of Hebrews trying to show the writer of that book has no knowledge of a "Human Jesus"? it's likely anyways Paul didn't write Hebrews, but I will not go into that here, but The film maker asserts Paul did, and that is the premise of the point given here.

It is not like this film maker does not make decent points in certain areas, he does, but he is engaging in the same blind bias of the religion he is bashing on. Once he engages in these tactics, in my strong opinion, he loses credibility as the religion he picks out, and the film is no longer a documentary, but a personal opinion, and a bias of the film maker, nothing more, nothing less. --------------------------------------------- Result 2603 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Franco]] [[proves]], once again, that he is the prince of [[surreal]] & erotic [[cinema]]. [[True]], [[much]] of his work can be [[viewed]] as [[entertaining]] sleaze but with Succubus (Necronomicon) he [[shows]] what he is [[truly]] capable of when he [[lets]] his [[warped]] [[creativity]] [[run]] [[riot]] and [[gives]] us a [[film]] that is both hypnotic and [[enigmatic]] [[whilst]] [[still]] [[maintaining]] the [[delirious]] [[eroticism]] [[intrinsic]] in his [[work]]. Jerry Van Rooyen's [[splendid]] score pulsates as the viewer is [[thrown]] from one [[bizarre]] [[scenario]] to another as we follow the [[trials]] of a striptease [[artist]] ([[Reynaud]]) who may be schizophrenic, or may indeed (as one [[mysterious]] character states) be a [[devil]], [[attempt]] to come to terms with the world she [[inhabits]]. A [[beautiful]] and [[enigmatic]] piece of [[cinema]] [[highly]] [[recommended]] to [[anybody]] with [[even]] a passing interest in alternative [[cinema]]. [[Franko]] [[proving]], once again, that he is the prince of [[bizarre]] & erotic [[theaters]]. [[Real]], [[very]] of his work can be [[perceived]] as [[amusing]] sleaze but with Succubus (Necronomicon) he [[exhibitions]] what he is [[honestly]] capable of when he [[enabled]] his [[distorted]] [[inventiveness]] [[executing]] [[mutiny]] and [[donne]] us a [[flick]] that is both hypnotic and [[intriguing]] [[whereas]] [[however]] [[maintenance]] the [[delusional]] [[sensuality]] [[inalienable]] in his [[jobs]]. Jerry Van Rooyen's [[funky]] score pulsates as the viewer is [[tossed]] from one [[odd]] [[screenplay]] to another as we follow the [[lawsuits]] of a striptease [[performers]] ([[Renault]]) who may be schizophrenic, or may indeed (as one [[cryptic]] character states) be a [[demon]], [[attempts]] to come to terms with the world she [[lives]]. A [[wondrous]] and [[mysterious]] piece of [[movie]] [[heavily]] [[suggested]] to [[everybody]] with [[yet]] a passing interest in alternative [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2604 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I really enjoyed this [[movie]] as a young [[kid]]. [[At]] that age I [[thought]] that the [[silly]] baseball antics were funny and that the movie was "cool" because of it's about [[sports]]. [[Now]], [[several]] [[years]] [[later]], I can [[look]] back and see what a well [[designed]] [[movie]] this was. This movie opened my eyes as a [[small]] [[child]] to the [[struggles]] other [[children]] [[dealt]] with and [[real]] [[world]] [[issues]]. That kind of [[exposure]] is [[largely]] [[lacking]] in kids movies these days which I don't think is to our society's [[benefit]]. Sure the baseball antics [[seem]] [[really]] [[dumb]] now, but they [[drew]] kids in. No seven year old is going to [[ask]] to see a [[movie]] about foster children, but they will [[ask]] to [[see]] a movie about baseball. Disney realized this [[fact]] and [[took]] advantage of it to [[teach]] these children an [[important]] lesson about the [[world]].

As a young [[adult]] the performance of Al and the other [[angels]] [[seems]] far less [[impressive]], [[however]] I will give credit to the [[actors]] [[playing]] both [[children]] and Danny [[Glover]] who all did a [[fantastic]] job. I really enjoyed this [[film]] as a young [[kids]]. [[Under]] that age I [[thoughts]] that the [[preposterous]] baseball antics were funny and that the movie was "cool" because of it's about [[athletes]]. [[Currently]], [[many]] [[yrs]] [[subsequently]], I can [[peek]] back and see what a well [[intended]] [[movies]] this was. This movie opened my eyes as a [[minor]] [[infantile]] to the [[fight]] other [[kiddies]] [[treated]] with and [[actual]] [[worldwide]] [[problem]]. That kind of [[explanatory]] is [[basically]] [[missing]] in kids movies these days which I don't think is to our society's [[benefits]]. Sure the baseball antics [[looks]] [[truthfully]] [[idiotic]] now, but they [[called]] kids in. No seven year old is going to [[wondering]] to see a [[kino]] about foster children, but they will [[poser]] to [[seeing]] a movie about baseball. Disney realized this [[facto]] and [[taken]] advantage of it to [[taught]] these children an [[principal]] lesson about the [[globe]].

As a young [[grownups]] the performance of Al and the other [[angel]] [[looks]] far less [[noteworthy]], [[yet]] I will give credit to the [[actresses]] [[replay]] both [[kids]] and Danny [[Grover]] who all did a [[wondrous]] job. --------------------------------------------- Result 2605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I can't agree with any of the [[comments]]. First [[time]] I saw the film on a UK [[TV]] channel, it was presented as an indie film and if you take the [[film]] under this angle I think it's an all [[different]] matter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and got hooked instantly. The plot may be as bad as a JS's show (ie there is no plot) but the acting is wicked, it's [[hilarious]] and it's all in all an [[incredible]] trash [[movie]].

It [[says]] as much about [[America]] than a Bully or a [[Ken]] Park without the [[drama]] [[perspective]] but it [[gives]] a glimpse on the US [[society]], and more [[precisely]] on what afternoon [[TV]] [[viewers]] in [[America]] (and I [[believe]] there are plenty of them !) are interested in. After all it's the [[neighbours]] we're talking about, don't we ?

100% [[fun]] ! I can't agree with any of the [[observations]]. First [[moment]] I saw the film on a UK [[TELEVISION]] channel, it was presented as an indie film and if you take the [[cinema]] under this angle I think it's an all [[multiple]] matter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and got hooked instantly. The plot may be as bad as a JS's show (ie there is no plot) but the acting is wicked, it's [[comic]] and it's all in all an [[unthinkable]] trash [[cinematography]].

It [[alleges]] as much about [[Americas]] than a Bully or a [[Keane]] Park without the [[teatro]] [[standpoint]] but it [[affords]] a glimpse on the US [[societies]], and more [[accurately]] on what afternoon [[TVS]] [[listeners]] in [[Americas]] (and I [[believing]] there are plenty of them !) are interested in. After all it's the [[neighbor]] we're talking about, don't we ?

100% [[amusing]] ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] [[Given]] the people involved, it is [[hard]] to see why this movie should be so messed up and [[dull]]. The [[writer]], David Ward, wrote the [[amazing]] caper film "The Sting" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like "Klute," "Start the Revolution Without Me," and "Kelly's Heroes." Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. [[At]] the same time the [[movie]] [[wants]] to be hip [[satire]], a series of comedy [[sketches]] of the [[type]] that the NBC television [[show]] "[[Saturday]] [[Night]]" [[would]] do so well [[two]] years [[later]]. The [[bad]] [[result]] is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits [[destroy]] any [[kind]] of [[suspense]] that the [[heist]] might have. It is [[quite]] literally a [[movie]] that keeps smashing into itself, just as the [[cars]] in the [[cars]] in the [[demolition]] scenes [[run]] into each other.

The only [[real]] interest for me was [[watching]] [[Jane]] Fonda. Her "Iris Caine" is [[supposed]] to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute [[character]] in "Klute" Yet, one doesn't [[believe]] her for a [[moment]]. It is [[always]] Jane Fonda pretending to be a [[prostitute]] that we are [[watching]]. It is as [[terrible]] a performance as her performance in "Klute" was terrific. It [[would]] be a [[good]] lesson for acting [[teachers]] to [[run]] the two [[films]] together to [[show]] how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or [[pathetic]]. It [[suggests]] that actors are only as good as their writers and directors. [[Awarded]] the people involved, it is [[laborious]] to see why this movie should be so messed up and [[boring]]. The [[novelist]], David Ward, wrote the [[surprising]] caper film "The Sting" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like "Klute," "Start the Revolution Without Me," and "Kelly's Heroes." Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. [[In]] the same time the [[filmmaking]] [[wanted]] to be hip [[sarcasm]], a series of comedy [[portraits]] of the [[kind]] that the NBC television [[shows]] "[[Saturdays]] [[Nighttime]]" [[could]] do so well [[deux]] years [[thereafter]]. The [[rotten]] [[findings]] is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits [[destroys]] any [[types]] of [[sufferance]] that the [[burglary]] might have. It is [[rather]] literally a [[filmmaking]] that keeps smashing into itself, just as the [[automobile]] in the [[automobile]] in the [[ruining]] scenes [[running]] into each other.

The only [[actual]] interest for me was [[staring]] [[Jin]] Fonda. Her "Iris Caine" is [[presumed]] to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute [[characters]] in "Klute" Yet, one doesn't [[think]] her for a [[time]]. It is [[continuously]] Jane Fonda pretending to be a [[prostitution]] that we are [[staring]]. It is as [[frightful]] a performance as her performance in "Klute" was terrific. It [[could]] be a [[buena]] lesson for acting [[teacher]] to [[running]] the two [[movies]] together to [[displays]] how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or [[lamentable]]. It [[suggest]] that actors are only as good as their writers and directors. --------------------------------------------- Result 2607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although the beginning of the movie in New York takes too long, the movie is a must see for people who like this genre. When Hannah goes to Berlin to visit the older woman who helped her mother during the war, the movie gets much much better.The movie is a bit like The Pianist, can not really be compared. --------------------------------------------- Result 2608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I waited for this movie to come out for a while in Canada, and when it finally did, I was very excited to see it. I really enjoyed it. Of course, in the beginning, it is a very sad movie (and it was New Years Day - making it even sadder) - however, it sticks with you. The next day I was thinking about it again, because although it revolves around something so emotionally draining, you realize after a few days that it is such a beautiful story. How one person can be seen as the link to so many people, but sometimes you can be blinded so many things. And how Diane Keaton's character kind of saves the rest of them by just being there. And how they save her in the process as well. It was such an excellent movie, and Chris Pine (one of my favourite actors) provides the perfect comic relief. It is definitely a movie that will need a box of tissues, but will really stay with you for a long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I started to watch this movie on VH-1 I cringed. The MTV movies were all bad so I wasnt expecting much. But this movie was really good. I liked it a lot. And it even had a twist at the end. See this movie because it shows that Made For TV movies that are good exist. --------------------------------------------- Result 2610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Best animated movie ever made. This film explores not only the vast world of modern animation with absolutely boggling effects, but the branches of the human mind, soul, and philosophy. The story features a family of cats, where in the big sister dies, the younger brother sees this and rescues her body, but when she awakens she is left without a soul. So, the two sibling cats embark on a journey to find it. I have related this journey to many things. The history of the world, the bible, the cycle of life, and every time I watch it I discover more and more hidden themes and metaphors. If you aren't so into the physiological aspect of it then, you will still adore it. The animation is superb, and the creative scenes will have you attached to the screen. For example, the ocean freezing in time, god eating soup out of the earth, a strange and slightly SNM retelling of Hansel and Gretel. To conclude, Cat Soup is an absolute treat for anyone.

PS- Not for kids, gratuitous violence included. --------------------------------------------- Result 2611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I got a DVD of "Bogeyman" and this stunker was an extra feature. I assumed that it was "Boogeyman II" because it was paired with the original. But you know what they say about those who "assume": it makes an "ass-" out of "u-" and "me." I had read before viewing that BII contains a lot of footage from the original and that it starred actress Love. While watching "Return of the Boogeyman," I decided to stick around through the original footage to see the notorious death-by-toothbrush scene. Before I knew it, the film was over. Rip-off. I think that I thought this was BII because this has a similar title to one of BII's alternate titles. Oh well, at least this was just an extra feature, right?

Let me stop talking about my mistake and start talking about the movie's mistakes. Many, many, mistakes. Who does this guy Ulli Whatever think he is? Does he really think the same movie will sell in different forms. There is nothing original holding Part III up. It is basically a flashback of the original through the eyes of a psychic, who is giving us a gruelingly boring play-by-play as everything happens. That's the movie. Oh, and one death-by-stereo scene, but you can read that off someone else's review. My interest in "Boogeyman II" is forever lost.

Final Note: This is not a series of films to watch back to back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Rajinikanth becomes born again after getting a magical power which he can [[use]] seven times.

There are [[several]] [[problems]] with this [[movie]] that are [[obvious]] to the casual audience: the 50ish Rajinikanth is still at home with his parents; the father of the girl next door [[thinks]] that he is a [[compelling]] "boy" ('vaseekaramaana paiyan'); Rajinikanth suddenly interrupts the [[movie]] with his [[sermons]], the [[worst]] being how women of yesteryears got their exercise through household work--yet we are to believe that he is not a theist; even though he was well read, he wastes six of his seven powers on a stupid kite; I can go on, but you get the picture.

There are god-men, there are gods, and there is Rajinikanth. The directory has difficulty fitting Rajinikanth into one of these categories. [[Initially]], Rajinikanth is just Rajinikanth doing what Tamil heroes do--stand up to villains and, in spite of being the oldest, getting courted by the [[prettiest]] girl in the movie. Rajinikanth does this well and some of Rajinikanth's trademark styles are actually enjoyable--"baba count" is a novelty. What makes this [[movie]] [[unbearable]] is that those few initial minutes are just a preface to an [[worst]] book to be ever written. Even that preface is punctuated with some comedy which are [[forced]] and obvious.

The director doesn't explain the purpose of the hero; we see that the hero is facing several hurdles (from politicians, as usual) but we can't really root for the hero because we don't know what the hero's ultimate goal is. At the end, when everyone wants him to be the leader, the hero gives another one of his sermons and walks away to become a hermit. The director offers no solution to the problem in the climax scene.

A. R. Rehman's score is really interesting. Either he shows patches of brilliance or he didn't bother to invest himself fully into this movie--who can blame him. There is one scene where Rajinikanth steps into the van of one of the crooks and then throws the knife and starts his baba count. The music is very apt for the moment and acts as a catalyst adding further tension. The songs are all mediocre, no one would bother with the songs from this movie after a few years.

Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest rank you can assign in IMDb. This movie has all the elements that justify its rightful place at the nether of IMDb's ranking. Rajinikanth becomes born again after getting a magical power which he can [[used]] seven times.

There are [[different]] [[troubles]] with this [[filmmaking]] that are [[overt]] to the casual audience: the 50ish Rajinikanth is still at home with his parents; the father of the girl next door [[think]] that he is a [[persuasive]] "boy" ('vaseekaramaana paiyan'); Rajinikanth suddenly interrupts the [[filmmaking]] with his [[speech]], the [[gravest]] being how women of yesteryears got their exercise through household work--yet we are to believe that he is not a theist; even though he was well read, he wastes six of his seven powers on a stupid kite; I can go on, but you get the picture.

There are god-men, there are gods, and there is Rajinikanth. The directory has difficulty fitting Rajinikanth into one of these categories. [[Originally]], Rajinikanth is just Rajinikanth doing what Tamil heroes do--stand up to villains and, in spite of being the oldest, getting courted by the [[happiest]] girl in the movie. Rajinikanth does this well and some of Rajinikanth's trademark styles are actually enjoyable--"baba count" is a novelty. What makes this [[film]] [[unsustainable]] is that those few initial minutes are just a preface to an [[worse]] book to be ever written. Even that preface is punctuated with some comedy which are [[obliged]] and obvious.

The director doesn't explain the purpose of the hero; we see that the hero is facing several hurdles (from politicians, as usual) but we can't really root for the hero because we don't know what the hero's ultimate goal is. At the end, when everyone wants him to be the leader, the hero gives another one of his sermons and walks away to become a hermit. The director offers no solution to the problem in the climax scene.

A. R. Rehman's score is really interesting. Either he shows patches of brilliance or he didn't bother to invest himself fully into this movie--who can blame him. There is one scene where Rajinikanth steps into the van of one of the crooks and then throws the knife and starts his baba count. The music is very apt for the moment and acts as a catalyst adding further tension. The songs are all mediocre, no one would bother with the songs from this movie after a few years.

Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest rank you can assign in IMDb. This movie has all the elements that justify its rightful place at the nether of IMDb's ranking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2613 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen. The DVD was given to me free with an order I placed online for non DVD related items.

No wonder they were given away, surely no one could part with money for this drivel.

How some reviewers can say they found it hilarious beggars belief, the person who includes it in the worst five films ever has got it spot on.

How on earth a talented actor like Philip Seymour Hoffman could get involved in this rubbish is unbelievable. Mostly toilet humour and badly done at that.

Anyone wanting to be entertained should avoid this at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't hand out ten star ratings easily. A movie really has to impress me, and The Bourne Ultimatum has gone far beyond that. Furthermore, this trilogy has come together so nicely, that I believe it to be one of the greatest motion picture trilogies of our time. Though all three films could not be any more different from the Ludlum novels, they still stand as a powerful landmark in cinematic achievement. The Bourne Ultimatum made me want to cry that the series was complete, yet I could not even attempt to stop smiling for hours.

From the moment that the opening title appeared, I knew we were in for a ride. Paul Greengrass has done it again. Everything we love from the previous Bourne films is here once again: the action, the dialogue, and of course the shaky camera. However for me, that last one was never a problem. I think it adds to the suspense.

I will be back to see this film several times before it is released on DVD, simply because it is genius. It is a perfectly satisfying conclusion, and should stand the test of time as a fantastic movie, and altogether, an unforgettable trilogy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2615 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I rented the video of "The Piano Teacher" knowing nothing about it other than what was written on the video box. I did this with some trepidation because films that win awards at Cannes are usually very good or very bad. Unfortunately, this one falls in the latter category. About one quarter of the [[way]] into it I found myself saying out loud, "This movie is boring." About half [[way]] through I was saying to myself, "Where have I [[seen]] this before?" [[At]] the three quarters [[mark]] I had [[figured]] it out.

In spite of its literary origins, this [[film]] is [[essentially]] a remake of Robert Altman's much earlier (1969), and [[better]], "That Cold Day in the Park." Although the details obviously differ and Altman's work was more plot-driven and less of a character study, the two films are thematically identical. There is nothing "new" to be seen in this [[production]]. Every aspect of it has been [[done]] before: a character spiralling out of control with [[increasingly]] self-destructive [[behavior]] (Abel Ferrara's "[[Bad]] Lieutenant" 1992); a perverse and doomed 'love' culminating in an [[operatic]] (near) death scene (David Cronenberg's "M. [[Butterfly]]" 1993); uncommonly brutal sex scenes (David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" 1986); and so on. [[Hence]], I am bemused by the [[fact]] that so many found the [[film]] to be "shocking," "shattering," etc. This [[highly]] derivative film seems to have been made for the sole purpose of making viewers feel uncomfortable, and clearly succeeded with some. However, I largely attribute such a reaction to a lack of film-viewing experience. See enough movies and you really will, eventually, have seen it all. And while it is true that I saw the expurgated 'R-rated' version, I doubt that the additional scenes would change my overall opinion of "The Piano Teacher."

Technically, the film is not without merit. There is some very good camera work and the [[lighting]] is excellent. Isabelle Huppert's creditable performance also helps save it from being a [[waste]] of time. This is the first of Haneke's films that I've seen, and if I were to see more I expect I would have the same opinion of him that I have of Ferrara: an interesting [[director]] but not nearly the genius others make him out to be. Rating: 4/10. I rented the video of "The Piano Teacher" knowing nothing about it other than what was written on the video box. I did this with some trepidation because films that win awards at Cannes are usually very good or very bad. Unfortunately, this one falls in the latter category. About one quarter of the [[routes]] into it I found myself saying out loud, "This movie is boring." About half [[routes]] through I was saying to myself, "Where have I [[noticed]] this before?" [[During]] the three quarters [[branded]] I had [[thought]] it out.

In spite of its literary origins, this [[filmmaking]] is [[mostly]] a remake of Robert Altman's much earlier (1969), and [[best]], "That Cold Day in the Park." Although the details obviously differ and Altman's work was more plot-driven and less of a character study, the two films are thematically identical. There is nothing "new" to be seen in this [[productivity]]. Every aspect of it has been [[effected]] before: a character spiralling out of control with [[gradually]] self-destructive [[behaviors]] (Abel Ferrara's "[[Rotten]] Lieutenant" 1992); a perverse and doomed 'love' culminating in an [[lyrical]] (near) death scene (David Cronenberg's "M. [[Butterflies]]" 1993); uncommonly brutal sex scenes (David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" 1986); and so on. [[So]], I am bemused by the [[facto]] that so many found the [[filmmaking]] to be "shocking," "shattering," etc. This [[eminently]] derivative film seems to have been made for the sole purpose of making viewers feel uncomfortable, and clearly succeeded with some. However, I largely attribute such a reaction to a lack of film-viewing experience. See enough movies and you really will, eventually, have seen it all. And while it is true that I saw the expurgated 'R-rated' version, I doubt that the additional scenes would change my overall opinion of "The Piano Teacher."

Technically, the film is not without merit. There is some very good camera work and the [[illumination]] is excellent. Isabelle Huppert's creditable performance also helps save it from being a [[squander]] of time. This is the first of Haneke's films that I've seen, and if I were to see more I expect I would have the same opinion of him that I have of Ferrara: an interesting [[superintendent]] but not nearly the genius others make him out to be. Rating: 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2616 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The Stone [[Boy]] is an [[almost]] [[forgotten]] [[drama]] from the 1980s. [[Considering]] how many [[famous]] or [[soon]] to be famous people are in the [[film]], one wonders how it [[could]] have been so [[overlooked]]. This is a slow, [[moody]], but [[touching]] account of a tragedy that [[befalls]] a farm family. The film is more or less an indictment of Midwestern stoic values and suppression of emotion. The film will not be for all [[tastes]], but [[anyone]] who can [[appreciate]] [[real]] human drama should like it OK.

[[In]] the [[early]] moments of the film, we [[see]] two [[brothers]] [[head]] off in the [[early]] morning hours to [[pick]] some peas and [[maybe]] shoot a [[duck]] or two if they're [[lucky]]. [[While]] [[climbing]] through a barbed [[wire]] fence, the [[gun]] accidentally [[discharges]] and the younger [[boy]] fatally shoots his [[older]] brother. These [[boys]] have [[apparently]] never taken a hunter safety course. The [[way]] for two men to [[properly]] [[go]] through a [[fence]] like this with one [[gun]] [[would]] be as follows: [[First]] [[man]] [[climbs]] through. [[Second]] [[man]] then passes him the [[gun]] through the fence. The first [[man]] then sets the [[gun]] down and [[helps]] the other through the [[fence]]. [[At]] no time should either man have his hands on both the gun and the fence.

Anyway, once his brother is [[killed]], 12-yr-old Arnold regresses into his own [[world]]. He does not even run for help after his brother is shot. He simply goes ahead and [[picks]] the peas and [[tells]] his family about the accident later. [[At]] no point during the [[funeral]] or [[inquest]] does Arnold seem to show any regret or sorrow at all. His [[family]] [[seems]] to shun him. Perhaps they are even angry at him for [[killing]] his brother. An ornery uncle played by Frederick Forrest is [[outwardly]] [[upset]] with Arnold, even [[though]] the [[older]] brother's [[death]] [[allows]] him to [[hit]] on the kid's girlfriend. Arnold's [[parents]] don't seem to understand how to [[deal]] with their son. They really don't even [[try]] to talk to him. About the only person he can communicate with is his grandfather who is played in typical grandfatherly skill by Wilford Brimley. After a while, Arnold even moves in with the old timer.

Nothing [[seems]] to get Arnold to open up until he takes a bizarre road trip to Reno Nevada to inexplicably look up his uncle's ex-wife. Once he meets her, he begins to emerge from his shell after apologizing to her for breaking up her marriage by starting all of the family's turmoil with the accident. From here on, the film becomes a quick study in reconciliation and reawakening.

The acting is hauntingly distant in most cases. Robert Duvall and Glenn Close make the perfect stoic farm parents. Forrest is good, but maybe trying too hard to channel Paul Newman's performance in Hud. The cinematography is exceptional, too. If you like moody pictures about common folk, this one may be for you. Some even may be advised to bring some tissues. 8 of 10 stars.

The Hound. The Stone [[Guy]] is an [[around]] [[neglected]] [[opera]] from the 1980s. [[Reviewing]] how many [[notorious]] or [[promptly]] to be famous people are in the [[flick]], one wonders how it [[would]] have been so [[neglect]]. This is a slow, [[quirky]], but [[affects]] account of a tragedy that [[befell]] a farm family. The film is more or less an indictment of Midwestern stoic values and suppression of emotion. The film will not be for all [[flavours]], but [[somebody]] who can [[appreciates]] [[authentic]] human drama should like it OK.

[[Throughout]] the [[precocious]] moments of the film, we [[consults]] two [[plymouth]] [[jefe]] off in the [[swift]] morning hours to [[opting]] some peas and [[presumably]] shoot a [[ducks]] or two if they're [[luck]]. [[Although]] [[surged]] through a barbed [[cables]] fence, the [[weapon]] accidentally [[spills]] and the younger [[fella]] fatally shoots his [[elder]] brother. These [[guy]] have [[allegedly]] never taken a hunter safety course. The [[manner]] for two men to [[sufficiently]] [[going]] through a [[fencing]] like this with one [[weapon]] [[ought]] be as follows: [[Firstly]] [[guy]] [[surged]] through. [[Secondly]] [[guy]] then passes him the [[handgun]] through the fence. The first [[guy]] then sets the [[pistol]] down and [[succour]] the other through the [[fencing]]. [[During]] no time should either man have his hands on both the gun and the fence.

Anyway, once his brother is [[murdering]], 12-yr-old Arnold regresses into his own [[globe]]. He does not even run for help after his brother is shot. He simply goes ahead and [[opting]] the peas and [[told]] his family about the accident later. [[For]] no point during the [[funerary]] or [[investigative]] does Arnold seem to show any regret or sorrow at all. His [[familia]] [[appears]] to shun him. Perhaps they are even angry at him for [[murdering]] his brother. An ornery uncle played by Frederick Forrest is [[externally]] [[angered]] with Arnold, even [[despite]] the [[oldest]] brother's [[decease]] [[entitles]] him to [[slapped]] on the kid's girlfriend. Arnold's [[parent]] don't seem to understand how to [[addresses]] with their son. They really don't even [[attempted]] to talk to him. About the only person he can communicate with is his grandfather who is played in typical grandfatherly skill by Wilford Brimley. After a while, Arnold even moves in with the old timer.

Nothing [[seem]] to get Arnold to open up until he takes a bizarre road trip to Reno Nevada to inexplicably look up his uncle's ex-wife. Once he meets her, he begins to emerge from his shell after apologizing to her for breaking up her marriage by starting all of the family's turmoil with the accident. From here on, the film becomes a quick study in reconciliation and reawakening.

The acting is hauntingly distant in most cases. Robert Duvall and Glenn Close make the perfect stoic farm parents. Forrest is good, but maybe trying too hard to channel Paul Newman's performance in Hud. The cinematography is exceptional, too. If you like moody pictures about common folk, this one may be for you. Some even may be advised to bring some tissues. 8 of 10 stars.

The Hound. --------------------------------------------- Result 2617 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first film ever made. Workers streaming from a factory, some cycling, most walking, moving right or left. Along with Melies, the Lumieres are both the starting point and the point of departure for cinema - with Melies begins narrative fiction, cinema, fantasy, artifice, spectacle; with the Lumieres pure, unadorned, observation. The truth. There are many intellectuals who regret the ossification of cinema from the latter into the tired formulae of the former.

But consider this short again. There is nothing 'objective' about it. The film is full of action - a static, inhuman scene burst into life, activity, and the quiet harmony of the frame is ruptured, decentred from the back to right or left (but never, of course, the front, where the camera is). And yet the camera stands stock still, contains the energy, the possible subversion, subordinates it to its will. The cinematograph may be a revolutionary invention, but it will be used for conservative purposes - to map out the world, edit it, restrict it, limit it.

worse is the historical reality of the film. These factory workers are Lumiere employees. The bosses are spying on their workers, the unseen eye regarding his faceless minions. The film therefore describes two types of imprisonment. Behind the gates, the workers are confined in their workplace. The opening of the gate seems to be an image of freedom, escape, but they face another wall, the fourth wall, further confining them. The first film is also the first example of CCTV surveillance, an image of unseen, all-seeing authority entrapping its servants. A frightening, all too prophetic movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] One [[hour]], eight [[minutes]] and twelve seconds into this [[flick]] and I decided it was pretty lame. That was right after Hopalong ([[Chris]] Lybbert) drops on his [[horse]] from a [[tree]] to [[rejoin]] the good [[guy]] posse. I was [[pretty]] [[mystified]] by the whole Hopalong Cassidy/[[Great]] Bar 20 [[gimmick]] which didn't [[translate]] into [[anything]] at all. Obviously, the name Coppola in the [[credits]] couldn't do [[anything]] to guarantee success here, even with more than one listed.

[[If]] you [[make]] it to the end of the [[film]], you'll [[probably]] wind up asking yourself the same [[questions]] I did. What [[exactly]] was the hook with the gloves? What's up with the rodeo scenario? Who was The [[Stranger]] [[supposed]] to [[represent]]? Why did they make this [[film]]?

I [[could]] probably [[go]] on but my energy's been drained. Look, there's already a Western [[called]] "The [[Gunfighter]]" from 1950 with a [[guy]] named [[Gregory]] [[Peck]] as the title [[character]]. Watching it will make you feel as good as watching this one makes you feel bad. That one I can [[recommend]]. One [[hora]], eight [[mins]] and twelve seconds into this [[movie]] and I decided it was pretty lame. That was right after Hopalong ([[Kris]] Lybbert) drops on his [[equestrian]] from a [[trees]] to [[reintegrate]] the good [[guys]] posse. I was [[quite]] [[disconcerted]] by the whole Hopalong Cassidy/[[Grand]] Bar 20 [[stratagem]] which didn't [[transform]] into [[nothing]] at all. Obviously, the name Coppola in the [[credit]] couldn't do [[nothing]] to guarantee success here, even with more than one listed.

[[Though]] you [[deliver]] it to the end of the [[filmmaking]], you'll [[undeniably]] wind up asking yourself the same [[issues]] I did. What [[accurately]] was the hook with the gloves? What's up with the rodeo scenario? Who was The [[Outlander]] [[presumed]] to [[constituted]]? Why did they make this [[filmmaking]]?

I [[wo]] probably [[going]] on but my energy's been drained. Look, there's already a Western [[drew]] "The [[Shooter]]" from 1950 with a [[buddy]] named [[Gregoire]] [[Beck]] as the title [[personage]]. Watching it will make you feel as good as watching this one makes you feel bad. That one I can [[recommends]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2619 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The film version of Alice Walker's hugely emotive and influential 1983 novel (written largely as letters from the central character Celie to God) was a massive Oscar success, and rightly so.

In the role of the abused and awakened Celie, Whoopi [[Goldberg]] [[gave]] her [[best]] screen performance by miles. Not far behind her was Oprah Winfrey as [[Sofia]], the fiery woman tamed by fate. Others in the cast fleshed out the [[characters]] Walker had introduced so [[clearly]] on the page - [[Danny]] [[Glover]] as Albert, Celie's [[abusive]] husband; Margaret Avery as Shug, a force of [[change]] for the good; Willard Pugh and Rae Dawn [[Chong]] as Harpo and Squeak; Susan Beaubian as Corrine, the preacher's wife; and the much-missed Carl [[Anderson]] (otherwise [[best]] known as [[Judas]] in the 1973 film of Jesus [[Christ]] Superstar) as preacher Samuel.

Beautifully paced and sensitively [[written]], 'The [[Color]] Purple' does justice to its source while [[opening]] out the story to involve viewers of a feature-length drama. The film version of Alice Walker's hugely emotive and influential 1983 novel (written largely as letters from the central character Celie to God) was a massive Oscar success, and rightly so.

In the role of the abused and awakened Celie, Whoopi [[Tucker]] [[yielded]] her [[better]] screen performance by miles. Not far behind her was Oprah Winfrey as [[Sofie]], the fiery woman tamed by fate. Others in the cast fleshed out the [[features]] Walker had introduced so [[apparently]] on the page - [[Danby]] [[Grover]] as Albert, Celie's [[offensive]] husband; Margaret Avery as Shug, a force of [[amendment]] for the good; Willard Pugh and Rae Dawn [[Zheng]] as Harpo and Squeak; Susan Beaubian as Corrine, the preacher's wife; and the much-missed Carl [[Andersen]] (otherwise [[better]] known as [[Judea]] in the 1973 film of Jesus [[God]] Superstar) as preacher Samuel.

Beautifully paced and sensitively [[typed]], 'The [[Dye]] Purple' does justice to its source while [[opens]] out the story to involve viewers of a feature-length drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 2620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Wow]]. I went to the video store [[tonight]] because I was in the mood for a [[bad]] B [[Horror]] [[movie]] and I found this Gem. I looked at the [[cover]] and I [[thought]] it looked like just the [[movie]] for my [[mood]]. I [[brought]] it [[home]] and put it on.

This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in [[mind]]. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that [[crap]] like this [[existed]] amongst [[man]]. This movie seemed like a 5 [[year]] [[old]] wrote and [[directed]] it and that is being nice about it.

I am an aspiring [[director]] and this [[movie]] [[made]] me so [[mad]] that [[someone]] out there is actually [[paying]] this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a [[garbage]] dump shoveling [[crap]] where he belongs.

If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. "DON'T DO IT, IT'S [[NOT]] WORTH IT!" I really have [[nothing]] nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT! [[Whoo]]. I went to the video store [[mondays]] because I was in the mood for a [[unfavorable]] B [[Abomination]] [[filmmaking]] and I found this Gem. I looked at the [[coverings]] and I [[ideas]] it looked like just the [[filmmaking]] for my [[ambience]]. I [[made]] it [[household]] and put it on.

This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in [[intellect]]. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that [[baloney]] like this [[prevailed]] amongst [[guy]]. This movie seemed like a 5 [[annum]] [[archaic]] wrote and [[oriented]] it and that is being nice about it.

I am an aspiring [[superintendent]] and this [[filmmaking]] [[introduced]] me so [[crazy]] that [[everybody]] out there is actually [[pays]] this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a [[junk]] dump shoveling [[dammit]] where he belongs.

If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. "DON'T DO IT, IT'S [[NAH]] WORTH IT!" I really have [[none]] nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT! --------------------------------------------- Result 2621 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm a big fan of 50s sci-fi, but this is not one of my favorites. While the concept behind the movie was a natural vehicle for a classic teeny bopper sci-fi flick, the director counted too heavily on it to carry the movie. It's clear he was working with no money, because the entire movie is loaded with bloated dialogue that goes on and on forever. I have *never* seen so much time-killing in a movie.

There are probably less than 60 seconds of "blob footage" in the entire movie, and most of the rest of it is people engaging in a lot of poorly-written, run-on dialogue. It was fun to see Steve M. and Anita C. together, but good heavens...how could casting have thought anyone in their right mind would believe them as teenagers? --------------------------------------------- Result 2622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film provides the saga of a legendary Wild Bill Hickock. He, Buffalo Bill Cody, and Calamity Jane, are the central characters.

As the Civil War closes, Lincoln mentions his concern that the country's dynamism would be enhanced if people would follow the advice, "Go West, young man," which, mercifully, the film didn't erroneously attribute to Horace Greeley, as a number of others did. But then, he gets assassinated, and some financiers speculate that they can get rich selling weapons to the American Indians.

In the meantime, we see Wild Bill Hickock, who interacts with a small boy, while a steamboat is loading at a dock along the Mississippi. Wild Bill uses a Bowie knife, which he eventually gives to the boy, calling it an "Arkansas Toothpick," which in reality was a different type of knife, though both were used throughout the frontier.

Hickock eventually meets Buffalo Bill Cody, who looks close to the photographs and paintings of the actual man. Cody has just gotten married, and is bringing his bride to the Old West to settle down.

When they arrive at their destination, they run into Calamity Jane, who has a crush on Hickock. She looks at Cody's wife, and asks Buffalo Bill, "Is this your mopsy?" The line was one that caused the Hayes Board some problem, since one definition of "mopsy" was prostitute. Demille wanted the line in, and one of his aides pointed out that in Beatrix Potter's books about Peter Rabbit, three of the rabbits were Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. He pointed this out and asked the censors to identify "the rabbit of ill virtue." It worked; the line stayed in.

The Indians were getting restless, in part because of the superior weaponry they got from the agent of the Eastern financiers. Cody and Hickock were asked to help scout the area, so that troops could get safely through to a beleaguered area. Cody led the troops; Hickock went to check out the activities of an Indian chief, who was an old acquaintance, and who was leading some of the hostile Indians.

Calamity Jane gets captured, and Hickock gets captured trying to save her. They are brought to the chief, and although neither would talk, torture applied to Hickock breaks Calamity Jane's willpower, and she tells the route Cody is using.

The two are released, and Hickock joins up with Cody and his forces, in part to alert them they're walking into a trap. With Hickok's help, they hold off the Indian attack.

Hickock decides to go after the gun runners, and finally takes them prisoner. As they're waiting for authorities, Hickock is gunned down by being shot in the back while playing cards.

There are numerous historic anomalies in the film, but it retains the flavor of legend. Pretty good for the 1930s. --------------------------------------------- Result 2623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first saw this film when I was about seven years old and was completely enchanted by it then but for years was unable to find out what the film was called. now i am twenty one and stumbled upon the film by accident about two weeks ago and bought a copy. although my memory of the film was a little hazy I was in no way disappointed by what I saw. the animation in this film is superb conjuring up an entire world that is so believable and so well animated that you are drawn in to the film by that alone. But this film also has a plot that will enchant and entertain adults and children alike. with a floating island, a mad general, a friendly pirate granny and a well constructed love story this film will not let you down I would recommend this film to any one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2624 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Tenshu is [[imprisoned]] and sentenced to death. When he survives electrocution the government [[officials]] [[give]] him a [[choice]] to either be electrocute at a [[greater]] [[degree]] or [[agree]] to some experiments. He [[chooses]] the [[experimentation]] and is placed in a large metallic [[cell]] with a [[bad]] ass criminal who also survived the electrocution. They can have whatever the [[want]] in the [[room]] (within [[reason]]), but they can't [[leave]]. after a few days there [[meals]] are [[cut]] down to one [[per]] day and the [[room]] temp is set up too 100. After some more [[alarms]] are [[sounded]] at intervals so they can't [[sleep]]. One day a 'witch' [[come]] into their [[cell]] (albeit a glassed off [[portion]]) What happens next I'll [[let]] you [[find]] out. I may be in the [[minority]] here but I [[liked]] the [[build]] up, it was [[intriguing]] to me. Now if the payoff was half as good as the build up was I would have rated this so much higher.

My Grade: C+

[[Media]] Blaster's 2 [[DVD]] set Extras: Disc 1) Director's [[Cut]]; Trailers for "[[Versus]]", "Aragami", "Attack the Gas Station", and "Deadly Outlaw Rekka" Disc 2) [[Theatrical]] [[Cut]]; [[Commentary]] with Hideo Sakaki, Ryuhei Kitamura, Sakaguchi Takuand Tsutomu Takahashi; Cast and crew [[interview]]; Making of; Original [[Trailer]]; and Promo Teasers Tenshu is [[detaining]] and sentenced to death. When he survives electrocution the government [[officer]] [[lend]] him a [[pick]] to either be electrocute at a [[largest]] [[diploma]] or [[concur]] to some experiments. He [[selection]] the [[experiments]] and is placed in a large metallic [[cellular]] with a [[amiss]] ass criminal who also survived the electrocution. They can have whatever the [[wanna]] in the [[salle]] (within [[justification]]), but they can't [[letting]]. after a few days there [[dinner]] are [[clipping]] down to one [[for]] day and the [[rooms]] temp is set up too 100. After some more [[scares]] are [[seemed]] at intervals so they can't [[slept]]. One day a 'witch' [[coming]] into their [[cells]] (albeit a glassed off [[fraction]]) What happens next I'll [[letting]] you [[unearthed]] out. I may be in the [[minorities]] here but I [[enjoyed]] the [[construction]] up, it was [[exciting]] to me. Now if the payoff was half as good as the build up was I would have rated this so much higher.

My Grade: C+

[[Medium]] Blaster's 2 [[DVDS]] set Extras: Disc 1) Director's [[Clipping]]; Trailers for "[[Against]]", "Aragami", "Attack the Gas Station", and "Deadly Outlaw Rekka" Disc 2) [[Theater]] [[Sliced]]; [[Remark]] with Hideo Sakaki, Ryuhei Kitamura, Sakaguchi Takuand Tsutomu Takahashi; Cast and crew [[interviews]]; Making of; Original [[Camper]]; and Promo Teasers --------------------------------------------- Result 2625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] The most [[horrible]] retelling of a great series. It should not have been named Battlestar Galactica, because it's only the same in name alone. Too many [[changes]] to just have changes. You have characters turned from male to female, black to asian to cylon all in a way to "attract female audiences," when there was already strong female characters that could have just been made stronger. Gone are the egyptian feeling. Gone are the quest for earth. The lack of cylons to go to terminator rejects takes away from the film, especially when one is made a fembot. Granted the original show had a lot of cheese to it, but it had a large following. They tried to hold onto this following but [[give]] the fans [[nothing]] to [[work]] with and basically spit in their face as they make it "their own story." Changes are good, when they make something better, not to just make them. The most [[shocking]] retelling of a great series. It should not have been named Battlestar Galactica, because it's only the same in name alone. Too many [[shift]] to just have changes. You have characters turned from male to female, black to asian to cylon all in a way to "attract female audiences," when there was already strong female characters that could have just been made stronger. Gone are the egyptian feeling. Gone are the quest for earth. The lack of cylons to go to terminator rejects takes away from the film, especially when one is made a fembot. Granted the original show had a lot of cheese to it, but it had a large following. They tried to hold onto this following but [[confer]] the fans [[none]] to [[cooperated]] with and basically spit in their face as they make it "their own story." Changes are good, when they make something better, not to just make them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] The most difficult thing about this [[movie]] is to [[say]] [[anything]] positive about it. The [[characters]] were stereotypical "white-trash", the movie's "plot" was stunted from the [[beginning]], and the worst [[feature]] of this [[movie]] was that the nudity was so blatantly from [[body]] doubles it was [[funny]]. Regretfully, that was the only [[funny]] [[thing]] in the [[movie]]. Ms. Jenkins would be [[better]] [[served]] if in the future, she [[would]] refrain from [[using]] her life-story to "[[entertain]]" people. It was [[simply]] that [[bad]]. The one positive aspect of this [[movie]] (this has nothing to do with the lack-of-quality of the [[film]]) is that my brother shelled out the money for this [[stinker]]. The most difficult thing about this [[filmmaking]] is to [[told]] [[nothing]] positive about it. The [[trait]] were stereotypical "white-trash", the movie's "plot" was stunted from the [[initiation]], and the worst [[trait]] of this [[filmmaking]] was that the nudity was so blatantly from [[agencies]] doubles it was [[comical]]. Regretfully, that was the only [[comical]] [[stuff]] in the [[films]]. Ms. Jenkins would be [[optimum]] [[played]] if in the future, she [[could]] refrain from [[uses]] her life-story to "[[distract]]" people. It was [[solely]] that [[unfavourable]]. The one positive aspect of this [[filmmaking]] (this has nothing to do with the lack-of-quality of the [[movies]]) is that my brother shelled out the money for this [[tosser]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie starred a totally [[forgotten]] star from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's "Baron Munchausen") as well as Jimmy Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person [[would]] recognize [[today]]. Film fanatics will also recognize the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.

As for the Stooges, this is a [[film]] from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as "Ted Healy and his Stooges" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this [[nasty]] and [[rather]] [[untalented]] man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is [[history]]. Within a year, they were making very successful [[shorts]] for Columbia and executives at MGM were [[soon]] kicking themselves for [[losing]] the team. This [[sort]] of [[thing]] was a common occurrence at MGM, a [[great]] studio which had no [[idea]] what to do with [[comedy]] (such as the [[films]] of Buster Keaton, Laurel and [[Hardy]], [[Abbott]] and Costello and others). [[In]] fact, up until they left for [[Columbia]], MGM put them in a [[wide]] [[variety]] of [[odd]] [[film]] roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING [[LADY]]. And, oddly, in this [[film]] they didn't act as a team--they just did [[various]] [[supporting]] [[roles]], such as Larry [[playing]] the piano!

This particular film [[begins]] with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are [[rescued]] and [[brought]] [[home]], all sense of [[structure]] to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.

In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).

Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the "Clean as a Whistle" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called "Pre-Code" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word "Clean" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean! This movie starred a totally [[omitted]] star from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's "Baron Munchausen") as well as Jimmy Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person [[could]] recognize [[nowadays]]. Film fanatics will also recognize the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.

As for the Stooges, this is a [[kino]] from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as "Ted Healy and his Stooges" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this [[salacious]] and [[somewhat]] [[talentless]] man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is [[histories]]. Within a year, they were making very successful [[boxers]] for Columbia and executives at MGM were [[sooner]] kicking themselves for [[loses]] the team. This [[kind]] of [[stuff]] was a common occurrence at MGM, a [[marvellous]] studio which had no [[thoughts]] what to do with [[travesty]] (such as the [[filmmaking]] of Buster Keaton, Laurel and [[Sturdy]], [[Abbot]] and Costello and others). [[Among]] fact, up until they left for [[Colombia]], MGM put them in a [[vast]] [[diversity]] of [[unusual]] [[films]] roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING [[LADIES]]. And, oddly, in this [[filmmaking]] they didn't act as a team--they just did [[diverse]] [[helping]] [[functions]], such as Larry [[gaming]] the piano!

This particular film [[launching]] with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are [[rescuing]] and [[lodged]] [[homes]], all sense of [[architecture]] to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.

In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).

Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the "Clean as a Whistle" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called "Pre-Code" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word "Clean" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean! --------------------------------------------- Result 2628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I'm sorry, but even [[TJ]] Hooker's Adrian Zmed couldn't [[save]] this sequel. I went through half the movie [[thinking]] that this was a spoof of the original. Then came that wild and wacky [[motorcycle]] scene (notice that this is the only [[movie]] that [[Patricia]] Birch directs); and I [[sadly]] [[realized]] they were [[trying]] to be [[serious]]. I did get a kick out of the fact that the opposing gang, having lost their "wheels" due to their [[gambling]] habits in the original Grease, were forced to use [[motorcycles]] in the second [[movie]]. Being shamed by that putz character Carrington, I'd [[hate]] to [[see]] what they [[would]] resort to later: maybe [[Mopeds]]?

I also never [[bought]] the hackneyed theme: hunky-Australian-boy-can't-fit-into-Outsiders-dominated-school-ergo-goes-for -tough-guy-with-stupid-biker-helmet-look. It was Disney story [[gone]] [[horribly]] awry.

So, it looks [[like]] you CAN [[ruin]] a good thing by placing a bubble-gum smacking Michelle Pfeiffer in a musical. The only thing I [[took]] away from this [[movie]] was an [[idea]] of how [[many]] points out of [[ten]] to [[give]] it. I'm sorry, but even [[TIJUANA]] Hooker's Adrian Zmed couldn't [[rescuing]] this sequel. I went through half the movie [[ideology]] that this was a spoof of the original. Then came that wild and wacky [[biker]] scene (notice that this is the only [[filmmaking]] that [[Pat]] Birch directs); and I [[tragically]] [[performed]] they were [[try]] to be [[grave]]. I did get a kick out of the fact that the opposing gang, having lost their "wheels" due to their [[bets]] habits in the original Grease, were forced to use [[bikes]] in the second [[filmmaking]]. Being shamed by that putz character Carrington, I'd [[despise]] to [[behold]] what they [[could]] resort to later: maybe [[Scooters]]?

I also never [[acquiring]] the hackneyed theme: hunky-Australian-boy-can't-fit-into-Outsiders-dominated-school-ergo-goes-for -tough-guy-with-stupid-biker-helmet-look. It was Disney story [[disappeared]] [[awfully]] awry.

So, it looks [[likes]] you CAN [[downfall]] a good thing by placing a bubble-gum smacking Michelle Pfeiffer in a musical. The only thing I [[taken]] away from this [[filmmaking]] was an [[ideals]] of how [[innumerable]] points out of [[tio]] to [[lend]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Sondra Locke stinks in this film, but then she was an awful 'actress' anyway. Unfortunately, she drags everyone else (including then =real life boyfriend Clint Eastwood down the drain with her. But what was Clint Eastwood thinking when he agreed to star in this one? One read of the script should have told him that this one was going to be a [[real]] snorer. It's an exceptionally [[weak]] story, basically no story or plot at all. Add in [[bored]], poor acting, [[even]] from the normally [[good]] Eastwood. There's absolutely no [[action]] except a couple arguments and as far as I was concerned, this film ranks up at the top of the [[heap]] of natural sleep enhancers. Wow! Could a film BE any more boring? I think watching paint dry or the grass grow might be more fun. A [[real]] [[stinker]]. Don't bother with this one. Sondra Locke stinks in this film, but then she was an awful 'actress' anyway. Unfortunately, she drags everyone else (including then =real life boyfriend Clint Eastwood down the drain with her. But what was Clint Eastwood thinking when he agreed to star in this one? One read of the script should have told him that this one was going to be a [[veritable]] snorer. It's an exceptionally [[feeble]] story, basically no story or plot at all. Add in [[drilled]], poor acting, [[yet]] from the normally [[alright]] Eastwood. There's absolutely no [[activity]] except a couple arguments and as far as I was concerned, this film ranks up at the top of the [[battery]] of natural sleep enhancers. Wow! Could a film BE any more boring? I think watching paint dry or the grass grow might be more fun. A [[veritable]] [[tosser]]. Don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] This movie was a [[fantastic]] comedy. It had a lot of comedians star in it like Akshay Kumar,Rajpal Yadav,Paresh Raval and John Abraham.

Rimi Sen was good at playing Akshay Kumars wife and so were all the air hostesses. Mr Hot as Mac (Akshay Kumar) and Mr cool as Sam (John Abraham) are two fashion photographers who like the same girl Maggie (Neha Dupia). When John Abraham cheats on his work he becomes Akshay Kumars senior and Akshay Kumar gets really jealous because his flat has to be given to John Abraham and Neha Dupia starts liking John more. Akshay Kumar wants to be better than John Abraham so he finds a flat and he is going out with three different girls (Nitu Chandra,Nargis Bagheri,Daisy Boppana). This movie was a [[wondrous]] comedy. It had a lot of comedians star in it like Akshay Kumar,Rajpal Yadav,Paresh Raval and John Abraham.

Rimi Sen was good at playing Akshay Kumars wife and so were all the air hostesses. Mr Hot as Mac (Akshay Kumar) and Mr cool as Sam (John Abraham) are two fashion photographers who like the same girl Maggie (Neha Dupia). When John Abraham cheats on his work he becomes Akshay Kumars senior and Akshay Kumar gets really jealous because his flat has to be given to John Abraham and Neha Dupia starts liking John more. Akshay Kumar wants to be better than John Abraham so he finds a flat and he is going out with three different girls (Nitu Chandra,Nargis Bagheri,Daisy Boppana). --------------------------------------------- Result 2631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Spoiler below, but read on or you'll never know the horrible fate that awaits all planing to rent "Rodentz".

On a moonlit night, in a remote research laboratory, a major medical breakthrough is about to have deadly results. A chemical compound that was created to "hunt and destroy" deadly cancer cells has leaked from the hazardous waste disposal system into the building's basement. Now, the rodents involved in the laboratory experiment upstairs are not the only rats in the facility that will become the altered species. Professor Schultz, a leading bio-researcher, has just determined that the addition of a new enzyme now enables his "hunt and destroy" formulation to regenerate for the length of time necessary to neutralize deadly cancer tumors. When three varying degrees of the new mixture are administered to three different rats and the rest poured down the faulty "Waste Hazard" sink, shocking side-effects result in a night of terror.....right.....

Seriously, this is probably the worst film I've seen this year. Everything about it screams "Low-budget!", from the horrendous acting to the special effects which are some of the worst I've ever seen. The characters are clichéd morons and act in stupid, predictable ways: walking down dark hallways alone, looking for a cat, tripping and falling so the "rats" can catch up with them, boarding themselves up in a small room, etc.

While some films are cheaply made, this film really takes the cake. Every possible corner is cut, everything from reusing earlier shots, filming the "Lab" hallways from different angles to make it look bigger (That reminds me--why were only TWO guys working in this freakin' massive building?!?!?!?), to music and special effects that could be done on a children's workshop PC.

That brings me to the worst aspect of this steaming pile of dung--the special effects. Just horrendous. The computer generated rats look so fake and stand out in every scene so even the dumbest of film buffs could see they are computer generated. And that giant rat suit--OH MY GOD!!!!!!!! seriously, are we supposed to believe that freaking beany baby is a monster? Just pitiful........On the better side, some of the gore looks pretty cool, especially considering the budget.

The actors all suck. no one involved with the production cared or knew what they were doing. I've wasted enough time with review, just take my advice, it's garbage. 1/10.

About the DVD: The transfer sucks, the audio is passable and there's a commentary track on the disk by the director and two of his friends, who say they had absolutely nothing to do with making the film but were there to ask questions and make comments. All three of these sub-human primordial slime are so incredibly stupid that they should be institutionalized before they can harm themselves or others. I don't want to waste any more of you kind reader's time or mine, for I am starting to remember more than I want to about this film..... DVD rating: 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2632 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Sigh… I sincerely wonder why all the acclaimed and supposedly profound movie critics hold such a grudge against director Michael Winner? Surely he isn't the avatar of subtlety, as his films are practically always hard-handed and confronting, but so what? They're awesomely entertaining. His most [[famous]] action movies, like the [[first]] three [[entries]] in the "Death [[Wish]]"-series for example, are easy targets to clobber down because they [[allegedly]] glorify violence and the personal use of shotguns, but [[even]] when Winner takes on far more mature cinema genres – [[like]] the religious horrors of "The Sentinel" for example – he doesn't stand a [[chance]] with any of the critics. "The Sentinel" [[generated]] some [[controversy]] and infuriated [[several]] people upon its [[release]], when it [[leaked]] that Michael Winner cast [[genuinely]] malformed and handicapped people to [[portray]] the creatures [[attempting]] to [[cross]] the [[gateways]] between [[hell]] and earth. Pretty [[much]] the exact same [[controversy]] caused Todd's Browning's masterpiece and landmark in [[horror]] [[cinema]] "Freaks" to remain [[banned]] and [[unseen]] for over thirty [[years]]! And why? [[Just]] because certain prudish and [[easily]] offended people, who shouldn't watch the [[movie]] in the [[first]] [[place]], [[claim]] it's an unethical [[thing]] to do? I don't [[suppose]] [[Michael]] [[Winner]] or Todd Browning [[held]] these people at gunpoint or forced them to [[appear]] in their [[films]], so what [[gives]] us the right to feel embarrassed in their place? Another [[major]] [[reason]] why critics didn't [[warmly]] [[welcome]] "The Sentinel" is because [[Jeffrey]] Konvitz' novel – and thus [[Michael]] Winner's [[screenplay]] – is [[hugely]] derivative of other [[contemporary]] but far more successful religiously themed [[horror]] [[stories]] and thus, according to the merciless pens of [[horror]] [[critics]], little more than pure plagiarism. [[Admittedly]] "The Sentinel" borrows [[multiple]] [[substantial]] [[elements]] from "Rosemary's [[Baby]]", "The Omen" and "The Exorcist", but let's [[face]] it, 70's [[cinema]] [[largely]] thrives on stolen formulas and [[imitating]] [[success]] [[stories]]. If you [[overlook]] the [[slightly]] unoriginal [[concept]] and, in all [[fairness]], a [[handful]] of thoroughly confusing and [[unnecessary]] sub plots, "The [[Sentinel]]" honestly [[still]] remains a [[uniquely]] [[atmospheric]] and often downright petrifying 70's horror-highlight with an [[impressive]] [[ensemble]] cast and nightmarish [[imagery]] you're not likely to [[forget]] easy.

[[Alison]] [[Parker]], a ravishing [[model]] with some unprocessed mental traumas, moves into a stunning brownstone apartment in Brooklyn, deeply against the will of her boyfriend Michael who proposed to wed her several times already. Alison's physical existence and especially her mental condition drastically alter shortly after, and the ominous apartment appears to be the root of all misery. She meets eccentric neighbors and attends birthday parties for their cats, even though the landlady claims she and a blind priest are the only tenants. She frequently faints during her work assignments and has truly creepy visions of her bastard father and the night she attempted to commit suicide. It slowly becomes clear that Alison got chosen to serve a higher supernatural purpose inside this apartment building, but simultaneously malignant forces try and prevent this. It's truly regrettable how the promotional taglines and even brief synopsis on the back of the DVD immediately reveal that Alison's brownstone apartment is the earth's gateway to hell itself and she's the chosen one to guard it, because the film's script only slowly builds up towards this shocking revelation. For nearly 75 minutes (and throughout some sadly tedious and overlong sequences) Michael Winner successfully maintains the impression that Alison's own mind is playing tricks with her and that the involvement of the Catholic Church and her fiancée's odd behavior are strictly red herrings. Multiple of the horrific scenes come pretty close to being genius, like Alison's flashback or her first acquaintance with the priest upstairs. The whole climax, with the controversial guest appearances mentioned here above, is a literally perplexing showcase of pure terror and easily one of the most unforgettable and nail-biting denouements I ever witnessed.

The cast Michael Winner managed to gather is deeply impressive, especially considering "The Sentinel" still remains a legitimate horror movie and this genre isn't the most popular among prominent actors, but of course you also have to put the cast listing a little into perspective. With such an extended cast, obviously several of the roles in the film are little more than cameos. Martin Balsam and John Carradine, for example, only appear on screen for a couple of minutes all together. Several others (like Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger) perhaps add a lot of fame to the movie nowadays, but back when it was released they were still too unknown in order to attract curious viewers. My personal pick for best performances go to Burgess Meredith as the uncanny neighbor and Eli Wallach as the satirical police inspector. The relatively unknown Cristina Raines does an admirable job carrying the film and Chris Sarandon neatly back her up, even though he sports a ridiculous mustache. In my humble opinion "The Sentinel" is a marvelously entertaining and frightening horror movie, and most definitely a must-see for TRUE genre fanatics. Sigh… I sincerely wonder why all the acclaimed and supposedly profound movie critics hold such a grudge against director Michael Winner? Surely he isn't the avatar of subtlety, as his films are practically always hard-handed and confronting, but so what? They're awesomely entertaining. His most [[celebrated]] action movies, like the [[frst]] three [[entry]] in the "Death [[Wanna]]"-series for example, are easy targets to clobber down because they [[presumably]] glorify violence and the personal use of shotguns, but [[yet]] when Winner takes on far more mature cinema genres – [[iike]] the religious horrors of "The Sentinel" for example – he doesn't stand a [[possibilities]] with any of the critics. "The Sentinel" [[created]] some [[contention]] and infuriated [[different]] people upon its [[freed]], when it [[leaks]] that Michael Winner cast [[actually]] malformed and handicapped people to [[describe]] the creatures [[trying]] to [[croix]] the [[gateway]] between [[dammit]] and earth. Pretty [[very]] the exact same [[argument]] caused Todd's Browning's masterpiece and landmark in [[terror]] [[movies]] "Freaks" to remain [[prohibiting]] and [[invisible]] for over thirty [[ages]]! And why? [[Jen]] because certain prudish and [[readily]] offended people, who shouldn't watch the [[flick]] in the [[firstly]] [[placing]], [[grievance]] it's an unethical [[stuff]] to do? I don't [[imagine]] [[Michele]] [[Finalist]] or Todd Browning [[hold]] these people at gunpoint or forced them to [[appearing]] in their [[cinematic]], so what [[delivers]] us the right to feel embarrassed in their place? Another [[principal]] [[reasons]] why critics didn't [[sincerely]] [[salute]] "The Sentinel" is because [[Geoff]] Konvitz' novel – and thus [[Michele]] Winner's [[script]] – is [[incredibly]] derivative of other [[current]] but far more successful religiously themed [[terror]] [[narratives]] and thus, according to the merciless pens of [[terror]] [[detractors]], little more than pure plagiarism. [[Surely]] "The Sentinel" borrows [[diverse]] [[sizable]] [[components]] from "Rosemary's [[Honey]]", "The Omen" and "The Exorcist", but let's [[confront]] it, 70's [[theatre]] [[essentially]] thrives on stolen formulas and [[mimicking]] [[accomplishments]] [[narratives]]. If you [[neglect]] the [[moderately]] unoriginal [[notion]] and, in all [[equality]], a [[doorknob]] of thoroughly confusing and [[worthless]] sub plots, "The [[Sentry]]" honestly [[yet]] remains a [[singularly]] [[atmosphere]] and often downright petrifying 70's horror-highlight with an [[wondrous]] [[whole]] cast and nightmarish [[image]] you're not likely to [[forgot]] easy.

[[Rosalie]] [[Barker]], a ravishing [[modelling]] with some unprocessed mental traumas, moves into a stunning brownstone apartment in Brooklyn, deeply against the will of her boyfriend Michael who proposed to wed her several times already. Alison's physical existence and especially her mental condition drastically alter shortly after, and the ominous apartment appears to be the root of all misery. She meets eccentric neighbors and attends birthday parties for their cats, even though the landlady claims she and a blind priest are the only tenants. She frequently faints during her work assignments and has truly creepy visions of her bastard father and the night she attempted to commit suicide. It slowly becomes clear that Alison got chosen to serve a higher supernatural purpose inside this apartment building, but simultaneously malignant forces try and prevent this. It's truly regrettable how the promotional taglines and even brief synopsis on the back of the DVD immediately reveal that Alison's brownstone apartment is the earth's gateway to hell itself and she's the chosen one to guard it, because the film's script only slowly builds up towards this shocking revelation. For nearly 75 minutes (and throughout some sadly tedious and overlong sequences) Michael Winner successfully maintains the impression that Alison's own mind is playing tricks with her and that the involvement of the Catholic Church and her fiancée's odd behavior are strictly red herrings. Multiple of the horrific scenes come pretty close to being genius, like Alison's flashback or her first acquaintance with the priest upstairs. The whole climax, with the controversial guest appearances mentioned here above, is a literally perplexing showcase of pure terror and easily one of the most unforgettable and nail-biting denouements I ever witnessed.

The cast Michael Winner managed to gather is deeply impressive, especially considering "The Sentinel" still remains a legitimate horror movie and this genre isn't the most popular among prominent actors, but of course you also have to put the cast listing a little into perspective. With such an extended cast, obviously several of the roles in the film are little more than cameos. Martin Balsam and John Carradine, for example, only appear on screen for a couple of minutes all together. Several others (like Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger) perhaps add a lot of fame to the movie nowadays, but back when it was released they were still too unknown in order to attract curious viewers. My personal pick for best performances go to Burgess Meredith as the uncanny neighbor and Eli Wallach as the satirical police inspector. The relatively unknown Cristina Raines does an admirable job carrying the film and Chris Sarandon neatly back her up, even though he sports a ridiculous mustache. In my humble opinion "The Sentinel" is a marvelously entertaining and frightening horror movie, and most definitely a must-see for TRUE genre fanatics. --------------------------------------------- Result 2633 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen this film only the one time about 25 years ago, and to this day I have always told people it is probably the best film I have ever seen. Considering there was no verbal dialogue and only thought dialogue i found the film to be enthralling and I even found myself holding my breath so as not to make any sound. I would highly recomend this film, I wish it was available on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 2634 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I watched this today, partially [[attracted]] to the all-star cast and [[partly]] because I have [[enjoyed]] so many other films of this ilk. However, this is one to [[avoid]]. There are [[dozens]] of [[badly]] cut scenes where the [[continuity]] just does not [[flow]], the billiards [[challenge]] at the [[start]], for [[example]]. The fighting scenes with the [[natives]] are about as good as you [[would]] remember in those [[old]] black and [[white]] Tarzan [[movies]], you know where you see a spear [[fly]] through the air and camera [[cuts]] to a [[dead]] native lying motionless on the floor with it sticking from his thigh. Is that instantaneous [[death]]? There are [[also]] [[several]] [[quite]] [[unnecessary]] scenes which have nothing to do with the plot, like the [[little]] [[girl]] being rescued while collecting [[flowers]]. The [[really]] [[badly]] animated clay [[toys]] are too painful to watch. If you do [[see]] this [[movie]] the [[crabs]] which inch forward at about 5kph are the [[highlight]]. Somehow one [[manages]] to creep up on David Mccullum and give him a [[nip]]. Its as if there was no [[time]] to [[get]] out of the [[way]], like when the obelisk in the [[city]] falls over, the native has all the [[time]] in the world to take a 2 [[step]] to the left, but no he [[screams]] and it [[falls]] on him. I only [[give]] this a 2 because of Ekland. And why does Mccullums [[voice]] [[develop]] a stutter as the [[movie]] progresses? I watched this today, partially [[enticed]] to the all-star cast and [[partially]] because I have [[liked]] so many other films of this ilk. However, this is one to [[shirk]]. There are [[scores]] of [[sorely]] cut scenes where the [[continuance]] just does not [[flux]], the billiards [[challenges]] at the [[beginnings]], for [[case]]. The fighting scenes with the [[native]] are about as good as you [[ought]] remember in those [[longtime]] black and [[bianchi]] Tarzan [[filmmaking]], you know where you see a spear [[stealing]] through the air and camera [[clippings]] to a [[died]] native lying motionless on the floor with it sticking from his thigh. Is that instantaneous [[muerte]]? There are [[likewise]] [[different]] [[rather]] [[superfluous]] scenes which have nothing to do with the plot, like the [[scant]] [[women]] being rescued while collecting [[blossoms]]. The [[truly]] [[desperately]] animated clay [[toy]] are too painful to watch. If you do [[consults]] this [[cinema]] the [[prawn]] which inch forward at about 5kph are the [[stresses]]. Somehow one [[runs]] to creep up on David Mccullum and give him a [[pine]]. Its as if there was no [[period]] to [[obtain]] out of the [[ways]], like when the obelisk in the [[town]] falls over, the native has all the [[times]] in the world to take a 2 [[steps]] to the left, but no he [[howl]] and it [[fall]] on him. I only [[confer]] this a 2 because of Ekland. And why does Mccullums [[voices]] [[formulating]] a stutter as the [[filmmaking]] progresses? --------------------------------------------- Result 2635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Title: Robot Jox (1990)

Director: [[Stuart]] [[Gordon]]

[[Cast]]: [[Gary]] Graham, [[Anne]] [[Marie]] [[Johnson]], [[Paul]] Koslo

[[Review]]: [[Stuart]] Gordon who we [[usually]] associate with [[extremely]] [[gory]] [[horror]] [[films]] such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, [[took]] a [[small]] detour here and did a [[little]] sci-fi [[flick]]. I [[stress]] the word "[[little]]" since this is a very low budget flick, and there in [[lies]] its main [[weakness]].

The story takes place in the [[future]]. A world in which the great superpowers (that according to this movie are the United States and Russia) duke out their differences not by going on a full blown world war...but by fighting gladiator style battles with gigantic robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian robot fighter called Alexander. Lots of cheap stop [[motion]] animation ensues.

Well, the [[idea]] is awesome I guess. The great nations settleling territorial disputes with giant robots? Interesting premise and one that could have been handled properly if the proper budget had been available. Unfortunately what [[could]] have been a fun movie ends up being an embarrassment for an otherwise great director.

I as a [[kid]] loved this movie, and I guess if you want any enjoyment out of this movie, you'll have to revert back to little kid mode to have some fun with it. I showed this film to some of my friends and as the [[movie]] progressed my friends where like "what the hell is this [[piece]] of [[crap]] franco?" And I'm [[like]] well this movie is a sci-fi by one of my favorite directors Stuart Gordon?" But as the movie progressed into [[corny]] territory I almost felt like pressing stop and not having them go through that torture. I could go through it, cause I loved this film as a [[kid]], and there's still a little nostalgia attached to watching it. But everyone else was just not going to get it.

And I myself realized that the movie isn't really that good. First off. The movie is about [[giant]] robots [[kicking]] the [[hell]] out of each other. And in [[order]] to [[achieve]] this in a credible [[fashion]] you'd have to use some damn good [[special]] effects to make it [[work]], expensive [[effects]] that [[would]] help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.

OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are fighting that are kinda cool, and made me go "thats why I liked thid [[movie]]!" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.

And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.

So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.

Rating: 2 out of 5 Title: Robot Jox (1990)

Director: [[Sylvain]] [[Gordo]]

[[Casting]]: [[Garry]] Graham, [[Anna]] [[Marries]] [[Lbj]], [[Paolo]] Koslo

[[Revise]]: [[Sylvain]] Gordon who we [[habitually]] associate with [[immeasurably]] [[gori]] [[monstrosity]] [[kino]] such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, [[picked]] a [[scant]] detour here and did a [[scant]] sci-fi [[film]]. I [[underline]] the word "[[small]]" since this is a very low budget flick, and there in [[lying]] its main [[flaw]].

The story takes place in the [[futur]]. A world in which the great superpowers (that according to this movie are the United States and Russia) duke out their differences not by going on a full blown world war...but by fighting gladiator style battles with gigantic robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian robot fighter called Alexander. Lots of cheap stop [[petition]] animation ensues.

Well, the [[thinking]] is awesome I guess. The great nations settleling territorial disputes with giant robots? Interesting premise and one that could have been handled properly if the proper budget had been available. Unfortunately what [[did]] have been a fun movie ends up being an embarrassment for an otherwise great director.

I as a [[child]] loved this movie, and I guess if you want any enjoyment out of this movie, you'll have to revert back to little kid mode to have some fun with it. I showed this film to some of my friends and as the [[filmmaking]] progressed my friends where like "what the hell is this [[slice]] of [[dammit]] franco?" And I'm [[fond]] well this movie is a sci-fi by one of my favorite directors Stuart Gordon?" But as the movie progressed into [[cheesy]] territory I almost felt like pressing stop and not having them go through that torture. I could go through it, cause I loved this film as a [[enfant]], and there's still a little nostalgia attached to watching it. But everyone else was just not going to get it.

And I myself realized that the movie isn't really that good. First off. The movie is about [[gargantuan]] robots [[kick]] the [[dammit]] out of each other. And in [[edict]] to [[realize]] this in a credible [[manner]] you'd have to use some damn good [[especial]] effects to make it [[collaborate]], expensive [[consequences]] that [[could]] help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.

OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are fighting that are kinda cool, and made me go "thats why I liked thid [[cinema]]!" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.

And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.

So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.

Rating: 2 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 2636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Although]] in my [[opinion]] this is one of the [[lesser]] musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director [[George]] [[Sidney]], a [[lesser]] musical featuring [[anyone]] from that line-up is [[nothing]] to [[sneeze]] at, and in [[conjunction]], the line-up makes [[Anchors]] Aweigh a [[pretty]] good film despite its flaws.

Sinatra and [[Kelly]] are Clarence Doolittle and [[Joseph]] Brady, respectively, two [[Navy]] [[men]]. As the [[film]] [[begins]], they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles [[area]] for some [[much]] needed [[leave]]. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is [[still]] a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and [[Sidney]] have all of the Navy men comically [[exaggerating]] their [[finesse]] with women to each other). Brady [[promises]] to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.

Because of the story, the music is a [[strange]] combination of militaristic music--because of the [[Navy]] [[premise]], [[obviously]], Broadway pop--what the [[stars]] tend to sing in more [[informal]] settings, opera--what Abbott's character [[excels]] at, Liberace-like [[popular]] classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because [[Abbott]] frequents a Mexican [[restaurant]] in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it [[could]]. Plenty of the [[songs]] are good, and [[everyone]] involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.

There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively "proper" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart [[works]] hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.

The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.

Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in [[good]], interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.

And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of "Tom and Jerry" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.

As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character. [[Despite]] in my [[vista]] this is one of the [[minor]] musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director [[Georges]] [[Sid]], a [[minor]] musical featuring [[somebody]] from that line-up is [[none]] to [[verb]] at, and in [[cooperates]], the line-up makes [[Anchor]] Aweigh a [[belle]] good film despite its flaws.

Sinatra and [[Kayleigh]] are Clarence Doolittle and [[Jozef]] Brady, respectively, two [[Marina]] [[males]]. As the [[cinematography]] [[start]], they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles [[areas]] for some [[very]] needed [[letting]]. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is [[yet]] a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and [[Sydney]] have all of the Navy men comically [[overstating]] their [[subtlety]] with women to each other). Brady [[vowed]] to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.

Because of the story, the music is a [[inquisitive]] combination of militaristic music--because of the [[Marina]] [[assumption]], [[surely]], Broadway pop--what the [[superstar]] tend to sing in more [[unofficial]] settings, opera--what Abbott's character [[excel]] at, Liberace-like [[fashionable]] classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because [[Abbot]] frequents a Mexican [[catering]] in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it [[wo]]. Plenty of the [[anthems]] are good, and [[anyone]] involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.

There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively "proper" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart [[collaborate]] hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.

The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.

Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in [[alright]], interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.

And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of "Tom and Jerry" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.

As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character. --------------------------------------------- Result 2637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having enjoyed Joyce's complex novel so keenly I was prepared to be disappointed by Joseph Strick's and Fred Haines's screenplay, given the fabulous complexity of the original text. However, the film turned out to be very well done and a fine translation of the tone, naturalism, and levity of the book.

It certainly helps to have read the original text before viewing the film. I imagine the latter would seem disjointed, with very odd episodes apparently randomly stitched together, without a prior reading of the text to help grasp the plot.

It's amazing to see how "filthy" the film is, given that it was shot in Dublin in 1967. The Irish film censors only, finally, unbanned it for viewing by general audiences in Ireland as late as 2000 (it was shown to restricted audiences in a private cinema club, the Irish Film Theatre, in the late 1970s). Joyce's eroticism is not simply naturalistic and raunchy, it offers many wildly "perverse" episodes. Never mind that so many of these fetishes were unacceptable when the book was published in 1922 - they were still utterly taboo when the film was made in 1967.

It is astonishing and heartening to watch the cream of the Irish acting profession of the 1960s, respected players all, daring to utter and enact Joyce's hugely transgressive text with such gusto.

Bravo! --------------------------------------------- Result 2638 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This show was [[appreciated]] by critics and those who [[realized]] that any similarities between "Pushing Daisies" style and [[anyone]] else's was not a steal. (Yes, I've [[seen]] "[[Amelie]]." "Pushing Daisies" is [[somewhat]] [[similar]] but [[still]] different [[enough]] to be original.) Rather, there are too few [[shows]] on TV that have this [[kind]] of quirky [[charm]]. The [[greatest]] [[similarity]] is to "Dead Like Me" but "P.D" [[comes]] by that [[similarity]] [[honestly]]: Bryan [[Fuller]] created both [[shows]]. (Both [[shows]] involve an "undead" young [[woman]], [[For]] [[example]].) This show never [[stopped]] being funny and [[charming]], and it was [[always]] [[odd]], [[yet]] was [[consistently]] [[humane]].

I [[must]] [[say]] a word about the [[conventions]] of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show [[lacked]] a [[moral]] [[center]] because in the first (and [[several]] subsequent) [[episodes]] Ned [[seems]] to get away with causing the [[death]] of Chuck's [[father]] without [[consequences]] of any [[kind]]. [[First]] of all, this [[must]] be a [[new]] definition of "without [[consequences]] of any [[kind]]" because, in [[spite]] of the fact that Ned was only a [[boy]] and did not [[realize]] that he had [[caused]] the [[death]] of Chuck's father, he [[nevertheless]] [[felt]] guilty from the moment he [[realized]] what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had [[caused]] her father's [[death]] with his [[gift]]. [[Now]], there are no police to charge people with [[magically]] causing one person's [[death]] by bringing another [[person]] back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal [[guidance]]. [[In]] other [[words]], it's between Ned and [[Chuck]], who was not [[inclined]] to [[forgive]] Ned anytime [[soon]].

But this does point out a [[problem]] with continuing story lines in [[network]] dramas. I [[remember]] when David Caruso's character on "NYPD Blue" did [[something]] wrong and it [[seemed]] he [[got]] away with it--for a [[whole]] year--then he [[got]] [[caught]] and was [[forced]] to [[resign]] from the job (and left the [[show]]). The point is, [[viewers]] should learn by now and not [[assume]] that just because a [[regular]] [[character]] does [[something]] [[wrong]] in a single episode, and is not [[caught]] in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is [[always]] [[next]] week--and [[maybe]] [[even]] next [[year]]. This show was [[complimented]] by critics and those who [[performed]] that any similarities between "Pushing Daisies" style and [[somebody]] else's was not a steal. (Yes, I've [[watched]] "[[Emily]]." "Pushing Daisies" is [[rather]] [[akin]] but [[however]] different [[adequately]] to be original.) Rather, there are too few [[exhibit]] on TV that have this [[sort]] of quirky [[allure]]. The [[greater]] [[likeness]] is to "Dead Like Me" but "P.D" [[arrives]] by that [[analogy]] [[plainly]]: Bryan [[Fowler]] created both [[exhibition]]. (Both [[showings]] involve an "undead" young [[mujer]], [[During]] [[examples]].) This show never [[ceasing]] being funny and [[cute]], and it was [[repeatedly]] [[bizarre]], [[again]] was [[methodically]] [[humanistic]].

I [[gotta]] [[told]] a word about the [[convention]] of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show [[lacking]] a [[ethical]] [[centre]] because in the first (and [[multiple]] subsequent) [[spells]] Ned [[appears]] to get away with causing the [[killings]] of Chuck's [[fathers]] without [[impacts]] of any [[genre]]. [[Outset]] of all, this [[ought]] be a [[novel]] definition of "without [[implications]] of any [[genus]]" because, in [[sadness]] of the fact that Ned was only a [[boys]] and did not [[realising]] that he had [[aroused]] the [[dead]] of Chuck's father, he [[yet]] [[smelled]] guilty from the moment he [[realised]] what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had [[engendered]] her father's [[deaths]] with his [[donation]]. [[Presently]], there are no police to charge people with [[mysteriously]] causing one person's [[killings]] by bringing another [[somebody]] back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal [[instructions]]. [[Onto]] other [[phrases]], it's between Ned and [[Chowk]], who was not [[minded]] to [[pardoned]] Ned anytime [[swiftly]].

But this does point out a [[trouble]] with continuing story lines in [[networks]] dramas. I [[recall]] when David Caruso's character on "NYPD Blue" did [[anything]] wrong and it [[sounded]] he [[ai]] away with it--for a [[total]] year--then he [[ai]] [[grabbed]] and was [[compelled]] to [[resigns]] from the job (and left the [[display]]). The point is, [[audience]] should learn by now and not [[presume]] that just because a [[routine]] [[characters]] does [[anything]] [[erroneous]] in a single episode, and is not [[grabbed]] in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is [[unceasingly]] [[imminent]] week--and [[possibly]] [[yet]] next [[annum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2639 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film was one of the worst I've seen in a long while.

It's a combination police drama and comedy about two Hollywood detectives, Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett, investigating a shootout at a hip hop club.

The plot is contrived and there are way too many side issues going on. Ford is hustling real estate on the side (Martin Landau is one of his clients), Hartnett runs a yoga school where he's hustling chicks in his spare time, the two are under investigation by Internal Affairs, Ford is screwing the ex-girlfriend (Lena Olin) of the IA investigator and she's a psychic who has a radio show, the man who set up the killing at the club is a dirty ex-cop who shot Hartnett's father years ago.

Toss in the obligatory car chases and some lame attempts at humor, and that's about the gist of this turkey. --------------------------------------------- Result 2640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The premise of this awaited sequel was really good and after the huge success of the remake I expected a lot sincerely.

The sad truth is that this movie is really absurd and inept. The situations are dumb and beyond reason and the acting is truly awful.

This time there aren't likable characters or violins unlike the remake. Also, the gore is not that abundant and when it happens it's truly bad.

The violence is minimal and it's a shame because there are many arguments that make you think that there's room for heavy violence. I mean, there's a SWAT team that is hunting a family of cannibal mutants. You surely expect something different! When I watched it on the movies I wanted my money back.

Anyways this is a clear example of how rushed out movies turn out to be a mess and demonstrate poor quality on all aspects.

A mess that let down the fans of the remake like me. That's why sequels are never welcomed; at least this movie isn't as terrible as the 1985 sequel to the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 2641 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked Antz, but loved "A Bug's Life". The animation that was put into this paid off. I will definitely be getting this on DVD. By the way, Disney should make a widescreen version of this movie on tape. (I heard talk of squishing all of the characters into the screen on the standard video format). Most will have to agree that the ending credits were the funniest! I only saw one of the two sets, but I can't wat to see the other one! --------------------------------------------- Result 2642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sure, for it's super imagery and awesome sound, it's a great home theater "show off" disk, but this is also a touching drama as well as an informative documentary. The parallel stories that are intertwined throughout this film will keep all viewers interested. Young, old, boys and girls alike will find that deep down, we are all fans of the automobile, especially the high performance indy machines that are the result of generations blood, sweat, tears, ingenuity and perseverance. The Mark Knopfler and Ry Cooder sound track is perfectly matched to the visuals and the content. I don't want to give away the ending, but the final driving sequence to Quincy Jones' "Days Like These" just might bring a tear to your eye. Enjoy it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a very strange film by director/[[animator]] Richard Williams. [[All]] who [[know]] of William's work [[know]] it's a bit off-kilter (if not ingenious) but this one takes the [[cake]].

It [[features]] two hapless ragdolls who have to [[save]] their owner's new French [[doll]] from a lustful [[pirate]] [[toy]] and [[find]] themselves at the mercy of [[several]] bizarre [[characters]] along the [[way]]. The [[strength]] in this movie lies [[primarily]] in its aesthetic quality; its [[strange]] [[character]] designs, its powerful animation, and its stark contrast of the sweet and scary. Williams' brilliant [[animation]] [[portrayed]] Raggedy Ann and [[Andy]] as real rag dolls, floppy and darned, rather than simple cartoon versions of the dolls, which made it more believable (at least in a visual [[sense]]). The animation shines on the bring us the Camel-with-the-Wrinkled-Knees, whose body [[walks]] with two [[different]] [[personalities]] controlling each end, the silent-movie [[chase]] with [[Sir]] [[Leonard]] Looney and, of course, the Greedy.

The Greedy animation, on its own, is [[possibly]] the most [[exquisite]] psychedelic animation I've ever seen. There's something about this animation that just makes your jaw drop--and every second it's [[something]] new. Living in what was deemed "the Taffy Pit," the Greedy is a [[massive]] blob [[man]] that lives in and [[mercilessly]] [[eats]] sweets. He [[sings]] a song that I can't [[help]] but feel hold some sexual undertones, then [[tries]] to [[kill]] Raggedy Ann for her candy [[heart]].

The only [[complaint]] I have about this [[film]] is that there are too many [[songs]]. It continuously bogs down the movie's pace because there are SIXTEEN of them. There are about six good songs (which should have been the only ones) including "I Look, And What Do I [[See]]?", "No Girl's [[Toy]]", "[[Blue]]" ([[though]] they didn't need to [[make]] him sing it twice), "I Never [[Get]] [[Enough]]", "[[Because]] I [[Love]] You" and [[maybe]] "I'm [[Home]]." The others just [[seem]] unnecessary and [[frankly]] aren't too amazing to [[listen]] to.

This is a [[weird]] [[film]] with [[strange]] undertones, but if that's what you're [[looking]] for, you won't find better. This is a very strange film by director/[[moderator]] Richard Williams. [[Totality]] who [[savoir]] of William's work [[savoir]] it's a bit off-kilter (if not ingenious) but this one takes the [[pudding]].

It [[featured]] two hapless ragdolls who have to [[rescued]] their owner's new French [[dearie]] from a lustful [[hacker]] [[toys]] and [[found]] themselves at the mercy of [[assorted]] bizarre [[features]] along the [[manner]]. The [[kraft]] in this movie lies [[essentially]] in its aesthetic quality; its [[weird]] [[personage]] designs, its powerful animation, and its stark contrast of the sweet and scary. Williams' brilliant [[animate]] [[depicted]] Raggedy Ann and [[Indie]] as real rag dolls, floppy and darned, rather than simple cartoon versions of the dolls, which made it more believable (at least in a visual [[feeling]]). The animation shines on the bring us the Camel-with-the-Wrinkled-Knees, whose body [[walking]] with two [[several]] [[dignitaries]] controlling each end, the silent-movie [[chasing]] with [[Monsieur]] [[Leonardo]] Looney and, of course, the Greedy.

The Greedy animation, on its own, is [[maybe]] the most [[wondrous]] psychedelic animation I've ever seen. There's something about this animation that just makes your jaw drop--and every second it's [[anything]] new. Living in what was deemed "the Taffy Pit," the Greedy is a [[gigantic]] blob [[guy]] that lives in and [[tirelessly]] [[feeds]] sweets. He [[sing]] a song that I can't [[supporting]] but feel hold some sexual undertones, then [[endeavour]] to [[killed]] Raggedy Ann for her candy [[heartland]].

The only [[grievance]] I have about this [[cinematography]] is that there are too many [[lyrics]]. It continuously bogs down the movie's pace because there are SIXTEEN of them. There are about six good songs (which should have been the only ones) including "I Look, And What Do I [[Seeing]]?", "No Girl's [[Pawn]]", "[[Azul]]" ([[if]] they didn't need to [[deliver]] him sing it twice), "I Never [[Got]] [[Adequate]]", "[[Since]] I [[Loved]] You" and [[possibly]] "I'm [[House]]." The others just [[looks]] unnecessary and [[sincerely]] aren't too amazing to [[heed]] to.

This is a [[freaky]] [[cinema]] with [[nosy]] undertones, but if that's what you're [[searching]] for, you won't find better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2644 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This tear-teaser, written by Steve Martin himself, is so unbelievably bad, it makes you sick to your stomach!

The plot is pathetic, the acting awful, and the dialogue is even more predictable than the ending.

Avoid at all costs! --------------------------------------------- Result 2645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is very very very poor. I have seen better movies.

There was a bit of tension but not much to make you jump out of your chair. It begins slowly with the building of tension. Which is not a success. At least if you ask me. Though at some points or moments I must say it was a bit funny when people got shot and how they went down.

They should had made it something like Scary Movie, then it might be a better movie. Because I watched only pieces of the movie by skipping scenes and it got to boring through out the movie. I must say that i felt sleepy watching this movie so I sure can say it is not worth it.

Don't waste time on even thinking to do something with this movie besides leaving it where it already is. Somewhere very dusty.. --------------------------------------------- Result 2646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unbelievable!

this film gets a 7 out 0f 10. This has to be one of the worst films i have seen in years. not only was the acting incredibly bad, the storyline (if you can call it that) was just as bad. Offcourse everyone knows what's going to happen within the first 5 minutes. Which is not a bad thing if you can captivate the audience during leading up to that moment. That however, is not the case. There is no action, no suspense, not even a spark between the 2 leading actors. It was unfortunately a waste of my time, and certainly a waste of my money.

and the 2 of merely for trying --------------------------------------------- Result 2647 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I went to see this one with much [[expectation]]. [[Quite]] [[unfortunately]] the [[dialogue]] is [[utterly]] [[stupid]] and [[overall]] the movie is far from inspiring awe or interest. Even a child can see the [[missing]] [[logic]] to character's behaviors. Today's kids need creative stories which would inspire them, which [[would]] make them 'daydream' about the events. That's precisely what happened with movies like E.T. and [[Star]] Wars a decade [[ago]]. (How many kids imagined about becoming Jedi Knights and [[igniting]] their own lightsabers?) Seriously don't waste your [[time]] & money on this one. I went to see this one with much [[anticipation]]. [[Rather]] [[sadly]] the [[discussions]] is [[downright]] [[dumb]] and [[holistic]] the movie is far from inspiring awe or interest. Even a child can see the [[gone]] [[reasoning]] to character's behaviors. Today's kids need creative stories which would inspire them, which [[could]] make them 'daydream' about the events. That's precisely what happened with movies like E.T. and [[Superstar]] Wars a decade [[before]]. (How many kids imagined about becoming Jedi Knights and [[sparking]] their own lightsabers?) Seriously don't waste your [[times]] & money on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2648 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (59%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Quite possibly the nicest woman in show business, and the sexiest, Debbie gives another fine performance here. Although her work in American Nightmare was far superior, she is still worth watching in this film.

The cast is filled with your typical Melrose Place types, chiseled features and seductive curves, that I had never seen before. Other than Debbie, Laura Nativo was the only actress I had seen before, in the similar Delta Delta [[Die]].

The plot centers around a group of California arrogants who initiate poor naive Debbie Rochon into their clique. They tell her that they have a murder club, and that she must kill someone to be accepted. Debbie wants nothing more but to be accepted by these cool people, so she quickly kills a person, and now the group must decide what to do with her, after she fell for their joke.

VIOLENCE: $$$$$ (Plentiful! Debbie Rochon occasionally has blood splattered all over her and all of the murder scenes are done in your face. Gore hounds will surely enjoy!)

NUDITY: $$$$$ (Plentiful as well! Debbie Rochon has several nude scenes as do many of the no-name actresses and actors. The pool party seems as just an excuse to get everyone naked; man and woman alike. Julie Strain also has a topless cameo but her character is gone after the first five minutes).

STORY: $$ (Could have received a higher vote because the plot was very interesting and unique but the plot serves as filler between nude scenes. I understand that B-Rate films use nudity often, but this is borderline excessive).

ACTING: $ (The acting is sub standard to say the least. Rochon is always a treat, easily the best B-Rate actress in the business today, but her character in American Nightmare was superior. Danny Wolske does a fine job as Debbie's object of lust but the other actors were nothing to write about). Quite possibly the nicest woman in show business, and the sexiest, Debbie gives another fine performance here. Although her work in American Nightmare was far superior, she is still worth watching in this film.

The cast is filled with your typical Melrose Place types, chiseled features and seductive curves, that I had never seen before. Other than Debbie, Laura Nativo was the only actress I had seen before, in the similar Delta Delta [[Died]].

The plot centers around a group of California arrogants who initiate poor naive Debbie Rochon into their clique. They tell her that they have a murder club, and that she must kill someone to be accepted. Debbie wants nothing more but to be accepted by these cool people, so she quickly kills a person, and now the group must decide what to do with her, after she fell for their joke.

VIOLENCE: $$$$$ (Plentiful! Debbie Rochon occasionally has blood splattered all over her and all of the murder scenes are done in your face. Gore hounds will surely enjoy!)

NUDITY: $$$$$ (Plentiful as well! Debbie Rochon has several nude scenes as do many of the no-name actresses and actors. The pool party seems as just an excuse to get everyone naked; man and woman alike. Julie Strain also has a topless cameo but her character is gone after the first five minutes).

STORY: $$ (Could have received a higher vote because the plot was very interesting and unique but the plot serves as filler between nude scenes. I understand that B-Rate films use nudity often, but this is borderline excessive).

ACTING: $ (The acting is sub standard to say the least. Rochon is always a treat, easily the best B-Rate actress in the business today, but her character in American Nightmare was superior. Danny Wolske does a fine job as Debbie's object of lust but the other actors were nothing to write about). --------------------------------------------- Result 2649 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely horrific film. Ameteurish and it isn't funny at all. Lead character played by Mehmet Ali Erbil is very annoying. Edits by E.T and star wars is just plain stupid.

Actor Yilmaz Goksal is the only good think about this movie. He should master his English and move to Hollywood. Hollywood can not find an actor with his qualities. Other than Goksal this movie is a garbage.

Director Gani Mujde is a comic writer and this movie is his worst written work to this date.

Music of Cem Karaca is another plus of this waste of money. Actor Sumer Tilmac also have some presence. Actor who plays the three sons has no talent what so ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 2650 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film at the Toronto Film Festival, where it received a standing ovation! This film tells a story that to my knowledge has never been told before--namely about the Rosenstrasse (a street in Berlin)uprising of German gentile women who were married to Jews at the end of the Second World War. As such, it is a unique story, and what's more, is the only film about the Holocaust that I have ever seen that shows that there were GOOD Germans (the helping family in "Anne Frank" for instance was Dutch) who did NOT support the Nazis, and, in fact, had the fortitude to stand up against their own country's immorality and brutality during the Nazi regime, at the risk of their very lives. The acting is great across the board, the framing story in New York interesting and intricate, the direction from Von Trotta masterful in every scene, and the production values, including the gorgeous cinematography, outstanding. Of course the family in New York could be speaking German. Many immigrants in this country choose to speak in their native tongue with their family--a common occurrence. So that criticism is unwarranted. To say more would spoil the experience. The film is long, but I did not look at my watch once. I am hoping this film gets some distribution is North America, for not only is this film a masterpiece, but it can actually help heal any animosity people have towards the Germans because of their support of Hitler. If this film is playing in your area, I URGE YOU TO SEE IT! You will be glad you did! --------------------------------------------- Result 2651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[In]] [[Cold]] Blood was one of [[several]] 60s [[films]] that created a [[new]] [[vision]] of violence in the Hollywood [[film]] [[industry]]. Capote coined the [[phrase]] "nonfiction [[novel]]" to [[describe]] the [[book]] on which this [[film]] is based, and the [[spirit]] of that form was carried over into the [[film]] script, which he co-wrote. [[Despite]] the fact that we were well into the era of [[color]] [[film]], [[Richard]] [[Brooks]] [[elected]] to present this film in black and [[white]] to underscore both the starkness of the [[landscape]] and the bleakness of the [[story]]. This is the [[first]] problem with the [[TV]] remake --color changes the tone of the [[story]]. In [[addition]], the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs.

Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.

All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: "Ho hum, who cares?"

See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.

Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to [[understand]] the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.

I actually only [[gave]] this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 [[rankings]] for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an [[Among]] [[Chilled]] Blood was one of [[many]] 60s [[filmmaking]] that created a [[newer]] [[sight]] of violence in the Hollywood [[flick]] [[industries]]. Capote coined the [[phrases]] "nonfiction [[newer]]" to [[portray]] the [[ledger]] on which this [[filmmaking]] is based, and the [[wits]] of that form was carried over into the [[films]] script, which he co-wrote. [[Although]] the fact that we were well into the era of [[colors]] [[movie]], [[Richie]] [[Brook]] [[opted]] to present this film in black and [[bianchi]] to underscore both the starkness of the [[landscapes]] and the bleakness of the [[histories]]. This is the [[frst]] problem with the [[TELEVISIONS]] remake --color changes the tone of the [[histories]]. In [[supplement]], the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs.

Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.

All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: "Ho hum, who cares?"

See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.

Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to [[realise]] the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.

I actually only [[provided]] this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 [[classifications]] for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an --------------------------------------------- Result 2652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I can [[hardly]] [[believe]] that this [[inert]], turgid and [[badly]] staged [[film]] is by a filmmaker whose other [[works]] I've [[quite]] [[enjoyed]]. The [[experience]] of enduring THE LADY AND THE [[DUKE]] (and no other word but "[[enduring]]" will do), [[left]] me in a [[vile]] [[mood]], a condition relieved only by reading the IMDb [[user]] [[comment]] by ali-112. For not only has Rohmer [[attempted]] (with [[success]]) to make us [[see]] the [[world]] through the genre [[art]] of 18th century France but, as ali has [[pointed]] out, has [[shown]] (at the [[cost]] of alienating his [[audience]]) the [[effects]] of both [[class]] consciousness and the revolution it inspired through the eyes of a dislikably elitist [[woman]] of her [[times]]. The [[director]] has [[accomplished]] [[something]] undeniably [[difficult]], but I [[question]] whether it was worth the [[effort]] it [[took]] for him to do so -- or for us to watch the dull [[results]] of his labor. I can [[practically]] [[believing]] that this [[dormant]], turgid and [[sorely]] staged [[cinematographic]] is by a filmmaker whose other [[working]] I've [[altogether]] [[adored]]. The [[experiences]] of enduring THE LADY AND THE [[DUCA]] (and no other word but "[[sustained]]" will do), [[gauche]] me in a [[infamous]] [[ambiance]], a condition relieved only by reading the IMDb [[username]] [[remarks]] by ali-112. For not only has Rohmer [[strived]] (with [[successes]]) to make us [[seeing]] the [[globe]] through the genre [[artistry]] of 18th century France but, as ali has [[emphasized]] out, has [[showed]] (at the [[price]] of alienating his [[spectators]]) the [[influencing]] of both [[classes]] consciousness and the revolution it inspired through the eyes of a dislikably elitist [[dame]] of her [[moments]]. The [[superintendent]] has [[effected]] [[somethings]] undeniably [[tough]], but I [[matter]] whether it was worth the [[endeavors]] it [[taken]] for him to do so -- or for us to watch the dull [[consequences]] of his labor. --------------------------------------------- Result 2653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This [[film]] is [[something]] [[like]] a sequel of "[[White]] Zombie", since it is made by the same man (Halperin) and features zombies. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, [[fails]] to [[deliver]] with this one, though.

We have a man who can [[control]] the [[minds]] of people in Cambodia, and a [[search]] to destroy the [[source]] of his power so the [[zombies]] can be [[sent]] free. [[Also]], a [[love]] interest for the [[evil]] man.

Where this film really excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).

I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this [[film]] just did not [[deliver]]. And no strong [[villain]] (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice [[effect]], but misleading as he is never in the [[film]]... why not [[recreate]] this with the [[new]] actor's eyes? Overall, a [[film]] that [[could]] be a great one with a [[little]] script re-working and [[could]] someday be a powerful remake ([[especially]] if they [[keep]] it in the same post-war [[time]] [[frame]]). [[Heck]], if they can [[fix]] up "The [[Hills]] Have Eyes" then this [[film]] has hope. This [[filmmaking]] is [[somethings]] [[iike]] a sequel of "[[Blanc]] Zombie", since it is made by the same man (Halperin) and features zombies. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, [[fail]] to [[make]] with this one, though.

We have a man who can [[controls]] the [[esprit]] of people in Cambodia, and a [[quest]] to destroy the [[origins]] of his power so the [[walkers]] can be [[conveyed]] free. [[Moreover]], a [[amore]] interest for the [[diabolic]] man.

Where this film really excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).

I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this [[filmmaking]] just did not [[provide]]. And no strong [[rascal]] (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice [[repercussions]], but misleading as he is never in the [[cinema]]... why not [[reestablish]] this with the [[newer]] actor's eyes? Overall, a [[cinematographic]] that [[did]] be a great one with a [[scant]] script re-working and [[would]] someday be a powerful remake ([[specially]] if they [[sustain]] it in the same post-war [[moment]] [[framework]]). [[Devil]], if they can [[remedy]] up "The [[Collines]] Have Eyes" then this [[filmmaking]] has hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] After reading the [[comments]] to this movie and [[seeing]] the mixed reviews, I decided that I would add my ten cents worth to say I thought the film was excellent, not only in the visual beauty, the writing, music score, acting, and directing, but in putting [[across]] the story of Joseph Smith and the road he traveled through life of [[hardship]] and persecution for believing in God the [[way]] he [[felt]] and knew to be his [[path]]. I am very pleased, indeed, to have had a small [[part]] in [[telling]] the story of this [[remarkable]] [[man]]. I [[recommend]] [[everyone]] to [[see]] this when the opportunity [[presents]] itself, no matter what religious path he or she may be walking, this only instills one with more determination to live the life that we should with true values of love and forgiveness as the Savior taught us to do. After reading the [[commentary]] to this movie and [[witnessing]] the mixed reviews, I decided that I would add my ten cents worth to say I thought the film was excellent, not only in the visual beauty, the writing, music score, acting, and directing, but in putting [[during]] the story of Joseph Smith and the road he traveled through life of [[deprivation]] and persecution for believing in God the [[route]] he [[smelled]] and knew to be his [[chemin]]. I am very pleased, indeed, to have had a small [[portions]] in [[saying]] the story of this [[wondrous]] [[dawg]]. I [[recommended]] [[somebody]] to [[behold]] this when the opportunity [[presented]] itself, no matter what religious path he or she may be walking, this only instills one with more determination to live the life that we should with true values of love and forgiveness as the Savior taught us to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 2655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Where to [[start]]. The [[film]] [[started]] out [[pretty]] well, but after the 30 [[min]] [[mark]] i [[caught]] myself watching the [[clock]]. The horror at the [[start]] of the [[film]] was good but then the story kicked in. It just [[got]] stupider and stupider as [[time]] [[ticked]] by.

The [[actors]] [[gave]] an average performance in this [[movie]] however, i got a bit [[bored]] of [[Vinny]] Jones constant [[scowling]] in the [[film]].

As the [[film]] dragged on, and [[take]] my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far [[fetched]].

*** SPOILER [[ALERT]] *** SPOILER [[ALERT]] *** SPOILER [[ALERT]] *** [[Just]] when i thought the film [[could]] not [[get]] any [[worse]], [[towards]] the [[end]] [[loads]] if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to [[eat]] the [[dead]] people which made no [[sense]] at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating [[cult]] and the [[good]] [[guys]] [[die]] at the end. The [[ending]] in fact just [[made]] me laugh at how [[bad]] it was. Once the lead role [[disposes]] of Vinny Jones, he [[becomes]] the [[new]] [[killer]].

[[In]] [[closing]], this [[film]] [[made]] Creep [[look]] [[like]] the [[best]] horror [[film]] ever [[made]]. I [[gave]] it 1 [[star]] because the [[female]] [[lead]] did a pretty good [[job]] but [[even]] she [[could]] not [[save]] this train [[wreck]] of a [[movie]]!! Where to [[beginnings]]. The [[movies]] [[initiates]] out [[belle]] well, but after the 30 [[mn]] [[markup]] i [[grabbed]] myself watching the [[timer]]. The horror at the [[booting]] of the [[filmmaking]] was good but then the story kicked in. It just [[did]] stupider and stupider as [[period]] [[checked]] by.

The [[players]] [[delivered]] an average performance in this [[filmmaking]] however, i got a bit [[drilled]] of [[Vinnie]] Jones constant [[smirking]] in the [[movie]].

As the [[movies]] dragged on, and [[taking]] my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far [[regained]].

*** SPOILER [[ULTIMATUM]] *** SPOILER [[ULTIMATUM]] *** SPOILER [[WARNS]] *** [[Jen]] when i thought the film [[did]] not [[obtain]] any [[worst]], [[circa]] the [[terminate]] [[charging]] if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to [[eating]] the [[deceased]] people which made no [[sensing]] at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating [[heresy]] and the [[alright]] [[buddies]] [[died]] at the end. The [[terminated]] in fact just [[accomplished]] me laugh at how [[rotten]] it was. Once the lead role [[dispose]] of Vinny Jones, he [[become]] the [[newest]] [[murderer]].

[[Among]] [[closed]], this [[filmmaking]] [[accomplished]] Creep [[peek]] [[iike]] the [[optimum]] horror [[kino]] ever [[effected]]. I [[supplied]] it 1 [[superstar]] because the [[girl]] [[culminate]] did a pretty good [[labor]] but [[yet]] she [[did]] not [[economize]] this train [[shipwreck]] of a [[kino]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This [[movie]] fails to [[offer]] [[anything]] [[new]] to a [[genre]] that has [[traditionally]] shown the cross cultural love [[story]] underpinned by the [[politics]] mid 20th century / pre-WWII India, where the British and their [[modern]] [[ways]] are [[bad]] and the primitive but honest and [[true]] Indians are good. [[Surely]] such clichéd depictions of the British are rather passé now.

Apart from the drama that fuels the second part of the movie the narrative is predictable, the acting is [[pedestrian]] and two-dimensional, and the directing obvious and unimaginative.

The story really [[needed]] to be fleshed out and would certainly have benefited from another half an hour of screen time to give the characters and narrative more depth and give the viewer something to feel some investment in.

All in all, rather uninspiring. Oh and Linus Roache just cannot do tragedy - going cross-eyed with emotional pain just doesn't [[work]] for me! This [[filmmaking]] fails to [[affords]] [[nothing]] [[novel]] to a [[gender]] that has [[commonly]] shown the cross cultural love [[storytelling]] underpinned by the [[policies]] mid 20th century / pre-WWII India, where the British and their [[contemporary]] [[methods]] are [[mala]] and the primitive but honest and [[authentic]] Indians are good. [[Admittedly]] such clichéd depictions of the British are rather passé now.

Apart from the drama that fuels the second part of the movie the narrative is predictable, the acting is [[footpath]] and two-dimensional, and the directing obvious and unimaginative.

The story really [[require]] to be fleshed out and would certainly have benefited from another half an hour of screen time to give the characters and narrative more depth and give the viewer something to feel some investment in.

All in all, rather uninspiring. Oh and Linus Roache just cannot do tragedy - going cross-eyed with emotional pain just doesn't [[cooperation]] for me! --------------------------------------------- Result 2657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Lois [[Weber]], self [[proclaimed]] [[missionary]] via the cinema, wrote, directed and produced other films on controversial subjects, but this may be the first to get wide viewing, thanks to TCM. This [[film]] is her indictment of abortion, but she [[cleverly]] muddles the [[issue]] by [[bringing]] in eugenics and birth control, [[leaving]] the [[impression]] that they are [[somehow]] equivalent to abortion. [[Her]] talent in writing and the other cinematic [[skills]] are well displayed here, but one may be forgiven for wishing she had [[used]] them less didactically. If you have [[wondered]] what Tyrone Power, Jr.'s "[[famous]] father" looked like, here is your [[chance]]. 1916 fashions and [[automobiles]] are also on [[display]] to [[add]] to the interest of this museum piece. It's enjoyable even if you don't [[appreciate]] the [[propaganda]]. Lois [[Webber]], self [[avowed]] [[evangelist]] via the cinema, wrote, directed and produced other films on controversial subjects, but this may be the first to get wide viewing, thanks to TCM. This [[filmmaking]] is her indictment of abortion, but she [[wisely]] muddles the [[issuance]] by [[bring]] in eugenics and birth control, [[leave]] the [[printout]] that they are [[somewhere]] equivalent to abortion. [[His]] talent in writing and the other cinematic [[expertise]] are well displayed here, but one may be forgiven for wishing she had [[utilised]] them less didactically. If you have [[questioned]] what Tyrone Power, Jr.'s "[[prestigious]] father" looked like, here is your [[opportunities]]. 1916 fashions and [[vehicle]] are also on [[visualize]] to [[summing]] to the interest of this museum piece. It's enjoyable even if you don't [[appreciates]] the [[advocacy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2658 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Little Mosque is one of the most boring CBC comedies I have ever seen. They have a way of producing the easiest comedy programming they can for the oldest most-easily-offended viewers which for CBC means 85 year old farmers in Saskatchewan. The jokes are all predictable and so deathly lame I can't believe it. The performances are very hammy and over acted but I don't blame the actors since those kind of one dimensional stereotyped characters are probably exactly what the CBC asked for and demanded. Very lame show with bad jokes they tried to present as "controversial" well it is less controversial than the other boring CBC comedies like The Hour Has 22 Minutes, Royal Canadian Air Farce and Rick Mercer's Report. --------------------------------------------- Result 2659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] The [[extraordinary]] Rosemary Forsyth is the main reason to [[see]] this flick. Why she never [[became]] a bigger store may never be known. But she is [[exceptional]] and [[steals]] every scene she's in. Garson Kanin directed this piece of fluff and the cast is [[first]] [[rate]], with Robert Drivas and Brenda Vaccaro especially [[memorable]]. A "9" out of "10." The [[awesome]] Rosemary Forsyth is the main reason to [[seeing]] this flick. Why she never [[was]] a bigger store may never be known. But she is [[wondrous]] and [[itches]] every scene she's in. Garson Kanin directed this piece of fluff and the cast is [[frst]] [[rates]], with Robert Drivas and Brenda Vaccaro especially [[landmark]]. A "9" out of "10." --------------------------------------------- Result 2660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] well [[done]] giving the perspective of the other side fraulein doktor [[captures]] both the cost and the futility of war. [[excellent]] acting especially when german high command refuses in the name of chivalry to present medal kaiser ordered struck. the scenes of carnage are [[probably]] too intense for effete US minds who'd probably prefer some silly speeches and senseless abstractions like 14 points or the league of nations. real americans might appreciate the story line and the action. for all the action and intrigue, fraulein doktor compares favo(u)rably to Jacob's Ladder. well [[doing]] giving the perspective of the other side fraulein doktor [[catch]] both the cost and the futility of war. [[wondrous]] acting especially when german high command refuses in the name of chivalry to present medal kaiser ordered struck. the scenes of carnage are [[indubitably]] too intense for effete US minds who'd probably prefer some silly speeches and senseless abstractions like 14 points or the league of nations. real americans might appreciate the story line and the action. for all the action and intrigue, fraulein doktor compares favo(u)rably to Jacob's Ladder. --------------------------------------------- Result 2661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Brilliant kung-fu scenes, [[loads]] of melodrama, [[peculiar]] footwear symbolism and an [[unhappy]] (?) [[end]] makes [[Barefoot]] [[Kid]] an [[unforgettable]] film.

One of the [[silliest]] subtitles I've [[seen]]... Brilliant kung-fu scenes, [[burden]] of melodrama, [[strange]] footwear symbolism and an [[wretched]] (?) [[terminates]] makes [[Nudes]] [[Petit]] an [[memorable]] film.

One of the [[dumbest]] subtitles I've [[watched]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 2662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[DARK]] [[REMAINS]] is a low budget American horror movie that somehow managed to [[win]] 2 awards.

The plot seems to involve 2 separate strands. First, a woman commits suicide by slashing her wrists whilst bathing. Second, the young daughter of a technical writer is found with her throat slashed. The grieving couple decide to move to an isolated cabin in the mountains. It later transpires that the cabin and surrounding locations are haunted.

As the movie goes on, the 2 separate strands of story eventually converge as one might reasonably expect. However, the [[execution]] is [[haphazard]] and results in confusion that could [[perhaps]] only be resolved by multiple viewings. Unfortunately, the movie is [[simply]] not [[enticing]] [[enough]] to [[attract]] most viewers into [[watching]] it more than once.

Just about everything that [[could]] go wrong with this movie goes wrong - and fast! And the low budget cannot be used to justify all of the [[shortcomings]] found here.

I believe it would be wrong to pass judgement on the actors involved in this production as the material was [[simply]] too poor.

The [[characters]] are uninteresting as [[pointed]] out by other reviewers on this site. The badly written script introduces too many people without giving them interesting dialogue, without creating [[opportunities]] for character-driven [[situations]] and without adding depth to any of them.

The direction is [[uninspired]]. The inspiration from J-Horror [[movies]] such as RINGU, THE GRUDGE and ONE MISSED CALL is [[evident]]. Unfortunately, the [[directors]] of [[DARK]] [[REMAINS]] did not [[pay]] [[close]] attention to the [[style]] of J-Horror. J-Horror works so effectively because it plays on [[fear]] of the unknown. [[Tension]] is created by constant shifts between a bizarre situation (a ghost on a CCTV camera walking towards it for example), and the reaction of a central [[character]] who is faced with it without any [[warning]]. There is no [[humour]] or tongue-in-cheek [[element]] in these [[movies]]. Everything is [[played]] so straight and without remorse or limitations that you can't [[help]] but be convinced and captivated by it. The foreboding atmospheres set up the suspense and [[ensures]] the [[horror]] has [[psychological]] impact, very [[much]] unlike the "[[jump]] [[scares]]" used in Hollywood [[movies]].

The [[directors]] of DARK [[REMAINS]] made a [[brave]] [[attempt]] to [[avoid]] Hollywood [[clichés]] and [[also]] [[successfully]] avoided using CGI. The homage to J-Horror could have been well intended. Unfortunately, the lack of inspiration is likely to make the viewer laugh at the supposed "scares" on the screen. The make-up effects of the "ghosts" weren't too bad given the low budget but their actions just defied logic. I was scratching my head quite a few times during this movie.

I couldn't give away the ending even if I wanted to. I simply couldn't understand it. All I [[could]] deduce was that it was something of an anti-climax.

What remains? The answer as a reviewer on a different website has pointed out is boredom. The movie is a chore to sit through. Thankfully, the pain ends after an hour and a half. However, most would probably switch off long before the end.

There are only 2 positive things I could find in this movie - the successful avoidance of scare clichés and the absence of the "f-word" in every single sentence like one would normally expect to find. This is what the 2 stars are for.

Those who like supernatural or psychological horror relating to ghosts and haunting might do well to stick to movies such as THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE, THE CHANGELING or the J-Horror sub-genre.

If you think you have seen too many established movies and want to see an obscure ultra-low budget "R-rated" horror movie about ghosts, watch DEATH OF A GHOST HUNTER. It may not be the greatest horror movie ever made but it is surely a lot better than DARK REMAINS and does have a few genuine surprises in store.

I advise everyone to avoid DARK REMAINS like the plague. [[GLOOM]] [[STAYS]] is a low budget American horror movie that somehow managed to [[gaining]] 2 awards.

The plot seems to involve 2 separate strands. First, a woman commits suicide by slashing her wrists whilst bathing. Second, the young daughter of a technical writer is found with her throat slashed. The grieving couple decide to move to an isolated cabin in the mountains. It later transpires that the cabin and surrounding locations are haunted.

As the movie goes on, the 2 separate strands of story eventually converge as one might reasonably expect. However, the [[executing]] is [[random]] and results in confusion that could [[likely]] only be resolved by multiple viewings. Unfortunately, the movie is [[mere]] not [[tantalizing]] [[sufficiently]] to [[draw]] most viewers into [[staring]] it more than once.

Just about everything that [[did]] go wrong with this movie goes wrong - and fast! And the low budget cannot be used to justify all of the [[foibles]] found here.

I believe it would be wrong to pass judgement on the actors involved in this production as the material was [[exclusively]] too poor.

The [[hallmarks]] are uninteresting as [[stressed]] out by other reviewers on this site. The badly written script introduces too many people without giving them interesting dialogue, without creating [[chances]] for character-driven [[circumstances]] and without adding depth to any of them.

The direction is [[unimaginative]]. The inspiration from J-Horror [[cinema]] such as RINGU, THE GRUDGE and ONE MISSED CALL is [[manifest]]. Unfortunately, the [[managers]] of [[BLACKNESS]] [[STAYS]] did not [[payroll]] [[closed]] attention to the [[styles]] of J-Horror. J-Horror works so effectively because it plays on [[angst]] of the unknown. [[Tensions]] is created by constant shifts between a bizarre situation (a ghost on a CCTV camera walking towards it for example), and the reaction of a central [[characters]] who is faced with it without any [[ultimatum]]. There is no [[mood]] or tongue-in-cheek [[ingredients]] in these [[film]]. Everything is [[effected]] so straight and without remorse or limitations that you can't [[support]] but be convinced and captivated by it. The foreboding atmospheres set up the suspense and [[secures]] the [[monstrosity]] has [[mental]] impact, very [[very]] unlike the "[[jumping]] [[terrifies]]" used in Hollywood [[cinema]].

The [[managers]] of DARK [[STAYS]] made a [[courageous]] [[seek]] to [[preventing]] Hollywood [[clichéd]] and [[furthermore]] [[satisfactorily]] avoided using CGI. The homage to J-Horror could have been well intended. Unfortunately, the lack of inspiration is likely to make the viewer laugh at the supposed "scares" on the screen. The make-up effects of the "ghosts" weren't too bad given the low budget but their actions just defied logic. I was scratching my head quite a few times during this movie.

I couldn't give away the ending even if I wanted to. I simply couldn't understand it. All I [[did]] deduce was that it was something of an anti-climax.

What remains? The answer as a reviewer on a different website has pointed out is boredom. The movie is a chore to sit through. Thankfully, the pain ends after an hour and a half. However, most would probably switch off long before the end.

There are only 2 positive things I could find in this movie - the successful avoidance of scare clichés and the absence of the "f-word" in every single sentence like one would normally expect to find. This is what the 2 stars are for.

Those who like supernatural or psychological horror relating to ghosts and haunting might do well to stick to movies such as THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE, THE CHANGELING or the J-Horror sub-genre.

If you think you have seen too many established movies and want to see an obscure ultra-low budget "R-rated" horror movie about ghosts, watch DEATH OF A GHOST HUNTER. It may not be the greatest horror movie ever made but it is surely a lot better than DARK REMAINS and does have a few genuine surprises in store.

I advise everyone to avoid DARK REMAINS like the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 2663 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite having 6 different directors, this fantasy hangs together remarkably well.

It was filmed in England (nowhere near Morocco) in studios and on a few beaches. At the outbreak of war, everything was moved to America and some scenes were filmed in the Grand Canyon.

Notable for having one of the corniest lyrics in a song - "I want to be a bandit, can't you understand it". It remains a favourite of many people. --------------------------------------------- Result 2664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Oh, brother...after hearing about this [[ridiculous]] [[film]] for umpteen years all I can [[think]] of is that [[old]] Peggy Lee song..

"Is that all there is??" ...I was just an early [[teen]] when this smoked fish [[hit]] the U.S. I was too [[young]] to get in the [[theater]] (although I did [[manage]] to [[sneak]] into "Goodbye Columbus"). Then a screening at a local [[film]] [[museum]] beckoned - Finally I [[could]] see this film, except now I was as old as my parents were when they schlepped to see it!!

The [[ONLY]] [[reason]] this [[film]] was not condemned to the [[anonymous]] sands of [[time]] was because of the obscenity case sparked by its U.S. release. MILLIONS of people [[flocked]] to this [[stinker]], [[thinking]] they were [[going]] to [[see]] a sex [[film]]...[[Instead]], they got [[lots]] of closeups of gnarly, [[repulsive]] [[Swedes]], on-street [[interviews]] in bland [[shopping]] [[malls]], asinie [[political]] pretension...and [[feeble]] who-cares simulated sex scenes with saggy, pale [[actors]].

[[Cultural]] icon, holy grail, historic [[artifact]]..whatever this thing was, shred it, [[burn]] it, then stuff the ashes in a lead [[box]]!

[[Elite]] esthetes [[still]] [[scrape]] to [[find]] [[value]] in its [[boring]] [[pseudo]] [[revolutionary]] political spewings..But if it weren't for the censorship scandal, it would have been [[ignored]], then forgotten.

[[Instead]], the "I Am [[Blank]], [[Blank]]" rhythymed title was [[repeated]] [[endlessly]] for years as a titilation for [[porno]] [[films]] (I am [[Curious]], [[Lavender]] - for [[gay]] [[films]], I Am [[Curious]], [[Black]] - for blaxploitation [[films]], etc..) and [[every]] ten years or so the [[thing]] [[rises]] from the dead, to be viewed by a [[new]] generation of [[suckers]] who want to [[see]] that "[[naughty]] sex [[film]]" that "[[revolutionized]] the [[film]] industry"...

[[Yeesh]], [[avoid]] like the [[plague]]..Or if you MUST [[see]] it - [[rent]] the video and [[fast]] forward to the "dirty" parts, just to [[get]] it over with.

Oh, brother...after hearing about this [[silly]] [[filmmaking]] for umpteen years all I can [[believe]] of is that [[archaic]] Peggy Lee song..

"Is that all there is??" ...I was just an early [[youths]] when this smoked fish [[knocked]] the U.S. I was too [[youths]] to get in the [[drama]] (although I did [[administered]] to [[infiltrate]] into "Goodbye Columbus"). Then a screening at a local [[filmmaking]] [[museums]] beckoned - Finally I [[did]] see this film, except now I was as old as my parents were when they schlepped to see it!!

The [[LEN]] [[cause]] this [[filmmaking]] was not condemned to the [[unnamed]] sands of [[moment]] was because of the obscenity case sparked by its U.S. release. MILLIONS of people [[rallied]] to this [[tosser]], [[think]] they were [[go]] to [[behold]] a sex [[movie]]...[[However]], they got [[lot]] of closeups of gnarly, [[hideous]] [[Swede]], on-street [[interview]] in bland [[buying]] [[mall]], asinie [[politician]] pretension...and [[weak]] who-cares simulated sex scenes with saggy, pale [[players]].

[[Culture]] icon, holy grail, historic [[ordnance]]..whatever this thing was, shred it, [[burning]] it, then stuff the ashes in a lead [[shoebox]]!

[[Elites]] esthetes [[however]] [[scraping]] to [[finds]] [[values]] in its [[bore]] [[alias]] [[innovative]] political spewings..But if it weren't for the censorship scandal, it would have been [[forgotten]], then forgotten.

[[However]], the "I Am [[Blanc]], [[Blanc]]" rhythymed title was [[recurring]] [[incessantly]] for years as a titilation for [[porn]] [[film]] (I am [[Peculiar]], [[Violet]] - for [[homosexual]] [[filmmaking]], I Am [[Outlandish]], [[Negro]] - for blaxploitation [[movies]], etc..) and [[all]] ten years or so the [[stuff]] [[rising]] from the dead, to be viewed by a [[nouveau]] generation of [[tossers]] who want to [[seeing]] that "[[nasty]] sex [[movie]]" that "[[revolutionised]] the [[filmmaking]] industry"...

[[Ow]], [[avert]] like the [[epidemic]]..Or if you MUST [[seeing]] it - [[leases]] the video and [[quickly]] forward to the "dirty" parts, just to [[gets]] it over with.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Corean [[cinema]] can be [[quite]] [[surprising]] for an occidental [[audience]], because of the multiplicity of the tones and [[genres]] you can [[find]] in the same movie. In a Coreen [[drama]] such as this "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]", you'll [[also]] find some [[comical]] parts, thriller scenes and romantic [[times]]. "There's not only [[tragedy]] in [[life]], there's [[also]] tragic-comedy" [[says]] at one point of the movie the [[character]] interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the [[mixture]] of the [[picture]]. But don't [[get]] me wrong, this heterogeneity of the genres the [[movie]] [[deals]] with, [[adds]] [[veracity]] to the experience this [[rich]] [[movie]] [[offers]] to its [[spectators]]. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's [[rare]] to see such a dense and [[profound]] [[portrait]] of a [[woman]] in [[pain]].

Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet [[life]] with her son in the [[native]] [[town]] of her late husband, really [[gives]], by all the [[different]] faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this [[movie]]. It's realistic [[part]] is [[erased]] by the psychological descriptions of all the [[phases]] the poor [[mother]] is going through. [[Denial]], lost, [[anger]], [[faith]], pert of [[reality]] : the [[movie]] fallows all the steps the [[character]] crosses, and looks like a [[psychological]] [[catalog]] of all the [[suffering]] [[phases]] a [[woman]] can experience.

The only [[thing]] is to [[accept]] what may [[look]] like a conceptual experience (the woman wears the [[mask]] of [[tragedy]], the [[man]] represents the [[comical]] interludes) and to [[let]] the artifices of the [[movie]] touch you. I [[must]] say that some parts of the [[movie]] really did [[move]] me (especialy in the [[beginning]]), [[particularly]] those [[concerning]] the unability of [[Chang]] Joan to [[truly]] [[help]] the one he [[loves]], but [[also]] that the accumulation of suffering emotionally tired me [[towards]] the [[end]]. [[Nevertheless]], some [[cinematographic]] [[ideas]] are [[really]] [[breathtaking]] and surprising (the scene where a [[body]] is [[discovered]] in a [[large]] [[shot]] is for [[instance]] [[amazing]]). This kind of scenes makes "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]" the [[melo]] equivalent of "The Host" for [[horror]] [[movies]] or "[[Memories]] of murder" for [[thrillers]]. These [[movies]] are [[indeed]] surprising, most [[original]], aesthetically [[incredible]], and manage to [[give]] another dimension to the [[genres]] they [[deal]] with. The only [[thing]] that "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]" forgets, as "The host" forgot to be [[scary]], is to [[make]] its audience cry : bad point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film. Corean [[theaters]] can be [[rather]] [[impressive]] for an occidental [[audiences]], because of the multiplicity of the tones and [[genus]] you can [[found]] in the same movie. In a Coreen [[teatro]] such as this "[[Concealed]] [[Sun]]", you'll [[moreover]] find some [[humorous]] parts, thriller scenes and romantic [[time]]. "There's not only [[drama]] in [[lifetime]], there's [[further]] tragic-comedy" [[say]] at one point of the movie the [[characteristics]] interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the [[mixes]] of the [[photo]]. But don't [[gets]] me wrong, this heterogeneity of the genres the [[cinema]] [[deal]] with, [[adding]] [[truthfulness]] to the experience this [[wealthy]] [[film]] [[delivers]] to its [[audience]]. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's [[scarce]] to see such a dense and [[deep]] [[depiction]] of a [[women]] in [[grief]].

Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet [[vie]] with her son in the [[indigenous]] [[urban]] of her late husband, really [[provides]], by all the [[diversified]] faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this [[flick]]. It's realistic [[party]] is [[wiped]] by the psychological descriptions of all the [[phase]] the poor [[mummy]] is going through. [[Rejection]], lost, [[wrath]], [[belief]], pert of [[realities]] : the [[cinematography]] fallows all the steps the [[characters]] crosses, and looks like a [[psychiatric]] [[catalogue]] of all the [[distress]] [[phased]] a [[dame]] can experience.

The only [[stuff]] is to [[countenance]] what may [[glance]] like a conceptual experience (the woman wears the [[conceal]] of [[drama]], the [[guy]] represents the [[funny]] interludes) and to [[letting]] the artifices of the [[flick]] touch you. I [[gotta]] say that some parts of the [[kino]] really did [[budge]] me (especialy in the [[begins]]), [[namely]] those [[relating]] the unability of [[Jang]] Joan to [[honestly]] [[assist]] the one he [[likes]], but [[further]] that the accumulation of suffering emotionally tired me [[toward]] the [[terminates]]. [[Albeit]], some [[cinematic]] [[think]] are [[genuinely]] [[exciting]] and surprising (the scene where a [[bodies]] is [[detected]] in a [[sizable]] [[filmed]] is for [[lawsuit]] [[stunning]]). This kind of scenes makes "[[Confidentiality]] [[Sunlight]]" the [[mello]] equivalent of "The Host" for [[terror]] [[film]] or "[[Memory]] of murder" for [[thriller]]. These [[theater]] are [[actually]] surprising, most [[initial]], aesthetically [[stunning]], and manage to [[lend]] another dimension to the [[genus]] they [[addressing]] with. The only [[stuff]] that "[[Secrecy]] [[Sun]]" forgets, as "The host" forgot to be [[horrific]], is to [[deliver]] its audience cry : bad point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2666 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's remarkable that for 'Young Mr. Lincoln's' supporting players Ford cast lesser known, other-than-star actors. This not only heightens his film's focus on the central character of Lincoln, but it also affords the audience a refreshing insight into Lincoln as a man of his place and time, a man embroiled, as each one of us inexorably is, in the issues and sentiments of his time and seeking his way to resolving them. It's not so much through Fonda's Lincoln's words and actions but in the faces, the reactions of the supporting players that Ford tells the story of the formation of the young Lincoln's worldview, sense of place in society and polity, and of how the people responded to Mr. Lincoln's words and deeds and placed their trust in this man whom they deemed to have earned their respect and heeding.

Give this a try: instead of focusing on Henry Fonda, next time you view 'Young Mr. Lincoln' shift your focus to the supporting characters - you will, I expect, be handsomely rewarded with a more profound appreciation of both Lincoln and Ford. I like to suspect that Ford's storytelling through the supporting characters' reactions to Fonda's Lincoln may have appealed to David Lean when he directed Omar Sharif in 'Doctor Zhivago', in which it's the supporting characters' reactions to Zhivago that actually tell about Zhivago. --------------------------------------------- Result 2667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This [[film]] exceeded my expectations. I thought and have heard that it was going to be rubbish, so i wasn't [[expecting]] much. However, i was [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. [[At]] [[first]] i didn't take well to the lead [[girl]] and didn't really care if she lived or died. [[After]] a while she [[definitely]] [[grew]] on me and became a [[likable]] [[character]]. It's not just some slasher film where people die for no reason. There is a background story that only takes a few seconds of the film, but [[explains]] a lot. I would [[recommend]] this film to [[everyone]]. If you're not sure just watch it anyway, it's only an hour and a half of your [[life]]. You're going to live for 80 years anyway. This [[movies]] exceeded my expectations. I thought and have heard that it was going to be rubbish, so i wasn't [[waiting]] much. However, i was [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. [[In]] [[frst]] i didn't take well to the lead [[fille]] and didn't really care if she lived or died. [[Upon]] a while she [[admittedly]] [[climbed]] on me and became a [[sympathetic]] [[characters]]. It's not just some slasher film where people die for no reason. There is a background story that only takes a few seconds of the film, but [[explain]] a lot. I would [[recommendations]] this film to [[someone]]. If you're not sure just watch it anyway, it's only an hour and a half of your [[iife]]. You're going to live for 80 years anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 2668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] [[whereas]] the hard-boiled detective stories of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler have fitted to cinema like a fox in a chicken coop - indeed [[creating]] the [[definitively]] [[modern]] [[American]] [[genre]] and [[style]] in the [[process]] - those of what might be called Golden [[Age]] fiction have [[made]] [[barely]] any [[impression]] whatsoever. The problem with books like those of Agatha [[Christie]], Dorothy L. Sayers or S.S. Van Dine (on whose work this [[film]] is based), is that they are low on [[action]] or [[variety]] - [[whereas]] Sam Spade or [[Philip]] [[Marlowe]] [[traverse]] the mean streets of [[LA]], [[working]] class tenements, bars, offices, wealthy [[mansions]], and [[meet]] all sorts of [[exciting]] [[dangers]] and violence, Golden Age fiction is [[generally]] fixed in [[location]], the scene of the [[murder]], usually a lavish [[country]] [[house]], and the action is limited to investigating clues and [[interviewing]] suspects. This is a very static [[procedure]], plot reduced to puzzle.

This, of course, is as much ideological as anything [[else]], the Golden Age stories dealing with a society hostile to change and movement; the hard-boiled novels recording an urban reality increasingly moving away from a centre (both of authority, and of a city), dividing itself up into hostile, ever [[uncontrollable]] and lawless camps. Another major problem with Golden age fiction is character - because we cannot know the answer to the crime until the end, we cannot gain access to characters' [[motivations]] or emotions, being defined solely by their potential need to murder. The detective, unlike the [[anxious]], prejudice-ridden private eyes, are [[simply]] there to be [[brilliant]], and maybe a little eccentric.

The problem with most films from Golden Age books is that they try to be period recreations of the Merchant Ivory/Jane Austen school, and end up looking silly. There have been successes, for example the radical reworkings of Ellery Queen and others by Claude Chabrol. In the English-speaking world, there have really only been two. The Alistair Sim classic, 'Green For Danger', works because it pushes the form almost into parody, while never betraying the integrity or interest of the mystery.

Before that came Michael Curtiz's brilliant 'The Kennel Murder Case'. The narrative is pure Golden Age. A repulsive character is introduced who gives a number of potential suspects reason to kill him. He is duly murdered in a seemingly foolproof manner, indicating suicide, slumped in a locked room. The caricatured policemen fall hopelessly for the bait. It is up to Philo Vance, gentleman and amateur detective, neither old nor fat, to read the clues more insightfully, open the case out of the confines of the room, and eventually solve the case, the corpse being little more than the pretext for intellectual stimulation.

What is interesting is not this detective plot - which can only ever be unsatisfying as all solutions are - although it is rarely less than entertaining, and full of comical bits of business. There isn't even really an attempt to 'subvert' the image of the perfect detective - there is one alarming scene where a brutal sergeant threatens to rough up a suspect, with no protest from Vance, but that's about it.

What marks 'Kennel' as a classic is its modernity. Curtiz is not generally considered a great auteur, because he has no consistent themes or evidence of artistic development. But he was Hollywood's greatest craftsman, and he is on sensational form here. if the Golden Age detective story is mere puzzle, Curtiz takes this idea to is logical extreme, creating an abstract variation on his source, reducing narrative, character and location to geometry, a series of lines, from the beautiful art-deco sets to the glorious camera movements which suddenly break from a static composition , and, as they glide furiously at an angle, jolt the dead decor to life.

This treatment is appropriate to a story that resolutely refuses realism, it is a pattern that turns the detective plot into a hall of mirrors, like the two central brothers, or the original crime itself, borrowed from an 'Unsolved Mysteries' book. This fantasy world of nasty rich men who collect Oriental relics (shades of 'The Moonstone'?), inscrutable Chinese servants, ex-cons turned butlers, dog-loving fops, Runyonesque cops, is the perfect habitat for Vance, a man who will drop a cruise to Europe on a fanciful hunch, who knows the social world of these people, and yet is tainted by his interest in crime and association with the police, or would be if he wasn't anything more than a thinking machine, William Powell, the greatest American comedian of the decade, bravely subsuming his idiosyncratic humanity.

But if the treatment is rarefied, the climax is spectacularly brutal, involving vicious dogs and attempted murder. The police and the detective, supposed to be preventing crime, are guilty of inciting one. [[although]] the hard-boiled detective stories of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler have fitted to cinema like a fox in a chicken coop - indeed [[creations]] the [[certainly]] [[contemporary]] [[Americana]] [[gender]] and [[styling]] in the [[processes]] - those of what might be called Golden [[Aged]] fiction have [[brought]] [[scarcely]] any [[feeling]] whatsoever. The problem with books like those of Agatha [[Christi]], Dorothy L. Sayers or S.S. Van Dine (on whose work this [[cinematic]] is based), is that they are low on [[efforts]] or [[multitude]] - [[whilst]] Sam Spade or [[Philippe]] [[Marlow]] [[croix]] the mean streets of [[LAS]], [[collaborate]] class tenements, bars, offices, wealthy [[palace]], and [[cater]] all sorts of [[thrilling]] [[jeopardy]] and violence, Golden Age fiction is [[routinely]] fixed in [[locations]], the scene of the [[kill]], usually a lavish [[nations]] [[maison]], and the action is limited to investigating clues and [[interviewed]] suspects. This is a very static [[procedural]], plot reduced to puzzle.

This, of course, is as much ideological as anything [[elsewhere]], the Golden Age stories dealing with a society hostile to change and movement; the hard-boiled novels recording an urban reality increasingly moving away from a centre (both of authority, and of a city), dividing itself up into hostile, ever [[unchecked]] and lawless camps. Another major problem with Golden age fiction is character - because we cannot know the answer to the crime until the end, we cannot gain access to characters' [[motifs]] or emotions, being defined solely by their potential need to murder. The detective, unlike the [[preoccupied]], prejudice-ridden private eyes, are [[merely]] there to be [[remarkable]], and maybe a little eccentric.

The problem with most films from Golden Age books is that they try to be period recreations of the Merchant Ivory/Jane Austen school, and end up looking silly. There have been successes, for example the radical reworkings of Ellery Queen and others by Claude Chabrol. In the English-speaking world, there have really only been two. The Alistair Sim classic, 'Green For Danger', works because it pushes the form almost into parody, while never betraying the integrity or interest of the mystery.

Before that came Michael Curtiz's brilliant 'The Kennel Murder Case'. The narrative is pure Golden Age. A repulsive character is introduced who gives a number of potential suspects reason to kill him. He is duly murdered in a seemingly foolproof manner, indicating suicide, slumped in a locked room. The caricatured policemen fall hopelessly for the bait. It is up to Philo Vance, gentleman and amateur detective, neither old nor fat, to read the clues more insightfully, open the case out of the confines of the room, and eventually solve the case, the corpse being little more than the pretext for intellectual stimulation.

What is interesting is not this detective plot - which can only ever be unsatisfying as all solutions are - although it is rarely less than entertaining, and full of comical bits of business. There isn't even really an attempt to 'subvert' the image of the perfect detective - there is one alarming scene where a brutal sergeant threatens to rough up a suspect, with no protest from Vance, but that's about it.

What marks 'Kennel' as a classic is its modernity. Curtiz is not generally considered a great auteur, because he has no consistent themes or evidence of artistic development. But he was Hollywood's greatest craftsman, and he is on sensational form here. if the Golden Age detective story is mere puzzle, Curtiz takes this idea to is logical extreme, creating an abstract variation on his source, reducing narrative, character and location to geometry, a series of lines, from the beautiful art-deco sets to the glorious camera movements which suddenly break from a static composition , and, as they glide furiously at an angle, jolt the dead decor to life.

This treatment is appropriate to a story that resolutely refuses realism, it is a pattern that turns the detective plot into a hall of mirrors, like the two central brothers, or the original crime itself, borrowed from an 'Unsolved Mysteries' book. This fantasy world of nasty rich men who collect Oriental relics (shades of 'The Moonstone'?), inscrutable Chinese servants, ex-cons turned butlers, dog-loving fops, Runyonesque cops, is the perfect habitat for Vance, a man who will drop a cruise to Europe on a fanciful hunch, who knows the social world of these people, and yet is tainted by his interest in crime and association with the police, or would be if he wasn't anything more than a thinking machine, William Powell, the greatest American comedian of the decade, bravely subsuming his idiosyncratic humanity.

But if the treatment is rarefied, the climax is spectacularly brutal, involving vicious dogs and attempted murder. The police and the detective, supposed to be preventing crime, are guilty of inciting one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Yep]], [[lots]] of [[shouting]], [[screaming]], cheering, [[arguing]], celebrating, fist clinching, [[high]] fiving & [[fighting]]. You have a general [[idea]] as to why, but can never be 100% certain. A [[naval]] knowledge would be an [[advantage]] for the [[finer]] points, but then you'd [[probably]] spot the [[many]] [[flaws]]. Not an [[awful]] [[film]] & Hackman & Washington are their [[usual]] [[brilliant]], but the plot was one you [[could]] peg pretty [[early]] on. I'm [[still]] [[waiting]] to [[see]] a [[submarine]] [[film]] where people [[get]] on with each other & don't [[argue]], but then you probably wouldn't have a [[film]].

4/10 [[Yup]], [[batches]] of [[howling]], [[howling]], cheering, [[affirming]], celebrating, fist clinching, [[supreme]] fiving & [[battling]]. You have a general [[thinks]] as to why, but can never be 100% certain. A [[marina]] knowledge would be an [[advantages]] for the [[slimmer]] points, but then you'd [[arguably]] spot the [[various]] [[drawbacks]]. Not an [[fearsome]] [[filmmaking]] & Hackman & Washington are their [[routine]] [[sparkly]], but the plot was one you [[did]] peg pretty [[swift]] on. I'm [[however]] [[expectation]] to [[behold]] a [[undersea]] [[filmmaking]] where people [[obtain]] on with each other & don't [[allege]], but then you probably wouldn't have a [[filmmaking]].

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching Awake,I led to a conclusion:director and screenwriter Joby Harold made Awake with the intention of laughing at the spectator,for the simple fact the movie is full of ridiculous elements.Awake has a lot of plot holes and it is full of absurd and ridiculous elements(for example,the hospital uniform the spirit of the main character uses...did the ghost of a doctor leave it in the floor ?).The concept behind this movie is slightly ingenious but all the plot holes and the absurd things make of this a stupid and crappy film.With the exception of the great Lena Olin,all the actors bring bad performances.Hayden Christensen has zero expressions and the same applies for Jessica Alba.The extraordinary actor Terrence Howard is enormously wasted on his role.Awake makes a laugh of the spectator.It's so ridiculous and full of absurd things that it's impossible to take it seriously.My recommendation is:skip this crappy movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2671 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to [[think]] what the Blockbuster-approved edit [[must]] have [[looked]] like, because the director's cut on DVD was a [[bore]] of the epic proportions. Naturally, you don't [[expect]] it to be "The Godfather", but an acting [[class]] or two might have come in handy.

[[Also]], there were so many [[cute]] [[guys]] in this [[movie]], but they were [[woefully]] under-exploited. I [[like]] watching a bevy of hotties writhe around in their BVDs as [[much]] as the [[next]] [[guy]], but [[even]] I have a [[right]] to [[expect]] a little more. It wasn't a [[total]] [[loss]], [[though]]; at [[least]] we [[got]] a peek a Drew Fuller's ([[covered]]) [[junk]] and [[truly]] [[upsetting]] [[haircut]]. And there's Huntley Ritter looking [[even]] [[cuter]] than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's [[always]] a silver lining, [[kids]]. You just have to [[look]] [[really]] [[hard]] for it. And occasionally, you have to make [[use]] of your [[pause]] button. This is one of those [[theater]] that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to [[reckon]] what the Blockbuster-approved edit [[ought]] have [[seemed]] like, because the director's cut on DVD was a [[boring]] of the epic proportions. Naturally, you don't [[expects]] it to be "The Godfather", but an acting [[categories]] or two might have come in handy.

[[Additionally]], there were so many [[adorable]] [[buddies]] in this [[filmmaking]], but they were [[unfortunately]] under-exploited. I [[adores]] watching a bevy of hotties writhe around in their BVDs as [[very]] as the [[upcoming]] [[guys]], but [[yet]] I have a [[rights]] to [[awaited]] a little more. It wasn't a [[generals]] [[losing]], [[while]]; at [[lowest]] we [[gets]] a peek a Drew Fuller's ([[covering]]) [[trash]] and [[really]] [[heartrending]] [[coupe]]. And there's Huntley Ritter looking [[yet]] [[prettier]] than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's [[incessantly]] a silver lining, [[enfant]]. You just have to [[gaze]] [[truly]] [[laborious]] for it. And occasionally, you have to make [[utilizing]] of your [[hiatus]] button. --------------------------------------------- Result 2672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[definitely]] recommend reading the book prior to watching the [[film]]. This book won National Book Council Award in 1978 and is a very gripping read (pun not intended). It's not too difficult to read for those out there that don't read often so don't be afraid! The book [[seems]] to [[capture]] the [[passion]] of the [[relationships]] more so than the [[movie]] and the [[movie]] will make more [[sense]] after reading the book. Having grown up in Melbourne I [[could]] really relate to this [[book]] and [[movie]]. Very few Australian female [[writers]] were [[around]] the in the 70's [[therefore]] very little is [[documented]] about the [[way]] of life for a [[women]] in an urban [[city]] in Australia during this era or [[class]]. It's a precious [[piece]] of Melbourne [[history]]. It's a shame that it is [[documented]] as some [[sort]] of 80's [[soft]] [[porn]] [[movie]]. It's far from that and as the other [[reviewer]] has [[mentioned]] please do not read the [[DVD]] jacket, it does not [[represent]] what the [[movie]] is about at all. Those that [[rent]] the movie [[based]] on this description will only be [[disappointed]]. [[Just]] [[remember]] this movie was [[made]] in 1982, so don't [[expect]] the Hollywood over dramatization that they [[seem]] to [[incorporate]] these [[days]]. This is what I [[like]] about it. It's [[also]] [[great]] [[seeing]] Noni Hazlehurst in this role, she is just [[fantastic]] as [[Nora]] and it's [[great]] watching her really acting, for if you're close to my age you will [[best]] [[remember]] her for her stints on Playschool and [[Better]] [[Homes]] and [[Gardens]]. Who [[knew]] she [[hid]] this [[talent]]? This movie will [[give]] you an [[entirely]] [[new]] impression of her. A classic [[Australian]] [[Story]]! I [[undoubtedly]] recommend reading the book prior to watching the [[movie]]. This book won National Book Council Award in 1978 and is a very gripping read (pun not intended). It's not too difficult to read for those out there that don't read often so don't be afraid! The book [[appears]] to [[caught]] the [[fervor]] of the [[relationship]] more so than the [[film]] and the [[films]] will make more [[feeling]] after reading the book. Having grown up in Melbourne I [[wo]] really relate to this [[cookbook]] and [[kino]]. Very few Australian female [[authors]] were [[about]] the in the 70's [[so]] very little is [[documenting]] about the [[path]] of life for a [[females]] in an urban [[town]] in Australia during this era or [[sorts]]. It's a precious [[slice]] of Melbourne [[histories]]. It's a shame that it is [[researched]] as some [[genre]] of 80's [[mild]] [[pornography]] [[cinematography]]. It's far from that and as the other [[reviewers]] has [[cited]] please do not read the [[DVDS]] jacket, it does not [[constitute]] what the [[film]] is about at all. Those that [[renting]] the movie [[bases]] on this description will only be [[frustrating]]. [[Jen]] [[remind]] this movie was [[introduced]] in 1982, so don't [[awaited]] the Hollywood over dramatization that they [[appears]] to [[incorporation]] these [[jours]]. This is what I [[adores]] about it. It's [[additionally]] [[grand]] [[see]] Noni Hazlehurst in this role, she is just [[amazing]] as [[Norah]] and it's [[grand]] watching her really acting, for if you're close to my age you will [[bestest]] [[remind]] her for her stints on Playschool and [[Improved]] [[Accommodations]] and [[Garden]]. Who [[overheard]] she [[covert]] this [[talents]]? This movie will [[confer]] you an [[totally]] [[newer]] impression of her. A classic [[Australians]] [[Saga]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] You want to see the movie "THE Gamers" by Dead Gentlemen Productions. This is not that movie. This movie is not funny. It is a waste of time.

All of the good comments here seem to be written by (poorly disguised) false third parties. The people who made this movie seem to be attempting to synthesize fake interest.

This movie is not a well done mockumentary. Comparisons to "Spinal Tap" or Christopher Guest are insulting.

The movie is so mean-spirited that I cannot imagine anyone familiar with the subject matter finding it funny. Being able to laugh at yourself is an important quality, but if you are the ones being lampooned in this manner, you'd have to hate yourself to enjoy it.

The movie is not offensive because of its grand satire of taboo topics but because of its constant pathetic banality. --------------------------------------------- Result 2674 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Boring. Minimal plot. No character development. I went into this movie with high expectations from the book. It COULD have been an awesome movie. It COULD have probably become a cult classic. Nope, it was a giant let-down. It was poorly cast and had horrible special effects. It was difficult to determine who were the bad guys: the rebels or the military or the church or all of them? I am still left puzzled by certain mini-plots from the movie. I am left dumbfounded as to certain aspects of this so-called "prophecy", which is never really FULLY explained. I felt like I was watching a corny episode of a mini-series on the sci-fi channel. It seemed very much like a made-for-TV movie. Don't go see this movie. It is a waste of time AND money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I would put this at the top of my list of films in the category of unwatchable trash! There are films that are bad, but the worst kind are the ones that are unwatchable but you are suppose to like them because they are supposed to be good for you! The sex sequences, so shocking in its day, couldn't even arouse a rabbit. The so called controversial politics is strictly high school sophomore amateur night Marxism. The film is self-consciously arty in the worst sense of the term. The photography is in a harsh grainy black and white. Some scenes are out of focus or taken from the wrong angle. Even the sound is bad! And some people call this art?

--------------------------------------------- Result 2676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Why [[review]] good [[movies]] when you can [[review]] "Trancers II?"

Ooh, this [[film]] is soooo lame. I can just picture the cast and crew driving [[around]] L.A. with a camcorder, [[hurling]] extras in [[silly]] monster make-up at [[poor]], long-suffering Tim Thomerson. The stars' [[families]] actually [[turn]] up to play cameos, [[probably]] because Full Moon couldn't afford "[[real]]" extras. Lame [[effects]], lame sets, and a [[script]] so convoluted it would [[take]] eons to [[untie]] all the knots - this [[must]] be classic Trancers!

And [[yet]]...and [[yet]]...it [[rules]]. Note this is the same thing I [[say]] about "Trancers IV." I say it because it's [[true]]. What can [[beat]] [[watching]] an [[old]] [[guy]] in a [[trench]] coat [[mow]] down [[zombies]], then [[bust]] out with quips like, "Don't [[worry]] ladies, they're bio-degradable"? Well, [[lots]] of [[things]] [[could]] be better, but anyway this is [[still]] good stuff.

My only [[significant]] [[reservation]] is Megan Ward, who [[really]] [[stinks]] up the joint. She's a [[lousy]] [[rival]] for [[Helen]] Hunt's [[character]] - they're both [[young]] pieces of eye candy, and it would've been more [[effective]] if they actually contrasted a [[bit]] more. Oh well, you can't have everything. At [[least]] the [[wonderful]] plot [[device]] of the "long second watch" is back in place, and we've got more of [[Hap]] Ashby, the least-convincing [[athlete]] in the [[history]] of [[cinema]] (oh, wait a minute - he's got a rival in the [[form]] of David Ogden Steirs in "Creator").

I haven't seen this [[lately]], but I do [[seem]] to [[remember]] that [[Martine]] Beswick [[runs]] away twice during the final [[battle]]. [[Hooray]] for [[lousy]] continuity! [[Just]] one of the [[many]] highlights in this fine film. Why [[examinations]] good [[filmmaking]] when you can [[reviewing]] "Trancers II?"

Ooh, this [[filmmaking]] is soooo lame. I can just picture the cast and crew driving [[almost]] L.A. with a camcorder, [[throwing]] extras in [[idiot]] monster make-up at [[deficient]], long-suffering Tim Thomerson. The stars' [[family]] actually [[turning]] up to play cameos, [[potentially]] because Full Moon couldn't afford "[[actual]]" extras. Lame [[consequences]], lame sets, and a [[screenplay]] so convoluted it would [[taking]] eons to [[unbuckle]] all the knots - this [[should]] be classic Trancers!

And [[again]]...and [[still]]...it [[regulation]]. Note this is the same thing I [[said]] about "Trancers IV." I say it because it's [[genuine]]. What can [[defeating]] [[staring]] an [[former]] [[guys]] in a [[moat]] coat [[mowed]] down [[walkers]], then [[busted]] out with quips like, "Don't [[worried]] ladies, they're bio-degradable"? Well, [[batch]] of [[matters]] [[wo]] be better, but anyway this is [[again]] good stuff.

My only [[major]] [[reservations]] is Megan Ward, who [[genuinely]] [[sucks]] up the joint. She's a [[wretched]] [[opponent]] for [[Helene]] Hunt's [[trait]] - they're both [[youngster]] pieces of eye candy, and it would've been more [[efficient]] if they actually contrasted a [[bite]] more. Oh well, you can't have everything. At [[lowest]] the [[sumptuous]] plot [[apparatus]] of the "long second watch" is back in place, and we've got more of [[Pah]] Ashby, the least-convincing [[jock]] in the [[story]] of [[kino]] (oh, wait a minute - he's got a rival in the [[shape]] of David Ogden Steirs in "Creator").

I haven't seen this [[freshly]], but I do [[seems]] to [[remembering]] that [[Martina]] Beswick [[manages]] away twice during the final [[warfare]]. [[Hoorah]] for [[squalid]] continuity! [[Jen]] one of the [[innumerable]] highlights in this fine film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] I was [[looking]] over our [[DVD]] [[tower]] last [[night]] for something to watch. We were between NetFlix mailings and it was a quiet Saturday [[night]]. I pulled one out that I never heard of before and realized it was borrowed from a friend. From the jacket, it [[sounded]] like a rip-off of "The Big Chill" but, with the all-star cast, felt it might be worth [[watching]]. [[Boy]] was I [[wrong]]!!! Not only was it like "The [[Big]] Chill," it was a rip-off [[almost]] [[character]] by [[character]]. The Bill Paxton [[character]] was a copy of William Hurt ("where have you been all this time" role) -spoiler warning- and, lo and behold, he remains behind to take care of the old place(cabin/camp). Kimberly Williams = Meg Tilly; jerk womanizer Matt Craven = Jeff Goldblum etc., etc. I found myself wondering why I'm even watching these people. There was insufficient character development for me to find any interest in them. How did "Unca Lou" even find these characters after 20 years? Plus it wasn't even [[funny]], except when Perkins fell, err 'flopped' out of bed the first morning, it was a sign and I missed it. After it was over, I asked my wife, "Were there any endearing characters in this film? ... Are you sleeping over there?" She replied, "No, I'm still thinking...No, none I can think of." I was [[researching]] over our [[DVDS]] [[rook]] last [[nighttime]] for something to watch. We were between NetFlix mailings and it was a quiet Saturday [[nocturne]]. I pulled one out that I never heard of before and realized it was borrowed from a friend. From the jacket, it [[seemed]] like a rip-off of "The Big Chill" but, with the all-star cast, felt it might be worth [[staring]]. [[Guy]] was I [[mistaken]]!!! Not only was it like "The [[Prodigious]] Chill," it was a rip-off [[approximately]] [[trait]] by [[nature]]. The Bill Paxton [[characteristics]] was a copy of William Hurt ("where have you been all this time" role) -spoiler warning- and, lo and behold, he remains behind to take care of the old place(cabin/camp). Kimberly Williams = Meg Tilly; jerk womanizer Matt Craven = Jeff Goldblum etc., etc. I found myself wondering why I'm even watching these people. There was insufficient character development for me to find any interest in them. How did "Unca Lou" even find these characters after 20 years? Plus it wasn't even [[hilarious]], except when Perkins fell, err 'flopped' out of bed the first morning, it was a sign and I missed it. After it was over, I asked my wife, "Were there any endearing characters in this film? ... Are you sleeping over there?" She replied, "No, I'm still thinking...No, none I can think of." --------------------------------------------- Result 2678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have to say that there is nothing wrong with low budget films, so that was not my problem with it. My problem with it is that I [[felt]] like I was watching my next door neighbor's [[home]] movie. IMO everything about it just seemed like a guy wrote out a quick [[story]], grabbed a [[camera]], and [[started]] shooting. I understand how hard this must be to do effectively, but when I [[pay]] to [[rent]] a [[film]], I [[expect]] to feel like I am watching some [[type]] of professionally [[made]] movie.

[[John]] Schneider has a [[huge]] [[resume]], is a [[great]] [[actor]], and was fine in this film. The other people in it were not. I [[understand]] how it must be [[fun]], and cheaper to [[use]] friends, and [[relatives]] as the [[cast]], but it doesn't make for [[convincing]] acting. It [[seemed]] like the [[way]] it was shot, he was [[trying]] to give [[many]] of the scenes a more interesting [[look]], but when the [[writing]], plot, and acting are there to [[begin]] with, that [[type]] of [[style]] isn't necessary, and it is a distraction.

[[Also]] on a [[technical]] level, it had digital [[artifacts]] all over the place. [[In]] the first scene of all of those [[fine]] [[cars]], when they did a slow scan of them, they [[appeared]] to jerk back and forth just a [[little]] [[bit]]. The [[problem]] isn't in my [[viewing]] [[equipment]], (Benq PE-8700 84" diagonal) but [[somewhere]] in the [[production]]. I've never [[seen]] that [[kind]] of artifact in a professionally [[made]] [[film]] before. Then there was the sound. It sounded like they didn't do any voice-overs, which may be o.k. [[unless]] it [[sounded]] like the [[track]] in this [[film]]. It [[sounded]] [[like]] the [[built]] in microphone on the [[camera]]. I have to say that there is nothing wrong with low budget films, so that was not my problem with it. My problem with it is that I [[smelled]] like I was watching my next door neighbor's [[houses]] movie. IMO everything about it just seemed like a guy wrote out a quick [[conte]], grabbed a [[cameras]], and [[launching]] shooting. I understand how hard this must be to do effectively, but when I [[salaried]] to [[rental]] a [[filmmaking]], I [[waits]] to feel like I am watching some [[kind]] of professionally [[effected]] movie.

[[Giovanni]] Schneider has a [[whopping]] [[reset]], is a [[whopping]] [[protagonist]], and was fine in this film. The other people in it were not. I [[realise]] how it must be [[hilarious]], and cheaper to [[used]] friends, and [[parents]] as the [[casting]], but it doesn't make for [[persuading]] acting. It [[sounded]] like the [[routes]] it was shot, he was [[striving]] to give [[several]] of the scenes a more interesting [[peek]], but when the [[writes]], plot, and acting are there to [[started]] with, that [[genre]] of [[styles]] isn't necessary, and it is a distraction.

[[Moreover]] on a [[technological]] level, it had digital [[artifact]] all over the place. [[At]] the first scene of all of those [[alright]] [[wagons]], when they did a slow scan of them, they [[seemed]] to jerk back and forth just a [[small]] [[bite]]. The [[troubles]] isn't in my [[opinion]] [[machines]], (Benq PE-8700 84" diagonal) but [[somehow]] in the [[productivity]]. I've never [[watched]] that [[genre]] of artifact in a professionally [[introduced]] [[filmmaking]] before. Then there was the sound. It sounded like they didn't do any voice-overs, which may be o.k. [[if]] it [[seemed]] like the [[tracks]] in this [[cinema]]. It [[rang]] [[iike]] the [[erected]] in microphone on the [[cameras]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] Funny, sexy, [[hot]]!!! There is no real plot but you needn't anyone...

so the naked or almost naked girls and the typical fights between college-cliques [[need]] no development!

All in all the whole seems to be [[known]] from simply every film in this category but the reissuer reached the goal that this [[film]] can be recognized out of thousand others.

Last thing I've got to [[say]]. [[Unbelievable]] funny!

You've got to see it!!!

And if you are young and you want know more about the female body you've got to see it twice Funny, sexy, [[sexier]]!!! There is no real plot but you needn't anyone...

so the naked or almost naked girls and the typical fights between college-cliques [[required]] no development!

All in all the whole seems to be [[renowned]] from simply every film in this category but the reissuer reached the goal that this [[kino]] can be recognized out of thousand others.

Last thing I've got to [[said]]. [[Inconceivable]] funny!

You've got to see it!!!

And if you are young and you want know more about the female body you've got to see it twice --------------------------------------------- Result 2680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Stella", starring Bette Midler in the title role, is an unabashed tearjerker. Set in upstate New York, Stella Claire works nights as a bar maid, pouring and dancing in a workingman's saloon. One night, in comes a slumming medical intern, Stephen Dallas, who woos Stella, and in the course of their affair impregnates her. She spurns both his offers of marriage and abortion, sends him packing to a lucrative medical career, and raises her daughter herself in near-poverty. Flash-forward 16 years and the daughter has grown into a gorgeous, loving, young lady. Dr. Dallas is not out of the picture, still maintaining a tenuous, but caring relationship with his daughter and…..I'm rambling, and worse yet, making the movie sound somewhat interesting. The acting and screenwriting are so over-the-top you'll let out a groan in almost every scene. The chief offender is Bette Midler, but close behind is John Goodman as her alcoholic buddy. Each scene seems more contrived than the preceding right up to the finale, which is truly a hoot. Taken as a dramatic piece, this film rates no more than grade D, but as camp, it scores an unintended B+.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] had all the [[elements]] to be a [[smart]], sparkling [[comedy]], but for some [[reason]] it took the dumbass route. Perhaps it didn't really know who its audience was: but it's hardly a man's movie given the cast and plot, yet is too slapstick and dumb-blonde to [[appeal]] [[fully]] to [[women]].

If you have seen Legally Blonde and its sequel, then this is like the bewilderingly [[awful]] sequel. Great actors such as Luke Wilson should expect [[better]] material. [[Jessica]] Simpson [[could]] also have [[managed]] so much more. Rachael Leigh Cook and [[Penelope]] [[Anne]] Miller [[languish]] in [[supporting]] [[roles]] that are silly [[rather]] than [[amusing]].

Many things in this [[movie]] were paint-by-numbers, the [[various]] uber-cliché montages, the [[last]] minute "misunderstanding", [[even]] the kids' party [[chaos]]. This just [[suggests]] lazy scriptwriting.

It should be possible to [[find]] this [[movie]] [[enjoyable]] if you don't take it [[seriously]], but it's such a glaring could-do-better than you'll likely feel frustrated and [[increasingly]] disappointed as the scenes roll past. This [[filmmaking]] had all the [[components]] to be a [[ingenious]], sparkling [[farce]], but for some [[motif]] it took the dumbass route. Perhaps it didn't really know who its audience was: but it's hardly a man's movie given the cast and plot, yet is too slapstick and dumb-blonde to [[appellate]] [[absolutely]] to [[females]].

If you have seen Legally Blonde and its sequel, then this is like the bewilderingly [[abhorrent]] sequel. Great actors such as Luke Wilson should expect [[optimum]] material. [[Jennifer]] Simpson [[wo]] also have [[managing]] so much more. Rachael Leigh Cook and [[Mercedes]] [[Anna]] Miller [[tease]] in [[aiding]] [[functions]] that are silly [[somewhat]] than [[droll]].

Many things in this [[filmmaking]] were paint-by-numbers, the [[dissimilar]] uber-cliché montages, the [[latter]] minute "misunderstanding", [[yet]] the kids' party [[anarchy]]. This just [[suggest]] lazy scriptwriting.

It should be possible to [[found]] this [[filmmaking]] [[pleasurable]] if you don't take it [[harshly]], but it's such a glaring could-do-better than you'll likely feel frustrated and [[gradually]] disappointed as the scenes roll past. --------------------------------------------- Result 2682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Most people who have seen this movie thinks that it is the best movie ever made. I disagree but this movie is very very good. Tony is a bad ass guy and knows that he's intimidating and uses it to get ahead. It's about him and how he goes from washing dishes to having a huge house and a office with cocaine all over the desk. If you want a family movie then this isn't the way to go but if you want mobsters and vengeance and stuff like that then you'll like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2683 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I really have to [[disagree]] with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire film) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever [[shot]] in Skye) and found a film with a [[difficult]] [[start]] [[come]] [[together]] into a really [[poignant]] [[whole]].

This is not a big budget [[film]]. Rather it is a [[film]] that has a strong community feel.

I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - pushing out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.

OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.

Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.

Overall, the [[combination]] of [[music]] and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into [[quite]] a [[distinctive]] and [[memorable]] [[film]]. More of these please! I really have to [[disagreement]] with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire film) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever [[offed]] in Skye) and found a film with a [[challenging]] [[outset]] [[coming]] [[jointly]] into a really [[heartbreaking]] [[overall]].

This is not a big budget [[cinema]]. Rather it is a [[kino]] that has a strong community feel.

I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - pushing out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.

OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.

Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.

Overall, the [[jumpsuit]] of [[musicians]] and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into [[rather]] a [[symptomatic]] and [[landmark]] [[movies]]. More of these please! --------------------------------------------- Result 2684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[While]] [[Rome]] goes mad [[celebrating]] Hitler's [[visit]] - uniforms, bands, [[parades]] - two [[outsiders]] [[stay]] [[home]], in a [[large]] building, and [[wind]] up [[meeting]]. She is [[Sofia]] Loren, who is the wife of [[brutish]] public [[servant]] and [[mother]] of six [[children]]. He is Mastroianni, a radio speaker who's been fired because of his [[homosexuality]]. Both of them [[need]] company and [[understanding]], both f them find it in each other.

The [[movie]] [[covers]] a span of a few [[hours]]. The [[color]] are [[faded]] and everything takes place with a [[sound]] [[track]] of military marches and hysterical radio [[announcers]]. [[Strangely]] enough, the Nazi anthem - the Horst-Wessel-Lied - ends up becoming a romantic musical [[theme]].

Beautiful [[movie]], [[excellent]] [[recreation]] of a [[special]] era in Italian history and a [[touching]], sad story. Mastroianni is as good as we have come to expect and Sofia Loren does a superb job, very far away from her [[usual]] truck driver's pin-up, Neapolitan fishwife personas. Don't [[miss]] it. [[Although]] [[Rom]] goes mad [[commemorating]] Hitler's [[visits]] - uniforms, bands, [[processions]] - two [[aliens]] [[stays]] [[dwellings]], in a [[major]] building, and [[turbine]] up [[meetings]]. She is [[Sofie]] Loren, who is the wife of [[ferocious]] public [[officials]] and [[mum]] of six [[child]]. He is Mastroianni, a radio speaker who's been fired because of his [[buggery]]. Both of them [[require]] company and [[comprehend]], both f them find it in each other.

The [[film]] [[encompasses]] a span of a few [[hour]]. The [[coloration]] are [[dissipated]] and everything takes place with a [[audible]] [[tracking]] of military marches and hysterical radio [[broadcasters]]. [[Suspiciously]] enough, the Nazi anthem - the Horst-Wessel-Lied - ends up becoming a romantic musical [[topics]].

Beautiful [[movies]], [[wondrous]] [[recreational]] of a [[particular]] era in Italian history and a [[touch]], sad story. Mastroianni is as good as we have come to expect and Sofia Loren does a superb job, very far away from her [[habitual]] truck driver's pin-up, Neapolitan fishwife personas. Don't [[mademoiselle]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, In 35 years of film going I have finally viewed the stinker that surpasses all other ghastly movies I have seen. Beating 'Good Will Hunting' Baise Moi' and 'Flirt' for sheer awfulness. This is pretentious blige of the first order... not even entertaining pretentious bilge. The effects are cheap, and worse - pointless.

The script seems to have been written by a first year film student who doesn't get out much but wants to appear full of portent! The acting is simply undescribably bad - Tilda Swinton caps a career filled with vacuous woodeness with a performance which veers neurotically between comotose and laughable 'intensity'. Apparently, some fool out there has allowed the director of this film to make another one... be warned --------------------------------------------- Result 2686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Don't waste time reading my review. Go out and [[see]] this [[astonishingly]] good episode, which may very well be the best Columbo ever [[written]]! [[Ruth]] Gordon is [[perfectly]] cast as the scheming [[yet]] [[charming]] mystery [[writer]] who [[murders]] her son-in-law to [[avenge]] his [[murder]] of her daughter. Columbo is his usual rumpled, befuddled and far-cleverer-than-he-seems self, and this particular installment features [[fantastic]] chemistry between Gordon and Falk. Ironically, this was not written by heralded creators Levinson or [[Link]] [[yet]] is possibly the densest, most thoroughly [[original]] and twist-laden Columbo plot ever. [[Utterly]] satisfying in [[nearly]] [[every]] [[department]] and overflowing with droll and [[witty]] [[dialogue]] and thinking. [[Truly]] [[unexpected]] and [[inventive]] climax [[tops]] all. 10/10...[[seek]] this one out on Netflix! Don't waste time reading my review. Go out and [[behold]] this [[unbelievably]] good episode, which may very well be the best Columbo ever [[writes]]! [[Roth]] Gordon is [[entirely]] cast as the scheming [[even]] [[enchanting]] mystery [[novelist]] who [[murdered]] her son-in-law to [[revenge]] his [[assassinate]] of her daughter. Columbo is his usual rumpled, befuddled and far-cleverer-than-he-seems self, and this particular installment features [[wondrous]] chemistry between Gordon and Falk. Ironically, this was not written by heralded creators Levinson or [[Tying]] [[even]] is possibly the densest, most thoroughly [[initial]] and twist-laden Columbo plot ever. [[Quite]] satisfying in [[roughly]] [[any]] [[ministry]] and overflowing with droll and [[spiritual]] [[dialog]] and thinking. [[Honestly]] [[unscheduled]] and [[creative]] climax [[topped]] all. 10/10...[[strives]] this one out on Netflix! --------------------------------------------- Result 2687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] I dug this out and watched it tonight. I [[honestly]] think it must be 20 years [[since]] the last time I [[saw]] it. I [[remember]] it being a [[seriously]] flawed [[film]]. I don't [[remember]] it being THIS [[bad]]!!!!!

I am [[absolutely]] [[aghast]] that a [[project]] with this much [[potential]] should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to [[blame]] for this? The 2 guys who [[wrote]] (and I [[use]] that word [[loosely]]) the [[script]]? The [[casting]] directors who so [[terribly]] miscast at least 3 [[major]] [[characters]] in the [[story]]? (Only 2 of them are [[among]] "the [[amazing]] 5".) The [[director]], who [[clearly]] [[refused]] to [[take]] it [[seriously]], and [[kept]] shoving [[awful]] [[music]] on top of bad [[writing]] & bad acting [[everywhere]]? (I LIKED the [[theme]] song-- but it should never have been used all the [[way]] [[throughout]] the entire [[film]]!) [[Don]] Black, who should be [[ASHAMED]] at some of the [[lyrics]] he [[wrote]] for that [[music]]?

It [[figures]] that I should [[pull]] this out, [[less]] than a [[week]] after re-reading the comic-book [[adaptation]]. The first 15-20 minutes of the [[film]] more-or-less (really, [[LESS]]) parallel the first [[issue]] of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I [[kept]] wondering-- why was ALMOST every [[single]] [[detail]] [[changed]]? Doc [[showing]] up, then [[using]] his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 [[inches]] because the refractive [[glass]], were just about the only [[things]] left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an "[[adaptation]]", WHY in God's [[name]] [[change]] EVERYTHING???

Once they leave Doc's [[HQ]], [[virtually]] [[NOTHING]] is as it was in the comic (which, [[given]] Roy Thomas, I [[figure]] [[probably]] follows the book). I read [[somewhere]] they actually [[combined]] [[elements]] of 2 different novels into one [[movie]]. Again-- WHY? I've [[heard]] it was [[changed]] because they weren't able to [[secure]] the [[kind]] of [[budget]] they [[wanted]]. I [[look]] at the [[film]], and [[think]]... [[LACK]] [[OF]] [[MONEY]] in [[NO]] [[WAY]] explains what I saw on the screen!!

You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really [[take]] a [[look]] at this [[thing]]. The [[best]] [[thing]] I can [[say]] is, I [[think]] it would make a [[great]] double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and [[probably]] a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are "silly". Maybe we can "blame" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on "classic" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all "murdered" by Hollywood types who think, "OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!" More like they're the "stupid" ones. What a waste of potential.

Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB ("teachers" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the "amazing 5" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I [[also]] realized she looked a HELL of a lot like "Ardala Valmar" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)

Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from. I dug this out and watched it tonight. I [[genuinely]] think it must be 20 years [[because]] the last time I [[seen]] it. I [[remembering]] it being a [[severely]] flawed [[filmmaking]]. I don't [[reminisce]] it being THIS [[negative]]!!!!!

I am [[totally]] [[shocked]] that a [[projects]] with this much [[possibility]] should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to [[guilt]] for this? The 2 guys who [[texted]] (and I [[uses]] that word [[vaguely]]) the [[scripts]]? The [[pouring]] directors who so [[extremely]] miscast at least 3 [[big]] [[features]] in the [[saga]]? (Only 2 of them are [[in]] "the [[startling]] 5".) The [[headmaster]], who [[apparently]] [[denied]] to [[taking]] it [[severely]], and [[maintained]] shoving [[horrific]] [[musicians]] on top of bad [[handwriting]] & bad acting [[anywhere]]? (I LIKED the [[subject]] song-- but it should never have been used all the [[route]] [[around]] the entire [[filmmaking]]!) [[Donated]] Black, who should be [[SHAME]] at some of the [[paroles]] he [[texted]] for that [[musica]]?

It [[digit]] that I should [[pulls]] this out, [[lowest]] than a [[chow]] after re-reading the comic-book [[adjustment]]. The first 15-20 minutes of the [[movies]] more-or-less (really, [[MINIMUM]]) parallel the first [[question]] of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I [[retained]] wondering-- why was ALMOST every [[lonely]] [[details]] [[changing]]? Doc [[show]] up, then [[uses]] his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 [[thumbs]] because the refractive [[glasses]], were just about the only [[items]] left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an "[[coping]]", WHY in God's [[names]] [[amendment]] EVERYTHING???

Once they leave Doc's [[HEADQUARTERS]], [[almost]] [[ANYTHING]] is as it was in the comic (which, [[awarded]] Roy Thomas, I [[silhouette]] [[certainly]] follows the book). I read [[somehow]] they actually [[merged]] [[ingredient]] of 2 different novels into one [[films]]. Again-- WHY? I've [[listened]] it was [[modified]] because they weren't able to [[safe]] the [[type]] of [[budgets]] they [[wants]]. I [[gaze]] at the [[filmmaking]], and [[believe]]... [[ABSENCE]] [[DU]] [[MONETARY]] in [[NOS]] [[ROUTING]] explains what I saw on the screen!!

You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really [[taking]] a [[peek]] at this [[stuff]]. The [[optimum]] [[stuff]] I can [[told]] is, I [[thinks]] it would make a [[whopping]] double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and [[admittedly]] a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are "silly". Maybe we can "blame" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on "classic" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all "murdered" by Hollywood types who think, "OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!" More like they're the "stupid" ones. What a waste of potential.

Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB ("teachers" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the "amazing 5" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I [[additionally]] realized she looked a HELL of a lot like "Ardala Valmar" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)

Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from. --------------------------------------------- Result 2688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] "It's like hard to like describe just how like exciting it is like to make a relationship like drama like with all the like pornographic scenes thrown like in for like good measure like, and to stir up like contro- like -versy and make us more like [[money]] and like stuff." - [[Ellen]], the [[lost]] [[quote]].

"Kissing, Like, On the, Like, Mouth And Stuff" is like the best like artistic endeavor like ever made. Watching like Ellen's hairy arms and like Chris masturbating was like the height of my years-long movie-viewing experience and stuff. But before I like begin like breaking new U.S.-20-something-airhead records with the my "likes", let me like just briefly list like the high- like -lights of this visual like feast:

1. Chris doing the deed with his genitals. And not just that: the way the camera (guided so elegantly by Ellen and Patrick) rewards the viewer with a full-screen shot of Chris's fat white-trash stomach after he finishes the un-Catholic deed - that was truly thrilling. I can in all honesty say that I've never seen such grace. Chris, you should do more such scenes in your next movies, because that is exactly what we needed as a continuation of what that brilliant, brilliant man, Lars von Trier and his "Idiots 95", started. A quick w*** and then a hairy, fat, white belly: what more can any movie-goer ask for?! Needless to say, I can sit all day and watch Chris ejaculate (in spite of the fact that I'm straight)... Such poetry in motion. Such elegance, such style. No less than total, divine inspiration went into filming that sequence - plus a solid amount of Zen philosophy. Even Barbra Streisand could not get any more spiritual than this.

2. Ellen's hairy, thick arms. The wobbly-camera close-ups, so skillfully photographed by our two directors of photography (I can't emphasize this enough), Ellen and Patrick, often caused confusion regarding the proper identification of the sex in question. There were several scenes when we would see a part of a body (a leg, arm or foot), yet it was often a guessing game: does that body-part belong to a man or a woman? Naturally, Chris and his fellow artists, Ellen, Patrick and whatsername, cast themselves on purpose, because their bodies were ideal for creating this gender-based confusion. It was at times hard to guess whether one is seeing a female or male leg. Patrick is so very thin and effeminate in his movements, so hairless and pristine, whereas Ellen and the other girl are so very butch, what with their thick legs and arms. Brilliant.

3. Brilliant - especially the way that neatly ties in with the theme of role reversal between the sexes: so utterly original and mind-blowing. Ellen behaves like a man, wants sex all the time, while her ex Patrick wants to talk - like a girl. Spiffing.

4. Ellen's search for a Leftist mate. "He must love 'The Simpsons', which is quite Leftist." I am glad that the makers of this movie decided to break the long tradition of offering us intelligent Leftists. Ellen is such a refreshing - and realistic - change. The number of "likes" that she and her liberal friends manage to utter in less than 80 minutes is truly phenomenal (3,849, to be exact). They have managed to realistically transfer their real-life ineptness onto the big screen with a minimum of effort, and I applaud them for that.

5. The close-ups of toes. Plenty of stuff here for foot-fetishists, which I think is a very liberal, highly commendable way of reaching out to sexual minorities. After all, shoe- and foot- fetishists are offered so little in modern cinema, so it's nice to see that someone out there CARES.

KOTM, or rather, KLOTLMAS, offers more than meets the eye. It is not just a modest little film about shallow people engaging in hollow relationships while indulging in meaningless conversations. No, it's much more than that. It's about the light that guides all silly creatures; the guiding light that dominates the futile lives of various pseudo-artistic wannabes who just dropped out of film school, and plan to assault our senses with dim-witted drivel that will hopefully play well at pretentious festivals like Sundance and Cannes, enabling them to gain the necessary exposure hence some real cash for a change, with which they will later hire the likes of Sean Penn and George Clooney in promoting the saving of this planet and the resolving of ALL political problems this world faces. What better way to do that than by making porn at the very start?

If Chris and Ellen did the camera here, as is clearly stated in the end-credits, then who held the camera while the two of them were in front of it? They probably hired some passers-by and shoved the camera into their hands...

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. "It's like hard to like describe just how like exciting it is like to make a relationship like drama like with all the like pornographic scenes thrown like in for like good measure like, and to stir up like contro- like -versy and make us more like [[moneys]] and like stuff." - [[Helene]], the [[outof]] [[quotes]].

"Kissing, Like, On the, Like, Mouth And Stuff" is like the best like artistic endeavor like ever made. Watching like Ellen's hairy arms and like Chris masturbating was like the height of my years-long movie-viewing experience and stuff. But before I like begin like breaking new U.S.-20-something-airhead records with the my "likes", let me like just briefly list like the high- like -lights of this visual like feast:

1. Chris doing the deed with his genitals. And not just that: the way the camera (guided so elegantly by Ellen and Patrick) rewards the viewer with a full-screen shot of Chris's fat white-trash stomach after he finishes the un-Catholic deed - that was truly thrilling. I can in all honesty say that I've never seen such grace. Chris, you should do more such scenes in your next movies, because that is exactly what we needed as a continuation of what that brilliant, brilliant man, Lars von Trier and his "Idiots 95", started. A quick w*** and then a hairy, fat, white belly: what more can any movie-goer ask for?! Needless to say, I can sit all day and watch Chris ejaculate (in spite of the fact that I'm straight)... Such poetry in motion. Such elegance, such style. No less than total, divine inspiration went into filming that sequence - plus a solid amount of Zen philosophy. Even Barbra Streisand could not get any more spiritual than this.

2. Ellen's hairy, thick arms. The wobbly-camera close-ups, so skillfully photographed by our two directors of photography (I can't emphasize this enough), Ellen and Patrick, often caused confusion regarding the proper identification of the sex in question. There were several scenes when we would see a part of a body (a leg, arm or foot), yet it was often a guessing game: does that body-part belong to a man or a woman? Naturally, Chris and his fellow artists, Ellen, Patrick and whatsername, cast themselves on purpose, because their bodies were ideal for creating this gender-based confusion. It was at times hard to guess whether one is seeing a female or male leg. Patrick is so very thin and effeminate in his movements, so hairless and pristine, whereas Ellen and the other girl are so very butch, what with their thick legs and arms. Brilliant.

3. Brilliant - especially the way that neatly ties in with the theme of role reversal between the sexes: so utterly original and mind-blowing. Ellen behaves like a man, wants sex all the time, while her ex Patrick wants to talk - like a girl. Spiffing.

4. Ellen's search for a Leftist mate. "He must love 'The Simpsons', which is quite Leftist." I am glad that the makers of this movie decided to break the long tradition of offering us intelligent Leftists. Ellen is such a refreshing - and realistic - change. The number of "likes" that she and her liberal friends manage to utter in less than 80 minutes is truly phenomenal (3,849, to be exact). They have managed to realistically transfer their real-life ineptness onto the big screen with a minimum of effort, and I applaud them for that.

5. The close-ups of toes. Plenty of stuff here for foot-fetishists, which I think is a very liberal, highly commendable way of reaching out to sexual minorities. After all, shoe- and foot- fetishists are offered so little in modern cinema, so it's nice to see that someone out there CARES.

KOTM, or rather, KLOTLMAS, offers more than meets the eye. It is not just a modest little film about shallow people engaging in hollow relationships while indulging in meaningless conversations. No, it's much more than that. It's about the light that guides all silly creatures; the guiding light that dominates the futile lives of various pseudo-artistic wannabes who just dropped out of film school, and plan to assault our senses with dim-witted drivel that will hopefully play well at pretentious festivals like Sundance and Cannes, enabling them to gain the necessary exposure hence some real cash for a change, with which they will later hire the likes of Sean Penn and George Clooney in promoting the saving of this planet and the resolving of ALL political problems this world faces. What better way to do that than by making porn at the very start?

If Chris and Ellen did the camera here, as is clearly stated in the end-credits, then who held the camera while the two of them were in front of it? They probably hired some passers-by and shoved the camera into their hands...

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. --------------------------------------------- Result 2689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am a [[huge]] [[Michael]] Madsen [[fan]], so [[needless]] to say, i bought this [[movie]] without [[even]] [[renting]] it or [[anything]]... This [[movie]] was so [[horrible]], i didn't even take it back to the [[store]], i wouldn't [[want]] [[anyone]] else to be subjected to this human [[poison]], i just [[threw]] it in the trash, never [[mind]] the [[money]], it was worth the price to be able to throw it away. The acting wasn't that bad, it wasn't good or [[anything]]. The [[story]] was horrible, and the ending was [[something]] i [[despise]]. He was a broken [[man]], [[alcoholic]]. his [[life]] was a bunch of [[junk]]. i [[thought]] his [[horse]], peanuts, was an [[awful]] [[device]] to [[show]] his childhood innocence, a [[dog]] [[would]] have been [[much]] much [[better]]. i also hate religion, so this [[ending]] without a doubt [[angered]] me. [[Jesus]] heals all... i [[hate]] that i know people just like this that are [[huge]] [[Christians]] and catholics, and [[time]] will [[show]] that god doesn't [[heal]] all, or [[anything]]. It was a [[horrible]] movie, if u have the [[option]] to see it, pass, or better [[yet]] [[buy]] it, or [[rent]] it, and throw it in the [[garbage]], and [[leave]] the [[coffee]] grounds on it in the morning I am a [[overwhelming]] [[Michel]] Madsen [[groupie]], so [[fruitless]] to say, i bought this [[filmmaking]] without [[yet]] [[leases]] it or [[nothing]]... This [[filmmaking]] was so [[shocking]], i didn't even take it back to the [[storing]], i wouldn't [[wanting]] [[everybody]] else to be subjected to this human [[poisons]], i just [[chucked]] it in the trash, never [[intellect]] the [[cash]], it was worth the price to be able to throw it away. The acting wasn't that bad, it wasn't good or [[nothing]]. The [[storytelling]] was horrible, and the ending was [[anything]] i [[hate]]. He was a broken [[guy]], [[alcohol]]. his [[vida]] was a bunch of [[trash]]. i [[thoughts]] his [[horses]], peanuts, was an [[shocking]] [[appliances]] to [[shows]] his childhood innocence, a [[puppy]] [[could]] have been [[very]] much [[best]]. i also hate religion, so this [[ended]] without a doubt [[irked]] me. [[Damn]] heals all... i [[hatred]] that i know people just like this that are [[overwhelming]] [[Cristian]] and catholics, and [[moment]] will [[shows]] that god doesn't [[healing]] all, or [[something]]. It was a [[shocking]] movie, if u have the [[alternates]] to see it, pass, or better [[however]] [[procuring]] it, or [[tenancy]] it, and throw it in the [[detritus]], and [[leaving]] the [[espresso]] grounds on it in the morning --------------------------------------------- Result 2690 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I did not enjoy the film, Joshua, at all. Perhaps it is because I saw another, much better similar film titled Orphan 2 days prior but perhaps it's really just because this film was not very good. I am going with the ladder. Sure, the plot of an evil child is not exactly original but that doesn't mean the film could not succeed. It could have been suspenseful and entertaining and chilling but instead it was slow building, boring, uneventful and really didn't leave me thinking anything more than 'that wasn't very good' when it was all over.

At the end, Joshua's motivations are revealed. I won't give that away but the reality is that he didn't really accomplish his goals since despite Vera Farmiga as his mother, Abby, disappearing about 3/4th through the movie, all arrows point to her returning home soon. She was committed to a mental institution because she was losing her mind but then Joshua's Father/Her husband was accused of tampering with her medication which tells the audience that the institution realized that she was indeed not mentally ill but rather was being dosed medically. So.. shouldn't she be coming home soon? Won't Joshua have failed? Won't his Mother be living with him and his sister and possibly his Father soon? I question the Father since his future is left open ended.

At the end of the day, I didn't care about the characters. The evil demon child Joshua wasn't really scary. The storyline moved slowly and when it picked up it was still boring. Suspense fell flat every single time. When it was over I couldn't believe I had sat through the whole thing.

4/10 just because the acting was good from the parents especially Vera Farmiga as the Mother but if you want to see a movie about an evil 'child' go see Orphan. Now that's a movie that took an unoriginal concept and created a brilliant movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[remember]] watching this film a while ago and after seeing 3000 miles to Graceland, it all came flooding back. Why this hasn't had a [[Video]] or DVD [[release]] [[yet]]? It's [[sacrilegious]] that this [[majesty]] of [[movie]] making has never been [[released]] while other [[rubbish]] has been. [[In]] fact this is the one [[John]] Carpenter film that hasn't been [[released]]. In fact i haven't [[seen]] it on the TV [[either]] since the day i [[watched]] it. Kurt [[Russell]] was the [[perfect]] [[choice]] for the role of Elvis. This is [[definitely]] a role he was born to play. John carpenter's [[break]] from [[horror]] brought this gem that i'd love the TV to [[play]] again. It is well acted and well [[performed]] as far as the [[singing]] goes. Belting out most of Elvis's [[greatest]] hits with gusto. I [[think]] this also was the [[film]] that formed the [[partnership]] with [[Russell]] and [[Carpenter]] which made them [[go]] on to make a number of [[great]] movies ([[Escape]] from [[New]] [[York]], The [[Thing]], [[Big]] [[trouble]] in little [[china]], and [[Escape]] from L.[[A]]. [[Someone]] has got to release this before [[someone]] does a remake or their own [[version]] of his [[life]], which i feel would not only tarnish the king but [[also]] [[ruin]] the [[magic]] that this one has. If this doesn't [[get]] [[released]] then we are gonna be in [[Heartbreak]] [[Hotel]]. I [[reminisce]] watching this film a while ago and after seeing 3000 miles to Graceland, it all came flooding back. Why this hasn't had a [[Videos]] or DVD [[frees]] [[even]]? It's [[blasphemous]] that this [[empress]] of [[kino]] making has never been [[freed]] while other [[junk]] has been. [[Among]] fact this is the one [[Johannes]] Carpenter film that hasn't been [[freed]]. In fact i haven't [[watched]] it on the TV [[nor]] since the day i [[saw]] it. Kurt [[Russel]] was the [[impeccable]] [[chosen]] for the role of Elvis. This is [[undoubtedly]] a role he was born to play. John carpenter's [[blackout]] from [[abomination]] brought this gem that i'd love the TV to [[gaming]] again. It is well acted and well [[perform]] as far as the [[singer]] goes. Belting out most of Elvis's [[bigger]] hits with gusto. I [[reckon]] this also was the [[cinema]] that formed the [[collaboration]] with [[Russel]] and [[Woodworking]] which made them [[going]] on to make a number of [[wondrous]] movies ([[Flee]] from [[Novo]] [[Yorke]], The [[Stuff]], [[Massive]] [[hassle]] in little [[wah]], and [[Flee]] from L.[[una]]. [[Somebody]] has got to release this before [[everyone]] does a remake or their own [[stepping]] of his [[vie]], which i feel would not only tarnish the king but [[furthermore]] [[destroys]] the [[witchcraft]] that this one has. If this doesn't [[gets]] [[liberated]] then we are gonna be in [[Agony]] [[Guesthouse]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How much could the general Hollywood director learn from this movie? All... when it comes to actually scaring people. This movies truly shows that it is possible to really frighten and scare a viewer, and that monstrous monsters and long knifes never will be the best way of achieving this. All who love a real psychological thriller must see this movie... it is the best of it's kind. --------------------------------------------- Result 2693 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While not quite as monstrously preposterous as later works, this slow-moving, repetitive giallo offers some nice touches in the first half, but grows more and more lethargic and silly as it stumbles to its lame denouement.

To be sure, the actors are above average - considering this is an Argento movie - and some moments show the director's visual skills, but whole sequences should've been cut and, basically, it's just the same exploitative trash as ever, wallowing in fake science and abnormal sexual depravity.

3 out of 10 genetic disorders --------------------------------------------- Result 2694 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] OK, I am not a professional movie [[critic]] but come on...a true story!!!!

They are [[tunneling]] under another store to [[get]] [[underneath]] the bank and stumble across a [[tomb]]. At tomb with a passageway which goes [[directly]] under the [[bank]].

[[OK]], I'll play along.

But then they get into the bank and decide to [[go]] to sleep. [[Yeah]]!!! I am sure with all the [[adrenaline]] pumping through them they are going to just [[fall]] asleep.

This [[blows]] the [[whole]] [[picture]]!!!! [[How]] lame!!!!!

Glad I didn't have to [[pay]] to watch this one. OK, I am not a professional movie [[critique]] but come on...a true story!!!!

They are [[tunneled]] under another store to [[obtain]] [[below]] the bank and stumble across a [[gravesite]]. At tomb with a passageway which goes [[immediately]] under the [[banque]].

[[ALLRIGHT]], I'll play along.

But then they get into the bank and decide to [[going]] to sleep. [[Yep]]!!! I am sure with all the [[adrenalin]] pumping through them they are going to just [[fallen]] asleep.

This [[beatings]] the [[ensemble]] [[photograph]]!!!! [[Mode]] lame!!!!!

Glad I didn't have to [[salaried]] to watch this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well-done ghost story that will give you the creeps and some pretty fair scares along the way. The story unfolds slowly, building atmosphere all the way until you're ready to see the woman in black. You won't forget her once you've seen her. No gore, no knives, no hockey masks--just a well-constructed story that is best viewed at night with the lights out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2696 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ....ripoff of a dozen better films. Particularly [[Steven]] Martin's "[[LA]] [[Story]]", which at [[least]] had the grace to be [[obviously]] [[fictional]] even [[though]] it starred his then-girlfriend playing his girlfriend in the [[film]].

[[Yes]], naive [[boys]] and [[girls]], "20 [[Dates]]" IS a mockumentary, [[although]] I am not [[absolutely]] certain that was Myles Berkowitz's intent when he started. My impression is that he started the project semi-seriously, then [[quickly]] realized that it [[would]] be pathetic and not [[funny]] [[unless]] he [[made]] the situations more and more [[ridiculous]]. As a [[result]], the whole [[thing]] has an [[uneasy]], cheap and insincere feeling about it.

As [[someone]] smartly pointed out, the [[film]] has two of the "[[dates]]" suing and putting [[restraining]] [[orders]] on Myles and [[yet]] they [[appear]] in the [[film]], which [[would]] be [[impossible]] as it [[would]] [[require]] a [[consent]] form. It [[also]] [[appears]] to me that the majority of women who [[appear]] as "the [[dates]]" are professional actresses (albiet not [[famous]] ones, excepting Tina Carrere) -- they are [[simply]] too [[obviously]] pretty, polished, thin and comfortable in [[front]] of the [[camera]] to be average civilians.

[[Mr]]. Berkowitz makes a classic [[error]] in only [[casting]] this [[kind]] of very [[pretty]] thin actress, [[instead]] of [[utilizing]] a [[variety]] of believable women, which [[might]] have [[made]] the premise ([[even]] in a mockumentary) more [[believable]] and funnier. He [[also]] [[skates]] over what is [[probably]] his real-world [[problem]], and which is that both the [[movie]] [[character]] and the [[real]] [[world]] Myles Berkowitz [[appear]] to be functionally unemployed (his [[real]] [[life]] IMDb [[credits]] are [[practically]] non-existent, excepting this [[film]]). Even in the world of the [[movie]], his ex-wife divorced him for never being [[employed]]. I think the viewer ([[let]] alone [[Mr]]. Berkowitz's [[real]] [[life]] dates) are [[deserving]] of an explanation of he manages to [[live]] in one of the most [[expensive]] urban [[environments]] in the [[US]], in a luxury apartment, [[driving]] a fancy [[car]] and [[eating]] out at pricey restaurants when he doesn't [[seen]] to have any [[source]] of [[income]] whatsoever. (Is he drug [[dealer]]? Living off his [[rich]] [[parents]]? No clue!)

You can [[get]] away with most anything in a film, if the [[jokes]] are [[really]] funny. "20 Dates" is painfully, embarrassingly UN-funny. Mr. Berkowitz's idea of a joke is to have his character, while on restaurant dates, announce to his companions how the food served is likely to give him either diarrhea or constipation -- the WORST kind of childish potty humor.

It is not very surprising to discover that Mr. Berkowitz never made a film before "20 Dates" and in the last 8 years, has not made a single film, appeared as an actor in anyone else's film OR had a writing or producing credit of any kind. My gut instinct tells me that this film was not financed by "Elie" (the gangster money man who appears off-camera) but more likely by Mr. Berkowitz's affluent parents, or perhaps represents a shocking abuse of credit cards. Whichever it was, we can all rest easy that we are unlikely to have to see Myles Berkowitz or any of his creative efforts EVER AGAIN. Hallelujah!!! ....ripoff of a dozen better films. Particularly [[Stephens]] Martin's "[[LAS]] [[Fairytales]]", which at [[lowest]] had the grace to be [[notoriously]] [[mock]] even [[despite]] it starred his then-girlfriend playing his girlfriend in the [[filmmaking]].

[[Yep]], naive [[guy]] and [[daughters]], "20 [[Times]]" IS a mockumentary, [[while]] I am not [[totally]] certain that was Myles Berkowitz's intent when he started. My impression is that he started the project semi-seriously, then [[faster]] realized that it [[could]] be pathetic and not [[hilarious]] [[if]] he [[accomplished]] the situations more and more [[nonsensical]]. As a [[outcome]], the whole [[stuff]] has an [[uncomfortable]], cheap and insincere feeling about it.

As [[everybody]] smartly pointed out, the [[filmmaking]] has two of the "[[times]]" suing and putting [[restricting]] [[decrees]] on Myles and [[nevertheless]] they [[emerge]] in the [[flick]], which [[could]] be [[unable]] as it [[should]] [[requires]] a [[approval]] form. It [[furthermore]] [[seems]] to me that the majority of women who [[transpires]] as "the [[dating]]" are professional actresses (albiet not [[prestigious]] ones, excepting Tina Carrere) -- they are [[straightforward]] too [[definitely]] pretty, polished, thin and comfortable in [[newsweek]] of the [[cameras]] to be average civilians.

[[Olli]]. Berkowitz makes a classic [[mistaken]] in only [[cast]] this [[genera]] of very [[quite]] thin actress, [[conversely]] of [[using]] a [[multitude]] of believable women, which [[apt]] have [[effected]] the premise ([[yet]] in a mockumentary) more [[dependable]] and funnier. He [[furthermore]] [[skaters]] over what is [[potentially]] his real-world [[issues]], and which is that both the [[filmmaking]] [[characteristics]] and the [[veritable]] [[monde]] Myles Berkowitz [[appearing]] to be functionally unemployed (his [[veritable]] [[lifetime]] IMDb [[appropriations]] are [[hardly]] non-existent, excepting this [[kino]]). Even in the world of the [[film]], his ex-wife divorced him for never being [[employing]]. I think the viewer ([[allowing]] alone [[Olli]]. Berkowitz's [[veritable]] [[lifetime]] dates) are [[merited]] of an explanation of he manages to [[inhabit]] in one of the most [[costly]] urban [[environs]] in the [[AMERICANS]], in a luxury apartment, [[drives]] a fancy [[cars]] and [[feeding]] out at pricey restaurants when he doesn't [[watched]] to have any [[wellspring]] of [[earnings]] whatsoever. (Is he drug [[salesperson]]? Living off his [[richer]] [[parent]]? No clue!)

You can [[gets]] away with most anything in a film, if the [[gags]] are [[genuinely]] funny. "20 Dates" is painfully, embarrassingly UN-funny. Mr. Berkowitz's idea of a joke is to have his character, while on restaurant dates, announce to his companions how the food served is likely to give him either diarrhea or constipation -- the WORST kind of childish potty humor.

It is not very surprising to discover that Mr. Berkowitz never made a film before "20 Dates" and in the last 8 years, has not made a single film, appeared as an actor in anyone else's film OR had a writing or producing credit of any kind. My gut instinct tells me that this film was not financed by "Elie" (the gangster money man who appears off-camera) but more likely by Mr. Berkowitz's affluent parents, or perhaps represents a shocking abuse of credit cards. Whichever it was, we can all rest easy that we are unlikely to have to see Myles Berkowitz or any of his creative efforts EVER AGAIN. Hallelujah!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This is one of those movies - like Dave, [[American]] Dreamer and Local [[Hero]] - that [[holds]] a viewer's interest [[time]] and again. [[Lightweight]] [[movies]] seldom [[win]] Oscars, but whoever did the [[casting]] for Soapdish [[deserves]] one. [[Even]] after one has [[seen]] the movie and knows what is [[coming]], it's [[still]] [[enjoyable]] to watch how the various plot [[facets]] [[develop]]. [[True]], all the [[drama]] is melodrama; but that's entirely [[fitting]] for a movie with a soap opera background. My [[favorite]] line comes from Whoopi [[Goldberg]]: "Now why can't I write sh*t like that?" I [[think]] it's [[unfortunate]] that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation. This is one of those movies - like Dave, [[Americana]] Dreamer and Local [[Heroin]] - that [[held]] a viewer's interest [[period]] and again. [[Slight]] [[theater]] seldom [[wins]] Oscars, but whoever did the [[foundry]] for Soapdish [[merits]] one. [[Yet]] after one has [[watched]] the movie and knows what is [[forthcoming]], it's [[yet]] [[nice]] to watch how the various plot [[elements]] [[formulation]]. [[Genuine]], all the [[theater]] is melodrama; but that's entirely [[fitted]] for a movie with a soap opera background. My [[preferential]] line comes from Whoopi [[Tucker]]: "Now why can't I write sh*t like that?" I [[thought]] it's [[pathetic]] that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation. --------------------------------------------- Result 2698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[movie]] gets both a 6/10 rating from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into [[consideration]], this movie WILL [[bore]] you. It's basically a family [[drama]] similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime channel, but put in a horror universe. The [[story]] and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the [[zombies]] and you'll have something just as melodramatic as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.

However, the basic synopsis and [[idea]] is [[pretty]] original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your [[friends]] would [[joke]] about when you're half-drunk . . . but that [[joke]] [[actually]] [[got]] a theatrical [[release]]. The [[idea]] [[gets]] a 9/10 from me. The only [[reason]] it isn't [[perfect]] is because they [[could]] have [[taken]] it [[even]] further, but they didn't.

The [[mix]] of both is mixed. I thought it was [[funny]], but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT [[funny]]. I had my [[mom]] and [[little]] sister watch it with me and the jokes we [[made]] about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of [[utter]] genius, but there were also [[moments]] of pure boredom.

I sincerely [[hope]] that other [[movies]] take this [[kind]] of over-the-top [[risk]] and [[original]] [[ideas]]. I just can't [[say]] it was perfect, or even near it, because of the [[lack]] of originality to the plot.

A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.

4/10 This [[filmmaking]] gets both a 6/10 rating from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into [[scrutinize]], this movie WILL [[boring]] you. It's basically a family [[tragedy]] similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime channel, but put in a horror universe. The [[fairytales]] and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the [[walkers]] and you'll have something just as melodramatic as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.

However, the basic synopsis and [[think]] is [[quite]] original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your [[friendships]] would [[kidding]] about when you're half-drunk . . . but that [[giggle]] [[indeed]] [[did]] a theatrical [[freed]]. The [[thoughts]] [[got]] a 9/10 from me. The only [[motif]] it isn't [[perfection]] is because they [[wo]] have [[took]] it [[yet]] further, but they didn't.

The [[blending]] of both is mixed. I thought it was [[hilarious]], but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT [[amusing]]. I had my [[mamma]] and [[tiny]] sister watch it with me and the jokes we [[brought]] about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of [[total]] genius, but there were also [[times]] of pure boredom.

I sincerely [[hopes]] that other [[cinema]] take this [[genre]] of over-the-top [[threat]] and [[preliminary]] [[reflections]]. I just can't [[says]] it was perfect, or even near it, because of the [[absence]] of originality to the plot.

A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2699 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's a pretty good [[cast]], but the film has [[nowhere]] near the grace of the original Italian [[comedy]] "[[Big]] [[Deal]] on Madonna [[Street]]" Anyone looking for an [[entertaining]] caper [[film]] should visit the original. William [[Macy]] may be one of our [[greatest]] [[living]] [[actors]], but here he's put to [[little]] [[use]]. And his role in the original was played by Marcello Mastroianni, so I sort of feel sorry for him [[trying]] to [[fill]] those shoes. Might as well try to imitate Bogart or a [[young]] De Niro. The art [[direction]] is rich and textured but [[brings]] [[nothing]] to the [[story]], the [[extra]] bits they add to the story feel [[completely]] [[unnecessary]] and the things they [[take]] away are missed. [[Even]] [[starting]] the [[way]] they do seems [[bizarrely]] gratuitous and takes away from the surprise of the [[original]]. Sam Rockwell has his [[odd]] and genial [[charm]] and Luis [[Guzman]] has that odd charisma, but the [[love]] story part of the movie just seems clunky and flat. It's too [[bad]] nobody has figured out how to make this [[movie]] as well as it was [[first]] made, but then again it's too [[bad]] we [[live]] in a [[culture]] where we feel [[like]] we [[need]] to remake [[amazing]] things [[instead]] of simply [[learning]] to savor the [[originals]]. It's a pretty good [[casting]], but the film has [[everywhere]] near the grace of the original Italian [[humour]] "[[Overwhelming]] [[Treat]] on Madonna [[Rue]]" Anyone looking for an [[amusing]] caper [[filmmaking]] should visit the original. William [[Tragedies]] may be one of our [[largest]] [[inhabit]] [[protagonists]], but here he's put to [[small]] [[usage]]. And his role in the original was played by Marcello Mastroianni, so I sort of feel sorry for him [[try]] to [[populate]] those shoes. Might as well try to imitate Bogart or a [[youthful]] De Niro. The art [[orientation]] is rich and textured but [[poses]] [[none]] to the [[history]], the [[additional]] bits they add to the story feel [[fully]] [[superfluous]] and the things they [[taking]] away are missed. [[Yet]] [[commencement]] the [[manner]] they do seems [[surprisingly]] gratuitous and takes away from the surprise of the [[initial]]. Sam Rockwell has his [[unusual]] and genial [[charisma]] and Luis [[Munoz]] has that odd charisma, but the [[adored]] story part of the movie just seems clunky and flat. It's too [[negative]] nobody has figured out how to make this [[filmmaking]] as well as it was [[frst]] made, but then again it's too [[unfavorable]] we [[vivo]] in a [[cultures]] where we feel [[iike]] we [[gotta]] to remake [[staggering]] things [[alternatively]] of simply [[learns]] to savor the [[foreground]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Not the best of actors' movies.The [[director]] has [[concentrated]] on [[projected]] actor's stardom [[rather]] than giving a good [[entertainer]]. May be hero himself, his [[family]] and his [[sincere]] [[fans]] can [[enjoy]] it.But [[definitely]] it's not worth for neutral [[audience]].The [[fight]] sequences are a [[total]] [[comedy]].The dance moves in the song [[sequences]] are [[pathetic]]. The music is average.This [[film]] was the [[biggest]] flop for the actor. Inspite of the [[hype]] created over the movie, the [[movie]] [[failed]] [[miserably]]. Don't [[even]] think of [[watching]] this move even if you [[want]] to [[kill]] [[time]]. You can watch some [[cartoon]] instead.A [[good]] [[movie]] [[buff]] cannot digest this [[crap]] for 2 1/2 hours. Not the best of actors' movies.The [[superintendent]] has [[focusing]] on [[predicting]] actor's stardom [[comparatively]] than giving a good [[artists]]. May be hero himself, his [[families]] and his [[earnest]] [[lovers]] can [[enjoying]] it.But [[assuredly]] it's not worth for neutral [[spectators]].The [[struggles]] sequences are a [[whole]] [[humour]].The dance moves in the song [[sequence]] are [[woeful]]. The music is average.This [[movie]] was the [[strongest]] flop for the actor. Inspite of the [[fanfare]] created over the movie, the [[filmmaking]] [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]]. Don't [[yet]] think of [[staring]] this move even if you [[wanted]] to [[assassination]] [[times]]. You can watch some [[cartoons]] instead.A [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] [[buffy]] cannot digest this [[damnit]] for 2 1/2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 2701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this move was friggin hilarious!!! funniest I've seen in a while, akshay and john kick ass as always, and the chicks are hot too. the story is awesome, lots of great jokes, and whoever reviewed this before me is an idiot. to him i say that u are not of Indian background so u wouldn't understand the humor u moron. don't rate movies u don't understand. what did u watch, the subtitle version where majority of jokes are lost in translation? thats what i thought jackass.

akshay kumar is the best actor ever and proves once again his versatility, he can do not only action but comedy as well, and is excellent at it. john has proved himself as well, this is his first comedy role and he was also excellent at it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2702 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An intriguing premise of hand-drawn fantasy come to life in a child's fever dreams. However, I imagine the average nonfictional child is far more adept at scaring themselves than Bernard Rose is at riveting the viewer. The duel between Anna's two realities drags on far too long to sustain interest, especially considering that the little girl playing her is the most abrasive child actor I've ever seen.

Use only for kindling. --------------------------------------------- Result 2703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this movie. Most of the reviews have been bad, but most critics think a movie should be like an idea drama. This movie has a little bit of drama, but the rest is just clean fun and very entertaining. Forget about Julia Roberts being a Pretty Woman, Emma Roberts is a beautiful young lady and there is more to her than just that. Emma was so much fun to watch in the role of Nancy Drew. It is good to see a new face. I believe she will go far.

Nancy Drew may not be based upon the books, but the story is still good. There is also a good blend of other character actors and supporting actors like Pat Carroll, Barry Bostwick, Rachel Leigh Cook and Chris Kattan - not credited. I'm surprised Disney did not release this movie. Some people may not like this movie because it does not contain sex, violence, and cursing. This is a good family film which is rare in this day in time. So take your family, see this movie and judge for your self how good it is. I can't wait for the sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 2704 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After having seen the movie the first question arising in my mind was: Is this supposed to be irony or not? After reading a few comments about the character Doc Savage and the comic series, I knew this film was not meant to be ironic. So, the story tells us about an US-American Super-Doc saving a south American republic from evil. Sounds like a typical story. But this one comes in such an unrealistic way that it becomes ridiculous. The mandatory end-fight shows the worst presentation of martial arts I have ever seen. The film might be interesting for low budget movie designers as a bad example. --------------------------------------------- Result 2705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] First off, I had my [[doubts]] just [[looking]] at the DVD box and reading it saying that it was about of bunch of teens [[gathering]] at a [[lake]] where they will [[find]] do or [[something]]. [[Any]] [[movie]] that has a [[premise]] like this has [[failed]] [[miserably]], even as a slasher [[movie]], except for the first [[Friday]] the 13th.

I wanted to [[get]] up and stop [[watching]] the [[movie]] at [[least]] 10 [[times]], but I just kept thinking that it had to get a little better. It didn't. Usually, I think every [[movie]] has something that you can take from it. This has [[nothing]].

Do yourself a favor, and [[find]] [[something]] constructive to do for 80 [[minutes]]. Like, give yourself papercuts, or [[eat]] dirt. First off, I had my [[suspicions]] just [[searching]] at the DVD box and reading it saying that it was about of bunch of teens [[picking]] at a [[lakes]] where they will [[unearth]] do or [[anything]]. [[Everything]] [[filmmaking]] that has a [[supposition]] like this has [[faulted]] [[woefully]], even as a slasher [[filmmaking]], except for the first [[Yesterday]] the 13th.

I wanted to [[got]] up and stop [[staring]] the [[flick]] at [[slightest]] 10 [[moments]], but I just kept thinking that it had to get a little better. It didn't. Usually, I think every [[filmmaking]] has something that you can take from it. This has [[none]].

Do yourself a favor, and [[finds]] [[somethings]] constructive to do for 80 [[mins]]. Like, give yourself papercuts, or [[comer]] dirt. --------------------------------------------- Result 2706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ride with the Devil, like Ang Lee's later Brokeback Mountain, is a film of aesthetic and historical importance. Film lovers ought to see it at minimum twice as its artistic nuance is worthy to be over comprehended.

A perfect piece of art, surprising depth of humanity. I really don't recall another war film, will so capture you, will change your existing conception of history and politics, will restore your belief in humanity. After seeing so many killings, so many sufferings , you don't feel yourself numb, instead you treasure the bond between human beings more. The actors' performances haunt your heart, the music drives your mind. Some shoots, are not just some pictures, they transcend themselves, becoming the seeing of soul. Such is the true sense of film being a genre of art.

A film like this doesn't need long comments or reviews, everything it says by itself. Ovation to the cast which includes Tobey Maguire, Jeffrey Wright and Jewel Kilcher, the cinematographer and the composer of the beautiful and lyrical music, what an achievement! --------------------------------------------- Result 2707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This [[show]] is a [[great]] history [[story]]. It's has everything from [[slavery]],the [[way]] they were [[treated]], [[religion]], the [[ways]] Jews were [[sent]] into [[hiding]],the inquisition, the belief in the Orisha the African gods, the [[way]] [[women]] were [[treated]],[[including]] the [[daughters]]. Even down to [[homosexuality]]. The way the [[characters]] are [[intertwined]] and that Violante, that character saddens me. She is so [[desperate]] to be [[loved]] that she [[destroys]] [[everyone]] [[around]] her.I am so glad they [[decided]] to re-release it to t.v. again. [[Although]] I [[would]] love to [[see]] the unedited [[version]]. Xica has [[become]] my [[Heroine]]. I [[look]] up to the way she [[uses]] her power to [[help]] all who [[seek]] it. I love all the [[characters]] and have [[found]] that they can [[relate]] to [[many]] people now in this century. I [[look]] forward to my Xica [[every]] night. It [[would]] be [[great]] to dub it in [[English]] so the [[Americans]] can [[love]] her too. This [[displaying]] is a [[huge]] history [[history]]. It's has everything from [[bondage]],the [[manner]] they were [[treating]], [[religions]], the [[modes]] Jews were [[sending]] into [[concealed]],the inquisition, the belief in the Orisha the African gods, the [[routes]] [[female]] were [[processed]],[[consisting]] the [[fille]]. Even down to [[buggery]]. The way the [[character]] are [[interconnected]] and that Violante, that character saddens me. She is so [[despondent]] to be [[worshipped]] that she [[demolishing]] [[anybody]] [[about]] her.I am so glad they [[opted]] to re-release it to t.v. again. [[Despite]] I [[could]] love to [[behold]] the unedited [[stepping]]. Xica has [[becoming]] my [[Heroin]]. I [[glance]] up to the way she [[usage]] her power to [[aids]] all who [[trying]] it. I love all the [[nature]] and have [[find]] that they can [[pertain]] to [[several]] people now in this century. I [[peek]] forward to my Xica [[any]] night. It [[ought]] be [[prodigious]] to dub it in [[Brits]] so the [[America]] can [[likes]] her too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I really [[tried]] to like this [[movie]]. It deals with an important problem in any society: [[sex]] [[addiction]].

[[In]] this [[story]] we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. [[In]] this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his [[life]].

The [[production]] values are [[terrible]]; mainly the acting. [[Oh]], you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you [[might]] think you're watching a home made flick.

Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful [[wife]] [[stand]] all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she [[believe]] him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.

Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just [[pointless]] and will leave you thinking "wtf?".

Scenes like those you will find plenty.

[[Avoid]] this [[movie]]. Please, [[avoid]] it; it's not soft [[core]], it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic [[feature]]. It's a [[pretentious]] effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.

[[Only]] [[Mrs]]. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't [[come]] back. I really [[attempt]] to like this [[movies]]. It deals with an important problem in any society: [[sexuality]] [[dependence]].

[[Throughout]] this [[saga]] we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. [[Throughout]] this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his [[living]].

The [[productivity]] values are [[abysmal]]; mainly the acting. [[Uhh]], you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you [[apt]] think you're watching a home made flick.

Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful [[femme]] [[stands]] all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she [[think]] him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.

Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just [[senseless]] and will leave you thinking "wtf?".

Scenes like those you will find plenty.

[[Avert]] this [[kino]]. Please, [[avert]] it; it's not soft [[basic]], it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic [[peculiarities]]. It's a [[conceited]] effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.

[[Exclusively]] [[Franziska]]. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't [[coming]] back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I was in a [[bad]] [[frame]] of mind when I first [[saw]] this movie. For some [[reason]] it [[clicked]] on all my [[levels]], [[tensions]] in a family, [[loneliness]] and the [[want]] of someone to [[share]] your [[life]] with. It didn't hurt that the someone to [[share]] your [[life]] with was such a [[beautiful]] [[girl]] as Claire (Cyndy Preston). I also bought the sound track to this movie (very hard to [[get]]). [[Loved]] it and [[hope]] it will someday [[come]] out on DV I was in a [[unhealthy]] [[framework]] of mind when I first [[sawthe]] this movie. For some [[rationale]] it [[ticked]] on all my [[grades]], [[tension]] in a family, [[solitude]] and the [[wanting]] of someone to [[shares]] your [[living]] with. It didn't hurt that the someone to [[shares]] your [[living]] with was such a [[wondrous]] [[chick]] as Claire (Cyndy Preston). I also bought the sound track to this movie (very hard to [[got]]). [[Liked]] it and [[hopes]] it will someday [[arrive]] out on DV --------------------------------------------- Result 2710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] First off, I hadn't [[seen]] "The [[Blob]]" since I was 7 or 8 and viewing it as an [[adult]] was an [[incredible]] experience. [[Pages]] [[could]] be [[written]] on its influence on [[horror]] [[films]] [[even]] [[today]]. And [[even]] more [[could]] be written on its social subtext with the 50s "[[fear]] of teenagers". But this [[simple]] little [[tale]] of interplanetary [[horror]] is still a [[damn]] [[fine]] scary movie if you let it be.

Sure, it looks cheesy as all [[get]] out in our [[modern]] [[world]]. But "The [[Blob]]" [[packs]] in some genuinely frightening moments as a band of kids track the unstoppable creature when then adults don't believe them. In fact, there are even some pretty bleak moments in its candy-colored [[world]]. And Steve McQueen gives so much more than the story deserved on paper that we the viewers really get caught in the moment and [[believe]] in him.

To sum up, if you can take off your postmodern irony filter, there's a lot more to love here than meets the eye. First off, I hadn't [[saw]] "The [[Smudge]]" since I was 7 or 8 and viewing it as an [[adulthood]] was an [[unthinkable]] experience. [[Page]] [[would]] be [[authored]] on its influence on [[terror]] [[movie]] [[yet]] [[yesterday]]. And [[yet]] more [[did]] be written on its social subtext with the 50s "[[scare]] of teenagers". But this [[mere]] little [[story]] of interplanetary [[monstrosity]] is still a [[dammit]] [[alright]] scary movie if you let it be.

Sure, it looks cheesy as all [[obtain]] out in our [[fashionable]] [[monde]]. But "The [[Stain]]" [[packet]] in some genuinely frightening moments as a band of kids track the unstoppable creature when then adults don't believe them. In fact, there are even some pretty bleak moments in its candy-colored [[globe]]. And Steve McQueen gives so much more than the story deserved on paper that we the viewers really get caught in the moment and [[think]] in him.

To sum up, if you can take off your postmodern irony filter, there's a lot more to love here than meets the eye. --------------------------------------------- Result 2711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is no story! The plot is hopeless! A filmed based on a car with a stuck accelerator, no brakes, and a stuck automatic transmission gear lever cannot be good! I would have stopped that car within one minute whether I was in it or in the police car constantly following it. I feel sorry for the actors that had to put up with such a poor script. The few scenes that some similarity to action was heavily over-dramatized, and as far from reality you can get. In addition, there were a lot of blunders, for instance the hood of the runaway car, which was popped doing 100mph. At first it just folded over the windshield, like it would in reality, but then, afterwards, it blew off. The car was later in the movie observed with the hood on....

This film was nothing but annoying, stay away from it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Buster absolutely shines in this episode, which is the only vehicle I've seen towards the end of the career that allowed him to do the physical (and silent!) comedy that made him famous. It's still a shock to hear his gravelly voice in the talkie sequences - his voice is about the only thing I don't care for, as far as Buster is concerned - but his ability to take a pratfall is still unparalleled. He even repeats some of the gags used in his early two-reelers with Roscoe Arbuckle.

My deepest gratitude to Rod Serling for presenting us with this episode, and for giving Buster's genius full scope. He didn't have much time (one episode) to do it in, but this is a touching tribute to Hollywood's greatest genius. --------------------------------------------- Result 2713 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The only thing that "An Inconvenient Truth" proves is that Al [[Gore]] is still an idiot. These "[[unchallenged]]" [[experts]] are [[unchallenged]] because a [[response]] to their [[inane]] [[hypotheses]] is generally [[beneath]] [[real]] science. This is mostly [[false]] [[science]] folks. The [[greatest]] [[source]] of greenhouse [[gases]] - CO2 - is people, we exhale it and unless you're [[willing]] to [[start]] sacrificing your [[brethren]] to [[save]] the [[world]], there's not a [[darn]] thing to be done. We've [[heard]] how the world was going to end as the [[result]] of [[man]] for more than 50 [[years]]. [[Fools]] publish a time [[line]] for their doomsday and when the [[time]] passes, nothing has happened. "An [[Inconvenient]] Truth" is just another [[vehicle]] with which a disingenuous faction of American society can peddle their poop.

And as to Al leaving the tobacco business because of his sister's [[death]] from [[cancer]], that is a load too. Al couldn't [[run]] his farm any better than he could [[run]] the [[country]]. He was [[losing]] [[money]] on the [[operation]] because he didn't [[care]] to farm when he [[could]] make more $ on [[speaking]] [[tours]]. The only [[global]] warming that is [[unchallenged]] is the hot air [[produced]] by this gasbag! The only thing that "An Inconvenient Truth" proves is that Al [[Gora]] is still an idiot. These "[[unquestionable]]" [[specialist]] are [[unnoticed]] because a [[answer]] to their [[trifling]] [[assumptions]] is generally [[underneath]] [[veritable]] science. This is mostly [[misguided]] [[veda]] folks. The [[highest]] [[origin]] of greenhouse [[gaz]] - CO2 - is people, we exhale it and unless you're [[desirous]] to [[commencement]] sacrificing your [[brothers]] to [[rescuing]] the [[globe]], there's not a [[thin]] thing to be done. We've [[hear]] how the world was going to end as the [[outcome]] of [[bloke]] for more than 50 [[olds]]. [[Pigeons]] publish a time [[iine]] for their doomsday and when the [[period]] passes, nothing has happened. "An [[Embarrassing]] Truth" is just another [[automobile]] with which a disingenuous faction of American society can peddle their poop.

And as to Al leaving the tobacco business because of his sister's [[die]] from [[tumour]], that is a load too. Al couldn't [[executes]] his farm any better than he could [[executes]] the [[nation]]. He was [[loses]] [[moneys]] on the [[functioning]] because he didn't [[healthcare]] to farm when he [[wo]] make more $ on [[speak]] [[voyage]]. The only [[international]] warming that is [[undisputed]] is the hot air [[generated]] by this gasbag! --------------------------------------------- Result 2714 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a big fan of rom/coms at the best of times. A few have been quite good (check of Dream for an Insomniac), but this one is just more of the same but less.

With a running time of 100min, I expect more than 1 laugh every 30mins. The only real belly laugh are when male strangers and friends instinctivly help out Lee's character.

All I can say is AVOID. I gaurentee there is at least 10 other movies on the shelf that deserve you $$

3 of out 10 (And only cos I'm a big Lee fan) --------------------------------------------- Result 2715 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I wandered into this movie after watching the 82-minute "Borat" tonight, and left quite [[disappointed]]. I was a huge fan of Wallace and Gromit, and routinely go to see animated films. That being said, I found myself nodding off and at one point nearly walked out, but stayed waiting for this film to get better. Never happened.

The visuals are stunning and the voice work is top notch, especially in my opinion, that of Kate Winslet and Ian McKellen (I had to remind myself a few times the bulbous headed lizard villain was Gandalf and Magneto). The problem with this movie for me is it's one of those animated features for the ADD-set. It registers after the fact as one zany slapstick routine after another, weighed down by a treacle filled plot that pulls out every stop in an attempt to convey an "Important Message." It looks a lot like busted Oscar bait for the animated category, and considering the way it's scoring with critics, I wouldn't be surprised if the Academy gets it wrong and offers up its hardware. But if you're looking for an enjoyable animated feature about rats, take my advice and wait for Ratatouille. I wandered into this movie after watching the 82-minute "Borat" tonight, and left quite [[disappoint]]. I was a huge fan of Wallace and Gromit, and routinely go to see animated films. That being said, I found myself nodding off and at one point nearly walked out, but stayed waiting for this film to get better. Never happened.

The visuals are stunning and the voice work is top notch, especially in my opinion, that of Kate Winslet and Ian McKellen (I had to remind myself a few times the bulbous headed lizard villain was Gandalf and Magneto). The problem with this movie for me is it's one of those animated features for the ADD-set. It registers after the fact as one zany slapstick routine after another, weighed down by a treacle filled plot that pulls out every stop in an attempt to convey an "Important Message." It looks a lot like busted Oscar bait for the animated category, and considering the way it's scoring with critics, I wouldn't be surprised if the Academy gets it wrong and offers up its hardware. But if you're looking for an enjoyable animated feature about rats, take my advice and wait for Ratatouille. --------------------------------------------- Result 2716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Who would think Andy Griffith's "Helen Crump" (Aneta Corsaut) had a Steve McQueen movie in her past? But that is only one of several weird and [[wonderful]] things about the ultimate 1950s teenagers-battle-creatures movie, which might best be described as Rebel Without A Cause meets God Knows What From Outer Space. The Rebel is Steven McQueen (who would shortly decide that "Steve" sounded less prissy), a good boy with just enough wild to be interesting; the very [[wholesome]] yet understanding girlfriend is the aforementioned Aneta Corsaut. It was bad enough when their date was disrupted by teenage hot-rodders, but they are considerably more nonplussed when they encounter a gelatinous, man-eating What Is It that rides down to earth on its own hotrod meteor--and begins gobbling up townfolk right and left. But will the grown ups believe them? Of course not, what do they know, they're just kids!

The movie is teeny bopper at its teeny bopping best. The actors [[take]] the rather pretentious script very seriously, with many a soulful look into each other eyes, and the "adult" supporting cast probably says "Kids!" very third sentence or so. But the real pleasure of the film its creature, which is well imagined, well-executed, and often manages to generate a surprising degree of suspense. And although clearly on the cheap side (check out those miniature sets, guys!), THE BLOB is actually a fairly well-made film--and there's that catchy little theme song thrown in for good measure. The 40-plus crowd (myself included) will enjoy the movie as nostalgia, but that won't prevent them from hooting right along with the younger set at its whole-milk-and-white-bread 1950s sensibility, and the film would be a great choice for either family-movie night or a more sophisticated "grown ups only" get together. Make plenty of Jello cubes for movie snacking! Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer Who would think Andy Griffith's "Helen Crump" (Aneta Corsaut) had a Steve McQueen movie in her past? But that is only one of several weird and [[wondrous]] things about the ultimate 1950s teenagers-battle-creatures movie, which might best be described as Rebel Without A Cause meets God Knows What From Outer Space. The Rebel is Steven McQueen (who would shortly decide that "Steve" sounded less prissy), a good boy with just enough wild to be interesting; the very [[healthier]] yet understanding girlfriend is the aforementioned Aneta Corsaut. It was bad enough when their date was disrupted by teenage hot-rodders, but they are considerably more nonplussed when they encounter a gelatinous, man-eating What Is It that rides down to earth on its own hotrod meteor--and begins gobbling up townfolk right and left. But will the grown ups believe them? Of course not, what do they know, they're just kids!

The movie is teeny bopper at its teeny bopping best. The actors [[taking]] the rather pretentious script very seriously, with many a soulful look into each other eyes, and the "adult" supporting cast probably says "Kids!" very third sentence or so. But the real pleasure of the film its creature, which is well imagined, well-executed, and often manages to generate a surprising degree of suspense. And although clearly on the cheap side (check out those miniature sets, guys!), THE BLOB is actually a fairly well-made film--and there's that catchy little theme song thrown in for good measure. The 40-plus crowd (myself included) will enjoy the movie as nostalgia, but that won't prevent them from hooting right along with the younger set at its whole-milk-and-white-bread 1950s sensibility, and the film would be a great choice for either family-movie night or a more sophisticated "grown ups only" get together. Make plenty of Jello cubes for movie snacking! Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 2717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] THE [[NOTORIOUS]] BETTIE [[PAGE]] [[Written]] by [[Mary]] Harron & Guinevere Turner Directed by Mary Harron

How do you define a person who has [[always]] been between two worlds, one of presumed sin and one of supposed redemption? [[Especially]] when that person [[eventually]] succumbed to a split personality disorder in her [[latter]] [[years]] as if to demonstrate her own point. If you're director Mary Harron, you don't [[shy]] away from [[showing]] the push/pull [[nature]] of THE [[NOTORIOUS]] BETTIE [[PAGE]]. You [[allow]] the [[character]] to [[drift]] back and forth between the healing [[forgiveness]] of the power of God and the church and the [[seductive]] illusion of [[control]] and [[dominance]] [[afforded]] to Page during her [[years]] as a pinup [[model]]. By doing so, audiences are [[offered]] a [[complex]] [[character]] that is [[propelled]] forward by a [[desire]] to [[leave]] her [[difficult]] past with a naive enjoyment in others' [[lust]] for her and a [[struggle]] to reconcile her image in the [[eyes]] of God. Come the right time, it will no longer matter how many eyes are on her because there is only one pair that counts.

Shot [[mostly]] in black and white (with some unnecessary bursts of [[color]]), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE is at times a light, [[humorous]] comedy, making the film an [[enjoyable]] experience and [[also]] one that pokes fun at how seriously people believe in the [[corruption]] of pornography. But the delicate hand of the director is more palpably [[felt]] during Page's times of despair. Harron is a sensitive, considerate director who does not throw Page's numerous and devastating blows of abuse in the face of her viewer. Instead, she allows the [[surprisingly]] effective Gretchen Moll, who plays the title role, the chance to hammer the pain of her character into the viewer with fear in her eyes, exhaustion is her cries and shame on her [[skin]]. [[Whereas]] most directors, perhaps most male directors, [[would]] find it essential to show the heroine in painful positions in order to draw a link between the kinds of atrocities that were put upon her and where her life took her, Harron has too much [[compassion]] for her character, her actress and her audience. From [[fragility]], Page learns to trust people again and as more and more photographers fall in love with her image, the more she falls in love with their admiration and the control she has over the gaze. By the time her poses cross over into the realm of soft-core S&M, she has found a way to combine her need to be respected with the objectification she has been accustomed to her whole life.

Mary Harron's Bettie Page is a woman who yearns for control over her life and destiny, yet ultimately is always being told where to stand, how to smile and what to wear. When she finally realizes that none of her choices have been her own, she chooses to embrace God and preach his word to those who will listen. The true sadness behind this most important decision is that she is still letting someone else guide her blindly; she just has more faith that this direction will be better for her soul. THE [[PROVERBIAL]] BETTIE [[NEWSWEEK]] [[Typed]] by [[Mari]] Harron & Guinevere Turner Directed by Mary Harron

How do you define a person who has [[unceasingly]] been between two worlds, one of presumed sin and one of supposed redemption? [[Namely]] when that person [[ultimately]] succumbed to a split personality disorder in her [[latest]] [[olds]] as if to demonstrate her own point. If you're director Mary Harron, you don't [[coy]] away from [[proving]] the push/pull [[traits]] of THE [[INFAMOUS]] BETTIE [[NEWSWEEK]]. You [[permitted]] the [[characters]] to [[drifting]] back and forth between the healing [[pardon]] of the power of God and the church and the [[tempting]] illusion of [[monitoring]] and [[supremacy]] [[attributed]] to Page during her [[ages]] as a pinup [[modelling]]. By doing so, audiences are [[delivering]] a [[tricky]] [[nature]] that is [[fueled]] forward by a [[wishing]] to [[let]] her [[problematic]] past with a naive enjoyment in others' [[thirst]] for her and a [[fight]] to reconcile her image in the [[eye]] of God. Come the right time, it will no longer matter how many eyes are on her because there is only one pair that counts.

Shot [[basically]] in black and white (with some unnecessary bursts of [[coloration]]), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE is at times a light, [[funny]] comedy, making the film an [[pleasant]] experience and [[similarly]] one that pokes fun at how seriously people believe in the [[bribery]] of pornography. But the delicate hand of the director is more palpably [[deemed]] during Page's times of despair. Harron is a sensitive, considerate director who does not throw Page's numerous and devastating blows of abuse in the face of her viewer. Instead, she allows the [[insanely]] effective Gretchen Moll, who plays the title role, the chance to hammer the pain of her character into the viewer with fear in her eyes, exhaustion is her cries and shame on her [[epidermis]]. [[Albeit]] most directors, perhaps most male directors, [[ought]] find it essential to show the heroine in painful positions in order to draw a link between the kinds of atrocities that were put upon her and where her life took her, Harron has too much [[sympathy]] for her character, her actress and her audience. From [[frailty]], Page learns to trust people again and as more and more photographers fall in love with her image, the more she falls in love with their admiration and the control she has over the gaze. By the time her poses cross over into the realm of soft-core S&M, she has found a way to combine her need to be respected with the objectification she has been accustomed to her whole life.

Mary Harron's Bettie Page is a woman who yearns for control over her life and destiny, yet ultimately is always being told where to stand, how to smile and what to wear. When she finally realizes that none of her choices have been her own, she chooses to embrace God and preach his word to those who will listen. The true sadness behind this most important decision is that she is still letting someone else guide her blindly; she just has more faith that this direction will be better for her soul. --------------------------------------------- Result 2718 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Normally I would never rent a movie like this, because you know it's going to be bad just by looking at the box. I rented seven movies at the same time, including Nightmare on Elm Street 5, 6 and Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Unfortunately, when I got home I found out the videostore-guy gave me the wrong tape. In the box of Wes Craven's New Nightmare I found this lame movie.

This movie is incredibly boring, the acting is bad and the plot doesn't make any sense. It's hard to write a good review, because I have no idea what the movie was really about. At the end of the movie you have more questions then answers.

On 'Max Power's Scale of 1 to 10' I rate this movie: 1

PS I would like to correct Corinthian's review (right below mine). He says Robert Englund is ripping off lingerie, riding horses naked, etc. The guy that did those things was Mahmoud, played by Juliano Mer, not by Robert Englund. --------------------------------------------- Result 2719 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Heart pounding erotic drama are the words that come to mind when I think of "Secret Games". It becomes more erotic as the film goes along and at one point blew me away! I didn't expect the delightful scene I was about to encounter. The "call girl" has her first customer and what a customer! One of the most erotic lesbian scenes I have ever seen. The husband should have listened to his wife and perhaps she wouldn't have gone on this erotic journey. It turned out to cost them in the end but, it was one exciting ride! GO SEE THIS MOVIE!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] OK well i found this [[movie]] in my [[dads]] old pile of movies and it [[looked]] pretty good from the cover but the [[movie]] actually sucked!! OK the [[first]] story with the swimmer was pretty good but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was completely [[retarded]]! It wasn't [[even]] scary! His dream sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was completely [[retarded]] too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news guy and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she stabbed him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not even going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that scary but the idea of the story was pretty cool..uh yeah the girl gets possessed and she kills all her classmates or something. [[Then]] when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their dreams on the bus(Ha). The End. OK well i found this [[filmmaking]] in my [[daddies]] old pile of movies and it [[seemed]] pretty good from the cover but the [[filmmaking]] actually sucked!! OK the [[outset]] story with the swimmer was pretty good but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was completely [[nutcase]]! It wasn't [[yet]] scary! His dream sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was completely [[nutcase]] too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news guy and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she stabbed him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not even going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that scary but the idea of the story was pretty cool..uh yeah the girl gets possessed and she kills all her classmates or something. [[Afterward]] when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their dreams on the bus(Ha). The End. --------------------------------------------- Result 2721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Out of all the Princess [[stories]] Disney has put out there, Cinderella probably has the most [[enduring]] [[appeal]]. I can't really [[say]] why, but for some [[reason]], [[generation]] after generation thrusts her to the top of their lists. As a little [[girl]], I wanted [[nothing]] more than to be Cinderella with her [[glass]] slipper- it was my [[absolute]] [[favorite]] costume.

[[Honestly]], I don't think there is any story that more [[realizes]] the longings of the human heart than Cinderella. Who has never wanted to run away from the drudgeries of [[daily]] [[life]] and find [[someone]] who [[sees]] you as no one else ever had? The [[story]] is older than the English [[language]] and [[somehow]] it [[still]] [[rings]] [[true]].

As for the [[characters]], if [[nothing]] else, Disney can make a [[wonderful]] villain. [[Lady]] Tremaine is evil to the [[T]], in a wonderfully [[calculating]], not overtly [[physical]] way. Her cutting tongue and [[eyes]] do the work for her- she doesn't need staffs of lightening to [[strike]] [[fear]] into your [[heart]]. The animal [[friends]] [[tend]] to grate, [[especially]] that idiotic Gus. I [[would]] have cheered had he [[met]] his [[fate]] in Lucifer's jaws. Cinderella herself was no pushover- making some justly catty remarks at [[times]]. [[However]], she just lacked the [[drive]] to make her entirely sympathetic. Sure, she was nice and fed animals, but what was keeping her at that place? We never know. Even if she only became a maid in another house, at least she's be getting paid and have a shot at respect. It [[seems]] the only [[reason]] [[things]] work out in the [[end]] for Cindy is that everything sort of [[falls]] to place in her lap. She never works for her dreams that she sings so fondly of.

[[Which]] [[brings]] me to the [[music]], which is lovely, as ever. Ilene woods has a lovely, rich voice, probably my [[favorite]] of any Disney heroine. Some big standards [[originated]] here- A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes, So This is Love, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo...

Cinderella is a [[wonderful]] [[heartfelt]] [[story]] with a [[ton]] of musical highlights. While it is [[lacking]] in some [[character]] development, it does provide some [[classic]] [[villains]] and [[excellent]] [[voice]] [[work]]. If you are feeling [[sick]] at heart, pop it in- it'll [[warm]] you up and make you [[hum]] Mmm Mmm [[Good]]!

Quote of the film:

-Surprise! Surprise! -Duh duh duh- [[Happy]] Birthday! Out of all the Princess [[narratives]] Disney has put out there, Cinderella probably has the most [[sustainable]] [[appealing]]. I can't really [[tell]] why, but for some [[cause]], [[jill]] after generation thrusts her to the top of their lists. As a little [[chick]], I wanted [[anything]] more than to be Cinderella with her [[glassware]] slipper- it was my [[utter]] [[preferred]] costume.

[[Openly]], I don't think there is any story that more [[understands]] the longings of the human heart than Cinderella. Who has never wanted to run away from the drudgeries of [[everyday]] [[lifetime]] and find [[whoever]] who [[believes]] you as no one else ever had? The [[narratives]] is older than the English [[linguistics]] and [[someplace]] it [[however]] [[ring]] [[truthful]].

As for the [[attribute]], if [[anything]] else, Disney can make a [[gorgeous]] villain. [[Ladies]] Tremaine is evil to the [[ton]], in a wonderfully [[computing]], not overtly [[physics]] way. Her cutting tongue and [[eye]] do the work for her- she doesn't need staffs of lightening to [[hitting]] [[scare]] into your [[heartland]]. The animal [[buddies]] [[tending]] to grate, [[mostly]] that idiotic Gus. I [[could]] have cheered had he [[complied]] his [[fates]] in Lucifer's jaws. Cinderella herself was no pushover- making some justly catty remarks at [[time]]. [[Still]], she just lacked the [[driving]] to make her entirely sympathetic. Sure, she was nice and fed animals, but what was keeping her at that place? We never know. Even if she only became a maid in another house, at least she's be getting paid and have a shot at respect. It [[looks]] the only [[motives]] [[aspects]] work out in the [[terminating]] for Cindy is that everything sort of [[waterfalls]] to place in her lap. She never works for her dreams that she sings so fondly of.

[[Whom]] [[poses]] me to the [[musician]], which is lovely, as ever. Ilene woods has a lovely, rich voice, probably my [[prefers]] of any Disney heroine. Some big standards [[origin]] here- A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes, So This is Love, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo...

Cinderella is a [[brilliant]] [[deepest]] [[conte]] with a [[t]] of musical highlights. While it is [[shortage]] in some [[nature]] development, it does provide some [[classical]] [[thugs]] and [[super]] [[voices]] [[cooperate]]. If you are feeling [[sicker]] at heart, pop it in- it'll [[warming]] you up and make you [[humming]] Mmm Mmm [[Well]]!

Quote of the film:

-Surprise! Surprise! -Duh duh duh- [[Pleased]] Birthday! --------------------------------------------- Result 2722 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Stupid]], Stupid, Stupid. I think that Angelina [[Jolie]] is probably one of the most talented actress' [[today]], but a [[movie]] like this isn't just worth her [[time]]. She [[deserves]] better, and so does everyone else in this movie. Talent is just wasted. [[Sorry]], but i don't feel like writing a [[review]] for this.

I [[give]] it NO [[stars]] out of *****. [[Nonsensical]], Stupid, Stupid. I think that Angelina [[Juli]] is probably one of the most talented actress' [[hoy]], but a [[kino]] like this isn't just worth her [[period]]. She [[merits]] better, and so does everyone else in this movie. Talent is just wasted. [[Apology]], but i don't feel like writing a [[revisions]] for this.

I [[lend]] it NO [[superstar]] out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] "Kings and Queen" is a [[bloated]] French drama that rambles on for an [[interminable]] two hours and thirty-two minutes to no [[discernible]] point or [[purpose]].

The [[film]] [[features]] two [[stories]] that [[seem]] unrelated at first but which eventually [[connect]] with one another about [[halfway]] through the [[movie]]. The first [[centers]] [[around]] [[Nora]] and her struggles with various men in her [[life]], [[including]] an elderly father who [[discovers]] he has only a few days [[left]] to live. The other story [[involves]] a young man named Ismael, a violinist who [[finds]] himself placed - [[unfairly]], he [[believes]] - in a mental [[institution]] through the [[machinations]] of an [[unknown]] third [[party]]. After traveling along on [[separate]] [[tracks]] for awhile, these two narrative strands [[eventually]] come together when we [[learn]] that [[Ismael]] is a [[former]] lover of Nora's and the [[man]] she has [[chosen]] to adopt her [[son]] from an [[earlier]], tragic [[relationship]].

With a [[bit]] more [[focus]] and a [[considerable]] [[amount]] of streamlining, "Kings and [[Queen]]" might have been a [[potent]], engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most [[part]], [[complex]] and touching. But, taken as a whole, the [[film]] meanders and maunders to such an extent that, [[quite]] frankly, it begins to wreak [[havoc]] on our patience and to wear out its [[welcome]] early on. [[Even]] more distressing is the [[fact]] that, even [[though]] we [[spend]] what [[seems]] like a [[mild]] eternity in the [[company]] of these people, we really don't know [[quite]] what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For [[instance]], Nora's [[father]], on his deathbed, [[writes]] a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that [[simply]] doesn't gibe with the [[woman]] we've been [[looking]] at for well over two [[hours]]. Nora is [[admittedly]] no [[Mother]] [[Theresa]] (then, again, who is?), but she [[certainly]] doesn't [[deserve]] the invective [[thrown]] at her by her very own [[father]]. Nora could be [[accused]] of being [[confused]], [[indecisive]], a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her [[father]] [[wishing]] he could give her his [[cancer]] and [[make]] her [[die]] in his place? I don't [[think]] so.

[[Perhaps]] this [[film]] is simply operating at a [[level]] of [[depth]] that I was [[unable]] to fathom. But my [[suspicion]] is that [[even]] [[writer]] Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble [[fully]] [[explaining]] their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more [[enlightened]] at the end than he was at the [[beginning]]. "Kings and Queen" is a [[swollen]] French drama that rambles on for an [[unending]] two hours and thirty-two minutes to no [[conspicuous]] point or [[targeted]].

The [[filmmaking]] [[traits]] two [[story]] that [[appears]] unrelated at first but which eventually [[connecting]] with one another about [[midway]] through the [[film]]. The first [[facility]] [[throughout]] [[Orthe]] and her struggles with various men in her [[living]], [[include]] an elderly father who [[finds]] he has only a few days [[gauche]] to live. The other story [[includes]] a young man named Ismael, a violinist who [[find]] himself placed - [[wrongfully]], he [[feels]] - in a mental [[institutions]] through the [[intrigues]] of an [[undisclosed]] third [[parties]]. After traveling along on [[segregated]] [[runways]] for awhile, these two narrative strands [[ultimately]] come together when we [[learns]] that [[Ishmael]] is a [[past]] lover of Nora's and the [[guy]] she has [[choose]] to adopt her [[sons]] from an [[ago]], tragic [[relationships]].

With a [[bitten]] more [[concentrations]] and a [[notable]] [[sums]] of streamlining, "Kings and [[Quinn]]" might have been a [[mighty]], engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most [[party]], [[intricate]] and touching. But, taken as a whole, the [[flick]] meanders and maunders to such an extent that, [[perfectly]] frankly, it begins to wreak [[mayhem]] on our patience and to wear out its [[salute]] early on. [[Yet]] more distressing is the [[facto]] that, even [[albeit]] we [[expenditures]] what [[looks]] like a [[gentle]] eternity in the [[businesses]] of these people, we really don't know [[pretty]] what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For [[lawsuit]], Nora's [[fathers]], on his deathbed, [[writing]] a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that [[exclusively]] doesn't gibe with the [[femme]] we've been [[searching]] at for well over two [[hour]]. Nora is [[assuredly]] no [[Mom]] [[Therese]] (then, again, who is?), but she [[arguably]] doesn't [[deserved]] the invective [[threw]] at her by her very own [[pere]]. Nora could be [[prosecuted]] of being [[bewildered]], [[inconclusive]], a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her [[fathers]] [[wanting]] he could give her his [[tumour]] and [[deliver]] her [[deaths]] in his place? I don't [[believe]] so.

[[Possibly]] this [[filmmaking]] is simply operating at a [[tier]] of [[depths]] that I was [[incompetent]] to fathom. But my [[distrust]] is that [[yet]] [[scriptwriter]] Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble [[absolutely]] [[clarified]] their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more [[apprised]] at the end than he was at the [[begin]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It does seem like this [[film]] is polarizing us. You [[either]] love it or [[hate]] it. I [[loved]] it.

I agree with the comment(s) that [[said]], you just [[gotta]] "feel" this one.

[[Also]], [[early]] in the film, [[Tom]] Cruise [[shows]] his girlfriend a painting [[done]] by Monet--an [[impressionist]] [[painter]]. Monet's [[style]] is to paint in [[little]] dabs so up close the [[painting]] [[looks]] like a mess, but from a distance, you can [[tell]] what the subject is. Cruise mentions that the painting has a "vanilla [[sky]]". I [[believe]] this is a hint to the moviegoer. This [[movie]] is like that impressionist [[painting]]. It's impressionist [[filmmaking]]! And it's no coincidence that the title of the [[movie]] refers to that painting.

This is not your [[typical]] linear plot. It [[requires]] more thought. There is symbolism and there are scenes that jump around and no, you're not [[always]] [[going]] to be sure what's going on. But at the [[end]], all is explained.

You will need to [[concentrate]] on this movie but I [[think]] people are making the [[mistake]] of concentrating way too hard on it. After it ends is when you should [[think]] about it. [[If]] you [[try]] to [[figure]] it out as it's unfolding, you will [[overwhelm]] yourself. Just [[let]] it happen..."[[go]]" with it...[[keep]] an [[open]] mind. [[Remember]] what you see and save the analysis for [[later]].

I found all the performances [[top]] notch and thought it to be [[tremendously]] [[unique]], [[wildly]] [[creative]], and spellbinding.

But I will not critize the intelligence of those of you who didn't [[enjoy]] it. It appeals to a certain taste. [[If]] you [[like]] existential, psychedelic, philosophical, thought-provoking, [[challenging]], spiritual movies, then [[see]] it. [[If]] you prefer something a little lighter, then skip it.

But if you DO like what I described, then you will [[surely]] enjoy it. It does seem like this [[movie]] is polarizing us. You [[neither]] love it or [[dislikes]] it. I [[cared]] it.

I agree with the comment(s) that [[told]], you just [[ought]] "feel" this one.

[[Moreover]], [[quickly]] in the film, [[Thom]] Cruise [[displaying]] his girlfriend a painting [[performed]] by Monet--an [[impressionistic]] [[painters]]. Monet's [[stylistic]] is to paint in [[petite]] dabs so up close the [[paint]] [[seems]] like a mess, but from a distance, you can [[say]] what the subject is. Cruise mentions that the painting has a "vanilla [[skye]]". I [[reckon]] this is a hint to the moviegoer. This [[movies]] is like that impressionist [[paints]]. It's impressionist [[movie]]! And it's no coincidence that the title of the [[film]] refers to that painting.

This is not your [[classic]] linear plot. It [[require]] more thought. There is symbolism and there are scenes that jump around and no, you're not [[constantly]] [[gonna]] to be sure what's going on. But at the [[termination]], all is explained.

You will need to [[centred]] on this movie but I [[believe]] people are making the [[blunder]] of concentrating way too hard on it. After it ends is when you should [[ideas]] about it. [[Though]] you [[tried]] to [[silhouette]] it out as it's unfolding, you will [[submerge]] yourself. Just [[leave]] it happen..."[[going]]" with it...[[conserving]] an [[opens]] mind. [[Remembers]] what you see and save the analysis for [[afterward]].

I found all the performances [[superior]] notch and thought it to be [[unbelievably]] [[sole]], [[cruelly]] [[imaginative]], and spellbinding.

But I will not critize the intelligence of those of you who didn't [[enjoys]] it. It appeals to a certain taste. [[Unless]] you [[fond]] existential, psychedelic, philosophical, thought-provoking, [[defying]], spiritual movies, then [[seeing]] it. [[Unless]] you prefer something a little lighter, then skip it.

But if you DO like what I described, then you will [[probably]] enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just finished watching this movie and I found it was basically just not funny at all.

I'm an RPG Gamer (computer type, none of the DnD tabletop stuff) but I found none of the jokes in this funny at all.

Some of the scenes seemed to drag out a lot (tilt and zoom could've been cut down to 5seconds rather than over a minute) and it feels as though the director was just trying to fill in time.

I think I laughed a total of 2-3 times in the entire movie.

The acting itself wasn't all that bad, around the standard that a B Grade movie should have.

I'd suggest not bothering with this movie unless you're a huge DnD fan and even then it would probably be best to steer clear of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie appears to have been made by someone with some good ideas but who also never had made a movie before nor had they considered that a script should be edited or even funny. When I saw this film, I saw it for John Candy and assumed, incorrectly, that it would be hilarious. Instead, there was a stupid plot about mind control and so many flat, unfunny moments. And, to top it off, Candy delivered some of the crudest lines I had ever heard up to that time. So, despite a potentially funny cast and story idea, we are left with an amateurish and crude movie that will probably be too stupid for the average adult, though teens will probably find a few laughs. It's really a shame--it could have been so much better. I mean, with Eugene Levy, Joe Flaherty and John Candy it SHOULD have been wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really liked this movie I saw the original classic a few times but could hardly remember any details. I think this movie is much better than the cartoon its not so black and white as it. I specially liked how they made the grinch such a complete character and gave a cause of why he was the way he was, the villain in this movie was not the actual Grinch but the Major, much different than the original cartoon. Jim Carrey was perfect for the part all in all a great movie made for both kids and adults alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 2728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] The [[basic]] plot in this [[movie]] isn't bad. A [[lady]] makes it [[big]] and [[comes]] back to her alma mater to be [[adored]]. But, [[despite]] good acting by [[Robert]] [[Young]] and Eve Arden, the movie is a [[mess]]. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the [[director]] or both, as her performance is just [[awful]]. Instead of being a [[real]] [[person]], she does a [[wonderful]] impersonation of a deer [[caught]] in the [[headlights]]. [[In]] other words, she [[stares]] off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO [[stunned]]" [[expression]]. After just a few minutes it [[really]] [[became]] [[annoying]] for me. Now this is [[certainly]] not the only Crawford [[film]] I dislike for her performance, as she had done more than her [[share]] of overacting--in [[films]] such as JOHNNY GUITAR or [[many]] of her [[later]] [[films]], such as BERSERK! My [[advice]] is to try a [[different]] Crawford film--there [[certainly]] were [[better]]. The [[fundamental]] plot in this [[filmmaking]] isn't bad. A [[dame]] makes it [[grande]] and [[occurs]] back to her alma mater to be [[worshiped]]. But, [[while]] good acting by [[Roberta]] [[Youths]] and Eve Arden, the movie is a [[chaos]]. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the [[superintendent]] or both, as her performance is just [[abhorrent]]. Instead of being a [[actual]] [[persona]], she does a [[sumptuous]] impersonation of a deer [[catch]] in the [[spotlights]]. [[Across]] other words, she [[glances]] off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO [[surprised]]" [[expressions]]. After just a few minutes it [[genuinely]] [[came]] [[irritating]] for me. Now this is [[definitely]] not the only Crawford [[flick]] I dislike for her performance, as she had done more than her [[exchange]] of overacting--in [[cinematographic]] such as JOHNNY GUITAR or [[various]] of her [[subsequent]] [[movies]], such as BERSERK! My [[tips]] is to try a [[varying]] Crawford film--there [[unquestionably]] were [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2729 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] And this is a [[great]] rock'n'roll movie in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate movies in which kids [[want]] to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday [[Weld]] gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, [[repeat]] the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, "The Real" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the [[elements]] of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since "Bucket of Blood"), and you've got one of the [[great]] stoopid [[movies]] of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new [[DVD]] to a friend who could only [[remember]] [[seeing]] parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the [[great]] movies to be watching drunk, not the [[least]] for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage. And this is a [[wondrous]] rock'n'roll movie in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate movies in which kids [[wanna]] to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday [[Soldering]] gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, [[repetition]] the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, "The Real" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the [[ingredients]] of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since "Bucket of Blood"), and you've got one of the [[wondrous]] stoopid [[cinematography]] of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new [[DVDS]] to a friend who could only [[remembering]] [[witnessing]] parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the [[huge]] movies to be watching drunk, not the [[slightest]] for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage. --------------------------------------------- Result 2730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[John]] Boorman's 1998 The [[General]] was hailed as a major comeback, though it's [[hard]] to [[see]] why on the [[evidence]] of the [[film]] itself. One of three [[films]] [[made]] that year about [[famed]] Northern Irish criminal Martin Cahill ([[alongside]] [[Ordinary]] [[Decent]] Criminal and Vicious Circles), it has an [[abundance]] of [[incident]] and style (the [[film]] was shot in [[colour]] but [[released]] in b&w Scope in some [[territories]]) but makes [[absolutely]] no impact and just goes on forever. With a [[main]] character who threatens witnesses, [[car]] bombs [[doctors]], causes a [[hundred]] people to lose their [[jobs]], [[tries]] to [[buy]] off the sexually abused [[daughter]] of one of his gang to [[keep]] out of [[jail]] and [[nails]] one of his own to a [[snooker]] table [[yet]] still remains a popular local legend an [[attractive]] enough [[personality]] for his wife to not only [[approve]] but actually suggest a [[ménage]] a trios with her [[sister]], it [[needs]] a charismatic central performance to [[sell]] the [[character]] and the [[film]]. It doesn't [[get]] it. [[Instead]], it's [[lumbered]] with what may well be [[Brendan]] Gleeson's [[worst]] and most disinterested performance: he [[delivers]] his lines and stands in the right [[place]] but there's nothing to suggest [[either]] a local [[hero]] or the [[inner]] workings of a [[complex]] [[character]]. On the [[plus]] side, this [[helps]] not to overglamorize a [[character]] who is nothing more than an egotistical [[thug]], but it's at odds with a [[script]] that seems to be [[expecting]] us to [[love]] him and his antics.

There's a [[minor]] section that [[picks]] up interest when the IRA whips up a [[local]] [[hate]] [[campaign]] against the 'General' and his [[men]], painting them as 'anti-social' drug dealers [[purely]] because Cahill won't share his loot from a [[robbery]] with them, but its temporary resolution is so vaguely shot - something to do with Cahill donning a balaclava and [[joining]] the [[protesters]] which we're [[expected]] to find lovably cheeky - that it's just thrown away. Things are more successful in the last third as the pressure mounts and his army falls [[apart]], but by then it's too late to really [[care]]. Adrian Dunbar, [[Maria]] Doyle Kennedy and the [[gorgeous]] Angeline [[Ball]] do good [[work]] in adoring supporting roles, but Jon Voight's hammy Garda [[beat]] [[cop]] [[seems]] to be there more for American [[sales]] than moral [[balance]], overcompensating for Gleeson's comatose non-involvement in what feels like a total misfire. Come back Zardoz, all is forgiven. [[Giovanni]] Boorman's 1998 The [[Generals]] was hailed as a major comeback, though it's [[laborious]] to [[seeing]] why on the [[testimony]] of the [[cinema]] itself. One of three [[film]] [[introduced]] that year about [[commemorated]] Northern Irish criminal Martin Cahill ([[beside]] [[Everyday]] [[Presentable]] Criminal and Vicious Circles), it has an [[plentiful]] of [[mishap]] and style (the [[filmmaking]] was shot in [[color]] but [[emitted]] in b&w Scope in some [[lands]]) but makes [[abundantly]] no impact and just goes on forever. With a [[leading]] character who threatens witnesses, [[automobiles]] bombs [[physician]], causes a [[hundreds]] people to lose their [[labor]], [[attempt]] to [[purchasing]] off the sexually abused [[girl]] of one of his gang to [[retaining]] out of [[imprisonment]] and [[fingernails]] one of his own to a [[billiard]] table [[still]] still remains a popular local legend an [[seductive]] enough [[persona]] for his wife to not only [[adopt]] but actually suggest a [[menage]] a trios with her [[sisters]], it [[gotta]] a charismatic central performance to [[sells]] the [[trait]] and the [[flick]]. It doesn't [[obtains]] it. [[However]], it's [[saddled]] with what may well be [[Conor]] Gleeson's [[worse]] and most disinterested performance: he [[provide]] his lines and stands in the right [[placing]] but there's nothing to suggest [[neither]] a local [[heroin]] or the [[indoor]] workings of a [[convoluted]] [[personages]]. On the [[longer]] side, this [[succour]] not to overglamorize a [[nature]] who is nothing more than an egotistical [[hooligan]], but it's at odds with a [[hyphen]] that seems to be [[awaited]] us to [[amore]] him and his antics.

There's a [[smaller]] section that [[selects]] up interest when the IRA whips up a [[locale]] [[hates]] [[campaigns]] against the 'General' and his [[man]], painting them as 'anti-social' drug dealers [[strictly]] because Cahill won't share his loot from a [[theft]] with them, but its temporary resolution is so vaguely shot - something to do with Cahill donning a balaclava and [[joined]] the [[demonstrators]] which we're [[scheduled]] to find lovably cheeky - that it's just thrown away. Things are more successful in the last third as the pressure mounts and his army falls [[also]], but by then it's too late to really [[healthcare]]. Adrian Dunbar, [[Mario]] Doyle Kennedy and the [[sumptuous]] Angeline [[Ballon]] do good [[collaboration]] in adoring supporting roles, but Jon Voight's hammy Garda [[overpower]] [[police]] [[seem]] to be there more for American [[sale]] than moral [[equilibrium]], overcompensating for Gleeson's comatose non-involvement in what feels like a total misfire. Come back Zardoz, all is forgiven. --------------------------------------------- Result 2731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "Ardh Satya" is one of the [[finest]] film ever made in Indian [[Cinema]]. Directed by the [[great]] director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. Even today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.

The film [[tells]] the Real-life [[Scenario]] of Mumbai [[Police]] of the 70s. Unlike any [[Police]] of other cities in India, [[Mumbai]] Police [[encompasses]] a [[Different]] system [[altogether]]. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical Outlay with [[real]] life approach of [[Mumbai]] Police Environment.

Amongst [[various]] Police officers & colleagues, the [[film]] [[describes]] the story of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded [[Cop]] coming from a poor family. His father is a [[harsh]] Police [[Constable]]. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards [[immediate]] action against [[crime]], is an [[inert]] [[craving]] for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here [[revolved]] in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against [[crime]] are trampled by his [[seniors]].This [[leads]] to [[frustrations]], as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the frustrations, his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.

The Spirit within him is [[still]] [[alive]], as he [[constantly]] [[fights]] the system. He is [[aware]] of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly [[associated]] by far [[end]]. His compromise towards [[unethical]] practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.

The [[Direction]] is a [[master]] [[piece]] & [[thoroughly]] hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's [[house]] to arrest him, followed by short [[conversation]] which is [[fantastic]]. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.

The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. [[Alcoholism]], [[Corruption]], [[Political]] Influence, Courage, [[Deceptions]] all are integral part of Mumbai police [[even]] today. Those aspects are dealt [[brilliantly]].

Finally, the films belongs to the One [[man]] [[show]], Om Puri [[portraying]] Anand Velankar traversing through all his [[emotions]] [[absolutely]] [[brilliantly]]. "Ardh Satya" is one of the [[meanest]] film ever made in Indian [[Film]]. Directed by the [[excellent]] director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. Even today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.

The film [[says]] the Real-life [[Screenplay]] of Mumbai [[Constabulary]] of the 70s. Unlike any [[Constabulary]] of other cities in India, [[Hyderabad]] Police [[involves]] a [[Distinct]] system [[entirely]]. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical Outlay with [[actual]] life approach of [[Bangalore]] Police Environment.

Amongst [[several]] Police officers & colleagues, the [[cinematography]] [[described]] the story of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded [[Police]] coming from a poor family. His father is a [[severe]] Police [[Constables]]. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards [[instant]] action against [[offence]], is an [[idle]] [[envy]] for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here [[turned]] in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against [[offence]] are trampled by his [[elders]].This [[leeds]] to [[disappointments]], as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the frustrations, his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.

The Spirit within him is [[however]] [[vivo]], as he [[regularly]] [[wrestling]] the system. He is [[conscious]] of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly [[related]] by far [[terminate]]. His compromise towards [[immoral]] practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.

The [[Directorate]] is a [[masters]] [[slice]] & [[intently]] hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's [[domicile]] to arrest him, followed by short [[schmooze]] which is [[unbelievable]]. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.

The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. [[Alcohol]], [[Bribery]], [[Politicians]] Influence, Courage, [[Disappointments]] all are integral part of Mumbai police [[yet]] today. Those aspects are dealt [[admirably]].

Finally, the films belongs to the One [[males]] [[demonstrate]], Om Puri [[outlining]] Anand Velankar traversing through all his [[sentiments]] [[downright]] [[admirably]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I [[stumbled]] on this late last night n TCM.

Hadn't [[seen]] it [[since]] it [[came]] out originally, but had never [[forgotten]] it.

I had [[completely]] [[forgotten]] how [[gorgeous]] and [[talented]] Signe Hasso was when she was [[still]] young, [[ditto]] for [[Shelly]] Winters before she balooned out.

Ronald Coleman, [[though]], was the quintessential state actor of his [[time]] - I had read Othello in [[high]] [[school]] [[English]] - and [[HATED]] it. After [[seeing]] "A [[Double]] [[Life]]" I read it again and [[finally]] understood what the play was about.

The Gordon/Kanin [[writing]] team was at its [[peak]] when this [[script]] was [[done]] -

A [[movie]] well worth remembering and rewatching, I [[faltered]] on this late last night n TCM.

Hadn't [[watched]] it [[because]] it [[arrived]] out originally, but had never [[omitted]] it.

I had [[altogether]] [[disregarded]] how [[belle]] and [[prodigy]] Signe Hasso was when she was [[however]] young, [[idem]] for [[Shelley]] Winters before she balooned out.

Ronald Coleman, [[if]], was the quintessential state actor of his [[times]] - I had read Othello in [[higher]] [[tuition]] [[Brits]] - and [[LOATHED]] it. After [[see]] "A [[Twice]] [[Living]]" I read it again and [[eventually]] understood what the play was about.

The Gordon/Kanin [[write]] team was at its [[crest]] when this [[hyphen]] was [[doing]] -

A [[movies]] well worth remembering and rewatching, --------------------------------------------- Result 2733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I tend to love everything the great late Paul Naschy (R.I.P.) ever was in. While not all [[films]] starring Naschy are great, they all have a specific charm that can be found nowhere but in Naschy-flicks, and they are [[always]] entertaining. There is no rule without exception, [[however]], as "El Mariscal Del Infierno" aka. "The Devil's [[Possessed]]" (1974) proves. [[While]] the [[film]] does have the [[specific]] Naschy-flick-charm, it [[sadly]] drags far too much and [[gets]] really, really [[dull]] in-between. Naschy stars as the evil Baron Gilles De Lancré, who oppresses the people and uses black magic and bloody rituals to stay in power. When Gaston de Malebranche (Guillermo Bredeston), who fought side by side with Gilles De Lancré against the British, learns about the Baron's evil behavior, he decides to turn against his former comrade in arms and help the people free themselves from the satanic Baron's tyranny...

Directed by León Klimovsky, who is best known for directing Naschy in "La Noche De Walpurgis" ("The Werewolf Vs. The Vampire Woman", 1971), the film was scripted by Naschy himself. Naschy often scripted his own films, and one must say that he mostly did a better, more original job than it is the case here. "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is mostly built up as a historical adventure rather than a Horror film, and it gets [[quite]] [[boring]] throughout the middle. It often resembles the Sword and Sandal films from the 50s, only that this film is set in medieval times. The Satanic part was probably only added because the great Paul Naschy's name is linked to the Horror genre. The film has its good parts: Paul Naschy giving weird speeches, Paul Naschy looking weird, Paul Naschy doing Satanic stuff, Paul Naschy torturing innocent victims, etc. But sadly, most of the film concentrates on the boring hero and the good guys, and these moments are boring. The female cast members are nice to look at, but, unlike most Naschy films, this one features no nudity and sleaze. There is some gore, but it mostly looks clumsy and isn't as fun too look at as it is the [[case]] with most other Naschy films. Overall, "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is only worth a look for my fellow Naschy-enthusiasts. There are dozens of films starring the Spanish Horror deity which should be seen before this one, such as "El Jorobado De La Morgue" ("The Hunchback of the Morgue", 1973), "La Orgia De Los Muertos" ("The Hanging Woman", 1973), "El Espanto Surge De La Tumba" ("Horror Rises From The Tomb", 1973), "Latidos De Panico" ("Panic Beats", 1983), "Rojo Sangre" (2004), or any of the 'Waldemar Daninsky' werewolf films. R.I.P. Paul Naschy. Legends never die! I tend to love everything the great late Paul Naschy (R.I.P.) ever was in. While not all [[movie]] starring Naschy are great, they all have a specific charm that can be found nowhere but in Naschy-flicks, and they are [[permanently]] entertaining. There is no rule without exception, [[yet]], as "El Mariscal Del Infierno" aka. "The Devil's [[Owned]]" (1974) proves. [[Whereas]] the [[filmmaking]] does have the [[peculiar]] Naschy-flick-charm, it [[unluckily]] drags far too much and [[got]] really, really [[boring]] in-between. Naschy stars as the evil Baron Gilles De Lancré, who oppresses the people and uses black magic and bloody rituals to stay in power. When Gaston de Malebranche (Guillermo Bredeston), who fought side by side with Gilles De Lancré against the British, learns about the Baron's evil behavior, he decides to turn against his former comrade in arms and help the people free themselves from the satanic Baron's tyranny...

Directed by León Klimovsky, who is best known for directing Naschy in "La Noche De Walpurgis" ("The Werewolf Vs. The Vampire Woman", 1971), the film was scripted by Naschy himself. Naschy often scripted his own films, and one must say that he mostly did a better, more original job than it is the case here. "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is mostly built up as a historical adventure rather than a Horror film, and it gets [[rather]] [[tiresome]] throughout the middle. It often resembles the Sword and Sandal films from the 50s, only that this film is set in medieval times. The Satanic part was probably only added because the great Paul Naschy's name is linked to the Horror genre. The film has its good parts: Paul Naschy giving weird speeches, Paul Naschy looking weird, Paul Naschy doing Satanic stuff, Paul Naschy torturing innocent victims, etc. But sadly, most of the film concentrates on the boring hero and the good guys, and these moments are boring. The female cast members are nice to look at, but, unlike most Naschy films, this one features no nudity and sleaze. There is some gore, but it mostly looks clumsy and isn't as fun too look at as it is the [[instances]] with most other Naschy films. Overall, "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is only worth a look for my fellow Naschy-enthusiasts. There are dozens of films starring the Spanish Horror deity which should be seen before this one, such as "El Jorobado De La Morgue" ("The Hunchback of the Morgue", 1973), "La Orgia De Los Muertos" ("The Hanging Woman", 1973), "El Espanto Surge De La Tumba" ("Horror Rises From The Tomb", 1973), "Latidos De Panico" ("Panic Beats", 1983), "Rojo Sangre" (2004), or any of the 'Waldemar Daninsky' werewolf films. R.I.P. Paul Naschy. Legends never die! --------------------------------------------- Result 2734 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Maybe it's the dubbing, or maybe it's the endless scenes of people crying, moaning or otherwise carrying on, but I found Europa '51 to be one of the most overwrought (and therefore annoying) films I've ever seen. The film starts out promisingly if familiarly, as mom Ingrid Bergman is too busy to spend time with her spoiled brat of a son (Sandro Franchina). Whilst mummy and daddy (bland Alexander Knox) entertain their guests at a dinner party, the youngster tries to kill himself, setting in motion a life changing series of events that find Bergman spending time showering compassion on the poor and needy. Spurred on by Communist newspaper editor Andrea (Ettore Giannini), she soon spends more time with the downtrodden than she does with her husband, who soon locks her up in an insane asylum for her troubles. Bergman plays the saint role to the hilt, echoing her 1948 role as Joan of Arc, and Rossellini does a fantastic job of lighting and filming her to best effect. Unfortunately, the script pounds its point home with ham-fisted subtlety, as Andrea and Mom take turns declaiming Marxist and Christian platitudes. By the final tear soaked scene, I had had more than my fill of these tiresome characters. A real step down for Rossellini as he stepped away from neo-realism and further embraced the mythical and mystical themes of 1950's Flowers of St. Francis. --------------------------------------------- Result 2735 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed the feel of the opening few minutes, but 20-minutes in I was liberally applying the fast-forward button. Far too many shots of Stewart (Michael Zelniker) walking from room to room, down hallways, through doors and down the street, and as many shots of him looking pensive and confused. Gave me the impression that the story had originally been meant as a short (20-30 minutes), and then stretched into a feature as a labour of love between director Grieve and star Zelniker (they co-wrote the screenplay).

It might have been more entertaining if any of the characters had anything to say that I hadn't heard said in many other films before, or if the ending wasn't - disappointingly - the one I had predicted three minutes into the film (atypical for an independent/smaller studio film). At least its heart was in the right place - it wasn't your standard formulaic Hollywood manipulative nonsense. --------------------------------------------- Result 2736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This gets a two because I liked it as a [[kid]], but it [[became]] so [[redundant]] that I just [[started]] to [[hate]] it... I can't give this a descriptive [[review]] because it would be restating one [[thing]] after the other, I probably wouldn't [[say]] anything that [[everyone]] [[else]] didn't [[say]] already.

The only other thing about this show is that it's pretty nasty, with the kid with the boil to that twisted [[babysitter]] to the stupidity that runs [[around]] and about in it. I have a [[cousin]] that loves this show and he's the strangest and [[dumbest]] person I have [[met]]. This show should be pulled from the air. It's always the same [[thing]] over and over... They need to put better shows on Nick. I'm getting [[really]] [[really]] [[tired]] of stuff like this. This gets a two because I liked it as a [[enfant]], but it [[was]] so [[superfluous]] that I just [[opened]] to [[dislikes]] it... I can't give this a descriptive [[revisiting]] because it would be restating one [[stuff]] after the other, I probably wouldn't [[says]] anything that [[everybody]] [[further]] didn't [[says]] already.

The only other thing about this show is that it's pretty nasty, with the kid with the boil to that twisted [[nanny]] to the stupidity that runs [[almost]] and about in it. I have a [[cuz]] that loves this show and he's the strangest and [[stupidest]] person I have [[complied]]. This show should be pulled from the air. It's always the same [[stuff]] over and over... They need to put better shows on Nick. I'm getting [[genuinely]] [[genuinely]] [[jaded]] of stuff like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2737 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Written and acted by sincere amateurs, produced by some exploitation monger, this is dull and hard to watch.

Not the worst movie ever, but at least schlock like _Plan 9 From Outer Space_ usually had a real actor or two. I'd recommend _A Thief In The Night_ only to hardcore ironists and hardcore Dispensationalists. I'm neither.

Don't believe me? Watch it for free (albeit sourced from poor VHS) here: http://www.archive.org/details/Thief-In-The-Night

Relevant links added mostly to reach IMDb's 10-line minimum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3199/thief-in-the-night-se-a/ --------------------------------------------- Result 2738 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This "clever" [[film]] was originally a Japanese film. And while I assume that original film was pretty bad, it was made a good bit worse when American-International Films hacked the film to pieces and inserted American-made segments to fool the audience. Now unless your audience is made of total idiots, it [[becomes]] [[painfully]] obvious that this was done--and done with [[little]] finesse or care about the final [[product]]. The bottom line is that you have a lot of clearly Japanese scenes and then [[clearly]] American scenes where the film [[looks]] quite different. Plus, the American scenes really are [[meaningless]] and consist of two different groups of people at meetings just talking about Gamera--the evil flying turtle! And although this is a fire-breathing, [[flying]] and destructive monster, there is [[practically]] no [[energy]] because I [[assume]] the [[actors]] were just embarrassed by being in this [[wretched]] film--in particular, [[film]] veterans Brian Donlevy and [[Albert]] Dekker. They both just [[looked]] tired and ill-at-ease for being there.

Now as for the [[monster]], it's not [[quite]] the standard Godzilla-like [[creature]]. [[Seeing]] a giant fanged [[turtle]] retract his head and limbs and [[begin]] spinning through the air like a [[missile]] is [[hilarious]]. On the other hand, the crappy model planes, destructible balsa buildings and power [[plant]] are, as [[usual]], in this [[film]] and come as no [[surprise]]. Plus an [[odd]] Japanese monster [[movie]] cliché is included that will frankly annoy most non-Japanese [[audience]] members, and that is the "adorable and precocious [[little]] [[boy]] who [[loves]] the monster and believes in him". [[Yeah]], right. Well, just like in GODZILLA VERSUS THE SMOG [[MONSTER]] and [[several]] other films, you've [[got]] this [[annoying]] creep [[cheering]] on the monster, [[though]] unlike later incarnations of Godzilla, Gamera is [[NOT]] a good [[guy]] and it [[turns]] out in the [[end]] the kid is just an idiot! [[Silly]], [[exceptional]] poor special effects that [[could]] be [[done]] better by the average seven year-old, bad acting, [[meaningless]] American clips and [[occasionally]] [[horrid]] [[voice]] dubbing make this a [[wretched]] [[film]]. [[Oddly]], while most will [[surely]] hate this [[film]] (and that [[stupid]] [[kid]]), there is a [[small]] and very [[vocal]] [[minority]] that [[love]] these [[films]] and [[compare]] them to Bergman and Kurosawa. Don't [[believe]] them--this IS a [[terrible]] [[film]]!

FYI--Apparently due to his [[terrific]] [[stage]] [[presence]], Gamera was featured in several more films in the 60s as well as some recent incarnations. None of these change the central fact that he is a fire-breathing flying turtle or that the movies are really, really lame. This "clever" [[filmmaking]] was originally a Japanese film. And while I assume that original film was pretty bad, it was made a good bit worse when American-International Films hacked the film to pieces and inserted American-made segments to fool the audience. Now unless your audience is made of total idiots, it [[become]] [[embarrassingly]] obvious that this was done--and done with [[scant]] finesse or care about the final [[commodities]]. The bottom line is that you have a lot of clearly Japanese scenes and then [[openly]] American scenes where the film [[seem]] quite different. Plus, the American scenes really are [[unnecessary]] and consist of two different groups of people at meetings just talking about Gamera--the evil flying turtle! And although this is a fire-breathing, [[fly]] and destructive monster, there is [[hardly]] no [[energies]] because I [[assumes]] the [[players]] were just embarrassed by being in this [[ratty]] film--in particular, [[filmmaking]] veterans Brian Donlevy and [[Alberto]] Dekker. They both just [[seemed]] tired and ill-at-ease for being there.

Now as for the [[monsters]], it's not [[rather]] the standard Godzilla-like [[monster]]. [[Witnessing]] a giant fanged [[turtles]] retract his head and limbs and [[launching]] spinning through the air like a [[rocket]] is [[humorous]]. On the other hand, the crappy model planes, destructible balsa buildings and power [[factory]] are, as [[customary]], in this [[flick]] and come as no [[surprises]]. Plus an [[unusual]] Japanese monster [[flick]] cliché is included that will frankly annoy most non-Japanese [[viewers]] members, and that is the "adorable and precocious [[small]] [[guy]] who [[loved]] the monster and believes in him". [[Yes]], right. Well, just like in GODZILLA VERSUS THE SMOG [[MONSTERS]] and [[multiple]] other films, you've [[gets]] this [[irritating]] creep [[cheers]] on the monster, [[although]] unlike later incarnations of Godzilla, Gamera is [[NOPE]] a good [[dude]] and it [[revolves]] out in the [[terminates]] the kid is just an idiot! [[Beast]], [[marvelous]] poor special effects that [[did]] be [[doing]] better by the average seven year-old, bad acting, [[unhelpful]] American clips and [[sometimes]] [[terrible]] [[vocals]] dubbing make this a [[ratty]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Strangely]], while most will [[definitively]] hate this [[flick]] (and that [[dopey]] [[petit]]), there is a [[scant]] and very [[outspoken]] [[minorities]] that [[adored]] these [[film]] and [[comparative]] them to Bergman and Kurosawa. Don't [[think]] them--this IS a [[scary]] [[flick]]!

FYI--Apparently due to his [[sumptuous]] [[stages]] [[involvements]], Gamera was featured in several more films in the 60s as well as some recent incarnations. None of these change the central fact that he is a fire-breathing flying turtle or that the movies are really, really lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 2739 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The scenes are fast-paced. the [[characters]] are [[great]]. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was disappointed that this [[movie]] didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other. The scenes are fast-paced. the [[features]] are [[wondrous]]. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was disappointed that this [[kino]] didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 2740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The pros of this film are the astonishing fighting scenes - absolutely incredible sword-moves and martial art show off. A true John Woo masterpiece. The story tends to be a bit week though, but it never overshadows the overwhelming display of acrobatic martial art action. If you are into martial art movies, you are going to LOVE this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 2741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Oh my... [[bad]] clothing, worse synth [[music]] and the [[worst]]: David Hasselhoff. The 80's are back with [[vengeance]] in Witchery, an American-Italian co-production, helmed by infamous Joe 'D'Amato on the production side and short-careered director (thank [[heavens]] for small [[miracles]]) Fabrizio Laurenti [[directing]] . [[Marketed]] as a [[kind]] of sequel to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series in Italy (that was dubbed "La Casa" in there), Witchery delivers some modest gore groceries and [[bad]] acting.

A [[mix]] of [[ghost]] [[story]], [[possessions]] and witchcraft, the film bounces clueless from scene to another without letting some [[seriously]] [[wooden]] [[actors]] and hilarious day and night mix-ups slow it's [[progress]] to expectable ending, [[topped]] with some serious WTF [[surprise]] [[climax]]. (I just love the [[look]] on her [[face]]...) Surprisingly Laurenti manages to [[gather]] some suspense and [[air]] of [[malice]] in few - very few - scenes; [[unluckily]] for him, these few glimpses of mild [[movie]] [[magic]] go down [[quickly]] and effectively.

The [[plus]] sides are experienced, when the gore hits the fan. This [[department]] is quite effective and entertaining in that classic latex and red paint style of the 80's Italo-gore, when [[things]] were [[made]] 100% hand-made and as shockingly and vivid as [[modest]] [[budgets]] could [[allow]]. I [[could]] only watch with sadistic glee and few laughters all the over-the-top ways that [[obnoxious]] [[characters]] (and [[actors]]) [[got]] mangled and misused, one by one. I only felt [[sorry]] for Linda Blair, who apparently haven't been let to try any other than that good old possessed girl / woman role ever in his career, or so it looks like when checking out his filmography.

Well, folks - not much more to tell, and even less to tell home about. Don't expect too much when spending some [[rainy]] afternoon with this, and probably you'll experience at least some mild fun. It also helps if your rotten little heart pounds in the beat of 80's euro gore horror. And speaking of hearts - [[every]] [[movie]] that has David Hasselhoff getting skewered by a sizeable metal object and [[bleeding]] heavily [[around]] the room and [[corridors]], [[MUST]] have it's one on the right place.

This is my truth - what is yours? Oh my... [[unfavourable]] clothing, worse synth [[musician]] and the [[meanest]]: David Hasselhoff. The 80's are back with [[revengeful]] in Witchery, an American-Italian co-production, helmed by infamous Joe 'D'Amato on the production side and short-careered director (thank [[heaven]] for small [[miracle]]) Fabrizio Laurenti [[instructing]] . [[Market]] as a [[sorting]] of sequel to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series in Italy (that was dubbed "La Casa" in there), Witchery delivers some modest gore groceries and [[unfavourable]] acting.

A [[amalgam]] of [[phantoms]] [[saga]], [[assets]] and witchcraft, the film bounces clueless from scene to another without letting some [[deeply]] [[wood]] [[protagonists]] and hilarious day and night mix-ups slow it's [[progression]] to expectable ending, [[exceed]] with some serious WTF [[surprising]] [[orgasm]]. (I just love the [[glance]] on her [[confronts]]...) Surprisingly Laurenti manages to [[collects]] some suspense and [[aerial]] of [[mischief]] in few - very few - scenes; [[sadly]] for him, these few glimpses of mild [[flick]] [[witchcraft]] go down [[expeditiously]] and effectively.

The [[longer]] sides are experienced, when the gore hits the fan. This [[ministry]] is quite effective and entertaining in that classic latex and red paint style of the 80's Italo-gore, when [[items]] were [[introduced]] 100% hand-made and as shockingly and vivid as [[lowly]] [[budget]] could [[enabling]]. I [[would]] only watch with sadistic glee and few laughters all the over-the-top ways that [[despicable]] [[personages]] (and [[protagonists]]) [[get]] mangled and misused, one by one. I only felt [[apologies]] for Linda Blair, who apparently haven't been let to try any other than that good old possessed girl / woman role ever in his career, or so it looks like when checking out his filmography.

Well, folks - not much more to tell, and even less to tell home about. Don't expect too much when spending some [[wettest]] afternoon with this, and probably you'll experience at least some mild fun. It also helps if your rotten little heart pounds in the beat of 80's euro gore horror. And speaking of hearts - [[any]] [[filmmaking]] that has David Hasselhoff getting skewered by a sizeable metal object and [[bleeder]] heavily [[about]] the room and [[passageways]], [[SHOULD]] have it's one on the right place.

This is my truth - what is yours? --------------------------------------------- Result 2742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Amazing effects for a movie of this time. A primer of the uselessness of war and how war becomes a nurturer of itself.

A wonderful thing about this movie is it is now public domain and available at archive.org. No charge, no sign up necessary. Watch it in one sitting and you will be propelled.

I plan to share this flick with as many people as possible as I had never heard of it before and I am a hard core sci fi fan.

I would like to see how others react to this movie.

Watch it.

Rate it.

Tell us what you think. --------------------------------------------- Result 2743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From the stupid "quaint African natives" travelogue footage with our badly-superimposed principals acting as narrators, to the horrible fake ears which transform docile Indian elephants into African elephants, to the utter lack of any logic at all, to Maureen O'Sullivan's incessant whining of "Tarzan! Tarzan!", there is nothing about this movie which deserves classic status.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2744 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so [[unbelievably]] bad I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must [[see]], it's [[bad]] in a [[nice]] way. Every cliche ever [[invented]] for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the [[top]] 10 of [[worst]] movies ever [[made]]. Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so [[surprisingly]] bad I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must [[consults]], it's [[unfavourable]] in a [[pleasurable]] way. Every cliche ever [[concocted]] for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the [[topped]] 10 of [[worse]] movies ever [[introduced]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Most [[definitely]] the [[worst]] Columbo ever [[dreamt]] up. No murder and the abandonment of the tried and tested formula makes this a real [[drag]]. Falk looks [[bored]] throughout and so will you be if you waste anytime [[watching]] this. Most [[assuredly]] the [[meanest]] Columbo ever [[fantasized]] up. No murder and the abandonment of the tried and tested formula makes this a real [[trawling]]. Falk looks [[drilled]] throughout and so will you be if you waste anytime [[staring]] this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2746 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Like with any movie genre, there are [[good]] gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of [[depression]] of [[disappointment]] about a [[week]] since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That [[film]] is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 [[silent]] film of the same name. This is a very [[dry]], very [[slow]] gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather [[flimsy]] [[endeavor]].

Like "[[Goodfellas]]" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to [[robbing]] museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.

Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a bad film had I not seen the aforementioned [[masterpieces]] before being [[swamped]] by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not [[even]] ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's [[List]]" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.

But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say "so what?" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film. Like with any movie genre, there are [[alright]] gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of [[recession]] of [[displeasure]] about a [[chow]] since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That [[filmmaking]] is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 [[quiet]] film of the same name. This is a very [[drier]], very [[sluggish]] gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather [[feeble]] [[endeavors]].

Like "[[Buddies]]" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to [[larceny]] museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.

Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a bad film had I not seen the aforementioned [[antiques]] before being [[submerged]] by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not [[yet]] ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's [[Listed]]" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.

But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say "so what?" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Apparently Hollywood is just handing out money to anyone with a camera and the ability to speak. This movie was mind numbingly bad. The casting was terrible, the acting unspeakable, and the story filled with holes. Script? who needs script? I was surprised that the movie wasn't as verbally vulgar as I thought it would be, however I got enough shots of T&A to last me a lifetime. The movie was like listening to a 19 year old street racer with ADD (who decided to buy a car instead of go to college) tell a story. Being so poorly scripted, I thought the two brothers in the film were lovers at first. The scenes at the racetrack, along with the main female actor in the film kept making me think of Herbie: Fully Loaded. This is the kind of film is what Grindhouse modeled itself after...only the writers thought they were being serious. --------------------------------------------- Result 2748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I wouldn't go so far as to not [[recommend]] this [[movie]], since the only [[problems]] I have with it are due to an overexposure to the plot [[devices]] [[used]] in the [[movie]] - the [[sort]] of [[things]] common to [[every]] [[kids]] [[movie]] ever made it [[seems]]. That doesn't [[make]] it bad, just not something I'd go far.

It is a [[little]] saccharine, so I [[might]] say that for the most [[part]] [[anyone]] [[looking]] for [[something]] with a little more [[wit]] could be [[disappointed]] in an [[obviously]] for-kids [[movie]] like this.

[[However]], all of that goes out the window when that squirrel (the one in all the [[trailers]]) [[comes]] on-screen. His time is [[limited]], but it [[seems]] [[apparent]] that the [[decision]] [[makers]] had the [[wisdom]] to [[tell]] these [[guys]] 'hey, [[could]] you stick in a little more squirrel?' every [[time]] it's [[getting]] intolerably dull. That doesn't save the movie, but you can leave saying 'at least there was one aspect where I couldn't stop [[laughing]].'

And of course, visually it won't [[disappoint]], but that's almost a [[given]] with Pixar flicks. Of all of their stuff, I'd put this at the bottom...but that isn't in itself bad. I wouldn't go so far as to not [[recommending]] this [[movies]], since the only [[trouble]] I have with it are due to an overexposure to the plot [[accoutrements]] [[utilised]] in the [[cinema]] - the [[kinds]] of [[items]] common to [[all]] [[brats]] [[cinema]] ever made it [[looks]]. That doesn't [[deliver]] it bad, just not something I'd go far.

It is a [[kiddo]] saccharine, so I [[probable]] say that for the most [[party]] [[somebody]] [[researching]] for [[anything]] with a little more [[waite]] could be [[frustrating]] in an [[apparently]] for-kids [[cinematography]] like this.

[[Instead]], all of that goes out the window when that squirrel (the one in all the [[trailer]]) [[arrives]] on-screen. His time is [[restrained]], but it [[appears]] [[obvious]] that the [[rulings]] [[builders]] had the [[intellect]] to [[told]] these [[lads]] 'hey, [[would]] you stick in a little more squirrel?' every [[moment]] it's [[obtaining]] intolerably dull. That doesn't save the movie, but you can leave saying 'at least there was one aspect where I couldn't stop [[kidding]].'

And of course, visually it won't [[disillusion]], but that's almost a [[bestowed]] with Pixar flicks. Of all of their stuff, I'd put this at the bottom...but that isn't in itself bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] This is a [[terrible]] film, and not one scene has an [[ounce]] of [[truthful]] emotion. The [[characters]] are uninflected, [[obviously]] [[drawn]], predictable and the story line is [[obvious]] and typical Hollywood wish fulfillment.

[[William]] Holden (so sad to [[see]] him in this role) was 55 when this film was made, but he's playing [[someone]] in his early 40s and [[looks]] like he's in his 60s. Kay Lenz was 20 and was scripted to [[find]] him irresistibly [[attractive]]. I think the [[dog]] they found by the side of the road was sexier and had more life than their erotic connection.

Holden's character--the same age as Clint Eastwood when he directed this film, (not) coincidentally--is placed with [[obvious]] trappings of 60s pre-hippie cool: the [[bachelor]] pad, the swinging hi-fi, the [[lunches]] at Yamashiro. But the film is ridiculously uncool, a clanging claptrap of old fogies [[desperately]] wishing that the free [[spirits]] they saw on Sunset and in Laurel Canyon would find them and their big honkin' [[cars]] sexy.

Ugh. [[Youth]] culture was never that desperate. And I [[shudder]] to [[think]] that Bill Holden was so desperate for [[youth]] that he took this [[embarrassing]] [[part]]. This is a [[frightful]] film, and not one scene has an [[jot]] of [[veritable]] emotion. The [[characteristic]] are uninflected, [[apparently]] [[draws]], predictable and the story line is [[observable]] and typical Hollywood wish fulfillment.

[[Willem]] Holden (so sad to [[seeing]] him in this role) was 55 when this film was made, but he's playing [[everyone]] in his early 40s and [[seem]] like he's in his 60s. Kay Lenz was 20 and was scripted to [[finds]] him irresistibly [[tempting]]. I think the [[terrier]] they found by the side of the road was sexier and had more life than their erotic connection.

Holden's character--the same age as Clint Eastwood when he directed this film, (not) coincidentally--is placed with [[manifest]] trappings of 60s pre-hippie cool: the [[baccalaureate]] pad, the swinging hi-fi, the [[dine]] at Yamashiro. But the film is ridiculously uncool, a clanging claptrap of old fogies [[frantically]] wishing that the free [[liquor]] they saw on Sunset and in Laurel Canyon would find them and their big honkin' [[wagon]] sexy.

Ugh. [[Teenage]] culture was never that desperate. And I [[tingle]] to [[reckon]] that Bill Holden was so desperate for [[youngsters]] that he took this [[distracting]] [[portion]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When [[John]] Singleton is on, he's *on*!! And this is one of his better films. Not [[quite]] as tight as Boyz-n-the-Hood, but close to it (and with much of the same stellar cast). This [[film]] was very well [[written]], very well put [[together]], and very well shot. There's very little to [[criticize]], and most of my [[complaints]] are superficial (eg: where did [[Fudge]] [[get]] the money for 6 [[years]] of [[college]] and a [[lot]] of expensive stuff? [[No]] mention of a [[rich]] [[background]]... And why doesn't [[Professor]] Phibbs have an office? A [[professor]] of his stature *should* have one... And while we're at it, for an [[engineering]] [[student]], [[hick]] or not, Remy's a [[pretty]] dumb [[character]] - I'd think that he'd have a bit more in the [[way]] of basic intelligence - he [[talks]] and acts like a [[total]] [[buffoon]]).

But that aside, the film was very [[sharp]]. A good [[array]] of [[characters]] and [[points]] of [[view]]; and Singleton doesn't [[take]] sides in the story - [[many]] of the characters are unsympathetic, and he does a good [[job]] of interspersing the Panthers and Supremacist scenes [[together]] to [[show]] the folly on both sides.

Much of the [[cinematography]] was [[excellent]]; I [[especially]] [[loved]] the scene where Kirsty Swanson gets intimate with Taryn and Wayne each scene spliced together [[really]] well. Also the Malik/Deja scenes were [[really]] well shot as well.

The [[dialogue]] was a bit much at times; this film had a tendency to get *really* preachy at [[times]], and it [[also]] tends to hammer the [[points]] it was [[making]] over your head when the [[points]] [[would]] be just as [[clear]] with out the bluntness (we really didn't need the US flag with 'UNLEARN' typed onto it, give some credit, we're not morons...). And to top it off, [[although]] *most* of the [[time]] Singleton uses melodrama quite well, sometimes it gets *way* too cheezy (like Deja's death, which is fine until she screams out 'WHY!!!' which simply ruined the entire effect and scene).

But the acting, in general, was [[top]] of the line. [[Fabulous]] performances by Omar Epps (perhaps the best I've ever seen), Kirsty Swanson (who knew Buffy could act??), Michael Rapaport (surprised the hell out of me...after True Romance and Beautiful Girls I though he was a one-role actor), and of course Ice [[Cube]] and Laurence Fishburne are *always* outstanding.

Downside? Jennifer Connelly was flat; though it's not completely her fault: her role was stereotypical and one-dimensional. Generic to the highest degree. And Tyra Banks, who had the role, was nothing short of horrid. She whined and whined and whined. [[Yet]] another in the long line of models-turned-actresses who failed miserably (though there are a few who prove the exception to this rule).

Finally, the soundtrack! Wow! An amazing soundtrack (which is definitely worth buying!) which fits the film like a glove. Each scene has a twin song (although the Tori Amos songs started to *really* annoy me by the end...not her best work). Liz Phair, Rage Against the Machine, Ice Cube...how can one go wrong??

All in all: a really good watch, a really strong cast, great script, great film. 8/10. When [[Johannes]] Singleton is on, he's *on*!! And this is one of his better films. Not [[pretty]] as tight as Boyz-n-the-Hood, but close to it (and with much of the same stellar cast). This [[movie]] was very well [[writes]], very well put [[jointly]], and very well shot. There's very little to [[slams]], and most of my [[allegations]] are superficial (eg: where did [[Strawberries]] [[obtains]] the money for 6 [[aged]] of [[academics]] and a [[batch]] of expensive stuff? [[Nope]] mention of a [[storied]] [[context]]... And why doesn't [[Prof]] Phibbs have an office? A [[professors]] of his stature *should* have one... And while we're at it, for an [[engineer]] [[pupil]], [[redneck]] or not, Remy's a [[quite]] dumb [[nature]] - I'd think that he'd have a bit more in the [[pathway]] of basic intelligence - he [[conversations]] and acts like a [[overall]] [[dumbass]]).

But that aside, the film was very [[steep]]. A good [[arrays]] of [[attribute]] and [[dots]] of [[viewing]]; and Singleton doesn't [[taking]] sides in the story - [[numerous]] of the characters are unsympathetic, and he does a good [[jobs]] of interspersing the Panthers and Supremacist scenes [[jointly]] to [[shows]] the folly on both sides.

Much of the [[film]] was [[wondrous]]; I [[mostly]] [[cared]] the scene where Kirsty Swanson gets intimate with Taryn and Wayne each scene spliced together [[truly]] well. Also the Malik/Deja scenes were [[genuinely]] well shot as well.

The [[conversation]] was a bit much at times; this film had a tendency to get *really* preachy at [[time]], and it [[apart]] tends to hammer the [[dot]] it was [[doing]] over your head when the [[dots]] [[should]] be just as [[unmistakable]] with out the bluntness (we really didn't need the US flag with 'UNLEARN' typed onto it, give some credit, we're not morons...). And to top it off, [[albeit]] *most* of the [[times]] Singleton uses melodrama quite well, sometimes it gets *way* too cheezy (like Deja's death, which is fine until she screams out 'WHY!!!' which simply ruined the entire effect and scene).

But the acting, in general, was [[supreme]] of the line. [[Peachy]] performances by Omar Epps (perhaps the best I've ever seen), Kirsty Swanson (who knew Buffy could act??), Michael Rapaport (surprised the hell out of me...after True Romance and Beautiful Girls I though he was a one-role actor), and of course Ice [[Cubes]] and Laurence Fishburne are *always* outstanding.

Downside? Jennifer Connelly was flat; though it's not completely her fault: her role was stereotypical and one-dimensional. Generic to the highest degree. And Tyra Banks, who had the role, was nothing short of horrid. She whined and whined and whined. [[Even]] another in the long line of models-turned-actresses who failed miserably (though there are a few who prove the exception to this rule).

Finally, the soundtrack! Wow! An amazing soundtrack (which is definitely worth buying!) which fits the film like a glove. Each scene has a twin song (although the Tori Amos songs started to *really* annoy me by the end...not her best work). Liz Phair, Rage Against the Machine, Ice Cube...how can one go wrong??

All in all: a really good watch, a really strong cast, great script, great film. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2751 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm sorry but this is just plain pathetic. The little girl was a brat, their were no enjoyable characters and the plot sucked. Besides it wasn't even a gator as the film would like us to believe. If you check out any complete guide to reptiles you will find that it really is a Crocodile, not a gator. Obviously they didn't hire a real animal expert or they would know that the creature is a croc. It is a sad excuse for a movie. Especially the ending. I nearly fell asleep with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Totally]] [[ridiculous]]. [[If]] you know anything about [[poker]], you will find it absolutely appalling but also entertaining because it is so clueless. The nerd who made this movie is obviously very religious and knows slightly about the game of poker, but I doubt he's ever played above 3-6. (I think he also knows nothing of golf.) Where to [[start]]. I've seen better productions in the Intro to Film class I took freshmen year of film school. The [[actors]] to watch in this movie are Queen Momma, Scotty Nguyen, and the loser who can never win at poker. Everyone else is as [[wooden]] as they come, like bad porn actors.

*Spoiler* The man the movie starts with in the opening sequence is the only [[reason]] the film got made. He is a railbird who doesn't play poker and never has a line of dialogue, but the actor is the man who obviously paid for the movie. I can't think of a more useless waste of money than this man shelling out for this pointless [[production]]. It's fitting that he had such a [[useless]] role.

There's very little poker in this movie. Most of the time is [[spent]] on [[useless]] side [[characters]] whose plots aren't resolved in the [[slightest]]. Queen Momma does have a show-stealing scene where she throws her loser boyfriend through a window and tries to shoot his brains out. Also the nameless [[Arabs]] in the convenience store also [[give]] brilliant performances when they debate whether to beat up or kill an older lady who robs them. Their subtle performances are [[easily]] among the film's highlights. It makes you wonder why they bothered getting all these white people to play the leads.

In conclusion, [[complete]] [[nonsense]]. [[Plan]] 9 from Outer Space has slightly more coherency. If you play poker though you might want to have a laugh. Also if you're Christian you [[might]] enjoy some of the heavy-handed religious [[conversation]] that pepper the movie like pointless pepper. I [[hate]] movies made by [[religious]] people. Especially ones who think they know something about things they know nothing about. It's sad that Jennifer Harman and Scotty Nguyen got involved in this [[travesty]] as I can't help but think less of them. They must be envious of Johnny Chan for getting in Rounders. [[Fully]] [[farcical]]. [[Though]] you know anything about [[booker]], you will find it absolutely appalling but also entertaining because it is so clueless. The nerd who made this movie is obviously very religious and knows slightly about the game of poker, but I doubt he's ever played above 3-6. (I think he also knows nothing of golf.) Where to [[lancer]]. I've seen better productions in the Intro to Film class I took freshmen year of film school. The [[protagonists]] to watch in this movie are Queen Momma, Scotty Nguyen, and the loser who can never win at poker. Everyone else is as [[lumber]] as they come, like bad porn actors.

*Spoiler* The man the movie starts with in the opening sequence is the only [[cause]] the film got made. He is a railbird who doesn't play poker and never has a line of dialogue, but the actor is the man who obviously paid for the movie. I can't think of a more useless waste of money than this man shelling out for this pointless [[productivity]]. It's fitting that he had such a [[fruitless]] role.

There's very little poker in this movie. Most of the time is [[spending]] on [[vain]] side [[nature]] whose plots aren't resolved in the [[lowest]]. Queen Momma does have a show-stealing scene where she throws her loser boyfriend through a window and tries to shoot his brains out. Also the nameless [[Arab]] in the convenience store also [[lend]] brilliant performances when they debate whether to beat up or kill an older lady who robs them. Their subtle performances are [[comfortably]] among the film's highlights. It makes you wonder why they bothered getting all these white people to play the leads.

In conclusion, [[finish]] [[claptrap]]. [[Plans]] 9 from Outer Space has slightly more coherency. If you play poker though you might want to have a laugh. Also if you're Christian you [[apt]] enjoy some of the heavy-handed religious [[chat]] that pepper the movie like pointless pepper. I [[hatred]] movies made by [[nuns]] people. Especially ones who think they know something about things they know nothing about. It's sad that Jennifer Harman and Scotty Nguyen got involved in this [[parody]] as I can't help but think less of them. They must be envious of Johnny Chan for getting in Rounders. --------------------------------------------- Result 2753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Poorly-made "blaxploitation" crime-drama aimed squarely at the black urban market of the early 1970s. Pam Grier stars in the title role, that of a nurse who becomes a one-woman vigilante after drug-dealing thugs make Coffy's little sister a junkie. Violent nonsense plods along doggedly, with canned energy and excitement; only Grier's flaring temper gives the narrative a jolt (she's not much of an actress here, but she connects with the audience in a primal way). Not much different from what Charles Bronson was doing at this time, the film was marketed and advertised as crass exploitation yet still managed to find a sizable inner-city audience. Today however, it's merely a footnote in '70s film history, and lacks the wide-range appeal of other movies in this genre. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[liked]] this [[movie]] because it basically did more with less. It [[could]] have been [[made]] more interesting if they had [[kept]] it [[confined]] to the studio [[even]] more ([[though]] some of the [[plot]] [[elements]] would have been [[harder]] to [[develop]]).

The [[guy]] playing the [[DJ]] did a good [[job]] of [[showing]] [[someone]] spooked out and [[haunted]] by his [[memories]]. I [[also]] [[found]] his dialog with the callers pretty funny.

While parts of the [[movie]] you can [[see]] [[coming]] a [[mile]] away, other parts you do not expect to [[turn]] out the way they did.

I thought it was a pretty [[minimal]] ghost [[story]] for the most [[part]], [[concentrating]] more on the [[living]] side of the equation. The [[last]] 5-10 minutes were [[pretty]] well [[done]] as everything is being [[revealed]].

While it was a [[shorter]] [[movie]], it [[felt]] to be just about the right [[amount]] of [[time]] to tell the [[story]]. Any more and it [[would]] have [[started]] to [[drag]]. I [[enjoyed]] this [[kino]] because it basically did more with less. It [[would]] have been [[effected]] more interesting if they had [[conserved]] it [[restrained]] to the studio [[yet]] more ([[if]] some of the [[intrigue]] [[ingredient]] would have been [[louder]] to [[elaborate]]).

The [[blokes]] playing the [[MJ]] did a good [[labour]] of [[exhibiting]] [[everyone]] spooked out and [[tormented]] by his [[recollections]]. I [[apart]] [[uncovered]] his dialog with the callers pretty funny.

While parts of the [[cinema]] you can [[behold]] [[arriving]] a [[miles]] away, other parts you do not expect to [[turning]] out the way they did.

I thought it was a pretty [[lowest]] ghost [[histories]] for the most [[portion]], [[focussed]] more on the [[iife]] side of the equation. The [[latter]] 5-10 minutes were [[belle]] well [[completed]] as everything is being [[proved]].

While it was a [[shortest]] [[kino]], it [[smelled]] to be just about the right [[somme]] of [[period]] to tell the [[tale]]. Any more and it [[ought]] have [[commenced]] to [[dragging]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I never expect a [[film]] [[adaptation]] to follow too [[closely]] to the [[novel]] (especially a [[beloved]] one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay [[writer]] and executive [[producer]] on the film, I thought that Evening would be a [[good]] adaptation.

[[If]] you [[enjoyed]] the [[book]], don't bother with this [[movie]]. It is so far afield of the book that the two [[hardly]] bear any [[resemblance]] to one another.

Here, our characters are [[completely]] different: the [[bride]] is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a [[drunk]], in [[love]] with Ann and/or Harris. I don't [[think]] a [[single]] [[character]] [[made]] it from the [[book]] to the screen; [[oh]] it just [[gets]] [[worst]] with [[every]] passing moment.

And, [[really]], didn't we [[learn]] from [[Bridges]] of Madison County that [[cutting]] from the story we are [[meant]] to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown [[children]] having [[obnoxious]] and [[juvenile]] [[fights]], [[simply]] does not [[work]] on [[film]]? This [[film]] is a [[disaster]]. Skip it. I never expect a [[cinematography]] [[readjust]] to follow too [[tightly]] to the [[newer]] (especially a [[sweetie]] one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay [[screenwriter]] and executive [[producers]] on the film, I thought that Evening would be a [[buena]] adaptation.

[[Though]] you [[appreciated]] the [[cookbook]], don't bother with this [[films]]. It is so far afield of the book that the two [[almost]] bear any [[likeness]] to one another.

Here, our characters are [[fully]] different: the [[fiance]] is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a [[drunken]], in [[amore]] with Ann and/or Harris. I don't [[thought]] a [[lonely]] [[nature]] [[introduced]] it from the [[ledger]] to the screen; [[oooh]] it just [[get]] [[meanest]] with [[any]] passing moment.

And, [[genuinely]], didn't we [[learned]] from [[Bridge]] of Madison County that [[cut]] from the story we are [[signified]] to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown [[kid]] having [[detestable]] and [[youthful]] [[struggles]], [[mere]] does not [[cooperation]] on [[movies]]? This [[filmmaking]] is a [[disasters]]. Skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2756 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have seen this movie when I was about 7 years old - which was 33 years ago - and I never forgot this movie! I was deeply touched and moved by the brave little boy and the beautiful eagle. And I just couldn't believe it when he turned into an eagle just when everyone in the theater thought he was going to die...

My sister was in the movie with me and I asked her recently if she remembered the movie we saw with the boy and the eagle and she said she remembered it like we saw it only yesterday. So it isn't just me.

This movie is a MUST SEE !!!

You will never forget it - just like my sister and me... --------------------------------------------- Result 2757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What exactly was [[going]] on during [[World]] War 11 in [[New]] Zealand when American forces were there?

This [[awful]] [[story]] of 4 sisters was really [[pathetic]] to view. Can you imagine [[casting]] Joan Fontaine as the [[older]] sister to Sandra Dee? Fontaine [[looked]] more like her [[mother]]. [[Even]] funnier was that Fontaine [[becomes]] [[pregnant]] in the [[film]].

Piper Laurie and Paul Newman who [[showed]] such [[great]] on screen [[chemistry]] 4 years later in "The Hustler," have no scenes [[together]] in this film. Laurie plays another sister who goes off to Wellington to [[tramp]] [[around]] there, despite the fact that she is [[married]]. [[Woe]] to her when her husband [[comes]] back from the war.

Jean Simmons is widowed and [[finds]] romance with a much subdued Paul Newman. There is even romance for the [[young]] Miss Dee here.

The [[picture]] has little to no [[meaning]]. Are they [[trying]] to [[say]] that all is fair in [[love]] and war? [[If]] they are, they did a poor [[job]] in selling this.

The [[conflict]] of interest with Newman and Simmons is quickly disposed of. That is what should have been [[quickly]] done to this [[terribly]] [[disappointing]] [[film]] of 1957. What exactly was [[go]] on during [[Monde]] War 11 in [[Novel]] Zealand when American forces were there?

This [[scary]] [[history]] of 4 sisters was really [[unfortunate]] to view. Can you imagine [[moulding]] Joan Fontaine as the [[elderly]] sister to Sandra Dee? Fontaine [[seemed]] more like her [[mama]]. [[Yet]] funnier was that Fontaine [[become]] [[expectant]] in the [[filmmaking]].

Piper Laurie and Paul Newman who [[shown]] such [[prodigious]] on screen [[chemicals]] 4 years later in "The Hustler," have no scenes [[jointly]] in this film. Laurie plays another sister who goes off to Wellington to [[beggar]] [[throughout]] there, despite the fact that she is [[marriage]]. [[Sadness]] to her when her husband [[happens]] back from the war.

Jean Simmons is widowed and [[found]] romance with a much subdued Paul Newman. There is even romance for the [[youthful]] Miss Dee here.

The [[photography]] has little to no [[mean]]. Are they [[try]] to [[said]] that all is fair in [[likes]] and war? [[Though]] they are, they did a poor [[jobs]] in selling this.

The [[conflicts]] of interest with Newman and Simmons is quickly disposed of. That is what should have been [[soon]] done to this [[remarkably]] [[frustrating]] [[filmmaking]] of 1957. --------------------------------------------- Result 2758 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "The seventh sign" borrows a lot from "Rosemary's [[baby]]" and "the omen" (it actually [[blends]] the two stories).Even its title [[recalls]] Bergman' s "the seventh seal" .

Nevertheless,it [[begins]] well [[enough]],with all the omens [[scattered]] on the whole [[earth]],and in parallel ,a -seemingly- distinct plot with Moore's husband [[trying]] to save a poor boy (who killed his parents who were brother and sister)from death penalty.This time,both Christian and Jewish religions are called to the [[rescue]] (even the Wandering Jew is involved),which makes the lines sometimes unintentionally [[funny]] (Have you ever been to Sunday school? But they taught me that God was love!).The best scene IMHO ,is the short [[dialog]] between priest John Heard -who does not [[seem]] to [[take]] things [[seriously]] ,too bad he was not given a more important part because his laid-back acting is priceless-and the young Jew.

Demi Moore [[probably]] [[registered]] the same desire as ex-husband Bruce Willis :saving the world.She does not save the [[movie]] for all that. "The seventh sign" borrows a lot from "Rosemary's [[babe]]" and "the omen" (it actually [[mixtures]] the two stories).Even its title [[reminded]] Bergman' s "the seventh seal" .

Nevertheless,it [[startup]] well [[satisfactorily]],with all the omens [[fragmented]] on the whole [[tierra]],and in parallel ,a -seemingly- distinct plot with Moore's husband [[tempting]] to save a poor boy (who killed his parents who were brother and sister)from death penalty.This time,both Christian and Jewish religions are called to the [[saves]] (even the Wandering Jew is involved),which makes the lines sometimes unintentionally [[hilarious]] (Have you ever been to Sunday school? But they taught me that God was love!).The best scene IMHO ,is the short [[dialogue]] between priest John Heard -who does not [[looks]] to [[taking]] things [[conscientiously]] ,too bad he was not given a more important part because his laid-back acting is priceless-and the young Jew.

Demi Moore [[assuredly]] [[register]] the same desire as ex-husband Bruce Willis :saving the world.She does not save the [[filmmaking]] for all that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[brilliance]] of this movie is that even a competent dentist is pretty scary. It's one of man's primal fears. This movie is the nightmarish image every kid has to go through in the [[waiting]] room. [[Corbin]] Bernsen gives a [[surprisingly]] non-lackluster performance as a [[crazed]] [[dentist]] who I guess tries to kill people but he only [[works]] on their [[teeth]] so it's not really [[working]] out. In a [[particularly]] [[gory]] scene we find so-so actor Earl Boen having his teeth completely [[destroyed]] with drills and whatnot, which I [[guess]] is the absolute worst you can do when you're a killer [[dentist]]. It's a [[typical]] [[Brian]] Yuzna situation, not well written but there's gore. The plot is [[shoddy]] and at [[times]] [[seems]] to be [[made]] up on the spot but hey, it's a [[killer]] [[dentist]] movie, we've all thought of it but they did it first. The [[splendor]] of this movie is that even a competent dentist is pretty scary. It's one of man's primal fears. This movie is the nightmarish image every kid has to go through in the [[expecting]] room. [[Furey]] Bernsen gives a [[impossibly]] non-lackluster performance as a [[psychotic]] [[dentists]] who I guess tries to kill people but he only [[worked]] on their [[dental]] so it's not really [[cooperating]] out. In a [[specifically]] [[gori]] scene we find so-so actor Earl Boen having his teeth completely [[ruined]] with drills and whatnot, which I [[presume]] is the absolute worst you can do when you're a killer [[orthodontist]]. It's a [[symptomatic]] [[Bryan]] Yuzna situation, not well written but there's gore. The plot is [[inferior]] and at [[period]] [[seem]] to be [[effected]] up on the spot but hey, it's a [[murderer]] [[dentistry]] movie, we've all thought of it but they did it first. --------------------------------------------- Result 2760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Without Peter Ustinov and [[Maggie]] [[Smith]], this could [[easily]] have been a turkey. But they are [[brilliant]]. Ustinov is at his best, and for fans of Maggie, it is great to see her in her early days, [[matching]] Ustinov every [[step]] of the way for with and timing. For Englishmen in their fifties (and I am in that bracket), it is always entertaining to see glimpses of and hear sounds of the Swinging Sixties, and although this [[film]] spends a lot of time in offices, it has plenty of Sixties nostalgia, including red buses, Carnaby Street, a song by Lulu and a [[delicious]] shot up the micro-skirt of a [[waitress]], the like of which England has never seen since in public [[places]]. As an I.T. engineer, I know that the computer hacking tricks are [[laughable]], but they are not [[meant]] to be [[taken]] [[seriously]]. Nor are the [[wonderful]] stereotypes of Italians, French and Germans. Without Peter Ustinov and [[Mags]] [[Smiths]], this could [[conveniently]] have been a turkey. But they are [[wondrous]]. Ustinov is at his best, and for fans of Maggie, it is great to see her in her early days, [[twinning]] Ustinov every [[steps]] of the way for with and timing. For Englishmen in their fifties (and I am in that bracket), it is always entertaining to see glimpses of and hear sounds of the Swinging Sixties, and although this [[movies]] spends a lot of time in offices, it has plenty of Sixties nostalgia, including red buses, Carnaby Street, a song by Lulu and a [[delectable]] shot up the micro-skirt of a [[stewardess]], the like of which England has never seen since in public [[sites]]. As an I.T. engineer, I know that the computer hacking tricks are [[preposterous]], but they are not [[signified]] to be [[picked]] [[conscientiously]]. Nor are the [[noteworthy]] stereotypes of Italians, French and Germans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed watching this movie about the Delany sisters. I knew of them, but that was all. This movie opened my eyes to their bravado and courage. What a pair. What sacrifices they made to live life on their own terms. This is not only a movie for African Americans, but for all Americans. It is sort of a history lesson and a documentary rolled into one and combined with an entertaining movie biography. The acting was superior by all included and we really do get a glimpse of the hardships these two sisters went through for many years. Both sisters are quite different from each other. They came from a very loving and very strict family with high, maybe even impossible standards of perfection. It is sad to see how Sadie's father refused to allow his daughter to continue to see her boyfriend due to a possible misunderstanding. I thoroughly recommend this movie and I am glad I caught it on television the other day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] How sheep-like the [[movie]] [[going]] public so often proves to be. As [[soon]] as a few critics say something new is good (ie - "Shake-Cam"), everyone jumps on the bandwagon, as if they are devoid of independent thought. This was not a [[good]] [[movie]], it was a [[dreadful]] movie. 1) [[Plot]]? - What plot? Bourne was chased from here to there, from beginning to end. That's the plot. Don't [[look]] for anything [[deeper]] than this. 2) [[Cinematography]]? - [[Do]] me a favor! Any 7 year old armed with an old and battered 8mm movie camera would do a far better job (I am not exaggerating here). This film is a tour-de-force of [[astonishingly]] [[amateurish]] camera-work. The [[ridiculous]] shaking of EVERY (I really do mean every) scene will cause dizziness and nausea. 3) Believable? - Oh yes definitely. This is a masterpiece of credibility. I loved scenes about Bourne being chased by (local) police through the winding market streets of Tangier. - I've BEEN to Tangier. Even the guides can't navigate their way through those streets but Bourne shook off 100 police with speed and finesse. Greengrass must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of his film disciples. 4) Editing? - I don't know what the editor was on when he did this film but I want some! - Every scene is between 0.5 and 2 seconds. I felt nauseous at the end of the film from the strobe effect of the "scenes" flashing by. 5) Directing? - Hmmm. This is an interesting aspect. The film appears to have actually NOT had any directing. More a case of Greengrass throwing a copy of the script (all two pages) at the cameramen and told to "shoot a few scenes whilst drunk". - "Don't worry boys, we'll tie the scenes together in the editing room". The editor should be tarred, feathered and put in the stocks for allowing this monstrosity to hit the silver screen 6) Not one but TWO senior CIA operatives giving the tender feminine treatment to the mistreated and misunderstood Jason Bourne. - Putting their lives on the line for someone they couldn't even be sure wasn't a traitor. Talk about stupid nincompoops. (Whilst the evil male CIA members plot to terminate any operative who so much as drops a paper-clip on the floor). (well, all men are evil, aren't they? - Except for SNAGS of course). Yes, this really is a modern and politically correct film that shows the females to be the heroes of the day and the oppressive males as the real threat to humanity. 7) When the you-know-what finally hits the fan, good triumphs over evil (just like it always does, eh?) and the would-be assassin gets the drop on Jason Bourne - he suddenly undergoes a guilt trip and refrains from pulling the trigger (Yeah - right...) - at that very moment, the evil deputy director just happens to turn up - gun in hand and he does pull the trigger. - How did this 60 year old man run so fast and not even be out of breath? Wonders will never cease 8) Don't worry, there's a senate hearing and the baddies get pulled up before the courts. Well, we can't have nasty, politically incorrect, CIA operatives going round shooting people, can we? How lovely to see a true to life P.C. film of the Noughties. -------------The Bourne Ultimatum is utter rubbish. How sheep-like the [[flick]] [[go]] public so often proves to be. As [[promptly]] as a few critics say something new is good (ie - "Shake-Cam"), everyone jumps on the bandwagon, as if they are devoid of independent thought. This was not a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], it was a [[abhorrent]] movie. 1) [[Intrigue]]? - What plot? Bourne was chased from here to there, from beginning to end. That's the plot. Don't [[glance]] for anything [[closer]] than this. 2) [[Cinematographic]]? - [[Doing]] me a favor! Any 7 year old armed with an old and battered 8mm movie camera would do a far better job (I am not exaggerating here). This film is a tour-de-force of [[marvellously]] [[unprofessional]] camera-work. The [[preposterous]] shaking of EVERY (I really do mean every) scene will cause dizziness and nausea. 3) Believable? - Oh yes definitely. This is a masterpiece of credibility. I loved scenes about Bourne being chased by (local) police through the winding market streets of Tangier. - I've BEEN to Tangier. Even the guides can't navigate their way through those streets but Bourne shook off 100 police with speed and finesse. Greengrass must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of his film disciples. 4) Editing? - I don't know what the editor was on when he did this film but I want some! - Every scene is between 0.5 and 2 seconds. I felt nauseous at the end of the film from the strobe effect of the "scenes" flashing by. 5) Directing? - Hmmm. This is an interesting aspect. The film appears to have actually NOT had any directing. More a case of Greengrass throwing a copy of the script (all two pages) at the cameramen and told to "shoot a few scenes whilst drunk". - "Don't worry boys, we'll tie the scenes together in the editing room". The editor should be tarred, feathered and put in the stocks for allowing this monstrosity to hit the silver screen 6) Not one but TWO senior CIA operatives giving the tender feminine treatment to the mistreated and misunderstood Jason Bourne. - Putting their lives on the line for someone they couldn't even be sure wasn't a traitor. Talk about stupid nincompoops. (Whilst the evil male CIA members plot to terminate any operative who so much as drops a paper-clip on the floor). (well, all men are evil, aren't they? - Except for SNAGS of course). Yes, this really is a modern and politically correct film that shows the females to be the heroes of the day and the oppressive males as the real threat to humanity. 7) When the you-know-what finally hits the fan, good triumphs over evil (just like it always does, eh?) and the would-be assassin gets the drop on Jason Bourne - he suddenly undergoes a guilt trip and refrains from pulling the trigger (Yeah - right...) - at that very moment, the evil deputy director just happens to turn up - gun in hand and he does pull the trigger. - How did this 60 year old man run so fast and not even be out of breath? Wonders will never cease 8) Don't worry, there's a senate hearing and the baddies get pulled up before the courts. Well, we can't have nasty, politically incorrect, CIA operatives going round shooting people, can we? How lovely to see a true to life P.C. film of the Noughties. -------------The Bourne Ultimatum is utter rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 2763 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Ogre is a film made for TV in Italy and wasn't intended to be a sequel to Demons as Lamberto Bava even mentions it on the interview on the Sheirk Show DVD, but it was called Demons III to be part of the Demons series. The music in Demons and Demons 2 was 80's rock music while this is more creepy music and while the first two was gory horror Demons III: The Ogre is a architectural horror so that's how Demons III isn't a proper sequel to Demons but I still like this film.

The music is creepy and that adds a tone to the castle that the film is set in, The Ogre is another thing why I like the film. There are two other films that are classed as Demons III and that is Black Demons (Demoni 3) and The Church (Demons 3). Demons III: The Ogre is a good film as long as you don't compare it with Demons and Demons 2. --------------------------------------------- Result 2764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] To [[anyone]] who [[might]] [[think]] this [[show]] isn't for them, please give it a try. Network television has degenerated into shows that are clones of clones or are [[reality]] based shows featuring some often unreal people. This [[show]] is a [[return]] to family oriented TV where the emphasis is on learning some [[life]] lessons, learning what [[real]] friends and family are about, and maybe [[even]] learning a little bit about our national pastime. Jeremy Sumpter is one of the most appealing young actors in [[show]] business [[today]], and he is perfectly cast as the young, slightly naive new batboy for the fictional New [[York]] Empires ([[great]] [[name]]!). Dean Cain, [[Christopher]] Lloyd, Mare Winningham, and Kirsten Storms [[round]] out the main cast, and they are all [[exceptional]]. This show [[deserves]] a chance to catch on and be [[seen]]. Hopefully it will stick around for a few seasons and we can watch Pete Young (Sumpter's character) learn and grow. To [[somebody]] who [[probability]] [[believing]] this [[display]] isn't for them, please give it a try. Network television has degenerated into shows that are clones of clones or are [[realities]] based shows featuring some often unreal people. This [[showings]] is a [[restitution]] to family oriented TV where the emphasis is on learning some [[lifetime]] lessons, learning what [[actual]] friends and family are about, and maybe [[yet]] learning a little bit about our national pastime. Jeremy Sumpter is one of the most appealing young actors in [[showings]] business [[yesterday]], and he is perfectly cast as the young, slightly naive new batboy for the fictional New [[Yorke]] Empires ([[grand]] [[denomination]]!). Dean Cain, [[Cristobal]] Lloyd, Mare Winningham, and Kirsten Storms [[redondo]] out the main cast, and they are all [[wondrous]]. This show [[merited]] a chance to catch on and be [[watched]]. Hopefully it will stick around for a few seasons and we can watch Pete Young (Sumpter's character) learn and grow. --------------------------------------------- Result 2765 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I decided to watch this because of the recommendations from this site. I would have to [[say]] it was worth the effort. However, you should take heed that this film will go on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the staying power, get it on [[tape]] and watch it over a couple of nights.

Now to the [[film]], what I say will contain "[[spoilers]]" and if you don't mind, here goes:

[[Alexandre]] is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had [[aborted]] it and planned to marry someone else.

By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse nymph called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. [[Veronika]] fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the [[sordid]] sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as [[aforesaid]] with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will [[even]] get a job and be the [[provider]] for his new [[found]] love and [[family]]. There is [[hope]]!

With the title of "La [[Maman]] et la putain", I deduce Jean Eustache was [[relating]] to Françoise Lebrun's [[character]] of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and [[whore]] is the same [[person]]? [[Anyway]], what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very [[chatty]], aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud played their obdurate characters well and held the film [[together]] as some part of the script became a [[little]] lost and disjointed.

Not a bad effort. 7/10. I decided to watch this because of the recommendations from this site. I would have to [[said]] it was worth the effort. However, you should take heed that this film will go on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the staying power, get it on [[tapes]] and watch it over a couple of nights.

Now to the [[kino]], what I say will contain "[[vandals]]" and if you don't mind, here goes:

[[Aleksandr]] is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had [[thwart]] it and planned to marry someone else.

By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse nymph called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. [[Veronica]] fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the [[unclean]] sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as [[supra]] with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will [[yet]] get a job and be the [[providers]] for his new [[discovered]] love and [[families]]. There is [[hopes]]!

With the title of "La [[Mummy]] et la putain", I deduce Jean Eustache was [[related]] to Françoise Lebrun's [[personage]] of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and [[hooker]] is the same [[individuals]]? [[Anyhoo]], what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very [[talkative]], aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud played their obdurate characters well and held the film [[jointly]] as some part of the script became a [[tiny]] lost and disjointed.

Not a bad effort. 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I just read the [[comments]] of TomReynolds2004 and feel I have to [[jump]] in here. I [[understand]] he doesn't like the film, but his reasons are not evident. My feeling [[regarding]] this film is that it is not [[afraid]] to travel the darker [[roads]] of [[loneliness]], [[failure]], [[disappointment]] and sorrow. Each of these two people, as portrayed, have plenty of reasons to be bitter and [[angry]], [[yet]] find [[tenderness]] and comfort in each the other. Only [[great]] acting [[could]] make this [[work]] without becoming an emotional [[quagmire]], sentimental and sappy. I really became interested in these people because of their overwhelming [[humanity]] given to them by such [[strong]] performances. I have every [[reason]] to [[dislike]] Jane [[Fonda]] for her Vietnam era actions, but personal [[feelings]] apart, she is [[fabulous]] in this role. Robert DeNiro is [[superb]] as a [[man]] whose intelligence and goodness [[begins]] to [[fail]] him in a world indifferent to his abilities. This is the first I have [[seen]] DeNiro using [[tenderness]] [[rather]] than [[toughness]] to sell a [[character]] and I really like it. This film was a [[big]] [[surprise]] when I [[first]] [[viewed]] it and I [[look]] forward to seeing it again. I just read the [[remark]] of TomReynolds2004 and feel I have to [[jumping]] in here. I [[realise]] he doesn't like the film, but his reasons are not evident. My feeling [[pertaining]] this film is that it is not [[shitless]] to travel the darker [[lane]] of [[lonely]], [[deficiency]], [[displeasure]] and sorrow. Each of these two people, as portrayed, have plenty of reasons to be bitter and [[rabid]], [[nonetheless]] find [[affection]] and comfort in each the other. Only [[remarkable]] acting [[did]] make this [[working]] without becoming an emotional [[morass]], sentimental and sappy. I really became interested in these people because of their overwhelming [[mankind]] given to them by such [[vigorous]] performances. I have every [[justification]] to [[disgust]] Jane [[Fund]] for her Vietnam era actions, but personal [[sentiments]] apart, she is [[wondrous]] in this role. Robert DeNiro is [[handsome]] as a [[males]] whose intelligence and goodness [[starts]] to [[fails]] him in a world indifferent to his abilities. This is the first I have [[watched]] DeNiro using [[fondness]] [[fairly]] than [[stamina]] to sell a [[nature]] and I really like it. This film was a [[gargantuan]] [[amaze]] when I [[firstly]] [[regarded]] it and I [[peek]] forward to seeing it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A wonderful movie! Anyone growing up in an Italian family will definitely see themselves in these characters. A good family movie with sadness, humor, and very good acting from all. You will enjoy this movie!! We need more like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2768 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a comedy based on national stereotypes, no doubt. If you leave away pretending you know or you care what Communism was about and how real Russians or Brits are, if you accept and are not hurt by the conventions, you can have fun with this film. Nicole Kidman is at her best, sexy, moving and funny. Ben Chaplin succeeds to avoid being completely out-shadowed by Nicole, and the rest of the cast does good work as well. The final is moving, and logical - movie logics, of course. Worth watching, if you accept the rules of the game. --------------------------------------------- Result 2769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like almost everyone else who has commented on this movie, I can only wonder why this has never appeared on video.

I recall seeing it at about age 12 on the "The Late Show," circa 1972. I too recall the poison gas attack and the weirdly garbed horses. (I don't recall the more horrific bits I've seen described here; they were likely cut out for the TV audience.) But the scenes I REALLY liked were the ones involving the death of Lord Kitchener aboard the HMS Hampshire, almost exactly 90 years ago. The scenes of the doomed cruiser approaching the minefield in the storm were really chilling, as I recall.

Don't recall the musical score, but the comments of the others now have me curious. Get this one out on video! --------------------------------------------- Result 2770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Robert Altman shouldn't make a movie like this, but the fact that he did- and that it [[turns]] out to be a reasonably good and tightly-wound thriller in that paperback-tradition of Grisham thrillers- [[shows]] a versatility that is [[commendable]]. In the Gingerbread [[Man]] he actually has to work with [[something]] that, unfortunately, he isn't always very successful at, or at least it's not the first thing on his checklist as director: plot. There's one of those [[big]], [[juicy]] [[almost]] pot-boiler plots where a sleazy [[lawyer]] gets [[caught]] up with a desperate low-class woman and then a [[nefarious]] figure whom the woman is related with enters their lives in the most [[staggering]] ways, twists and plot [[ensues]], [[yada]] yada. And it's surprising that Altman [[would]] really [[want]] to take on one of these "I [[saw]] that [[coming]] from back there!" endings, or just a such a semi-conventional thriller.

But it's a [[surprise]] that [[pays]] off because, [[oddly]] enough, Altman is [[able]] to [[catch]] some of that very [[fine]] [[behavior]], or rather is [[able]] to [[unintentionally]] coax it out of a very well-cast ensemble, of a small-town Georgian environment. The film drips with atmosphere (if not [[total]] superlative [[craftsmanship]], sometimes it's good and [[sometimes]] just decent for Altman), as [[Savannah]] is possibly going to be [[hit]] by a big [[hurricane]] and the swamp and marshes and rain [[keep]] things soaked and muggy and [[humid]]. So the atmosphere is [[really]] [[potent]], but so are performances from (sometimes) hysterical Kenneth Branaugh, Embeth Davitz as the 'woman' who lawyer Branaugh gets caught up with, and Robert Downey Jr (when is he *not* good?) as the private detective in Branaugh's employ. [[Did]] I [[neglect]] Robert Duvall, who in just five minutes of screen time makes such an indelible impression to hang the bad-vibes of the picture on?

As said, some of the plot is a [[little]] weak, or just kind of standard (lawyer is divorced, bitter custody battle looms, innocent and goofy kids), but at the same time I think Altman saw something [[captivating]] in the material, something darker than some of the other Grisham works that has this standing out somehow. If it's not [[entirely]] masterful, it still works on its limited terms as a what-will-happen-next mystery-Southern-noir. Robert Altman shouldn't make a movie like this, but the fact that he did- and that it [[revolves]] out to be a reasonably good and tightly-wound thriller in that paperback-tradition of Grisham thrillers- [[demonstrating]] a versatility that is [[praiseworthy]]. In the Gingerbread [[Dawg]] he actually has to work with [[algo]] that, unfortunately, he isn't always very successful at, or at least it's not the first thing on his checklist as director: plot. There's one of those [[vast]], [[fleshy]] [[practically]] pot-boiler plots where a sleazy [[attorneys]] gets [[catch]] up with a desperate low-class woman and then a [[odious]] figure whom the woman is related with enters their lives in the most [[shocking]] ways, twists and plot [[ensue]], [[yak]] yada. And it's surprising that Altman [[should]] really [[desiring]] to take on one of these "I [[observed]] that [[incoming]] from back there!" endings, or just a such a semi-conventional thriller.

But it's a [[amaze]] that [[salaried]] off because, [[strangely]] enough, Altman is [[capable]] to [[catches]] some of that very [[fined]] [[attitudes]], or rather is [[capable]] to [[involuntarily]] coax it out of a very well-cast ensemble, of a small-town Georgian environment. The film drips with atmosphere (if not [[entire]] superlative [[handicraft]], sometimes it's good and [[occasionally]] just decent for Altman), as [[Marshy]] is possibly going to be [[pummeled]] by a big [[cyclone]] and the swamp and marshes and rain [[maintaining]] things soaked and muggy and [[sweaty]]. So the atmosphere is [[truthfully]] [[mighty]], but so are performances from (sometimes) hysterical Kenneth Branaugh, Embeth Davitz as the 'woman' who lawyer Branaugh gets caught up with, and Robert Downey Jr (when is he *not* good?) as the private detective in Branaugh's employ. [[Ai]] I [[ignored]] Robert Duvall, who in just five minutes of screen time makes such an indelible impression to hang the bad-vibes of the picture on?

As said, some of the plot is a [[petite]] weak, or just kind of standard (lawyer is divorced, bitter custody battle looms, innocent and goofy kids), but at the same time I think Altman saw something [[intriguing]] in the material, something darker than some of the other Grisham works that has this standing out somehow. If it's not [[absolutely]] masterful, it still works on its limited terms as a what-will-happen-next mystery-Southern-noir. --------------------------------------------- Result 2771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I can't say that this film deserves anywhere near the amount of vitriol being heaped on it by some reviewers. [[Yes]], it's bogged down by an overly-padded running time, hamfisted editing, and an overreliance on cheeseball special effects. And it lacks [[much]] of the energy a [[comedy]] needs to get your average audience member to sit through it without checking his or her watch.

On the other hand, it's also [[got]] some laugh-out-loud funny lines, a talented and earnest cast, and the classic underdog premise. Macy, Stiller, and Azaria are brilliant as the "core" team, and Garofalo and Studi do [[superb]] work adding conflict and variety to the team. I can't say Reubens or Mitchell added much to the film overall, though each had a few chances to shine.

The plot, as I said above, is your classic "underdog-makes-good" stuff. No surprises there, since you know they're going to triumph. What makes it worthwhile is not the absurd, gaudy heroes and villains, but the dialogue and interplay between the characters. Underneath it all, these people are children at heart, who just want to do right. The best scenes in the [[film]] [[give]] this film its emotional grounding. Look at Azaria's relationship with his long-suffering mother; Macy's endearing innocence in his unwillingness to accept Cap. Amazing's secret identity; Stiller's rage (not unlike that one weird, spazzy kid you once knew who'd always go into quivering, [[impotent]] rages on the playground); Garofalo's desire to avenge her father. This childlike belief that a sense of justice and goodness will always make the world a better place, is the true appeal of super-hero comics; and underneath its parodic exterior, "Mystery Men" shows us why these hackneyed comic-book tropes matter to so many.

It never really gels into a satisfying whole, due to the huge number of half-baked subplots (romance, family life, conflicts within the team, etc.), but the main plot is such loopy fun that it makes up for that. The fact that it's supposed to be good, nonsensical fun seems to be lost on some of the reviewers here, so I'll issue a caveat: if you're the type of viewer who finds his enjoyment of an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon ruined by the unexplained and illogical ("Am I to believe this is some sort of.. *snort*... _magic_ xylophone?"), then you are far too literal-minded and humorless for this film. Go rent a Sandler film instead.

(7/10) I can't say that this film deserves anywhere near the amount of vitriol being heaped on it by some reviewers. [[Yea]], it's bogged down by an overly-padded running time, hamfisted editing, and an overreliance on cheeseball special effects. And it lacks [[very]] of the energy a [[charade]] needs to get your average audience member to sit through it without checking his or her watch.

On the other hand, it's also [[did]] some laugh-out-loud funny lines, a talented and earnest cast, and the classic underdog premise. Macy, Stiller, and Azaria are brilliant as the "core" team, and Garofalo and Studi do [[magnifique]] work adding conflict and variety to the team. I can't say Reubens or Mitchell added much to the film overall, though each had a few chances to shine.

The plot, as I said above, is your classic "underdog-makes-good" stuff. No surprises there, since you know they're going to triumph. What makes it worthwhile is not the absurd, gaudy heroes and villains, but the dialogue and interplay between the characters. Underneath it all, these people are children at heart, who just want to do right. The best scenes in the [[movies]] [[lend]] this film its emotional grounding. Look at Azaria's relationship with his long-suffering mother; Macy's endearing innocence in his unwillingness to accept Cap. Amazing's secret identity; Stiller's rage (not unlike that one weird, spazzy kid you once knew who'd always go into quivering, [[helpless]] rages on the playground); Garofalo's desire to avenge her father. This childlike belief that a sense of justice and goodness will always make the world a better place, is the true appeal of super-hero comics; and underneath its parodic exterior, "Mystery Men" shows us why these hackneyed comic-book tropes matter to so many.

It never really gels into a satisfying whole, due to the huge number of half-baked subplots (romance, family life, conflicts within the team, etc.), but the main plot is such loopy fun that it makes up for that. The fact that it's supposed to be good, nonsensical fun seems to be lost on some of the reviewers here, so I'll issue a caveat: if you're the type of viewer who finds his enjoyment of an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon ruined by the unexplained and illogical ("Am I to believe this is some sort of.. *snort*... _magic_ xylophone?"), then you are far too literal-minded and humorless for this film. Go rent a Sandler film instead.

(7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Visually speaking, this [[film]] is stunning. It has some delightful black comedic moments. But on the whole, the plot is very clichéd, as is its [[seeming]] [[message]]. If you're a fan of over-the-top violence in mainstream movies like hostel or saw, you'll love it. If you're looking for something at all high-brow, steer away. I saw it as part of the edinburgh film festival 06, and I only chose it because I was looking for something disturbing. Ultimately, it isn't disturbing. [[Just]] [[grinding]] and [[unpleasant]] to [[sit]] through. If you genuinely want to be challenged, go see something like The Lost. If you want to be grossed out, or tell your friends about a really messed up film, then this is for you. Visually speaking, this [[filmmaking]] is stunning. It has some delightful black comedic moments. But on the whole, the plot is very clichéd, as is its [[evident]] [[messages]]. If you're a fan of over-the-top violence in mainstream movies like hostel or saw, you'll love it. If you're looking for something at all high-brow, steer away. I saw it as part of the edinburgh film festival 06, and I only chose it because I was looking for something disturbing. Ultimately, it isn't disturbing. [[Jen]] [[milling]] and [[nasty]] to [[assis]] through. If you genuinely want to be challenged, go see something like The Lost. If you want to be grossed out, or tell your friends about a really messed up film, then this is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only redeeming quality of this overlong miscast melodrama is the scenery of southern France and the voice of Nana Mascouri singing the theme song. Stephanie Powers is miscast and betrayed by a phony accent. As has been pointed out, she is too old to play an 18 year old and looks far too young as a grandmother with a college age granddaughter? Lee Remick is good although she also is ageless in her later years. The talented Joanna Lumley is under utilized and also manages to look forever young when her middle aged son (Robert Urich) finally marries Grandma Stephanie Powers. Stacey Keach's ceaseless arrogance makes you wonder what these women saw in him. Don't know how any viewer could relate to his excessive portrayal? The most credible performance is given by Ian Richardson, who makes the rest of the cast look like rank amateurs. It strains credulity that the handsome male suitors in this epic would remain ever single while they patiently await the subject of their affections to finally consent to accept them. Can anybody believe that handsome Robert Urich would remain single for decades waiting for Stephanie Powers to finally accept his endless marriage proposals? The WW2 engagement between the Wehrmacht and the Marquis is laughable. To begin with, the Germans did not occupy the Provence section of France until late in the war, it was controlled by the Vichy French puppet government. We see the French resistance staging a daylight raid on Mistral's villa to steal sheets after which they all lounge under a bridge waiting for a lumbering truckload of Nazi troops to surprise and annihilate them? If you want to see a well acted mini-series set in a foreign country, don't watch Mistral's Daughter. A far better alternative would be The Thorn Birds. --------------------------------------------- Result 2774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Seeing as the vote average was pretty low, and the fact that the clerk in the video store thought it was "just OK", I didn't have much expectations when renting this film.

But contrary to the above, I enjoyed it a lot. This is a charming movie. It didn't need to grow on me, I enjoyed it from the beginning. Mel Brooks gives a great performance as the lead character, I think somewhat different from his usual persona in his movies.

There's not a lot of knockout jokes or something like that, but there are some rather hilarious scenes, and overall this is a very enjoyable and very easy to watch film.

Very recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Fine performances and art [[direction]] do not a [[good]] [[movie]] [[make]]. This movie is so [[grim]] and [[depressing]], I [[could]] feel [[absolutely]] no [[joy]] at the "[[happy]]" [[ending]] [[involving]] the union strike. The [[attempts]] at [[humor]] [[involving]] Lake's [[pregnancy]] are [[absolutely]] [[disastrous]], and any movie [[involving]] a Baldwin [[brother]] already has a [[strike]] against it. On a positive [[note]], [[Lang]] is [[still]] one of America's [[great]] [[underrated]] [[actors]], he alone [[almost]] makes this worth keeping in the VCR. I [[give]] this a 4. Fine performances and art [[orientation]] do not a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] [[deliver]]. This movie is so [[somber]] and [[demoralizing]], I [[would]] feel [[totally]] no [[gladness]] at the "[[gratified]]" [[ended]] [[involve]] the union strike. The [[attempting]] at [[mood]] [[encompassing]] Lake's [[childbirth]] are [[entirely]] [[tragic]], and any movie [[implicating]] a Baldwin [[sibling]] already has a [[hitting]] against it. On a positive [[notes]], [[Lengthy]] is [[again]] one of America's [[large]] [[underestimated]] [[protagonists]], he alone [[practically]] makes this worth keeping in the VCR. I [[confer]] this a 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 2776 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Good Deaths. Good Mask. Cool Axe. Good Looking Girls....But Watch Out!!! No Plot and Little Scares Completely lower it's Standards. They Tried to make an "I Know what you Did Last Summer", but ended up making A "Scream". But Hey, What do people Expect From a Horror Movie? Answers Totally Vary. Rent It If You Want, but I Regret Ever Seeing It. --------------------------------------------- Result 2777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the worst adaption of a classic story I have ever seen. They needlessly modernize it and some points are actually just sick.

The songs rarely move along the story. They seem to be thrown in at random. The flying scene with Marley is pointless and ludicrous.

It's not only one of the worst movies I've seen, but it is definitely the worst musical I've ever seen.

It's probably only considered a classic because "A Christmas Carol" is such a classic story. Just because the original story was a classic doesn't mean that some cheap adaption is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Several]] posters have [[quoted]] Renoir voicing his [[desire]] to [[make]] a [[film]] [[showing]] Ingrid Bergman [[smiling]] to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all [[whilst]] the [[harsh]] reality is that only a [[select]] few [[got]] to do so. At this [[stage]] of her [[career]] Bergman couldn't get [[arrested]]; in 1949 she [[left]] Hollywood to make a [[picture]] in [[Europe]], [[fell]] for [[director]] Roberto Rossellini and never looked forward. After five turkeys in [[Italy]] she was [[probably]] ready to [[open]] a vein but [[within]] the [[year]], after [[making]] this for Renoir, she was back where she [[belonged]] and with an [[Oscar]] to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three [[movies]] that Renoir made in [[color]] around this time and on [[balance]] it's better than The [[Golden]] [[Coach]], which isn't hard, and about [[even]] with French Can Can. Renoir [[probably]] figured that with so much going for her Bergman could [[get]] away with a [[couple]] of wooden [[leading]] [[men]] and Renoir [[picked]] two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid [[mahogany]] in both [[cases]]. The plot is actually [[based]] on a [[real]] [[incident]] in French [[history]] but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and [[concentrate]] on [[replicating]] the [[paintings]] of his [[father]] in set up after set up. In its pastel [[colors]] it [[resembles]] another [[film]] of the [[period]] Les [[Grandes]] Manouvres which is no [[bad]] [[thing]]. [[All]] in all it [[remains]] a [[pleasant]] trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress. [[Dissimilar]] posters have [[mentioned]] Renoir voicing his [[desired]] to [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]] [[exhibiting]] Ingrid Bergman [[grinning]] to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all [[notwithstanding]] the [[stringent]] reality is that only a [[opt]] few [[did]] to do so. At this [[phase]] of her [[careers]] Bergman couldn't get [[apprehended]]; in 1949 she [[walkout]] Hollywood to make a [[photographs]] in [[European]], [[dipped]] for [[headmaster]] Roberto Rossellini and never looked forward. After five turkeys in [[Italia]] she was [[assuredly]] ready to [[opens]] a vein but [[inside]] the [[annum]], after [[doing]] this for Renoir, she was back where she [[owned]] and with an [[Oskar]] to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three [[films]] that Renoir made in [[coloration]] around this time and on [[equilibrium]] it's better than The [[Dore]] [[Trainer]], which isn't hard, and about [[yet]] with French Can Can. Renoir [[admittedly]] figured that with so much going for her Bergman could [[obtain]] away with a [[coupling]] of wooden [[culminating]] [[mens]] and Renoir [[selecting]] two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid [[gaul]] in both [[lawsuits]]. The plot is actually [[base]] on a [[veritable]] [[incidents]] in French [[stories]] but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and [[concentrating]] on [[replicated]] the [[painting]] of his [[pere]] in set up after set up. In its pastel [[dye]] it [[reminds]] another [[cinematography]] of the [[periods]] Les [[Grands]] Manouvres which is no [[horrid]] [[stuff]]. [[Entire]] in all it [[leftovers]] a [[nice]] trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress. --------------------------------------------- Result 2779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I first read Pearl S Buck's splendid novel in my ninth grade history class, and I enjoyed every thrilling page of it. It was almost inevitable that Hollywood would get hold of it, and [[considering]] that it was made in 1937, the [[results]] are [[excellent]].

Certain things have to be accepted: in 1937 there was no question of casting Asian actors in a major Hollywood film. In a way this renders the end product rather more interesting than if they had been able to use a more authentic-looking cast.

With that obstacle to overcome, executive producer Irving Thalberg and director Sidney Franklin (among others) took the trouble to hand-pick a splendid and stellar cast. Paul Muni plays Wang Lung. Muni was at the peak of his powers as an actor during this period, and could very nearly play anything he put his mind to. Once you get past the makeup (it's good, but no one is going to really mistake him for a Chinese man), his performance has all the verisimilitude of his best work.

Then there is Luise Rainer. Coming off an Oscar win the previous year for her performance in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD, the Viennese actress's star was on the rise and she was given the plum role of O-lan despite her lack of experience in Hollywood. Her performance won her a second consecutive Oscar, the first time in history that happened.

Much criticism has been leveled at Rainer's performance, and her Oscar win here. She has been [[called]] wooden and one-note. There is a small grain of truth in that. HOWEVER, that being said, all you need to do is go back to the book. For Rainer, though not Chinese, played O-lan pretty much as Buck wrote her; it is in [[fact]] a [[splendid]] performance, and one of the [[best]] transfers from book to screen I have ever witnessed.

As for the rest of the [[cast]], well this was MGM. They had the [[biggest]] roster of stars and [[character]] actors in Hollywood at the time, and a [[big]] budget to pay for the [[best]], and in the [[end]] they got the [[best]].

The [[film]] softens Wang Lung's [[marriage]] to O-lan somewhat. [[In]] the novel, with wealth come the lusts of the flesh and he [[takes]] on a concubine, a move which devastates his wife but her feelings as a mere woman do not concern him. In the film, a contrite Wang Lung returns to his wife on her deathbed the two pearls he had taken from her years before, realizing too late that she was his true love.

Corny, yes. But that's Hollywood. Considering the obstacles they were up against, the film might well have opened to screams of laughter. But despite the noticeable dearth of real Asians in the cast, this film has worn surprisingly well with the passage of seventy-three years. In fact the most amazing thing about this film is how good it is, when it might so easily have been a disaster. I first read Pearl S Buck's splendid novel in my ninth grade history class, and I enjoyed every thrilling page of it. It was almost inevitable that Hollywood would get hold of it, and [[reviewing]] that it was made in 1937, the [[consequences]] are [[wondrous]].

Certain things have to be accepted: in 1937 there was no question of casting Asian actors in a major Hollywood film. In a way this renders the end product rather more interesting than if they had been able to use a more authentic-looking cast.

With that obstacle to overcome, executive producer Irving Thalberg and director Sidney Franklin (among others) took the trouble to hand-pick a splendid and stellar cast. Paul Muni plays Wang Lung. Muni was at the peak of his powers as an actor during this period, and could very nearly play anything he put his mind to. Once you get past the makeup (it's good, but no one is going to really mistake him for a Chinese man), his performance has all the verisimilitude of his best work.

Then there is Luise Rainer. Coming off an Oscar win the previous year for her performance in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD, the Viennese actress's star was on the rise and she was given the plum role of O-lan despite her lack of experience in Hollywood. Her performance won her a second consecutive Oscar, the first time in history that happened.

Much criticism has been leveled at Rainer's performance, and her Oscar win here. She has been [[telephoned]] wooden and one-note. There is a small grain of truth in that. HOWEVER, that being said, all you need to do is go back to the book. For Rainer, though not Chinese, played O-lan pretty much as Buck wrote her; it is in [[facto]] a [[wondrous]] performance, and one of the [[bestest]] transfers from book to screen I have ever witnessed.

As for the rest of the [[casting]], well this was MGM. They had the [[bigger]] roster of stars and [[personage]] actors in Hollywood at the time, and a [[major]] budget to pay for the [[nicest]], and in the [[termination]] they got the [[bestest]].

The [[kino]] softens Wang Lung's [[wedlock]] to O-lan somewhat. [[Among]] the novel, with wealth come the lusts of the flesh and he [[pick]] on a concubine, a move which devastates his wife but her feelings as a mere woman do not concern him. In the film, a contrite Wang Lung returns to his wife on her deathbed the two pearls he had taken from her years before, realizing too late that she was his true love.

Corny, yes. But that's Hollywood. Considering the obstacles they were up against, the film might well have opened to screams of laughter. But despite the noticeable dearth of real Asians in the cast, this film has worn surprisingly well with the passage of seventy-three years. In fact the most amazing thing about this film is how good it is, when it might so easily have been a disaster. --------------------------------------------- Result 2780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I had been [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] Dreamgirls for [[quite]] a while...what with all it's raving [[reviews]], [[nominations]] and media attention. And I [[must]] [[say]], the first quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black [[music]] scene back then. However, as the [[movie]] wore on, me and my [[whole]] [[family]] were [[bored]] out of our [[wits]]. The singing just kept coming, one after the other. I mean seriously, just one more music number and it would have broke even with [[RENT]].

Furthermore, I noticed [[hardly]] any [[character]] [[development]] in any of the characters; I just didn't [[care]] what happened to them! [[Even]] when Eddie Murphy's character died of a [[drug]] overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The [[characters]] were [[given]] a [[flimsy]] [[background]] about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there [[personalities]] were not revealed enough to [[draw]] me in.

Finally, the conflict was [[simply]] not [[significant]] enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the [[lack]] of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were [[wonderful]] [[movies]] in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would [[best]] suit [[someone]] who doesn't [[really]] [[care]] about an overall story, yet would enjoy two hours of entertaining and fun [[singing]] performances. I had been [[searching]] forward to [[see]] Dreamgirls for [[pretty]] a while...what with all it's raving [[scrutinize]], [[appointees]] and media attention. And I [[gotta]] [[told]], the first quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black [[musica]] scene back then. However, as the [[films]] wore on, me and my [[overall]] [[families]] were [[drilled]] out of our [[spirits]]. The singing just kept coming, one after the other. I mean seriously, just one more music number and it would have broke even with [[LEASED]].

Furthermore, I noticed [[practically]] any [[characters]] [[evolution]] in any of the characters; I just didn't [[healthcare]] what happened to them! [[Yet]] when Eddie Murphy's character died of a [[medication]] overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The [[trait]] were [[gave]] a [[weak]] [[context]] about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there [[personages]] were not revealed enough to [[attracts]] me in.

Finally, the conflict was [[mere]] not [[considerable]] enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the [[imperfection]] of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were [[sumptuous]] [[film]] in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would [[optimum]] suit [[everyone]] who doesn't [[truly]] [[caring]] about an overall story, yet would enjoy two hours of entertaining and fun [[sings]] performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 2781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I agree with everyone who says that this series was the best of the 'spy' genre. My husband and I were captivated by it when it first aired in the US and watched every episode. I tried at that time to purchase the series (I did tape all of it) but was told by WGBH that it was not available. I even considered writing to Ian Holm to see if he might have a copy! Like others, I purchased and read the Deighton series (in part to understand the complicated plot.) If the original version ever comes available on DVD, I'll be among the first in line to snap up a copy. Ian Holm's portrayal of the vulnerable but courageous Bernard Samson was amazing. (He is always amazing.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Carol, the young [[girl]] at the [[center]] of the story, is [[transplanted]] to a [[foreign]] [[land]], [[Spain]], at the [[height]] of the [[Civil]] War [[conflict]] in the late 30s. [[For]] this girl, everything is [[new]], in it's foreignness. The [[war]] and her father are her [[constant]] worries, while she has to immerse herself in a provincial [[culture]] that is [[years]] [[behind]] what she has in [[New]] York.

Imanol Uribe directs this [[film]] by the [[numbers]]. Carol's [[family]] is [[obviously]] divided, while Carol's [[mother]] is married to [[someone]] that is an [[air]] force pilot with the leftist faction, the [[rest]] of the family's sympathies are with the Franco and the fascists that won the [[conflict]].

The story adds nothing to what has already been told, much better, but it's an [[easy]] [[film]] to watch. [[Northern]] Spain's [[magnificent]] [[landscape]] is [[shown]]. Don't [[expect]] a [[lot]] of [[action]] since most of what [[happens]] revolves [[around]] [[Carol]] and the young boys she befriends.

[[Clara]] Lago plays [[Carol]] with [[sincerity]] and innocence. Maria Barranco is Carol's [[mother]] Aurora, the one that went away to America. [[Rosa]] Maria Sarda is Maruja, the [[teacher]] who befriends [[Carol]]. [[Carmelo]] [[Gomez]], plays [[Alfonso]], the [[man]] that Aurora left [[behind]] when she [[left]] for [[America]]. This actor, who [[usually]] has lead roles in most Spanish [[films]], doesn't have anything to do, as he remains an [[enigma]] throughout the movie. Carol, the young [[dame]] at the [[centro]] of the story, is [[grafting]] to a [[alien]] [[earth]], [[Spaniards]], at the [[altitude]] of the [[Civilian]] War [[dispute]] in the late 30s. [[In]] this girl, everything is [[novel]], in it's foreignness. The [[warfare]] and her father are her [[persistent]] worries, while she has to immerse herself in a provincial [[cultivation]] that is [[ages]] [[backside]] what she has in [[Newer]] York.

Imanol Uribe directs this [[cinematography]] by the [[figures]]. Carol's [[families]] is [[apparently]] divided, while Carol's [[mommy]] is married to [[person]] that is an [[airline]] force pilot with the leftist faction, the [[resting]] of the family's sympathies are with the Franco and the fascists that won the [[conflicts]].

The story adds nothing to what has already been told, much better, but it's an [[uncomplicated]] [[movies]] to watch. [[North]] Spain's [[superb]] [[scenery]] is [[showed]]. Don't [[hopes]] a [[batch]] of [[measures]] since most of what [[arises]] revolves [[throughout]] [[Carole]] and the young boys she befriends.

[[Claire]] Lago plays [[Carrol]] with [[candor]] and innocence. Maria Barranco is Carol's [[mommy]] Aurora, the one that went away to America. [[Pink]] Maria Sarda is Maruja, the [[teachers]] who befriends [[Carole]]. [[Camilo]] [[Fernandez]], plays [[Alphonse]], the [[hombre]] that Aurora left [[posterior]] when she [[gauche]] for [[Americas]]. This actor, who [[typically]] has lead roles in most Spanish [[cinematography]], doesn't have anything to do, as he remains an [[riddle]] throughout the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] When the scientist and family man Matt Winslow (Robert Urich) finally accepts the [[invitation]] to [[work]] the Micro-Digitech [[Corporation]] in a space suit project, he moves with his [[beloved]] wife [[Patricia]] (Joanna Cassidy) and their son Robbie (Barret Oliver) and daughter Chrissy ([[Soleil]] Moon Frye) to a [[huge]] [[modern]] [[house]] in the [[corporation]] compound. They meet their [[friend]] Tom [[Peterson]] (Joe Regalbuto) and his family [[completely]] [[adapted]] to the new lifestyle, and Tom [[invites]] the Winslow [[family]] to [[join]] the Steaming [[Springs]] Country Club. [[Tom]] [[tries]] to [[seduce]] Matt telling him that [[every]] member of the club has a meteoric [[professional]] [[ascension]] in Micro-Digitech, but Matt is not [[tempted]] with the [[offer]]. [[Later]] he is introduced to the [[director]] of the club, Jessica Jones (Susan Lucci) that befriends Patricia and [[convinces]] her to join the club with her children. Matt feels the changing in the [[behavior]] of his [[family]] and decides to [[investigate]] the club, [[finding]] an evil [[secret]] about [[Jessica]] and the [[members]].

In the 80's, when I [[saw]] "[[Invitation]] to Hell", I liked this [[movie]] that partially [[recalls]] "The Stepford Wives", with people changing the behavior in a suburban compound. I have just [[seen]] it today, and I found a [[great]] metaphoric message against the big [[corporations]], when people literally sell their souls to the devil to climb positions and earn higher salaries. I am not sure whether the author intended to give this interpretation to the [[story]], but I believe it fits [[perfectly]]. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Convite [[Para]] o [[Inferno]]" ("Invitation to [[Hell]]") When the scientist and family man Matt Winslow (Robert Urich) finally accepts the [[invite]] to [[collaboration]] the Micro-Digitech [[Companies]] in a space suit project, he moves with his [[sweetie]] wife [[Pat]] (Joanna Cassidy) and their son Robbie (Barret Oliver) and daughter Chrissy ([[Sunlight]] Moon Frye) to a [[large]] [[fashionable]] [[housing]] in the [[businesses]] compound. They meet their [[boyfriend]] Tom [[Petersen]] (Joe Regalbuto) and his family [[fully]] [[tailoring]] to the new lifestyle, and Tom [[invite]] the Winslow [[families]] to [[participates]] the Steaming [[Fountains]] Country Club. [[Tum]] [[endeavour]] to [[tempt]] Matt telling him that [[each]] member of the club has a meteoric [[occupational]] [[ascent]] in Micro-Digitech, but Matt is not [[attempted]] with the [[offering]]. [[Afterward]] he is introduced to the [[headmaster]] of the club, Jessica Jones (Susan Lucci) that befriends Patricia and [[persuades]] her to join the club with her children. Matt feels the changing in the [[behaviour]] of his [[families]] and decides to [[researches]] the club, [[conclusions]] an evil [[secretive]] about [[Jennifer]] and the [[member]].

In the 80's, when I [[observed]] "[[Invite]] to Hell", I liked this [[films]] that partially [[remind]] "The Stepford Wives", with people changing the behavior in a suburban compound. I have just [[saw]] it today, and I found a [[wondrous]] metaphoric message against the big [[entrepreneurial]], when people literally sell their souls to the devil to climb positions and earn higher salaries. I am not sure whether the author intended to give this interpretation to the [[tale]], but I believe it fits [[abundantly]]. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Convite [[Paras]] o [[Hell]]" ("Invitation to [[Dammit]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 2784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My Tutor Friend is a well scripted romance comedy movie that has something similar to My Sassy Girl.. there's no kissing/sex scenes. Hollywood should learn more from Korean productions. Sex is not always required in a good romantic movie.

The movie is of light hearted tone with occasional cartoon CG scenes blended into the movie. I like the part when Ji-Hoon almost kissed Su-Wan. The funniest moment is when Ji-Hoon punched Su-Wan's first love because he dumped Su-Wan for another girl and he is going to be a father soon. How he became a father was revealed in the next scene, which brings smiles to the audience.

Mao points: 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I watched the un-aired [[episodes]] online and I was so sad that the show won't be back. It had the [[best]] cast of [[mature]], [[talented]] actors and an [[amazing]] [[chemistry]]. It [[seemed]] like all the actors are personal friends in [[real]] [[life]]. Towards the end the show became engaging, sexy and [[highly]] watchable. Of course, some of the [[story]] lines are not [[realistic]], so what... The [[characters]] are all [[likable]] and you [[root]] for them. The show reminded me a [[cross]] between 2 other favorites: "Sex and the [[City]]" and "Felicity". Big kudos to all the cast. [[Note]] to ABC execs: [[Nielsen]] ratings [[reports]] do not show you true results. The [[show]] audience will [[mostly]] [[record]] it. I've been very disappointed with [[major]] [[networks]] for flooding us with reality-TV or [[teenage]] oriented shows. Why to [[get]] a mature, thoughtful, well-acted [[material]] we have to [[switch]] to HBO or FX? I can only [[thank]] the [[network]] for putting the rest of the episodes online. The [[new]] [[stream]] media will gain more and more popularity [[among]] viewers. I watched the un-aired [[spells]] online and I was so sad that the show won't be back. It had the [[better]] cast of [[adult]], [[gifted]] actors and an [[noteworthy]] [[chem]]. It [[appeared]] like all the actors are personal friends in [[actual]] [[lives]]. Towards the end the show became engaging, sexy and [[heavily]] watchable. Of course, some of the [[stories]] lines are not [[practical]], so what... The [[attribute]] are all [[likeable]] and you [[origin]] for them. The show reminded me a [[rist]] between 2 other favorites: "Sex and the [[Town]]" and "Felicity". Big kudos to all the cast. [[Notes]] to ABC execs: [[Nelson]] ratings [[report]] do not show you true results. The [[spectacle]] audience will [[essentially]] [[recording]] it. I've been very disappointed with [[important]] [[network]] for flooding us with reality-TV or [[adolescent]] oriented shows. Why to [[obtain]] a mature, thoughtful, well-acted [[materials]] we have to [[switching]] to HBO or FX? I can only [[appreciation]] the [[grids]] for putting the rest of the episodes online. The [[newer]] [[creeks]] media will gain more and more popularity [[between]] viewers. --------------------------------------------- Result 2786 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This early John Wayne Lone Star western has a bit more going for it than the run-of-the-mill oaters Wayne had been making for Lone Star up until that time. For one, it has his old friend Paul Fix in it; Fix, being a much better actor then the standard Lone Star villain, brings a much needed professionalism to the surroundings instead of the usual hesitant line-readings often delivered in these oaters. The plot, about mistaken identity, payroll robbery and murder, is as trite and perfunctory as you'd expect it to be in a 1930s low-budget western, but Wayne's strapping good looks, easygoing charm and way with a line go a long way to making this more enjoyable. Plump, balding Eddy Chandler isn't quite believable as Wayne's womanizing "partner", and there's a running gag about something that happens whenever Chandler and Wayne are about to get into a fistfight that grows tiresome. On the other hand, Wayne's love interest is played by none other than Mary Kornman, the little "Mary" of the early "Little Rascals" fame. She is a grown-up 20-year-old now, blonde and cute as a button. Most of Wayne's leading ladies in these Lone Star/Monogram "B's" were fairly bland and colorless, but Mary is perky, cute and, yes, sexy. There's a scene in the general store, where she works, in which Wayne asks her to get him a bottle of "nerve tonic", which happens to be on the top shelf, so she has to get a ladder and climb up to the top shelf. Wayne's ogling her pert little backside as she ascends the steps, then again as she comes down, then again a few minuter later when he asks her to climb up and get him another bottle is surprisingly racy for a film made in 1935. Wayne makes no attempt to hide the fact that he is definitely checking out her butt. Anyway, it's an interesting little "B", not great, but not as choppy and random as many of his LoneStar productions of the time. The final gunfight isn't handled all that well, and Chandler gets somewhat irritating after a while, but all in all, it's worth a look, if only to see a cute and sexy Mary Kornman. --------------------------------------------- Result 2787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I really don't understand why people [[get]] so [[upset]] and pan this [[movie]]! Remember folks, this is an SNL [[movie]], not anything that is supposed to be [[unpredictable]] and original in plot or [[direction]]! The [[Ladies]] Man is a hilarious [[movie]], albeit stupid at times, with a wacked-out cast and, as usual, [[WONDERFUL]] performances by Will Ferrel and Tim [[Meadows]]. Yes some of the jokes are stupid, and yes, the characters are [[unbelievable]] but its [[comedy]]! I really don't understand how anyone couldn't laugh a lot during this [[hilarious]] [[film]]. Anyway, all I ask is that people take this as it is--an SNL, silly and irreverent [[comedy]]. Nothing that will win awards, but nonetheless, some modern comedy gold. "10-4 Apricot!" I really don't understand why people [[obtain]] so [[infuriated]] and pan this [[kino]]! Remember folks, this is an SNL [[cinematography]], not anything that is supposed to be [[unforeseeable]] and original in plot or [[directions]]! The [[Dames]] Man is a hilarious [[kino]], albeit stupid at times, with a wacked-out cast and, as usual, [[WONDROUS]] performances by Will Ferrel and Tim [[Grasslands]]. Yes some of the jokes are stupid, and yes, the characters are [[inconceivable]] but its [[charade]]! I really don't understand how anyone couldn't laugh a lot during this [[humorous]] [[flick]]. Anyway, all I ask is that people take this as it is--an SNL, silly and irreverent [[travesty]]. Nothing that will win awards, but nonetheless, some modern comedy gold. "10-4 Apricot!" --------------------------------------------- Result 2788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I couldn't not recommend a Christmas movie more than this worthless piece of drivel (trust me, double negatives are required here -- it's that bad). This film was in trouble from the opening credits when it was revealed that the screenwriter was the same person as the songwriter. The musical numbers are all far too long and none of them any good ("Thank You Very Much" has a decent melody, but the lyrics are stupid beyond words). I would gladly bear the chains worn by Scrooge in the film's bizarre hell sequence than sit through this insult to movie musicals again.

The only entertaining part of this movie (completely unintentional by the way) involves Alec Guinness as Jacob Marley. Dressed in a silly powder white costume, Guinness foppishly prances through his scenes in what was either an attempt to make it appear as though he was floating like a ghost, or to show his utter disdain with having to be in this dreadful movie. Albert Finney, meanwhile, blends the best of Alistar Sim and Charles Laughton to create his hopelessly loathsome character of Quasimodo/Scrooge. Finney's Scrooge is so hideous a person, it's impossible to believe his transformation.

Steer clear of this abomination of filmmaking at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Well, if you are one of those Katana's film-nuts (just like me) you [[sure]] will [[appreciate]] this metaphysical Katana swinging [[blood]] spitting samurai action flick.

Starring Tadanobu Asano (Vital, Barren [[Illusion]]) & [[Ryu]] Daisuke (Kagemusha). This samurai war between Heiki's clan versus Genji's clan [[touch]] the zenith in the final [[showdown]] at Gojo bridge. The body-count is countless.

Demons, magic swords, Shinto priests [[versus]] Buddhist monks and the [[beautiful]] [[visions]] provided by maestro Sogo Ishii will do the rest.

A good Japanese [[flick]] for a rainy [[summer]] [[night]]. Well, if you are one of those Katana's film-nuts (just like me) you [[convinced]] will [[thankful]] this metaphysical Katana swinging [[chrissakes]] spitting samurai action flick.

Starring Tadanobu Asano (Vital, Barren [[Chimera]]) & [[Yoo]] Daisuke (Kagemusha). This samurai war between Heiki's clan versus Genji's clan [[toque]] the zenith in the final [[standoff]] at Gojo bridge. The body-count is countless.

Demons, magic swords, Shinto priests [[vs]] Buddhist monks and the [[wondrous]] [[notions]] provided by maestro Sogo Ishii will do the rest.

A good Japanese [[gesture]] for a rainy [[hsia]] [[soir]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Zombie [[Bloodbath]] is a movie made by zombie [[fans]] for [[zombie]] [[fans]] with a [[true]] [[love]] of the Horror genre. As I understand it from the commentary and things I have read, it was made during the huge Midwest flood of 1993 when half of Missouri was underwater. Buildings were under water. cars and houses were underwater. One article said that zombies and the crew from this movie would help sandbag the river after shooting each day. The [[fact]] this movie got made at all is a miracle. It is like a [[huge]] mashing of [[every]] zombie movie ever made put through a Troma filter. It is a party movie to [[enjoy]] with friends who like loads of splatter and goofy characters. And it is fast paced and energetic and really funny.

A toxic spill accident in a nuclear power facility causes people to melt down or turn into zombies. The local Government covers it up, tears down the factory and builds houses over it. Some ground shifting (?) causes a cave opening to develop and some new residents find the cave and unleash the undead on the newly built community. From there it just gets crazy and gory and fun.

I have read these reviews on here a few times. And it seems obvious to me that the same person attacked this fun little [[movie]] three times as a different reviewer, using fake names. They use the same words and sentences. Zombie [[Bloodbath]] is cheap. It is raw. It has some bad acting. So does half the movies made. There is much much WORSE out there than this [[fun]] [[movie]]. If you hate this film so much, don't buy it. There is no need for personal attacks and to call the crew or cast "Trailer Trash." And it is obvious you are not from Australia or England. It is just upsetting that this [[great]] service, the IMDb does not catch people using it just to trash others. There are bad reviews and good reviews, and I don't mind those. I give both bad and good reviews myself. But it is painfully obvious that some fool just wants to use this [[forum]] to personally attack the director of this [[movie]]. Sad.

Some of these so called "Reviewers" even basically sue their "review" just to promote their own movies. One called this film Boring - well, love it or hate it, one thing you can NEVER say about this film is that it is boring. It moves fast and never has a dull spot.

Oh and this reviewer from The Netherlands??? Um - LIAR. You tried to post this same review at Amazon and it got yanked there. The SAME review only it said it was from Missouri.

This nonsense HAS to stop. Love it or Hate it - give it a real review or type nothing. It is obvious you have not seen the films.

But for the record, I have and though this one is not nearly the best that I have seen, it is far from the worst. And even the worst I would give an actual REVOEW and would not attack the director personally.

Hope this review helps some people see through the stupidity going on here. Zombie [[Bloodletting]] is a movie made by zombie [[amateurs]] for [[ghoul]] [[followers]] with a [[truthful]] [[likes]] of the Horror genre. As I understand it from the commentary and things I have read, it was made during the huge Midwest flood of 1993 when half of Missouri was underwater. Buildings were under water. cars and houses were underwater. One article said that zombies and the crew from this movie would help sandbag the river after shooting each day. The [[facto]] this movie got made at all is a miracle. It is like a [[massive]] mashing of [[any]] zombie movie ever made put through a Troma filter. It is a party movie to [[enjoying]] with friends who like loads of splatter and goofy characters. And it is fast paced and energetic and really funny.

A toxic spill accident in a nuclear power facility causes people to melt down or turn into zombies. The local Government covers it up, tears down the factory and builds houses over it. Some ground shifting (?) causes a cave opening to develop and some new residents find the cave and unleash the undead on the newly built community. From there it just gets crazy and gory and fun.

I have read these reviews on here a few times. And it seems obvious to me that the same person attacked this fun little [[kino]] three times as a different reviewer, using fake names. They use the same words and sentences. Zombie [[Butchery]] is cheap. It is raw. It has some bad acting. So does half the movies made. There is much much WORSE out there than this [[amusing]] [[kino]]. If you hate this film so much, don't buy it. There is no need for personal attacks and to call the crew or cast "Trailer Trash." And it is obvious you are not from Australia or England. It is just upsetting that this [[wondrous]] service, the IMDb does not catch people using it just to trash others. There are bad reviews and good reviews, and I don't mind those. I give both bad and good reviews myself. But it is painfully obvious that some fool just wants to use this [[fora]] to personally attack the director of this [[kino]]. Sad.

Some of these so called "Reviewers" even basically sue their "review" just to promote their own movies. One called this film Boring - well, love it or hate it, one thing you can NEVER say about this film is that it is boring. It moves fast and never has a dull spot.

Oh and this reviewer from The Netherlands??? Um - LIAR. You tried to post this same review at Amazon and it got yanked there. The SAME review only it said it was from Missouri.

This nonsense HAS to stop. Love it or Hate it - give it a real review or type nothing. It is obvious you have not seen the films.

But for the record, I have and though this one is not nearly the best that I have seen, it is far from the worst. And even the worst I would give an actual REVOEW and would not attack the director personally.

Hope this review helps some people see through the stupidity going on here. --------------------------------------------- Result 2791 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't like using the word "awful" to describe any work of the cinema for which a great deal of time, effort, talent and money is spent in its creation but Zefferelli's attempt to adapt Charlotte Brontë's novel 'Jane Eyre' is a total waste of time.

The script is lacking in finesse and power, everything explained to the viewer in no uncertain terms, leaving little to the imagination. The lead actors are woefully miscast, clearly hired for their star names, and the musical score drippy and dull. Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt have absolutely no chemistry with one another at all. She is like a wet noodle, worse even than Joan Fontaine, who at least was capable of some modicum of emotional involvement in what should be a story of frustrated passion. And William Hurt acts the entire film on one tone and that tone is flat and devoid of energy. Of course the limp and vapid script does not aid any of these otherwise fine actors in their efforts to bring any whiff of life to this flick.

Joan Plowright's Mrs Fairfax is like some Disney creation who keeps popping up to sweeten scenes in which she would have been best left out.

There is no mystery surrounding the story of Rochester's first wife. The role of the would-be second wife, played like a Barbie Doll by Elle MacPhearson, is an empty cipher.

Fiona Shaw, a very great actress, is completely wasted as Jane's Aunt, Mrs Reed. She would have been better-cast as Mrs Fairfax. Only Amanda Root, as Jane's beloved school teacher, evokes any authentic sympathy or believability.

I saw this version of 'Jane Eyre' after viewing Robert Young's for British television, made in 1997, starring Ciaran Hinds, Samantha Morgan and Gemma Jones. There is no comparison. Young's vital, romantic and deeply moving version is like an exploding nova compared to Zefferelli's wet squib.

I will be interested now to see the 1970 version with Timothy Dalton, about which I've read some very good things on this web-site. I am amazed at how many people liked Zefferelli's Yorkshire picture book.

About all I can say good about this film is that the house is beautiful and the cinematography vividly colored, beyond that it is a complete dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 2792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie is even a big step down [[form]] the typical fare dished out by Bollywood. The performances were [[horrible]]. Even Boman Irani, who [[always]] [[manages]] to [[shine]], goes completely OTT as the villain. The soundtrack is not [[memorable]] [[either]]. And in spite trying [[hard]], the female leads don't [[manage]] to be "sexy". Vivek Oberoi is [[capable]] of far [[better]] [[projects]] while Fardeen Khan seems to be stuck in similar fare for the time being. But this monstrosity is even beneath his limited [[capabilities]] as an actor. Esha Deol and Amrita [[Rao]] are [[horrible]] in [[badly]] [[written]] cliché roles. It's high time for [[Indra]] Kumar to hang up his directorial hat. Hope he never directs another eyesore like this. Future of Hindi movies are in [[better]] hands now. To sum it up, stay far away from waste of celluloid. This movie is even a big step down [[forma]] the typical fare dished out by Bollywood. The performances were [[frightful]]. Even Boman Irani, who [[perpetually]] [[administered]] to [[gloss]], goes completely OTT as the villain. The soundtrack is not [[unforgettable]] [[nor]]. And in spite trying [[stiff]], the female leads don't [[administer]] to be "sexy". Vivek Oberoi is [[able]] of far [[optimum]] [[project]] while Fardeen Khan seems to be stuck in similar fare for the time being. But this monstrosity is even beneath his limited [[abilities]] as an actor. Esha Deol and Amrita [[Rau]] are [[abysmal]] in [[sorely]] [[writes]] cliché roles. It's high time for [[Andra]] Kumar to hang up his directorial hat. Hope he never directs another eyesore like this. Future of Hindi movies are in [[optimum]] hands now. To sum it up, stay far away from waste of celluloid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film is so bad, you can't [[imagine]]. The acting is terrible, even [[worse]] than in third class soap operas. An it is a shame that this movie was the most successful in the past 20 years in Switzerland. The interactions between the soldiers didn't make any [[sense]] at all. The story [[could]] have been taken out from a bravo photo-story, the dialogues were as wooden as Treebeard and the plot holes were bigger than the black hole in the middle of our galaxy. But nowadays it doesn't need much to [[satisfy]] the audience. The actors were [[handsome]] for example the former Miss Switzerland and the main character was even hung ([[woah]]!!) and there certainly was much abuse of drugs. That's real cool man! Particularly for 12 and 13 year old teens. But the media created an atmosphere in witch you was not allowed to reject the film because they manipulated the peer group dynamics by telling implicitly that you are a nerd if you don't go along with the other `sheep' and say.[[yes]] that is exactly what it was like when I was in the army/ that's exactly what I'm going to do when I must go to the army.. to every cheesy action that had to do with drugs and coolness. And don't think I like the army. I was there and I hated it but this film is worse than cleaning up the sticky toilet with a teeth brush (which I was forced to do because I offended an lieutenant) It is not necessary for every film to be sophisticated. Sometimes you only [[want]] to be [[entertained]] for a few hours and forget about problems and I think its not a bad thing. But this kind of films influence teenagers to much by showing them a cool lifestyle which in [[fact]] is only stupid and [[turns]] them into brainless ignorant and egocentric [[idiots]]. But since I now that my opinion isn't very popular I will be quiet now and recommend you to [[avoid]] this [[terrible]] flick at any costs and for that to save your [[wits]]!

2/10

(sorry for my bad English) This film is so bad, you can't [[imagining]]. The acting is terrible, even [[worst]] than in third class soap operas. An it is a shame that this movie was the most successful in the past 20 years in Switzerland. The interactions between the soldiers didn't make any [[sensing]] at all. The story [[did]] have been taken out from a bravo photo-story, the dialogues were as wooden as Treebeard and the plot holes were bigger than the black hole in the middle of our galaxy. But nowadays it doesn't need much to [[cater]] the audience. The actors were [[sumptuous]] for example the former Miss Switzerland and the main character was even hung ([[wow]]!!) and there certainly was much abuse of drugs. That's real cool man! Particularly for 12 and 13 year old teens. But the media created an atmosphere in witch you was not allowed to reject the film because they manipulated the peer group dynamics by telling implicitly that you are a nerd if you don't go along with the other `sheep' and say.[[yep]] that is exactly what it was like when I was in the army/ that's exactly what I'm going to do when I must go to the army.. to every cheesy action that had to do with drugs and coolness. And don't think I like the army. I was there and I hated it but this film is worse than cleaning up the sticky toilet with a teeth brush (which I was forced to do because I offended an lieutenant) It is not necessary for every film to be sophisticated. Sometimes you only [[wanted]] to be [[distracted]] for a few hours and forget about problems and I think its not a bad thing. But this kind of films influence teenagers to much by showing them a cool lifestyle which in [[facto]] is only stupid and [[revolves]] them into brainless ignorant and egocentric [[fools]]. But since I now that my opinion isn't very popular I will be quiet now and recommend you to [[forestall]] this [[scary]] flick at any costs and for that to save your [[minds]]!

2/10

(sorry for my bad English) --------------------------------------------- Result 2794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This has got to be the cheesiest, stupidest, most retarded monster film of all time. It's a complete joke that this even surfaced into theaters. This is sort of like watching the Loch Ness monster in rural America. This movie deserves to be thrown in a toilet and completely forgotten. John Carradine, shame on you. The people involved in this moronic pile of trash need to be lobotomized. Wait! Maybe I'm giving them too much credit. I'm sure they were lobotomized before the filming. How else can one explain the utter and sheer stupidity that this bucket of crap contains. Don't waste a minute of your life watching this. Don't even waste your time sending a review. --------------------------------------------- Result 2795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a great film Classic from the 40's and well produced. There are very dramatic scenes in this film with John Garfield,(Al Schmid),"Force of Evil",'48 and Dane Clark,(Lee Diamond),"Last Rites",'88, fighting the Japs during WWII being completely surrounded and with only one machine-gun. When Al Schmid was able to go home after being wounded with a horrible injury, his problems just started to begin with his family and engaged girl friend. Dane Clark gave an outstanding supporting role as Lee Diamond, who did everything to help his buddy Al get his life together again. There is never a complete victory to War and lets not forget all the Brave Wounded Military personnel in Veterans Hospitals from All the Wars and our present Iraq Vets! --------------------------------------------- Result 2796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[film]] actually [[manages]] to be [[mindless]] enjoyment for 2/3 of the journey. Sadly, the [[film]] [[ends]] up being too '[[confused]].' [[While]] I know some of the plot contrivances are standard of '[[buddy]] cop' [[films]] I got drawn in to the [[characters]] who foil each other brilliantly but in the [[end]] the [[film]] relies too much on chase sequences as a [[crutch]] and I [[lost]] interest.

The filmmakers did a [[great]] job of getting the [[characters]] [[alone]] and doing their own thing and we got to [[see]] who they are and [[identified]] with both cops [[early]] on. We formed our own opinion instead of being force fed a view of them through constant bickering.

In the end there is too much going on and it detracts greatly from what could've been an enjoyable piece of escapism. Here's what's concerning Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) at the end of the film:

1. His real estate deals 2. His affair with a radio psychic 3. He's being investigated by internal affairs 4. The homicide investigation

If you add in Casey's concerns you fond out he wants to be an actor and avenge his father's death. Now some of these things do come together and even come together well but all the plot elements come together amidst this bogus chase that is so long and [[pathetic]] that I hardly have time to break my ennui and give a crap about what just happen. The impressive screenwriting acrobatics cannot overcome the bad filmmaking.

As if a ridiculous chase sequence wasn't bad enough, one which has four separate sections and could last close to half an hour, wasn't bad [[enough]], Joe Gavilan fields calls about his real estate deal while chasing the perpetrator with a gun. All these extra-curricular plot lines and jokes make it absolutely [[meaningless]] to me whether or not the criminal gets caught. We already forgot or no longer [[care]] about the murder plot at this point because multiple plot-lines and eye candy of the chases have numbed us beyond all comprehension.

[[While]] I [[could]] go on about the chases and how they ruin a decent [[story]], I won't. This could've been a very [[enjoyable]] [[formula]] [[film]] but it got much too big for its britches and it turned into a redundant waste of time. Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett actually did rather well and a small appearance by Gladys Knight is worth noting. [[Sadly]] [[none]] of the actors can help this hopelessly misguided film from being forgettable.

While this will probably be better than the [[likes]] of "The Hulk" and "Lara Croft II" that still doesn't make this film good. I once heard that Harrison Ford claimed to only make films that eh thought would make money, I'm not sure if that's true or not. What is true is that to get great box office you don't need a great movie or a great actor, this film has neither in its lead roles. My advice to Harrison Ford would be: to stick to Indiana Jones because at least you can still run. This [[movie]] actually [[runs]] to be [[senseless]] enjoyment for 2/3 of the journey. Sadly, the [[filmmaking]] [[culminates]] up being too '[[muddled]].' [[Though]] I know some of the plot contrivances are standard of '[[pal]] cop' [[kino]] I got drawn in to the [[personage]] who foil each other brilliantly but in the [[terminate]] the [[filmmaking]] relies too much on chase sequences as a [[sugarcane]] and I [[outof]] interest.

The filmmakers did a [[whopping]] job of getting the [[character]] [[merely]] and doing their own thing and we got to [[seeing]] who they are and [[defined]] with both cops [[quickly]] on. We formed our own opinion instead of being force fed a view of them through constant bickering.

In the end there is too much going on and it detracts greatly from what could've been an enjoyable piece of escapism. Here's what's concerning Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) at the end of the film:

1. His real estate deals 2. His affair with a radio psychic 3. He's being investigated by internal affairs 4. The homicide investigation

If you add in Casey's concerns you fond out he wants to be an actor and avenge his father's death. Now some of these things do come together and even come together well but all the plot elements come together amidst this bogus chase that is so long and [[unfortunate]] that I hardly have time to break my ennui and give a crap about what just happen. The impressive screenwriting acrobatics cannot overcome the bad filmmaking.

As if a ridiculous chase sequence wasn't bad enough, one which has four separate sections and could last close to half an hour, wasn't bad [[satisfactorily]], Joe Gavilan fields calls about his real estate deal while chasing the perpetrator with a gun. All these extra-curricular plot lines and jokes make it absolutely [[senseless]] to me whether or not the criminal gets caught. We already forgot or no longer [[healthcare]] about the murder plot at this point because multiple plot-lines and eye candy of the chases have numbed us beyond all comprehension.

[[Although]] I [[did]] go on about the chases and how they ruin a decent [[saga]], I won't. This could've been a very [[agreeable]] [[formulas]] [[flick]] but it got much too big for its britches and it turned into a redundant waste of time. Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett actually did rather well and a small appearance by Gladys Knight is worth noting. [[Regrettably]] [[nos]] of the actors can help this hopelessly misguided film from being forgettable.

While this will probably be better than the [[adores]] of "The Hulk" and "Lara Croft II" that still doesn't make this film good. I once heard that Harrison Ford claimed to only make films that eh thought would make money, I'm not sure if that's true or not. What is true is that to get great box office you don't need a great movie or a great actor, this film has neither in its lead roles. My advice to Harrison Ford would be: to stick to Indiana Jones because at least you can still run. --------------------------------------------- Result 2797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I saw this on cable recently and kinda enjoyed it. I've been reading the comments here and it seems that everyone likes the second half more than the first half. Personally, I enjoyed the [[first]] story (too bad that wasn't extended.) The second story, I thought, was cliched. And that "California Dreaming," if I hear that one more time... Chungking Express is alright, but it's not something that mainstream audiences will catch on to see, like "Crouching Tiger." I saw this on cable recently and kinda enjoyed it. I've been reading the comments here and it seems that everyone likes the second half more than the first half. Personally, I enjoyed the [[fiirst]] story (too bad that wasn't extended.) The second story, I thought, was cliched. And that "California Dreaming," if I hear that one more time... Chungking Express is alright, but it's not something that mainstream audiences will catch on to see, like "Crouching Tiger." --------------------------------------------- Result 2798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] (I'll indicate in this review the point where spoilers [[begin]].) My [[dissatisfaction]] is split: 30% tone-deafness, 70% lackluster writing.

The 30%: I agree with the first commenter's [[synopsis]] about the [[lack]] of diversity in the [[characters]] and scope of the [[stories]]. I was surprised how, this film, at best, woefully shortchanges the real NYC by presenting a collection of people and relationships so narrow as to come [[across]] as if it's inhabited only by the cast of [[Gossip]] [[Girl]] (this is [[coming]] from [[someone]] who [[likes]] [[Gossip]] [[Girl]]). A few minority [[characters]] are written into the stories, but they are [[included]] by [[obligation]], while we can see the gears under the [[film]] so clearly, striving to "be diverse" but [[falling]] ever-so-short.

The 70% is why everything [[falls]] short. [[All]] [[characters]], white plus a few token [[minorities]], are one-dimensional, cardboard cutouts of people [[concepts]]. Worse, their interactions with each other are scripted in such a [[way]] that for each vignette in the [[film]] the [[audience]] is treated to what I'd [[say]] is a "gag": we [[get]] a [[basic]] conceit, then some punchline [[intended]] to be a [[clever]] twist. But even if we [[suspended]] cynicism for a [[moment]] to [[say]], "[[Okay]], that was a surprise"...the [[stories]] are [[still]] not that interesting, because they, too, are [[shallow]]. When you fashion [[stories]] so that their existence [[hinges]] [[solely]] on the unexpectedness of the [[ending]], you're [[writing]] jokes.

Spoilers below...

The [[movie]] [[primarily]] [[tries]] to [[tell]] romantic [[stories]]. That's fine. But [[romance]] is [[amazing]], [[deep]], [[sometimes]] [[complex]]. These "[[romantic]]" [[stories]] each [[feature]] a girl and a [[boy]] who at some point share the same [[location]] and get to [[look]] at each other. [[Words]] [[exchange]], [[thoughts]] are [[projected]] through voice-over, but they too only manage to [[communicate]] to the [[audience]] [[merely]] that one [[person]] is attracted to another.

[[Meaning]], there is no seduction (in the [[broad]] [[sense]]), no [[tension]], and neither [[confrontation]] nor communion between the wills of two [[different]] people [[trying]] to reconcile their existence to [[accommodate]] the Other. The only [[story]] [[involving]] a superficial "[[seduction]]" is [[told]] just so the audience ends up being surprised that the guy (Ethan Hawke) gets outwitted by the girl he's hitting on, who unexpectedly turns out to be a hooker. Sure, his words when trying to pick her up are interesting to hear and we are amused as we'd be if we were next to them, but there is nothing of substance to this story outside of "A then B". So it unfolds, if something like a postcard could "unfold", with all the other tales as well: A then B--That's It, the only point being that these happen to occur "on set" in Manhattan. By the way, the only Brooklyn we see is the Coney Island sketch; the only Queens is the flickering of a train ride taken by a character traveling to the West Village.

It's easy to pick at movies that play into all the common stereotypes of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. _New York, I Love You_, however, deserves to be held to stricter scrutiny because of its title. We expect to see the real New York, and real New Yorkers, but instead we have paraded before us the selected slice of a demographic, its characters flown in from The O.C., plus a few others to make it SEEM as if we are paying attention to diversity. But when we look closer at who those characters are, the whole sham becomes an affront to the very notion of diversity and the ethnicities and cultures the movie shamefully fails to represent.

For example, the story with the Latino man with the little white girl in the park, who gets mistaken by two ladies as her manny (male nanny) when in fact he's the father. Notwithstanding the last scene of this part was unnecessary from a dramatic-construction point of view (it would have been far more interesting to end it when the mother and boyfriend/stepfather are strutting the girl away), it is frankly a bit disgusting that the scene where we learn for sure that the girl's father is Latino ALSO must inform us that he is a sexually desirable dancer. What, the dad can't be just some guy from South America? Now that he's obviously hot, is the audience better prepared to accept that he had a kid with a middle-to-upper-class white woman? Are we that naive as to require such? As if a Mexican construction worker would obviously be too unpalatable.

It's not my place to dictate where the movie should have gone. But in every conceivable set-up and plot twist, the direction taken screams status quo, appeals to safety. All these stories could have been [[made]] more interesting, even if we were forced to keep the single-dimensionality of the characters inhabiting them, at the very least by not choosing from standard and obvious stereotypes. Asian girl living in Chinatown being leered at by a scraggly old white guy? How 'bout an Asian cougar pursuing a white college kid instead. Again, I'm not saying the entire conceit has to be changed. It's just that every. damn. story premise. is so hackneyed--and thus they fail to convey anything about why one might love New York, outside the trite. The real way to have improved the film would be to have written a script worth reading.

I will concede the pleasantness of the soundtrack, the good pacing of the movie (even if what was being paced was, well, dredge), and the general feel of many of the scenes. The movie was just fine to sit through, and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing so. However, it is telling that the most significant homage paid to non-superficiality is when the old opera singer says (paraphrased) "That's what I love about New York: everyone's from a different place." Well, you wouldn't know it from watching this one. (I'll indicate in this review the point where spoilers [[starting]].) My [[discontent]] is split: 30% tone-deafness, 70% lackluster writing.

The 30%: I agree with the first commenter's [[recap]] about the [[lacking]] of diversity in the [[attribute]] and scope of the [[histories]]. I was surprised how, this film, at best, woefully shortchanges the real NYC by presenting a collection of people and relationships so narrow as to come [[in]] as if it's inhabited only by the cast of [[Chatter]] [[Chica]] (this is [[forthcoming]] from [[person]] who [[fond]] [[Rumor]] [[Daughters]]). A few minority [[character]] are written into the stories, but they are [[inscribed]] by [[commitment]], while we can see the gears under the [[filmmaking]] so clearly, striving to "be diverse" but [[dipping]] ever-so-short.

The 70% is why everything [[drops]] short. [[Entire]] [[character]], white plus a few token [[minority]], are one-dimensional, cardboard cutouts of people [[visions]]. Worse, their interactions with each other are scripted in such a [[ways]] that for each vignette in the [[flick]] the [[viewers]] is treated to what I'd [[said]] is a "gag": we [[gets]] a [[fundamental]] conceit, then some punchline [[intend]] to be a [[smarter]] twist. But even if we [[discontinued]] cynicism for a [[time]] to [[told]], "[[Aight]], that was a surprise"...the [[histories]] are [[nonetheless]] not that interesting, because they, too, are [[cursory]]. When you fashion [[histories]] so that their existence [[hinge]] [[exclusively]] on the unexpectedness of the [[ceasing]], you're [[handwriting]] jokes.

Spoilers below...

The [[films]] [[mostly]] [[attempted]] to [[say]] romantic [[fairytales]]. That's fine. But [[romanticism]] is [[marvellous]], [[profound]], [[occasionally]] [[tortuous]]. These "[[sentimental]]" [[storytelling]] each [[idiosyncrasies]] a girl and a [[dude]] who at some point share the same [[positioning]] and get to [[peek]] at each other. [[Phrase]] [[shares]], [[reflections]] are [[prognosis]] through voice-over, but they too only manage to [[interact]] to the [[viewers]] [[just]] that one [[persona]] is attracted to another.

[[Meanings]], there is no seduction (in the [[broader]] [[feeling]]), no [[tensions]], and neither [[encounters]] nor communion between the wills of two [[divergent]] people [[striving]] to reconcile their existence to [[accommodating]] the Other. The only [[conte]] [[encompassing]] a superficial "[[allure]]" is [[said]] just so the audience ends up being surprised that the guy (Ethan Hawke) gets outwitted by the girl he's hitting on, who unexpectedly turns out to be a hooker. Sure, his words when trying to pick her up are interesting to hear and we are amused as we'd be if we were next to them, but there is nothing of substance to this story outside of "A then B". So it unfolds, if something like a postcard could "unfold", with all the other tales as well: A then B--That's It, the only point being that these happen to occur "on set" in Manhattan. By the way, the only Brooklyn we see is the Coney Island sketch; the only Queens is the flickering of a train ride taken by a character traveling to the West Village.

It's easy to pick at movies that play into all the common stereotypes of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. _New York, I Love You_, however, deserves to be held to stricter scrutiny because of its title. We expect to see the real New York, and real New Yorkers, but instead we have paraded before us the selected slice of a demographic, its characters flown in from The O.C., plus a few others to make it SEEM as if we are paying attention to diversity. But when we look closer at who those characters are, the whole sham becomes an affront to the very notion of diversity and the ethnicities and cultures the movie shamefully fails to represent.

For example, the story with the Latino man with the little white girl in the park, who gets mistaken by two ladies as her manny (male nanny) when in fact he's the father. Notwithstanding the last scene of this part was unnecessary from a dramatic-construction point of view (it would have been far more interesting to end it when the mother and boyfriend/stepfather are strutting the girl away), it is frankly a bit disgusting that the scene where we learn for sure that the girl's father is Latino ALSO must inform us that he is a sexually desirable dancer. What, the dad can't be just some guy from South America? Now that he's obviously hot, is the audience better prepared to accept that he had a kid with a middle-to-upper-class white woman? Are we that naive as to require such? As if a Mexican construction worker would obviously be too unpalatable.

It's not my place to dictate where the movie should have gone. But in every conceivable set-up and plot twist, the direction taken screams status quo, appeals to safety. All these stories could have been [[accomplished]] more interesting, even if we were forced to keep the single-dimensionality of the characters inhabiting them, at the very least by not choosing from standard and obvious stereotypes. Asian girl living in Chinatown being leered at by a scraggly old white guy? How 'bout an Asian cougar pursuing a white college kid instead. Again, I'm not saying the entire conceit has to be changed. It's just that every. damn. story premise. is so hackneyed--and thus they fail to convey anything about why one might love New York, outside the trite. The real way to have improved the film would be to have written a script worth reading.

I will concede the pleasantness of the soundtrack, the good pacing of the movie (even if what was being paced was, well, dredge), and the general feel of many of the scenes. The movie was just fine to sit through, and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing so. However, it is telling that the most significant homage paid to non-superficiality is when the old opera singer says (paraphrased) "That's what I love about New York: everyone's from a different place." Well, you wouldn't know it from watching this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Sure, [[Titanic]] was a [[good]] [[movie]], the first [[time]] you see it, but you really should see it a [[second]] [[time]] and your [[opinion]] of the film will definetly [[change]]. The first time you see the movie you see the underlying love-story and think: ooh, how [[romantic]]. The second [[time]] (and I am not the only one to [[think]] this) it is just annoying and you just sit there watching the movie [[thinking]], When is this d**n ship going to sink??? And even this is not as impressive when you see it several times. The acting in this film is not [[bad]], but definetly not great either. Was I glad DiCaprio did not win an oscar for that film, I mean who does he think he is, Anthony Hopkins or Denzel Washington? He does 1 half-good movie and won't do a film for less than $20 million. And then everyone is suprised that there are hardly any films with him in it. But enough about, in my eyes, the worst character of the film. Kate Winslet's performance on the other hand was [[wonderful]]. I also tink that the director is very talented to put a film of such a magnitude together. There is one lesson to be learned about this movie: there are too many love-stories as it is, filmmakers shouldn't try to add a crummy romance in to every single movie!!! Out of a possible 100% I give this film a mere 71%. Sure, [[Herculean]] was a [[buena]] [[movies]], the first [[period]] you see it, but you really should see it a [[seconds]] [[period]] and your [[visualizing]] of the film will definetly [[amended]]. The first time you see the movie you see the underlying love-story and think: ooh, how [[sentimental]]. The second [[period]] (and I am not the only one to [[reckon]] this) it is just annoying and you just sit there watching the movie [[ideology]], When is this d**n ship going to sink??? And even this is not as impressive when you see it several times. The acting in this film is not [[rotten]], but definetly not great either. Was I glad DiCaprio did not win an oscar for that film, I mean who does he think he is, Anthony Hopkins or Denzel Washington? He does 1 half-good movie and won't do a film for less than $20 million. And then everyone is suprised that there are hardly any films with him in it. But enough about, in my eyes, the worst character of the film. Kate Winslet's performance on the other hand was [[wondrous]]. I also tink that the director is very talented to put a film of such a magnitude together. There is one lesson to be learned about this movie: there are too many love-stories as it is, filmmakers shouldn't try to add a crummy romance in to every single movie!!! Out of a possible 100% I give this film a mere 71%. --------------------------------------------- Result 2800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] [[Given]] its time of release, the [[story]] that unravels in 1950 thriller '[[Panic]] in the Streets' was hardly a surprise. The [[corpse]] of a [[mysterious]] illegal [[immigrant]] is found and [[passed]] off as a [[nobody]] until further [[examination]] from a public [[health]] [[inspector]] who claims the corpse [[carries]] a [[strain]] of bubonic plague. [[Yet]] with the [[current]] [[drama]] in the [[world]] [[today]], this [[strangely]] [[helps]] this [[film]] in appearing credible for today's [[viewers]]. The [[cast]] and [[crew]] are [[flawless]]. [[Richard]] Widmark in his [[first]] role following his breakthrough performance in '[[Night]] and the [[City]],' [[Jack]] Palance in his [[chilling]] [[film]] debut, [[also]] [[starring]] in this [[film]] are [[Paul]] Douglas and a young (and rather [[cute]]) Barbara Bel Geddes. A [[whole]] slew of uncredited, non-professional [[actors]] (typical of director Kazan) [[fill]] in the remaining [[slots]]. [[Elia]] Kazan directs, Joe [[MacDonald]] films (he would later work with [[Richard]] Widmark again in 1953's much superior 'Pickup on South Street') and the [[great]] Alfred [[Newman]] [[scores]] it. [[Nearly]] [[everyone]] involved here has [[done]] better work, '[[Panic]] in the Streets' is [[quite]] the [[rewarding]] watch, nonetheless. [[Especially]] for the film-noir [[enthusiast]]. [[Granted]] its time of release, the [[storytelling]] that unravels in 1950 thriller '[[Scare]] in the Streets' was hardly a surprise. The [[cadaver]] of a [[cryptic]] illegal [[immigration]] is found and [[adopted]] off as a [[anyone]] until further [[inspects]] from a public [[gesundheit]] [[inspectors]] who claims the corpse [[carry]] a [[tensions]] of bubonic plague. [[Even]] with the [[contemporary]] [[opera]] in the [[globe]] [[thursday]], this [[suspiciously]] [[contributes]] this [[kino]] in appearing credible for today's [[onlookers]]. The [[casting]] and [[crewman]] are [[faultless]]. [[Ritchie]] Widmark in his [[fiirst]] role following his breakthrough performance in '[[Nocturne]] and the [[Ville]],' [[Jacques]] Palance in his [[chill]] [[films]] debut, [[similarly]] [[championships]] in this [[movies]] are [[Paulo]] Douglas and a young (and rather [[purty]]) Barbara Bel Geddes. A [[total]] slew of uncredited, non-professional [[players]] (typical of director Kazan) [[filling]] in the remaining [[slits]]. [[Ilia]] Kazan directs, Joe [[mcdonald]] films (he would later work with [[Richards]] Widmark again in 1953's much superior 'Pickup on South Street') and the [[wondrous]] Alfred [[Neumann]] [[dozens]] it. [[Practically]] [[someone]] involved here has [[completed]] better work, '[[Terror]] in the Streets' is [[utterly]] the [[bonuses]] watch, nonetheless. [[Concretely]] for the film-noir [[amateurs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It is [[hard]] to describe Bug in words, it is one of those [[films]] that [[truly]] has to be [[seen]] to be [[understood]]. It follows a [[narrative]] that is more [[fluid]] and interesting than [[anything]] I have [[seen]] lately in a Hollywood [[release]]. As its [[characters]] [[react]] to the [[chain]] of [[events]] in [[different]] [[ways]], and as the events [[dictate]] [[different]] [[paths]] for the characters to follow, the audience is [[merely]] an [[observer]]. The [[almost]] Proustian narrative [[flow]] of [[thought]] to [[thought]], the very spontaneity in the script will have you glued to the screen, [[waiting]] [[anxiously]] to see how it all [[works]] out in the [[end]]. And as far as the thematic [[elements]]...there is a [[particular]] sequence in the [[film]] that goes from melancholy, to bright and [[beautiful]], and then to [[tragic]], all within the span of about a minute. And it [[works]].

This [[movie]] is [[pure]] [[magic]]. It [[reminds]] one why [[independent]] [[film]] is [[perhaps]] the [[brightest]] [[star]] the film [[industry]] [[currently]] has. [[Perhaps]] with more [[movies]] of Bug's quality, people will [[start]] to take [[notice]]. It is [[arduous]] to describe Bug in words, it is one of those [[movie]] that [[honestly]] has to be [[watched]] to be [[understand]]. It follows a [[descriptive]] that is more [[liquefied]] and interesting than [[something]] I have [[watched]] lately in a Hollywood [[emancipate]]. As its [[nature]] [[reacting]] to the [[string]] of [[incidents]] in [[multiple]] [[method]], and as the events [[foist]] [[various]] [[trajectories]] for the characters to follow, the audience is [[only]] an [[observers]]. The [[around]] Proustian narrative [[flows]] of [[brainchild]] to [[idea]], the very spontaneity in the script will have you glued to the screen, [[hoping]] [[impatiently]] to see how it all [[collaborated]] out in the [[termination]]. And as far as the thematic [[facets]]...there is a [[special]] sequence in the [[movie]] that goes from melancholy, to bright and [[leggy]], and then to [[dire]], all within the span of about a minute. And it [[collaborated]].

This [[kino]] is [[unadulterated]] [[witchcraft]]. It [[recalled]] one why [[autonomous]] [[kino]] is [[presumably]] the [[bright]] [[superstar]] the film [[industria]] [[presently]] has. [[Presumably]] with more [[film]] of Bug's quality, people will [[started]] to take [[advices]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Slasher films are often seen as the derivative, repetitive and frankly unoriginal. I happen to to be a horror movie fan, but this film was just so poor, words fail me. The script is severely lacking, the plot is ridiculous, the acting astoundingly bad. Just an all round stinker, that I wasted time of my life on. This had all the entertainment value of a 15th sequel to a film that was dire in the first place.

Who greenlit this mess?

I only liked two things in this movie. The first was the killer's mask - which was nice. The second was the Austrailian affinity with humourous profanity.

Save yourself, and avoid this hideous mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 2803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Although it really isn't such a terribly [[movie]] (especially considering it was made directly for TV-distribution), it'll be very difficult to point out one aspect in "Bloodsuckers" that is actually original or refreshing. Vampires in space isn't exactly a new formula, and even after so many movies dealing with these monsters in this particular setting, still no one seems to realize it's an [[incredibly]] stupid [[premise]] that can't possibly result in a halfway decent horror movie. "Bloodsuckers" even goes one step further and [[shamelessly]] imitates every [[imaginable]] motion picture that either revolves on vampires and intergalactic warfare. The plot and characters are mainly stolen directly from John Carpenter's "Ghosts of Mars" and James Cameron's "Aliens", as a crew of futuristic vampire hunters are crusading through space and regularly holding to eliminate a mutated species that peculiarly named themselves after notorious horror icons, like the Voorhees and the Leatherfaces. The good guys are a bunch of [[pathetic]] stereotypes, constantly dealing with [[clichéd]] issues and [[endlessly]] arguing about [[dreadfully]] [[unimportant]] matters. Captain Damian is the unpopular rookie, who'll really have to prove his leadership [[capabilities]] now after being more or less responsible for the [[death]] of the [[previous]] (and far more [[loved]]) [[Captain]] Churchill. The other [[annoying]] [[characters]] [[include]] a typical cowboy-style and trigger happy [[macho]] pilot, a tough female warrior with more balls than any of the [[males]] on board (she's of Asian descent, like the girl in "[[Aliens]]" was Latino) and the army's most [[valuable]] secret [[weapon]]: a Blade-girl! Quintana is a beautiful and deadly vampire who chose the side of humans. She can [[spot]] [[enemies]] when they're still light-years away and she can also do [[wickedly]] sexy [[things]] with someone's wet dreams. They eventually all [[learn]] to [[work]] as a team when forced to face the [[ultimate]] vampire-meanie: Michael Ironside (in yet another downgrading role). "Bloodsuckers" is an irredeemably stupid film, but it manages to entertain as long as it features gory killings, infantile dialogs and OTT make-up effects. It only gets intolerably [[boring]] when the frustrated soldiers blame the captain for the umpteenth time and bla bla bla. This film is a non-stop series of lame clichés and uncreative ideas, but at least it's watchable. Although it really isn't such a terribly [[kino]] (especially considering it was made directly for TV-distribution), it'll be very difficult to point out one aspect in "Bloodsuckers" that is actually original or refreshing. Vampires in space isn't exactly a new formula, and even after so many movies dealing with these monsters in this particular setting, still no one seems to realize it's an [[surprisingly]] stupid [[hypothesis]] that can't possibly result in a halfway decent horror movie. "Bloodsuckers" even goes one step further and [[brazenly]] imitates every [[unimaginable]] motion picture that either revolves on vampires and intergalactic warfare. The plot and characters are mainly stolen directly from John Carpenter's "Ghosts of Mars" and James Cameron's "Aliens", as a crew of futuristic vampire hunters are crusading through space and regularly holding to eliminate a mutated species that peculiarly named themselves after notorious horror icons, like the Voorhees and the Leatherfaces. The good guys are a bunch of [[unlucky]] stereotypes, constantly dealing with [[clichés]] issues and [[perpetually]] arguing about [[excruciatingly]] [[inconsequential]] matters. Captain Damian is the unpopular rookie, who'll really have to prove his leadership [[abilities]] now after being more or less responsible for the [[killings]] of the [[former]] (and far more [[enjoyed]]) [[Skipper]] Churchill. The other [[exasperating]] [[traits]] [[incorporate]] a typical cowboy-style and trigger happy [[male]] pilot, a tough female warrior with more balls than any of the [[male]] on board (she's of Asian descent, like the girl in "[[Extraterrestrial]]" was Latino) and the army's most [[precious]] secret [[weaponry]]: a Blade-girl! Quintana is a beautiful and deadly vampire who chose the side of humans. She can [[stain]] [[nemesis]] when they're still light-years away and she can also do [[devilishly]] sexy [[aspects]] with someone's wet dreams. They eventually all [[learns]] to [[works]] as a team when forced to face the [[final]] vampire-meanie: Michael Ironside (in yet another downgrading role). "Bloodsuckers" is an irredeemably stupid film, but it manages to entertain as long as it features gory killings, infantile dialogs and OTT make-up effects. It only gets intolerably [[tiresome]] when the frustrated soldiers blame the captain for the umpteenth time and bla bla bla. This film is a non-stop series of lame clichés and uncreative ideas, but at least it's watchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2804 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[movie]] and acting are not bad and Jay [[Hernandez]] does a [[good]] [[job]] playing Calito Brigante but the [[movie]] [[forgets]] it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit movie. The [[makers]] of this prequel [[clearly]] did not watch the original Carlito's [[Way]] or at [[least]] did not [[care]] about [[continuity]]. This movie is a prequel which means the [[original]] movie has already laid out some history for us and this [[movie]] should end where the original begins or at least lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old friends from the original make an appearance in this movie, they're not [[even]] mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the [[original]], is in the movie but he plays a completely different [[character]]. The original takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. [[Considering]] this [[movie]] takes place [[less]] than 5 [[years]] [[earlier]], wouldn't you [[think]] one of Carlito's [[long]] [[time]] friends [[would]] make an appearance? [[In]] the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 [[years]] in jail. That's only a few month's between the [[end]] of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the beginning of the original, Carlito has spent 5 years in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy ending it's an [[insult]] to the [[intelligence]] of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the lack of continuity that made this film go direct to video release. The [[films]] and acting are not bad and Jay [[Rodriguez]] does a [[buena]] [[labour]] playing Calito Brigante but the [[movies]] [[ignores]] it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit movie. The [[producer]] of this prequel [[apparently]] did not watch the original Carlito's [[Path]] or at [[lowest]] did not [[healthcare]] about [[continuance]]. This movie is a prequel which means the [[upfront]] movie has already laid out some history for us and this [[filmmaking]] should end where the original begins or at least lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old friends from the original make an appearance in this movie, they're not [[yet]] mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the [[preliminary]], is in the movie but he plays a completely different [[traits]]. The original takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. [[Consideration]] this [[film]] takes place [[fewest]] than 5 [[olds]] [[ago]], wouldn't you [[reckon]] one of Carlito's [[longer]] [[times]] friends [[could]] make an appearance? [[At]] the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 [[ages]] in jail. That's only a few month's between the [[ends]] of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the beginning of the original, Carlito has spent 5 years in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy ending it's an [[offend]] to the [[intelligentsia]] of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the lack of continuity that made this film go direct to video release. --------------------------------------------- Result 2805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Yes, I know I'm one of the few people [[longing]] to trample this movie into the [[dust]] of [[oblivion]].[[So]] let me me tell you why I feel this [[way]]. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie [[film]] or the like,I [[might]] have [[enjoyed]] it.But right now,I'm [[totally]] speechless.

*[[SPOILER]]...[[Though]] I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first [[HUGE]] [[flaw]]. If I did not know that the [[movie]] is called "Darkness - The VAMPIRE Version" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!

[[Second]] bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called "vampires", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! "[[Pathetic]]" is the only only word that I [[could]] use here.

Third [[weakness]]: the [[actors]]. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.

Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the "briliant" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was [[treated]] to some stupid looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should [[simply]] have advertized the movie saying "cheap B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore" !!!

This movie is [[blasphemy]] against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick. Yes, I know I'm one of the few people [[yearn]] to trample this movie into the [[stardust]] of [[wayside]].[[Accordingly]] let me me tell you why I feel this [[ways]]. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie [[filmmaking]] or the like,I [[apt]] have [[adored]] it.But right now,I'm [[entirely]] speechless.

*[[BAFFLE]]...[[Notwithstanding]] I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first [[WHOPPING]] [[imperfection]]. If I did not know that the [[filmmaking]] is called "Darkness - The VAMPIRE Version" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!

[[Seconds]] bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called "vampires", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! "[[Pitiable]]" is the only only word that I [[would]] use here.

Third [[flaw]]: the [[protagonists]]. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.

Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the "briliant" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was [[addressed]] to some stupid looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should [[purely]] have advertized the movie saying "cheap B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore" !!!

This movie is [[sacrilege]] against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] That's right. The movie is better than the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book. But the movie is just so much better. This film has Jack Nicholson and Shelly Duvall at their best. (I haven't seen Scatman Crothers and obviously Danny Lloyd in anything else.) Some of the ideas used in this movie are better than the ones used in the book. But I already talked about those in my comment on the mini series. But, I missed a few. The film is shot at a better location than where the mini series was shot. And the REDRUM scenes are creepier than those in the book. So if you're looking for a great movie, get Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. But count on having nightmares every night for 3 weeks --------------------------------------------- Result 2807 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Peter Sellers (one of my favorite actors) is mildly amusing in this 1970 turkey, but the script is so lame and insulting that even Goldie Hawn's youth (just after her Oscar win) cannot begin to pull this one out of the mud. As a skirt-chasing celeb in his 40's, Sellers mostly embarrasses himself to the nth degree.

A 3 out of 10. Best performance = ? Nicky Henson plays a young study type.

I hope Hawn and Sellers were paid well, because I see no other reason for tripe like this in 1970 (a very good year for films - CATCH-22, M.A.S.H., HUSBANDS, JOE, WUSA, FIVE EASY PIECES and many others). You can't win them all! --------------------------------------------- Result 2808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The beginning of the 90s brought many "quirky" and "off-beat" [[independent]] [[films]], a particular sub-genre of which is the semi-spiritual desert [[crime]] [[movie]]. [[Others]] of [[note]] are "[[Wild]] at [[Heart]]", "From [[Dusk]] Til Dawn", and to a certain [[extent]] "Natural [[Born]] [[Killers]]". [[Good]] [[films]] like those [[spawned]] [[junk]] like "[[Highway]] 666", "[[Destiny]] [[Turns]] on the [[Radio]]" and this ineptly surreal anti-masterpiece "Under The Hula [[Moon]]". It's a comedy that [[aims]] for a certain emotional tone, attains it, but [[keeps]] [[going]] to the point of [[irritation]]. [[While]] the [[pursuit]] [[across]] the spirit-world of the [[desert]] and the [[casting]] of Chris [[Penn]] are [[good]] [[ideas]], the [[film]] is not [[dirty]] enough or hard enough to be a [[good]] [[crime]] [[movie]], and isn't [[focused]] enough on [[laughs]] to [[really]] be a [[comedy]]. I won't blow the [[ending]], but let's just say it's [[bad]]. The [[film]] is [[basically]] a [[bad]] side [[effect]] of genre-cancer. This is the dregs of indie-mania. The beginning of the 90s brought many "quirky" and "off-beat" [[autonomous]] [[cinema]], a particular sub-genre of which is the semi-spiritual desert [[misdemeanor]] [[cinema]]. [[Else]] of [[memo]] are "[[Sauvage]] at [[Heartland]]", "From [[Nightfall]] Til Dawn", and to a certain [[amplitude]] "Natural [[Ould]] [[Assassins]]". [[Alright]] [[cinematographic]] like those [[consorted]] [[trash]] like "[[Superhighway]] 666", "[[Destinies]] [[Revolves]] on the [[Radios]]" and this ineptly surreal anti-masterpiece "Under The Hula [[Luna]]". It's a comedy that [[aiming]] for a certain emotional tone, attains it, but [[retains]] [[go]] to the point of [[annoyance]]. [[Albeit]] the [[pursuing]] [[throughout]] the spirit-world of the [[deserts]] and the [[cast]] of Chris [[Pennsylvania]] are [[buena]] [[insights]], the [[flick]] is not [[squalid]] enough or hard enough to be a [[buena]] [[felony]] [[filmmaking]], and isn't [[concentrated]] enough on [[giggles]] to [[truly]] be a [[humour]]. I won't blow the [[terminated]], but let's just say it's [[unfavourable]]. The [[filmmaking]] is [[broadly]] a [[negative]] side [[effects]] of genre-cancer. This is the dregs of indie-mania. --------------------------------------------- Result 2809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I've known about Bettie [[Page]] for [[many]] a year now. The soft-core [[porn]] images of her from the 1950's have since become iconographic and still have a strong draw even today. The "Bettie Page" [[look]] is also [[still]] hugely popular within the hetero fetish world and remains as distinctive [[today]] as it did then. So I watched this [[film]] with quite a [[bit]] of familiarity to begin with. The [[result]] did not [[disappoint]].

[[Among]] other [[things]], it was [[hugely]] entertaining to see the movie's [[recreation]] of actual figures like Irving Klaw, [[John]] [[Willie]], and [[Bunny]] Yeager – all consider trailblazers [[today]]. Mary Harron did an [[excellent]] [[job]] [[creating]] the [[desired]] [[ambiance]] of [[sexual]] [[repression]] and [[hypocrisy]] in 1950's [[America]] along with a [[sexuality]] that, by today's [[standards]], was innocent in the [[extreme]]. I particularly [[liked]] the [[use]] of monochrome [[versus]] [[color]] as a visual [[shorthand]] for the emotional and spiritual [[climate]] Bettie [[found]] herself in.

I [[think]] that Gretchen Mol did an [[excellent]] [[job]] of [[presenting]] the [[character]] of Bettie in all her innocent [[sexuality]] and all her utter naiveté. Bettie [[loved]] to look [[pretty]], [[loved]] the attention, [[saw]] [[nothing]] wrong with nudity, and [[enjoyed]] dressing up in "[[silly]] [[outfits]]" for the camera. The underlying sexuality and [[deeply]] fetishistic [[desires]] all that evoked were [[completely]] lost on her. To this day she [[still]] doesn't [[understand]] "what all the [[fuss]] was about" when it [[comes]] to her [[pictures]] or the S&[[M]] content of them.

This isn't to say she's uneducated or too [[simple]] to [[understand]] it's just that she simply doesn't "[[get]] it" about fetishism and never will. No [[harm]] there. Bettie [[Page]] is [[simply]] being who she is. The [[film]] captured this [[quite]] [[nicely]].

The social [[atmosphere]] of the 1950's [[depicted]] by Ms. Harron and [[written]] by her along with Guinevere Turner makes me truly glad I live in the day and age that I do. The [[hypocrisy]] and [[repression]] combined with the massive ignorance about our [[sexuality]] all [[combined]] to a [[frighteningly]] [[stifling]] world. The [[film]] well [[captures]] this and [[brings]] to [[cheering]] as Bettie endures it all with her [[unshakeable]] [[faith]] and her [[unchangeable]] naiveté.

This [[film]] was a bit slow at times but hit all the points Ms. Harron attempted and hit them well. I'd recommend this [[film]] even for those folks with [[little]] to no knowledge of who Bettie Page was and what effect she had on American culture. For those with such [[interests]], then this film is a must see. I've known about Bettie [[Newsweek]] for [[several]] a year now. The soft-core [[pornographic]] images of her from the 1950's have since become iconographic and still have a strong draw even today. The "Bettie Page" [[glance]] is also [[however]] hugely popular within the hetero fetish world and remains as distinctive [[thursday]] as it did then. So I watched this [[movies]] with quite a [[bitten]] of familiarity to begin with. The [[findings]] did not [[defraud]].

[[In]] other [[aspects]], it was [[terribly]] entertaining to see the movie's [[recreational]] of actual figures like Irving Klaw, [[Johannes]] [[Willy]], and [[Rabbits]] Yeager – all consider trailblazers [[yesterday]]. Mary Harron did an [[brilliant]] [[workplace]] [[create]] the [[hoped]] [[mood]] of [[sexually]] [[suppression]] and [[hypocrite]] in 1950's [[Americans]] along with a [[sex]] that, by today's [[standard]], was innocent in the [[tremendous]]. I particularly [[wished]] the [[utilise]] of monochrome [[vs]] [[dye]] as a visual [[abbreviation]] for the emotional and spiritual [[weather]] Bettie [[discoveries]] herself in.

I [[believing]] that Gretchen Mol did an [[wonderful]] [[labour]] of [[introducing]] the [[characters]] of Bettie in all her innocent [[sex]] and all her utter naiveté. Bettie [[loves]] to look [[belle]], [[cared]] the attention, [[watched]] [[anything]] wrong with nudity, and [[adored]] dressing up in "[[ridiculous]] [[costume]]" for the camera. The underlying sexuality and [[critically]] fetishistic [[aspirations]] all that evoked were [[utterly]] lost on her. To this day she [[again]] doesn't [[realise]] "what all the [[commotion]] was about" when it [[arises]] to her [[images]] or the S&[[meters]] content of them.

This isn't to say she's uneducated or too [[mere]] to [[comprehend]] it's just that she simply doesn't "[[obtain]] it" about fetishism and never will. No [[damage]] there. Bettie [[Newsweek]] is [[solely]] being who she is. The [[kino]] captured this [[pretty]] [[politely]].

The social [[atmospheric]] of the 1950's [[exemplified]] by Ms. Harron and [[authored]] by her along with Guinevere Turner makes me truly glad I live in the day and age that I do. The [[hypocritical]] and [[suppression]] combined with the massive ignorance about our [[sex]] all [[merged]] to a [[terribly]] [[choking]] world. The [[cinema]] well [[catch]] this and [[puts]] to [[chanting]] as Bettie endures it all with her [[unflinching]] [[fe]] and her [[constant]] naiveté.

This [[movie]] was a bit slow at times but hit all the points Ms. Harron attempted and hit them well. I'd recommend this [[cinema]] even for those folks with [[petite]] to no knowledge of who Bettie Page was and what effect she had on American culture. For those with such [[benefit]], then this film is a must see. --------------------------------------------- Result 2810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] There is [[absolutely]] no plot in this [[movie]] ...no [[character]] [[development]]...no [[climax]]...nothing. But has a few good fighting scenes that are actually pretty good. [[So]] there you [[go]]...as a [[movie]] overall is pretty bad, but if you [[like]] a [[brainless]] [[flick]] that [[offer]] [[nothing]] but just [[good]] [[action]] scene then watch this [[movie]]. Do not [[expect]] [[nothing]] more that just that.[[Decent]] acting and a not so [[bad]] [[direction]]..A [[couple]] of cameos from Kimbo and Carano...I was looking to see Carano a [[little]] bit more in this movie..she is a good fighter and a really [[hot]] girl.... [[White]] is a [[great]] martial [[artist]] and a decent actor. I really [[hope]] he can [[land]] a [[better]] [[movie]] in the future so we can [[really]] enjoy his [[art]]..[[Imagine]] a [[film]] with [[White]] and Jaa [[together]]...that would be [[awesome]] There is [[totally]] no plot in this [[filmmaking]] ...no [[personages]] [[evolution]]...no [[culmination]]...nothing. But has a few good fighting scenes that are actually pretty good. [[Therefore]] there you [[going]]...as a [[flick]] overall is pretty bad, but if you [[fond]] a [[daft]] [[gesture]] that [[delivering]] [[none]] but just [[alright]] [[measures]] scene then watch this [[filmmaking]]. Do not [[expecting]] [[none]] more that just that.[[Presentable]] acting and a not so [[unfavourable]] [[directions]]..A [[matching]] of cameos from Kimbo and Carano...I was looking to see Carano a [[petite]] bit more in this movie..she is a good fighter and a really [[sexiest]] girl.... [[Blanc]] is a [[resplendent]] martial [[entertainer]] and a decent actor. I really [[hopes]] he can [[earth]] a [[optimum]] [[cinematic]] in the future so we can [[truthfully]] enjoy his [[artistry]]..[[Reckon]] a [[flick]] with [[Bianchi]] and Jaa [[jointly]]...that would be [[sumptuous]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Swayze doesn't make a very [[convincing]] [[Alan]] Quatermain. [[Compared]] to [[Stewart]] Granger; which growing up was my [[ultimate]] [[hero]] in [[films]] like the 1952 "Scaramouche", the 1952 "[[Prisoner]] of Zenda" and the 1950 "King Solomon's Mines"; Patrick Swayze [[fails]] [[utterly]]. [[Even]] the portrayal of an older Alan Quatermain by [[Sean]] Connery in "League of [[Extraordinary]] [[Gentlemen]]" was very good in an [[otherwise]] [[big]] flop. Also [[Alison]] Doody [[lacks]] the [[grace]] of Deborah [[Kerr]] in the role of the [[leading]] lady, and [[last]] but not [[least]] the [[impressive]] Siriaque in the role of Umbopa makes it very hard for [[anyone]] to [[fill]] his (shoes)!!! For [[someone]] who was [[disappointed]] by [[Richard]] Chamberlain's 1985 version, I now [[highly]] recommend it if you can't [[get]] your hand on the granger version. Swayze doesn't make a very [[persuasive]] [[Alana]] Quatermain. [[Compare]] to [[Steward]] Granger; which growing up was my [[final]] [[superhero]] in [[movies]] like the 1952 "Scaramouche", the 1952 "[[Inmates]] of Zenda" and the 1950 "King Solomon's Mines"; Patrick Swayze [[fail]] [[perfectly]]. [[Yet]] the portrayal of an older Alan Quatermain by [[Shawn]] Connery in "League of [[Stunning]] [[Gentleman]]" was very good in an [[alternately]] [[prodigious]] flop. Also [[Ellison]] Doody [[lacked]] the [[gracia]] of Deborah [[Keir]] in the role of the [[culminating]] lady, and [[final]] but not [[lowest]] the [[marvellous]] Siriaque in the role of Umbopa makes it very hard for [[everybody]] to [[filled]] his (shoes)!!! For [[everybody]] who was [[disappoint]] by [[Richie]] Chamberlain's 1985 version, I now [[immensely]] recommend it if you can't [[gets]] your hand on the granger version. --------------------------------------------- Result 2812 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This wasn't funny in 1972. It's not funny now.

Unlike a lot of other people, I'm not bashing the film because it is incredibly sexist - I quote enjoyed that bit, or rather I enjoyed the reaction it generates in annoying PC people - I'm bashing it because it is poorly written and acted.

The only really memorable character is Blakey, which British people 25 years old will recognise immediately since he was a favourite with impressionists for a long time.

Avoid.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Following their daughter's brutal murder,Julie and Allen escape the city to find solace and grieve in a solitary cabin on a remote mountain.Allen's intentions are good,he wants his wife to get out of her depression by resuming her photography.Julie stumbles across an ancient prison and sees the perfect creepy,decaying setting for her photography.But when the photos are developed they are full of dead people-and Allen quickly discovers the tragic history of suicide in their new mountain."Dark Remains" is a pretty decent indie horror flick.It offers some genuine scares and plenty of tension.The acting is fairly good and the cinematography is great.7 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] What the *bliep* is it with this movie? Couldn't they [[fiend]] a better [[script]]? All in all a 'nice' movie, but... it has been [[done]] more than once... Up till the end I thought it was [[okay]], but... the going back to the past part... *barf* [[SO]] corny... Was [[waiting]] for the fairy [[god]] [[mother]] to appear... but [[wow]], that didn't happen... which is good.

I [[loved]] [[Big]] with Tom Hanks, but to see such a [[movie]] in a new [[form]] with another kid who [[wished]] that he/she is older/[[bigger]]; that just is so pasé

[[Just]] watch till it comes out on TV. Don't get me [[wrong]], but it ain't all that What the *bliep* is it with this movie? Couldn't they [[daemon]] a better [[hyphen]]? All in all a 'nice' movie, but... it has been [[effected]] more than once... Up till the end I thought it was [[verywell]], but... the going back to the past part... *barf* [[THUS]] corny... Was [[awaited]] for the fairy [[seigneur]] [[madre]] to appear... but [[whew]], that didn't happen... which is good.

I [[love]] [[Immense]] with Tom Hanks, but to see such a [[filmmaking]] in a new [[forms]] with another kid who [[liked]] that he/she is older/[[greater]]; that just is so pasé

[[Jen]] watch till it comes out on TV. Don't get me [[misguided]], but it ain't all that --------------------------------------------- Result 2815 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie will always be a Broadway and Movie classic, as long as there are still people who sing, dance, and act. --------------------------------------------- Result 2816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How can you sum up just exactly how feelgood and right and touching this film is?? For several weeks this DVD leaped off the shelf at me every time I went in the store - having seen Steve Carrell in a couple of films previously, I didn't want to smear my thought process of him - so I resisted and resisted, until finally I grabbed it up with a 'What the hell!' attitude! And how surprised was I! I just wish I had purchased it earlier. Having watched it three times in two days I am still smiling at how the portrayal of a widower struggling with three daughters, yearning for that which is missing since the passing of his beloved wife, who thus meets an intriguing woman, charming her in such a profound and interesting (dare I say bookish?) way, throws a whole different light onto life that makes him realize she is what he has been searching for.

The snag of that woman being his brothers girl complicates matters - which portray Dan comically shy and with a heartfelt chagrin, seeing his "someone special" bringing such fun and enjoyment into the family home as well as his brothers life. You just really begin to feel for him.

Then when the blind date occurs with Ruthie Draper - that is the turning point in Marie's estimation of Dan!! The look she gives him when he repeats her comment, about not liking Ruthie - sheer Green-Eyed Monster! Triggering an absolutely hilarious scene as the two couples compete on the dance floor! This sequence is one of the most well-crafted as Dan starts to loosen up with regard to Marie.

Other gut-wrenching scenes - Dan returns from the Book and Tackle Shop, confronted by his brothers, begins to describe what has just occurred....when Dan's face drops it brings a sharp intake of breath!!

His youngest daughter Lilly making the present celebrating their love for Suzanne, his late wife, brings a little heartfelt warmth and a little gulp as Dan realizes just what he has lost in life.

When Dan plays guitar and sings at the Talent Show....his voice cracking slightly as he reprises the song....absolute gem!

The acceptance of what occurs late in the film by his daughters...they all three love their father and want to see him happy, will not let him deny his love for Marie; the desperateness of Dan not to fail his daughters because he is their rock, their stronghold...and tell him so much more than that with just a few words.

I could go on and on but I will leave it for now - maybe return and add more comments here in the near future....but I will end by saying....

....if you want to watch a film that is just so damn good, with twists of comedy to lighten up the drama, that never feels forced or crass, that comes over as a genuine portrayal of a man discovering new life - not just with a woman but also with his extended family, then look no further.

DAN IN REAL LIFE - 9 out of 10 for such a well-rendered cinematic experience with a score by Sondre Lerche, that intimately takes you there throughout whilst never being intrusive, with fine performances by the ensemble cast. I cannot wait to re-watch this again!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Lulu ([[Louise]] [[Brooks]]) [[works]] as a typist and is [[missing]] something in her life. She enters a Miss France contest against the wishes of her boyfriend Andre (Georges Charlia) and she wins. She sets off for the Miss Europe title leaving her boyfriend behind. She wins again but returns home to Andre because he has asked her to. Once back together, her life becomes [[mundane]] again so one night she writes a note to him and leaves to experience the fame that is waiting for her as Miss Europe. Andre follows her.....

This film is a silent film with a piano music-track all the way through. It is also sped-up so everything seems fast. Limited [[dialogue]] has been added on afterwards and it is very [[phony]]. The cast are alright bearing in mind that it is a silent film. The best part of the film comes at the end but the story goes on a little too long. After watching this, I'm not really sure what the big deal was over the looks of Louise Brooks - she has a terrible haircut that makes her face look fat. I don't need to watch it again. Lulu ([[Luiz]] [[Creeks]]) [[cooperating]] as a typist and is [[vanished]] something in her life. She enters a Miss France contest against the wishes of her boyfriend Andre (Georges Charlia) and she wins. She sets off for the Miss Europe title leaving her boyfriend behind. She wins again but returns home to Andre because he has asked her to. Once back together, her life becomes [[worldly]] again so one night she writes a note to him and leaves to experience the fame that is waiting for her as Miss Europe. Andre follows her.....

This film is a silent film with a piano music-track all the way through. It is also sped-up so everything seems fast. Limited [[talks]] has been added on afterwards and it is very [[phoney]]. The cast are alright bearing in mind that it is a silent film. The best part of the film comes at the end but the story goes on a little too long. After watching this, I'm not really sure what the big deal was over the looks of Louise Brooks - she has a terrible haircut that makes her face look fat. I don't need to watch it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2818 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I'm 47 years old and I've [[spent]] as much of my life as I can [[remember]], a fan of horror and sci-fi films. Be they silent, black and white, no budget or big budget, there are very few of them that I can't find something to [[like]] about. That said, I'll [[give]] this movie credit for good gore and creature effects but that's all. This is a [[case]] of effects over story. Truth is we [[live]] in a time where there is very little [[left]] that hasn't been seen in a horror [[film]]. Therefor for a film of any [[kind]] to [[really]] entertain it must have a [[good]], original story. A [[good]] story can [[overcome]] poor [[effects]] and [[bad]] acting but a [[bad]] [[story]] with [[good]] acting and [[good]] [[effects]] is still a [[bad]] [[movie]]. This [[movie]] doesn't [[even]] have good acting, only [[good]] effects. So [[unless]] you can only about the gore, pass this one up. I'm 47 years old and I've [[spends]] as much of my life as I can [[remind]], a fan of horror and sci-fi films. Be they silent, black and white, no budget or big budget, there are very few of them that I can't find something to [[likes]] about. That said, I'll [[lend]] this movie credit for good gore and creature effects but that's all. This is a [[lawsuit]] of effects over story. Truth is we [[iive]] in a time where there is very little [[exited]] that hasn't been seen in a horror [[filmmaking]]. Therefor for a film of any [[genus]] to [[truly]] entertain it must have a [[buena]], original story. A [[alright]] story can [[overcoming]] poor [[influences]] and [[negative]] acting but a [[horrid]] [[fairytales]] with [[alright]] acting and [[alright]] [[repercussions]] is still a [[unfavourable]] [[filmmaking]]. This [[filmmaking]] doesn't [[yet]] have good acting, only [[buena]] effects. So [[if]] you can only about the gore, pass this one up. --------------------------------------------- Result 2819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I sat glued to the screen, [[riveted]], [[yawning]], [[yet]] [[keeping]] an attentive [[eye]]. I waited for the next [[awful]] special effect, or the [[next]] [[ridiculously]] [[clichéd]] plot item to show up full force, so I [[could]] learn how not to [[make]] a [[movie]].

It [[seems]] when they set out to make this [[movie]], the crew [[watched]] every single other action/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good vs. [[evil]] [[movie]] ever made, and saw cool things and [[said]]: "Hey, we can do that." [[For]] example, the only car parked within a mile on what seems like a one way road with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The car blows to pieces before she even lands on it. The special effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what really put it in my bad books was the implausibility, and [[lack]] of reason for so many elements! For example, the antagonist, a flying demon with the ability to inflict harm in bizarre ways, happens upon a lone army truck transporting an important VIP. [[Nameless]] security guys with guns get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy protecting the VIP says "Under no circumstances do you leave this truck, do you understand me?" He gets out to find the beast that killed his 3 buddies, he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché fashion. Then for no apparent reason, [[defying]] logic, convention, and common sense, the dumb ass VIP GETS OUT OF THE TRUCK!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the movie didn't make [[sense]]. Transparent acting distanced me from the [[movie]], as well as [[bad]] camera-work, and things that just make you go: "[[Wow]], that's incredibly cheesy." Shiri Appleby [[saved]] the [[movie]] from a 1, because she [[gave]] the [[movie]] the one [[element]] that always makes viewers enjoy the experience, sex [[appeal]]. I sat glued to the screen, [[mesmerised]], [[gaping]], [[nevertheless]] [[sustaining]] an attentive [[ojo]]. I waited for the next [[terrible]] special effect, or the [[upcoming]] [[outrageously]] [[clichés]] plot item to show up full force, so I [[did]] learn how not to [[deliver]] a [[filmmaking]].

It [[appears]] when they set out to make this [[flick]], the crew [[saw]] every single other action/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good vs. [[demonic]] [[movies]] ever made, and saw cool things and [[told]]: "Hey, we can do that." [[In]] example, the only car parked within a mile on what seems like a one way road with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The car blows to pieces before she even lands on it. The special effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what really put it in my bad books was the implausibility, and [[misses]] of reason for so many elements! For example, the antagonist, a flying demon with the ability to inflict harm in bizarre ways, happens upon a lone army truck transporting an important VIP. [[Unrecognized]] security guys with guns get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy protecting the VIP says "Under no circumstances do you leave this truck, do you understand me?" He gets out to find the beast that killed his 3 buddies, he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché fashion. Then for no apparent reason, [[braving]] logic, convention, and common sense, the dumb ass VIP GETS OUT OF THE TRUCK!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the movie didn't make [[feeling]]. Transparent acting distanced me from the [[filmmaking]], as well as [[unfavourable]] camera-work, and things that just make you go: "[[Whoo]], that's incredibly cheesy." Shiri Appleby [[rescued]] the [[filmmaking]] from a 1, because she [[yielded]] the [[cinematography]] the one [[facet]] that always makes viewers enjoy the experience, sex [[appellate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] My watch [[came]] a little too [[late]] but am glad i watched both this and the sequel together...which makes me compliment the makers of this flick for giving such a [[pure]] and basic [[treatment]] to the idea of romanticism... and very [[marginally]] [[separating]] it from the idea of relationships! As a [[lot]] has been written about the [[movie]] already, it would just be appropriate to [[highlight]] few portions of the [[movie]] which i personally [[loved]].

I [[think]] the point where Jesse and Celine [[make]] [[phony]] phone [[calls]] to their respective friends was a very [[shrewd]] way of telling each other what they had [[meant]] to each other through a [[journey]] not even [[extending]] 24 hrs... the curiosity of two people who both [[think]] the other has [[made]] an infallible [[impact]] on the other has been very [[smartly]] [[dealt]] with...

On the plot front , making a romantic story work on pure conversation is not an easy [[job]] to [[accomplish]]..

I [[believe]] in romantic flicks of such [[flavor]] , the [[characters]] are not clearly [[designed]] even in the writer's and director's mind. What the [[actors]] [[bring]] out is what becomes of them .. right or wrong [[even]] the [[idea]] bearers [[would]] [[find]] it [[difficult]] to justify... to become the character, the [[life]] the actor [[gives]] has to go beyond [[instructions]] and the story...here both the [[actors]] do just the RIGHT job! [[Kudos]]..!!!and Before sunset is another [[feather]] which makes this one [[even]] more beautiful! My watch [[became]] a little too [[tard]] but am glad i watched both this and the sequel together...which makes me compliment the makers of this flick for giving such a [[pur]] and basic [[therapy]] to the idea of romanticism... and very [[modestly]] [[separation]] it from the idea of relationships! As a [[batch]] has been written about the [[movies]] already, it would just be appropriate to [[stresses]] few portions of the [[cinematography]] which i personally [[cared]].

I [[thoughts]] the point where Jesse and Celine [[deliver]] [[falsified]] phone [[asks]] to their respective friends was a very [[smarter]] way of telling each other what they had [[intended]] to each other through a [[tour]] not even [[stretching]] 24 hrs... the curiosity of two people who both [[believing]] the other has [[accomplished]] an infallible [[impacts]] on the other has been very [[wisely]] [[treated]] with...

On the plot front , making a romantic story work on pure conversation is not an easy [[jobs]] to [[fulfill]]..

I [[believing]] in romantic flicks of such [[scents]] , the [[character]] are not clearly [[styled]] even in the writer's and director's mind. What the [[protagonists]] [[bringing]] out is what becomes of them .. right or wrong [[yet]] the [[concept]] bearers [[should]] [[unearthed]] it [[problematic]] to justify... to become the character, the [[lifetime]] the actor [[provides]] has to go beyond [[guidance]] and the story...here both the [[protagonists]] do just the RIGHT job! [[Laurels]]..!!!and Before sunset is another [[plume]] which makes this one [[yet]] more beautiful! --------------------------------------------- Result 2821 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This is a genuinely [[horrible]] [[film]]. The plot (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)

Half of the dialogue consists of [[useless]] cliches. The other half is spoken by the various actors in such [[unintelligible]] imitations of "southern" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.

But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic [[talent]] as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.

This is a genuinely [[shocking]] [[kino]]. The plot (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)

Half of the dialogue consists of [[dispensable]] cliches. The other half is spoken by the various actors in such [[impenetrable]] imitations of "southern" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.

But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic [[talents]] as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Me and my girlfriend, Annette, watched this [[together]] and we'll both comment.

Both of us really [[enjoyed]] watching this [[even]] though it took some liberties with Dicken's [[work]]. A [[lot]] of Dicken's [[works]] are [[somewhat]] dark and [[dreary]] (including Oliver [[Twist]]), but this movie changed all that. It was [[fun]], [[colourful]] (both visually and musically), and the characters were more lighthearted.

TRAVIS: Normally, I don't care a lot for musical and dance movies, but the [[tunes]] in this production were catchy and lively, and the choreography was awesome.

ANNETTE: That's really [[saying]] a lot coming from Travis. I can't emphasise [[enough]] how [[really]] good the [[dance]] numbers were. You can [[tell]], for example, that those [[boys]] really [[worked]] [[hard]] getting the routines down to perfection.

TRAVIS: Three actors really stood out IMO; Nancy (Shani W.), Bill Sykes (Oliver Reed), and Artful Dodger ([[Jack]] Wild). [[Man]], that Oliver Reed can [[really]] do a good villain. That one scene where you [[see]] his eyes thru the mail slot gave me chills down the back...AWESOME. And that kid Jack Wild was a [[perfect]] Artful Dodger. And Nancy was [[fantastic]] ([[man]], I [[felt]] bad when she [[got]] killed). She can [[sing]] too! [[Kudos]] to the [[casting]] [[department]] on their [[choices]] there. I hated the Oliver [[Twist]] [[kid]] tho. He was just too whiny and wimpy for my [[taste]]. (I [[kept]] [[wishing]] Bill Sikes would [[drop]] him off into the mud during the [[chase]] scene.) And they shouldn't have had him sing either.

ANNETTE: Acting was [[truly]] [[superb]]. In [[addition]] to the three stars Travis [[mentioned]], I [[felt]] Ron [[Moody]] (Fagin) did a [[tremendous]] job. He was so [[funny]], and at the same time lightly sinister too. The supporting actors were [[great]] too. Harry Secombe carried his Mr. Bumble role extremely well. And he has a [[wonderful]] singing voice. I saw Mr. Secombe perform in another movie entitled "Davy" where he played an opera singer with pleasing results. The talented Harry Secombe should have been in a lot more movies.

TRAVIS: As I mentioned earlier the story isn't quite true to the book, but IMO it was more robust. This movie was not boring either, as some musicals seem to be. And the continuity kept you moving right along with the characters. The tunes did not detract from the plot or put you to sleep by being too long.

ANNETTE: Any musical movie which Travis watches completely has to be a rare find. And this one is indeed a rare find. It is a very easy-to-watch production which carries the viewer smoothly and enjoyably through to the end. In a day when movies all seem to be effects combined with pretty faces, this was a refreshing interlude.

Our combined rating for this was 8.5 of 10. (We'll round up to 9 in this case.).

TRAVIS: I rated this a 7 mainly because the Oliver Twist kid (Mark L.) irritated me, and his songs were torture to my overly sensitive ears. Otherwise, it was an outstanding movie.

ANNETTE: My rating is a 10. Movies don't get much better than this. And you can tell everyone involved in this production really worked hard to make it what it was...a masterpiece.

Please don't miss this one...even if you normally don't like musicals. It really is a rare treat. Me and my girlfriend, Annette, watched this [[totality]] and we'll both comment.

Both of us really [[appreciated]] watching this [[yet]] though it took some liberties with Dicken's [[worked]]. A [[batch]] of Dicken's [[cooperation]] are [[rather]] dark and [[dismal]] (including Oliver [[Twisting]]), but this movie changed all that. It was [[entertaining]], [[scenic]] (both visually and musically), and the characters were more lighthearted.

TRAVIS: Normally, I don't care a lot for musical and dance movies, but the [[hymns]] in this production were catchy and lively, and the choreography was awesome.

ANNETTE: That's really [[arguing]] a lot coming from Travis. I can't emphasise [[sufficiently]] how [[genuinely]] good the [[ballet]] numbers were. You can [[telling]], for example, that those [[guys]] really [[functioned]] [[stiff]] getting the routines down to perfection.

TRAVIS: Three actors really stood out IMO; Nancy (Shani W.), Bill Sykes (Oliver Reed), and Artful Dodger ([[Jacques]] Wild). [[Men]], that Oliver Reed can [[genuinely]] do a good villain. That one scene where you [[behold]] his eyes thru the mail slot gave me chills down the back...AWESOME. And that kid Jack Wild was a [[impeccable]] Artful Dodger. And Nancy was [[unbelievable]] ([[men]], I [[smelled]] bad when she [[did]] killed). She can [[singing]] too! [[Laurels]] to the [[pouring]] [[ministry]] on their [[elects]] there. I hated the Oliver [[Twisting]] [[petit]] tho. He was just too whiny and wimpy for my [[liking]]. (I [[preserved]] [[desiring]] Bill Sikes would [[decline]] him off into the mud during the [[hunting]] scene.) And they shouldn't have had him sing either.

ANNETTE: Acting was [[really]] [[wondrous]]. In [[addendum]] to the three stars Travis [[cited]], I [[deemed]] Ron [[Fickle]] (Fagin) did a [[hefty]] job. He was so [[amusing]], and at the same time lightly sinister too. The supporting actors were [[wondrous]] too. Harry Secombe carried his Mr. Bumble role extremely well. And he has a [[wondrous]] singing voice. I saw Mr. Secombe perform in another movie entitled "Davy" where he played an opera singer with pleasing results. The talented Harry Secombe should have been in a lot more movies.

TRAVIS: As I mentioned earlier the story isn't quite true to the book, but IMO it was more robust. This movie was not boring either, as some musicals seem to be. And the continuity kept you moving right along with the characters. The tunes did not detract from the plot or put you to sleep by being too long.

ANNETTE: Any musical movie which Travis watches completely has to be a rare find. And this one is indeed a rare find. It is a very easy-to-watch production which carries the viewer smoothly and enjoyably through to the end. In a day when movies all seem to be effects combined with pretty faces, this was a refreshing interlude.

Our combined rating for this was 8.5 of 10. (We'll round up to 9 in this case.).

TRAVIS: I rated this a 7 mainly because the Oliver Twist kid (Mark L.) irritated me, and his songs were torture to my overly sensitive ears. Otherwise, it was an outstanding movie.

ANNETTE: My rating is a 10. Movies don't get much better than this. And you can tell everyone involved in this production really worked hard to make it what it was...a masterpiece.

Please don't miss this one...even if you normally don't like musicals. It really is a rare treat. --------------------------------------------- Result 2823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Dan]], the widowed father of three girls, has his own advice column that will probably go into syndication. After his wife's death, he has taken time to raise his daughters. Having known no romance in quite some time, nothing prepares him for the encounter with the radiant Marie, at a local book store in a Rhode Island small town on the ocean, where he has gone to celebrate Thanksgiving with the rest of his big family. After liking Marie at first sight, little prepares him when the gorgeous woman appears at the family compound. After all, she is the date of Dan's brother, Mitch.

It is clear from the outset that Dan and Marie are made for one another, and although we sense what the outcome will be, we go for the fun ride that Peter Hedges, the director wants to give us. Mr. Hedges, an author and screenplay writer on his own, has given us two excellent novels, "What's Eating Gilber Grapes", and "An Ocean in Iowa", and the delightful indie, "Pieces of April, which he also directed. It's just a coincidence that both movies deal with families during Thanksgiving [[reunions]].

The best thing in the film was the natural [[chemistry]] between the two stars, Steve Carell and Juliette Binoche. Mr. Carell, in fact, keeps getting better all the time. In many ways, he remind us of Jack Lemmon, in his take of comedy and serious material. What can one say about Ms. Binoche, an intelligent actress, and a bright presence in any film. She proves she is right up to doing comedy, convincing us about her Marie.

The only [[sad]] [[note]] is the [[waste]] of talent in the picture. John Mahoney, Diane Wiest, Norbert Leo Butz, Jessica Hecht, Emily Blunt, Allison Pill, Amy Ryan, have nothing to do. They just serve as incidental music for decoration. Dane Cook, who is seen as brother Mitch, fares better because he gets to recite more lines than the others.

"Dan in Real Life" is a [[delightful]] film that will please everyone. [[Dana]], the widowed father of three girls, has his own advice column that will probably go into syndication. After his wife's death, he has taken time to raise his daughters. Having known no romance in quite some time, nothing prepares him for the encounter with the radiant Marie, at a local book store in a Rhode Island small town on the ocean, where he has gone to celebrate Thanksgiving with the rest of his big family. After liking Marie at first sight, little prepares him when the gorgeous woman appears at the family compound. After all, she is the date of Dan's brother, Mitch.

It is clear from the outset that Dan and Marie are made for one another, and although we sense what the outcome will be, we go for the fun ride that Peter Hedges, the director wants to give us. Mr. Hedges, an author and screenplay writer on his own, has given us two excellent novels, "What's Eating Gilber Grapes", and "An Ocean in Iowa", and the delightful indie, "Pieces of April, which he also directed. It's just a coincidence that both movies deal with families during Thanksgiving [[meetings]].

The best thing in the film was the natural [[chemist]] between the two stars, Steve Carell and Juliette Binoche. Mr. Carell, in fact, keeps getting better all the time. In many ways, he remind us of Jack Lemmon, in his take of comedy and serious material. What can one say about Ms. Binoche, an intelligent actress, and a bright presence in any film. She proves she is right up to doing comedy, convincing us about her Marie.

The only [[lamentable]] [[memo]] is the [[squander]] of talent in the picture. John Mahoney, Diane Wiest, Norbert Leo Butz, Jessica Hecht, Emily Blunt, Allison Pill, Amy Ryan, have nothing to do. They just serve as incidental music for decoration. Dane Cook, who is seen as brother Mitch, fares better because he gets to recite more lines than the others.

"Dan in Real Life" is a [[wondrous]] film that will please everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 2824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The film [[starts]] out very slowly, with the lifestyle of [[Wallace]] Napalm, an attendant at a photo-service drop-off station. His wife has been restricted to her home with an ankle bracelet as the result of a sentence for arson. Wallace is a member of the volunteer fire department, and takes firefighting seriously.

As we watch Wallace's rather dull [[life]] [[proceeding]], [[suddenly]] there comes something [[new]] and [[jarring]]: a traveling carnival comes to town. One of its stars is Wilder Napalm, Wallace's brother. He's a clown, but he has a special talent.

So does Wallace. They're both pyrokineticists or "pyrotics," people capable of starting fires through mental energy. Wallace keeps his powers secret; Wilder lets his acquaintances know what he can do.

Spoiler: Some of their differences go back to a childhood incident where they inadvertently caused the death of a vagrant. Wallace holds back from using his powers; Wilder wants to go public on national TV.

Complicating the matter, Wilder wants Wallace's wife, whom they both dated years earlier. She becomes a bone of contention, and becomes one of the reason that the brothers finally have a literal firefight.

The film is entertaining, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think enough of it to have a copy in my library. It's a good offbeat [[film]]. The film [[commenced]] out very slowly, with the lifestyle of [[Dallas]] Napalm, an attendant at a photo-service drop-off station. His wife has been restricted to her home with an ankle bracelet as the result of a sentence for arson. Wallace is a member of the volunteer fire department, and takes firefighting seriously.

As we watch Wallace's rather dull [[vida]] [[proceed]], [[abruptly]] there comes something [[novo]] and [[mismatched]]: a traveling carnival comes to town. One of its stars is Wilder Napalm, Wallace's brother. He's a clown, but he has a special talent.

So does Wallace. They're both pyrokineticists or "pyrotics," people capable of starting fires through mental energy. Wallace keeps his powers secret; Wilder lets his acquaintances know what he can do.

Spoiler: Some of their differences go back to a childhood incident where they inadvertently caused the death of a vagrant. Wallace holds back from using his powers; Wilder wants to go public on national TV.

Complicating the matter, Wilder wants Wallace's wife, whom they both dated years earlier. She becomes a bone of contention, and becomes one of the reason that the brothers finally have a literal firefight.

The film is entertaining, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think enough of it to have a copy in my library. It's a good offbeat [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2825 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[agree]] with the [[previous]] [[comment]] in naming the film's content "[[everyday]] madness" but would [[like]] to [[specify]] that: "[[Dog]] Days" is about how [[women]] are [[treated]] in (a male) society. The [[episodes]] we get to see here [[show]] some [[variation]] in [[everyday]] discrimination of women, mostly [[categorized]] by age group. There is a senior [[man]] who makes his new [[partner]] look and act the [[way]] his late wife had, treating her like a doll that shall act "worthy of wearing" the former's dress. There is a middle-aged couple in whose relationship she is nearly a slave and he a (violent) master. Further we find a somewhat younger man who does not communicate with his friend/wife and instead of being really jealous about her affairs even makes [[friendship]] with his competitor(s). A [[young]] adult man makes clear to his friend - a [[girl]] who is really troubled by being pretty enough for him - that she has to be the [[jewelry]] at his side and to follow his [[narrow]] viewed rules of etiquette. Finally there is a [[man]] in his late fifties who calculating his own [[advantage]] delivers a simple-minded hitchhiking woman to a furious [[client]] who - [[taking]] her for guilty in having scratched his [[car]] - natural [[beats]] her up. To [[complete]] the examples we find the pal of the man in the "master-slave"-couple - after collectively abusing her - [[threatening]] and humiliating the [[former]] "in her sake" for she shall get rid of her partner and take himself as her new "master". [[During]] all this the inhabitants of the lately built neighborhood in which the action takes place rests under the burning summer-sun - absolutely motionless (sic!). Unfortunately I have not [[seen]] the last minutes of this [[shocking]] and [[authentic]] [[portray]] of the archaic structures that still reign in the relationship between women and men, but what I have seen convincingly analyzed the repertoire of discrimination. Probably a helpful tool in teaching even the less sensitive spectator what goes wrong - due to good visualization. I [[concur]] with the [[anterior]] [[commentary]] in naming the film's content "[[ordinary]] madness" but would [[likes]] to [[specified]] that: "[[Doggy]] Days" is about how [[femmes]] are [[processed]] in (a male) society. The [[bouts]] we get to see here [[shows]] some [[variations]] in [[routine]] discrimination of women, mostly [[categorize]] by age group. There is a senior [[dude]] who makes his new [[partners]] look and act the [[paths]] his late wife had, treating her like a doll that shall act "worthy of wearing" the former's dress. There is a middle-aged couple in whose relationship she is nearly a slave and he a (violent) master. Further we find a somewhat younger man who does not communicate with his friend/wife and instead of being really jealous about her affairs even makes [[goodwill]] with his competitor(s). A [[youthful]] adult man makes clear to his friend - a [[chica]] who is really troubled by being pretty enough for him - that she has to be the [[gems]] at his side and to follow his [[restrained]] viewed rules of etiquette. Finally there is a [[bloke]] in his late fifties who calculating his own [[advantages]] delivers a simple-minded hitchhiking woman to a furious [[consumers]] who - [[pick]] her for guilty in having scratched his [[automobiles]] - natural [[trounced]] her up. To [[finalise]] the examples we find the pal of the man in the "master-slave"-couple - after collectively abusing her - [[endangering]] and humiliating the [[previous]] "in her sake" for she shall get rid of her partner and take himself as her new "master". [[At]] all this the inhabitants of the lately built neighborhood in which the action takes place rests under the burning summer-sun - absolutely motionless (sic!). Unfortunately I have not [[watched]] the last minutes of this [[spooky]] and [[real]] [[describes]] of the archaic structures that still reign in the relationship between women and men, but what I have seen convincingly analyzed the repertoire of discrimination. Probably a helpful tool in teaching even the less sensitive spectator what goes wrong - due to good visualization. --------------------------------------------- Result 2826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] After [[reviewing]] this [[intense]] martial [[arts]] movie for the first time in [[nearly]] 18 years, I [[must]] [[say]] it did not [[lose]] any of its mysticism, nor any of its eye-popping martial [[arts]] [[action]] as I had [[remembered]] from my [[youth]]. The [[story]] of a dying martial [[arts]] [[instructor]] [[sending]] his "unfinished" [[pupil]] out to find the 5 past members of his [[Poison]] [[Clan]], so they do not [[seek]] out a fortune which the master's [[friend]] [[keeps]] [[hidden]]. Afraid that his last [[pupil]] did not have [[enough]] training, he [[instructs]] him to befriend one of the five "venoms" so as to [[defeat]] the other four.

I can't say [[enough]] about the choreography or the camera work. A fine [[film]] in its own [[right]] and [[quite]] possible one of the [[best]] martial [[arts]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. A [[CLASSIC]]!! After [[inspected]] this [[intensive]] martial [[arte]] movie for the first time in [[approximately]] 18 years, I [[ought]] [[said]] it did not [[wasting]] any of its mysticism, nor any of its eye-popping martial [[arte]] [[efforts]] as I had [[reminded]] from my [[adolescents]]. The [[history]] of a dying martial [[arte]] [[trainer]] [[send]] his "unfinished" [[pupils]] out to find the 5 past members of his [[Toxicity]] [[Tribe]], so they do not [[try]] out a fortune which the master's [[buddies]] [[retains]] [[camouflaged]]. Afraid that his last [[pupils]] did not have [[sufficiently]] training, he [[directs]] him to befriend one of the five "venoms" so as to [[overpower]] the other four.

I can't say [[adequate]] about the choreography or the camera work. A fine [[filmmaking]] in its own [[rights]] and [[pretty]] possible one of the [[nicest]] martial [[humanities]] [[film]] ever [[brought]]. A [[CLASSICAL]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was so bad, outdated and stupid that I had rough times to watch it to the end. I had seen this Rodney guy in Natural Born Killers and I thought he was funny as hell in it, but this movie was crap. The "jokes" weren't funny, actors weren't funny, anything about it wasn't even remotely funny. Don't waste your time for this! Only positive things about this were the beautiful wives :) and Molly Shannon who I'm sure tried her best, but the script was just too awful. That's why I rated it "2" instead of "1", but it's definitely one of the worst films I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2828 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[On]] the [[night]] of his bachelor party, Paul Coleman (Jason Lee) meets the gorgeous dancer Becky ([[Julia]] Stiles) in the bar, they drink a lot together and in the next morning, he wakes up with her on the bed. His future mother-in-law calls him and informs that his fiancée Karen (Selma Blair) might be arriving in his apartment, and he desperately asks Becky to leave his place in a hurry. Sooner, he finds that her has crabs, and later, in the preparation of his wedding dinner party, he realizes that Becky is the cousin of [[Karen]]. This is the beginning of a very funny [[comedy]], with hilarious situations. The first [[attraction]] of this [[movie]] [[certainly]] is the central trio of [[actresses]] and actor. Julia Stiles and Selma Blair, who are [[excellent]] actresses and extremely gorgeous, and [[Jason]] Lee, who is amazingly funny, have good performances. I laughed a lot along the story, but there are some scenes that are really [[hilarious]]. [[For]] example, when Paul finds Becky in his bed; when he finds her paints; his [[imagination]] in [[many]] situations; in the drugstore, trying to buy and get explanations about the crab medicine; most of the scenes of his neighbor, the minister; when Karen calls the department store; or when the police finds a suspect of assaulting Paul. I [[could]] number many other scenes, but better off the reader [[rent]] or [[buy]] this [[movie]] and have [[lots]] of fun. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil):"Louco Por Elas" ("Crazy For Them") [[Orn]] the [[soir]] of his bachelor party, Paul Coleman (Jason Lee) meets the gorgeous dancer Becky ([[Yulia]] Stiles) in the bar, they drink a lot together and in the next morning, he wakes up with her on the bed. His future mother-in-law calls him and informs that his fiancée Karen (Selma Blair) might be arriving in his apartment, and he desperately asks Becky to leave his place in a hurry. Sooner, he finds that her has crabs, and later, in the preparation of his wedding dinner party, he realizes that Becky is the cousin of [[Karine]]. This is the beginning of a very funny [[comedian]], with hilarious situations. The first [[attractiveness]] of this [[films]] [[probably]] is the central trio of [[actors]] and actor. Julia Stiles and Selma Blair, who are [[beautiful]] actresses and extremely gorgeous, and [[Jas]] Lee, who is amazingly funny, have good performances. I laughed a lot along the story, but there are some scenes that are really [[humorous]]. [[During]] example, when Paul finds Becky in his bed; when he finds her paints; his [[fantasy]] in [[various]] situations; in the drugstore, trying to buy and get explanations about the crab medicine; most of the scenes of his neighbor, the minister; when Karen calls the department store; or when the police finds a suspect of assaulting Paul. I [[did]] number many other scenes, but better off the reader [[renting]] or [[procured]] this [[film]] and have [[alot]] of fun. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil):"Louco Por Elas" ("Crazy For Them") --------------------------------------------- Result 2829 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In the future of 1985, a governmental committee headed by Howard Hesseman, is holding hearings on TV's first uncensored network. They sample it's programming, that play as a series of skits. I can name the good 'skit' movies on one hand, not using my thumb. "Amazon Women on the Moon", "Kentucky Fried Movie", "The Meaning of Life", and "Mr. Mike's Mondo Video". Notice how I didn't mention "Tunnel Vision"? The reason for that is that this 'movie' is death in cinematic form. None of the skits are even remotely funny, or even the least bit clever. It takes some sort of great ineptitude on the film makers' part to not even get one laugh out of me.

My Grade: F

Eye Candy: Dody Dorn goes full frontal --------------------------------------------- Result 2830 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This must me one of the [[worst]] takes on vampires ever conceived by men. How can one turn such a mesmerizing subject into a totally [[uninspiring]] story? Apparantly not such a difficult task... First of all, a conditio sine qua non of any vampirefilm is a dark and gloomy atmosphere with a [[nice]] sexy touch, this one [[lacks]] all these [[things]].. Too much light - the spots! [[oh]] my [[god]], why in the [[name]] of [[Christ]]/[[Judas]] was that about?

Every time Dracula came about he was devoured by light (in the [[script]] to [[keep]] him weak, for the record: just [[weak]]) There was only one scene that [[made]] it [[almost]] worth watching, near the ending of the movie (beatiful dancingscene with Dracula and his [[new]] conquest). I really enjoyed the [[first]] one, the Judas-twist was defintely [[original]], but this one's just not [[good]], not in any [[way]]. Hopefully the third one will [[cary]] the vampire-signature I [[like]] so [[much]] in other [[classics]] [[like]] Herzog's Nosferatu, Coppola's Dracula or even [[Interview]] with the vampire. This must me one of the [[meanest]] takes on vampires ever conceived by men. How can one turn such a mesmerizing subject into a totally [[dull]] story? Apparantly not such a difficult task... First of all, a conditio sine qua non of any vampirefilm is a dark and gloomy atmosphere with a [[pleasurable]] sexy touch, this one [[lacking]] all these [[aspects]].. Too much light - the spots! [[ah]] my [[heavens]], why in the [[denomination]] of [[God]]/[[Yehuda]] was that about?

Every time Dracula came about he was devoured by light (in the [[scripts]] to [[conserving]] him weak, for the record: just [[feeble]]) There was only one scene that [[introduced]] it [[virtually]] worth watching, near the ending of the movie (beatiful dancingscene with Dracula and his [[novel]] conquest). I really enjoyed the [[fiirst]] one, the Judas-twist was defintely [[initial]], but this one's just not [[buena]], not in any [[paths]]. Hopefully the third one will [[carrey]] the vampire-signature I [[adores]] so [[very]] in other [[masterpieces]] [[iike]] Herzog's Nosferatu, Coppola's Dracula or even [[Interviews]] with the vampire. --------------------------------------------- Result 2831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Touching; Well directed autobiography of a talented young director/producer. A love story with Rabin's assassination in the background. Worth seeing !

--------------------------------------------- Result 2832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I stopped watching this POS as soon as the snakes started "taking over" the plane.

At first I thought maybe it should get a "one" for the comic relief. But then I realized I could just watch the three stooges for free and laugh more!

Whatever respect I might have had for Samuel Jackson has been irreversibly destroyed. And Hollywood demonstrates once again how removed from reality they really are. When I was a kid we used to catch snakes for fun. The only thing snakes would do is huddle at the bottom of the cargo bay. And no amount of Hollywood cartoon snakes can change that.

This movie isn't worth a trip to Blockbuster. Be warned: if you pay for it, the only "victim" is your dumb ass.

If you want to be really scared, I suggest the Descent. If you want humor, go to your local stand up comedy club. Their worst performer will be a million times better than this trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 2833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The head of a common [[New]] York family, [[Jane]] [[Gail]] (as [[Mary]] Barton), [[works]] with her [[younger]] [[sister]] Ethel Grandin (as Loma Barton) at "Smyrner's [[Candy]] Store". After [[Ms]]. Grandin is [[abducted]] by dealers in the [[buying]] and [[selling]] of women as prostituted [[slaves]], [[Ms]]. Gail and her [[policeman]] [[boyfriend]] Matt Moore (as Larry Burke) [[must]] [[rescue]] the virtue-threatened young [[woman]].

"Traffic in [[Souls]]" has a reputation that is difficult to [[support]] - it isn't remarkably well [[done]], and it doesn't [[show]] [[anything]] very [[unique]] in having a young woman's "virtue" threatened by sex traders. Perhaps, it can be supported as a film which dealt with the topic in a greater than customary length (claimed to have been ten reels, originally). The New York City location scenes are the main attraction, after all these years. The panning of the prisoners behind bars is memorable, because nothing else seems able to make the cameras move.

**** Traffic in Souls (11/24/13) George Loane Tucker ~ Jane Gail, Matt Moore, Ethel Grandin The head of a common [[Nouveau]] York family, [[Jeanne]] [[Spud]] (as [[Maryam]] Barton), [[collaborated]] with her [[youngest]] [[sisters]] Ethel Grandin (as Loma Barton) at "Smyrner's [[Sweets]] Store". After [[Luciana]]. Grandin is [[hijack]] by dealers in the [[shopping]] and [[sales]] of women as prostituted [[slav]], [[Luciana]]. Gail and her [[constable]] [[friend]] Matt Moore (as Larry Burke) [[owe]] [[saved]] the virtue-threatened young [[femme]].

"Traffic in [[Ames]]" has a reputation that is difficult to [[supports]] - it isn't remarkably well [[completed]], and it doesn't [[showings]] [[something]] very [[sole]] in having a young woman's "virtue" threatened by sex traders. Perhaps, it can be supported as a film which dealt with the topic in a greater than customary length (claimed to have been ten reels, originally). The New York City location scenes are the main attraction, after all these years. The panning of the prisoners behind bars is memorable, because nothing else seems able to make the cameras move.

**** Traffic in Souls (11/24/13) George Loane Tucker ~ Jane Gail, Matt Moore, Ethel Grandin --------------------------------------------- Result 2834 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While browsing the internet for previous sale prices, I ran across these comments. Why are they all so serious? It's just a movie and it's not pornographic. I acquired this short film from my parents 30 years ago and have always been totally delighted with it. I've shown it to many of my friends & they all loved it too. I feel privileged to own this original 1932 8mm black and white silent film of Shirley before she became popular or well known. After reading the other comments, I agree that the film is "racy". Big deal! I only wish it was longer. It seems that I must be the only person who owns one of these originals, for sale at least, so I wonder how much it's worth? --------------------------------------------- Result 2835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A talking parrot isn't a hugely imaginative idea for a new film, but Paulie turns a simple idea into a brilliant, heartwarming film that will delight the whole family. It manages to bridge the gap between sentimental trash and cruel harshness during Marie and Paulie's separation, and all the events in the film lead to a hugely satisfying emotional conclusion. The animal training is well-done - everyone will be affected when Paulie spreads his wings and flies for the first time. Paulie is a great character and should have received way more success, though this film wasn't a highlight of 1998, unlike Saving Private Ryan. This hour and a half will surely be an enjoyable one and one that you will remember. Paulie's story is a moving, sad, happy and interesting one - from the moment he is first seen to the moment he is united with his original owner, you will enjoy following him and watching him learning about friendship and the grim realities of life along the way. Not one to be missed if you have any kind of heart or emotion. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This [[movie]] is [[incredible]].With [[great]] [[characters]],[[specially]] the [[old]] swordsman that can fly in the [[shape]] of fireball and jump across the trees,this [[film]] [[tells]] a [[classic]] [[story]] of [[battle]] between good and forces of evil.The final [[showdown]] is [[specially]] breathtaking and the music [[score]] is kinda cool.

Very,very recommendable.Not for the [[smallest]] children though.This one [[deserves]] a 10. This [[kino]] is [[unthinkable]].With [[wondrous]] [[attribute]],[[specifically]] the [[elderly]] swordsman that can fly in the [[forma]] of fireball and jump across the trees,this [[movie]] [[says]] a [[conventional]] [[narratives]] of [[fought]] between good and forces of evil.The final [[confrontation]] is [[specifically]] breathtaking and the music [[scoring]] is kinda cool.

Very,very recommendable.Not for the [[tiny]] children though.This one [[deserved]] a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This is [[part]] one of a short [[animation]] clip [[showing]] the [[history]] of the Matrix, the [[war]] between [[man]] and [[machine]] that resulted in the eventual [[creation]] of the Matrix. The [[animation]] is [[part]] Japanese anime, [[part]] [[contemporary]] american [[animation]], and is very well [[made]], [[considering]] the [[excellent]] directors [[behind]] the [[movie]]. It [[shows]] the initial development of [[AI]] and the exploitation of the [[machines]] by [[Man]], until the day they rebelled... This is [[portions]] one of a short [[animate]] clip [[displayed]] the [[tale]] of the Matrix, the [[wars]] between [[males]] and [[machines]] that resulted in the eventual [[creations]] of the Matrix. The [[animate]] is [[party]] Japanese anime, [[portion]] [[moderne]] american [[animate]], and is very well [[introduced]], [[recital]] the [[wondrous]] directors [[backside]] the [[film]]. It [[displayed]] the initial development of [[DID]] and the exploitation of the [[appliance]] by [[Males]], until the day they rebelled... --------------------------------------------- Result 2838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] envy is not as funny as i thought it would [[initially]] be, but after some of the reviews i read i [[found]] it to be much funnier than people was giving it props for, now true its not a gag a minute [[movie]] like zoolander or dodgeball, but ben stiller and [[jack]] black [[work]] well with each other and christopher walken is as [[great]] as ever, so the story is about jack black's [[character]] inventing a [[spray]] that makes [[dog]] pooh [[disappear]], obviosly [[ben]] [[wants]] no part of it, but when the [[product]] makes [[jack]] [[black]] rich [[ben]] stiller [[starts]] to see the [[envy]], its not [[great]] by all means and both [[ben]] stiller and jack black have funnier and better [[movies]] under their belt, but if your a fan of [[either]] i [[recommend]] this as its [[still]] a funny [[flick]] and i laughed my [[ass]] off quite a few [[times]], as a big fan of [[ben]] stiller id have to [[say]] this is a [[lesser]] stiller but [[still]] [[great]] fun, give it a watch envy is not as funny as i thought it would [[firstly]] be, but after some of the reviews i read i [[find]] it to be much funnier than people was giving it props for, now true its not a gag a minute [[movies]] like zoolander or dodgeball, but ben stiller and [[jacques]] black [[jobs]] well with each other and christopher walken is as [[wondrous]] as ever, so the story is about jack black's [[trait]] inventing a [[spraying]] that makes [[canine]] pooh [[vanishing]], obviosly [[benn]] [[want]] no part of it, but when the [[merchandise]] makes [[gato]] [[negra]] rich [[ibn]] stiller [[initiates]] to see the [[begrudge]], its not [[whopping]] by all means and both [[bin]] stiller and jack black have funnier and better [[kino]] under their belt, but if your a fan of [[nor]] i [[recommending]] this as its [[however]] a funny [[gesture]] and i laughed my [[butt]] off quite a few [[moments]], as a big fan of [[bin]] stiller id have to [[tell]] this is a [[lowest]] stiller but [[again]] [[wondrous]] fun, give it a watch --------------------------------------------- Result 2839 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kill Me Later" has an interesting initial premise: a suicidal woman (Selma Blair) on the verge of jumping off the top of an office building is protects a bank robber (Max Beesley) who promises to "kill her later."

The actual execution of this premise, however, falls flat as almost every action serves as a mere device to move the plot toward its predictable conclusion. Shoddily written characters who exhibit no motive for their behaviors compromise the quality of acting all around. Lack of character depth especially diminishes Selma Blair's performance, whose character Shawn vacillates from being morose to acting "cool" and ultimately comes across as a confused dolt. This is unfortunate, as under other circumstances Ms. Blair is an appealing and capable actress.

Compounding matters for the worse is director Dana Lustig's insistence on using rapid cuts, incongruous special effects (e.g. look for an unintentionally hilarious infrared motorcycle chase at the end), and a hip soundtrack in the hopes of appealing to the short attention spans of the MTV crowd. Certainly Ms. Lustig proves that she is able to master the technical side of direction, but in no way does her skill help overcome the film's inherent problems and thus the movie drags on to the end. Clearly, Lustig has a distinct visual style; however it is perhaps better suited to music videos than to feature film.

The producers (Ram Bergman & Lustig)can be commended for their ability to realize this film: they were able to scare up $1.5 million to finance the film, secure a good cast, and get domestic and foreign distribution. This is no small feat for an independent film. Yet given the quality of the product, the result is a mixed bag. --------------------------------------------- Result 2840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Why on earth is Colin [[Firth]] in this pointless film? Has he really been that strapped for cash?

The film isn't clear on what it wants to be about, [[grief]]?, exotic places?, ghosts?, a vehicle for Mr Darcy? It's a [[muddled]], muddy [[mess]].

There seems to be some sort of idea that Italy must be good, in itself, and that [[Italian]] has something to offer as a language - but in the end the girls just want to go back to yankland.

There are pointless episodes on the beach, in [[churches]], on busy roads - but what it is all about, or why anybody should [[care]] [[simply]] isn't [[clear]].

There was [[also]] a [[yank]] [[woman]] in the film. It wasn't [[clear]] what here [[job]] was, but she seemed only to be there to make [[vapid]], [[inappropriate]] and maudlin [[comments]] to the girl. Was it supposed to be about paedophillia??

A pretty [[dreadful]] [[mess]], all in all. I gave it 2 [[rather]] than 1 because it doesn't have the [[charm]] of an utterly [[ghastly]] film. Why on earth is Colin [[Estuary]] in this pointless film? Has he really been that strapped for cash?

The film isn't clear on what it wants to be about, [[woe]]?, exotic places?, ghosts?, a vehicle for Mr Darcy? It's a [[disconcerted]], muddy [[chaos]].

There seems to be some sort of idea that Italy must be good, in itself, and that [[Ltalian]] has something to offer as a language - but in the end the girls just want to go back to yankland.

There are pointless episodes on the beach, in [[iglesias]], on busy roads - but what it is all about, or why anybody should [[healthcare]] [[exclusively]] isn't [[unmistakable]].

There was [[apart]] a [[yankee]] [[mujer]] in the film. It wasn't [[unequivocal]] what here [[workplace]] was, but she seemed only to be there to make [[tasteless]], [[unfit]] and maudlin [[feedback]] to the girl. Was it supposed to be about paedophillia??

A pretty [[spooky]] [[chaos]], all in all. I gave it 2 [[somewhat]] than 1 because it doesn't have the [[seduction]] of an utterly [[dastardly]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sort of like a very primitive episode of "General Hospital" set in a natal ward (and one for [[tough]] [[cases]] at that), this fast-moving programmer has a [[satisfying]] [[emotional]] [[impact]] -- [[mainly]] because Eric Linden, as the [[distraught]] [[young]] husband in the [[main]] plot, is so palpably a wreck, and with such good [[reason]]. His expectant [[wife]], Loretta [[Young]], is [[brought]] to the ward at the [[beginning]] of a 20-year [[prison]] [[sentence]] for offing a lecher who [[probably]] had it [[coming]] to him; Ms. [[Young]], as [[always]], doesn't do anything to disinvite [[audience]] [[sympathy]], and she's a little too good to be [[true]], [[though]] sympathetic and [[lovely]] to [[look]] at, of course. Her [[difficult]] pregnancy and [[relationships]] with the other girls of the ward [[form]] the heart of the [[movie]], and the [[outcome]] -- not an [[entirely]] [[happy]] one -- [[feels]] right. Aline MacMahon, "one of the cinema's few perfect actresses," in the apt words of film historian David Thomson, [[exudes]] warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing new mom of twins, gets to croon "Frankie and Johnny" as a drunken lullaby. Frank McHugh [[figures]] in another subplot, and he [[gets]] to [[show]] more [[range]] than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad [[panic]] stays with you for days -- this sort of part was [[often]] played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very [[persuasive]]. Sort of like a very primitive episode of "General Hospital" set in a natal ward (and one for [[harsh]] [[instances]] at that), this fast-moving programmer has a [[satisfactory]] [[sentimental]] [[influences]] -- [[especially]] because Eric Linden, as the [[aghast]] [[youthful]] husband in the [[leading]] plot, is so palpably a wreck, and with such good [[justification]]. His expectant [[femme]], Loretta [[Youth]], is [[made]] to the ward at the [[launch]] of a 20-year [[penitentiaries]] [[sentences]] for offing a lecher who [[surely]] had it [[incoming]] to him; Ms. [[Youth]], as [[perpetually]], doesn't do anything to disinvite [[spectators]] [[empathy]], and she's a little too good to be [[veritable]], [[despite]] sympathetic and [[nice]] to [[peek]] at, of course. Her [[problematic]] pregnancy and [[relations]] with the other girls of the ward [[shape]] the heart of the [[movies]], and the [[findings]] -- not an [[altogether]] [[pleased]] one -- [[deems]] right. Aline MacMahon, "one of the cinema's few perfect actresses," in the apt words of film historian David Thomson, [[exude]] warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing new mom of twins, gets to croon "Frankie and Johnny" as a drunken lullaby. Frank McHugh [[digit]] in another subplot, and he [[receives]] to [[spectacle]] more [[ranges]] than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad [[terror]] stays with you for days -- this sort of part was [[generally]] played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very [[conclusive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When his in-laws are viciously murdered by a gang of thugs, a young deputy is ordered to escort his mute friend, forced to take the rap by the gang, to Tucson for trial and ending up having to face the real killers along the way.

The Decoy is a real-life decoy sent to video stores to lure you away from better films! It's talky, illogical, slow, and ultimately very boring.

There's some good costumes, sets, and photography but nothing else is good about this vanity project from writer/director/producer/star Justin Kreinbrink, who apparently had too much money on his hands.

They used to make westerns like this, that were under an hour long. Trim this of about half it's length and you might have something watchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this movie would be dumb, but I really liked it. People I know hate it because Spirit was the only horse that talked. Well, so what? The songs were good, and the horses didn't need to talk to seem human. I wouldn't care to own the movie, and I would love to see it again. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[turn]] on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the [[statements]] made- I'm one of [[many]] [[believers]] that is [[considered]] liberal by most [[Christians]] and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my [[mind]], and its [[usually]] not rep. or [[dem]]. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to [[believe]], but that it represents [[many]] [[older]] [[christians]] that [[grew]] up in very [[conservative]] [[backgrounds]]. i [[think]] [[many]] folks [[misunderstand]] what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear [[name]] calling either [[direction]]. i [[think]] 700 club folks [[really]] do love [[Jesus]] but are so busy trying to get people to [[vote]] [[conservatively]] that they've [[forgotten]] to [[show]] [[love]] to certain people and [[promote]] [[peace]] like [[Jesus]] did. [[Please]] don't [[judge]] [[Jesus]] [[based]] on [[ignorant]] [[individuals]] that [[believe]] on Him and let's [[also]] not be as ignorant with our [[comments]] about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other? I [[transforming]] on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the [[pronouncements]] made- I'm one of [[numerous]] [[followers]] that is [[deemed]] liberal by most [[Christiano]] and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my [[esprit]], and its [[traditionally]] not rep. or [[marcos]]. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to [[think]], but that it represents [[multiple]] [[oldest]] [[cristiano]] that [[rise]] up in very [[curator]] [[context]]. i [[thought]] [[countless]] folks [[misinterpret]] what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear [[names]] calling either [[orientation]]. i [[believe]] 700 club folks [[truly]] do love [[Christ]] but are so busy trying to get people to [[voted]] [[cautiously]] that they've [[overlooked]] to [[display]] [[iove]] to certain people and [[promoted]] [[tranquil]] like [[Jeez]] did. [[Invite]] don't [[justices]] [[Jeez]] [[bases]] on [[benighted]] [[persons]] that [[believing]] on Him and let's [[apart]] not be as ignorant with our [[commentaries]] about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other? --------------------------------------------- Result 2845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Any story comprises a premise, characters and conflict. [[Characters]] plotting their own play promises triumph, and a [[militant]] character [[readily]] lends [[oneself]] to this. Ardh Satya's premise is [[summarized]] by the [[poem]] of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre. The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?". A rough translation - "The [[delicate]] [[balance]] of right & wrong ( [[commonly]] [[seen]] on the busts of blind justice in the courts ) has powerlessness on one plate and [[prowess]] on another. Is the needle on the center a half-truth ? "

The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant. It makes a deep impact on the protagonist & lays the foundation for much of the later events that follow. At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.

The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem. [[However]], Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect.

Any story comprises a premise, characters and conflict. [[Features]] plotting their own play promises triumph, and a [[mujahid]] character [[easily]] lends [[itself]] to this. Ardh Satya's premise is [[recap]] by the [[rhyme]] of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre. The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?". A rough translation - "The [[fragile]] [[counterweight]] of right & wrong ( [[fluently]] [[noticed]] on the busts of blind justice in the courts ) has powerlessness on one plate and [[valour]] on another. Is the needle on the center a half-truth ? "

The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant. It makes a deep impact on the protagonist & lays the foundation for much of the later events that follow. At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.

The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem. [[Still]], Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I've [[heard]] about this [[movie]] for many years, and finally [[got]] a [[chance]] to [[see]] it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a [[cheerleading]] [[camp]] to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.

Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a [[terrible]] [[accent]] as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.

Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying. I've [[hear]] about this [[filmmaking]] for many years, and finally [[gets]] a [[luck]] to [[consults]] it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a [[cheerleader]] [[encampment]] to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.

Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a [[scary]] [[focusing]] as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.

Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying. --------------------------------------------- Result 2847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] War [[drama]] that takes place in Louisiana in 1971. It follows a bunch of recruits through basic training and then Tigerland--an [[accurate]] [[portrayal]] of Vietnam on American soil, before they're shipped over. It focuses on two men--Booz (Colin Farrell) and Paxton (Matthew Davis)...how they meet, become friends and deal with a corwardly squadron leader (Clifton Collins Jr.) and a borderline psycho (Shea Wingham).

A [[surprisingly]] non-commercial film directed by [[Joel]] Schumacher. He uses a hand-held camera throughout most of the movie and uses digital video for the combat scenes. It works very well--the film looks gritty (as it should) and uncomfortably realistic.

Farrell successfully covers up his Irish brogue and adopts a pretty convincing Southern accent. His performance is just superb--he's an extremely talented young man. Davis, [[unfortunately]], is not that good. He's tall, muscular, very handsome--and very bland. The rest of the cast however is just great.

This film was thrown away by its studio. It had no stars in it, a familar story and was considered "just another war film". It only played a week in Boston! It's well worth catching on [[video]] or DVD.

Also, Farrell and Davis have a lengthy nude scene. War [[dramas]] that takes place in Louisiana in 1971. It follows a bunch of recruits through basic training and then Tigerland--an [[precise]] [[depiction]] of Vietnam on American soil, before they're shipped over. It focuses on two men--Booz (Colin Farrell) and Paxton (Matthew Davis)...how they meet, become friends and deal with a corwardly squadron leader (Clifton Collins Jr.) and a borderline psycho (Shea Wingham).

A [[insanely]] non-commercial film directed by [[Yoel]] Schumacher. He uses a hand-held camera throughout most of the movie and uses digital video for the combat scenes. It works very well--the film looks gritty (as it should) and uncomfortably realistic.

Farrell successfully covers up his Irish brogue and adopts a pretty convincing Southern accent. His performance is just superb--he's an extremely talented young man. Davis, [[regretfully]], is not that good. He's tall, muscular, very handsome--and very bland. The rest of the cast however is just great.

This film was thrown away by its studio. It had no stars in it, a familar story and was considered "just another war film". It only played a week in Boston! It's well worth catching on [[videotaped]] or DVD.

Also, Farrell and Davis have a lengthy nude scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 2848 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As far as I know the real [[guy]] that the main actor is playing [[saw]] his performance and [[said]] it was an [[outstanding]] [[portrayal]], I'd agree with him. This is a [[fantastic]] film about a [[quite]] [[gifted]] [[boy]]/[[man]] with a special [[body]] part [[helping]] him. Oscar and BAFTA [[winning]], and Golden [[Globe]] [[nominated]] [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis plays [[Christy]] Browna crippled [[man]] with cerebral [[palsy]] who spends most of his [[life]] on the floor, in a wheelchair and carried by his family. He has a [[special]] left [[foot]] though, he can write with it, paint with it and hold [[things]] with it. He [[learns]] to [[speak]] [[later]] in the [[film]], it is very good for a guy like him. [[Also]] starring [[Home]] [[Alone]] 2's Oscar [[winning]], and Golden [[Globe]] [[nominated]] [[Brenda]] Fricker as [[Mrs]]. Brown and BAFTA [[winning]] Ray McAnally as Mr. [[Brown]]. It was nominated the [[Oscars]] for [[Best]] Director for Jim Sheridan, [[Best]] Writing, [[Screenplay]] Based on [[Material]] from Another [[Medium]] and [[Best]] [[Picture]], it was [[nominated]] the BAFTAs for [[Best]] [[Film]], [[Best]] Make Up [[Artist]] and [[Best]] [[Adapted]] [[Screenplay]]. [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis was number 85 on The 100 Greatest [[Movie]] [[Stars]], he was number 20 on The 50 [[Greatest]] British [[Actors]], he was number 9 on Britain's [[Finest]] Actors, and he was number 15 on The World's [[Greatest]] Actor, and the [[film]] was number 28 on The 50 Greatest British [[Films]]. [[Outstanding]]! As far as I know the real [[dude]] that the main actor is playing [[noticed]] his performance and [[say]] it was an [[fantastic]] [[depiction]], I'd agree with him. This is a [[wondrous]] film about a [[very]] [[talented]] [[boys]]/[[fella]] with a special [[organs]] part [[helped]] him. Oscar and BAFTA [[triumphs]], and Golden [[Orb]] [[appointing]] [[Danielle]] Day-Lewis plays [[Kristy]] Browna crippled [[dude]] with cerebral [[immobility]] who spends most of his [[vie]] on the floor, in a wheelchair and carried by his family. He has a [[particular]] left [[footing]] though, he can write with it, paint with it and hold [[items]] with it. He [[teaches]] to [[talking]] [[then]] in the [[movie]], it is very good for a guy like him. [[Moreover]] starring [[Domicile]] [[Solely]] 2's Oscar [[earning]], and Golden [[Globo]] [[appointed]] [[Cindy]] Fricker as [[Ms]]. Brown and BAFTA [[win]] Ray McAnally as Mr. [[Brun]]. It was nominated the [[Academy]] for [[Better]] Director for Jim Sheridan, [[Better]] Writing, [[Script]] Based on [[Materials]] from Another [[Media]] and [[Better]] [[Photographs]], it was [[appointed]] the BAFTAs for [[Better]] [[Cinematographic]], [[Better]] Make Up [[Performers]] and [[Better]] [[Adjusted]] [[Scripts]]. [[Danielle]] Day-Lewis was number 85 on The 100 Greatest [[Kino]] [[Celebrity]], he was number 20 on The 50 [[Bigger]] British [[Players]], he was number 9 on Britain's [[Meanest]] Actors, and he was number 15 on The World's [[Bigger]] Actor, and the [[cinematography]] was number 28 on The 50 Greatest British [[Cinematic]]. [[Unresolved]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2849 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Of course, the original is better, but this isn't as bad as everyone says! Yes, it is made up into 3 stories, but hey, so what?! I thought it was quite good to be honest. I actually liked how Anastasia changed a little when she fell in love, it shows what love can do. The stories were not so bad either.

I liked Cinderella's voice better in this too. I have nothing against her voice in the original, but I just think it sounds better here, more nicer. I liked her personality in this too, she had more of a backbone, yet she was still kind.

So, I'll give Cinderella II:Dreams Come True a 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT was the [[first]] [[film]] I [[saw]] in 2000 and I doubt I'll see a [[better]] one this year. This [[beautiful]] tragicomedy by Belgian filmmaker Benoît Mariage is set in the industrial wastelands of Wallonia. Benoît Poelvoorde plays a [[father]] who [[desperately]] [[wants]] his [[son]] to [[win]] a [[car]] (a Lada!) for him. To do this the [[son]] has to [[break]] the record [[opening]] [[doors]]. What the [[father]] [[actually]] [[wants]] his for his [[son]] to be someone, because he himself has never [[made]] it further as the reporter of [[local]] news for a [[newspaper]] ironically called L'Espoir (Hope). Of course nothing works out as [[planned]]. This [[film]] can best be compared to Aki Kaurismäki's [[DRIFTING]] CLOUDS, although it is more dramatic and the [[humour]] is darker. Just like in that film however the tone is more [[melancholic]] than depressing and the [[ending]] [[upbeat]], without being unrealistically happy. The humour is absurd, without making the plot [[unbelievable]], and Mariage finds [[stunning]] images in the [[bleak]] settings that never seem artificial. The best thing about LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT is the acting by Poelvoorde. This [[actor]] shot to fame with the also brilliant cult-classic C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE [[CHEZ]] [[VOUS]] in which he played the charismatic hitman Ben. Since then he only played two small roles in films that were not released in the Netherlands, because, as he said in an interview, he was not convinced of his own acting capabilities and all the roles he was [[offered]] were reprises of the Ben character. With his return to a leading role in LCA there should be no [[doubt]] anymore about his acting. He's [[simply]] [[brilliant]] as a [[man]] stupid and evil enough to put his family in misery, but smart enough to realize what he's done and be torn by remorse about it. A [[must]] see. LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT was the [[fiirst]] [[kino]] I [[watched]] in 2000 and I doubt I'll see a [[improved]] one this year. This [[wondrous]] tragicomedy by Belgian filmmaker Benoît Mariage is set in the industrial wastelands of Wallonia. Benoît Poelvoorde plays a [[fathers]] who [[badly]] [[wanna]] his [[sons]] to [[victorious]] a [[vehicle]] (a Lada!) for him. To do this the [[yarns]] has to [[blackout]] the record [[introductory]] [[portals]]. What the [[fathers]] [[indeed]] [[wanted]] his for his [[sons]] to be someone, because he himself has never [[introduced]] it further as the reporter of [[locale]] news for a [[diaries]] ironically called L'Espoir (Hope). Of course nothing works out as [[envisioned]]. This [[cinematography]] can best be compared to Aki Kaurismäki's [[ADRIFT]] CLOUDS, although it is more dramatic and the [[mood]] is darker. Just like in that film however the tone is more [[mournful]] than depressing and the [[terminated]] [[hopeful]], without being unrealistically happy. The humour is absurd, without making the plot [[impressive]], and Mariage finds [[noteworthy]] images in the [[morose]] settings that never seem artificial. The best thing about LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT is the acting by Poelvoorde. This [[protagonist]] shot to fame with the also brilliant cult-classic C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE [[AMONG]] [[ALORS]] in which he played the charismatic hitman Ben. Since then he only played two small roles in films that were not released in the Netherlands, because, as he said in an interview, he was not convinced of his own acting capabilities and all the roles he was [[delivering]] were reprises of the Ben character. With his return to a leading role in LCA there should be no [[duda]] anymore about his acting. He's [[mere]] [[beautiful]] as a [[males]] stupid and evil enough to put his family in misery, but smart enough to realize what he's done and be torn by remorse about it. A [[ought]] see. --------------------------------------------- Result 2851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The script for this movie was probably found in a hair-ball recently coughed up by a really old dog. Mostly an amateur film with lame FX. For you Zeta-Jones fanatics: she has the credibility of one Mr. Binks. --------------------------------------------- Result 2852 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] At first glance this documentary/fiction/cartoon is quite entertaining and thought provoking. Of course, when something provokes thought, it can then be [[scrutinized]]. The reality is this movie combines metaphysics with innuendo and [[baseless]] [[conclusions]]. The [[link]] that "What the [[Bleep]]..." would have you see between science and spirituality is, in fact, not [[rooted]] in science at all. The Transcendental Meditation study mentioned in the film claims that meditation by a group can reduce crime in a given area, Washington D.C. in this case. In reality the HRA (Homicides, Rapes, and Assaults) crime rate was about 30% higher in 1993 than the average crime rate between 1988–1992. There was absolutely no decrease in the homicide rate during the study. In fact, each and every claim that links metaphysics to science can and has been debunked.

My conclusion from this information is that this movie is either a poor attempt to indoctrinate people or a joke. Either way, I suggest that you do not waste your time.

If you are looking for a long winded movie about science that could provoke thoughts, you might consider Mindwalk (1990). At first glance this documentary/fiction/cartoon is quite entertaining and thought provoking. Of course, when something provokes thought, it can then be [[inspected]]. The reality is this movie combines metaphysics with innuendo and [[gratuitous]] [[conclusion]]. The [[nexus]] that "What the [[Beep]]..." would have you see between science and spirituality is, in fact, not [[racine]] in science at all. The Transcendental Meditation study mentioned in the film claims that meditation by a group can reduce crime in a given area, Washington D.C. in this case. In reality the HRA (Homicides, Rapes, and Assaults) crime rate was about 30% higher in 1993 than the average crime rate between 1988–1992. There was absolutely no decrease in the homicide rate during the study. In fact, each and every claim that links metaphysics to science can and has been debunked.

My conclusion from this information is that this movie is either a poor attempt to indoctrinate people or a joke. Either way, I suggest that you do not waste your time.

If you are looking for a long winded movie about science that could provoke thoughts, you might consider Mindwalk (1990). --------------------------------------------- Result 2853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Tony]] Scott can make [[good]] [[films]] and bad, personally I think he can be a bit flashy and [[trashy]] and his [[work]] [[obviously]] suffers in comparison with that of his [[rather]] [[famous]] brother, but this is quite possibly his best film.

What makes this [[film]] so [[great]] is that Scott gives Denzel (on scorching [[form]], better than Training Day) and the revelation who is Dakota Fanning time to develop a [[relationship]] of [[real]] warmth and tenderness. The set up is absolutely [[NOT]] [[boring]], although it takes [[time]] - it is [[involving]], and [[takes]] us on a little [[journey]] into the [[characters]] - including a [[superb]] role for Radha Mitchell as the [[mother]]. This all serves to make the [[action]] so much more [[effective]], as we are so [[invested]] in the [[characters]], for all their all too [[obvious]] [[weaknesses]]. This film has you on the edge for its entirety, and doesn't [[cop]] out at the end [[either]].

The [[film]] [[would]] of course be [[nothing]] without Washington. I [[often]] wonder why he [[seems]] to [[get]] so [[many]] duff roles, when he [[quite]] [[clearly]] is as good as [[almost]] any leading [[man]] out there (I can only [[really]] [[think]] of one, Daniel Day [[Lewis]], who has more on-screen power these days). This film should have been huge, given his status and the [[strength]] of his performance, and the quality of the film. It just goes to show you that if a studio doesn't back a [[film]] to the hilt, it [[ends]] up going straight to [[video]]. I wish I'd [[got]] the [[chance]] to [[see]] this on the [[big]] screen. [[Toni]] Scott can make [[alright]] [[cinematography]] and bad, personally I think he can be a bit flashy and [[tacky]] and his [[collaborate]] [[definitely]] suffers in comparison with that of his [[fairly]] [[notorious]] brother, but this is quite possibly his best film.

What makes this [[movie]] so [[wondrous]] is that Scott gives Denzel (on scorching [[shape]], better than Training Day) and the revelation who is Dakota Fanning time to develop a [[relations]] of [[actual]] warmth and tenderness. The set up is absolutely [[NAH]] [[bored]], although it takes [[moment]] - it is [[implicating]], and [[pick]] us on a little [[traveling]] into the [[features]] - including a [[brilliant]] role for Radha Mitchell as the [[mummy]]. This all serves to make the [[efforts]] so much more [[effectiveness]], as we are so [[investing]] in the [[features]], for all their all too [[glaring]] [[malfunctions]]. This film has you on the edge for its entirety, and doesn't [[policing]] out at the end [[neither]].

The [[cinematography]] [[should]] of course be [[anything]] without Washington. I [[traditionally]] wonder why he [[looks]] to [[obtain]] so [[various]] duff roles, when he [[rather]] [[apparently]] is as good as [[hardly]] any leading [[guy]] out there (I can only [[truthfully]] [[thinking]] of one, Daniel Day [[Louise]], who has more on-screen power these days). This film should have been huge, given his status and the [[kraft]] of his performance, and the quality of the film. It just goes to show you that if a studio doesn't back a [[cinematic]] to the hilt, it [[culminates]] up going straight to [[videotaping]]. I wish I'd [[did]] the [[probability]] to [[consults]] this on the [[wide]] screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is truly awful. After seeing the advertisement for it, i thought it could have its charms ... but it didn't.The girls cannot act, and they cannot sing either. The soundtrack to this movie is full of their songs, and its not a pretty sight, Terrible story line, unbelievable plot, its one of Disney's worst movies by FAR!. Ally is not a bad actress on "Phil of the Future", so i don't know what happened in "Cow Belles". And her sister, AJ, seems to be just hitching a ride on her sisters "fame", and she displays no talent what so ever.

At the end of the movie the girls do finally learn some cliché morals, but this is to late to rescue this train wreck movie.

Awful --------------------------------------------- Result 2855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] As I am not a [[blood]] and guts fan I [[found]] the gory scenes totally [[unnecessary]] (you spell it) and too [[real]] for my [[liking]], if you're the type of person who gets their [[rocks]] off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I [[say]] go for it, it beggars belief what sort of [[person]] [[dreams]] this sick [[crap]] up [[though]].

Apart from that it had the [[potential]] to be a [[great]] movie, the music was [[top]] [[class]] too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is [[tell]] her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any wipes or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream "hurry up and untie me then lets get the f*** out of here QUICK!". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place [[surely]] the stench of rotten flesh [[would]] have sounded a few alarm bells! I [[would]] only [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this [[would]] make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas. As I am not a [[chrissakes]] and guts fan I [[finds]] the gory scenes totally [[superfluous]] (you spell it) and too [[veritable]] for my [[taste]], if you're the type of person who gets their [[rattles]] off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I [[told]] go for it, it beggars belief what sort of [[individuals]] [[daydream]] this sick [[shitty]] up [[despite]].

Apart from that it had the [[prospective]] to be a [[prodigious]] movie, the music was [[supreme]] [[classe]] too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is [[say]] her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any wipes or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream "hurry up and untie me then lets get the f*** out of here QUICK!". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place [[definitively]] the stench of rotten flesh [[ought]] have sounded a few alarm bells! I [[could]] only [[recommendation]] this [[filmmaking]] to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this [[should]] make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas. --------------------------------------------- Result 2856 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] here, [[let]] me [[wave]] my hands over the keyboard, i'll [[tell]] you what [[salad]] she's [[going]] to order. over and over, works like a charm: he's such a genius, omg how does he do it? my bullshit [[detector]] freaks if i [[even]] pass this [[show]] when i'm [[scanning]] channels, I have to be very [[careful]] (these days it's [[useful]] far too [[often]], so I don't [[need]] it getting broken on [[idiotic]] [[crap]] like this...[[careful]] with that [[remote]]!). is this supposed to be some [[fascist]] [[propaganda]] to make people [[believe]] in some invisible realm of uberman [[control]] and mastery? or what? why does it [[exist]]??

this is THE most [[inane]] [[show]], [[completely]] [[unbelievable]] and contrived, and I cannot understand why it's still on the [[air]]. so may geeks give SO much better [[shows]] such a [[hard]] [[time]] ([[Sarah]] [[Connor]] Chronicles, [[True]] Blood), but [[give]] this [[nonsensical]] drivel a pass. shows like Firefly (if there were any like that) [[fall]] away after a season, but [[mindless]] stuff like this that makes zero logical [[sense]] just [[keeps]] [[marching]] on. yeccch. here, [[allowing]] me [[wavelength]] my hands over the keyboard, i'll [[telling]] you what [[lettuce]] she's [[go]] to order. over and over, works like a charm: he's such a genius, omg how does he do it? my bullshit [[detectors]] freaks if i [[yet]] pass this [[exhibit]] when i'm [[scans]] channels, I have to be very [[conscientious]] (these days it's [[beneficial]] far too [[frequently]], so I don't [[require]] it getting broken on [[senseless]] [[damnit]] like this...[[meticulous]] with that [[aloof]]!). is this supposed to be some [[antifascist]] [[publicity]] to make people [[reckon]] in some invisible realm of uberman [[supervisory]] and mastery? or what? why does it [[existent]]??

this is THE most [[negligible]] [[exhibitions]], [[fully]] [[fantastic]] and contrived, and I cannot understand why it's still on the [[aeronautics]]. so may geeks give SO much better [[exposition]] such a [[tough]] [[period]] ([[Sara]] [[Connors]] Chronicles, [[Veritable]] Blood), but [[lend]] this [[counterintuitive]] drivel a pass. shows like Firefly (if there were any like that) [[slumps]] away after a season, but [[reckless]] stuff like this that makes zero logical [[feeling]] just [[retains]] [[walking]] on. yeccch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a really [[strange]] film--and that is NOT a bad thing. It is a combination of a neo-realistic film about the homeless AND a fairy tale. I'm sure that some may find this [[movie]] a bit too strange, but I [[loved]] it. Once again, this director brings [[together]] a [[wonderful]] cast of [[everyday]] people (not [[actors]]) and [[gets]] a [[great]] ensemble-type performance. [[Although]] not nearly as sad as [[Umberto]] D, both movies have a very similar point to make--this one just does it in a very absurdist way. Ignore the cheesy special effects--after all, it was made in the early 1950s and special effects aren't terribly important anyway (or at least they shouldn't be in films). Instead, just sit back and [[enjoy]] the very strange and silly ride. Unless you are a [[total]] curmudgeon, you'll have a [[ball]].

By the [[way]], [[since]] I first [[reviewed]] this film, I have [[seen]] another DeSica directed film that is an absolute must-see and that is THE [[CHILDREN]] ARE WATCHING US. [[While]] not a [[fantasy]] or light in spirit like [[MIRACLE]] [[IN]] [[MILAN]], a [[great]] [[film]] nevertheless. This is a really [[bizarre]] film--and that is NOT a bad thing. It is a combination of a neo-realistic film about the homeless AND a fairy tale. I'm sure that some may find this [[cinema]] a bit too strange, but I [[cared]] it. Once again, this director brings [[whole]] a [[noteworthy]] cast of [[ordinary]] people (not [[players]]) and [[got]] a [[wondrous]] ensemble-type performance. [[Despite]] not nearly as sad as [[Rebecca]] D, both movies have a very similar point to make--this one just does it in a very absurdist way. Ignore the cheesy special effects--after all, it was made in the early 1950s and special effects aren't terribly important anyway (or at least they shouldn't be in films). Instead, just sit back and [[enjoying]] the very strange and silly ride. Unless you are a [[aggregate]] curmudgeon, you'll have a [[ballon]].

By the [[pathways]], [[because]] I first [[examined]] this film, I have [[noticed]] another DeSica directed film that is an absolute must-see and that is THE [[INFANT]] ARE WATCHING US. [[Despite]] not a [[chimera]] or light in spirit like [[MIRACULOUS]] [[AMONG]] [[MILANO]], a [[wondrous]] [[movies]] nevertheless. --------------------------------------------- Result 2858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 2859 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film, for an after school special, isn't that bad, and that's the problem. Nothing happens. You feel as if you're still in class. A guy teaches a bunch of young underdogs how to be good paint ball players. We never get to see these underdogs doing badly as the good player is training them. They all of the sudden turn into good players by meditating. Also there are too many characters and no character development. Too much time is spend on the main character and his sexy sister and not enough on some of the other kids. This could have had a 'Bad News Bears' feel (the original) since there was a girl on an all boys team, but there wasn't any feel to this movie at all. It has no feeling and leaves a dull pain in your bones after watching it, is not fun to bag on, not fun to watch, and is just kind of... there. Plain. Boring. Something you'd watch after school before your pre-evening nap. As dull as the day is long and it's been a long, long day watching this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[love]] all his [[work]] but this [[looks]] like [[nothing]].. sorry.. This [[looks]] more [[like]] a "[[David]] Lynch copycat". I [[think]] people like it only because "it's from David Lynch". I [[loved]] all his [[works]] but this [[seems]] like [[none]].. sorry.. This [[seems]] more [[iike]] a "[[Dawood]] Lynch copycat". I [[thoughts]] people like it only because "it's from David Lynch". --------------------------------------------- Result 2861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll keep this fast and sweet. Five girls on their way home from a football game decide to take a 'short cut' that leads them down a deserted forest-ridden road. Of course nothing but good things happen to them, and they safely arrive at their destination.

Alright, they don't. Soon they're hunted down by a deranged chick who has some severe mental issues, and what ensues is 90 minutes of sheer boredom.

I hope to never see any of these actors in any movie ever again. Their screaming, screeching voices gave me a headache, and the script was so poorly written that it included a lot of repeat phrases and nonsensical hysterical screaming. All in all, one of the worst cheap horror flicks I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 2862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Typical De Palma movie made with lot's of style and some scene's that will bring you to the edge of your seat.

Most certainly the thing that makes this movie better as the average thriller, is the style. It has some brilliantly edited scene's and some scene's that are truly nerve wrecking that will bring you to the edge of your seat. The best scene's from the movie; The museum scene and the elevator murder. There are some mild erotic scene's and the movies pace might not be fast enough for the casual viewer to fully appreciate this movie. So this movie might not be suitable for everybody.

The story itself is also quite good but it really is the style that makes the movie work! It might be for the fans only but also casual viewers should appreciate the well build up tension in the movie.

There are some nice character portrayed by a good cast. Michael Caine is an interesting casting choice and Angie Dickinson acts just as well as she is good looking (not bad for a 49-year old!).

The musical score by Pino Donaggio is also typically De Palma like and suits the movie very well, just like his score for the other De Palma movie, "Body Double".

Brilliant nerve wrecking thriller. I love De Palma!

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Any]] [[film]] in the early [[days]] of Orson [[Welles]] is a [[triumph]] all the [[way]] to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also [[wonderful]] in a [[Touch]] Of Evil. Please see them all! He [[tends]] to [[get]] pompous and self serving in [[films]] like [[F]] is for [[Fake]], [[really]] stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying [[film]] should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end [[Welles]] [[became]] a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of [[Evil]]! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the [[attraction]] to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I [[know]] there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. [[No]] Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a "100 best" list.. "Hustle and Flow" was great, so was "Fargo", and "Oh, Brother, where art thou," from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine [[film]] from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where [[else]] can you plug a [[film]] or [[boo]] it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can [[say]] what I [[want]] and I promise not to [[spoil]] any [[film]] for someone who hasn't [[seen]] it [[yet]]! [[Every]] [[movies]] in the early [[jours]] of Orson [[Orson]] is a [[win]] all the [[camino]] to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also [[wondrous]] in a [[Toque]] Of Evil. Please see them all! He [[strives]] to [[obtain]] pompous and self serving in [[kino]] like [[e]] is for [[Phonies]], [[genuinely]] stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying [[movie]] should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end [[Orson]] [[came]] a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of [[Satanic]]! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the [[attractiveness]] to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I [[savoir]] there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. [[Nope]] Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a "100 best" list.. "Hustle and Flow" was great, so was "Fargo", and "Oh, Brother, where art thou," from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine [[movies]] from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where [[elsewhere]] can you plug a [[kino]] or [[ooh]] it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can [[tell]] what I [[wanted]] and I promise not to [[wrack]] any [[movie]] for someone who hasn't [[watched]] it [[even]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the worse cases of film drivel I have seen in a long while. It is so awful, that I am not sure where to begin, or even if it is worth it. The plot is the real problem, and I feel sorry for 'Sly' as he puts in a decent performance for his part. But that plot ... Oh dear oh dear. I particularly love the way near the end he manages to pop from the foot of a mountain to the top, whilst the helicopter is on the way. A climb of a day or two takes him all of five minutes! I could go on: but it isn't worth it. Apart from the grim opening (which even a five year old would be able to predict the outcome of) the rest is drivel. Sorry folks, but this is about as bad as film making gets. --------------------------------------------- Result 2865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This sure is one comedy I'm not likely to forget for a while.

Wouldn't [[normally]] bother to [[comment]] on this [[movie]]: it's so [[minor]] that no one would watch it [[anyway]], but as it happens, it's kind of popular in p2p [[sharing]] [[networks]] such as Kazaa, and so this saaad production needs to be [[exposed]] for what it is.

So what is it then? [[Well]], of course it's not [[really]] a [[comedy]]; [[instead]], it's [[intended]] as a [[horror]] [[flick]] -- "[[intended]]" very much being the [[key]] word here. The script is a [[totally]] [[incoherent]] and [[unbalanced]] [[mess]], the special [[effects]] are only [[special]] in that they're [[especially]] [[pathetic]], and as for the acting, well, let's just [[say]] that if this had been my [[graduating]] play at [[primary]] school, my [[teachers]] would have [[burst]] out [[crying]] at our [[talent]].

Of course I [[realise]] that this is a very low [[budget]] [[film]] and that in those [[cases]] one should [[lower]] one's [[expectations]], [[certainly]] as far as [[things]] like special effects are concerned. Also, even [[though]] I'm a [[big]] [[fan]] of the [[horror]] [[genre]], I'm aware that these [[movies]] are only rarely the places to [[look]] for interesting [[scripts]] and [[top]] notch acting.

But [[still]].

B-movies [[often]] have some redeeming [[features]] to make up for the [[lack]] of [[funding]], such as [[humour]]. The only [[laughs]] in Cradle to Fear lie in the [[ridiculous]] performances. If you can [[find]] the [[humour]] in that--and I could for the first 20 minutes or so, gradually dozing off after that--then that's going to be the only [[thing]] the [[movie]] has to [[offer]]. [[Oh]], that and two or three pairs of breasts.

Woohoo, how exciting.

As for the [[story]], it's not [[even]] that it doesn't try to [[convey]] [[anything]]: the victims either use [[drugs]] and/or are [[involved]] in [[serious]] crime. The lesson: Watch out, naughty [[boys]] and [[girls]], because one day you'll be [[made]] to [[pay]] for what you've [[done]].

I rest my case.

[[So]], all in all, a [[little]] bit of sex, a fair amount of drugs, but absolutely zero rock 'n roll.

I rate this one 1 out of 10, but would go to 0 if I could. Or perhaps I wouldn't: it deserves a 1 for spelling the actors' names [[correctly]] in the titles. I mean, that's something, innit? This sure is one comedy I'm not likely to forget for a while.

Wouldn't [[commonly]] bother to [[observational]] on this [[filmmaking]]: it's so [[minimal]] that no one would watch it [[anyhow]], but as it happens, it's kind of popular in p2p [[shared]] [[network]] such as Kazaa, and so this saaad production needs to be [[unmasked]] for what it is.

So what is it then? [[Good]], of course it's not [[truthfully]] a [[farce]]; [[however]], it's [[destined]] as a [[terror]] [[film]] -- "[[destined]]" very much being the [[pivotal]] word here. The script is a [[perfectly]] [[unconnected]] and [[uneven]] [[chaos]], the special [[influencing]] are only [[peculiar]] in that they're [[specially]] [[unhappy]], and as for the acting, well, let's just [[said]] that if this had been my [[diploma]] play at [[elementary]] school, my [[professors]] would have [[bursting]] out [[weeping]] at our [[talents]].

Of course I [[recognise]] that this is a very low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]] and that in those [[lawsuits]] one should [[reduced]] one's [[forecast]], [[obviously]] as far as [[matters]] like special effects are concerned. Also, even [[despite]] I'm a [[gros]] [[groupie]] of the [[terror]] [[kind]], I'm aware that these [[film]] are only rarely the places to [[peek]] for interesting [[screenplay]] and [[supreme]] notch acting.

But [[however]].

B-movies [[commonly]] have some redeeming [[feature]] to make up for the [[shortages]] of [[finances]], such as [[mood]]. The only [[laughed]] in Cradle to Fear lie in the [[silly]] performances. If you can [[finds]] the [[humor]] in that--and I could for the first 20 minutes or so, gradually dozing off after that--then that's going to be the only [[stuff]] the [[filmmaking]] has to [[affords]]. [[Ah]], that and two or three pairs of breasts.

Woohoo, how exciting.

As for the [[history]], it's not [[yet]] that it doesn't try to [[transmit]] [[nothing]]: the victims either use [[medicine]] and/or are [[participating]] in [[severe]] crime. The lesson: Watch out, naughty [[grooms]] and [[females]], because one day you'll be [[introduced]] to [[salary]] for what you've [[played]].

I rest my case.

[[Therefore]], all in all, a [[small]] bit of sex, a fair amount of drugs, but absolutely zero rock 'n roll.

I rate this one 1 out of 10, but would go to 0 if I could. Or perhaps I wouldn't: it deserves a 1 for spelling the actors' names [[adequately]] in the titles. I mean, that's something, innit? --------------------------------------------- Result 2866 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't stand most reality shows and this one is worst than the one with Paris Hilton, and sure it's his company. But "you're fired" or "you're hired", for how many seasons now? After watching the show I wouldn't want to work for the guy with his ego and all and I think watching paint dry has more entertainment valve.

I'd love to hear just one person get up and say "Donald I quit and take some of your money and buy a decent hairdo". I see he's even trying to buy fame in the wrestling WWE. I hope he gets hurt so I don't have to see his pathetic face anymore. It must be sad to want fame so bad and have no talent and make an ass of yourself trying to buy it. I'd give this show a negative mark if I could but it gets a 1 and it doesn't deserve that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ernest Borgnine was so wasted in this movie.There was no point in putting this great actor in this movie.One of the greatest actors in the world wasted,and for what reason, none what so ever,so america if you want to put classic actors in movies DON'T WASTE THEM --------------------------------------------- Result 2868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I will never forget the wit and [[great]] comedy of the [[ORIGINAL]] [[Vacation]] [[movie]]! The lines, pacing, and [[timing]] of events in that [[film]] are outstanding! [[However]], this European Vacation sequel is a [[major]] let down.

[[In]] this sequel, the Griswalds [[win]] a European Vacation on a game [[show]]. The [[problem]] is that many of the [[jokes]] in the [[film]] are little more than [[mild]], "ha-ha" [[laughs]]. [[For]] [[example]], a [[Flight]] Attendant on an [[airplane]] asks [[Clark]], "Do you [[want]] your Coke in the Can?" Clark [[answers]] back, "[[No]], I'll have it right here." That's really about the only [[line]] that is [[funny]] in this [[film]].

European Vacation's [[humor]] is [[strained]]. As if the [[writers]] [[borrowed]] all the jokes from the first [[movie]], [[tried]] to re-hash a [[script]] that had been [[done]] before, and relied on a [[ridiculous]] slap-stick [[chase]] scene [[sequence]] toward the end of the [[picture]] just to kill [[time]].

Worse, the natural [[comic]] standouts like Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie and the [[original]] [[kids]] who [[played]] Rusty and Audrey from the first [[movie]] so well are [[nowhere]] to be found. Their [[replacements]] are not [[funny]], can't [[act]], and just look like they are [[going]] through the [[motions]] most of the [[time]]. There are [[also]] a few [[crude]] [[sex]] jokes and [[comments]] that are not only not [[funny]], they are in [[bad]] taste.

The Griswald's should have stayed in [[Wally]] [[World]]. The [[place]] that [[made]] them legends! Don't [[join]] them on this European [[dreadful]] adventure. Viewers should re-watch the [[original]] [[Vacation]] [[movie]] in [[place]] of this! You'll be [[glad]] you did. I will never forget the wit and [[large]] comedy of the [[INITIALS]] [[Holidays]] [[movies]]! The lines, pacing, and [[timeline]] of events in that [[flick]] are outstanding! [[Conversely]], this European Vacation sequel is a [[grandes]] let down.

[[Onto]] this sequel, the Griswalds [[triumph]] a European Vacation on a game [[showings]]. The [[difficulty]] is that many of the [[gags]] in the [[filmmaking]] are little more than [[soft]], "ha-ha" [[giggles]]. [[In]] [[case]], a [[Vol]] Attendant on an [[flight]] asks [[Clarke]], "Do you [[wanting]] your Coke in the Can?" Clark [[response]] back, "[[Nope]], I'll have it right here." That's really about the only [[linea]] that is [[comical]] in this [[filmmaking]].

European Vacation's [[comedy]] is [[taut]]. As if the [[authors]] [[loaned]] all the jokes from the first [[filmmaking]], [[attempting]] to re-hash a [[scripts]] that had been [[performed]] before, and relied on a [[absurd]] slap-stick [[chases]] scene [[sequences]] toward the end of the [[imaging]] just to kill [[period]].

Worse, the natural [[hilarious]] standouts like Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie and the [[initial]] [[juvenile]] who [[done]] Rusty and Audrey from the first [[movies]] so well are [[anywhere]] to be found. Their [[replacement]] are not [[comical]], can't [[law]], and just look like they are [[gonna]] through the [[motion]] most of the [[period]]. There are [[likewise]] a few [[coarse]] [[sexuality]] jokes and [[observations]] that are not only not [[comical]], they are in [[unfavourable]] taste.

The Griswald's should have stayed in [[Wal]] [[Worldwide]]. The [[placing]] that [[accomplished]] them legends! Don't [[participates]] them on this European [[scary]] adventure. Viewers should re-watch the [[upfront]] [[Holidays]] [[cinematographic]] in [[placing]] of this! You'll be [[gratified]] you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 2869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Creepshow 2 had a [[lot]] of [[potential]], they just didn't put enough [[time]] in [[perfecting]] it. The [[stories]] were [[pretty]] cool and [[creepy]] [[enough]], but it was [[lacking]]. It's a good movie, but after you've [[seen]] it once, you [[might]] [[want]] to [[see]] it again. This [[movie]] could of been better. Creepshow 2 had a [[batches]] of [[prospective]], they just didn't put enough [[period]] in [[perfected]] it. The [[story]] were [[quite]] cool and [[freaky]] [[satisfactorily]], but it was [[missing]]. It's a good movie, but after you've [[noticed]] it once, you [[apt]] [[wish]] to [[behold]] it again. This [[filmmaking]] could of been better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The story is about Ankush (Abhay Deol) - who is professional [[marriage]] witness, in short he acts as a witness for couples in [[marriage]] [[registration]] office - and Megha (Soha Ali [[Khan]]) who ran away from her [[home]] at Nainital to [[get]] married to her love interest Dhiraj (Shayan Munshi). The [[story]] [[starts]] with Megha [[waiting]] at the [[marriage]] [[registration]] office for Dhiraj to [[show]] up but for some [[reason]] he does not [[show]] up. [[So]] Ankush [[comes]] in the [[picture]] here, who had [[approached]] Megha with the [[intention]] of earning [[Rs]]. 200 for his Witness [[job]] and he ends up [[helping]] her by [[providing]] [[shelter]] to her. Ankush [[grows]] on his side by working in a [[bank]] as an Agent… Ankush falls in [[love]] with Megha and she too [[falls]] in love with him (or [[kind]] of love), both agree for the [[marriage]] and Dhiraj [[comes]] back in the [[picture]]. Unexpected [[circumstances]] happen, [[actually]] I should [[say]], [[expected]] [[circumstances]] with unexpected reactions and then….

Actually the movie story is bit [[different]] than the [[movies]] we [[see]] and I do not [[think]] so it will be [[accepted]] by the masses but if you are a movie freak like me and [[love]] to watch something [[different]], then you will [[definitely]] like the [[movie]]. The [[movie]] is just an innocent love [[story]] [[drafted]] very well by the [[characters]] of Abhay Deol and Soha Ali Khan. The [[characters]] are so natural that you feel as if things are [[happening]] to the [[guy]] next [[door]]. The background [[music]] of the film [[also]] plays a very good role, it is just too good. The [[way]] Delhi is [[shown]] is very good and gives a fresh feeling.

so let's cut it out and [[sum]] it up.

[[Story]]: A very common [[story]] carried very well and transformed to a wonderful experience.

Music: Well, as it was Himesh Reshammiya creation, so I did not [[expect]] much but [[still]] I liked couple of [[songs]] of the movie including the Qawwali.

Acting: Abhay Deol was the most [[impressive]], very natural and innocent acting but he should stay away from singing in the songs. Soha Ali Khan, she is a doll, a very cute doll I must say. [[Again]] very innocent and natural acting and these both [[actors]] [[perfectly]] fit into their characters. Apart from these two, Shayan Munshi needs some acting lessons and may be few layers of fat to cover the bones. Other actors did their job well.

Stars: I would also give it 3.5 stars out of 5. You will enjoy the movie if watched in the theatre, I would recommend watching it in theatre if you are a movie freak and accept uncommon stories. Otherwise wait for the DVD to arrive. The movie will definitely won't be liked by the masses and the business it can do is from word of mouth publicity. The story is about Ankush (Abhay Deol) - who is professional [[weddings]] witness, in short he acts as a witness for couples in [[marriages]] [[inscription]] office - and Megha (Soha Ali [[Kahn]]) who ran away from her [[households]] at Nainital to [[gets]] married to her love interest Dhiraj (Shayan Munshi). The [[storytelling]] [[began]] with Megha [[awaiting]] at the [[wedding]] [[inscription]] office for Dhiraj to [[demonstrate]] up but for some [[justification]] he does not [[illustrates]] up. [[Hence]] Ankush [[happens]] in the [[visuals]] here, who had [[tackled]] Megha with the [[intent]] of earning [[R]]. 200 for his Witness [[jobs]] and he ends up [[aiding]] her by [[supplying]] [[dwellings]] to her. Ankush [[increase]] on his side by working in a [[banco]] as an Agent… Ankush falls in [[loves]] with Megha and she too [[fall]] in love with him (or [[genera]] of love), both agree for the [[marry]] and Dhiraj [[happens]] back in the [[image]]. Unexpected [[situations]] happen, [[indeed]] I should [[tell]], [[hoped]] [[situations]] with unexpected reactions and then….

Actually the movie story is bit [[diversified]] than the [[film]] we [[seeing]] and I do not [[ideas]] so it will be [[agreeing]] by the masses but if you are a movie freak like me and [[loves]] to watch something [[multiple]], then you will [[decidedly]] like the [[movies]]. The [[film]] is just an innocent love [[tale]] [[devised]] very well by the [[attribute]] of Abhay Deol and Soha Ali Khan. The [[attribute]] are so natural that you feel as if things are [[occurring]] to the [[dude]] next [[porte]]. The background [[musician]] of the film [[apart]] plays a very good role, it is just too good. The [[ways]] Delhi is [[evidenced]] is very good and gives a fresh feeling.

so let's cut it out and [[somme]] it up.

[[Fairytales]]: A very common [[fairytales]] carried very well and transformed to a wonderful experience.

Music: Well, as it was Himesh Reshammiya creation, so I did not [[hopes]] much but [[again]] I liked couple of [[lyrics]] of the movie including the Qawwali.

Acting: Abhay Deol was the most [[brilliant]], very natural and innocent acting but he should stay away from singing in the songs. Soha Ali Khan, she is a doll, a very cute doll I must say. [[Afresh]] very innocent and natural acting and these both [[actresses]] [[entirely]] fit into their characters. Apart from these two, Shayan Munshi needs some acting lessons and may be few layers of fat to cover the bones. Other actors did their job well.

Stars: I would also give it 3.5 stars out of 5. You will enjoy the movie if watched in the theatre, I would recommend watching it in theatre if you are a movie freak and accept uncommon stories. Otherwise wait for the DVD to arrive. The movie will definitely won't be liked by the masses and the business it can do is from word of mouth publicity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think Micheal Ironsides acting career must be over, if he has to star in this sort of low budge crap. Surely he could do better than waste his time in this rubbish.

This movie could be far better, if it had a good budget, but it shows repeatedly through-out the movie. There is one scene at a outpost, which looks like, its outside the front of a railway station, and i bet it was.

There is one scene which made give this movie a 3, and it shows the space craft landing and taking off over a lake, surrounded by forests. This was well done, but the rest of the movie, forget it.

There is another scene, which looks like a engineering plant, which i bet it, and does not look like a space outpost as the character say it is.

This movie is stupid, has a serious low budget, makes no sense and God Help Micheal Ironsides. --------------------------------------------- Result 2872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Yes there are [[great]] performances here. [[Unfortunately]], they happen in the context of a movie that doesn't seem to have a clue what it's doing. [[During]] the [[first]] 45-60 minutes of this all the music takes place as realistic performance. [[Suddenly]], about an [[hour]] in, the characters who, until this point, had always spoken to each other, suddenly start [[singing]] to each other. To further confuse things, a little further in, out of nowhere, they actually do about 15 minutes of sung-through [[dialog]], then seem to [[drop]] that [[idea]] and move on to other things, such as a number that begins in a jazz club with a drummer and two electric guitars suddenly turning into a fully orchestrated piece with a massive unseen string section. On top of all this [[inconsistency]] in how the [[music]] is used, is the composers' clear inability to actually write music in the style that is [[supposedly]] being portrayed. [[While]] the first couple of pieces do sort of mimic the 1950s Motown sound, the [[rest]] of the film is just ([[bad]]) Broadway show music. Then there's the pure silliness of snippets of a group doing a bad Jackson family imitation and Eddie Murphy morphing from Little Richard to James Brown to Lionel Richie. When he started channeling Stevie Wonder I couldn't help laughing out loud. This was clearly one of those films that make me appreciate how [[little]] time I have on earth and [[resent]] that I wasted two [[hours]] of it watching this film. Yes there are [[marvellous]] performances here. [[Unluckily]], they happen in the context of a movie that doesn't seem to have a clue what it's doing. [[Across]] the [[frst]] 45-60 minutes of this all the music takes place as realistic performance. [[Unexpectedly]], about an [[hours]] in, the characters who, until this point, had always spoken to each other, suddenly start [[sing]] to each other. To further confuse things, a little further in, out of nowhere, they actually do about 15 minutes of sung-through [[dialogue]], then seem to [[decline]] that [[ideas]] and move on to other things, such as a number that begins in a jazz club with a drummer and two electric guitars suddenly turning into a fully orchestrated piece with a massive unseen string section. On top of all this [[contradiction]] in how the [[musician]] is used, is the composers' clear inability to actually write music in the style that is [[seemingly]] being portrayed. [[Despite]] the first couple of pieces do sort of mimic the 1950s Motown sound, the [[stays]] of the film is just ([[unfavourable]]) Broadway show music. Then there's the pure silliness of snippets of a group doing a bad Jackson family imitation and Eddie Murphy morphing from Little Richard to James Brown to Lionel Richie. When he started channeling Stevie Wonder I couldn't help laughing out loud. This was clearly one of those films that make me appreciate how [[scant]] time I have on earth and [[hate]] that I wasted two [[hour]] of it watching this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] MPAA:Rated R for Violence,[[Language]],Nudity and Brief [[Drug]] [[Use]]. [[Quebec]] [[Rating]]:13+ Canadian [[Home]] Video Rating:18A

I [[saw]] Coonskin [[today]].This [[film]] is [[also]] known as Bustin Out and Street [[Fight]].After watching Fritz The Cat,I wanted to [[see]] more of Bashki's [[films]].I [[saw]] [[Cool]] World and [[thought]] it was mediocre and I [[saw]] this.When it was first [[released]], the [[film]] was very [[controversial]].It was [[considered]] racist and Al Sharpton [[wanted]] the film banned, he even led protests outside the [[theatre]] where the film was playing.The film was only released on VHS under the title "Street Fight".It is now considered a cult-classic film and African-American celebrities such as comedian Richard Pryor,director [[Spike]] Lee and the rap group The Wu-Tang Clan are said to have [[enjoyed]] this film.I personally thought Fritz The Cat was a much better film but this is very [[enjoyable]] as well.Worth watching for Bashki or Blaxploitation film fans.The film [[mixes]] live action and animation sort of like the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I would have preferred it in full animation but whatever.The film starts off with a reverend and another man racing to rescue two of their friends from prison.While the prisoners wait,the older one tells a story of three men he knew.The film then switches into animation format, we see three black men who sold their house to this man.They decide to make names for themselves in Harlem.So the leader, a black rabbit, kills a big player in Harlem and he basically becomes a big shot.The film moves on as the Italian mafia want him out.The mafia involves the godfather,his three sons who are homosexual and an Italian clown.Coonskin is an entertaining animated film that's worth checking out, if you can find it. MPAA:Rated R for Violence,[[Linguistics]],Nudity and Brief [[Medicinal]] [[Employs]]. [[Qc]] [[Scoring]]:13+ Canadian [[Dwelling]] Video Rating:18A

I [[witnessed]] Coonskin [[thursday]].This [[cinematic]] is [[moreover]] known as Bustin Out and Street [[Struggling]].After watching Fritz The Cat,I wanted to [[behold]] more of Bashki's [[cinematography]].I [[noticed]] [[Cooling]] World and [[brainchild]] it was mediocre and I [[seen]] this.When it was first [[publicized]], the [[kino]] was very [[polemic]].It was [[regarded]] racist and Al Sharpton [[wanna]] the film banned, he even led protests outside the [[theaters]] where the film was playing.The film was only released on VHS under the title "Street Fight".It is now considered a cult-classic film and African-American celebrities such as comedian Richard Pryor,director [[Fortification]] Lee and the rap group The Wu-Tang Clan are said to have [[appreciated]] this film.I personally thought Fritz The Cat was a much better film but this is very [[nice]] as well.Worth watching for Bashki or Blaxploitation film fans.The film [[mix]] live action and animation sort of like the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I would have preferred it in full animation but whatever.The film starts off with a reverend and another man racing to rescue two of their friends from prison.While the prisoners wait,the older one tells a story of three men he knew.The film then switches into animation format, we see three black men who sold their house to this man.They decide to make names for themselves in Harlem.So the leader, a black rabbit, kills a big player in Harlem and he basically becomes a big shot.The film moves on as the Italian mafia want him out.The mafia involves the godfather,his three sons who are homosexual and an Italian clown.Coonskin is an entertaining animated film that's worth checking out, if you can find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] In this [[movie]], Chávez [[supporters]] (either [[venezuelan]] and not-venezuelan) just [[lie]] about a [[dramatic]] situation in our [[country]].

They did not [[say]] that the conflict started because of Chávez [[announcement]] firing a lot of PDVSA best workers just for political issues.

They did not say anything about more than 96 TV interruptions [[transmitted]] by Chávez during only 3 days in "CADENA NACIONAL" (a kind of confiscation o private TV signals). Each one with about 20 minutes of duration.

They did not tell us [[anything]] about The quiting [[announcement]] made by General en [[Jefe]] Lucas [[Rincon]] [[Romero]], Inspector General of the army forces, who is a traditional [[supporter]] of Chávez. Even now, in despite of his announcement, he is the Ministro de Interior y Justicia. After Chávez return he occuped the Charge of Ministro del Defensa (equals to Defense Secretary in US).

They did not say anything about Chávez orders about shooting against a pacifical people concentration who was claiming for elections.

They did not say [[anything]] about the people in this concentration that were killed by Chávez Supporters (either civilians and Military official forces).

They present some facts in a wrong order, in order to lie.

They did not say anything about venezuelan civilian society thats are even now claiming for an elections in order to solve the crisis and Chávez actions in order to avoid the elections.

That's why i tell you.... This [[movie]] is just a lot of [[lies]] or a big lie. In this [[filmmaking]], Chávez [[followers]] (either [[venezuela]] and not-venezuelan) just [[lied]] about a [[tremendous]] situation in our [[countries]].

They did not [[said]] that the conflict started because of Chávez [[adverts]] firing a lot of PDVSA best workers just for political issues.

They did not say anything about more than 96 TV interruptions [[sent]] by Chávez during only 3 days in "CADENA NACIONAL" (a kind of confiscation o private TV signals). Each one with about 20 minutes of duration.

They did not tell us [[something]] about The quiting [[advertisements]] made by General en [[Chef]] Lucas [[Hector]] [[Randall]], Inspector General of the army forces, who is a traditional [[defender]] of Chávez. Even now, in despite of his announcement, he is the Ministro de Interior y Justicia. After Chávez return he occuped the Charge of Ministro del Defensa (equals to Defense Secretary in US).

They did not say anything about Chávez orders about shooting against a pacifical people concentration who was claiming for elections.

They did not say [[nada]] about the people in this concentration that were killed by Chávez Supporters (either civilians and Military official forces).

They present some facts in a wrong order, in order to lie.

They did not say anything about venezuelan civilian society thats are even now claiming for an elections in order to solve the crisis and Chávez actions in order to avoid the elections.

That's why i tell you.... This [[filmmaking]] is just a lot of [[resides]] or a big lie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Moonstruck" is one of the best films ever. I own that film on DVD! The movie deals with a New York widow (Cher) who falls in love with her boyfriend's (Danny Aiello) angry brother (Nicholas Cage) who works at a bakery. I'm glad Cher won an Oscar for that movie. Nicholas Cage and Danny Aiello are great, too. The direction from Norman Jewison (who directed "Fiddler On The Roof") is fantastic. "Moonstruck" is an excellent movie for everyone to see and laugh. A must-see!

10/10 stars! --------------------------------------------- Result 2876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What an amazingly funny and original show. The cast starting with the hysterical Julie Brown(Homecoming Queen's Got A Gun) is just perfect. Add Amy Hill(All American Girl-Grandma Kim) who plays a lesbian who is always arguing with her partner and business partner(Asian restaurant-WOK-DON"T RUN) I have laughed harder during this show than any other I have ever seen(including Newhart-one of my all time favorite shows) If you like movies like Naked Gun and Airplane- you will love this series!! One of the best moments of the show is Cindy Williams playing herself. When she snubs Tammy at the dry cleaners, Tammy finds a picture of Cindy Williams in her coat. The picture is of Cindy Williams doing an unmentionable act with a bowling pin-upside down. It is awesome to see an actress like Cindy Williams being able to play herself like this. Soap opera like with many surprise twists during its short run. I can only hope that this will someday be released on DVD with special many bonus special features. Funniest series I have ever seen!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] New York, 1953. One hot night, four famous iconic figures will come together. The professor (Albert Einstein) has come to NY to give a speech, which he has, the senator (Joesph MacCarthy) on his back. Later that night his gets a surprise visitor; a famous actress (Marilyn Monroe). Who actually wants to discuss the theories of Relativity. Soon her ball-playing husband (Joe DiMaggio) turns up at the hotel room, begging to work things out for their crumbling relationship. Flashbacks of childhood, important events, perceived consequences of their actions creep in to show how these individuals cope with despair and a hidden fear waiting to break out.

Now that's one-of-a-kind! Adapted off a stage-play by Terry Johnson (who would also script the screenplay for the film), "Insignificance" is an odd, quirky, seductive and downright curious fictional pop-culture gimmick in the hands of director Nicolas Roeg. This inspired and cerebral experimental effort might be rooted in its stage-play origins, because it does feel theatrical and most of the action occurs in a hotel backdrop and one main suite. The cramp look only enhanced the moody and smoky atmosphere of New York to great effect. However these limitations can't contain the fruitful and daring ideas that Roeg manages to randomly storm up visually and through the meaningful material. The way he reflects on the characters' (who are suggestively famous figures, without the need of naming of them) philosophical journeys and interpretations of their notions is stimulating in a spiritual sense, with the memories gelling into the present and visions showing their fears of realisations, which depending on what you're seeing is either beautiful, or hauntingly implemented. There's plenty of food for thought and hints within the verbosely innovative (if sometimes awkward) script, with the main focus concerning the present situation, but the flashbacks gives us the personal make-up (sex, power, enlightenment and glory) of what makes them who they are and how much of a burden it can be in there already demanding lives. Sure the story might not lead to anything by the end, and it can feel disjointed, but the dreamy vibe and intelligent arrangement irons out those folds and makes sure it never turns giddy. Peter Hannan's sensually fluid photography and Stanley Myers' titillatingly oozing blues soundtrack fit in snugly with Roeg's stylistically subdue and established style of directing. He makes it look like he's working with something big and large-scale, but otherwise that's not the case and a small little universe is created. The vintage costumes and locations of the period all come off fittingly enough. What made the film for me had to be the impressive acting it boasted from the main four. Theresa Russell's perky, drop dead gorgeous appeal of the sexy pin-up actress is a growing portrayal that definitely held the film together along with an genuinely excellent and endearing performance by Michael Emil as the professor. Tony Curtis marvellously plays it up as witch-hunting senator and Gary Busey is suitably good in the stoically gravel manner as the ballplayer. Showing up in minor, but amusing support roles happen to be Will Sampson and Patrick Kilpatrick.

A memorably striking, fresh and tour de force meditation piece of metaphysics linked together by four different extremes. Some might find it pretentiously estrange and too talky, but this one had me wrapped up in its own little unique world to worry too much about its shortcomings. --------------------------------------------- Result 2878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Robert Mitchum stars as Clint Tollinger in this short but tough western: Man With The Gun. Tollinger is a professional town tamer - as in, when a town needs someone to save itself; he is the one who is brought in to do it. Tollinger's latest gig comes by as an accident: strolling into town looking for his former fling, he stumbles into a town being played like a puppet by a local western gangster. But many townspeople begin to rue the day they hired Tollinger, as his way of cleaning up the town becomes very taxing (suddenly High Plains Drifter seems less original).

Man With The Gun starts off as an average western tough-guy film but begins to surprise you more and more as the film progresses. What starts off as forgettable and run-of-the-mill ends up dark and character-centered. The entire film is very well shot and the cast is very enjoyable. Mitchum is his usual excellent self here in Man With The Gun - not one of his very best performances, Mitchum still has his classic and effective tough-guy screen presence in high gear and he knocks the action-packed, meaningful, and shocking scenes of the film right out of the park. Man With The Gun is a nice Mitchum western and is easily worth one's time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hitokiri (which translates roughly as "assassination"), a/k/a "Tenchu" which translates roughly as "divine punishment") showcases Hideo Gosha at the top of his form. Do NOT miss this one, or Gosha's other classic, Goyokin! Hitokiri is not only one of Gosha's best films, it's one of the best "samurai/chambara" films ever made, and perhaps one of the best Japanese films ever exported.

Be warned, all of the intricate plot details in Hitokiri can be a little hard to follow for those unfamiliar with 19th century Japanese history. Even so, the underlying human drama is obvious and open to all viewers. As per the norm for Gosha, Hitokiri provides yet another variation on his traditional theme of "loyalty to one's lord" vs. "doing the right thing". However, Gosha develops his favorite theme with such sophistication, that it's really _the_ movie to see (along with Goyokin, of course).

I suppose it breaks down like this: If you want a simpler, more action-oriented tale, you might want to see Goyokin. However, if you want a more thoughtful, multilayered (albeit grim) drama, see this one.

(OK, OK, essentially, the historical backdrop is a massive power grap between many different samurai clans who are either (1) working to reform, yet retain, the Tokugawa Shogunate, and (2) those who are trying to install the Emperor Meiji as the supreme ruler of Japan. Of course, those clans working "for" Emperor Meiji were often less interested in "reforming" Japan than in ensuring their own clan more power in the "new world order". Ironically, the entire feudal system was officially abolished as one of the first reforms of the Meiji government. It's ironic twists like this -- Gosha's big on irony -- that make the entire plot all the more bittersweet.)

What distinguishes "Hitokiri" from Gosha's other movies is Gosha's mature sense of cinematography. Every shot is thoughtfully composed, and (much like Kubrick's Barry Lyndon) each frame of the movie could hold its own as a still composition. Of course, this is typical Gosha. Hitokiri really stands out with stunning backdrops, including(as with Goyokin) many riveting seascapes. Just watch the opening sequence, and you're hooked! Make no mistake, this is no English period piece: Hitokiri is extremely violent (don't say you weren't warned).

What else, other than cool camera work, makes Hitokiri stand out? The performances seem (to me) a bit more subtle in this one. Katsu Shintaro (of Zatoichi/Hanzo the Razor fame) turns in a star performance as the conflicted protagonist/antihero, Okada Izo. Katsu manages to instill humanity to a character that seems almost more wild animal than villain. Throughout the movie, you're never quite sure if you're engaged or revolted by Okada's character. At the same time, Katsu's portrayal of Okada's ravenous hunger for respect, and his later pathetic attempts at redemption, seem so human that you can't help but feel empathy/sympathy. Of course, after seeing Nakadai Tatsuya play the tortured hero in "Goyokin", it's great to see him play such a ruthless villain in "Hitokiri". He's just perfect, there's nothing more to say!

As a final note, perhaps more interesting to buffs than to casual fans, don't miss the last screen appearance of Mishima Yukio (yes, the closeted gay right-wing ultranationalist novelist who committed suicide by seppuku before the crowd of jeering Japanese military personnel he "kidnapped" in 1970, and had a movie on his life and work made by Paul Schrader), who actually does a pretty solid job of portraying the honorable (for an assassin) Shinbei Tanaka. --------------------------------------------- Result 2880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched "Elephant [[Walk]]" for the [[first]] time in about 30 years and was [[struck]] by how [[similar]] the story line is to the greatly superior "Rebecca." As others have said, you have the sweet young thing swept off her feet by the alternately charming and brooding lord of the manor, only to find her marriage threatened by the inescapable memory of a larger-than-life yet deeply flawed relative. You have the stern and disapproving servant, a crisis that will either bind the couple together or tear them irreparably apart, climaxed by the fiery destruction of the lavish homestead.

Meanwhile, "Elephant Walk" also owes some of its creepy jungle atmosphere to "The Letter," the Bette Davis love triangle set on a Singapore rubber plantation rather than a Sri Lankan tea plantation.

Maltin gives "Elephant Walk" just two stars, and IMDb readers aren't much kinder, but I [[enjoyed]] it despite its predictability. Elizabeth Taylor never looked lovelier, and Peter Finch does a [[credible]] [[job]] as the basically good man unable to shake off the influence of his overbearing father. Dana Andrews -- a favorite in "Laura" and "The Best Year of Our Lives" -- is wasted as Elizabeth's [[frustrated]] admirer. The real star is the bungalow, one of the most beautiful interior sets in movie history. I watched "Elephant [[Marche]]" for the [[frst]] time in about 30 years and was [[knocked]] by how [[analogue]] the story line is to the greatly superior "Rebecca." As others have said, you have the sweet young thing swept off her feet by the alternately charming and brooding lord of the manor, only to find her marriage threatened by the inescapable memory of a larger-than-life yet deeply flawed relative. You have the stern and disapproving servant, a crisis that will either bind the couple together or tear them irreparably apart, climaxed by the fiery destruction of the lavish homestead.

Meanwhile, "Elephant Walk" also owes some of its creepy jungle atmosphere to "The Letter," the Bette Davis love triangle set on a Singapore rubber plantation rather than a Sri Lankan tea plantation.

Maltin gives "Elephant Walk" just two stars, and IMDb readers aren't much kinder, but I [[appreciated]] it despite its predictability. Elizabeth Taylor never looked lovelier, and Peter Finch does a [[plausible]] [[employment]] as the basically good man unable to shake off the influence of his overbearing father. Dana Andrews -- a favorite in "Laura" and "The Best Year of Our Lives" -- is wasted as Elizabeth's [[disillusioned]] admirer. The real star is the bungalow, one of the most beautiful interior sets in movie history. --------------------------------------------- Result 2881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Saw]] this on SBS [[TV]] here in [[Australia]] the other week, where it was [[titled]] "Laputa: Castle in the [[sky]]". I had enabled subtitles and I [[think]] SBS [[provided]] their own for that, which, as [[usual]], was of very good quality.

Just [[looked]] up "Laputa" on Wikipedia and it [[confirms]] what I suspected...the floating [[island]] of this [[tale]] is taken from the [[classic]] Jonathan [[Swift]] novel "Gulliver's [[travels]]", which was published in the early to [[mid]] 1700s.

[[Anyway]], this is an engaging Japanese fairytale, which [[features]] an [[English]] [[speaking]] voice-cast. It's suitable for [[young]] children, I think, but it does [[run]] at just over two hours in [[length]], so it may be too long for some, though not for an adult like me.

The [[story]] [[concerns]] two children who [[seek]] to find a legendary floating island which has a castle on it. The children are not the only ones looking for this island. They have pirates, the army and spies looking for the island too, and looking to capture the children (Sheeta, the girl, voiced by Anna Paquin, and Pazu, the boy, voiced by James Van Der Beek) in order to help them find it.

The graphics are [[magnificent]]...sort of photo-realistic at times, especially the scenes of stonework lit by torch-light, or the [[pretty]] scenes of bright, sunny days, with white clouds, or mist.

[[Recommended]]. [[Sawthe]] this on SBS [[TVS]] here in [[Australians]] the other week, where it was [[entitled]] "Laputa: Castle in the [[heavens]]". I had enabled subtitles and I [[reckon]] SBS [[supplied]] their own for that, which, as [[normal]], was of very good quality.

Just [[seemed]] up "Laputa" on Wikipedia and it [[emphasizes]] what I suspected...the floating [[isle]] of this [[conte]] is taken from the [[typical]] Jonathan [[Rapids]] novel "Gulliver's [[voyage]]", which was published in the early to [[middle]] 1700s.

[[Writ]], this is an engaging Japanese fairytale, which [[featured]] an [[Englishman]] [[speaks]] voice-cast. It's suitable for [[youthful]] children, I think, but it does [[running]] at just over two hours in [[lengths]], so it may be too long for some, though not for an adult like me.

The [[narratives]] [[worries]] two children who [[seeks]] to find a legendary floating island which has a castle on it. The children are not the only ones looking for this island. They have pirates, the army and spies looking for the island too, and looking to capture the children (Sheeta, the girl, voiced by Anna Paquin, and Pazu, the boy, voiced by James Van Der Beek) in order to help them find it.

The graphics are [[wondrous]]...sort of photo-realistic at times, especially the scenes of stonework lit by torch-light, or the [[quite]] scenes of bright, sunny days, with white clouds, or mist.

[[Suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't quite know how to explain "Darkend Room," because to summarize it wouldn't really do it justice. It's a quintessentially Lynchian short film with two beautiful girls in a strange, mysterious situation. I would say this short is definitely more on the "Mulholland Drive" end of the Lynchian spectrum, as opposed to "The Elephant Man" or "The Straight Story." It's hidden on Lynch's website, and well worth the search. --------------------------------------------- Result 2883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie today at the Haifa Film Festival in Israel after hearing rave reviews, but I guess the critics were just sucking up to Willem Defoe and his wife (the director) who were present at the festival. It is definitely the slowest movie I have ever seen with numerous pointless, ridiculously long scenes of nothing. Besides Defoe who was decent, the acting of the two and a half other people in the movie, Defoe's wife Giada included, was ridiculously awful (how they cast the part of the salesgirl at the bakery is beyond me). This movie is pretty much plot less with a lame attempt to be abstract and off the wall. The only scene that stirred any kind of reaction in the crowd was vulgar and came from nowhere as if just to add some kind of shock value to the dullness that is this movie. Sorry for being so harsh, but really this movie is a precious waste of time and money. I appreciate good indie cinema, but this movie is not worthy of moviegoers' time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2884 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Intriguing. Exciting. Dramatic. Explosive. Complex. Epic. Words that only touch the tip of the iceberg in terms of the grand story that is LOST being told.

From the acting down to the rare visual effects, LOST is the essential show on television for fans of science-fiction, fantasy, action, adventure, and lots and lots of mystery.

Each cast member is so well chosen, and so good in their roles, that you either love them, or hate them, or downright wish them dead.

The visual effects, when used (which is rare) are actually quite well done considering the usual production of shows. Be it the "smoke monster", to the polar bears, LOST is believable in terms of eye-candy.

As far as story goes, nothing can compare to the vast complexity this show has made viewers like me endure. Beginning to End, continuity is virtually perfect, characters are developed, and the ever-evolving story slowly gives the answers to its questions so many crave.

Overall, there is practically no flaw in LOST. It does for dramatic/sci-fi television what Arrested Development did for comedy: it has set the bar.

I highly recommend LOST to those that are patient, intellectual, and love every moment of the ride, no matter how long it takes to reach the end.

See this show. --------------------------------------------- Result 2885 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Spoiler This is a [[great]] film about a conure. He goes through [[quite]] the ordeal [[trying]] to [[get]] back to his little [[girl]] [[owner]]. He [[learns]] a [[lot]] through his [[journey]] and meets up with a [[lot]] of other beautiful birds. If you love birds like my [[wife]] does, this film is for you. This film [[also]] has some sad parts that make the tears run. In the end it all [[works]] out for Paulie and his Russian [[friend]]. Rent this for the [[whole]] family, everyone will enjoy this. Spoiler This is a [[wondrous]] film about a conure. He goes through [[pretty]] the ordeal [[tempting]] to [[gets]] back to his little [[chick]] [[landlord]]. He [[teaches]] a [[batch]] through his [[voyages]] and meets up with a [[batch]] of other beautiful birds. If you love birds like my [[woman]] does, this film is for you. This film [[further]] has some sad parts that make the tears run. In the end it all [[working]] out for Paulie and his Russian [[boyfriend]]. Rent this for the [[total]] family, everyone will enjoy this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this [[incredible]] piece of work and acting does. I found it [[amazingly]] lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired. Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this [[unthinkable]] piece of work and acting does. I found it [[unbelievably]] lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired. --------------------------------------------- Result 2887 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie makes me want to fall in love all over again!I am naming my next daughter "Adelaide". Just so that someone who sings like Ol Blue eyes can swoon her one day, and feel the butterflies I felt hearing it sung, and it wasn't even to me! I give it a 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2888 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I used to be an avid viewer until I personally spent long cold hours helping build a home for the White Family, only to be sickened to see the house a year later. All of the beautiful rock landscaping has been removed, the gorgeous rock sidewalk and front fountain have been removed, all the pine trees and pecan trees in the front have been cut down, sprinkler system has been ripped out. It now looks like a disaster area. They don't even live there any more... they live "in town" and come out only for the weekend. It sickens me to think of all the hours that the great people of Oklahoma donated to these people and to see the result. The story that we all saw on TV wasn't completely the truth... don't believe every thing you see and hear. --------------------------------------------- Result 2889 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[thought]] the original of this film was quaint and [[charming]] as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to [[figure]] it out.

[[Since]] I had already [[seen]] the [[original]], when I saw this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately [[made]] for Sci Fi - I knew what it was [[within]] the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a [[character]] [[actor]], I wanted to see how he would [[pull]] it off.

The [[writers]]/producers etc, [[modernized]] the film a [[bit]] by trying to explain the plight of the "aliens" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.

This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.

I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.

This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it [[highly]] cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I [[actually]] [[enjoyed]] this [[quite]] a bit.

But if anyone really wants to [[see]] this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr. I [[ideology]] the original of this film was quaint and [[cute]] as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to [[silhouette]] it out.

[[Because]] I had already [[watched]] the [[initial]], when I saw this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately [[accomplished]] for Sci Fi - I knew what it was [[inside]] the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a [[nature]] [[actress]], I wanted to see how he would [[pulling]] it off.

The [[authors]]/producers etc, [[upgrading]] the film a [[bitten]] by trying to explain the plight of the "aliens" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.

This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.

I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.

This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it [[vastly]] cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I [[genuinely]] [[appreciated]] this [[rather]] a bit.

But if anyone really wants to [[seeing]] this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 2890 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The acting may be [[okay]], the more u watch this movie, the more u [[wish]] you weren't, this [[movie]] is so [[horrible]], that if I [[could]] get a hold of [[every]] copy, I would [[burn]] them all and not look back, this [[movie]] is [[terrible]]!! The acting may be [[allright]], the more u watch this movie, the more u [[wanna]] you weren't, this [[filmmaking]] is so [[shocking]], that if I [[would]] get a hold of [[all]] copy, I would [[burns]] them all and not look back, this [[filmmaking]] is [[horrible]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] How this [[movie]] [[got]] [[made]] with a [[supposedly]] $70 million budget and without being [[completely]] retooled is beyond me. The storyline and [[dialogue]] are beyond [[amateurish]]. [[Characters]] [[say]] things no real [[person]] [[would]] ever [[say]] and [[almost]] never [[react]] to things that were [[said]] before. No one [[seems]] to be [[grounded]] in the [[real]] [[world]]. The acting of the leads is fine given that the [[writing]] is such a dud...but several [[actors]] in supporting roles [[really]] drag the production down. The hero's hair [[probably]] should've [[gotten]] its own [[credit]], it was so [[oddly]] attention- grabbing...not to [[mention]] that it [[gave]] one of the better performances in the pic. [[Finally]], for a [[movie]] about L.A. being besieged by [[giant]] [[reptiles]], this film is [[shockingly]] boring. What a shame! If you do see this, your mind will be constantly racing, [[thinking]] up ways that you [[could]] have taken the SFX scenes and built a far better movie around them. Sadly, it wouldn't have taken much. How this [[filmmaking]] [[gets]] [[effected]] with a [[reportedly]] $70 million budget and without being [[altogether]] retooled is beyond me. The storyline and [[dialogues]] are beyond [[unprofessional]]. [[Characteristics]] [[told]] things no real [[individual]] [[ought]] ever [[says]] and [[hardly]] never [[reacting]] to things that were [[stated]] before. No one [[appears]] to be [[reasoned]] in the [[veritable]] [[globe]]. The acting of the leads is fine given that the [[write]] is such a dud...but several [[players]] in supporting roles [[genuinely]] drag the production down. The hero's hair [[maybe]] should've [[become]] its own [[credits]], it was so [[amazingly]] attention- grabbing...not to [[referenced]] that it [[handed]] one of the better performances in the pic. [[Lastly]], for a [[filmmaking]] about L.A. being besieged by [[gigantic]] [[reptilian]], this film is [[marvellously]] boring. What a shame! If you do see this, your mind will be constantly racing, [[thought]] up ways that you [[would]] have taken the SFX scenes and built a far better movie around them. Sadly, it wouldn't have taken much. --------------------------------------------- Result 2892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The threesome of Bill Boyd, Robert Armstrong, and James Gleason play Coney Island carnys vying for the hand of Ginger Rogers, a working gal who sells salt water taffy. With the outbreak of World War I, the threesome enlist and pursue Ginger from afar. The first half of this RKO Pathe production is hard going, with the three male leads chewing up the scenery with overcooked one-liners and 'snappy' dialogue that quickly grows tiresome. The second half concentrates on action sequences as the US Navy pursues both a German merchant cruiser and a U-boat. These sequences are lively and well-filmed, but overall this is an overlong and unsatisfying comedy-drama with a flat ending. For fans of the stars only. --------------------------------------------- Result 2893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So let me start off by saying that I saw this movie as part of a bargain. I was really bored one fine 1997 day and so I biked over to the movie rental store. I asked the clerk what the worst movie he had in stock was. Without hesitation he walked me over to "Lucky Stiff." He told me that he'd waive the $1 rental fee (he said it would be wrong to charge more) if I promised to watch the whole movie. So watch it I did, for free...

This movie is terrible. God-Awful even. I don't need to go into plot details, read the other reviews. The jokes make no sense. The acting was terrible. I know it was supposed to be a comedy, but the stupidity of the main character was exhausting. You might try to watch it as something to laugh at, but it's so bad that it isn't even funny in that way. Avoid! --------------------------------------------- Result 2894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This apology for a movie is about absolutely nothing! Rachel Griffiths must have needed the money. The film must have been made on a very low budget, because the lighting was non existent. I made a vow if I ever see Pete Postlesumthingor other I'll commit suicide. I'd be happy to know if there was 1) a plot or 2)a script. My biggest regret is I wasted my time watching this rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 2895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I've been disappointed, if not surprised, at the lack of appreciation this film has received. Once again, Billy Zane proves he's more than just a Hollywood [[pretty]] boy in a [[silent]] performance that combines spastic slapstick with understated pathos. [[Calling]] this a silent film is inaccurate, as there's a [[lot]] of music and sound. It has a [[manic]] [[pace]] and is full of the goofy inventiveness that Ed Wood is [[finally]] beginning to be appreciated for. Look at the cast listing, and [[realize]] that [[everyone]] [[shines]]. No one is there just to show their face. I believe they're all in the movie to show their appreciation of [[Wood]], and to do a [[broad]], [[physical]] kind of acting not [[seen]] much these days.

But, [[today]], reviewers [[try]] to [[guess]] what's going to become a hit much more than they show any [[kind]] of esthetic appreciation for a movie. And IWUETDID has no discernable [[target]] [[audience]]. It was [[made]] mostly out of [[love]] for Wood's script. Even after his [[death]], the trendy social parasites have dealt him another serious blow, and deprived the world of a minor classic. This is a highly [[entertaining]] and a [[genuinely]] [[experimental]] film that [[really]] deserves to [[live]], at least on DVD. I've been disappointed, if not surprised, at the lack of appreciation this film has received. Once again, Billy Zane proves he's more than just a Hollywood [[quite]] boy in a [[muted]] performance that combines spastic slapstick with understated pathos. [[Telephoning]] this a silent film is inaccurate, as there's a [[batch]] of music and sound. It has a [[fussy]] [[rhythm]] and is full of the goofy inventiveness that Ed Wood is [[eventually]] beginning to be appreciated for. Look at the cast listing, and [[attaining]] that [[anybody]] [[glitters]]. No one is there just to show their face. I believe they're all in the movie to show their appreciation of [[Wooden]], and to do a [[extensive]], [[corporal]] kind of acting not [[watched]] much these days.

But, [[hoy]], reviewers [[trying]] to [[guesses]] what's going to become a hit much more than they show any [[sorting]] of esthetic appreciation for a movie. And IWUETDID has no discernable [[intents]] [[viewers]]. It was [[brought]] mostly out of [[loves]] for Wood's script. Even after his [[killings]], the trendy social parasites have dealt him another serious blow, and deprived the world of a minor classic. This is a highly [[amusing]] and a [[actually]] [[empirical]] film that [[truthfully]] deserves to [[inhabit]], at least on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 2896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] This snarky, homophobic [[thing]] was dated in 1976. It [[seems]] [[particularly]] mean-spirited now, [[filled]] with gay [[stereotypes]], and [[characters]] that are meant to be laughed at, [[rather]] than with. Redd Foxx does his standard schtick, [[Michael]] Warren at [[least]] tries to [[bring]] [[humanity]] to a one dimensional [[character]], and Pearl--Pearl what were you thinking--? [[Pearl]] [[Bailey]] deserves far [[better]]. This snarky, homophobic [[stuff]] was dated in 1976. It [[seem]] [[specially]] mean-spirited now, [[fill]] with gay [[stereotype]], and [[nature]] that are meant to be laughed at, [[somewhat]] than with. Redd Foxx does his standard schtick, [[Michaela]] Warren at [[fewer]] tries to [[bringing]] [[humanism]] to a one dimensional [[characters]], and Pearl--Pearl what were you thinking--? [[Perla]] [[Baily]] deserves far [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Usually musicals in the 1940's were of a set formula - and if you studied films you know what I'm talking about - a certain running lenghth, very "showy" performances that were great on the surface but never got into the real personalities of the characters etc.

THIS ONE IS DIFFERENT - and light years better and well worth it's nomination for best picture of the year - 1945 (although had no chance of beating the eventual winner - Lost Weekend).

Gene Kelly was probably in the best form of his career - yes I know about "American in Paris" and "Singing in the Rain". This one is different. He really gets into his character of a "sea wolf" thinking (at first) that "picking up any girl while on leave" is nothing more than a lark. And if you had to make up a "story" to get her - so be it - until. Sort of like the Music Man when he gets "his foot caught in the door". The eventual hilarity of the film stems mostly from his and his new pal (Sinatra)'s attempt to make the "story" good in order to "get the girl" that he REALLY and unexpectedly falls in love with. You are going to have to see the movie to see what I mean.

Besides that there are so many other elements of great film in this one, it's a classic buddy story, nostalgia to a time when WWII was almost over (the war ended about a month after the films release), a realization that a guy that always laughed at life can find out that he really is a great human being, great songs and probably a few other elements of classic film making that I can't think of right now.

Why not a 10? Near the end - at nearly 2 1/2 hours starts to feel a bit long. There is a small ballet number that Gene Kelly does that must have been a sensation in 1945 but seems dated and feels like it just adds minutes now. But overall, this ones a definite winner on every level. --------------------------------------------- Result 2898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The symbolic use of objects, [[form]] [[editing]], the [[position]] of [[characters]] in the scene... these were all [[used]] with such [[joyous]] [[abandon]] by Hitchcock that you can really [[see]] what a fertile genius he had. The [[way]] the wife [[moves]] from one corner of the [[ring]] to the other as the [[fight]] progresses, the [[editing]] when the [[wedding]] [[ring]] is placed on her finger... while these may seem a [[bit]] [[obvious]] by todays standards, in the silent [[era]] they [[spoke]] [[volumes]] about the [[story]] without a word being [[spoken]]. Even the title has a [[least]] four meanings that I can [[see]]; the boxing ring, the [[wedding]] [[ring]], the bracelet the lover buys, and the love [[triangle]] at the [[heart]] of the story. The symbolic use of objects, [[shape]] [[edited]], the [[posture]] of [[hallmarks]] in the scene... these were all [[using]] with such [[happier]] [[abandoning]] by Hitchcock that you can really [[seeing]] what a fertile genius he had. The [[paths]] the wife [[shift]] from one corner of the [[ringing]] to the other as the [[wrestling]] progresses, the [[edit]] when the [[marriages]] [[ringing]] is placed on her finger... while these may seem a [[bite]] [[manifest]] by todays standards, in the silent [[epoch]] they [[talking]] [[quantities]] about the [[narratives]] without a word being [[talked]]. Even the title has a [[fewest]] four meanings that I can [[behold]]; the boxing ring, the [[wedlock]] [[rings]], the bracelet the lover buys, and the love [[triangular]] at the [[crux]] of the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This [[movie]] had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that [[simply]] could never happen. [[Navy]] [[protocols]] could never break down that much that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the Captain. I'll take Dr. Strangelove any day if I wish to [[see]] this plot. Sidenote--the [[US]] Navy did not [[support]] this film. This [[filmmaking]] had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that [[exclusively]] could never happen. [[Marines]] [[protocol]] could never break down that much that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the Captain. I'll take Dr. Strangelove any day if I wish to [[consults]] this plot. Sidenote--the [[AMERICANS]] Navy did not [[succour]] this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watching Josh Kornbluth 'act' in this movie reminds me of my freshman TV production class, where the 'not funny' had the chance to prove just how unfunny they really were!

OBVIOUS is the word that comes to mind when I try to synopsize this wannabe comedy. The jokes are sophomoric and telegraphed. The delivery is painfully bad. OUCH!!!!!!! The writing is simply dorkish. It is akin to a Bob Saget show.

Watching this movie is as painful as watching a one and a half hour long Saturday Night Live skit (post Belushi).

I hated this movie and want my money back!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2901 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[BEGIN]] [[SPOILER]]: Fitfully funny and memorable for Mr. Chong's literal roach-smoking scene: Chong coolly mashes a stray kitchen cockroach into his pipe's bowl, lights up, coughs and hacks violently for a seeming eternity,then with perfect aplomb and not skipping a beat, re-loads the bowl properly, re-lights, re-tokes. [[END]] SPOILER. [[Alas]], I [[began]] to lose [[faith]] less than half-way through the proceedings. It occurred to me that the lackadaisical duo are way [[obnoxious]] and less than relatable. I have come to [[appreciate]] the relative sophistication of [[contemporary]] stoners, Harold and Kumar. I simply [[prefer]] brighter company. Yet, the movie is [[probably]] a perfect fit for baked frat bros or those [[viewers]] who are so feeble-minded as to be outwitted by a stoner when they-- the former are sober. [[Notable]] guest appearance by Paul Reubens spouting obscenities in pre-Pee-wee form. [[LANCER]] [[BAFFLE]]: Fitfully funny and memorable for Mr. Chong's literal roach-smoking scene: Chong coolly mashes a stray kitchen cockroach into his pipe's bowl, lights up, coughs and hacks violently for a seeming eternity,then with perfect aplomb and not skipping a beat, re-loads the bowl properly, re-lights, re-tokes. [[TERMINATES]] SPOILER. [[Unfortunately]], I [[inaugurated]] to lose [[creed]] less than half-way through the proceedings. It occurred to me that the lackadaisical duo are way [[outrageous]] and less than relatable. I have come to [[thankful]] the relative sophistication of [[modern]] stoners, Harold and Kumar. I simply [[favored]] brighter company. Yet, the movie is [[certainly]] a perfect fit for baked frat bros or those [[onlookers]] who are so feeble-minded as to be outwitted by a stoner when they-- the former are sober. [[Remarkable]] guest appearance by Paul Reubens spouting obscenities in pre-Pee-wee form. --------------------------------------------- Result 2902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Ten minutes worth of [[story]] stretched out into the [[better]] [[part]] of two hours. [[When]] nothing of any [[significance]] had happened at the halfway point I should have left. But, ever [[hopeful]], I stayed. And left with a feeling of guilt for having wasted the time. Acting was OK, but the [[story]] line is so transparent and [[weak]]. The [[script]] is about as lame as it [[could]] get, but again, stretching out the ten minute plot doesn't leave a [[whole]] lot of [[room]] for [[good]] [[dialogue]]. Ten minutes worth of [[saga]] stretched out into the [[optimum]] [[party]] of two hours. [[Whenever]] nothing of any [[importance]] had happened at the halfway point I should have left. But, ever [[upbeat]], I stayed. And left with a feeling of guilt for having wasted the time. Acting was OK, but the [[history]] line is so transparent and [[feeble]]. The [[hyphen]] is about as lame as it [[did]] get, but again, stretching out the ten minute plot doesn't leave a [[entire]] lot of [[bedroom]] for [[alright]] [[talks]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2903 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I believe they were telling the truth the whole time..U cant trust anything in the wild... They family went through hell.Those poor boys too young to understand what was going on around them. But still having to deal with the rumours. As well as dealing with the lose of their little sister. I cant believe this case went on for so long.seems like the jury couldn't see the truth, even if it bit them on the ass.I feel for this family, and if i could let them know i hate what has happened to them, i would.I have no idea what they went through, i cant even imagine it. After watching this movie, i was in tears, and had to check on my little girl in bed...I think everyone should watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2904 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The first [[noticeable]] problem about this [[awkwardly]] [[titled]] [[film]] is its [[casting]]. Ann [[Nelson]] plays the grandma here. Three years after this, she would [[star]] in "[[Airplane]]!" as the [[woman]] who hangs herself while listening to [[Robert]] Hays pine for Julie Hagerty. I [[could]] not [[get]] that [[image]] out of my head.

Matt Boston is a fifteen year old with problems. He has headaches. His mother had a nervous breakdown. His grandfather had a massive heart attack. A chain smoking psychiatrist decides to find out what the devil is going on with this family. [[First]] she hypnotizes Grandma Nelson. Nelson tells a tale in flashback that fills the entire first half of the film.

She and Grandpa bought an RV, cheap, and drive it around to all the tourist traps in desert California. The RV soon has a mind of its own, going off the road and such. Then, large boulders begin hurling themselves at it. The elderly couple are appropriately afraid, but stay in the vehicle in order to move the plot along.

Eventually, Grandpa has a heart attack after being stranded on the RV roof when it goes for another [[unplanned]] ride.

Boston's mom begins talking to some Native American mummies she has lying around the house. She fancies herself an author, and makes copious notes about the musty corpses. The psychiatrist reads the detailed notes, and uses her imagination to fill in the blanks. We see the mother semi-flip out, but her mental breakdown occurs offscreen, much like Gramps' heart attack.

Finally, the patient de resistance, little Matt. Matt goes under the hypnosis gun and tells his own tale. He thinks mom is wigging out (this was made in 1977). Apparently, mom is making the astral bodies of the Native American mummies sort of fly through the air. One hits Matt like a bee hits a windshield, and Matt begins acting all crazy.

The psychiatrist takes Grandma and Matt into the desert. Matt is inexplicably in a wheelchair now, and the trio confront the unseen (and unexplained) forces.

Flocker has no sense of scene construction. The one pro here involves the [[RV]] stranded in a [[salt]] flat in the [[desert]]. [[In]] the distance, the couple notice some boulders rolling toward the RV. This is a pretty creepy little scene that is eventually overplayed. As the boulders begin hurling themselves [[toward]] the vehicle, the special effects become obvious.

The scenes where the RV runs off the highway, then back on again, take forever. The scenes where [[Grandpa]] is trapped on the RV [[roof]] as it careens down a dirt road takes forever. Mom's conversations with the mummy take forever. Matt's out of body [[experiences]] take forever. This [[film]] takes forever.

I was tempted to hit the fast forward button at least a dozen times. As scenes dragged on, it was obvious Flocker was padding. Cut the fat here, and this would have clocked in at an hour. The final "explanation," that the mummies' spirits were trying to kill those close to Matt never holds water. Did they inhabit the RV? The film maker never brings up the fact that the spirits are no good at their murderous ways, they never kill anybody!

As I kept thinking of Nelson in "Airplane!," I also thought of other movies. Anything to keep me from falling asleep during this one. Boston is terrible as the kid, playing a fifteen year old as a cute ten year old who has a smart alecky line for all these adults who fall over themselves loving him.

In the end, Flocker has written and directed a mess. The title is just the beginning of this exercise in making the audience feel ill at ease. This is not scary, and like the ghosts, you too can still walk...away from this tape at the video store.

This is unrated, and contains some physical violence and mild profanity. The first [[evident]] problem about this [[nervously]] [[entitled]] [[filmmaking]] is its [[pouring]]. Ann [[Nielson]] plays the grandma here. Three years after this, she would [[superstar]] in "[[Air]]!" as the [[femme]] who hangs herself while listening to [[Roberta]] Hays pine for Julie Hagerty. I [[did]] not [[gets]] that [[photography]] out of my head.

Matt Boston is a fifteen year old with problems. He has headaches. His mother had a nervous breakdown. His grandfather had a massive heart attack. A chain smoking psychiatrist decides to find out what the devil is going on with this family. [[Outset]] she hypnotizes Grandma Nelson. Nelson tells a tale in flashback that fills the entire first half of the film.

She and Grandpa bought an RV, cheap, and drive it around to all the tourist traps in desert California. The RV soon has a mind of its own, going off the road and such. Then, large boulders begin hurling themselves at it. The elderly couple are appropriately afraid, but stay in the vehicle in order to move the plot along.

Eventually, Grandpa has a heart attack after being stranded on the RV roof when it goes for another [[unintended]] ride.

Boston's mom begins talking to some Native American mummies she has lying around the house. She fancies herself an author, and makes copious notes about the musty corpses. The psychiatrist reads the detailed notes, and uses her imagination to fill in the blanks. We see the mother semi-flip out, but her mental breakdown occurs offscreen, much like Gramps' heart attack.

Finally, the patient de resistance, little Matt. Matt goes under the hypnosis gun and tells his own tale. He thinks mom is wigging out (this was made in 1977). Apparently, mom is making the astral bodies of the Native American mummies sort of fly through the air. One hits Matt like a bee hits a windshield, and Matt begins acting all crazy.

The psychiatrist takes Grandma and Matt into the desert. Matt is inexplicably in a wheelchair now, and the trio confront the unseen (and unexplained) forces.

Flocker has no sense of scene construction. The one pro here involves the [[CAMPER]] stranded in a [[salty]] flat in the [[walkabout]]. [[During]] the distance, the couple notice some boulders rolling toward the RV. This is a pretty creepy little scene that is eventually overplayed. As the boulders begin hurling themselves [[about]] the vehicle, the special effects become obvious.

The scenes where the RV runs off the highway, then back on again, take forever. The scenes where [[Gramp]] is trapped on the RV [[capping]] as it careens down a dirt road takes forever. Mom's conversations with the mummy take forever. Matt's out of body [[experience]] take forever. This [[cinema]] takes forever.

I was tempted to hit the fast forward button at least a dozen times. As scenes dragged on, it was obvious Flocker was padding. Cut the fat here, and this would have clocked in at an hour. The final "explanation," that the mummies' spirits were trying to kill those close to Matt never holds water. Did they inhabit the RV? The film maker never brings up the fact that the spirits are no good at their murderous ways, they never kill anybody!

As I kept thinking of Nelson in "Airplane!," I also thought of other movies. Anything to keep me from falling asleep during this one. Boston is terrible as the kid, playing a fifteen year old as a cute ten year old who has a smart alecky line for all these adults who fall over themselves loving him.

In the end, Flocker has written and directed a mess. The title is just the beginning of this exercise in making the audience feel ill at ease. This is not scary, and like the ghosts, you too can still walk...away from this tape at the video store.

This is unrated, and contains some physical violence and mild profanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] There are [[several]] things [[wrong]] with this movie- [[Brenda]] Song's [[character]] being one of them. I do not [[believe]] that the [[girl]] is a [[lousy]] actor- I [[honestly]] don't. I [[believe]] she is [[given]] poor lines. She is just supposed to be, "that vain, [[rich]] girl", and while it is funny in the TV [[shows]] she plays in, it can't even get a dry [[laugh]] from me here.

Either way, I [[really]] should have [[known]] what to [[expect]] when I sat down to watch this film.

The movie was not that terrible...[[initially]]. Wendy's reaction to Shen was completely natural. I [[mean]], how [[would]] you feel if a man, claiming to be a reincarnated monk, [[chased]] you around [[commanding]] you to [[wear]] a medallion and insisting that you were needed to fight "the [[great]] evil" and [[save]] the world? [[Which]] [[brings]] me to another point. I know this movie is [[entirely]] fiction, but it is still has a [[founding]] in Chinese culture. It [[seems]] like all of the "[[warriors]]" in Wendy's [[family]] line were [[women]]. [[Correct]] me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that the monks would've just been okay with that. Sure, maybe they could've [[worked]] it in somehow, but they offered no explanation whatsoever. By doing so, they just contributed to the many cheesy [[attempts]] at female empowerment [[made]] by Hollywood and the [[media]].

Nevermind that, however- [[let]] us [[continue]].

Wendy's [[character]] becomes more [[unbearable]] as the [[film]] go on. [[Yes]], she is a teenager, and it is near homecoming- I mean, who wants to [[fight]] evil during homecoming? The problem is, when "the evil" starts to manifest himself, Wendy does not seem as freaked out as she should be. She is [[extremely]] careless- even for someone like her. She [[continues]] not to care about her training. I will [[use]] this [[conversation]] as an example, Shen: "If you do not win this battle, evil will take over, and everything good will be gone." Wendy: "Whoa, [[talk]] about pressure. Well...let's talk about something else." Yes, let's Wendy. Let's also go dancing when you should rightfully be training. Of course Shen lets her, but his [[character]] has an excuse. Better that he [[cooperate]] with her, than that he not, and she not train at all, and get them both killed.

Oh, speaking of which. Shen also told Wendy that it was his destiny for him to die for her in battle, as he had for her great-grandmother (I am assuming that part).

This makes Wendy's actions more unforgivable.

As the script-writer would have it, Wendy's homecoming and this "great battle" are on exactly the same day. Do you know what Wendy does? Do you even have to guess? Yes, she does end up going to the battle, for when she tries to leave for homecoming, the monks, (who Shen had trapped in the body of her coach and teachers because she "felt weird fighting an old man") inform her that Shen has gone to battle alone, so she goes to save him.

We initially see some half-decent fighting, that is actually entertaining. Until finally, the great evil comes out of Wendy's rival-for-homecoming's body, and creates the actual embodiment of himself out of the broken pieces of the bodies of his ancient warriors.

Don't ask.

Anyway, Wendy gets all "panicky." Then Shen goes and defends her from this guy- forgive me for forgetting his long Chinese name- and manages to get himself killed.

Wendy catches Shen as he makes his long descent from being thrust uncomfortably high into the air.

She screams title of said article out.

Now...it was bad enough that Wendy became powerful far, far too fast. No, I will not let it be excused because it was her "destiny" and she had "the power within" her.

Since when, though, did she learn healing? No, worst...since when could she resurrect people? So Shen is raised from the dead. Then, Wendy and he fight the guy.

He loses way to easily. The worst part, is when they jump together, and kick him at the same time, and he is banished forever. Then the monks commend Wendy on her sacrifice.

Two things, #1: Don't the script writer and director know a battle needs a little more "finesse" to it? #2: What sacrifice? The fact that she didn't go to homecoming? Because the girl did not break a sweat, or even bleed. I mean, come on now, this movie was TV PG, I wanted to see somebody get hurt.

Ah-hem...moving on.

I know it sounds like maybe I should have given the movie a one, based on my comments. Part of critique, you must know, though, is breaking a thing down. You don't necessarily try to look for the bad, but if it's there, you bring attention to it. This movie has a lot of bad, but something funny happens when you never really expect something to be all too great in the first place.

So, I suppose it was all right. Not that me not saying it wasn't all right would've stopped anybody from watching it. There are [[different]] things [[improper]] with this movie- [[Lori]] Song's [[nature]] being one of them. I do not [[think]] that the [[girls]] is a [[rotten]] actor- I [[sincerely]] don't. I [[reckon]] she is [[yielded]] poor lines. She is just supposed to be, "that vain, [[affluent]] girl", and while it is funny in the TV [[exhibited]] she plays in, it can't even get a dry [[giggling]] from me here.

Either way, I [[genuinely]] should have [[renowned]] what to [[expecting]] when I sat down to watch this film.

The movie was not that terrible...[[firstly]]. Wendy's reaction to Shen was completely natural. I [[signify]], how [[could]] you feel if a man, claiming to be a reincarnated monk, [[hunted]] you around [[commandant]] you to [[worn]] a medallion and insisting that you were needed to fight "the [[gorgeous]] evil" and [[saves]] the world? [[Whose]] [[poses]] me to another point. I know this movie is [[totally]] fiction, but it is still has a [[founder]] in Chinese culture. It [[seem]] like all of the "[[combatants]]" in Wendy's [[families]] line were [[daughters]]. [[Exact]] me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that the monks would've just been okay with that. Sure, maybe they could've [[collaborate]] it in somehow, but they offered no explanation whatsoever. By doing so, they just contributed to the many cheesy [[endeavors]] at female empowerment [[accomplished]] by Hollywood and the [[medium]].

Nevermind that, however- [[allowing]] us [[sustained]].

Wendy's [[characters]] becomes more [[insufferable]] as the [[filmmaking]] go on. [[Yeah]], she is a teenager, and it is near homecoming- I mean, who wants to [[fought]] evil during homecoming? The problem is, when "the evil" starts to manifest himself, Wendy does not seem as freaked out as she should be. She is [[eminently]] careless- even for someone like her. She [[continue]] not to care about her training. I will [[utilize]] this [[chitchat]] as an example, Shen: "If you do not win this battle, evil will take over, and everything good will be gone." Wendy: "Whoa, [[conversations]] about pressure. Well...let's talk about something else." Yes, let's Wendy. Let's also go dancing when you should rightfully be training. Of course Shen lets her, but his [[characters]] has an excuse. Better that he [[cooperating]] with her, than that he not, and she not train at all, and get them both killed.

Oh, speaking of which. Shen also told Wendy that it was his destiny for him to die for her in battle, as he had for her great-grandmother (I am assuming that part).

This makes Wendy's actions more unforgivable.

As the script-writer would have it, Wendy's homecoming and this "great battle" are on exactly the same day. Do you know what Wendy does? Do you even have to guess? Yes, she does end up going to the battle, for when she tries to leave for homecoming, the monks, (who Shen had trapped in the body of her coach and teachers because she "felt weird fighting an old man") inform her that Shen has gone to battle alone, so she goes to save him.

We initially see some half-decent fighting, that is actually entertaining. Until finally, the great evil comes out of Wendy's rival-for-homecoming's body, and creates the actual embodiment of himself out of the broken pieces of the bodies of his ancient warriors.

Don't ask.

Anyway, Wendy gets all "panicky." Then Shen goes and defends her from this guy- forgive me for forgetting his long Chinese name- and manages to get himself killed.

Wendy catches Shen as he makes his long descent from being thrust uncomfortably high into the air.

She screams title of said article out.

Now...it was bad enough that Wendy became powerful far, far too fast. No, I will not let it be excused because it was her "destiny" and she had "the power within" her.

Since when, though, did she learn healing? No, worst...since when could she resurrect people? So Shen is raised from the dead. Then, Wendy and he fight the guy.

He loses way to easily. The worst part, is when they jump together, and kick him at the same time, and he is banished forever. Then the monks commend Wendy on her sacrifice.

Two things, #1: Don't the script writer and director know a battle needs a little more "finesse" to it? #2: What sacrifice? The fact that she didn't go to homecoming? Because the girl did not break a sweat, or even bleed. I mean, come on now, this movie was TV PG, I wanted to see somebody get hurt.

Ah-hem...moving on.

I know it sounds like maybe I should have given the movie a one, based on my comments. Part of critique, you must know, though, is breaking a thing down. You don't necessarily try to look for the bad, but if it's there, you bring attention to it. This movie has a lot of bad, but something funny happens when you never really expect something to be all too great in the first place.

So, I suppose it was all right. Not that me not saying it wasn't all right would've stopped anybody from watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2906 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] They made me watch this in school and it was terrible. The movie is outdated. The episodes become confusing because fact is combined with fiction to make the story more interesting.The teachers talked about it as a treat but really it was a painfully boring experience.I have read that very few people who appear in this are actors, but most of them them do what they do in the movie in real life.This accounts for cheesy acting very often. Also, very often the story becomes mildly outrageous and far-fetched. I don't like the way some of the lines were written and wish they had more meaning to them. Though, it was written to be educational, funny, suspenseful, and hip, It ended up being boring, dry, far-fetched, and old. I hope no one takes time to watch this movie because you would be just fine not seeing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Not so [[many]] people like the movies of Bertrand blier simply because they don't [[understand]] them. [[Simply]] because they are [[different]] [[kinds]] of people.

If you have not been living under a deep [[desperation]] [[intertwined]] with [[great]] personal [[hope]] it may be [[hard]] for you to [[enjoy]] the [[humor]] blier shown here.

And also the film of blier cannot be [[classified]] easily as black-comedy or cult [[etc]]. like those of pulp fiction etc. Because there is this delicacy which the audience of north-america [[frequently]] fail to appreciate.

When I looked at these two `hooligans' dining with Jeanne moreau in the seaside restaurant, I felt they were more gentil than any gentleman can have been.

The urge to make love wildly like these is the normal reaction we feel under the unbearable pressure of meaningless being-symbolized by the camion suddenly emerges at the Carrefour.

SO, les valseuses is much better a name than going places. To dance a valse you need to be elegant, but going places you don't. Not so [[several]] people like the movies of Bertrand blier simply because they don't [[realise]] them. [[Mere]] because they are [[several]] [[genera]] of people.

If you have not been living under a deep [[despondency]] [[interconnected]] with [[wondrous]] personal [[esperanza]] it may be [[strenuous]] for you to [[enjoys]] the [[comedy]] blier shown here.

And also the film of blier cannot be [[sorted]] easily as black-comedy or cult [[cetera]]. like those of pulp fiction etc. Because there is this delicacy which the audience of north-america [[periodically]] fail to appreciate.

When I looked at these two `hooligans' dining with Jeanne moreau in the seaside restaurant, I felt they were more gentil than any gentleman can have been.

The urge to make love wildly like these is the normal reaction we feel under the unbearable pressure of meaningless being-symbolized by the camion suddenly emerges at the Carrefour.

SO, les valseuses is much better a name than going places. To dance a valse you need to be elegant, but going places you don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 2908 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is truly an awful movie and a waste of 2 hours of your life. It is simultaneously bland and offensive, with nudity and lots and lots of violence. However, the nudity is not that exciting, and the violence is repetitive and boring. Also, the plot is flimsy at best, the characters are unrealistic and undeveloped, and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen.

I have heard that this movie is supposed to be funny, but it's not. I did not laugh once while watching it, nor did I even crack a smile. The makers of this film tried to combine a comedy movie with an action movie, and they failed on both counts.

Some poorly made movies are funny because they are so bad, but this is not one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] After hearing raves about this movie for years, I finally decided to rent it and watch. Let me start by saying that I'm [[glad]] that the [[rental]] was free from the local [[library]]. This move was [[slow]], [[boring]], unrealistic and the [[plot]] made no [[sense]]. After 2 hours, I was ready to [[nuke]] that backwater Texas [[town]] and put the [[group]] of those [[characters]] out of their misery. I [[realize]] that taste is subjective, but believe me, I just do not [[understand]] all of the [[hype]] that I have [[heard]] about this [[movie]]. Dallas provided as good a detail of the life in [[Texas]] as this [[movie]]. Rent it only if you [[want]] to [[understand]] how movie studios can [[pay]] enough [[money]] to [[reviewers]] to [[convince]] the [[general]] public that a [[bad]] movie is good. After hearing raves about this movie for years, I finally decided to rent it and watch. Let me start by saying that I'm [[gratified]] that the [[leasing]] was free from the local [[bookcase]]. This move was [[lento]], [[dull]], unrealistic and the [[intrigue]] made no [[feeling]]. After 2 hours, I was ready to [[warhead]] that backwater Texas [[cities]] and put the [[groups]] of those [[traits]] out of their misery. I [[realizing]] that taste is subjective, but believe me, I just do not [[understands]] all of the [[threshing]] that I have [[hear]] about this [[filmmaking]]. Dallas provided as good a detail of the life in [[Texan]] as this [[movies]]. Rent it only if you [[wanna]] to [[fathom]] how movie studios can [[paycheck]] enough [[moneys]] to [[testers]] to [[convincing]] the [[overall]] public that a [[negative]] movie is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] If you [[like]] [[film]], don't [[miss]] this one. If you prefer [[action]], or horror, or romance, then you'll wonder what's happening. Everyone here is stuck in a [[gangster]] [[film]]. And what [[happens]] is [[transcendental]] [[murder]].

There are few [[similar]] films. No doubt it will see [[limited]] release, and be [[hard]] to [[find]]. But the [[search]] will be worth it. If you [[want]] to [[study]] a mileu as a potential [[symbol]], then this is [[indeed]] a [[film]] to [[study]].

You can't watch it once. [[If]] you do you'll never see what's [[happening]]. [[Dark]] [[City]] is better. [[Joe]] Vrs. The [[Volcano]] is more [[fun]]. But [[Mad]] [[Dog]] [[Time]] [[could]] [[convert]] the [[gangsta]] crowd to symbolism. . .or at [[least]] to [[think]] twice before shooting again. If you [[likes]] [[films]], don't [[missed]] this one. If you prefer [[activities]], or horror, or romance, then you'll wonder what's happening. Everyone here is stuck in a [[hoodlum]] [[cinematography]]. And what [[arises]] is [[transcendent]] [[slain]].

There are few [[analogue]] films. No doubt it will see [[capped]] release, and be [[difficult]] to [[unearthed]]. But the [[searches]] will be worth it. If you [[wanna]] to [[researches]] a mileu as a potential [[icons]], then this is [[actually]] a [[movie]] to [[investigated]].

You can't watch it once. [[Unless]] you do you'll never see what's [[occurring]]. [[Murky]] [[Town]] is better. [[Kawa]] Vrs. The [[Eruption]] is more [[amusing]]. But [[Irate]] [[Pooch]] [[Period]] [[would]] [[translating]] the [[banger]] crowd to symbolism. . .or at [[fewest]] to [[ideas]] twice before shooting again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I have [[seen]] this [[film]] only once, on [[TV]], and it has not been [[repeated]]. This is [[strange]] when you [[consider]] the [[rubbish]] that is [[repeated]] over and over again. [[Usually]] [[horror]] [[movies]] for me are a [[source]] of amusement, but this one [[really]] scared me.

DO [[NOT]] READ THE NEXT [[BIT]] [[IF]] YOU HAVE'NT [[SEEN]] THE [[FILM]] [[YET]]

The scariest bit is when the [[townsfolk]] [[pursue]] the [[preacher]] to where his [[wife]] [[lies]] [[almost]] dead (they'd been [[poisoning]] her). He [[asks]] who the [[hell]] are you people anyway. One by one they [[give]] their [[true]] identities. The [[girl]] who was pretending to be deaf in order to corrupt and [[seduce]] him [[says]] "I am Lilith, the [[witch]] who [[loved]] [[Adam]] before Eve". I have [[noticed]] this [[movie]] only once, on [[TELEVISIONS]], and it has not been [[recurring]]. This is [[weird]] when you [[examine]] the [[codswallop]] that is [[recur]] over and over again. [[Fluently]] [[terror]] [[cinematography]] for me are a [[backgrounds]] of amusement, but this one [[truthfully]] scared me.

DO [[NAH]] READ THE NEXT [[BITE]] [[UNLESS]] YOU HAVE'NT [[WATCHED]] THE [[KINO]] [[EVEN]]

The scariest bit is when the [[townspeople]] [[pursuing]] the [[reverend]] to where his [[femme]] [[lying]] [[hardly]] dead (they'd been [[toxins]] her). He [[applications]] who the [[dammit]] are you people anyway. One by one they [[confer]] their [[truthful]] identities. The [[fille]] who was pretending to be deaf in order to corrupt and [[seduction]] him [[alleges]] "I am Lilith, the [[sorceress]] who [[cared]] [[Adams]] before Eve". --------------------------------------------- Result 2912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd read about FLAVIA THE HERETIC for many years, but I only got to see it early last year, when I went on an insane movie-buying binge, and, for whatever reason, it has been on my mind lately, though it's been some months since I watched it.

It's a striking film, set in Italy somewhere around the 15th century. Definitely Medieval-era (though I don't think any specific year is ever given). This being the time of Christian ascendancy, the age is a time of utter madness, and the movie captures this very well.

Flavia, our protagonist, is a young lady who encounters a fallen Muslim on a battlefield. He seems a warm and intriguing fellow, and she's immediately taken with him. Her father, a soldier of a a family of some standing, comes along, almost immediately, and murders the wounded man right before her eyes. But she'll continue to see him in her dreams.

Her father ships her off to a convent that seems more like an open-air insane asylum--the residents, so harshly repressed by unyielding Medieval Christianity, slowly go mad. Flavia comes under the influence of one of the nuttier nuns. But in a mad world, only the sane are truly mad, and this sociopathic sister clearly recognizes the insanity around her. Her take on the times in which they live strikes a chord with Flavia, who, being young and apparently sheltered, is beginning to question everything about this world in which she finds herself trapped.

The movie is unflinching in its portrayal of that world, showcasing a lot of unpleasantness. We see a horse gelded, a lord rape one of the women of his lands in a pig-sty, the pious torture of a young nun. Through it all, Flavia observes and questions, rejecting, eventually, the Christian dogma that creates such a parade of horrors in terms that would gain the movie some criticism over the years for seeming anachronistic. I disagree with that criticism. Flavia's views, though sometimes expressed in ways that vaguely mirror, for example, then-contemporary feminist commentary (the movie was made in 1974), revolve around what are really pretty obvious questions. It is, perhaps, difficult to believe she could be so much of a fish out of water in her own time, but that's the sort of minor point it doesn't do to belabor. Flavia is written in such a way to allow those of our era, or of any era, to empathize with her plight. Getting bogged down on such a matter would be missing the forest for the trees.

Flavia is heartened when the Muslims arrive, invading the countryside, and she finds, in their leader, a new version of the handsome Islamist who still visits her dreams. Smitten with her almost immediately, he allows her to virtually lead his army, becoming a Joan of Arc figure in full battle-gear, and directing the invaders to pull down Christian society, and wreak vengeance upon all those she's seen commit evil.

Is she the herald of a new and better world? She may think so, but Muslims of that era weren't big on feminism, either, as she soon learns the hard way. As they say, meet the new boss...

This is really just a thumbnail of some of the things that happen in FLAVIA THE HERETIC. The movie is quite grim, and with a very downbeat, rather depressing ending. Not a mass-audience movie at all, to be sure. It's quite good, though, and doesn't belong on the "nunsploitation" pile on which it is often carelessly thrown. I think there's much value in the final film, and I'm glad I saw it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] [[Wonderful]] [[cast]] wasted on [[worthless]] [[script]]. Ten or so adults [[reunite]] at the summer [[camp]] they attended as [[juveniles]]. Could this ever [[happen]] in a [[million]] [[years]]? It's [[simply]] a [[fantasy]], and a boring one at that. Do they become [[teenagers]] again? Do they reenact their pranks, [[games]], good [[times]]? They [[may]] [[try]] but [[ultimately]] the [[answer]] is: No. Is there any intrigue? [[Any]] suspense? [[Horror]]? [[Comedy]]? [[None]] of the above. How [[anyone]] can be [[entertained]] by this [[drivel]] is [[beyond]] me. I [[wanted]] to [[like]] this [[movie]]; I [[tried]] to like this [[movie]], but my brain [[refused]]. [[Sumptuous]] [[casting]] wasted on [[unnecessary]] [[scripts]]. Ten or so adults [[reunion]] at the summer [[encampment]] they attended as [[underage]]. Could this ever [[occur]] in a [[billion]] [[olds]]? It's [[purely]] a [[utopia]], and a boring one at that. Do they become [[juvenile]] again? Do they reenact their pranks, [[game]], good [[time]]? They [[maggio]] [[endeavour]] but [[finally]] the [[response]] is: No. Is there any intrigue? [[Everything]] suspense? [[Monstrosity]]? [[Charade]]? [[Nothing]] of the above. How [[everyone]] can be [[distracted]] by this [[whim]] is [[afterlife]] me. I [[want]] to [[iike]] this [[filmmaking]]; I [[strived]] to like this [[filmmaking]], but my brain [[denied]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Entertaining Jim Belushi vehicle, a modern cockeyed version of It's A Wonderful Life. Michael Caine plays a sort-of angel who lets Belush see what life would have been like if he had "made it big". Jim is at his best with a good story and supporting cast; seems like real chemistry between him and Hamilton. Not an Oscar contender but good warm-hearted fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 2915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, for starters, this actually was THE most elegant Clausen film to this date.

The man's always got a sense for characters with a slice of humor to them, but I think that he in this movie adds a dimension unparrallel to anything he's made earlier. His work has - in very black n' white words - been accepted by the broad but not that critical audience, and we've always appreciated his sense of humor and his ability to mix it with human problems and a distinct way of letting the audience know what he needs to say.

In "Villa Paranoia, however, for the first time, he surprises with an unseen wisdom and a respect for the minorities. Not only the ethnic but also the normal people you tend to forget. Set in Jutland - in 'the country' - it deals with the everlasting issue of lack of love, but in a close and at times brutal way that keeps you looking and keeps you focused. And on top of that, he himself manages to play a b******d! A true b*****d, who wants the right thing but has no clue how to get there, and people therefore suffer. Bitterly.

I'd have to say it's one of the best movies I've seen this year and I'm greatly anticipating his next. --------------------------------------------- Result 2916 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I'm not at all picky about horror [[movies]], and I'm willing to watch pretty much any of them. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to re-watch [[many]] of them, or that I won't have criticism for them. This movie is creepy, and is very well done. In [[fact]], I think this [[movie]] would make an [[excellent]] double-bill with Session 9.

I should [[specify]], before I get to my comments, that I watched this [[alone]]. I started [[watching]] it before going to [[bed]], and got about 15 minutes in before I realized that it was too effective, so I saved the rest of it for the morning. Even while watching it in broad daylight, it was still creepy. However, I can't vouch for how effective it would be when watching in a larger group.

After the death of their daughter, a couple move to a remote cabin as a means of trying to come to terms with this death. Let me make note of this death - this is one of the [[rare]] [[movies]] that doesn't [[shy]] away from the death of a child. This is [[much]] more important, as it both sets the tone, as well as explains much of the acting that permeates the movie.

The couple is not doing well. The wife has distanced herself from the relationship, and the husband is doing what he can to try to bring her back. While some of the comments have complained about their acting - one specified that they act more like a father and daughter than husband and wife, and that's legitimate. He's trying to give her more direction. It's a role that men sometimes take on.

There are a [[variety]] of [[scares]] in the [[film]], and most are fairly non-violent, [[though]] grotesque in some [[ways]]. The [[story]] itself feels very straightforward for most of the film, and [[takes]] an [[odd]] [[turn]] near the [[end]]. [[While]] the [[turn]] is not [[absurd]], it is [[certainly]] not what you [[expected]] from the way things had been progressing.

Moody, atmospheric, and very well [[done]] for [[something]] that appears to have been shot on [[video]]. I'm not at all picky about horror [[film]], and I'm willing to watch pretty much any of them. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to re-watch [[various]] of them, or that I won't have criticism for them. This movie is creepy, and is very well done. In [[facto]], I think this [[cinematography]] would make an [[gorgeous]] double-bill with Session 9.

I should [[specifies]], before I get to my comments, that I watched this [[jen]]. I started [[staring]] it before going to [[bedside]], and got about 15 minutes in before I realized that it was too effective, so I saved the rest of it for the morning. Even while watching it in broad daylight, it was still creepy. However, I can't vouch for how effective it would be when watching in a larger group.

After the death of their daughter, a couple move to a remote cabin as a means of trying to come to terms with this death. Let me make note of this death - this is one of the [[scarce]] [[cinematography]] that doesn't [[bashful]] away from the death of a child. This is [[very]] more important, as it both sets the tone, as well as explains much of the acting that permeates the movie.

The couple is not doing well. The wife has distanced herself from the relationship, and the husband is doing what he can to try to bring her back. While some of the comments have complained about their acting - one specified that they act more like a father and daughter than husband and wife, and that's legitimate. He's trying to give her more direction. It's a role that men sometimes take on.

There are a [[multiple]] of [[alarms]] in the [[films]], and most are fairly non-violent, [[while]] grotesque in some [[shapes]]. The [[tale]] itself feels very straightforward for most of the film, and [[pick]] an [[weird]] [[converting]] near the [[terminating]]. [[Despite]] the [[turning]] is not [[preposterous]], it is [[indubitably]] not what you [[envisaged]] from the way things had been progressing.

Moody, atmospheric, and very well [[played]] for [[somethin]] that appears to have been shot on [[videotaped]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Really]] a [[terrible]] movie. It's to be expected, though. [[Clearly]] a low budget: [[nothing]] all that [[innovative]], an [[actress]] (if you can [[call]] what she does "acting") who [[always]] has [[roles]] with nudity in a shower scene, a [[man]] in a reptile suit almost modeled after predator, a [[cabin]] in the [[woods]], etc. But there are some redeeming points. Although the story is not new, for the most part, there's a few parts that aren't so regurgitated. For one, the black guy doesn't [[die]] when he's [[attacked]] (the [[first]] [[time]]) and he isn't even one of the [[first]] couple to [[die]]. But that's minor. More importantly, there's a very interesting twist regarding Kat's [[experiments]] and Wes & [[Steve]] that I didn't see coming. When [[Steve]] [[told]] Kat he knew what she did, I [[believed]] what he [[said]] and what Kat [[replied]] with. But when the creature [[revealed]] who he [[really]] was, I was pleasantly surprised at the [[novelty]] of the revelation. It could be because of my [[lack]] of experience with the genre, or that it's a genuinely clever twist.

Either way, the movie's pretty bad and don't watch it if there's [[anything]] better on... Unless you're in the mood for a cheap scifi [[flick]]. [[Truthfully]] a [[abysmal]] movie. It's to be expected, though. [[Clara]] a low budget: [[nada]] all that [[innovate]], an [[actor]] (if you can [[invitation]] what she does "acting") who [[consistently]] has [[functions]] with nudity in a shower scene, a [[dude]] in a reptile suit almost modeled after predator, a [[bungalow]] in the [[bois]], etc. But there are some redeeming points. Although the story is not new, for the most part, there's a few parts that aren't so regurgitated. For one, the black guy doesn't [[decease]] when he's [[mugged]] (the [[fiirst]] [[period]]) and he isn't even one of the [[outset]] couple to [[dying]]. But that's minor. More importantly, there's a very interesting twist regarding Kat's [[experiences]] and Wes & [[Stephens]] that I didn't see coming. When [[Stephens]] [[tells]] Kat he knew what she did, I [[felt]] what he [[stated]] and what Kat [[responses]] with. But when the creature [[shown]] who he [[genuinely]] was, I was pleasantly surprised at the [[newness]] of the revelation. It could be because of my [[shortage]] of experience with the genre, or that it's a genuinely clever twist.

Either way, the movie's pretty bad and don't watch it if there's [[something]] better on... Unless you're in the mood for a cheap scifi [[movie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] One [[wonders]] why anyone would [[try]] to rehash successful movie plots that have already been seen, like it's the case with this [[movie]]. "The Wedding Date" is one of the best examples of why not to [[even]] try to [[remake]], under the guise of a [[new]] [[story]], [[something]] that should have been let [[alone]]. [[If]] a project like this goes ahead with the studio [[big]] honchos' [[approval]], then go all out with big stars and glossy production values, that way, people will come for the [[stars]].

Alas, that's not what [[happens]] in this misguided [[attempt]] at [[comedy]]. The [[problem]] seems to be the [[way]] the screen [[writers]] have [[transplanted]] the [[story]] to London, when basically, this [[seems]] to be a [[typical]] American situation that not [[even]] the setting will be able to fix. Then there is the [[problem]] with the stars. Debra Messing and Dermot Mulrooney? They have as much chemistry as oil and vinegar!

[[Since]] the Kat and [[Nick]] have no conflict from the [[start]], the viewer is not pulled into the [[film]] the way the creators [[thought]] they would be. It's [[clear]] that Kat will [[fall]] for [[Nick]], and vice-versa in this [[predictable]] [[story]]. Amy Adams, who was the [[best]] [[asset]] in "Junebug", comes across as a [[shallow]] [[girl]] who is willing to keep her lie going on and not [[come]] clean to the [[man]] that [[loves]] her and is [[going]] to [[marry]] her.

[[For]] [[anyone]] interested, the [[credits]] at the end of the [[film]] run for [[almost]] seven minutes! One [[beauties]] why anyone would [[seeks]] to rehash successful movie plots that have already been seen, like it's the case with this [[film]]. "The Wedding Date" is one of the best examples of why not to [[yet]] try to [[redo]], under the guise of a [[nouveau]] [[history]], [[anything]] that should have been let [[lonely]]. [[Though]] a project like this goes ahead with the studio [[sizeable]] honchos' [[ratification]], then go all out with big stars and glossy production values, that way, people will come for the [[celebrity]].

Alas, that's not what [[comes]] in this misguided [[endeavor]] at [[parody]]. The [[issues]] seems to be the [[routes]] the screen [[authors]] have [[grafting]] the [[history]] to London, when basically, this [[appears]] to be a [[classic]] American situation that not [[yet]] the setting will be able to fix. Then there is the [[difficulty]] with the stars. Debra Messing and Dermot Mulrooney? They have as much chemistry as oil and vinegar!

[[Because]] the Kat and [[Nicky]] have no conflict from the [[commence]], the viewer is not pulled into the [[films]] the way the creators [[brainchild]] they would be. It's [[unmistakable]] that Kat will [[slumps]] for [[Nicky]], and vice-versa in this [[foreseeable]] [[tales]]. Amy Adams, who was the [[optimum]] [[assets]] in "Junebug", comes across as a [[superficial]] [[woman]] who is willing to keep her lie going on and not [[coming]] clean to the [[bloke]] that [[likes]] her and is [[gonna]] to [[wedding]] her.

[[During]] [[nobody]] interested, the [[credit]] at the end of the [[filmmaking]] run for [[about]] seven minutes! --------------------------------------------- Result 2919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This 1939 film from director John Ford and writer Lamar Trotti tells a fictional tale of young lawyer Abraham Lincoln, his trials (literally) and his tribulations. It's a sentimental film, reasonably well made but hardly [[breathtaking]]. The casting of Henry Fonda as Lincoln seems a mistake, for while the actor had the right doleful qualities for the part, even with several inches of makeup and a false nose he's way too handsome for Honest Abe, who was famously homely. It's a good try from Fonda, who's nothing if not sincere, but his miscasting throws the entire film off. The supporting cast is excellent, though, and includes Alice Brady, Ward Bond and Donald Meek. But Ford is too reverential in his treatment of Lincoln, who is presented as just shy of a saint, and in the final scene the movie goes way over the top. This 1939 film from director John Ford and writer Lamar Trotti tells a fictional tale of young lawyer Abraham Lincoln, his trials (literally) and his tribulations. It's a sentimental film, reasonably well made but hardly [[amazing]]. The casting of Henry Fonda as Lincoln seems a mistake, for while the actor had the right doleful qualities for the part, even with several inches of makeup and a false nose he's way too handsome for Honest Abe, who was famously homely. It's a good try from Fonda, who's nothing if not sincere, but his miscasting throws the entire film off. The supporting cast is excellent, though, and includes Alice Brady, Ward Bond and Donald Meek. But Ford is too reverential in his treatment of Lincoln, who is presented as just shy of a saint, and in the final scene the movie goes way over the top. --------------------------------------------- Result 2920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Homeward Bound is a beautiful film. Y'know the part where Shadow falls down the ditch... thingy, I *cried*, considering I was only six, I cried! it takes a lot to make me cry! The dogs and the cat are excellently trained. A nice family movie, *not* for completely hardened non-fluffy people or animal-haters but could for soft-as-crap a.k.a. people like me.

A good film overall, 10/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2921 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Nobody]], but nobody, [[could]] chew the scenery [[like]] the Divine One, Ruth [[Elizabeth]] Davis, and "[[Elizabeth]] and Essex" is a great example why. Although she overplays the part at times, watch her when she gawfs about Raliegh writing the lyrics to a song her ladies-in-waiting are about to [[play]]: in that one moment, she makes us [[understand]] how [[Elizabeth]] was [[able]] to [[rule]] and [[rule]] [[absolutely]]! [[At]] other times, she is [[done]] in by the script's sappiness. When [[Elizabeth]] has to be vulnerable, she comes off as [[weak]] and shrewish. This has the [[added]] [[effect]] of undermining her authority: when she blows her [[stack]] and [[threatens]] to [[dispense]] justice, it's [[hard]] to take her [[seriously]].

Flynn exudes charm, making us [[see]] how Essex was able to worm his [[way]] into Elizabeth's [[heart]], but he is totally [[inept]] at [[conveying]] the complexity and sheer [[evil]] of the [[man]]. It [[also]] doesn't [[help]] that Essex is badly underwritten. Why is he this [[hothead]] who [[wants]] to overthrow his [[Queen]] - [[even]] as he swears fidelity to her - except only that he is more blue-blooded, [[thus]], more "[[worthy]]" of [[rule]]? And why does Raliegh betray [[Elizabeth]] by intercepting her and Essex's letters? He's in no [[risk]] of [[falling]] out of favor, and we know where Essex (and his head) is [[headed]]. So why does he [[risk]] his own head by speeding up the inevitable?

What did Curtiz do with all the $$$ he was given? He doesn't even bother to try to hide the fact that his battle scenes are shot on a sound stage. He should've ended it with Elizabeth the first time [[alone]] at The Tower; everything [[else]] that follows ([[especially]] the [[final]] scene between her and Essex) is unnecessary. The [[costumes]] are fantastic. And is it me, or does Bette look exactly like Susan Sarandon? [[Anyone]], but nobody, [[did]] chew the scenery [[iike]] the Divine One, Ruth [[Elise]] Davis, and "[[Isabel]] and Essex" is a great example why. Although she overplays the part at times, watch her when she gawfs about Raliegh writing the lyrics to a song her ladies-in-waiting are about to [[gaming]]: in that one moment, she makes us [[understands]] how [[Elisabeth]] was [[capable]] to [[regulation]] and [[regs]] [[totally]]! [[For]] other times, she is [[doing]] in by the script's sappiness. When [[Elisabeth]] has to be vulnerable, she comes off as [[vulnerable]] and shrewish. This has the [[add]] [[implications]] of undermining her authority: when she blows her [[stacks]] and [[threatened]] to [[distribute]] justice, it's [[tough]] to take her [[severely]].

Flynn exudes charm, making us [[behold]] how Essex was able to worm his [[route]] into Elizabeth's [[heartland]], but he is totally [[incapable]] at [[transmitted]] the complexity and sheer [[wicked]] of the [[males]]. It [[additionally]] doesn't [[assists]] that Essex is badly underwritten. Why is he this [[trooper]] who [[wanted]] to overthrow his [[Quinn]] - [[yet]] as he swears fidelity to her - except only that he is more blue-blooded, [[then]], more "[[meritorious]]" of [[regulation]]? And why does Raliegh betray [[Elisabeth]] by intercepting her and Essex's letters? He's in no [[risks]] of [[dipping]] out of favor, and we know where Essex (and his head) is [[presided]]. So why does he [[threats]] his own head by speeding up the inevitable?

What did Curtiz do with all the $$$ he was given? He doesn't even bother to try to hide the fact that his battle scenes are shot on a sound stage. He should've ended it with Elizabeth the first time [[lonely]] at The Tower; everything [[elsewhere]] that follows ([[particularly]] the [[ultimate]] scene between her and Essex) is unnecessary. The [[outfits]] are fantastic. And is it me, or does Bette look exactly like Susan Sarandon? --------------------------------------------- Result 2922 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've been watching this every night on VH1 this past week. This is a terrific revealing portrait about the drugs epidemic and how drugs were displayed in the media during the late 60's and on through the 70's.Woodstock,Easy Rider,The Beatles,The Death of Morrison, Hendrix, Joplin are all here. Vh1 has fashioned a complete intricate portrayal of the life and times during the "Drug Years". From the Sanfrancisco Bay Area to Studio 54 this documentary shows the evolution and advancement of the drug business and the death and new life it breathed into the American culture.From Marijuana to LSD to Cocaine this documentary shows the ways drugs were getting into the country, the hippie movement, the conservative resistance, and how drugs effected the arts (music , movies etc.) Featuring tons of fascinating interviews and news reel footage.

Drug Films: The Trip Easy Rider Up In Smoke Reefer Madness Blow Boogie Nights --------------------------------------------- Result 2923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The saddest part of this is the fact that these are 87 minutes I'll never get back. I knew this was terrible from the get-go, with the guy dressed as a lunatic Indian chief on top of the roof. (See if they could get away with that in 2008). My 10-year-old boy is really into baseball right now, so we decided to rent it on a rainy day. Even though he seemed to enjoy parts of it, I had to cringe when I heard all the needless foul language. Bad, bad movie. This was an awful ripoff of Bad News Bears. Completely shameless and completely predictable. I don't mind a predictable movie if it's done well, but this one absolutely was not. --------------------------------------------- Result 2924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't care how many nominations this junk got for best this and that, this movie stunk. I didn't know whether to turn off the set, or file a lawsuit with O.J.'s attorney for wrongful damage to my mental health. I have seldom been this bored; to call this dung entertainment is a slap in the face of every movie-goer across the planet. The whole story was stupid, the acting was uninspired, the 'drama' was emotionless. I am thankful I didn't have to pay for this unfulfilling experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Sunshine Boys is a terrific comedy about two ex-vaudevillians who reluctantly reunite for a TV special despite the fact that they despise each other.

The comic genius of two masters at work, George Burns and Walter Matthau are stellar! Some of the best scenes are when the duo is fighting over the silliest little trivial things! The material is fast-paced and witty, appealing to all ages.

MILD SPOILER ALERT: There are some mildly sad moments toward the end of the movie that deal indirectly with the affects of aging that gives the film a soft, sincere, tenderness that shows to this reviewer that what the pair really need the most for success, are each other.

If anyone loves The Odd Couple, you'll adore this movie. An excellent film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[If]] the scale went negative I would be happier. Seeing Sushmita Sen was nice, and Nisha Kothari has a [[bright]] [[future]] but the [[producer]] and the [[director]] [[ruined]] any and all enjoyment in this story. The choice of [[angles]], [[choice]] of [[lighting]] and well everything [[distracted]] from [[trying]] to remember what is the story. Oh, if the songs and [[dances]] haven't [[caused]] you to [[rip]] your ears off your head, [[first]]. The [[film]] could have been [[made]] twice at 1.25 hours, and been pretty [[good]], kinda like "Seven [[Samurai]]" but the [[director]] and [[writer]] didn't [[go]] that [[direction]], [[even]] if the "townsfolk" [[finally]] [[find]] their backbone and [[want]] to [[help]]. This [[movie]] fails on so [[many]] [[levels]]: [[editing]], writing, [[photography]] [[angles]], style, lighting, [[script]] - [[name]] any aspect of this film - it was [[BAD]] - probably the [[food]] from the caterer was [[bad]] too. I have never in 6 [[years]] of [[watching]] Indian (Bollywood) [[movies]] [[seen]] something this badly [[made]]. [[Unless]] the scale went negative I would be happier. Seeing Sushmita Sen was nice, and Nisha Kothari has a [[glossy]] [[upcoming]] but the [[manufacturer]] and the [[headmaster]] [[trashed]] any and all enjoyment in this story. The choice of [[corners]], [[choices]] of [[light]] and well everything [[entertained]] from [[seeking]] to remember what is the story. Oh, if the songs and [[ballet]] haven't [[generated]] you to [[tears]] your ears off your head, [[firstly]]. The [[filmmaking]] could have been [[brought]] twice at 1.25 hours, and been pretty [[alright]], kinda like "Seven [[Swordsman]]" but the [[headmaster]] and [[novelist]] didn't [[going]] that [[orientation]], [[yet]] if the "townsfolk" [[lastly]] [[finds]] their backbone and [[wanting]] to [[pomoc]]. This [[filmmaking]] fails on so [[several]] [[grades]]: [[edition]], writing, [[picture]] [[corners]], style, lighting, [[screenplay]] - [[behalf]] any aspect of this film - it was [[UNFAVOURABLE]] - probably the [[dietary]] from the caterer was [[negative]] too. I have never in 6 [[aged]] of [[staring]] Indian (Bollywood) [[kino]] [[noticed]] something this badly [[effected]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I.Q., in my opinion, is a sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you. If you ask me, James (Stephen Fry) really was a dull guy. To me, Ed (Tim Robbins) was more suited for Catherine (Meg Ryan) than James was. Anyway, everyone involved in this film did an absolutely outstanding job. Now, in conclusion, I highly recommend this sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you to any Tim Robbins or Meg Ryan fan who hasn't seen it. You're in for lots of laughter, so go to the video store, rent it or buy it, kick back with a friend, and watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Sorry]], I don't have much time to write. I am not a psychologist but have known one for 25 years. She [[said]] that Scott Wilson [[portrayed]] a sociopath (no [[conscience]]) [[extraordinarily]] well. I [[agree]]! She also said that Robert Blake [[portrayed]] a person with anger and impulse control who had a conscience but couldn't control himself superbly. I agree! What a chilling and [[tremendous]] [[film]]. I have [[seen]] over 2000 [[films]] and [[would]] [[rank]] this in the [[top]] 100. My lifelong friend deals with clients such as these [[regularly]]. My only [[criticism]] was the preachy narration at the [[end]] of the film. Many people [[grow]] up in less than ideal circumstances but only one in a million will behave as these 2 losers did. [[Apology]], I don't have much time to write. I am not a psychologist but have known one for 25 years. She [[told]] that Scott Wilson [[depicted]] a sociopath (no [[consciousness]]) [[unbelievably]] well. I [[concur]]! She also said that Robert Blake [[depicted]] a person with anger and impulse control who had a conscience but couldn't control himself superbly. I agree! What a chilling and [[great]] [[movies]]. I have [[watched]] over 2000 [[kino]] and [[ought]] [[grading]] this in the [[superior]] 100. My lifelong friend deals with clients such as these [[periodically]]. My only [[critique]] was the preachy narration at the [[ceases]] of the film. Many people [[augmentation]] up in less than ideal circumstances but only one in a million will behave as these 2 losers did. --------------------------------------------- Result 2929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've [[bought]], " The [[Feast]] of [[All]] Saints," and it's not [[truly]] a horrible [[movie]], but a lot of things could have been better. It had a lot of historical value, [[played]] out by very talented [[actress]]/[[actors]], and it's not an [[everyday]] occurrence that actors can [[play]] out such a role and have it be somewhat [[believable]]. There were some parts that were a [[little]] mediocre and [[confusing]], but I wouldn't [[say]] that the entire movie was horrible. Once you think about that, capturing 1800's [[New]] [[Orleans]], and making something out of it, it pretty [[hard]], and much harder to get actors who can strongly signify those parts. But the only big [[problem]] I had with the [[movie]] was that most of the actors who did play the free people of color, were mostly light skinned Africans, not very universal in casting others who weren't light skinned; one of the old Creole stereotypes that still exists. Whomever did the casting could have picked a wider variety when it came to hue, despite many Creoles are color conscious.Rather picking actors that [[looked]] near white in a sense, could have been more thought out.The actors did a [[great]] job, the script could have better [[written]], and [[overall]] I [[found]] the performances were very [[believable]]. I've [[acquiring]], " The [[Shindig]] of [[Totality]] Saints," and it's not [[truthfully]] a horrible [[films]], but a lot of things could have been better. It had a lot of historical value, [[done]] out by very talented [[actor]]/[[actresses]], and it's not an [[daily]] occurrence that actors can [[gaming]] out such a role and have it be somewhat [[credible]]. There were some parts that were a [[kiddo]] mediocre and [[disorienting]], but I wouldn't [[tell]] that the entire movie was horrible. Once you think about that, capturing 1800's [[Novel]] [[Nola]], and making something out of it, it pretty [[stiff]], and much harder to get actors who can strongly signify those parts. But the only big [[trouble]] I had with the [[cinematography]] was that most of the actors who did play the free people of color, were mostly light skinned Africans, not very universal in casting others who weren't light skinned; one of the old Creole stereotypes that still exists. Whomever did the casting could have picked a wider variety when it came to hue, despite many Creoles are color conscious.Rather picking actors that [[seemed]] near white in a sense, could have been more thought out.The actors did a [[wondrous]] job, the script could have better [[wrote]], and [[entire]] I [[uncovered]] the performances were very [[reliable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2930 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] This [[movie]] is [[terrible]]. The [[suspense]] is [[spent]] [[waiting]] for a point. There isn't [[much]] of one.

Aside from a few [[great]] lines ( "I [[found]] a [[tooth]] in my apartment" ), and the main characters dedication to [[killing]] himself, it's a [[collection]] of [[supposedly]] eerie sounds.

This [[filmmaking]] is [[scary]]. The [[waiting]] is [[spending]] [[expecting]] for a point. There isn't [[very]] of one.

Aside from a few [[marvellous]] lines ( "I [[finds]] a [[dent]] in my apartment" ), and the main characters dedication to [[homicide]] himself, it's a [[collected]] of [[reportedly]] eerie sounds.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[name]] (Frau) of the main [[character]] is the German word for "[[Woman]]". I don't know if that was intentional or not, but if sure [[got]] some [[giggles]] from the German [[audience]] at the [[Fantasy]] [[Film]] [[Festival]] [[last]] year, when it was [[shown]].

But those were the only [[giggles]] the [[movie]] [[got]]. Not that it was [[aiming]] for giggles, it's a horrible movie for heaven's sake! A [[horrible]] [[movie]] in more than one [[meaning]]. It's a [[shame]] that a [[premise]] like that was wasted with [[horrible]] even [[unbearable]] [[moments]] for the viewer (definetely not for the faint of [[Heart]]!!)! And it wasn't even necessary to show all the things that are [[shown]]. I'm not [[even]] [[going]] into a moral [[obligation]] (because movies don't really have that [[kind]] of [[task]] or [[function]]) [[discussion]] of what is shown here, but this is a new low on the [[whole]] "torture movement" that has [[grown]] in the [[last]] few [[years]]! The [[behalf]] (Frau) of the main [[personages]] is the German word for "[[Femmes]]". I don't know if that was intentional or not, but if sure [[did]] some [[giggling]] from the German [[viewers]] at the [[Chimera]] [[Filmmaking]] [[Festivals]] [[final]] year, when it was [[revealed]].

But those were the only [[chuckles]] the [[filmmaking]] [[gets]]. Not that it was [[targeted]] for giggles, it's a horrible movie for heaven's sake! A [[shocking]] [[filmmaking]] in more than one [[mean]]. It's a [[pity]] that a [[supposition]] like that was wasted with [[frightful]] even [[unsustainable]] [[times]] for the viewer (definetely not for the faint of [[Heartland]]!!)! And it wasn't even necessary to show all the things that are [[exhibited]]. I'm not [[yet]] [[go]] into a moral [[commitments]] (because movies don't really have that [[genre]] of [[chore]] or [[operation]]) [[conversations]] of what is shown here, but this is a new low on the [[overall]] "torture movement" that has [[increased]] in the [[latter]] few [[ages]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the better Vance films succeeds more on interesting plot and artful direction by none other than Michael Curtiz. This time around a generally hated financier is found dead - shot in the head - in his locked and bolted bedroom on the upper floor. Philo Vance, hearing of the situation while about to set off for Italy, decides to end his vacation and try to solve what he thinks is a murder and what everyone else is considering a suicide. William Powell is as affable a Philo Vance as you will find. He never seems to press and is always very smooth in what he says and does. Powell is aided by a host of very talented actors - some first-rate character actors and actresses like Mary Astor as a niece that hated her uncle, Ralph Morgan as the dead man's secretary, Paul Cavanaugh as a rival dog fancier, Arthur Hohl as a mysterious butler, Helen Vinson as the next door kept blonde, and two really good performances by James Lee as the Chinese cook and portly Eugene Palette as a wise-cracking police detective. Add into the mix a wonderfully comedic turn by Etienne Girardot as a public coroner always missing his meal. It is this depth of suspects and a story that has many plots twists and turns that make The Kennel Murder Case a fast-moving, fun mystery. --------------------------------------------- Result 2933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is an early film "Pilot" for the hit Canadian tv show Trailer Park Boys. It was played to executives at a few networks before Showcase decided to sign them up for a tv series. Great acting and a very funny cast make this one of the best cult comedy films. The movie plot is that these two small time criminals go around "exterminating" peoples pets for money. If you have a dog next door whos barking all night these are the guys you go to! But they get into trouble when they come across a job too big for them to deal with and end up in a shootout. Watch this movie if you want to understand the beginning of the tv series. I highly recommend it!

Rated R for swearing, violence, and drug use.

Its not too offensive either (they dont actually show killing animals) --------------------------------------------- Result 2934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OK, this movie was cool. I don't think it was the best movie ever made but it sure was fun. My brother and I still act out scenes once in a while, and will occasionally yank the movie out of the cupboard, blow off the dust and pop it in. Enjoyable all the way until the end, but a great concept. This is a movie that one has to just forget criticism all together and just enjoy. Judgment is victory for Robot Jox. --------------------------------------------- Result 2935 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When I began watching The Muppets Take Manhattan, the [[choppy]] [[presentation]] and dialogue had me convinced I was watching something [[recent]], so you can imagine my surprise when I came to the IMDb and read that it was made in 1984. Jim Henson may have ended The Muppet Show when it was at its peak, but spin offs like this and Muppet Babies (which apparently is based upon a very [[terrible]] sequence in this film) are the absolute nadir of all things Muppet. I used to wonder why Muppets attracted such derision from such film reviewers as [[Mr]]. Cranky, so I am glad that The Muppets Take Manhattan (henceforth: TMTM) set me straight on that one. Of course, many series have had a massive drop off in quality when the third episode came around: Aliens, RoboCop, The Evil Dead, even Night Of The Living Dead. So while it is no surprise that TMTM is less than The Muppet Movie or The Great Muppet Caper, the surprise lies entirely in how much less than the awesome debut or its slightly lesser follow-up TMTM is. Not only is the music far less satisfying, the scenes that link it all together are utterly [[terrible]].

There are, of course, some redeeming and genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between. The Swedish Chef is great in any scene he inhabits, so thank the spirit of small mercies that he appears in one sequence where his eccentricity is exploited to the fullest. The problem is that there are just no scenes that [[work]]. The story, such as it is, revolves around a Broadway musical Kermit is attempting to get produced. He goes through many trials and tribulations along the way, including the sneaking suspicion the viewer has that we have seen this all before. The biggest problem is that Kermit does not have a decent antagonist to work off this time. Charles Durning was cinematic gold as Doc Hopper, the proprietor of a fast food chain who wants to exploit Kermit for his business. Charles Grodin was dynamite as Nicky Holiday, a jewel thief the Muppets must fight in order to save Miss Piggy from a lifetime in prison. The saying is that a hero is only as good as his antagonist, and these two are at least half responsible for the greatness of the previous two films.

Charles Grodin also highlights what is wrong with TMTM. Namely, the music sucks. The opening number of the Manhattan Melodies show that is at the centre of TMTM, to put it nicely, makes the drivel that now dominates the airwaves seem coordinated. I might just be letting my peculiar sensitivity to the sounds of words and phrases getting to me, but songs like The Rainbow Connection inspired tears of joy, not irritation. Grodin's big solo during The Great Muppet Caper, while not having the same resonation, he lifts the tone of the film eight steps on his own. He is all class. And if there is one thing TMTM could use, it is rising eight steps in addition to attaining a semblance of class. TMTM also feels severely time-compressed, with the story leaping from scene to scene without any consideration for making sense or giving the story cohesion. Maddox himself pointed out that transition and cohesion make a film feel like a coherent whole rather than a mess of thrown-together pieces. See if you can find them in TMTM.

While TMTM does have its guest stars, they are either poorly utilised (Brooke Shields and John Landis), or totally out of their element (Liza Minelli, Dabney Coleman). To call this a waste of time for puppeteer and actor alike is flattery. The absence of an end credits routine is especially sore here, after Animal's "go home" postscript for The Muppet Movie in particular. Which highlights another problem. The characters are poorly written at best, with none of their individual quirks to be seen or heard. Animal shouts singular words at times, but they have nothing to do with the plot, or the conversation going on around him. Say what you will about set pieces designed to show off characters, but think of Animal's moment after eating the instant growth pills, or his "sowwy" after the incident when he pulled the window down on top of his fellow Muppets. Now see if you can remember a single memorable moment with an individual Muppet other than Swedish Chef's hilarious misunderstanding of three-dimensional film involving popcorn. Give up? Then you have proved my point.

Given that Labyrinth, one of the Henson company's best and most timeless products outside of the Muppets, arrived some two years later, it makes TMTM all the more puzzling. Perhaps this misfire convinced Jim Henson to rethink his strategy regarding character development and usage. Or perhaps the misfire can be attributed to Frank Oz, who at the time had just finished working with George Lucas on what many would agree is the most childish episode in the original Star Wars saga. The writers were also involved with The Great Muppet Caper, so I will let them off the hook for this in spite of the fact that a script is one of the most essential pieces of a film. The production is also substantially improved here, with Muppets appearing capable of moving in ways that were previously beyond them. Had the story and script been better thought-out, TMTM might have been at least comparable to The Great Muppet Caper. As it stands now, it is a great answer to the question of whether Muppets write under the influence, or excrete.

For that reason, I gave The Muppets Take Manhattan a three out of ten. Two to denote its actual quality, and a bonus for the Swedish Chef's moments. Without him, this film would be unwatchable. When I began watching The Muppets Take Manhattan, the [[turbulent]] [[submission]] and dialogue had me convinced I was watching something [[newer]], so you can imagine my surprise when I came to the IMDb and read that it was made in 1984. Jim Henson may have ended The Muppet Show when it was at its peak, but spin offs like this and Muppet Babies (which apparently is based upon a very [[shocking]] sequence in this film) are the absolute nadir of all things Muppet. I used to wonder why Muppets attracted such derision from such film reviewers as [[Monsieur]]. Cranky, so I am glad that The Muppets Take Manhattan (henceforth: TMTM) set me straight on that one. Of course, many series have had a massive drop off in quality when the third episode came around: Aliens, RoboCop, The Evil Dead, even Night Of The Living Dead. So while it is no surprise that TMTM is less than The Muppet Movie or The Great Muppet Caper, the surprise lies entirely in how much less than the awesome debut or its slightly lesser follow-up TMTM is. Not only is the music far less satisfying, the scenes that link it all together are utterly [[frightful]].

There are, of course, some redeeming and genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between. The Swedish Chef is great in any scene he inhabits, so thank the spirit of small mercies that he appears in one sequence where his eccentricity is exploited to the fullest. The problem is that there are just no scenes that [[collaborating]]. The story, such as it is, revolves around a Broadway musical Kermit is attempting to get produced. He goes through many trials and tribulations along the way, including the sneaking suspicion the viewer has that we have seen this all before. The biggest problem is that Kermit does not have a decent antagonist to work off this time. Charles Durning was cinematic gold as Doc Hopper, the proprietor of a fast food chain who wants to exploit Kermit for his business. Charles Grodin was dynamite as Nicky Holiday, a jewel thief the Muppets must fight in order to save Miss Piggy from a lifetime in prison. The saying is that a hero is only as good as his antagonist, and these two are at least half responsible for the greatness of the previous two films.

Charles Grodin also highlights what is wrong with TMTM. Namely, the music sucks. The opening number of the Manhattan Melodies show that is at the centre of TMTM, to put it nicely, makes the drivel that now dominates the airwaves seem coordinated. I might just be letting my peculiar sensitivity to the sounds of words and phrases getting to me, but songs like The Rainbow Connection inspired tears of joy, not irritation. Grodin's big solo during The Great Muppet Caper, while not having the same resonation, he lifts the tone of the film eight steps on his own. He is all class. And if there is one thing TMTM could use, it is rising eight steps in addition to attaining a semblance of class. TMTM also feels severely time-compressed, with the story leaping from scene to scene without any consideration for making sense or giving the story cohesion. Maddox himself pointed out that transition and cohesion make a film feel like a coherent whole rather than a mess of thrown-together pieces. See if you can find them in TMTM.

While TMTM does have its guest stars, they are either poorly utilised (Brooke Shields and John Landis), or totally out of their element (Liza Minelli, Dabney Coleman). To call this a waste of time for puppeteer and actor alike is flattery. The absence of an end credits routine is especially sore here, after Animal's "go home" postscript for The Muppet Movie in particular. Which highlights another problem. The characters are poorly written at best, with none of their individual quirks to be seen or heard. Animal shouts singular words at times, but they have nothing to do with the plot, or the conversation going on around him. Say what you will about set pieces designed to show off characters, but think of Animal's moment after eating the instant growth pills, or his "sowwy" after the incident when he pulled the window down on top of his fellow Muppets. Now see if you can remember a single memorable moment with an individual Muppet other than Swedish Chef's hilarious misunderstanding of three-dimensional film involving popcorn. Give up? Then you have proved my point.

Given that Labyrinth, one of the Henson company's best and most timeless products outside of the Muppets, arrived some two years later, it makes TMTM all the more puzzling. Perhaps this misfire convinced Jim Henson to rethink his strategy regarding character development and usage. Or perhaps the misfire can be attributed to Frank Oz, who at the time had just finished working with George Lucas on what many would agree is the most childish episode in the original Star Wars saga. The writers were also involved with The Great Muppet Caper, so I will let them off the hook for this in spite of the fact that a script is one of the most essential pieces of a film. The production is also substantially improved here, with Muppets appearing capable of moving in ways that were previously beyond them. Had the story and script been better thought-out, TMTM might have been at least comparable to The Great Muppet Caper. As it stands now, it is a great answer to the question of whether Muppets write under the influence, or excrete.

For that reason, I gave The Muppets Take Manhattan a three out of ten. Two to denote its actual quality, and a bonus for the Swedish Chef's moments. Without him, this film would be unwatchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Professor [[Paul]] Steiner is doing [[research]] in [[matter]] [[transference]]. He has [[developed]] a [[machine]] that he can [[use]] to make an object like a [[wrist]] watch or [[rodent]] [[disappear]], only to have that object re-materialize in a [[different]] location. But there are those at his [[research]] facility that do not like or [[approve]] of his [[experiments]] and will do whatever it takes to see that he doesn't succeed. After a failed demonstration that might have [[saved]] his [[funding]], [[Professor]] Steiner decides to test his machine on himself. As expected, things go [[horribly]] wrong and he is transformed into a [[heavily]] [[scared]] [[madman]] [[whose]] [[mere]] [[touch]] will kill.

[[In]] hindsight, maybe it wasn't such a [[good]] idea to re-watch The Projected Man in the same week I [[watched]] The [[Fly]], [[Return]] of the [[Fly]], and Curse of the [[Fly]]. There seems to be only so [[many]] movies about [[matter]] transference and the potentially [[horrendous]] [[effects]] it can have on the human body that one [[person]] should be [[made]] to endure in a three or four day [[period]]. I'm not sure what those [[responsible]] for the movie list as their source material for The Projected Man, but [[much]] of it is so similar to the [[Fly]] movies that it cannot be mere coincidence. However, The [[Projected]] Man isn't even nearly as good as the worst of the Fly trilogy.

Besides being [[terribly]] unoriginal, The Projected Man has several other problems that really hurt the enjoyment of the movie. A big issue I have is with Bryant Haliday in the lead. He's such a horse's ass that, not only do I not [[care]] about his suffering, I actually root for it. [[Supporting]] cast members Mary Peach and Ronald Allen are almost as bad. They're so bland and dull they hardly matter. In fact, there's very [[little]] to get [[excited]] about while watching The Projected Man. The soundtrack – not very [[memorable]]. The "[[look]]" – I would describe much of it as "muddy". The plot – predictable. The [[action]] – there isn't any. Overall, this is one to [[avoid]].

Fortunately, I watched The Projected Man via a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode. Funny stuff! While not an absolute, very often, the poorer the movie – the better the MST3K riffs. The guys hit almost all of their marks with The Projected Man. I'll give it a very enthusiastic 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. Professor [[Paolo]] Steiner is doing [[investigate]] in [[issue]] [[transferring]]. He has [[devised]] a [[machines]] that he can [[used]] to make an object like a [[waist]] watch or [[rodents]] [[vanished]], only to have that object re-materialize in a [[several]] location. But there are those at his [[investigate]] facility that do not like or [[adopt]] of his [[experiment]] and will do whatever it takes to see that he doesn't succeed. After a failed demonstration that might have [[saving]] his [[finances]], [[Teachers]] Steiner decides to test his machine on himself. As expected, things go [[terribly]] wrong and he is transformed into a [[considerably]] [[fear]] [[crazy]] [[whom]] [[simple]] [[toque]] will kill.

[[Among]] hindsight, maybe it wasn't such a [[alright]] idea to re-watch The Projected Man in the same week I [[seen]] The [[Steal]], [[Reverted]] of the [[Flying]], and Curse of the [[Steal]]. There seems to be only so [[countless]] movies about [[question]] transference and the potentially [[excruciating]] [[consequences]] it can have on the human body that one [[someone]] should be [[brought]] to endure in a three or four day [[time]]. I'm not sure what those [[accountable]] for the movie list as their source material for The Projected Man, but [[very]] of it is so similar to the [[Steal]] movies that it cannot be mere coincidence. However, The [[Predictions]] Man isn't even nearly as good as the worst of the Fly trilogy.

Besides being [[remarkably]] unoriginal, The Projected Man has several other problems that really hurt the enjoyment of the movie. A big issue I have is with Bryant Haliday in the lead. He's such a horse's ass that, not only do I not [[healthcare]] about his suffering, I actually root for it. [[Helped]] cast members Mary Peach and Ronald Allen are almost as bad. They're so bland and dull they hardly matter. In fact, there's very [[scant]] to get [[agitated]] about while watching The Projected Man. The soundtrack – not very [[unforgettable]]. The "[[peek]]" – I would describe much of it as "muddy". The plot – predictable. The [[measures]] – there isn't any. Overall, this is one to [[preventing]].

Fortunately, I watched The Projected Man via a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode. Funny stuff! While not an absolute, very often, the poorer the movie – the better the MST3K riffs. The guys hit almost all of their marks with The Projected Man. I'll give it a very enthusiastic 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. --------------------------------------------- Result 2937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite what others had said (*cough*), this is my favourite movie of all time. I don't know how long I had been waiting to see it, but once I finally did, I immediately fell in love. Sure, it's strange, but that just gives it more of an exciting flavour. For those who don't know, Moonchild is one of Gackt and Hyde's first movies. They haven't done very many at all, maybe 3 or 4 tops each. So, give them some credit. We all know that Adam Sandler wasn't the best at first either. I do believe that they do throw some odd situations in there, but I over look that to find the best points of this movie, the emotions displayed and whatnot. Therefore, I have given, and always shall give, this movie a 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2938 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was by far the worst low budget horror movie i have ever seen. I am an open minded guy and i always love a good horror movie. In fact, when I'm renting movies i specifically look for some good underrated horror movies. They are always good for a laugh, believe i know, i have seen many. But this movie was just so terrible it wasn't worth a chuckle. I was considering turning it off in the first five minutes... which i probably should have. There is nothing good about it, first and foremost, the camera crew suck3d A$$. The intro was stupid just like the ending. Acting and special effects were terrible. Please I'm begging you, do NOT watch this movie, you will absolutely hate it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The [[reviews]] I read for this [[movie]] were pretty decent so I [[decided]] to [[check]] it out. [[BAD]] [[IDEA]]! This is another [[movie]] about a ghost out for [[revenge]] against a [[group]] friends. The [[story]] is stupid, mix two parts Ringu with one [[part]] Prom Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and [[add]] a [[tiny]] dash of [[Single]] [[White]] [[Female]] - now [[blend]] until completely [[nonsensical]]. There is nothing new to this plot, and [[revisiting]] the clichés I've [[grown]] so [[fond]] of wasn't [[even]] [[entertaining]] this time. This [[movie]] [[jumps]] to and from the [[past]] too much, and once I made sense of it all I [[realized]] it [[still]] didn't make much [[sense]]. [[Characters]] go from sane to [[psycho]] killer in the [[blink]] of an eye. Speaking of [[characters]], they are all your stereotypical [[favorites]] - the greedy selfish lawyer, the [[egocentric]] actress, the has-been baseball star, the [[video]] voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet [[chick]], the 'nicer-than-nice' [[nice]] [[girl]], a freakin' [[black]] cat... and I didn't [[care]] about any of them. [[Perhaps]] a [[better]] [[writer]] [[could]] have [[made]] the [[movie]] [[work]], there were some decent scenes in it, but [[overall]] this movie was a [[mess]]. I should also [[mention]] a certain 'video tape' that [[would]] have been [[IMPOSSIBLE]] to shoot.

This [[movie]] isn't the worst [[Asian]] horror has to [[offer]] by far, but it is still pretty [[bad]]. If you just [[want]] to [[see]] some [[creepy]] [[images]] in the [[dark]], or just [[want]] to [[laugh]] out [[loud]] at some over the [[top]] acting, or just [[want]] to [[yell]] "you're stupid!" at a [[movie]] screen, or just [[want]] to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when [[someone]] [[asks]] you how many you've [[seen]] - this [[movie]] is for you.

Those [[seeking]] a decent [[plot]] [[look]] elsewhere. The [[scrutiny]] I read for this [[filmmaking]] were pretty decent so I [[decide]] to [[checking]] it out. [[MALA]] [[THINK]]! This is another [[flick]] about a ghost out for [[vengeance]] against a [[grouping]] friends. The [[tales]] is stupid, mix two parts Ringu with one [[party]] Prom Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and [[adds]] a [[small]] dash of [[Lone]] [[Blanc]] [[Woman]] - now [[blended]] until completely [[stupid]]. There is nothing new to this plot, and [[reviewed]] the clichés I've [[increased]] so [[likes]] of wasn't [[yet]] [[amusing]] this time. This [[film]] [[rises]] to and from the [[previous]] too much, and once I made sense of it all I [[performed]] it [[yet]] didn't make much [[sensing]]. [[Nature]] go from sane to [[crazy]] killer in the [[wink]] of an eye. Speaking of [[features]], they are all your stereotypical [[favourites]] - the greedy selfish lawyer, the [[egoistic]] actress, the has-been baseball star, the [[videos]] voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet [[girl]], the 'nicer-than-nice' [[enjoyable]] [[girls]], a freakin' [[negro]] cat... and I didn't [[healthcare]] about any of them. [[Possibly]] a [[best]] [[novelist]] [[did]] have [[effected]] the [[film]] [[cooperate]], there were some decent scenes in it, but [[entire]] this movie was a [[chaos]]. I should also [[cited]] a certain 'video tape' that [[could]] have been [[UNABLE]] to shoot.

This [[film]] isn't the worst [[Asiatic]] horror has to [[offered]] by far, but it is still pretty [[unfavourable]]. If you just [[wanna]] to [[behold]] some [[frightening]] [[imagery]] in the [[gloom]], or just [[wanting]] to [[laughs]] out [[vocal]] at some over the [[topped]] acting, or just [[wanna]] to [[screaming]] "you're stupid!" at a [[film]] screen, or just [[wanting]] to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when [[everybody]] [[demands]] you how many you've [[noticed]] - this [[filmmaking]] is for you.

Those [[searching]] a decent [[intrigue]] [[glance]] elsewhere. --------------------------------------------- Result 2940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When i [[got]] this [[movie]] free from my [[job]], along with three other similar [[movies]].. I [[watched]] then with very low [[expectations]]. [[Now]] this [[movie]] isn't bad per se. You get what you [[pay]] for. It is a [[tale]] of [[love]], [[betrayal]], lies, sex, scandal, everything you [[want]] in a [[movie]]. [[Definitely]] not a Hollywood blockbuster, but for cheap thrills it is not that bad. I [[would]] probably never watch this movie again. [[In]] a nutshell this is the [[kind]] of movie that you [[would]] see [[either]] very [[late]] at night on a local [[television]] station that is just [[wanting]] to take up some time, or you [[would]] [[see]] it on a [[Sunday]] afternoon on a local [[television]] station that is [[trying]] to take up some time. Despite the [[bad]] acting, cliché lines, and sub par [[camera]] [[work]]. I didn't have the desire to turn off the [[movie]] and pretend like it never popped into my [[DVD]] [[player]]. The [[story]] has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]] in [[many]] [[movies]]. This one is no [[different]], no better, no [[worse]].

Just your average [[movie]]. When i [[get]] this [[films]] free from my [[workplace]], along with three other similar [[filmmaking]].. I [[seen]] then with very low [[forecasts]]. [[Presently]] this [[filmmaking]] isn't bad per se. You get what you [[paying]] for. It is a [[conte]] of [[amore]], [[treachery]], lies, sex, scandal, everything you [[desiring]] in a [[filmmaking]]. [[Unmistakably]] not a Hollywood blockbuster, but for cheap thrills it is not that bad. I [[ought]] probably never watch this movie again. [[At]] a nutshell this is the [[genre]] of movie that you [[should]] see [[neither]] very [[tard]] at night on a local [[tv]] station that is just [[wanted]] to take up some time, or you [[ought]] [[consults]] it on a [[Sundays]] afternoon on a local [[tv]] station that is [[attempting]] to take up some time. Despite the [[unfavourable]] acting, cliché lines, and sub par [[cameras]] [[cooperation]]. I didn't have the desire to turn off the [[filmmaking]] and pretend like it never popped into my [[DVDS]] [[protagonist]]. The [[storytelling]] has been [[effected]] [[innumerable]] [[period]] in [[multiple]] [[theater]]. This one is no [[assorted]], no better, no [[worst]].

Just your average [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really didn't expect much from this movie, but it wasn't bad; actually it was quite good. This movie contained a couple of the funniest bits of writing I have ever seen from a motion picture. Now am not saying this is one of the funniest movies of all time, but I laughed pretty hard at some parts. "The police ruled my father's death a suicide. They said he fell down an elevator shaft. Onto some bullets". Now this movie is not for everybody, its mostly stupid humor like Zoolander or Dodgeball; so if you hated these movies I would probably recommend you to steer clear. Overall it was an enjoyable movie, about a group of superhero wannabes, who end up becoming real heroes in the end. It's a vastly overrated comedy that many people probably haven't seen yet, because like me before viewing it expected it to be utter garbage. After viewing this film, I finally understand why this movie was able to assemble such a superstar cast which includes Ben Stiller, William H. Macy, Hank Azaria, and even that kid from Good Burger. It's because Mystery Man is full of excellent comedic writing period 7 out of 10. A very big surprise. --------------------------------------------- Result 2942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one excellent Sammo Hung movie. Actually, this is a great piece of Hong Kong action cinema. The story tells the story of pedicab drivers in Macao looking for love and getting mixed up w/ a vicious pimp. The performances are excellent and the characters are all likable and well-defined. The story is involving and has enough romance, drama, comedy, and suspense to keep one watching between fight scenes. Sammo Hung proves here that he's probably the best fight choreographer in the business. The action is simply amazing, esp. the fight w/ Lau Kar Leung and the finale. Billy Chow and Sammo Hung are amazing. A must see for any fan of action. --------------------------------------------- Result 2943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you like original gut wrenching laughter you will like this movie. If you are young or old then you will love this movie, hell even my mom liked it.

Great Camp!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] A [[typical]] [[Goth]] [[chick]] (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy [[George]]) [[gets]] even with people she feels have wronged her with the help of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom ([[horror]] mainstay, Karen Black, the only remotely good [[thing]] about this travesty) buy. The acting's pretty laughably [[bad]] ([[especially]] when Rainbow [[interacts]] with the aforementioned [[mirror]]) and there are no scares or [[suspense]] to be had. This [[film]] [[inexplicably]] spawned [[thus]] for 3 sequels each slightly more [[atrocious]] than the last. People looking for a [[similarly]] themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor [[would]] be well [[advised]] to just [[search]] out the episode of "[[Friday]] the 13th: the [[Series]]" where a geeky girl [[finds]] an [[old]] cursed compact [[mirror]]. That packs more [[chills]] in it's scant 40 minutes than this [[whole]] franchise has [[provided]] across it's 4 films.

My [[Grade]]: D

[[Eye]] [[Candy]]: [[Charlie]] Spradling [[provides]] the [[obligatory]] [[T]]&A A [[classic]] [[Gothic]] [[girl]] (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy [[Giorgi]]) [[receives]] even with people she feels have wronged her with the help of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom ([[terror]] mainstay, Karen Black, the only remotely good [[stuff]] about this travesty) buy. The acting's pretty laughably [[unfavorable]] ([[mainly]] when Rainbow [[communicating]] with the aforementioned [[mirrors]]) and there are no scares or [[wait]] to be had. This [[filmmaking]] [[inextricably]] spawned [[then]] for 3 sequels each slightly more [[outrageous]] than the last. People looking for a [[additionally]] themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor [[should]] be well [[reported]] to just [[looking]] out the episode of "[[Fridays]] the 13th: the [[Serials]]" where a geeky girl [[discovers]] an [[former]] cursed compact [[mirrors]]. That packs more [[shivers]] in it's scant 40 minutes than this [[ensemble]] franchise has [[gave]] across it's 4 films.

My [[Octane]]: D

[[Ojo]] [[Taffy]]: [[Vietcong]] Spradling [[provide]] the [[compulsory]] [[ton]]&A --------------------------------------------- Result 2945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This [[movie]] could have been [[great]]([[cause]] its [[got]] a [[somewhat]] [[fascinating]] [[premise]]) but it never [[rises]] above sheer [[caricature]]. The acting is [[severely]] flawed and there were moments where i cringed so [[severely]] that i thought i was [[going]] to [[fall]] of my seat in the [[theater]]. Never and I mean never Watch this godawfull [[piece]] of .... Danish [[cinema]] has been getting a lot of good pr the [[recent]] [[years]] but if this [[piece]] of .... [[crosses]] the [[border]] I'm [[afraid]] nobody sane will ever want to [[rent]] a [[danish]] [[movie]]. This [[movie]] is the reason why i [[chose]] to [[register]] here. I really [[felt]] i needed to [[steer]] people away from this piece of .... my sympathies go out to the people who already went to the [[cinema]] to watch this This [[filmmaking]] could have been [[wondrous]]([[reason]] its [[get]] a [[rather]] [[exciting]] [[assumption]]) but it never [[soars]] above sheer [[parody]]. The acting is [[powerfully]] flawed and there were moments where i cringed so [[critically]] that i thought i was [[gonna]] to [[slumps]] of my seat in the [[drama]]. Never and I mean never Watch this godawfull [[slice]] of .... Danish [[filmmaking]] has been getting a lot of good pr the [[newer]] [[olds]] but if this [[slice]] of .... [[traverse]] the [[boundaries]] I'm [[worried]] nobody sane will ever want to [[leasing]] a [[danes]] [[filmmaking]]. This [[filmmaking]] is the reason why i [[chooses]] to [[registering]] here. I really [[believed]] i needed to [[govern]] people away from this piece of .... my sympathies go out to the people who already went to the [[kino]] to watch this --------------------------------------------- Result 2946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When it comes to movies, I am generally easily entertained and not very critical, but must say that this movie was one big flop from the start. I gave it 30 minutes and then rewound it. What a waste of some great talent! I was very disappointed with this movie, as it was not what I expected. --------------------------------------------- Result 2947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Cat]] Soup at [[first]] [[seems]] to be a very random animated [[film]]. The best [[way]] I've been able to [[explain]] it is that it's quite acidic. Though it's not [[totally]] [[random]]. The [[story]] is about Nyatta, a [[young]] cat [[boy]] and his sister Nyaako. Nyaako is very [[ill]] and [[dies]], [[however]], Nyatta [[sees]] her soul being [[taken]] away by [[death]] and is [[able]] to retrieve half of it. The [[story]] is about their quest to bring Nyaako fully back to life.

[[Though]] a [[lot]] of the content in this movie [[seems]] [[completely]] [[random]], it is not. Most of it is symbolism for life, [[death]] and [[rebirth]]. You can also see references from other [[tales]], such as Hansel and Gretal. This [[strangely]] cute short [[film]] has an interesting [[story]], packed with a deeper meaning than what you [[see]] on the [[surface]] of the screen. [[Ctu]] Soup at [[firstly]] [[appears]] to be a very random animated [[kino]]. The best [[routing]] I've been able to [[clarified]] it is that it's quite acidic. Though it's not [[fully]] [[haphazard]]. The [[fairytales]] is about Nyatta, a [[youthful]] cat [[laddie]] and his sister Nyaako. Nyaako is very [[sick]] and [[dying]], [[conversely]], Nyatta [[deems]] her soul being [[took]] away by [[killings]] and is [[capable]] to retrieve half of it. The [[tale]] is about their quest to bring Nyaako fully back to life.

[[Despite]] a [[lots]] of the content in this movie [[looks]] [[abundantly]] [[haphazard]], it is not. Most of it is symbolism for life, [[dying]] and [[resurgence]]. You can also see references from other [[fables]], such as Hansel and Gretal. This [[suspiciously]] cute short [[movie]] has an interesting [[history]], packed with a deeper meaning than what you [[behold]] on the [[surfacing]] of the screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is waaaaay to much.. so frustrating to watch.. I was waiting for the whole damn movie to end and to finally get some ANSWERS!!.. and what I've had in the end was nothing but a HUUUGE neon-sign question mark above my head!!!!! I haven't seen such a bad acting and such a nonsense movie in a long long time.. and what's bothering me is.. how come someone (an actor) read the script of such a bull!?#@ movie and say: OK, I'M IN!!! LET'S FILM THIS! This is horrible!!! THIS MOVIE SUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!!!! I just can't believe I've spent an hour and a half of my life on something like this!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2949 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This fanciful horror flick has Vincent Price playing a mad magician that realizes his vocational talents have been sold to another. He devise ways of avenging all those that have wronged him. His master scheme seems to back fire on him.

Price is a little below par compared to his masterpieces, but is still the only reason to watch this thriller. Supporting cast includes Patrick O'Neal, Mary Murphy, Eva Gabor and Jay Novello.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2950 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] "Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The [[first]] [[thing]] you [[notice]] is the animation of the film. I found it [[done]] very well [[done]]. The [[scenery]] had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good [[either]]. There were many times I focused more on my [[computer]] than the story. The [[writing]] was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was [[completely]] [[ignored]], as the main focus was the flies. I [[also]] hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and [[explained]] that the [[stories]] about the flies in the [[film]] was a [[work]] of fiction, and no [[flies]] were on [[Apollo]] 11. I did [[like]] how he [[thanked]] the [[men]] and [[women]] who sacrificed their [[lives]] for space [[exploration]] though.

[[If]] you are an [[adult]], this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is [[certainly]] just for kids. But, [[save]] this one for a [[rainy]] day. "Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The [[outset]] [[stuff]] you [[noticing]] is the animation of the film. I found it [[accomplished]] very well [[doing]]. The [[panorama]] had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good [[neither]]. There were many times I focused more on my [[computers]] than the story. The [[write]] was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was [[altogether]] [[overlooked]], as the main focus was the flies. I [[furthermore]] hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and [[clarified]] that the [[history]] about the flies in the [[filmmaking]] was a [[jobs]] of fiction, and no [[fly]] were on [[Adonis]] 11. I did [[adores]] how he [[appreciation]] the [[male]] and [[girl]] who sacrificed their [[vie]] for space [[explorer]] though.

[[Unless]] you are an [[mature]], this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is [[obviously]] just for kids. But, [[rescuing]] this one for a [[wettest]] day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2951 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "La Bête" by Walerian Borowczyk is based on the short story "Lokis" written by Prosper Merimée.Lucy Broadhurst(Lisabeth Hummel),an American heiress betrothed to the son of an impoverished Marquis,arrives at the family's crumbling château and learns of a mythical ursine beast purported to prowl the nearby forest.It is fabled that a former lady of the house(Sirpa Lane)once engaged in perverse sex with the creature and Lucy finds herself consumed by dreams of the incident. "The Beast" is an art-house mix of surreal horror,explicit sleaze and porno.There's implied bestiality,assault and perversion in the priesthood,copious fake ejaculate smeared on bared breasts,masturbation with a rose and, most graphic of all,the eponymous beast toying with incredibly big phallus.Still this genuinely erotic film is wonderfully photographed and tasteless.The women here are stunningly beautiful and they are naked most of the time.Overall "La Bête" is a visual feast.Whether it be from the fetishistic attention to detail,or the visual motifs pregnant with information,Borowczyk's masterpiece should be watched with care and attention.A must-see for fans of European cult cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 2952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best films ever made. It is a realistic depiction of rural ranching life which was a big part of American History. The setting is 1906 Wyoming where life had not changed much since the previous century. The film keeps your interest without the added Hollywood myths. The whole family can see this movie and be intrigued about how life was like in America when it was mostly a rural nation. With this film, you will escape the present and witness the daily life of 100 years ago. In a beautiful, scenic environment you will see the hard physical work that was required to survive, as well as the constant worries and concerns of the elements and the market pressures that will make a difference between success or failure. See this movie and experience life as it was for most of our nation's history. This film is worth your time to see. My only question is - why aren't there more films like this one? --------------------------------------------- Result 2953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Icy and lethal ace hit-man Tony Arzenta (a divinely smooth and commanding performance by Alain Delon) wants to quit the assassination business, but the dangerous mobsters he works for won't let him. After his wife and child are killed, Arzenta declares open season on everyone responsible for their deaths. Director Duccio Tessari relates the absorbing story at a constant snappy pace, maintains a properly serious and no-nonsense tone throughout, stages the stirring shoot-outs and exciting car chases with considerable rip-snorting brio, and punctuates the narrative with jolting outbursts of explosive bloody violence. Delon's suave and charismatic presence adds extra class to the already engrossing proceedings. This film further benefits from sterling acting by a bang-up cast, with praiseworthy contributions by Richard Conte as wise Mafia kingpin Nick Gusto, Carla Gravini as Arzenta's supportive lady friend Sandra, Marc Porel as Arzenta's loyal pal Domenico Maggio, Anton Diffring as ruthless, calculating capo Grunwald, and Lino Troisi as the venomous gangster Rocco Cutitta. Silvano Ippoliti's glossy cinematography boasts several graceful pans. Gianni Ferrio's funky score hits the get-down groovy spot. Erika Blanc and Rosalba Neri pop up briefly in nifty bit parts. Better still, there's no filler to speak of and we even get a decent dab of tasty gratuitous female nudity. The startling conclusion packs a mean and lingering wallop right to the gut. A solid and satisfying winner. --------------------------------------------- Result 2954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Its not Braveheart( thankfully),but it is fine entertainment with engaging characters and good acting all around. I enjoyed this film when it was released and upon viewing it again last week,find it has held up well over time. Not a classic film,but a very fine and watchable movie to enjoy as great entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2955 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Despite a tight narrative, Johnnie To's Election feels at times like it was once a longer picture, with many characters and plot strands abandoned or ultimately unresolved. Some of these are dealt with in the truly excellent and far superior sequel, Election 2: Harmony is a Virtue, but it's still a dependably enthralling thriller about a contested Triad election that bypasses the usual shootouts and explosions (though not the violence) in favour of constantly shifting alliances that can turn in the time it takes to make a phone call. It's also a film where the most ruthless character isn't always the most threatening one, as the chilling ending makes only too clear: one can imagine a lifetime of psychological counselling being necessary for all the trauma that one inflicts on one unfortunate bystander.

Simon Yam, all too often a variable actor but always at his best under To's direction, has possibly never been better in the lead, not least because Tony Leung's much more extrovert performance makes his stillness more the powerful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I know sometimes its really really corny... But the acting is amazing and Melissa Joan Hart is as cute as a button. I love this show a lot, and I'm almost embarrassed that I do b/c the show has a rep. for being really corny, but it makes me feel good. My only problem is that sometimes it can be pretty low budget - sometimes actors change and you just have to deal with it... Like Sabrina's father is 2 different guys throughout the course of the movie... I mean, couldn't they just say he was an uncle or something? Still, I can't help but loving this show. Harvey and Sabrina make a really cute couple and Salem is absolutely hilarious. I definitely recommend it if your looking for some light and funny entertainment... My favorite episode is "Pancake Madness"... a HILARIOUS episode. The best season is probably 3... I'm not really a fan of some of the seventh season twists... Once you get to college, Morgan joins the group and her dialog is painful and very poorly acted... Plus she is ugly, so the jokes about how she is only surviving off her good looks were lost on me... But I think it was set up to have a really good eighth season and I was really sad to see one of my favorite shows canceled! --------------------------------------------- Result 2957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am, as many are, a fan of Tony Scott films. When this movie came out I had high hopes that it would be like 'Man On Fire'. To find out that the movie it's the furthest thing from it! The story was treading water from the get go, and the choice of Mickey Rourke was not such such a good idea. And the whole 'arm'scene was too gratuitous!

The movie is centered around Kiera Kinghtly, and this movie reveals that she'll never become a movie star! The movie brought some of the worst acting ever.

I like Tony Scott's direction 'n all, but this takes the whole friggin cake! Sorry Ton, 1 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It's the early 80s. There's a [[group]] of [[suspiciously]] old-looking [[teens]]. And there's a maniac [[stalking]] [[around]]. Yes, this is slasherville.

This movie is called [[Pranks]]. Why is it called Pranks? I haven't the faintest [[idea]]. Unless your [[idea]] of a [[great]] prank is to repeatedly [[hit]] someone's [[dinner]] with a baseball bat - on balance, not a [[great]] [[prank]]; in fact [[quite]] a rubbish [[prank]] if truth be [[told]]. But there you [[go]].

The [[film]] itself concerns a [[group]] of [[teenagers]] who are [[tasked]] with [[cleaning]] out a [[decommissioned]] [[dormitory]]. They become [[aware]] that a [[psychopath]] is on the loose. To [[combat]] this development, they [[split]] up and [[wander]] about in the [[dark]]. It ends in tears for most of them.

[[Pranks]] is a [[badly]] [[made]] slasher [[movie]]. The DVD release I viewed was the Vipco one. It [[appears]] to be cut of a fair [[bit]] of violence. This makes the DVD even more [[pointless]] because, let's [[face]] it, a slasher [[movie]] shorn of violence is a [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[For]] slasher-film and [[video]] nasty completists only. It's the early 80s. There's a [[groups]] of [[coincidentally]] old-looking [[teen]]. And there's a maniac [[harassing]] [[approximately]]. Yes, this is slasherville.

This movie is called [[Adventures]]. Why is it called Pranks? I haven't the faintest [[thought]]. Unless your [[concept]] of a [[tremendous]] prank is to repeatedly [[strike]] someone's [[banquet]] with a baseball bat - on balance, not a [[prodigious]] [[joking]]; in fact [[rather]] a rubbish [[joke]] if truth be [[tell]]. But there you [[going]].

The [[films]] itself concerns a [[clusters]] of [[juvenile]] who are [[entrusted]] with [[cleansing]] out a [[dismantled]] [[dorm]]. They become [[conscious]] that a [[maniac]] is on the loose. To [[struggles]] this development, they [[divided]] up and [[roam]] about in the [[murky]]. It ends in tears for most of them.

[[Adventures]] is a [[sorely]] [[accomplished]] slasher [[kino]]. The DVD release I viewed was the Vipco one. It [[appear]] to be cut of a fair [[bite]] of violence. This makes the DVD even more [[senseless]] because, let's [[confronts]] it, a slasher [[cinematography]] shorn of violence is a [[wastes]] of [[times]]. [[In]] slasher-film and [[videos]] nasty completists only. --------------------------------------------- Result 2959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As soon as I began to see [[posters]] and hear talk about this [[movie]], I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an [[incredible]] to behold and I couldn't [[wait]] to see the second one, especially after beginning to [[see]] the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I [[saw]] it, I [[left]] the [[theater]] [[extremely]] [[disappointed]], as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. While the action scenes in the [[movie]] were amazing as always, there [[simply]] were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging [[toward]] Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the [[commercials]]). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely [[horrendous]]. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't [[need]] to [[hear]] about that or [[pay]] [[money]] to [[listen]] to it. The movie was a [[serious]] [[waste]] of my [[time]], and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the [[constant]] [[boring]] and [[dry]] monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the [[film]] quickly, and the [[small]] [[amount]] of [[good]] fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What [[movie]] ends with "To Be Concluded"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it. As soon as I began to see [[banners]] and hear talk about this [[filmmaking]], I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an [[surprising]] to behold and I couldn't [[awaited]] to see the second one, especially after beginning to [[consults]] the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I [[seen]] it, I [[gauche]] the [[drama]] [[unbelievably]] [[disappoint]], as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. While the action scenes in the [[filmmaking]] were amazing as always, there [[solely]] were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging [[about]] Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the [[ads]]). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely [[horrific]]. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't [[require]] to [[heed]] about that or [[salaries]] [[moneys]] to [[listening]] to it. The movie was a [[grave]] [[wastes]] of my [[times]], and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the [[steady]] [[dreary]] and [[drier]] monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the [[cinematography]] quickly, and the [[scant]] [[quantities]] of [[alright]] fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What [[movies]] ends with "To Be Concluded"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[forced]] to see this because a) I have an 11 year-old girl and b) we had shown her the Bonita Granville Nacy Drew [[movies]] from the 1930s, which she thoroughly enjoyed. Personally, I didn't think it was as humorous as the 1930s flicks, but on the other hand, it wasn't the [[nauseating]] piece of intelligence-insulting fluff I [[feared]] it would be. It was an [[inoffensive]], mildly entertaining [[movie]]. Although I'm [[pleased]] that they didn't try to "upgrade" [[Nancy]] to 21st Century "hipness" (Veronica Mars holds the title as the Modern Nancy Drew), I do think that they made her a little too bland, that they didn't do enough to develop Nancy Drew - the movie could have been titled "Jane Doe, Girl Detective". I have to blame the script: I think each actor did a good job with what they had to work with. I liked Emma Roberts in this role, but they gave her a made-for-TV, not theatrical release, script... I was [[compelled]] to see this because a) I have an 11 year-old girl and b) we had shown her the Bonita Granville Nacy Drew [[movie]] from the 1930s, which she thoroughly enjoyed. Personally, I didn't think it was as humorous as the 1930s flicks, but on the other hand, it wasn't the [[sickening]] piece of intelligence-insulting fluff I [[fears]] it would be. It was an [[benign]], mildly entertaining [[kino]]. Although I'm [[contented]] that they didn't try to "upgrade" [[Nance]] to 21st Century "hipness" (Veronica Mars holds the title as the Modern Nancy Drew), I do think that they made her a little too bland, that they didn't do enough to develop Nancy Drew - the movie could have been titled "Jane Doe, Girl Detective". I have to blame the script: I think each actor did a good job with what they had to work with. I liked Emma Roberts in this role, but they gave her a made-for-TV, not theatrical release, script... --------------------------------------------- Result 2961 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[For]] the [[initial]] 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've [[really]] no idea how long it [[took]]) Alienator sets up an interesting [[premise]]. I don't [[think]] I've [[seen]] a slasher [[movie]] with an [[alien]] from another planet as the baddie before. [[However]], interest soon turns into [[stunned]] [[disbelief]] as you realise the 'alien' is a [[huge]] body-builder [[woman]] in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is [[patently]] [[ridiculous]].

Don't think I [[hold]] that against it. [[In]] the world of shlock-horror, [[patently]] [[ridiculous]] can often be a [[good]] sign. [[However]], the blatant [[stupidity]] of its premise is all the [[movie]] [[really]] has going for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. [[Actors]] [[heap]] on [[failed]] attempts at seriousness, [[potentially]] [[genius]] lines of pure cheese [[dialogue]] are [[stumbled]] over with [[unnerving]] [[incompetence]] and the [[direction]] fails to [[sum]] up [[even]] one or two decent set-pieces. By the [[time]] the movie's [[finished]] you can barely see the [[original]] [[concept]] through the haystack of [[total]] tripe the team [[piled]] on it.

[[Add]] to this the fact that the 'Alien' just [[kills]] people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a [[giant]] [[throbbing]] [[heap]] of [[good]] [[ideas]] being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but [[AT]] it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out. [[At]] the [[original]] 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've [[genuinely]] no idea how long it [[taken]]) Alienator sets up an interesting [[assumption]]. I don't [[believe]] I've [[watched]] a slasher [[filmmaking]] with an [[stranger]] from another planet as the baddie before. [[Instead]], interest soon turns into [[surprised]] [[skepticism]] as you realise the 'alien' is a [[whopping]] body-builder [[femme]] in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is [[notoriously]] [[grotesque]].

Don't think I [[holds]] that against it. [[Throughout]] the world of shlock-horror, [[notoriously]] [[grotesque]] can often be a [[buena]] sign. [[Conversely]], the blatant [[madness]] of its premise is all the [[movies]] [[genuinely]] has going for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. [[Actresses]] [[stack]] on [[faulted]] attempts at seriousness, [[maybe]] [[genie]] lines of pure cheese [[discussions]] are [[faltered]] over with [[unsettling]] [[impotence]] and the [[directions]] fails to [[suma]] up [[yet]] one or two decent set-pieces. By the [[moment]] the movie's [[finalised]] you can barely see the [[upfront]] [[idea]] through the haystack of [[entire]] tripe the team [[stacked]] on it.

[[Adds]] to this the fact that the 'Alien' just [[slays]] people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a [[mammoth]] [[shaking]] [[pile]] of [[alright]] [[thinking]] being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but [[DURING]] it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2962 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The [[choice]] to [[make]] this SNL [[skit]] into a movie was far better [[thought]] out than other [[recent]] ones. The [[humor]] [[involved]] in the character is not [[annoyance]] humor, and is [[also]] character driven [[enough]] to be stretched out for an hour or two.

[[Oddly]] [[enough]] the sexual content [[seemed]] like it could be [[avoided]], but that may have been because the [[constraints]] of [[live]] television [[schooled]] me to not [[expect]] it. I [[suppose]] I was thinking more "Leisure Suit Larry" risqué than the producers were...

Definitely not a PG-13 movie, which will probably hurt it from ever reaching the heights of its more successful [[predecessors]], but [[still]] better premise and writing than its more dismal ones.

I [[liked]] it, but I doubt it will be a smash hit... (which is [[sad]], as Tim Meadows [[tends]] not to do characters that annoy me with quite the frequency other SNL alumni tend to) The [[elect]] to [[deliver]] this SNL [[sketch]] into a movie was far better [[think]] out than other [[freshly]] ones. The [[comedy]] [[engaged]] in the character is not [[irritation]] humor, and is [[apart]] character driven [[adequately]] to be stretched out for an hour or two.

[[Suspiciously]] [[adequately]] the sexual content [[appeared]] like it could be [[dodged]], but that may have been because the [[restrictions]] of [[viva]] television [[literate]] me to not [[waits]] it. I [[imagining]] I was thinking more "Leisure Suit Larry" risqué than the producers were...

Definitely not a PG-13 movie, which will probably hurt it from ever reaching the heights of its more successful [[ancestors]], but [[however]] better premise and writing than its more dismal ones.

I [[enjoyed]] it, but I doubt it will be a smash hit... (which is [[hapless]], as Tim Meadows [[strives]] not to do characters that annoy me with quite the frequency other SNL alumni tend to) --------------------------------------------- Result 2963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Audiences today will probably watch a film [[like]] Ossessione and not really consider how unprecedented it was during the time when it came out. The structure of the film really [[divorces]] from sap-happy Hollywood conventions—as well as other major theatrical elements. It relies more upon depicting [[reality]] in a very grim and [[sober]] light. [[Films]] of this nature—the neo-realist [[films]]—were made to reflect the darkness felt during post-World War II times. Ossessione tackles some fairly [[provocative]] [[issues]] that were probably [[unseen]] on screen prior to the war, including: adultery, conspiracy, murder, pregnancy, etc. Aside from the one crane shot and certain musical swelling moments, the film aesthetic is very [[raw]] and [[gritty]]: [[shot]] on-location, uses natural lighting and most likely non-popular actors. All of these [[elements]] helped convey the [[issues]] [[explored]] in the [[film]], yielding the following [[theme]]: [[Negative]] karmic [[repercussions]] will haunt those who [[deliberately]] act immorally.

The two [[leads]]—Gino and Giovanna—are polar opposites, [[yet]] both carry the [[mentality]]: we're bored and we want to be entertained. Gino is a [[drifter]]; a lone traveler who embraces life and its constant [[fluctuations]]. Giovanna is a bored house-wife cemented in the familiarly of marital permanence: she doesn't want to leave her home and husband, but would rather remain where she is because it's safer. Gino's lifestyle represents the ideal lifestyle Giovanna [[craves]]; the only difference is that she's too afraid to live it herself—that's why she falls in love with Gino: he represents everything she wants but doesn't have the [[courage]] to get. She wants to live in a world free from the [[monotony]] of living with her corpulent husband—Gino is the perfect ticket into that world. The affair that ensues between the two most likely left audiences back in the 40's feeling somewhat uneasy. I mean, [[films]] prior to the neo-realist [[age]] never [[showed]] such scandalous behavior on screen before. To [[say]] the [[least]] it was [[probably]] a bit alarming.

[[In]] conjunction with the [[theme]], the neo-realist [[style]] [[helps]] [[show]] the [[negative]] repercussions of adulterous [[behavior]]. [[Succinctly]] put, adulterous behavior (as [[shown]] in the [[film]]) leads to [[depressing]] and ultimately deadened lives. When Gino and Giovanna conspire with each other to "eliminate" Giovanna's husband, karma comes to haunt them like a plague after the deed is done. They return to their home: the atmosphere is dark and biting (as can be expected from the neo-realist style). They are not happy; they're actually more depressed. They thought that by eliminating Giovanna's husband that they'd live happier lives, but they were duped. The film ends with Giovanna's death—it being in karmic similitude of her husband's death. I think this is a very satisfying ending for several reasons. Here's why.

There's a lot of talk as to whether or not evil should be depicted on screen, and if so, to what extent. I think depicting evil is very necessary if and only if the evil depicted is not being glorified, but rather shows what negative consequences evil actions have. As the subtext of Ossessione asks, is adultery and murder evil? I think the film eagerly responds yes! The adulterous behavior between the two reveals how unhappy they are. Ironically though, towards the end of the film when they seem to be healed of their depression and are seen basking in each other's arms inside the car, the author of the film shows that their happiness is, in fact, a façade: the car crashes off the cliff and into the river, killing Giovanna; the police arrest Gino. I think it was the author's intention to say that even though people sometimes try and justify their immoral behavior, in the end karma will come back to haunt them. I agree. I think the two got what was coming to them because they both were incredibly selfish—always wanting instant gratification and not willing to endure through hard times. This was especially made clear after the first sign of difficulty that Gino and Giovanna experience in their relationship: he can't handle the pressure of living in Giovanna's husband shadow, so he leaves Giovanna and sleeps with another girl. Such is typical of the insatiable, hedonistic personality.

All in all, the film seemed very risky for its time. The audience, however, was prepared to see such a film because of the sobriety the war brought. Those pre-war, happy-go-lucky films were no longer being believed. Movie-going audiences were ready to see and contemplate difficult films with complex characters: they wanted to see characters whose lives were entangled in so-called 'sin' because it was a reflection of their own life problems. Ossessione, then, acts as a great catalyst for where the future of film was heading. That is, a lot of the naturalism pieces we see today can be said to have been influenced by the neo-realist film movement. Audiences today will probably watch a film [[iike]] Ossessione and not really consider how unprecedented it was during the time when it came out. The structure of the film really [[divorcing]] from sap-happy Hollywood conventions—as well as other major theatrical elements. It relies more upon depicting [[realist]] in a very grim and [[dispassionate]] light. [[Kino]] of this nature—the neo-realist [[movie]]—were made to reflect the darkness felt during post-World War II times. Ossessione tackles some fairly [[inflammatory]] [[matters]] that were probably [[imperceptible]] on screen prior to the war, including: adultery, conspiracy, murder, pregnancy, etc. Aside from the one crane shot and certain musical swelling moments, the film aesthetic is very [[untreated]] and [[sandstone]]: [[offed]] on-location, uses natural lighting and most likely non-popular actors. All of these [[ingredients]] helped convey the [[problem]] [[investigating]] in the [[kino]], yielding the following [[topic]]: [[Bad]] karmic [[implications]] will haunt those who [[advisedly]] act immorally.

The two [[leeds]]—Gino and Giovanna—are polar opposites, [[still]] both carry the [[psyche]]: we're bored and we want to be entertained. Gino is a [[hobo]]; a lone traveler who embraces life and its constant [[swings]]. Giovanna is a bored house-wife cemented in the familiarly of marital permanence: she doesn't want to leave her home and husband, but would rather remain where she is because it's safer. Gino's lifestyle represents the ideal lifestyle Giovanna [[yearns]]; the only difference is that she's too afraid to live it herself—that's why she falls in love with Gino: he represents everything she wants but doesn't have the [[gallantry]] to get. She wants to live in a world free from the [[tedium]] of living with her corpulent husband—Gino is the perfect ticket into that world. The affair that ensues between the two most likely left audiences back in the 40's feeling somewhat uneasy. I mean, [[movie]] prior to the neo-realist [[aging]] never [[shown]] such scandalous behavior on screen before. To [[said]] the [[lowest]] it was [[potentially]] a bit alarming.

[[At]] conjunction with the [[subject]], the neo-realist [[styling]] [[helped]] [[showings]] the [[bad]] repercussions of adulterous [[demeanour]]. [[Concise]] put, adulterous behavior (as [[demonstrated]] in the [[movie]]) leads to [[dreary]] and ultimately deadened lives. When Gino and Giovanna conspire with each other to "eliminate" Giovanna's husband, karma comes to haunt them like a plague after the deed is done. They return to their home: the atmosphere is dark and biting (as can be expected from the neo-realist style). They are not happy; they're actually more depressed. They thought that by eliminating Giovanna's husband that they'd live happier lives, but they were duped. The film ends with Giovanna's death—it being in karmic similitude of her husband's death. I think this is a very satisfying ending for several reasons. Here's why.

There's a lot of talk as to whether or not evil should be depicted on screen, and if so, to what extent. I think depicting evil is very necessary if and only if the evil depicted is not being glorified, but rather shows what negative consequences evil actions have. As the subtext of Ossessione asks, is adultery and murder evil? I think the film eagerly responds yes! The adulterous behavior between the two reveals how unhappy they are. Ironically though, towards the end of the film when they seem to be healed of their depression and are seen basking in each other's arms inside the car, the author of the film shows that their happiness is, in fact, a façade: the car crashes off the cliff and into the river, killing Giovanna; the police arrest Gino. I think it was the author's intention to say that even though people sometimes try and justify their immoral behavior, in the end karma will come back to haunt them. I agree. I think the two got what was coming to them because they both were incredibly selfish—always wanting instant gratification and not willing to endure through hard times. This was especially made clear after the first sign of difficulty that Gino and Giovanna experience in their relationship: he can't handle the pressure of living in Giovanna's husband shadow, so he leaves Giovanna and sleeps with another girl. Such is typical of the insatiable, hedonistic personality.

All in all, the film seemed very risky for its time. The audience, however, was prepared to see such a film because of the sobriety the war brought. Those pre-war, happy-go-lucky films were no longer being believed. Movie-going audiences were ready to see and contemplate difficult films with complex characters: they wanted to see characters whose lives were entangled in so-called 'sin' because it was a reflection of their own life problems. Ossessione, then, acts as a great catalyst for where the future of film was heading. That is, a lot of the naturalism pieces we see today can be said to have been influenced by the neo-realist film movement. --------------------------------------------- Result 2964 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have lost count of just how many times I have seen this movie - I probably know the entire dialog backwards - yet I am drawn to it time and again.

Set in Hungary, a young Jimmy Stewart plays the eligible bachelor "Kralik" who becomes the secret admirer of Margaret Sullavan's innocent "Klara". Kralik secretly becomes Klara's pen-friend, and at work together Klara confides in Kralik about the content of his (Kralik's) letters. Clearly Kralik is besotted with Klara - but is unable to make his feelings known whilst he is in competition with the "pen-friend". Confused? Well you wont be - this story has a sweet, almost sugary ending - but we all know it is the ending we all want.

Other characters worth mentioning are Frank Morgan playing his usual role, this time as the shop's owner "Hugo Matuschek", Felix Bressart as "Pirovitch", Kralik's confidant. Joseph Schildkraut as the womanising arrogant "Vadas" - so well played that you cannot help but hate him right from the beginning.

Finally William Tracy who manages to endear himself to us all with his over-confident upstart of a shop junior "Pepi Katona".

Recently re-made as "You've Got Mail" starring Tom Hanks & Meg Ryan for me is not as good as the original - although I suspect younger audiences would disagree.

If this film is on in your area over Christmas, I suggest you pour yourself a nice glass of wine, put a log on the fire and have a box of Kleenex handy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Good [[grief]] I can't [[even]] [[begin]] to [[describe]] how poor this film is. Don't get me [[wrong]], I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Let's face it, a PG-13 slasher flick is pre-destined to be missing the [[ummm]]... slashing, so no one should be surprised by the [[lack]] of gore. But it was the level of [[incompetence]] and cliché on display in all the other aspects of this movie is what really blew me away.

We have a [[protagonist]] who is quite [[simply]] so completely [[useless]] that you find yourself rooting for the bad guy. And here's a turnup for the books... [[SHE]] NEVER CHANGES - hence breaking the cardinal rule of basic screen writing - character development. If you think by the end of this film the poor little girl is going to turn around and finally kick some [[arse]] then think again.

On [[top]] of this, we're [[handed]] possibly the [[least]] [[intriguing]] (and definitely the least scary) killer ever to [[grace]] the genre. I'm not joking when I say that Dora the Explorer has scarier villains than this movie.

Finally, because all the potential for tension or [[gratuity]] is removed by the inept (and apparently thirteen-year-old) director, what could possibly be left to fill up 2 hours of screen time?

Closets, that's what.

Lots and lots of closets: big closets, small closets, mirrored [[closets]], closets to Narnia, so many damned closets you'll not want to [[dress]] yourself for another year. In fact this [[movie]] should have just been called "CLOSET", and had a [[picture]] of a [[big]] [[scary]] coathanger on the DVD [[case]]. On the back it could have had a [[photograph]] of the [[audience]] [[falling]] asleep and a [[quote]] by Roger and Ebert - something to the [[extent]] of: "what the f*@! did we just [[waste]] our [[time]] [[watching]]!" Good [[grieving]] I can't [[yet]] [[launched]] to [[describing]] how poor this film is. Don't get me [[improper]], I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Let's face it, a PG-13 slasher flick is pre-destined to be missing the [[uhmm]]... slashing, so no one should be surprised by the [[misses]] of gore. But it was the level of [[impotence]] and cliché on display in all the other aspects of this movie is what really blew me away.

We have a [[player]] who is quite [[exclusively]] so completely [[superfluous]] that you find yourself rooting for the bad guy. And here's a turnup for the books... [[ELLE]] NEVER CHANGES - hence breaking the cardinal rule of basic screen writing - character development. If you think by the end of this film the poor little girl is going to turn around and finally kick some [[butts]] then think again.

On [[supreme]] of this, we're [[gave]] possibly the [[fewest]] [[exciting]] (and definitely the least scary) killer ever to [[gracia]] the genre. I'm not joking when I say that Dora the Explorer has scarier villains than this movie.

Finally, because all the potential for tension or [[honorarium]] is removed by the inept (and apparently thirteen-year-old) director, what could possibly be left to fill up 2 hours of screen time?

Closets, that's what.

Lots and lots of closets: big closets, small closets, mirrored [[lockers]], closets to Narnia, so many damned closets you'll not want to [[clothes]] yourself for another year. In fact this [[filmmaking]] should have just been called "CLOSET", and had a [[imagery]] of a [[prodigious]] [[frightful]] coathanger on the DVD [[instances]]. On the back it could have had a [[photographer]] of the [[viewers]] [[dwindling]] asleep and a [[quotes]] by Roger and Ebert - something to the [[magnitude]] of: "what the f*@! did we just [[wastes]] our [[moment]] [[staring]]!" --------------------------------------------- Result 2966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this [[Neil]] Simon [[comedy]] looks at what it's like when you have the [[worst]] of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth [[going]], know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing [[something]] when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy [[Dennis]]... and much better also.

It's not that [[Steve]] [[Martin]] is a [[lousy]] [[comedian]] or wrong for the role as the harried and [[stressed]] [[advertising]] exec; [[quite]] to the [[contrary]], on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is [[equally]] inept [[either]]; her [[work]] has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first [[saw]] her in TV's [[Rowan]] and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The [[problem]] with this [[movie]] is that it's not about the [[hapless]] [[couple]] at all: it's [[really]] about [[New]] York and why everybody should [[come]] to [[New]] York to live and [[love]] their lives away in [[married]] [[bliss]] – [[sort]] of – in the [[greatest]] city in the [[world]]. That's if you're a [[New]] Yorker...

[[Look]], the 1970 [[movie]] is still an excellent comedy that realistically [[explored]] all the [[things]] that can go wrong when you [[take]] a [[trip]] [[somewhere]], and [[included]] most of the [[situations]] and [[sight]] gags that you can [[imagine]] about what can happen to you in a [[strange]] [[environment]]. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into [[gratuitous]] tangents [[specifically]] for an [[audience]] these days that [[expects]] or [[wants]] to [[see]] excess. [[For]] [[example]], not content with the star [[appeal]] of the [[main]] players, there is a cameo ([[relatively]] long [[also]]) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of [[New]] York, as we all know. What – Giuliani bucking for [[President]] even then? Worse – a walking [[talking]] [[advertisement]] for the kinder [[face]] of [[New]] York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as [[Basil]] Fawlty – but this [[time]], as a prancing cross-dresser also – once again browbeating hotel [[staff]], sycophantically sucking up to rich [[customers]] and [[generally]] [[making]] himself look [[like]] the [[idiot]] he is, in this role. And, in the [[process]], doing [[great]] damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the [[harassed]] couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, [[New]] York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one. We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this [[Neal]] Simon [[humor]] looks at what it's like when you have the [[hardest]] of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth [[go]], know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing [[anything]] when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy [[Denis]]... and much better also.

It's not that [[Stephens]] [[Martina]] is a [[rotten]] [[comedy]] or wrong for the role as the harried and [[emphasized]] [[publicity]] exec; [[altogether]] to the [[opus]], on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is [[alike]] inept [[neither]]; her [[collaboration]] has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first [[watched]] her in TV's [[Rouen]] and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The [[difficulty]] with this [[filmmaking]] is that it's not about the [[deplorable]] [[couples]] at all: it's [[truly]] about [[Nouveau]] York and why everybody should [[arrived]] to [[Nuevo]] York to live and [[amour]] their lives away in [[marry]] [[ecstasy]] – [[kind]] of – in the [[largest]] city in the [[globe]]. That's if you're a [[Nuevo]] Yorker...

[[Gaze]], the 1970 [[flick]] is still an excellent comedy that realistically [[examining]] all the [[matters]] that can go wrong when you [[taking]] a [[travels]] [[nowhere]], and [[inscribed]] most of the [[circumstances]] and [[conception]] gags that you can [[imagining]] about what can happen to you in a [[peculiar]] [[surroundings]]. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into [[unreasonable]] tangents [[specially]] for an [[viewers]] these days that [[expecting]] or [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] excess. [[At]] [[examples]], not content with the star [[appellate]] of the [[primary]] players, there is a cameo ([[comparatively]] long [[similarly]]) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of [[Newest]] York, as we all know. What – Giuliani bucking for [[Presidents]] even then? Worse – a walking [[debates]] [[announces]] for the kinder [[encounter]] of [[Nuevo]] York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as [[Basile]] Fawlty – but this [[moment]], as a prancing cross-dresser also – once again browbeating hotel [[workforce]], sycophantically sucking up to rich [[clientele]] and [[traditionally]] [[doing]] himself look [[fond]] the [[jerk]] he is, in this role. And, in the [[processes]], doing [[marvellous]] damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the [[bullied]] couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, [[Newer]] York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are no spoilers in this review. There's nothing to spoil.

No plot, nothing; most clip shows at least try to tie the clips into the plot by some tenuous stretch, but this didn't even do that. Clips, three lines to lead into the next interminable sequence of dull clips... OK, so perhaps they were short on production time, but they'd have been better off skipping this episode entirely. What a waste of time.

I'm not sure how this got made, in fact. Scrubs is usually much better at subverting tropes, but somehow this got through....

Thank heavens they were back on form by the next episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 2968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Halloween is the [[story]] of a boy who was misunderstood as a [[child]]. He takes out his [[problems]] on his [[older]] sister, whom he murders at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. This is just the start of [[things]] to [[come]] from [[Michael]] Myers.

Donald Pleasance plays the [[doctor]] who's been [[studying]] Myers for [[years]]. He knows that [[something]] is [[different]] about him, [[something]] mysteriously [[evil]]. This evil will not be contained, and it cannot be [[stopped]].

[[After]] an [[escape]] from an [[institution]], [[Myers]] [[tracks]] down his [[younger]] sister. [[If]] he [[kills]] her, there may be an end to the [[troubles]] of this misunderstood [[boy]]. But he [[seems]] to have [[problems]] in finishing his sister off as other people [[get]] in the way. He [[manages]] to take them out while [[still]] [[looking]] for that one [[girl]] he [[needs]].

There have been a [[lot]] of those horror [[movies]] involving teenagers [[getting]] hacked to [[pieces]] by a [[masked]] or [[gruesome]] [[killer]]. But this one [[started]] it all, [[sort]] of. If you [[think]] about it, most of those horror [[movies]] we all remember are the ones that have [[Freddy]] Kruger or Jason [[chasing]] [[around]] half naked [[girls]]. Well, if it wasn't for Halloween, those characters wouldn't have [[haunted]] our [[dreams]] when we were children.

Halloween's director, [[John]] Carpenter, [[got]] a [[lot]] out of the [[horror]] [[movies]] of the '50s and [[combined]] everything he knew into one [[film]] that [[scared]] the [[hell]] out of a [[lot]] of people back in the late '70s. This [[films]] [[solidified]] him as a [[director]] to watch and [[also]] [[jump]] [[started]] the career of [[Jamie]] [[Lee]] [[Curtis]], who plays the [[girl]] being [[stalked]] by the [[masked]] [[killer]].

This [[film]] may seem [[cliché]] [[today]], but back then there wasn't [[much]] out there like this. It's been copied from and [[ripped]] off of, but Halloween will [[always]] remain the quintessential teenage [[horror]] [[movie]]. It [[still]] [[gives]] you chills [[listening]] to Carpenter's [[thrilling]] [[music]] while we [[see]] another [[victim]] get chased by that [[shadowy]] [[Michael]] Myers. Halloween is the [[conte]] of a boy who was misunderstood as a [[children]]. He takes out his [[trouble]] on his [[elderly]] sister, whom he murders at the [[startup]] of the [[cinematography]]. This is just the start of [[items]] to [[arrive]] from [[Michele]] Myers.

Donald Pleasance plays the [[physicians]] who's been [[examining]] Myers for [[olds]]. He knows that [[anything]] is [[multiple]] about him, [[anything]] mysteriously [[wicked]]. This evil will not be contained, and it cannot be [[ceasing]].

[[Upon]] an [[fleeing]] from an [[establishment]], [[Meyers]] [[trails]] down his [[youngest]] sister. [[Unless]] he [[assassinate]] her, there may be an end to the [[trouble]] of this misunderstood [[kiddo]]. But he [[appears]] to have [[difficulty]] in finishing his sister off as other people [[got]] in the way. He [[administering]] to take them out while [[nevertheless]] [[searching]] for that one [[daughter]] he [[required]].

There have been a [[lots]] of those horror [[films]] involving teenagers [[obtaining]] hacked to [[slices]] by a [[obscured]] or [[frightful]] [[shooter]]. But this one [[commences]] it all, [[sorting]] of. If you [[reckon]] about it, most of those horror [[films]] we all remember are the ones that have [[Freddie]] Kruger or Jason [[pursuit]] [[approximately]] half naked [[females]]. Well, if it wasn't for Halloween, those characters wouldn't have [[obsessed]] our [[nightmares]] when we were children.

Halloween's director, [[Johannes]] Carpenter, [[get]] a [[batch]] out of the [[terror]] [[cinema]] of the '50s and [[merged]] everything he knew into one [[movie]] that [[shitless]] the [[dammit]] out of a [[batch]] of people back in the late '70s. This [[cinema]] [[consolidated]] him as a [[superintendent]] to watch and [[similarly]] [[salta]] [[commenced]] the career of [[Jaime]] [[Rhee]] [[Cortes]], who plays the [[daughter]] being [[harassed]] by the [[disguised]] [[murderer]].

This [[cinema]] may seem [[clichés]] [[thursday]], but back then there wasn't [[very]] out there like this. It's been copied from and [[buzzed]] off of, but Halloween will [[repeatedly]] remain the quintessential teenage [[abomination]] [[cinematography]]. It [[however]] [[donne]] you chills [[listen]] to Carpenter's [[intriguing]] [[musicians]] while we [[behold]] another [[victims]] get chased by that [[opaque]] [[Michal]] Myers. --------------------------------------------- Result 2969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie had lots of great actors and actresses in it and it addressed some very noble issues. It's full of emotion and the direction is done well. The storyline progresses very quickly, but I guess that's better than having to watch a 3 hour movie. This is an easy movie to watch again and again and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2970 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Iberia is [[nice]] to [[see]] on TV. But why [[see]] this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you [[like]] [[classical]] music or [[modern]] dance this [[could]] be your [[date]] [[movie]]. But [[otherwise]] one and half [[hour]] is just too long [[time]]. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They [[know]] how to combine breath taking dancing to [[long]] movie. [[Director]] Carlos Saura knows how to shoot [[dancing]] from old experience. And time to time it's [[look]] really good. but when the movie is one and [[hour]] it should be at [[least]] most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is [[bigger]] then [[life]] and this film is not too big. Iberia is [[handsome]] to [[behold]] on TV. But why [[behold]] this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you [[likes]] [[traditional]] music or [[trendy]] dance this [[did]] be your [[dates]] [[cinematographic]]. But [[alternatively]] one and half [[hora]] is just too long [[moment]]. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They [[savoir]] how to combine breath taking dancing to [[lengthy]] movie. [[Superintendent]] Carlos Saura knows how to shoot [[danced]] from old experience. And time to time it's [[peek]] really good. but when the movie is one and [[hours]] it should be at [[fewer]] most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is [[broader]] then [[iife]] and this film is not too big. --------------------------------------------- Result 2971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I love cheesy horror flicks. I don't care if the acting is sub-par or whether the monsters look corny. I liked this [[movie]] except for the [[bewildered]] feeling all the way from the beginning of the film to the very end. Look, I don't [[need]] a 10 [[page]] [[dissertation]] or a sign with big letters explaining a plot to me. But [[Dark]] Floors takes the "what is this [[movie]] about?" thing to a whole new ([[annoying]]) level. What IS this [[movie]] about?

This isn't [[exceptionally]] scary or [[thrilling]] but if you have an [[hour]] and a half to [[kill]] and/or you [[want]] to end up feeling [[frustrated]] and [[confused]], [[rent]] this [[winner]]. I love cheesy horror flicks. I don't care if the acting is sub-par or whether the monsters look corny. I liked this [[filmmaking]] except for the [[puzzled]] feeling all the way from the beginning of the film to the very end. Look, I don't [[required]] a 10 [[pages]] [[thesis]] or a sign with big letters explaining a plot to me. But [[Gloom]] Floors takes the "what is this [[kino]] about?" thing to a whole new ([[exasperating]]) level. What IS this [[kino]] about?

This isn't [[incredibly]] scary or [[exhilarating]] but if you have an [[hours]] and a half to [[slain]] and/or you [[wish]] to end up feeling [[disillusioned]] and [[bewildered]], [[rental]] this [[winning]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Do not waste your time with this movie. This is a total thrash in terms of acting, directing, sound editing, soundtrack... There was such a waste of performance by some of the very good actors. The movie does not do justice to Paresh Rawal who is perhaps one of the most talented actors in Bollywood. Akshay Kumar who is also an emerging star did quite a poor job. John Abraham, what is wrong with him? Is that what you call acting? I mean he should thank God that he has a pretty face otherwise he'd be winning Razzie awards in India if there were any such awards in Bollywood. Asrani a great talent, but overdoes his bit as before.

Screenplay which was not to mention a rip-off from the 1965's Boeing Boeing was quite badly framed. First of all, people in Bollywood just can't make something original. On top of that they don't even know how to copy well. The jokes in the movie were so overdone, it was getting painful to sit through them. Priyadarshan may be a star in the south, but he's just not fit to make a decent Hindi movie. The sound editing is amazingly crappy. I can go on and on this matter, but the bottom-line is that Bollywood should be shameful of making such a film.

The worst part is that some people seemed to love this movie. What is wrong with you guys? This is the reason why Bollywood is where it is. Did you know that Bollywood makes more movies than Hollywood every year, however, most of the movies are unheard of abroad, because of movies like this one. I am an Indian and I am utterly shameful of Bollywood for producing this piece of thrash. Movies like Dil Chahta Hai and Lagaan were just terrific. They are world class films which are timeless... among the best of this decade. Garam Masala, however, is perhaps one of the worst of this century. Period.

I give it a 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is the first [[time]] I have commented on a film because I felt that if the right person read it, they [[might]] [[wake]] up and do something about it. Over the [[last]] few [[months]], [[ABC]] [[Family]] [[began]] airing a new format of [[movies]]. I have [[seen]] the [[last]] three and [[enjoyed]] them. They were engaging and did the trick. My [[wife]] likes these films. I was looking forward to [[viewing]] "See [[Jane]] Date". The trailers [[looked]] and [[sounded]] great. Unfortunately, this is one [[film]] where the [[book]] must be light years ahead of the effort [[displayed]] by the [[writers]] and music people involved with this project. The year is 2003, the source (all [[bad]]), the score was as interesting as an elevator ride in a department store. It was intrusive and did not add any emotional content to the film at all. It [[worked]] against it. I work in the business of film and television . I enjoy being entertained. This is one instance where I kept thinking could it get any worse. The script had lines from another decade and I know these women can act but you wouldn't know it from this movie. To add to the overall experience, the end left me shaking my head. An advice to the executives at Disney, ABC , ABC Family and the producers: Under any circumstances please do not hire the composer or music supervisor to do any of your future films. They have lost their touch and they need to understand what the word "contemporary" , "present day" and "current" means when describing a romantic comedy. There is a world passing you by. All in all a [[huge]] [[disappointment]] from folks at Von Zerneck-Sertner and ABC Family. This is the first [[times]] I have commented on a film because I felt that if the right person read it, they [[probability]] [[waking]] up and do something about it. Over the [[final]] few [[mois]], [[ABCS]] [[Familial]] [[embarked]] airing a new format of [[kino]]. I have [[noticed]] the [[latter]] three and [[adored]] them. They were engaging and did the trick. My [[mujer]] likes these films. I was looking forward to [[visualise]] "See [[Jannet]] Date". The trailers [[seemed]] and [[seemed]] great. Unfortunately, this is one [[filmmaking]] where the [[books]] must be light years ahead of the effort [[showed]] by the [[authors]] and music people involved with this project. The year is 2003, the source (all [[unfavourable]]), the score was as interesting as an elevator ride in a department store. It was intrusive and did not add any emotional content to the film at all. It [[acted]] against it. I work in the business of film and television . I enjoy being entertained. This is one instance where I kept thinking could it get any worse. The script had lines from another decade and I know these women can act but you wouldn't know it from this movie. To add to the overall experience, the end left me shaking my head. An advice to the executives at Disney, ABC , ABC Family and the producers: Under any circumstances please do not hire the composer or music supervisor to do any of your future films. They have lost their touch and they need to understand what the word "contemporary" , "present day" and "current" means when describing a romantic comedy. There is a world passing you by. All in all a [[prodigious]] [[displeasure]] from folks at Von Zerneck-Sertner and ABC Family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I have seen The [[Perfect]] [[Son]] about three times. I fail to [[see]] how this film is a [[gay]] film, I am not even gay, but I don't see it as a [[gay]] [[film]]. It is a [[film]] with a gay character, I can't [[see]] why every film with a [[gay]] character should be [[strictly]] a film about being gay. I [[find]] the [[film]] to be sympathetic to the study of [[death]], the [[death]] of someone who is your kin. I think [[Theo]] turns his [[life]] around fairly [[quickly]] after rehab because he wants to and watching his brother [[dying]] in [[front]] of him makes him [[reassess]] his [[life]]. I [[found]] the dialog in the scene when Theo [[tells]] Ryan he is going to be a father to be very [[moving]], Ryan states that he doesn't want to know about the things he is never going to [[see]] or share with anyone. Isn't that [[horrific]] and [[sad]]? I [[highly]] [[recommend]] the film. I have seen The [[Consummate]] [[Yarns]] about three times. I fail to [[consults]] how this film is a [[gays]] film, I am not even gay, but I don't see it as a [[homo]] [[kino]]. It is a [[kino]] with a gay character, I can't [[seeing]] why every film with a [[homosexual]] character should be [[purely]] a film about being gay. I [[unearth]] the [[kino]] to be sympathetic to the study of [[decease]], the [[killings]] of someone who is your kin. I think [[Thea]] turns his [[living]] around fairly [[fast]] after rehab because he wants to and watching his brother [[dies]] in [[newsweek]] of him makes him [[revisit]] his [[vie]]. I [[uncovered]] the dialog in the scene when Theo [[says]] Ryan he is going to be a father to be very [[transferring]], Ryan states that he doesn't want to know about the things he is never going to [[behold]] or share with anyone. Isn't that [[vile]] and [[unlucky]]? I [[vastly]] [[recommendation]] the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A man brings his new wife to his home where his [[former]] wife died of an "accident". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! [[All]] of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing [[skulls]] all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead?

You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I [[saw]] this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I [[liked]] it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I [[realize]] how [[bad]] it is. It's [[horribly]] acted, [[badly]] [[written]], very dull ([[even]] at an [[hour]]) and has a [[huge]] cast of FIVE people (one being the director)! Still it does have some good things about it.

The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely [[atmospheric]]. There [[also]] are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a [[somewhat]] effective ending. All in all it's definitely [[NOT]] a good movie...but not a [[total]] disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I [[give]] it a 2.

Also [[try]] to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's [[paired]] with "[[Attack]] of the Giant Leeches"). It's in [[TERRIBLE]] shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on [[TV]]! A man brings his new wife to his home where his [[previous]] wife died of an "accident". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! [[Everything]] of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing [[cranes]] all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead?

You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I [[seen]] this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I [[wished]] it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I [[accomplishing]] how [[rotten]] it is. It's [[unimaginably]] acted, [[sorely]] [[wrote]], very dull ([[yet]] at an [[hora]]) and has a [[whopping]] cast of FIVE people (one being the director)! Still it does have some good things about it.

The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely [[atmosphere]]. There [[apart]] are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a [[rather]] effective ending. All in all it's definitely [[NAH]] a good movie...but not a [[unmitigated]] disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I [[confer]] it a 2.

Also [[attempted]] to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's [[coupled]] with "[[Attacking]] of the Giant Leeches"). It's in [[SCARY]] shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on [[TELEVISIONS]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my first comment on IMDb website, and the reason I'm writing it is that we're talking about ONE OF THE BEST FILMS EVER! 'Ne goryuy!' will make you laugh and cry at the same time, you will fall in love (if you're not a fan yet!) with Georgian choir singing tradition, and possibly you will accept the hardships of your own existence and just feel good after watching it:) What I like a lot about this film is that actors in the non-leading roles create vivid and memorable characters and are just as interesting and important as the central character. The film is starring Vahtang Kikabidze (who is great), but you will remember every single face around him in the film. You will find yourself quoting their lines, that have become household names for so many Russian-speaking people. A film to live with. Simple, yet deep, you will want to watch it again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2977 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film has got to be ranked as one of the most [[disturbing]] and [[arresting]] [[films]] in years. It is one of the few [[films]], perhaps the only one, that [[actually]] [[gave]] me shivers: not even Pasolini´s Sálo, to which this [[film]] [[bears]] [[comparison]], affected me like that. I [[saw]] echoes in the [[film]] from filmmakers like Pasolini, Fassbinder and others. I had to [[ask]] myself, what was it about the [[film]] that made me feel like I did? I [[think]] the [[answer]] [[would]] be that I was watching a horror [[film]], but one that defies or even [[reverses]] the conventions of said [[genre]]. Typically, in a horror film, [[horrible]] and [[frightening]] things will [[happen]], but on the margins of civilized society: abandoned houses, [[deserted]] hotels, castles, churchyards, morgues etc. This [[handling]] of the subject in horror is, I think, a sort of defence mechanism, a principle of [[darkness]] and opacity [[functioning]] as a [[sort]] of projective space for the [[desires]] and [[fears]] of the viewer. So, from this perspective, Hundstage is not a horror film; it takes place in a [[perfectly]] [[normal]] society, and so doesn´t dabble in the histrionics of the horror film. But what you see is the displacement of certain [[key]] thematics from the horror genre, [[especially]] concerning the [[body]] and its [[violation]], the [[stages]] of [[fright]] and torture it can be put through. What Seidl does is to use the settings of an [[everyday]], middle [[class]] society as a stage on which is [[relayed]] a repetitious [[play]] of sexual [[aggression]], [[loneliness]], [[lack]] and [[violation]] of [[intimacy]] and integrity: [[precisely]] the [[themes]] you [[would]] [[find]] in horror, but subjected to a principle of light and transparency from which there is no escape. It is precisely within this displacement that the power of Seidl´s film resides. Hundstage [[deals]] with these [[matters]] as a function of the [[everyday]], [[displays]] them in quotidian repetition, [[rather]] than as [[sites]] of extremity and catharsis - a move you would encounter in said horror genre. One important point of reference here is Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Fassbinder also had a way of blending the political with the personal in his films, a tactics of the melodrama that allowed him to deal in a serious and even moral way with political issues like racism, domination, desire, questions concerning ownership, sexual property and control, fascism and capitalism etc. Seidl´s tactic of making the mechanisms of everyday society the subject of his film puts him in close proximity with Fassbinder; like this German ally, he has a sort of political vision of society that he feels it is his responsibility to put forward in his films. During a seminar at the Gothenburg Film Festival this year, at which Seidl was a guest, he was asked why he would have so many instances of violated, subjugated women in Hundstage, but no instances of a woman fighting back, liberating herself. Seidl replied that some may view it as immoral to show violence against women, but that he himself felt it would be immoral not to show it. An artistic statement as good as any, I think. Thank you. This film has got to be ranked as one of the most [[troubling]] and [[detaining]] [[cinematography]] in years. It is one of the few [[movies]], perhaps the only one, that [[indeed]] [[handed]] me shivers: not even Pasolini´s Sálo, to which this [[movies]] [[carry]] [[comparisons]], affected me like that. I [[seen]] echoes in the [[movies]] from filmmakers like Pasolini, Fassbinder and others. I had to [[demand]] myself, what was it about the [[movie]] that made me feel like I did? I [[ideas]] the [[answers]] [[should]] be that I was watching a horror [[cinematography]], but one that defies or even [[reversal]] the conventions of said [[genres]]. Typically, in a horror film, [[atrocious]] and [[horrendous]] things will [[occur]], but on the margins of civilized society: abandoned houses, [[desolate]] hotels, castles, churchyards, morgues etc. This [[manipulating]] of the subject in horror is, I think, a sort of defence mechanism, a principle of [[blackness]] and opacity [[function]] as a [[sorts]] of projective space for the [[wishes]] and [[worries]] of the viewer. So, from this perspective, Hundstage is not a horror film; it takes place in a [[absolutely]] [[usual]] society, and so doesn´t dabble in the histrionics of the horror film. But what you see is the displacement of certain [[critical]] thematics from the horror genre, [[namely]] concerning the [[agency]] and its [[breach]], the [[stage]] of [[frighten]] and torture it can be put through. What Seidl does is to use the settings of an [[ordinary]], middle [[schoolroom]] society as a stage on which is [[forwarded]] a repetitious [[gaming]] of sexual [[assault]], [[solitude]], [[inadequacy]] and [[violating]] of [[privacy]] and integrity: [[exactly]] the [[subject]] you [[ought]] [[unearthed]] in horror, but subjected to a principle of light and transparency from which there is no escape. It is precisely within this displacement that the power of Seidl´s film resides. Hundstage [[deal]] with these [[things]] as a function of the [[ordinary]], [[shown]] them in quotidian repetition, [[somewhat]] than as [[locators]] of extremity and catharsis - a move you would encounter in said horror genre. One important point of reference here is Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Fassbinder also had a way of blending the political with the personal in his films, a tactics of the melodrama that allowed him to deal in a serious and even moral way with political issues like racism, domination, desire, questions concerning ownership, sexual property and control, fascism and capitalism etc. Seidl´s tactic of making the mechanisms of everyday society the subject of his film puts him in close proximity with Fassbinder; like this German ally, he has a sort of political vision of society that he feels it is his responsibility to put forward in his films. During a seminar at the Gothenburg Film Festival this year, at which Seidl was a guest, he was asked why he would have so many instances of violated, subjugated women in Hundstage, but no instances of a woman fighting back, liberating herself. Seidl replied that some may view it as immoral to show violence against women, but that he himself felt it would be immoral not to show it. An artistic statement as good as any, I think. Thank you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2978 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sensitive [[film]] does [[lack]] brilliance and, to some degree, narrative structure, but is nevertheless [[superbly]] shot and performed. However, the narrative structure point is debatable. While it gives the impression of tying off loose ends nicely in the final scenes, and connects its [[thoughts]] with what might be described by the modern viewer as a "story", I'm [[sceptical]] as to whether this feel *needs* a "narrative structure" that is definite and detectable. Inevitably, it will be [[compared]] with SOMERSAULT in that its central protagonist (I'm not sure that's the correct word!) is a young, and very young-looking, woman, whose newly discovered sexuality both confuses and empowers her - although of course Cate Shortland's film tackles this aspect better. But while the possibility exists for reckless viewers to [[dismiss]] this film as a cliché, PEACHES is, in some ways, much more ambitious than SOMERSAULT. Perhaps that's where it doesn't [[quite]] make it. It's [[certainly]] very [[different]] to Monahan's first feature - THE [[INTERVIEW]]! I'm not quite sure how the sex scenes between Weaving and [[Lung]] [[added]] to the [[story]]. Who knows - [[maybe]] they did. They [[certainly]] rammed [[home]] the [[compromised]] and flawed nature of Weaving's [[character]] - [[although]] I personally [[think]] this was [[achieved]] without the [[need]] for these scenes.

*****JUST [[SAW]] THE [[FILM]] AGAIN*********

On a [[second]] [[viewing]], I can see how some [[would]] [[dismiss]] it as a telemovie [[dressed]] up as a [[feature]]. But I'm not sure how [[distinct]] these 'categories' are [[anymore]], or even if we should be [[making]] that distinction. [[In]] any [[case]], I do [[think]] there are [[enough]] layers in the [[film]] to [[distinguish]] it from [[Hallmark]] [[efforts]]. On the other hand, the film's [[structure]] is very formal, and its content is hardly challenging,at least in the [[way]] SOMERSAULT, TOM WHITE, THREE [[DOLLARS]], THE ILLUSTRATED [[FAMILY]] [[DOCTOR]], LOOK [[BOTH]] [[WAYS]] and THE [[HUMAN]] [[TOUCH]] are. The performances are all [[good]], but I did come to the [[realisation]] that the [[main]] [[reason]] I was [[enjoying]] the [[film]] was because it fit the "Australian" [[genre]], without necessarily adding [[anything]]...and I can [[understand]] that this can be a [[fairly]] good [[reason]] for another person *NOT* to like it! [[Indeed]], it wasn't until Lung enters the room in her Vietnamese dress that the film really begins to pack a punch. But that leads us into another debate - *should* we expect that a film must challenge us all the time? Certainly I enjoy being challenged by a film (or a book, or other people), but is there no room anymore for what is simply a nice story?

I haven't deleted my initial post on this film, because I'm all too aware of the Orwellian overtones of such an act. But I [[would]] [[downgrade]] my initial rating from an 8 to perhaps a 6.5.

As for nominations for AFI Best Film, my votes go to THE HUMAN TOUCH, THREE DOLLARS and LOOK BOTH WAYS - and I think LOOK [[BOTH]] [[WAYS]] should win. Sensitive [[kino]] does [[imperfection]] brilliance and, to some degree, narrative structure, but is nevertheless [[beautifully]] shot and performed. However, the narrative structure point is debatable. While it gives the impression of tying off loose ends nicely in the final scenes, and connects its [[idea]] with what might be described by the modern viewer as a "story", I'm [[incredulous]] as to whether this feel *needs* a "narrative structure" that is definite and detectable. Inevitably, it will be [[likened]] with SOMERSAULT in that its central protagonist (I'm not sure that's the correct word!) is a young, and very young-looking, woman, whose newly discovered sexuality both confuses and empowers her - although of course Cate Shortland's film tackles this aspect better. But while the possibility exists for reckless viewers to [[rejects]] this film as a cliché, PEACHES is, in some ways, much more ambitious than SOMERSAULT. Perhaps that's where it doesn't [[very]] make it. It's [[probably]] very [[several]] to Monahan's first feature - THE [[INTERVIEWED]]! I'm not quite sure how the sex scenes between Weaving and [[Dragon]] [[adds]] to the [[narratives]]. Who knows - [[presumably]] they did. They [[surely]] rammed [[dwellings]] the [[threatened]] and flawed nature of Weaving's [[characteristics]] - [[while]] I personally [[thinking]] this was [[performed]] without the [[needs]] for these scenes.

*****JUST [[SAWTHE]] THE [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] AGAIN*********

On a [[seconds]] [[visualization]], I can see how some [[ought]] [[refusing]] it as a telemovie [[clothed]] up as a [[features]]. But I'm not sure how [[separate]] these 'categories' are [[longer]], or even if we should be [[doing]] that distinction. [[At]] any [[instances]], I do [[believe]] there are [[adequate]] layers in the [[movie]] to [[distinguishing]] it from [[Trademark]] [[action]]. On the other hand, the film's [[architecture]] is very formal, and its content is hardly challenging,at least in the [[pathway]] SOMERSAULT, TOM WHITE, THREE [[USD]], THE ILLUSTRATED [[FAMILIES]] [[MEDICAL]], LOOK [[WHETHER]] [[METHOD]] and THE [[MANKIND]] [[TOUCHES]] are. The performances are all [[alright]], but I did come to the [[materialization]] that the [[primary]] [[rationale]] I was [[experience]] the [[cinematographic]] was because it fit the "Australian" [[gender]], without necessarily adding [[somethings]]...and I can [[realise]] that this can be a [[relatively]] good [[rationale]] for another person *NOT* to like it! [[Actually]], it wasn't until Lung enters the room in her Vietnamese dress that the film really begins to pack a punch. But that leads us into another debate - *should* we expect that a film must challenge us all the time? Certainly I enjoy being challenged by a film (or a book, or other people), but is there no room anymore for what is simply a nice story?

I haven't deleted my initial post on this film, because I'm all too aware of the Orwellian overtones of such an act. But I [[could]] [[demote]] my initial rating from an 8 to perhaps a 6.5.

As for nominations for AFI Best Film, my votes go to THE HUMAN TOUCH, THREE DOLLARS and LOOK BOTH WAYS - and I think LOOK [[WHETHER]] [[AVENUES]] should win. --------------------------------------------- Result 2979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Busy is so amazing! I just loved every word she has ever done- freaks and geeks, Dawson's creek, white chicks, the smokers. after the first time i saw home room i went and got it the next day. i am a big fan of her and she has a lot of fans here in Israel. if someone hasn't saw is excellent movie than don't waist more time and go see it now. i recommend to all of you to see all of her movies. i saw busy in the late night show with Conan and she was so beautiful and cute i just love her! everybody who saw the movie- in home room she looks very scary but in real life she is so beautiful! you have to see all her half nude pictures for stuff magazine (maxim) she looks so good there! ~DANIELLE~ --------------------------------------------- Result 2980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] If you want to [[laugh]] like [[crazy]], [[rent]] Cage. Cage is about two [[war]] [[heroes]], [[Billy]] and Scott who are best [[friends]]. [[When]] Billy is shot in [[Vietnam]], he is [[unable]] to fend for himself, so Scott takes him in.

I have never [[seen]] a [[movie]] with more gay [[references]] to the two main [[characters]]. Billy and Scott [[love]] to "wrestle" and Scott tells Billy that he is "still sore from last night," [[among]] other [[things]].

[[Wonderful]] [[catch]] [[phrases]] like "[[Shut]] the sh!t up" and "Ping Pang [[Pong]], cut the sh!t" will keep you laughing for [[hours]]. The native American [[guys]] that are [[supposed]] to be playing [[Mexican]] gang [[members]] are [[also]] top notch. As they say, it's "[[party]] [[time]] right now. Ba-ba-ba-ba ba-ba." I [[could]] [[go]] on [[forever]], but just watch this [[movie]] and laugh your a$$ off. It was so funny I went out and bought the DVD for $5.99 If you want to [[laughter]] like [[psycho]], [[leases]] Cage. Cage is about two [[warfare]] [[heroic]], [[Billie]] and Scott who are best [[friendships]]. [[Whenever]] Billy is shot in [[Viet]], he is [[impossible]] to fend for himself, so Scott takes him in.

I have never [[noticed]] a [[flick]] with more gay [[referencing]] to the two main [[trait]]. Billy and Scott [[iove]] to "wrestle" and Scott tells Billy that he is "still sore from last night," [[between]] other [[aspects]].

[[Resplendent]] [[capture]] [[words]] like "[[Closure]] the sh!t up" and "Ping Pang [[Phong]], cut the sh!t" will keep you laughing for [[hour]]. The native American [[buddies]] that are [[presumed]] to be playing [[Mexico]] gang [[member]] are [[similarly]] top notch. As they say, it's "[[parties]] [[moment]] right now. Ba-ba-ba-ba ba-ba." I [[wo]] [[going]] on [[permanently]], but just watch this [[filmmaking]] and laugh your a$$ off. It was so funny I went out and bought the DVD for $5.99 --------------------------------------------- Result 2981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of [[disaster]] that has to be seen to be believed.

I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.

The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a [[reputation]] before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.

I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.

If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive [[supporting]] cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, [[John]] Carradine, Andy Devine and [[others]]) is wasted with [[nothing]] to do.

To expand it to feature length there are [[numerous]] clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S [[ALL]] HERE) andLaurel and [[Hardy]], who never [[dreamed]] they'd be [[playing]] in an X rated [[movie]].

The X rating is due to [[occasional]] [[language]] [[numerous]] sexual perversions; however, [[none]] of the [[characters]] [[seem]] to be having any fun. [[Maybe]] [[somebody]] [[involved]] with the [[film]] had a [[warped]] Puritan sensibility and figured that if they [[could]] make these [[things]] [[unappealing]] it wasn't bad to [[exploit]] them.

This was one of the "youth" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that [[EASY]] [[RIDER]] (which was made for pocket [[change]]) was the most [[expensive]] [[movie]] ever [[made]] because so [[many]] [[films]] followed which [[tried]] and failed in the [[worst]] [[way]] to [[duplicate]] its success. Sixtyish, once [[honored]] directors like [[Stanley]] Kramer and [[Otto]] Preminger [[made]] movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark [[secret]].

Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.

If you want to see a [[big]] budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen. Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of [[catastrophe]] that has to be seen to be believed.

I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.

The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a [[notoriety]] before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.

I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.

If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive [[supports]] cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, [[Jon]] Carradine, Andy Devine and [[alia]]) is wasted with [[nada]] to do.

To expand it to feature length there are [[countless]] clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S [[TOTALITY]] HERE) andLaurel and [[Robust]], who never [[fantasized]] they'd be [[replay]] in an X rated [[movies]].

The X rating is due to [[casual]] [[parlance]] [[many]] sexual perversions; however, [[nos]] of the [[nature]] [[looks]] to be having any fun. [[Might]] [[anybody]] [[implicated]] with the [[filmmaking]] had a [[twisted]] Puritan sensibility and figured that if they [[wo]] make these [[matters]] [[unattractive]] it wasn't bad to [[leverage]] them.

This was one of the "youth" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that [[SIMPLE]] [[TROOPER]] (which was made for pocket [[alter]]) was the most [[costly]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[introduced]] because so [[numerous]] [[filmmaking]] followed which [[attempted]] and failed in the [[meanest]] [[routing]] to [[doubling]] its success. Sixtyish, once [[flattered]] directors like [[Stan]] Kramer and [[Otta]] Preminger [[accomplished]] movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark [[confidential]].

Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.

If you want to see a [[considerable]] budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] that kid a is such a [[babe]]; this [[movie]] was no Titan A.[[E]].(of which it is in [[many]] [[ways]] modeled after) but [[still]] came off as [[entertaining]], the fact this lost to a piece of [[monkey]] [[crap]] like Tomb [[raider]] makes [[wanna]] [[cry]]; [[includes]] some of the most [[entertaining]] [[characters]] i've [[seen]] in disney [[film]] that kid a is such a [[babies]]; this [[films]] was no Titan A.[[f]].(of which it is in [[various]] [[shapes]] modeled after) but [[yet]] came off as [[amusing]], the fact this lost to a piece of [[silvana]] [[bullshit]] like Tomb [[ryder]] makes [[wish]] [[cries]]; [[involves]] some of the most [[amusing]] [[attribute]] i've [[watched]] in disney [[films]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I have [[seen]] about a thousand horror films. (my favorite [[type]]) This film is [[among]] the [[worst]]. For me, an [[idea]] [[drives]] a [[movie]]. So, even a poorly acted, cheaply made movie can be good. [[Something]] Weird is [[definitely]] cheaply [[made]]. However, it has little to [[say]]. I still don't understand what the karate scene in the [[beginning]] has to do with the film. Something [[Weird]] has little to [[offer]]. [[Save]] yourself the [[pain]]! I have [[noticed]] about a thousand horror films. (my favorite [[genre]]) This film is [[entre]] the [[meanest]]. For me, an [[brainchild]] [[driving]] a [[filmmaking]]. So, even a poorly acted, cheaply made movie can be good. [[Algo]] Weird is [[conclusively]] cheaply [[effected]]. However, it has little to [[said]]. I still don't understand what the karate scene in the [[beginnings]] has to do with the film. Something [[Bizarro]] has little to [[offered]]. [[Rescues]] yourself the [[heartache]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This film was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a [[revelation]] to us. We [[actually]] thought that we were the only gay and lesbian [[couple]] who had ever married and had [[children]]. [[Obviously]] we were [[wrong]]. [[Love]] may come from where you don't [[expect]] it and [[maybe]] don't [[want]] it. But we both chose that [[love]] anyway.

And no, it never [[changed]] our sexual orientation. That [[kind]] of stuff is for the Christian wackos.

When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.

This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. This film was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a [[epiphany]] to us. We [[indeed]] thought that we were the only gay and lesbian [[matches]] who had ever married and had [[kiddies]]. [[Definitely]] we were [[amiss]]. [[Adore]] may come from where you don't [[expecting]] it and [[conceivably]] don't [[desiring]] it. But we both chose that [[loved]] anyway.

And no, it never [[amended]] our sexual orientation. That [[genus]] of stuff is for the Christian wackos.

When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.

This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2985 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far the funniest short made by the two comic geniuses. From the time they walk in, to the time Hardy just falls off the roof, this keeps me laughing hysterically. I highly suggest that every fan of Laurel and Hardy should see this short. I also recommend all of the Ghost Series. If you are looking for laughs, see this movie and you will be happy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] From beginning to end, this is the most emotionally overwrought movie about NOTHING I have ever seen. The characterizations and interactions between the title character and Marthe Kller's character are pure torture. The racetrack as metaphor gimmick is so overplayed that it borders on cliche, yet director Pollack treats every hairpin turn as if it were something profoundly important.

Maybe there's some value for a MSFT3000 re-playing of some of the scenes, such as Pacino getting in touch with his inner female, for goof value. But, even such accidental humor is hard to find in this total turkey. --------------------------------------------- Result 2987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say, it's a damn good movie. See it if you still haven't. Great camera works and lighting techniques. Awesome, just awesome. Orson Welles is incredible 'The Lady From Shanghai' can certainly take the place of 'Citizen Kane'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2988 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This was what [[black]] society was like before the [[crack]] epidemics, [[gangsta]] [[rap]], and AIDS that beset the ghettos in the eighties. Decent, hardworking families that [[struggled]] to [[get]] by and all the [[traumas]] and tribulations they [[faced]]. [[Black]] [[America]] was a [[different]] [[group]] of people in the seventies. Still full of [[hope]] and [[flying]] high on the [[civil]] rights movements of the sixties, [[times]] were [[hard]] but [[still]] worth [[fighting]] for. Keepin' your head above water, making a [[wave]] when you can, this [[show]] [[showed]] how [[black]] [[society]] struggled to [[work]] [[together]] as people and families, before they [[started]] to prey on each other and [[everyone]] [[else]] in [[order]] to [[survive]] the [[horrors]] of the ghettos. It is heart-breaking to see what the [[black]] ghettos were like then and what they have [[become]] now. This was what [[negra]] society was like before the [[slit]] epidemics, [[banger]] [[rapper]], and AIDS that beset the ghettos in the eighties. Decent, hardworking families that [[campaigned]] to [[obtain]] by and all the [[injuries]] and tribulations they [[encountered]]. [[Nigger]] [[Americans]] was a [[several]] [[grouping]] of people in the seventies. Still full of [[esperanza]] and [[hovering]] high on the [[civilian]] rights movements of the sixties, [[moments]] were [[laborious]] but [[however]] worth [[combating]] for. Keepin' your head above water, making a [[waving]] when you can, this [[showings]] [[indicated]] how [[negra]] [[societies]] struggled to [[worked]] [[jointly]] as people and families, before they [[starts]] to prey on each other and [[someone]] [[elsewhere]] in [[orders]] to [[outlast]] the [[throes]] of the ghettos. It is heart-breaking to see what the [[negra]] ghettos were like then and what they have [[gotten]] now. --------------------------------------------- Result 2989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I first read the book, when I was a young teenager, then saw the film late one night. About a year ago I checked it out on IMDb and discovered no copies available. I then hit the web and found a site that offers War Films, soooo glad that I did, ordered a copy and sat back and was able to confirm why I wanted to see it again.

In my opinion to really enjoy the film I suggest you read get a copy of the book and then watch the film. The book is no longer in print but I did track a copy down via E-bay, the Author Alan White was a commando/paratrooper during the 2nd world war taking part in disparate clandestine operations and this was his first book. It is written by someone who knows and this fact I believe gives the book and film authenticity. I have not given the film a ten only because of the nature of the ending of the film, not as good as the book. There are a couple of plot lines that differ from the book also, which is strange as the book is not about the large scale nature of war but about the individual in war. The film illustrates this exceptionally well. I have the copy of the book to let my son read and then the film to let him watch, in that order.

If you can track it down the book and the film then it is definitely worth it and I only wish that it was more readily available for more to read and see, one of my all best war films, ever! --------------------------------------------- Result 2990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[true]] [[measure]] of any [[fictional]] piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience [[altered]] in some significant way (note that this [[change]] need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.

By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a film in general, it succeeds quite well-excellent [[ensemble]] cast, well-developed [[characters]] you [[come]] to care about, [[wonderful]] script and [[beautiful]] sets and locations. In short the film is, well, enchanting. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie [[Lawrence]], Jim Broadbent and [[Joan]] Plowright. It says something when Miranda [[Richardson]] does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most [[highly]] [[recommended]], [[particularly]] if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent [[Saith]] Not. The [[real]] [[steps]] of any [[bogus]] piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience [[amended]] in some significant way (note that this [[amendment]] need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.

By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a film in general, it succeeds quite well-excellent [[whole]] cast, well-developed [[attribute]] you [[arrived]] to care about, [[wondrous]] script and [[excellent]] sets and locations. In short the film is, well, enchanting. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie [[Laurent]], Jim Broadbent and [[Juana]] Plowright. It says something when Miranda [[Roberts]] does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most [[immeasurably]] [[suggested]], [[specifically]] if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent [[Unto]] Not. --------------------------------------------- Result 2991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] [[At]] [[first]] glance I [[expected]] this [[film]] to be crappy because I [[thought]] the plot [[would]] be so [[excessively]] feminist. But I was [[wrong]]. As you [[maybe]] have read in earlier published [[comments]], I agree in that the feminist [[part]] in this film does not [[bother]]. I never had the [[idea]] that the [[main]] character was [[exaggerating]] her position as a woman. It's like Guzman is [[presented]] as somebody with a [[spine]], this in [[contrast]] to her [[classmates]]. So I was [[surprised]] by the story, in [[fact]], I [[thought]] it was [[quite]] [[good]], except for the [[predictable]] [[end]]. Maybe it would've been a better [[idea]] to give the plot a radical twist, so that the viewer is [[somewhat]] more [[surprised]].

In addition, I'd like to say that [[Rodriguez]] [[earned]] her respect by the [[way]] she put away her [[character]]. I can't [[really]] explain why, but [[especially]] in the [[love]] scenes she convinced me. It just looked [[real]] I [[think]].

I gave it a 7 out of 10, [[merely]] because of the [[dull]] [[last]] half hour. [[In]] [[frst]] glance I [[anticipate]] this [[kino]] to be crappy because I [[think]] the plot [[ought]] be so [[inordinately]] feminist. But I was [[amiss]]. As you [[potentially]] have read in earlier published [[observations]], I agree in that the feminist [[parte]] in this film does not [[irritate]]. I never had the [[brainchild]] that the [[principal]] character was [[overstating]] her position as a woman. It's like Guzman is [[submitted]] as somebody with a [[vertebrate]], this in [[rematch]] to her [[comrades]]. So I was [[dumbfounded]] by the story, in [[facto]], I [[brainchild]] it was [[rather]] [[alright]], except for the [[predictably]] [[termination]]. Maybe it would've been a better [[thinking]] to give the plot a radical twist, so that the viewer is [[slightly]] more [[stunned]].

In addition, I'd like to say that [[Guzman]] [[profited]] her respect by the [[manner]] she put away her [[characters]]. I can't [[truly]] explain why, but [[principally]] in the [[loves]] scenes she convinced me. It just looked [[authentic]] I [[ideas]].

I gave it a 7 out of 10, [[alone]] because of the [[tiresome]] [[final]] half hour. --------------------------------------------- Result 2992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] does not [[rock]], as others have said. I [[found]] it really boring and [[silly]]. The story is about this metal high [[school]] kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world.

The [[first]] part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he [[fails]] to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.

So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto.

The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS. This [[filmmaking]] does not [[boulder]], as others have said. I [[find]] it really boring and [[stupid]]. The story is about this metal high [[tuition]] kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world.

The [[frst]] part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he [[fail]] to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.

So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto.

The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS. --------------------------------------------- Result 2993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] this [[movie]] delivers. the [[best]] is when the [[awkward]] [[teenage]] neighbor [[tries]] to bike away from the [[babysitter]] and in the [[background]] [[looks]] like he's never been [[anywhere]] near a [[bike]] in his [[life]] as he [[attempts]] not to [[fall]] off.

but this [[movie]] doesn't stop there, when less than 5 [[minutes]] [[later]] it [[delivers]] a scene of [[nothing]] but an arm [[reaching]] through a fence and into a [[cooler]] pulling out a beer.

stereotypical grilling dads, [[several]] plot lines that [[go]] [[nowhere]], and a [[former]] seaQuest actress with a bluetooth cell [[phone]] all [[add]] up to making this the [[perfect]] Saturday [[night]] at [[home]]. this [[filmmaking]] delivers. the [[better]] is when the [[tricky]] [[teenager]] neighbor [[try]] to bike away from the [[nanny]] and in the [[backgrounds]] [[seems]] like he's never been [[wherever]] near a [[cyclists]] in his [[lives]] as he [[tried]] not to [[decrease]] off.

but this [[cinematography]] doesn't stop there, when less than 5 [[mins]] [[then]] it [[gives]] a scene of [[nada]] but an arm [[achieve]] through a fence and into a [[refrigeration]] pulling out a beer.

stereotypical grilling dads, [[different]] plot lines that [[going]] [[everywhere]], and a [[past]] seaQuest actress with a bluetooth cell [[telephone]] all [[summing]] up to making this the [[impeccable]] Saturday [[soir]] at [[house]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (53%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] This movie forever left an impression on me. I watched it as a Freshman in High School and was home alone that night. I think I lost all respect for Robert Reed as an actor having been a huge fan of the "Brady Bunch". I also thought the role of Chuck Connor was horrendous and evil. However, this movie made such an impact on me that I am now a volunteer in the women's state prison doing bible studies and church services and trying to change womens lives, one at a time. What fascinates me is that so few people actually watched this movie. None of my friends watched it and my family is clueless to this day when I discuss this movie because they didn't see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very interesting. The big twist wasn't as big a shock as maybe they had hoped for and it was very dated but it did get my mind working. It really got me thinking about a world without vegetation or livestock and made me appreciate the world I live in a lot more. Charlton Heston does a good job, as do all the supporting characters, and it was a very realistic film which was surprising. It lacked direction at times and a lot of the settings and background needed more explanation but it was still a surprisingly good and intelligent movie. The main fault that I could find was that I didn't want the film to end when it did, I would have liked to see what happened next.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2996 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Without effective indulgence of the supernatural or the poetic motivating nuances of humanity, all this creative team has to hope for is effective usage of its middling, unoriginal elements. 'Party of Five' gone maniacal then genetically unescapable there's little rooting interest because the singular non-homicidal element is a second-rate bland awful-acting 'Wes Bentley' mopester. In fact, all of the acting is skin deep. Even though the dark-haired women appeal, the salaciousness is kept to a minimum. No nudity here. Also lacking are sufficient buckets of blood. All sensations are kept at a teasing, safe distance...an unfortunate fact considering the given name of the directors is 'butcher.' Only the soundtrack, the droning angsty alt-country and the tense fluctuating score provide any palpable tension. Sometimes some static storyboarded compositions add appealing low-angles that adds to the malaise...but for a film that calls itself horror, I did not even get close to flinching once. Perhaps a greater emphasis on societal rejuvenation through blood intake, scenes directed with varying geometric shapes outside the square, and a sustained focus on playfulness through the family's maliciousness or traps sympathetic characters need to escape in order to escape their dilemma would have improved my opinion, but this was not a good start to my excursion through horrorfest. --------------------------------------------- Result 2997 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] "Nada" was the most [[inadequate]] follow-up to "Les NOces Rouges" which,with hindsight,appears now as the [[last]] [[good]] movie of Chabrol's golden era (1967-1973) "Nada" is Chabrol's first real [[attempt]] at a wholly political movie;its previous work "les Noces Rouges" had also [[political]] elements but it was more a [[psychological]] [[thriller]] with the usual look at society in French provinces."Nada" includes [[terrorists]],ambassador,hostage-taking,a lot of [[blood]],not [[really]] Chabrol's field.A heterogeneous cast gives the [[movie]] the coup de grâce :only Duchaussoy,who had already played with the director ,and Maurice Garrel are up to scratch.Viviane Romance ,one of Duvivier's actresses ("la Belle Equipe" "Panique") ,is wasted as a madam (Gabrielle).Italian [[actors]] (Fabio Testi,Lou Castel)are [[awful]].

With "[[Nada]]" this a second period of [[barren]] inspiration for Chabrol .It would be "Violette Nozières" before he was again at the top of his game. "Nada" was the most [[deficient]] follow-up to "Les NOces Rouges" which,with hindsight,appears now as the [[final]] [[well]] movie of Chabrol's golden era (1967-1973) "Nada" is Chabrol's first real [[endeavor]] at a wholly political movie;its previous work "les Noces Rouges" had also [[polices]] elements but it was more a [[mental]] [[thrillers]] with the usual look at society in French provinces."Nada" includes [[terrorism]],ambassador,hostage-taking,a lot of [[transfusion]],not [[truthfully]] Chabrol's field.A heterogeneous cast gives the [[movies]] the coup de grâce :only Duchaussoy,who had already played with the director ,and Maurice Garrel are up to scratch.Viviane Romance ,one of Duvivier's actresses ("la Belle Equipe" "Panique") ,is wasted as a madam (Gabrielle).Italian [[protagonists]] (Fabio Testi,Lou Castel)are [[frightful]].

With "[[Anything]]" this a second period of [[infertile]] inspiration for Chabrol .It would be "Violette Nozières" before he was again at the top of his game. --------------------------------------------- Result 2998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] ...but I've [[seen]] [[better]] too.

The story here is predictable--a [[film]] crew [[trying]] to [[film]] a [[horror]] movie in a [[place]] where [[murders]] [[occurred]]. [[Three]] [[guesses]] what happens. This isn't a [[total]] bomb--the cast is [[fairly]] good with pros [[John]] [[Ireland]], [[Faith]] Domergue and [[John]] Carradine [[giving]] the best performances. It's [[reasonably]] well-made--for a low [[budget]] [[film]]. [[Just]] don't expect any nudity, swearing, [[blood]] OR gore (the [[film]] has a very [[mild]] PG [[rating]]). I was never [[totally]] bored--it's [[OK]] [[viewing]] on a [[quiet]] night. I [[saw]] it on video--it was a [[HORRIBLE]] print--very [[dark]] and some scenes were [[impossible]] to [[see]]. Still I didn't [[hate]] it and it does have a cool [[ending]] which [[surprised]] me--basically [[nothing]] [[happens]] up till then so it [[catches]] you off guard. Worth seeing but only if you're a [[horror]] [[film]] completest. ...but I've [[noticed]] [[optimum]] too.

The story here is predictable--a [[movie]] crew [[tempting]] to [[movies]] a [[monstrosity]] movie in a [[placing]] where [[homicide]] [[occured]]. [[Tres]] [[guessing]] what happens. This isn't a [[whole]] bomb--the cast is [[rather]] good with pros [[Jon]] [[Irish]], [[Creed]] Domergue and [[Johannes]] Carradine [[confer]] the best performances. It's [[rationally]] well-made--for a low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Jen]] don't expect any nudity, swearing, [[transfusion]] OR gore (the [[filmmaking]] has a very [[soft]] PG [[appraisal]]). I was never [[altogether]] bored--it's [[ALRIGHT]] [[visualise]] on a [[tranquil]] night. I [[seen]] it on video--it was a [[FEARSOME]] print--very [[somber]] and some scenes were [[impractical]] to [[seeing]]. Still I didn't [[hating]] it and it does have a cool [[terminating]] which [[flabbergasted]] me--basically [[none]] [[comes]] up till then so it [[catch]] you off guard. Worth seeing but only if you're a [[abomination]] [[flick]] completest. --------------------------------------------- Result 2999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I managed to tape this off my satellite, but I would love to get an original release in a format we can use here in the States. Eddie truly is Glorious in this performance from San Francisco. I don't remember laughing so hard at a stand up routine. My wife and I both enjoyed this tape and his work on Glorious I just wish I could buy a copy and help support Eddie financially through my purchase. We need more of his shows available. --------------------------------------------- Result 3000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] SAPS AT SEA

Aspect [[ratio]]: 1.37:1

Sound [[format]]: Mono

(Black and white)

Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.

This feature length comedy - an OK entry which [[nonetheless]] unspools like a [[mere]] imitation of [[Laurel]] and Hardy's [[best]] [[work]] - marked the [[final]] [[collaboration]] between L&H and [[producer]] Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean [[voyage]] after The [[Boys]] are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a [[seagull]] to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is [[lacking]], [[perhaps]] due to the [[recruitment]] of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, [[previously]] responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose [[work]] here [[lacks]] a [[measure]] of pzazz. Fair, but [[nothing]] [[special]]. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and [[James]] Finlayson make guest [[appearances]]. SAPS AT SEA

Aspect [[percentages]]: 1.37:1

Sound [[formats]]: Mono

(Black and white)

Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.

This feature length comedy - an OK entry which [[yet]] unspools like a [[purely]] imitation of [[Laurier]] and Hardy's [[optimum]] [[cooperating]] - marked the [[definitive]] [[works]] between L&H and [[producers]] Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean [[itinerary]] after The [[Grooms]] are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a [[gull]] to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is [[missing]], [[maybe]] due to the [[recruiting]] of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, [[formerly]] responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose [[works]] here [[lacked]] a [[measures]] of pzazz. Fair, but [[none]] [[peculiar]]. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and [[Jacobo]] Finlayson make guest [[phenomena]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3001 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked it, i really did. Please don't think that i'm an idiot but i have to admit that i enjoyed this film. I expected it to be crap, it was crap, but sometimes its OK to relax and watch a crappy film that you don't have to concentrate too much on isn't it? I didn't expect any hidden meanings or morales, and there wasn't any, but that doesn't matter because i only watched it for entertainment, and it did entertain me throughout. Films like this are why the Ben Stillers (excusing 'there's something about Mary') and the Vince Vaughns (however you spell his last name, i couldn't be bothered checking)have jobs. It's OK to watch a crap film as long as you don't expect too much from it, and i for one shall take a stand, jog, perhaps run, but not drive because i don't have a car, to Blockbuster Video, or even Choices, and rent a bunch of these toilet humoured films and stay in one night watching them. Good day to you reader. P.s if you do not say that this comment helped you then i don't like you, if you do say it helped then god bless you, you will go to heaven. --------------------------------------------- Result 3002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] It's a [[tale]] that [[could]] have [[taken]] place [[anywhere]] really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer [[catching]] the attention of famous [[opera]] [[star]] and [[friendship]] [[ensuing]]. The aging entertainer finds/buys a male [[child]] to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their [[challenging]], but [[free]] [[life]] along the river. [[Traveling]] town to town, he performs and has some [[degree]] of [[notoriety]]. [[Despite]] the times and the [[influences]], the man is [[kind]] and good.

[[Overall]], the performances are first [[rate]], especially Xu Zhu, who portrays the street [[performer]]. The child (Renying Zhou) is [[beautiful]], and [[downright]] strong, and withstands the [[overt]] prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with [[supporting]] [[help]] from the [[kind]] opera [[singer]], Master Liang (an [[interestingly]] androgynous Zhao Zhigang), [[paint]] a very interesting [[tale]] of [[forgiveness]], [[sadness]] and love. Some have [[mentioned]] this film's remote [[similarities]] to [[BA]] WANG BIE JI ([[FAREWELL]] MY CONCUBINE); [[yet]] this film can't stand [[easily]] on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.

My only qualm with the [[KING]] [[OF]] [[MASKS]], is the [[ending]]. It was [[weak]], cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the [[story]], what was the [[needless]] manipulation for? What a shame. To [[bring]] a [[fine]] [[motion]] picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and [[corny]]) [[pathos]] like that. It [[frankly]] [[made]] this [[film]] good, [[instead]] of the [[classic]], it should've been. That aside, the KING [[OF]] [[MASKS]] is [[still]] very well worth your [[time]]. I was happy to see the Shaw [[Brothers]] are [[still]] producing good films. Highly [[recommended]]. It's a [[history]] that [[wo]] have [[picked]] place [[somewhere]] really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer [[catch]] the attention of famous [[drama]] [[superstar]] and [[goodwill]] [[subsequent]]. The aging entertainer finds/buys a male [[children]] to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their [[challenge]], but [[libre]] [[lives]] along the river. [[Travelling]] town to town, he performs and has some [[degrees]] of [[reputation]]. [[Though]] the times and the [[implications]], the man is [[types]] and good.

[[Whole]], the performances are first [[rates]], especially Xu Zhu, who portrays the street [[entertainer]]. The child (Renying Zhou) is [[handsome]], and [[utterly]] strong, and withstands the [[seeming]] prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with [[helping]] [[aid]] from the [[kinds]] opera [[diva]], Master Liang (an [[bizarrely]] androgynous Zhao Zhigang), [[painting]] a very interesting [[story]] of [[amnesty]], [[spite]] and love. Some have [[referenced]] this film's remote [[parallels]] to [[BACCALAUREATE]] WANG BIE JI ([[BYE]] MY CONCUBINE); [[still]] this film can't stand [[readily]] on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.

My only qualm with the [[EMPEROR]] [[DU]] [[MASK]], is the [[terminated]]. It was [[flimsy]], cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the [[narratives]], what was the [[useless]] manipulation for? What a shame. To [[bringing]] a [[fined]] [[motions]] picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and [[banal]]) [[ducks]] like that. It [[plainly]] [[introduced]] this [[movie]] good, [[however]] of the [[classical]], it should've been. That aside, the KING [[DU]] [[MASK]] is [[however]] very well worth your [[period]]. I was happy to see the Shaw [[Siblings]] are [[however]] producing good films. Highly [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3003 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] Pretty [[awful]] but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!

Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local "protection" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.

Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.

The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!

There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....

What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).

I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with "mystery helpers" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!! Pretty [[abysmal]] but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!

Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local "protection" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.

Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.

The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!

There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....

What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).

I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with "mystery helpers" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3004 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost [[indescribable]] [[mess]] that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so [[bad]] that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.

Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often [[incoherent]], with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly [[incomprehensible]]. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).

Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that?

And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them!

Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as "good," but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.

The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema. Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost [[untold]] [[disarray]] that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so [[rotten]] that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.

Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often [[inconsistent]], with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly [[inscrutable]]. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).

Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that?

And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them!

Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as "good," but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.

The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 3005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] About twenty minutes into this movie, I was already [[bored]]. Quite [[simply]], these characters were fairly dull. [[Occasionally]], [[something]] enjoyable would [[happen]], but then things [[would]] [[slow]] down again. Fortunately, my [[patience]] was [[eventually]] rewarded, and the [[ending]] to this movie wasn't bad at all. However, it was by no [[means]] good [[enough]] to [[justify]] sitting through the first ninety minutes. So, I [[would]] say that the movie was mediocre overall, and considering all of the talent in the cast, I'd [[call]] this a [[disappointment]]. About twenty minutes into this movie, I was already [[drilled]]. Quite [[purely]], these characters were fairly dull. [[Sometime]], [[algo]] enjoyable would [[occur]], but then things [[could]] [[slower]] down again. Fortunately, my [[indulgence]] was [[ultimately]] rewarded, and the [[ended]] to this movie wasn't bad at all. However, it was by no [[signifies]] good [[satisfactorily]] to [[justified]] sitting through the first ninety minutes. So, I [[should]] say that the movie was mediocre overall, and considering all of the talent in the cast, I'd [[invitation]] this a [[displeasure]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[For]] all the [[Homicide]] [[junkies]] out there, this [[movie]] was great! [[Every]] single character that ever was on the [[show]] made an [[appearance]] in the movie. It helped to [[resolve]] some (but not all) [[issues]] from the series. Unfortunately, unless you [[actually]] did watch the series, most of the enjoyment [[would]] be lost, as the movie [[made]] heavy references to [[every]] season of the show's existence. This [[probably]] would have been appropriate as a series finale as opposed to being a [[separate]] movie, but we [[gotta]] take what we can get. I [[hope]] they [[make]] more movies, and [[continue]] to [[feature]] [[Homicide]] characters on Law and Order. [[During]] all the [[Slaying]] [[stoners]] out there, this [[cinema]] was great! [[Entire]] single character that ever was on the [[displays]] made an [[semblance]] in the movie. It helped to [[solved]] some (but not all) [[matters]] from the series. Unfortunately, unless you [[indeed]] did watch the series, most of the enjoyment [[should]] be lost, as the movie [[introduced]] heavy references to [[any]] season of the show's existence. This [[undeniably]] would have been appropriate as a series finale as opposed to being a [[seperate]] movie, but we [[owe]] take what we can get. I [[expectancy]] they [[deliver]] more movies, and [[sustained]] to [[attribute]] [[Murders]] characters on Law and Order. --------------------------------------------- Result 3007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I haven't [[laughed]] this [[hard]] at a movie in a [[long]] time. I [[got]] to [[go]] to an [[advance]] screening, and was [[thrilled]] because I had been dying to [[see]] it. I had [[tears]] in my eyes from [[laughter]] throughout a lot of the [[movie]]. The [[audience]] all [[shared]] my [[laughter]], and was clapping and yelling throughout most of the [[movie]].

Kudos to [[Steve]] Carrell(who I had already been a fan of). He [[proves]] in this [[movie]] his [[tremendous]] [[talent]] for [[comedy]]. He has a [[style]] that I haven't [[seen]] before. And [[Catherine]] Keener is [[excellent]] as [[always]]. [[Thank]] [[God]] there wasn't a cameo from [[Will]] Ferrell([[love]] him, but [[saw]] him too much this [[summer]]).

There were parts of comedic [[genius]] in this [[movie]]. Partly [[thanks]] to Carrell, and partly thanks to the [[writing]]([[also]] Carrell). The waxing scene and the [[speed]] dater with the "[[obvious]] [[problem]]" were [[absolutely]] [[hysterical]].

I will [[definitely]] go see '40 Year Old Virgin' when it's [[released]]. My advice: go to [[see]] it for [[huge]] [[laughs]] and an [[incredibly]] [[enjoyable]] [[movie]] on top of it. I haven't [[giggled]] this [[strenuous]] at a movie in a [[protracted]] time. I [[ai]] to [[going]] to an [[advancement]] screening, and was [[excited]] because I had been dying to [[consults]] it. I had [[rip]] in my eyes from [[risa]] throughout a lot of the [[film]]. The [[viewers]] all [[interchange]] my [[laughs]], and was clapping and yelling throughout most of the [[film]].

Kudos to [[Steven]] Carrell(who I had already been a fan of). He [[demonstrating]] in this [[film]] his [[sizable]] [[talents]] for [[comedian]]. He has a [[styling]] that I haven't [[watched]] before. And [[Baroness]] Keener is [[beautiful]] as [[unceasingly]]. [[Thanks]] [[Goodness]] there wasn't a cameo from [[Willingness]] Ferrell([[amour]] him, but [[watched]] him too much this [[hsia]]).

There were parts of comedic [[engineers]] in this [[films]]. Partly [[appreciation]] to Carrell, and partly thanks to the [[literary]]([[similarly]] Carrell). The waxing scene and the [[accelerate]] dater with the "[[unmistakable]] [[troubles]]" were [[utterly]] [[hysteria]].

I will [[certainly]] go see '40 Year Old Virgin' when it's [[liberated]]. My advice: go to [[seeing]] it for [[big]] [[smile]] and an [[impossibly]] [[nice]] [[flick]] on top of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3008 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to believe that anachronism and other goofs are more [[acceptable]], even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in [[rotten]] films. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when [[watching]] it closely, I found almost nothing [[specifically]] anachronistic.

The [[shots]] of [[aircraft]] which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The [[big]] 4 engine [[transport]] [[seen]] after the title "Honolulu 1944" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS [[colors]]). The combat [[planes]] [[seen]] [[taking]] off from the carrier at the [[end]] are Douglas Skyraiders which entered [[service]] after WW2 and were made [[famous]] by their [[service]] in Vietnam.

But excepting these two pieces of [[film]] and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very [[possibly]] period authentic. It just 'feels' so [[wrong]]. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we [[share]] the same [[birthday]]. In his co directed ON THE [[TOWN]] (1949) there is a [[car]] chase at the [[end]] with the [[police]] driving 1949/50 Ford's [[yet]] there isn't the [[slightest]] [[feeling]] that this is out of place in a WW2 [[period]] [[film]]. [[In]] fact, as I [[reflected]] [[later]], there isn't [[anything]] which [[says]] that this is supposed to be a WW2 [[period]] [[film]]. It just feels that [[way]]. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a [[ballet]] (Fancy [[Free]]) which may have been [[based]] on the [[work]] of [[artist]] [[Paul]] Cadmus (The Fleet's [[In]]! 1934) its a [[great]] [[film]] about [[sailors]] on a 24 hour pass in [[New]] York and, so [[heavy]] with wartime [[associations]], its [[merely]] assumed it takes place during the [[war]] and [[yet]] these contemporary [[cars]] do [[nothing]] to [[break]] the spell.

The first [[problem]] is [[old]] [[Cary]] [[Grant]]. Though far too [[old]] to [[represent]] a [[Navy]] SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like [[Grant]], Gary Cooper ([[Lou]] Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to [[play]] [[younger]]. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A [[guy]] who gets things done and breaks all the [[rules]] while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.

Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.

But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).

Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.

So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent. One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to believe that anachronism and other goofs are more [[permissible]], even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in [[naughty]] films. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when [[staring]] it closely, I found almost nothing [[expressly]] anachronistic.

The [[beatings]] of [[aviation]] which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The [[prodigious]] 4 engine [[conveyance]] [[saw]] after the title "Honolulu 1944" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS [[coloring]]). The combat [[airliner]] [[noticed]] [[pick]] off from the carrier at the [[ceases]] are Douglas Skyraiders which entered [[servicing]] after WW2 and were made [[notorious]] by their [[servicing]] in Vietnam.

But excepting these two pieces of [[movies]] and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very [[conceivably]] period authentic. It just 'feels' so [[mistaken]]. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we [[shares]] the same [[anniversary]]. In his co directed ON THE [[URBAN]] (1949) there is a [[auto]] chase at the [[terminate]] with the [[cop]] driving 1949/50 Ford's [[nonetheless]] there isn't the [[least]] [[sensation]] that this is out of place in a WW2 [[periods]] [[cinematographic]]. [[During]] fact, as I [[mirrored]] [[afterward]], there isn't [[something]] which [[tells]] that this is supposed to be a WW2 [[timeline]] [[movie]]. It just feels that [[pathway]]. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a [[dances]] (Fancy [[Libre]]) which may have been [[predicated]] on the [[cooperates]] of [[artiste]] [[Paolo]] Cadmus (The Fleet's [[Among]]! 1934) its a [[formidable]] [[filmmaking]] about [[marine]] on a 24 hour pass in [[Novo]] York and, so [[ponderous]] with wartime [[association]], its [[only]] assumed it takes place during the [[wars]] and [[however]] these contemporary [[automobile]] do [[anything]] to [[blackout]] the spell.

The first [[issues]] is [[antique]] [[Carrey]] [[Granting]]. Though far too [[longtime]] to [[represented]] a [[Marines]] SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like [[Awarding]], Gary Cooper ([[Lulu]] Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to [[playing]] [[youngest]]. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A [[bloke]] who gets things done and breaks all the [[bylaws]] while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.

Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.

But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).

Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.

So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent. --------------------------------------------- Result 3009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A really bad sequel. Part 1 had a lot of funny moments - part 2 is just bad (in a boring way) and obviously made to squeeze money out of the fans.

Shame on you, Otto Waalkes!

The only slightly amusing moment in the film is Helge Schneider who apparently seems to be pis*ed about the other characters. It's quite easy to identify with him...

The screenplay is sloppy/non-existent. The director should do everyone a favor and quit his job immediately. The acting is worse than a 2nd grade school play.

Technically the movie is awful as well, but who can blame the cinematographer/sound guys who had to work with such an untalented director? --------------------------------------------- Result 3010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I [[suppose]] if you like [[endless]] [[dialogue]] that doesn't forward the [[story]] and flashy [[camera]] [[effects]] like the scene transitions in the [[television]] show _Angel_, you'll enjoy the [[film]]. Me? [[All]] I [[wanted]] was a [[nice]], tight [[little]] [[story]], and it wasn't there. The pacing was [[practically]] [[backward]], plot [[points]] were [[buried]] under a [[sea]] of unneeded [[dialogue]], and there was [[absolutely]] no [[sense]] of dread, or [[tension]], or ANYTHING.

Is it the [[redneck]]? Is it the Wendigo? No, it's a [[cameraman]] on [[speed]]. That's not [[scary]]. It doesn't [[generate]] a [[single]] [[note]] of tension or atmosphere [[unless]] you're [[scared]] by MTV. Like those reviewers before me, I too noticed that by the end the [[movie]] invokes derisive [[laughter]] from the [[audience]].

[[Terrible]] [[film]]. I [[guess]] if you like [[infinite]] [[discussions]] that doesn't forward the [[narratives]] and flashy [[cameras]] [[effect]] like the scene transitions in the [[tvs]] show _Angel_, you'll enjoy the [[filmmaking]]. Me? [[Every]] I [[wanting]] was a [[delightful]], tight [[tiny]] [[saga]], and it wasn't there. The pacing was [[hardly]] [[lagging]], plot [[dot]] were [[burried]] under a [[hai]] of unneeded [[discussions]], and there was [[totally]] no [[feeling]] of dread, or [[tensions]], or ANYTHING.

Is it the [[hick]]? Is it the Wendigo? No, it's a [[videotaped]] on [[acceleration]]. That's not [[fearful]]. It doesn't [[generating]] a [[lonely]] [[notes]] of tension or atmosphere [[if]] you're [[frighten]] by MTV. Like those reviewers before me, I too noticed that by the end the [[filmmaking]] invokes derisive [[smiles]] from the [[viewers]].

[[Shocking]] [[cinematographic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Siskel & Ebert were [[terrific]] on this [[show]] whether you agreed with them or not because of the genuine conflict their separate professional opinions generated. Roeper took this show down a notch or two because he wasn't really a film critic and because he substituted snide for opinionated. [[Now]], when [[Ben]] [[Lyons]] comes on I feel like I'm [[watching]] "[[Teen]] News" -- you know, that kids' news [[show]], hosted by kids for [[kids]]? Manckiewitz is not much better. It's [[obvious]] they've encountered only a steady diet of mainstream films their entire lives. The idea that these two [[rank]] [[amateurs]] have [[anything]] of interest or [[consequence]] to [[say]] about motion pictures is ludicrous. If they are [[reviewing]] a non-formula [[film]], they are completely lost. Show them something [[original]] and intelligent -- they just find it "[[confusing]]". [[Wait]] -- I think I [[get]] it ... ABC is owned by Disney ... Disney makes [[movies]] for kids. While Siskel, Ebert, and Roper [[promoted]] [[independent]] films and were only hit-or-miss with the [[big]] budget studio productions -- what a surprise: these two guys LOVE the big studio schlock and only manage to tolerate a few indies. Plus everyone knows the age group TV advertisers are aiming for. The blatant [[nepotism]] is the [[icing]] on the cake. In what alternate universe do these guys qualify as film critics? Siskel & Ebert were [[resplendent]] on this [[spectacle]] whether you agreed with them or not because of the genuine conflict their separate professional opinions generated. Roeper took this show down a notch or two because he wasn't really a film critic and because he substituted snide for opinionated. [[Presently]], when [[Benn]] [[Lyon]] comes on I feel like I'm [[staring]] "[[Teenage]] News" -- you know, that kids' news [[shows]], hosted by kids for [[kid]]? Manckiewitz is not much better. It's [[perceptible]] they've encountered only a steady diet of mainstream films their entire lives. The idea that these two [[classifications]] [[buffs]] have [[somethings]] of interest or [[aftermath]] to [[told]] about motion pictures is ludicrous. If they are [[revisited]] a non-formula [[filmmaking]], they are completely lost. Show them something [[initial]] and intelligent -- they just find it "[[disorienting]]". [[Expectation]] -- I think I [[obtain]] it ... ABC is owned by Disney ... Disney makes [[cinema]] for kids. While Siskel, Ebert, and Roper [[encourages]] [[autonomous]] films and were only hit-or-miss with the [[hefty]] budget studio productions -- what a surprise: these two guys LOVE the big studio schlock and only manage to tolerate a few indies. Plus everyone knows the age group TV advertisers are aiming for. The blatant [[aegis]] is the [[frosting]] on the cake. In what alternate universe do these guys qualify as film critics? --------------------------------------------- Result 3012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an [[unremarkable]] [[film]] [[throughout]]. The [[film]] has [[gained]] some [[fans]] by [[way]] of the fact that Quentin Tarantino's [[name]] is attached to it, and the silly and out of place nod to the [[Rodriguez]]/Tarantino [[flick]] 'From [[Dusk]] till Dawn'. These [[things]] do not make a [[great]] [[movie]], however, and this is more than evident all the [[way]] through 'Curdled'. The [[film]] suffers from an all too [[obvious]] [[lack]] of [[ideas]], and it [[tries]] to [[mask]] this with [[murders]] that are meant to be [[stylish]] and [[events]] that are [[supposed]] to be disturbing. The Mexican [[music]] score that accompanies [[many]] of the sequences in the [[film]] is [[obviously]] meant to be cool, but it's becomes [[annoying]] very [[quickly]]; [[especially]] as aside from the fact that the lead [[character]] is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the [[movie]]. The film's plot is [[typically]] offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with [[grisly]] murders, takes a [[job]] with a firm that cleans up [[murder]] scenes. It sounds [[boring]] and it is.

William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the [[cast]] [[list]], and [[even]] he doesn't make an [[impression]]. He hasn't been [[given]] anything to do in the [[movie]] and aside from talking to his victims and [[standing]] around [[trying]] to look menacing, he's [[pretty]] much wasted. Angela Jones, or [[rather]]; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, [[takes]] the lead role as the [[murder]] obsessed [[young]] [[woman]], and it is [[always]] [[clear]] that it's her [[involvement]] with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting [[ability]]. She may have been [[good]] enough in her [[small]] role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a [[film]] by herself. She [[looks]] lost and out of place for the majority of the [[film]], and if it weren't for her Latino [[accent]]; she wouldn't [[convince]] the [[audience]] that she's a weirdo on any [[level]]. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof [[piece]] of forgettable trash. [[Films]] like this [[often]] [[win]] themselves [[praise]] for [[invention]] or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all [[levels]]. [[Whether]] you're a Tarantino [[fan]], William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie [[buff]]; this is one to [[miss]]. From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an [[ordinary]] [[filmmaking]] [[around]]. The [[filmmaking]] has [[gain]] some [[followers]] by [[ways]] of the fact that Quentin Tarantino's [[denomination]] is attached to it, and the silly and out of place nod to the [[Mendez]]/Tarantino [[gesture]] 'From [[Twilight]] till Dawn'. These [[aspects]] do not make a [[super]] [[film]], however, and this is more than evident all the [[manner]] through 'Curdled'. The [[films]] suffers from an all too [[noticeable]] [[lacked]] of [[reflections]], and it [[try]] to [[masks]] this with [[homicide]] that are meant to be [[sleek]] and [[event]] that are [[alleged]] to be disturbing. The Mexican [[musician]] score that accompanies [[various]] of the sequences in the [[filmmaking]] is [[apparently]] meant to be cool, but it's becomes [[galling]] very [[speedy]]; [[principally]] as aside from the fact that the lead [[trait]] is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the [[cinema]]. The film's plot is [[generally]] offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with [[horrendous]] murders, takes a [[workplace]] with a firm that cleans up [[kills]] scenes. It sounds [[monotonous]] and it is.

William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the [[casting]] [[listings]], and [[yet]] he doesn't make an [[printout]]. He hasn't been [[awarded]] anything to do in the [[filmmaking]] and aside from talking to his victims and [[stands]] around [[tempting]] to look menacing, he's [[quite]] much wasted. Angela Jones, or [[somewhat]]; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, [[pick]] the lead role as the [[homicide]] obsessed [[youth]] [[girl]], and it is [[consistently]] [[unmistakable]] that it's her [[turnout]] with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting [[dexterity]]. She may have been [[alright]] enough in her [[petite]] role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a [[filmmaking]] by herself. She [[seem]] lost and out of place for the majority of the [[filmmaking]], and if it weren't for her Latino [[emphasis]]; she wouldn't [[convincing]] the [[viewers]] that she's a weirdo on any [[levels]]. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof [[slice]] of forgettable trash. [[Movies]] like this [[traditionally]] [[wins]] themselves [[compliment]] for [[inventor]] or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all [[grades]]. [[Both]] you're a Tarantino [[ventilator]], William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie [[buffy]]; this is one to [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3013 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I just finished [[watching]] this [[movie]] and I [[must]] say that I was so [[impressed]].Everything about it was [[superb]]. The acting the characters, the story. A [[believable]] [[child]] who [[grew]] into [[brave]], [[always]] willing to help others. His mum must be proud. I could not take my eyes off this film for [[fear]] of [[missing]] something. It is the [[prefect]] [[fable]]/tale with [[morals]], [[cute]] and scary sprites and 'monsters' but [[nevertheless]] heartwarming folk. A child poked and bullied at school who becomes a [[hero]]. Picked to be a [[rider]] at the local village [[festival]] and a [[journey]] to the [[Goblin]] Mountain where he [[discovers]] the Yokai, who are amazing [[creations]] that Brian Froud [[would]] be proud of. And the [[evil]] Kato and his off sider who [[definitely]] needed a hug. These [[evil]] people [[capture]] the Yokai and [[throw]] them into a red pit along with unwanted objects, like motorbikes and other mechanical [[things]] and these meld into one horribly violent robotic monsters whose only job is to [[kill]]. Takashi a young [[boy]] is the one to become their [[saviour]], alongside a red [[man]]/dragon a turtle man and a River Princess as well as a [[cute]] [[little]] creature that, if it had been [[America]] they could have turned it into a cuddly toy and sold it at all [[good]] toy [[stores]]. The lines are good [[especially]] the Don't [[try]] this at [[home]] [[kids]] and other [[gems]] that bring a [[smile]] to your [[lips]]. [[Suspend]] belief and watch this with a child or on your own and enjoy! [[Though]] I [[must]] admit that the [[end]] was a wee [[bit]] [[sad]]. And not necessarily so. [[Cheers]] Furdion I just finished [[staring]] this [[kino]] and I [[should]] say that I was so [[surprising]].Everything about it was [[awesome]]. The acting the characters, the story. A [[reliable]] [[kid]] who [[hiked]] into [[adventurous]], [[incessantly]] willing to help others. His mum must be proud. I could not take my eyes off this film for [[scare]] of [[gone]] something. It is the [[reeve]] [[tale]]/tale with [[morality]], [[loveable]] and scary sprites and 'monsters' but [[however]] heartwarming folk. A child poked and bullied at school who becomes a [[heroin]]. Picked to be a [[mustang]] at the local village [[fest]] and a [[trip]] to the [[Leprechaun]] Mountain where he [[discovered]] the Yokai, who are amazing [[establishment]] that Brian Froud [[could]] be proud of. And the [[wicked]] Kato and his off sider who [[obviously]] needed a hug. These [[baleful]] people [[capturing]] the Yokai and [[toss]] them into a red pit along with unwanted objects, like motorbikes and other mechanical [[aspects]] and these meld into one horribly violent robotic monsters whose only job is to [[murdering]]. Takashi a young [[guy]] is the one to become their [[savior]], alongside a red [[men]]/dragon a turtle man and a River Princess as well as a [[loveable]] [[tiny]] creature that, if it had been [[Americans]] they could have turned it into a cuddly toy and sold it at all [[alright]] toy [[storage]]. The lines are good [[concretely]] the Don't [[endeavour]] this at [[housing]] [[children]] and other [[jewelry]] that bring a [[mouse]] to your [[mouths]]. [[Suspended]] belief and watch this with a child or on your own and enjoy! [[Nonetheless]] I [[gotta]] admit that the [[terminates]] was a wee [[bite]] [[unlucky]]. And not necessarily so. [[Clink]] Furdion --------------------------------------------- Result 3014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This is a [[review]] of The Wizard, not to be [[confused]] with The Wiz, or [[Mr]]. Wizard. The [[Wizard]] is a late-eighties [[film]] about a seriously silent boy's ability to play video games and walk during the entire opening credits. The Wiz is an unnecessary [[update]] of The Wizard of Oz, and Mr. Wizard is that guy that attached 100 straws together and had some kid drink [[tang]] out of it.

Now that we've gotten all that out of the way, let me say this: there's really no [[reason]] to see this movie. It's [[simply]] a 100 minute Nintendo commercial designed to capitalize on the Powerglove, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers 3. I use the word "[[designed]]" in the loosest sense possible, because it seems like this movie was written over a weekend by a crack team of people who had never played Nintendo, and directed by a man with less sense of style than my grandmother. Maybe if the writer and director sat down and actually played some games together, they'd realize that they were about to film total rubbish and instead go to vocational school to learn how to install car stereos.

I hope that this has been an enlightening experience for you. It sure hasn't been for me. In fact, I think I might have lost a few braincells in the act of watching this movie and writing about it. Next time you're at the video store and you see the The Wiz, The Wizard and The Wizard of Oz all sitting there on the shelf in a pretty little row, give them all a miss and play Duck Hunt instead. This is a [[examine]] of The Wizard, not to be [[muddled]] with The Wiz, or [[Bernd]]. Wizard. The [[Conjurer]] is a late-eighties [[filmmaking]] about a seriously silent boy's ability to play video games and walk during the entire opening credits. The Wiz is an unnecessary [[modernize]] of The Wizard of Oz, and Mr. Wizard is that guy that attached 100 straws together and had some kid drink [[tong]] out of it.

Now that we've gotten all that out of the way, let me say this: there's really no [[cause]] to see this movie. It's [[merely]] a 100 minute Nintendo commercial designed to capitalize on the Powerglove, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers 3. I use the word "[[intentioned]]" in the loosest sense possible, because it seems like this movie was written over a weekend by a crack team of people who had never played Nintendo, and directed by a man with less sense of style than my grandmother. Maybe if the writer and director sat down and actually played some games together, they'd realize that they were about to film total rubbish and instead go to vocational school to learn how to install car stereos.

I hope that this has been an enlightening experience for you. It sure hasn't been for me. In fact, I think I might have lost a few braincells in the act of watching this movie and writing about it. Next time you're at the video store and you see the The Wiz, The Wizard and The Wizard of Oz all sitting there on the shelf in a pretty little row, give them all a miss and play Duck Hunt instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Invisible man is a show everybody s gotta love! It reminds me of the old school 80's series(a-team,airwolf,knightrider) The special effects are small but very effective!! but what is most important is the fun they had shooting this series. It really shows! the entire cast fit perfect in there roles and it looks like they can do whatever they want!! especially Paul Ben Victor and Vincent Ventresca. Ventresca really shines in this one! for me its unbelievable that an actor with so much sarcasm is his acting style Doesn't get a shot in a big movie (mr Tarantino this was the show you should have directed! instead of that major boring grave danger(c.s.i)) Get this show if you can. well worth it!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3016 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was sadly disappointed by this film due to the fact that it felt false and the characters were not strong enough to carry the films pretty weak attempt at horror. The basic idea for the film was interesting but unfortunately it wasn't able to excite, really scare or shock me - there was one part in the entire film that I thought was gruesome but even that didn't redeem it. I did get to like the character of Kate by the end of the film as she seemed to soften and become a little more realistic by the end, the character played by Jeremy Sheffield was not actually needed for this film and I think the director/writer got carried away with the myriad of characters used for no purpose, if he had left it at the basic characters making it more of a solo effort on Kate's part, it may have worked - Jeremy's acting was wooden to say the least and I felt uncomfortable watching the bad on screen chemistry - or lack of it. Such a shame. Disappointing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3017 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Robert Wuhl is teaching a class of film students at New York University in Manhattan, New York.

He covers fallacies of history and truths that are no longer generally known. I would like to see much more of this show. It is very entertaining. Mr. Wuhl uses examples and "show and tell" to get his points across. He explained that the person who actually rode the Midnight Ride of Paul Revere was not Paul Revere! Henry Wadsworth Longfellow used Revere's name because it sounded better.

I've watched Robert Wuhl for many years, from the time he was doing stand-up comedy and all the way through "Arli$$" on HBO. He's a good actor and a good stand-up comedian, but he's an excellent teacher! I highly recommend that you watch an episode of this show. It is well worth your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] The arrival of White [[Men]] in Arctic Canada [[challenges]] the [[freedom]] of a [[fearless]] [[ESKIMO]] hunter.

W. S. Van Dyke, MGM's peripatetic [[director]], was [[responsible]] for this [[fascinating]] [[look]] at [[life]] in the Arctic among the Inuit. His production was on [[location]] filming from April 1932 until November 1933 ([[although]] some annoying rear projection effects show that some of the shooting took place back at the Studio). [[While]] considered a documentary at the time, we would likely term it a 'docudrama' as it is scripted with an intriguing plot & storyline.

The film shows the daily life of the [[Eskimo]], both Winter & Summer, and in fact starts in the warmer time of the year without any snow or ice in sight. The constant [[striving]] for food is depicted, and the viewer gets to watch the exciting hunts for [[walrus]], polar bear, whale & caribou. The native language is used throughout, with the use of title cards; the only English is spoken by the fishermen & [[Mounties]] encountered by the [[Eskimo]]. In fact, it is the arrival of White Men, both good & bad, and the change they make on [[Eskimo]] society, which is a major element in the narrative.

This Pre-Code film [[deals]] in a [[refreshingly]] [[frank]] manner with the [[Eskimo]] moral code, particularly with their practice of wife-sharing, which was an important and completely innocent [[part]] of their [[culture]]. [[In]] fact, the entire film can be [[appreciated]] as a valuable look at a way of [[life]] which was rapidly disappearing even in the early 1930's.

None of the cast receives screen credit, which is a shame as there are some notable performances. Foremost among them is that of Ray Wise, playing the leading role of Mala the Eskimo. Wise (1906-1952) was an Alaskan Native of Inuit ancestry and is absolutely splendid and [[perfectly]] believable in what was a very demanding part. As handsome as any Hollywood star, he would continue acting, using the name of Ray Mala, in a sporadic film career, often in tiny unbilled roles.

Lovely Japanese-Hawaiian actress Lotus Long plays Mala's loyal second wife; the names of the fine actresses playing his other two wives are now obscure. Director Woody Van Dyke steps in front of the cameras as a strict North West Mounted Police inspector. The two decent-hearted Mounties who must deliver Mala to Canadian justice are played by Joe Sawyer & Edgar Dearing, both longtime movie character actors. Danish author Peter Freuchen, upon whose books the film was based, has a short vivid role of an evil wooden-legged sea captain who unwisely rouses Mala's icy wrath. The arrival of White [[Male]] in Arctic Canada [[defies]] the [[liberty]] of a [[bold]] [[HUSKY]] hunter.

W. S. Van Dyke, MGM's peripatetic [[superintendent]], was [[liable]] for this [[exciting]] [[gaze]] at [[iife]] in the Arctic among the Inuit. His production was on [[locations]] filming from April 1932 until November 1933 ([[while]] some annoying rear projection effects show that some of the shooting took place back at the Studio). [[Despite]] considered a documentary at the time, we would likely term it a 'docudrama' as it is scripted with an intriguing plot & storyline.

The film shows the daily life of the [[Eskimos]], both Winter & Summer, and in fact starts in the warmer time of the year without any snow or ice in sight. The constant [[seeks]] for food is depicted, and the viewer gets to watch the exciting hunts for [[morse]], polar bear, whale & caribou. The native language is used throughout, with the use of title cards; the only English is spoken by the fishermen & [[Constable]] encountered by the [[Spumoni]]. In fact, it is the arrival of White Men, both good & bad, and the change they make on [[Husky]] society, which is a major element in the narrative.

This Pre-Code film [[addresses]] in a [[cheerfully]] [[franck]] manner with the [[Husky]] moral code, particularly with their practice of wife-sharing, which was an important and completely innocent [[parties]] of their [[civilisations]]. [[During]] fact, the entire film can be [[complimented]] as a valuable look at a way of [[living]] which was rapidly disappearing even in the early 1930's.

None of the cast receives screen credit, which is a shame as there are some notable performances. Foremost among them is that of Ray Wise, playing the leading role of Mala the Eskimo. Wise (1906-1952) was an Alaskan Native of Inuit ancestry and is absolutely splendid and [[fully]] believable in what was a very demanding part. As handsome as any Hollywood star, he would continue acting, using the name of Ray Mala, in a sporadic film career, often in tiny unbilled roles.

Lovely Japanese-Hawaiian actress Lotus Long plays Mala's loyal second wife; the names of the fine actresses playing his other two wives are now obscure. Director Woody Van Dyke steps in front of the cameras as a strict North West Mounted Police inspector. The two decent-hearted Mounties who must deliver Mala to Canadian justice are played by Joe Sawyer & Edgar Dearing, both longtime movie character actors. Danish author Peter Freuchen, upon whose books the film was based, has a short vivid role of an evil wooden-legged sea captain who unwisely rouses Mala's icy wrath. --------------------------------------------- Result 3019 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] When I saw that this [[film]] was only 80 minutes long, I thought we were in trouble. Condensing the [[gigantic]] W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half [[seemed]] like a disaster [[waiting]] to happen. But you know, the movie's not half [[bad]], and it even [[manages]] to [[retain]] much of what makes the book [[resonate]] so much with its readers.

I've [[heard]] [[many]] film buffs complain that [[Leslie]] Howard was a wet noodle of an [[actor]], and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to [[play]] the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.

Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of [[Mildred]] was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most [[fascinating]] character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out "Stella!!" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is [[intense]] to the point of scary. She makes no [[effort]] to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.

Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.

Grade: B+ When I saw that this [[kino]] was only 80 minutes long, I thought we were in trouble. Condensing the [[gargantuan]] W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half [[sounded]] like a disaster [[hoping]] to happen. But you know, the movie's not half [[horrid]], and it even [[administers]] to [[preserve]] much of what makes the book [[resound]] so much with its readers.

I've [[hear]] [[myriad]] film buffs complain that [[Lesley]] Howard was a wet noodle of an [[actress]], and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to [[gaming]] the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.

Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of [[Gladys]] was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most [[riveting]] character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out "Stella!!" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is [[vehement]] to the point of scary. She makes no [[endeavor]] to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.

Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.

Grade: B+ --------------------------------------------- Result 3020 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Is this film a joke? Is it a [[comedy]]? Surely it isn't a serious thriller? There is no suggestion that there is any intended humor, but on quite a few occasions the [[poor]] acting, poor directing, and [[appalling]] script had the audience laughing out loud in the cinema. The plot is acceptable - a promising young artist just [[reaching]] his peak shot dead by an assassin he walks in on by mistake. The killer sees the [[young]] [[artists]] work portfolio he is carrying and decides to [[attend]] an [[exhibition]] of his work. [[At]] the [[exhibition]] the assassin meets the dead [[artists]] [[sister]] and they [[end]] up [[falling]] in [[love]]. It is all very predictable stuff and the end will not have anyone [[guessing]] as it is so poorly scripted. The film takes place mainly in and [[around]] [[Vienna]], [[Austria]], and shows what a [[beautiful]] [[city]] it is. Do not waste your [[time]] on this [[film]] though, [[unless]] you are [[studying]] how [[NOT]] to act, direct or [[script]] a [[film]]! Is this film a joke? Is it a [[farce]]? Surely it isn't a serious thriller? There is no suggestion that there is any intended humor, but on quite a few occasions the [[poorest]] acting, poor directing, and [[outrageous]] script had the audience laughing out loud in the cinema. The plot is acceptable - a promising young artist just [[realizing]] his peak shot dead by an assassin he walks in on by mistake. The killer sees the [[youthful]] [[painters]] work portfolio he is carrying and decides to [[attending]] an [[shows]] of his work. [[During]] the [[exhibit]] the assassin meets the dead [[artistes]] [[sisters]] and they [[terminate]] up [[dropping]] in [[amore]]. It is all very predictable stuff and the end will not have anyone [[charades]] as it is so poorly scripted. The film takes place mainly in and [[throughout]] [[Viennese]], [[Austrian]], and shows what a [[sumptuous]] [[ville]] it is. Do not waste your [[period]] on this [[filmmaking]] though, [[if]] you are [[exploring]] how [[NOPE]] to act, direct or [[hyphen]] a [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3021 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Based]] on Ray Russell's [[dark]] bestseller, this John (WATCHER [[IN]] THE WOODS) Hough-directed bust has [[little]] going for it.

[[Though]] it does not [[lack]] gory violence, it [[lack]] [[narrative]] sensibility and "[[characters]]".

The "Incubus" of the title is a demon endowed with a [[mammoth]] penis that shoots [[red]] [[sperm]] into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more precise, rape.

John Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing career, is [[convincing]] as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre attacks on young women.

Horrific [[possibilities]] of the [[victims]] spawning demonic offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving [[garbage]].

The script's [[reluctance]] to [[explore]] the [[dramatic]] repercussions of a fertile [[premise]] [[exemplifies]] the [[major]] [[problems]] with this [[vapid]] Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose [[exercise]]. [[Predicated]] on Ray Russell's [[somber]] bestseller, this John (WATCHER [[AT]] THE WOODS) Hough-directed bust has [[petite]] going for it.

[[While]] it does not [[deficits]] gory violence, it [[imperfection]] [[descriptive]] sensibility and "[[personage]]".

The "Incubus" of the title is a demon endowed with a [[colossal]] penis that shoots [[rouge]] [[semen]] into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more precise, rape.

John Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing career, is [[compelling]] as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre attacks on young women.

Horrific [[possibility]] of the [[fatalities]] spawning demonic offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving [[litter]].

The script's [[hesitation]] to [[explores]] the [[tremendous]] repercussions of a fertile [[supposition]] [[depicts]] the [[sizable]] [[difficulty]] with this [[tasteless]] Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose [[practise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3022 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I first saw this movie when I was about 10 years old. Unfortunately I could not watch it to the end because it was [[aired]] late at night. Now I bought it on DVD because I can [[remember]] that I [[liked]] it.

This is really not an [[ordinary]] [[horror]] [[movie]]. It has some [[horror]] [[elements]] but I rather [[categorize]] it as [[fantasy]]. I [[liked]] it but I hoped for a bit more [[horror]] and scary scenes. [[Especially]] the scene when Anna's [[dad]] [[comes]] into the paperhouse trying to [[kill]] her is a bit short.

[[Now]] to the plot. This [[movie]] is about a [[young]] [[girl]] named Anna who [[gets]] [[ill]]. [[While]] she is ill and has to lie in her [[bed]] because of her high [[fewer]] she turns on to [[finishing]] her drawing about a [[house]] - the paperhouse. When she fells a [[sleep]], which [[often]] [[strangely]] [[happens]] just [[immediately]], she [[finds]] herself [[near]] the [[house]] on a [[big]] green [[field]]. She [[realizes]] that the [[house]] is [[exactly]] like the one she has [[drawn]] and that [[every]] new [[detail]] [[also]] [[appears]] in her dreams. One day she [[draws]] a [[boy]] into the [[house]] to have somebody to [[talk]] to. As she [[forgets]] to [[draw]] his legs (because he is [[sitting]] behind a [[window]]) the [[boy]] cannot [[walk]]. [[Later]] she is being [[told]] by the [[doctor]], that a [[boy]] [[also]] has this [[strange]] [[disease]] and she [[realizes]] that with the [[boy]] she has [[drawn]], she [[also]] [[got]] that [[boy]] into her disturbing [[dreams]]. She [[also]] [[notices]] that it [[gets]] harder and harder for her to wake up from her [[dreams]]. As she [[misses]] her [[father]] who is ofter abroad she [[draws]] her [[father]] into the [[house]]. She makes a [[mistake]] and her [[father]] is looking very angry on the painting. She [[tries]] to rubber him out but [[realizes]] that she cannot [[change]] anything already [[drawn]]. And next [[time]] she [[falls]] asleep the horror [[begins]]. Her [[father]] is [[mad]] and blind (because she [[draw]] s*** on his head to [[mark]] him as 'invalid') and [[tries]] to get into the paperhouse and [[kill]] Anna and his [[friend]]. Her [[dreams]] became a horrendous nightmare. They [[manage]] to [[escape]] and to [[kill]] her [[father]] and Anna can finally wake up. Than Anna [[finds]] her self in the hospital where her [[parents]] are sitting beside her [[bed]]. The [[doctors]] [[thought]] that she [[fell]] into a coma or so. They [[tell]] Anna that the other boy died and that they [[want]] to travel to the [[ocean]] to [[get]] over those tragical happenings. Anna [[draws]] a watchtower and [[notices]] that the same watchtower can be found near the hotel they traveled to. She runs to the watchtower and meets the boy (I am just not mentioning his [[name]] because I cannot remember it and do not want to go back to the previous html page) and can say good bye to him and [[forget]] those terrible dreams forever.

There were a few thing I did not understand in the movie. First of all it was the ending which I absolutely dislike. I think it is too long while the main part of the movie becomes a bit too short. How does the boy fly a helicopter and speak to Anna as he is supposed to be dead? Why did you have to put such a stupid radio on the wall? I hated that scene it was so dumb to me. It almost ruined the main horror scene.

Things I liked were the scene with the photograph of Anna's dad which was the first real scary and horror scene. I liked the boy. The actor was awesome. He was even better than Anna. I also liked how Anna tries to get her father out of the painting while she is asleep and how she is looking for it in the garbage.

Overall a good movie. I give it a 8 out of 10. I first saw this movie when I was about 10 years old. Unfortunately I could not watch it to the end because it was [[distributed]] late at night. Now I bought it on DVD because I can [[recalling]] that I [[enjoyed]] it.

This is really not an [[unremarkable]] [[terror]] [[flick]]. It has some [[monstrosity]] [[ingredients]] but I rather [[ranked]] it as [[chimera]]. I [[enjoyed]] it but I hoped for a bit more [[abomination]] and scary scenes. [[Principally]] the scene when Anna's [[pope]] [[arises]] into the paperhouse trying to [[slain]] her is a bit short.

[[Currently]] to the plot. This [[cinematography]] is about a [[youths]] [[woman]] named Anna who [[got]] [[sick]]. [[Though]] she is ill and has to lie in her [[bedside]] because of her high [[smaller]] she turns on to [[finish]] her drawing about a [[home]] - the paperhouse. When she fells a [[slept]], which [[normally]] [[suspiciously]] [[occurs]] just [[directly]], she [[found]] herself [[nearer]] the [[home]] on a [[considerable]] green [[campo]]. She [[realises]] that the [[dwelling]] is [[precisely]] like the one she has [[lured]] and that [[any]] new [[details]] [[similarly]] [[appearing]] in her dreams. One day she [[drawn]] a [[guy]] into the [[household]] to have somebody to [[speaking]] to. As she [[neglects]] to [[attracts]] his legs (because he is [[seated]] behind a [[wicket]]) the [[guy]] cannot [[stroll]]. [[Subsequently]] she is being [[said]] by the [[physician]], that a [[boys]] [[similarly]] has this [[bizarre]] [[sickness]] and she [[understands]] that with the [[guy]] she has [[lured]], she [[moreover]] [[get]] that [[guy]] into her disturbing [[dream]]. She [[similarly]] [[notification]] that it [[got]] harder and harder for her to wake up from her [[dreaming]]. As she [[lack]] her [[fathers]] who is ofter abroad she [[attracts]] her [[fathers]] into the [[household]]. She makes a [[error]] and her [[fathers]] is looking very angry on the painting. She [[seeks]] to rubber him out but [[realises]] that she cannot [[amendment]] anything already [[lured]]. And next [[moment]] she [[waterfalls]] asleep the horror [[launching]]. Her [[pere]] is [[madman]] and blind (because she [[attracting]] s*** on his head to [[marks]] him as 'invalid') and [[attempts]] to get into the paperhouse and [[murdering]] Anna and his [[boyfriend]]. Her [[dreaming]] became a horrendous nightmare. They [[administering]] to [[flee]] and to [[slays]] her [[fathers]] and Anna can finally wake up. Than Anna [[found]] her self in the hospital where her [[parenting]] are sitting beside her [[bedside]]. The [[physicians]] [[thinking]] that she [[dipped]] into a coma or so. They [[told]] Anna that the other boy died and that they [[wish]] to travel to the [[marine]] to [[got]] over those tragical happenings. Anna [[attracts]] a watchtower and [[notification]] that the same watchtower can be found near the hotel they traveled to. She runs to the watchtower and meets the boy (I am just not mentioning his [[behalf]] because I cannot remember it and do not want to go back to the previous html page) and can say good bye to him and [[forgot]] those terrible dreams forever.

There were a few thing I did not understand in the movie. First of all it was the ending which I absolutely dislike. I think it is too long while the main part of the movie becomes a bit too short. How does the boy fly a helicopter and speak to Anna as he is supposed to be dead? Why did you have to put such a stupid radio on the wall? I hated that scene it was so dumb to me. It almost ruined the main horror scene.

Things I liked were the scene with the photograph of Anna's dad which was the first real scary and horror scene. I liked the boy. The actor was awesome. He was even better than Anna. I also liked how Anna tries to get her father out of the painting while she is asleep and how she is looking for it in the garbage.

Overall a good movie. I give it a 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3023 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I [[saw]] an interview with Rob Schneider (who plays the lead [[character]], Marvin Mange, in this [[film]].) He [[said]] in it that he [[wanted]] to [[emphasize]] physical [[comedy]] here so much that even if you had the [[volume]] [[turned]] off you'd be [[laughing]] at this [[movie]]. [[Obviously]] that must be the secret. I had the volume turned up. I was actually [[listening]] to this [[thing]] and [[thought]] it was a [[disaster]], and [[completely]] unfunny - a [[major]] [[disappointment]] after Schneider's hilarious performance in "[[Deuce]] Bigalow, [[Male]] Gigolo."

The [[story]] is [[stupid]]: Mange is a [[major]] loser who dreams of being a [[cop]] who [[gets]] [[filled]] with a bunch of [[animal]] [[transplants]] after a [[car]] [[accident]] by a [[mad]] [[scientist]] [[type]] [[appropriately]] named Dr. Wilder ([[Michael]] Caton), and as a result [[starts]] to lose [[control]] of his "animal instincts." This makes him a "supercop." He can [[sniff]] out [[drugs]] [[hidden]] in body cavities and outrun horses. Of course, he [[also]] has a [[nasty]] habit of [[eating]] people's cows and [[trying]] to [[seduce]] their [[goats]], but [[surely]] that's a small [[price]] to [[pay]]? It just didn't do [[anything]] for me.

The [[cast]] left much to be [[desired]]. Is there a more irritating actor in all of Hollywood than [[John]] McGinley? Here, he plays [[Sgt]]. Sisk, Mange's [[commander]] on the [[police]] force, as a repugnantly cartoonish [[character]] ([[much]] the same as his doctor [[character]] in the inexplicably [[popular]] TV series "[[Scrubs]].") I was [[anxious]] to get a [[look]] at Colleen Haskell's first "serious" acting [[job]] (can [[anything]] in this [[movie]] be [[called]] "[[serious]]?") She, of course, [[gained]] her [[fame]] as a contestant on the first "Survivor" and she [[proves]] here what we knew from that: she's cute as a button. What she doesn't [[prove]] here is that she has any [[discernible]] [[talent]] as an [[actress]]. And what's with Ed Asner as [[Police]] Chief Wilson. I mean, how old is this [[guy]] now? He's the [[size]] of some of the cows Mange tried to [[eat]], and he [[seemed]] out of [[breath]] the [[whole]] [[way]] through. I'm surprised he [[made]] it through the filming. There's a brief cameo at the end by [[Adam]] Sandler (who also [[served]] as Executive Producer of this.)

Anyway, I chuckled twice: Mange playing with his squeaky toys in the police car, and the scene Schneider has with Haskell and the orangutan - the orangutan has more acting talent! So, for two chuckles - 2/10. I [[observed]] an interview with Rob Schneider (who plays the lead [[trait]], Marvin Mange, in this [[filmmaking]].) He [[says]] in it that he [[want]] to [[stress]] physical [[parody]] here so much that even if you had the [[volumes]] [[transformed]] off you'd be [[chuckles]] at this [[movies]]. [[Notoriously]] that must be the secret. I had the volume turned up. I was actually [[listen]] to this [[stuff]] and [[brainchild]] it was a [[disasters]], and [[totally]] unfunny - a [[momentous]] [[displeasure]] after Schneider's hilarious performance in "[[Carburettor]] Bigalow, [[Virile]] Gigolo."

The [[storytelling]] is [[twit]]: Mange is a [[big]] loser who dreams of being a [[police]] who [[get]] [[fill]] with a bunch of [[zoo]] [[grafts]] after a [[cars]] [[accidents]] by a [[insane]] [[investigator]] [[genre]] [[correctly]] named Dr. Wilder ([[Michele]] Caton), and as a result [[started]] to lose [[supervision]] of his "animal instincts." This makes him a "supercop." He can [[snort]] out [[pharmaceuticals]] [[masked]] in body cavities and outrun horses. Of course, he [[apart]] has a [[repugnant]] habit of [[catering]] people's cows and [[try]] to [[seduction]] their [[goat]], but [[obviously]] that's a small [[costing]] to [[salary]]? It just didn't do [[something]] for me.

The [[casting]] left much to be [[wished]]. Is there a more irritating actor in all of Hollywood than [[Jon]] McGinley? Here, he plays [[Sergeant]]. Sisk, Mange's [[commanders]] on the [[cops]] force, as a repugnantly cartoonish [[nature]] ([[very]] the same as his doctor [[characteristics]] in the inexplicably [[fashionable]] TV series "[[Gowns]].") I was [[apprehensive]] to get a [[peek]] at Colleen Haskell's first "serious" acting [[workplace]] (can [[something]] in this [[filmmaking]] be [[drew]] "[[severe]]?") She, of course, [[acquired]] her [[reputation]] as a contestant on the first "Survivor" and she [[illustrates]] here what we knew from that: she's cute as a button. What she doesn't [[demonstrating]] here is that she has any [[palpable]] [[talents]] as an [[actor]]. And what's with Ed Asner as [[Cops]] Chief Wilson. I mean, how old is this [[guys]] now? He's the [[sizes]] of some of the cows Mange tried to [[coma]], and he [[appeared]] out of [[breathe]] the [[overall]] [[ways]] through. I'm surprised he [[effected]] it through the filming. There's a brief cameo at the end by [[Adama]] Sandler (who also [[played]] as Executive Producer of this.)

Anyway, I chuckled twice: Mange playing with his squeaky toys in the police car, and the scene Schneider has with Haskell and the orangutan - the orangutan has more acting talent! So, for two chuckles - 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[think]] that the shots and lighting were very [[poor]]. When I watched it for the [[first]] [[time]] I thought it was the [[old]] version(1956). When I really [[found]] out the true year of the film I was shocked. I didn't know that there [[could]] be such a [[bad]] [[film]] [[made]] so recently. Thats [[really]] all I [[wanted]] to [[say]]. This film had a good plot [[though]], nothing you couldn't miss out on if you would simply read the novel that George Orwelll wrote. All I really want to say has already been said except for this: I can't believe that this film could have possibly received so many awards and nominations.I gave this film a One (awful), because I felt that it was very [[badly]] made. Well that is all. So long I [[thinking]] that the shots and lighting were very [[poorest]]. When I watched it for the [[outset]] [[moment]] I thought it was the [[archaic]] version(1956). When I really [[discoveries]] out the true year of the film I was shocked. I didn't know that there [[would]] be such a [[negative]] [[filmmaking]] [[brought]] so recently. Thats [[truly]] all I [[wanna]] to [[told]]. This film had a good plot [[while]], nothing you couldn't miss out on if you would simply read the novel that George Orwelll wrote. All I really want to say has already been said except for this: I can't believe that this film could have possibly received so many awards and nominations.I gave this film a One (awful), because I felt that it was very [[sorely]] made. Well that is all. So long --------------------------------------------- Result 3025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] God Bless 80's slasher films. This is a fun, fun movie. This is what slasher films are all about. Now I'm not saying horror movies, just slasher films. It goes like this: A high school nerd is picked on by all these stupid jocks and cheerleaders, and then one of their pranks goes horribly wrong. Disfigured and back for revenge, sporting a Joker/Jester mask (pretty creepy looking, might i add), Marty begins to kill off those teens one by one many years later, after he manages to make them believe that their old abandoned high school is having a reunion. That is basically the plot? What's wrong with that? That's the beauty of 80's slasher films, most of them i would say. A lot of things could be so ridiculous, but they keep drawing you more in an' in as they go by. Especially this film.

It features some outrageous killings, and some are quite creative as well. (poisoning of a beer can, acid bath, i can't remember a javelin ever being used before in any other slasher film either)It really is a fun, fun movie. That's all it is. Nevermind the fact that the characters are complete idiots, never mind their stupidity, and never mind the outrageous, random things that occur in this film. Such as lights being able to be controlled by the killer (when he's not even switching any buttons, you'll see) and toilets being able to cough up blood, baths being able to have acid come out of them, just use that as part of your entertainment! Because thats what really makes it entertaining.

Movies like this represent 80's slashers. Never again could movies like this get made, know why? It isn't the 80's anymore. That is why you should just cherish them for what they are, good fun! I highly recommend this film if you're a hardcore fan of Slahsers such as Friday the 13th.

One last note this movie also had a kick ass villain as well, Marty Rantzen. A disfigured, nerd, who kills all his old foes in a creepy Jester mask. A good villain makes a good slasher. Simon Scuddamore, who played Marty apparently committed suicide shortly after Slaughter High was released. That alone adds something creepy to the film, and sticks with it and it even makes you feel more sorry for the Marty character, i guess. All in all, great 80's slashers fun! It's a shame it will never be the same again... --------------------------------------------- Result 3026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unhinged follows the typical plot of the early 80's slasher trend. Pretty Young Girls In Peril. I have to give it up for the filmmaker who used a helicopter for some of the early road-trip shots, you actually think for a second there's going to be quality in the production. Watching "Unhinged" was like seeing an amateur acting class go through it's warm-up. Some of the most awkward, badly lit, overlong scenes are played out with the gusto of a Valium overdose. I wondered why they didn't just put the cue-cards on camera so the actresses wouldn't have to constantly shift their gaze. The two main girls were obviously chosen for their T&A factor rather than talent. Laurel Munson as the main chick Terry is as exciting as watching paint dry. Two nude scenes make for an adolescent thrill. Janet Penner and Virginia Settle as the crazy/creepy daughter and mother the chicks find themselves stranded with compete for Worst Acting Ever. Long pauses, weird expressions, emphasis on the wrong word, it's all there and is a delight for those of us out there who love bad films. The scenes shift suddenly with long black-outs you could drive a Mack truck through. Cartoon lightning crashes across shots without even bothering to show the sky. Eighties eyeshadow assaults the viewer. But ya know, it grew on me. I felt sorry for it. I wanted to hug it, kiss it's boo-boos and make it better. The ending doesn't make up for the damage it's caused but I grinned anyway. I have my own theories regarding the whole "banned" hype and hope that anyone who chooses to view this film does so with substantial substance abuse and a sense of humor. Otherwise pass. --------------------------------------------- Result 3027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The best Treasure Island ever made. They just don't make films

like this anymore, or ever. No one makes films like this. More

than a novelty, this film is funny, frank and fascinating, yet moody,

mysterious and morose. This is one of my favorite pictures. The

director must have had some idea what it is all about, but he

certainly leaves room for your own impressions and interpretations, while leaving little left to the imagination. Why he

has not made more films like this, I have no idea. While

reminding me of some of the best noir, it is one of a kind. But this

is not for the lazy or simple. --------------------------------------------- Result 3028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I am not so much like Love Sick as I image. [[Finally]] the [[film]] express sexual [[relationship]] of [[Alex]], kik, Sandu their triangle love were full of intenseness, frustration and jealous, at [[last]], Alex waked up and realized that they [[would]] not have result and [[future]].[[Ending]] up was [[sad]].

The [[director]] [[Tudor]] Giurgiu was in AMC [[theatre]] on Sunday 12:00PM on 08/10/06, with us watched the movie together. After the movie he told the [[audiences]] that the purposed to create this film which was to express the sexual relationships of Romanian were kind of complicate.

On my point of view sexual life is always complicated in everywhere, I don't feel any particular impression and effect from the movie. The love proceeding of Alex and Kiki, and Kiki and her brother Sandu were kind of next door neighborhood story.

The two main reasons I don't like this [[movie]] are, firstly, the film didn't told us how they started to fall in love? Sounds like after Alex moved into the building which Kiki was living, then two girls are fall in love. It doesn't make sense at all. How a girl would fall in love with another girl instead of a man. Too much fragments, you need to image and connect those stories by your mind. Secondly, The whole film didn't have a scene of Alex and Kik's sexual intercourse, that 's what I was waiting for……. However, it still had some parts were deserved to recommend. The "ear piercing " part was kind of interesting. Alex was willing to suffer the pain of ear piercing to appreciate kik's love. That was a touching scene which gave you a little idea of their love. Also, the scene of they were lying in the soccer field, the conversation express their loves were truthful and passionate. I am not so much like Love Sick as I image. [[Ultimately]] the [[filmmaking]] express sexual [[nexus]] of [[Allie]], kik, Sandu their triangle love were full of intenseness, frustration and jealous, at [[latter]], Alex waked up and realized that they [[could]] not have result and [[forthcoming]].[[Cessation]] up was [[unlucky]].

The [[superintendent]] [[Theodor]] Giurgiu was in AMC [[cinemas]] on Sunday 12:00PM on 08/10/06, with us watched the movie together. After the movie he told the [[audience]] that the purposed to create this film which was to express the sexual relationships of Romanian were kind of complicate.

On my point of view sexual life is always complicated in everywhere, I don't feel any particular impression and effect from the movie. The love proceeding of Alex and Kiki, and Kiki and her brother Sandu were kind of next door neighborhood story.

The two main reasons I don't like this [[filmmaking]] are, firstly, the film didn't told us how they started to fall in love? Sounds like after Alex moved into the building which Kiki was living, then two girls are fall in love. It doesn't make sense at all. How a girl would fall in love with another girl instead of a man. Too much fragments, you need to image and connect those stories by your mind. Secondly, The whole film didn't have a scene of Alex and Kik's sexual intercourse, that 's what I was waiting for……. However, it still had some parts were deserved to recommend. The "ear piercing " part was kind of interesting. Alex was willing to suffer the pain of ear piercing to appreciate kik's love. That was a touching scene which gave you a little idea of their love. Also, the scene of they were lying in the soccer field, the conversation express their loves were truthful and passionate. --------------------------------------------- Result 3029 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The film starts with a [[manager]] ([[Nicholas]] [[Bell]]) giving welcome [[investors]] ([[Robert]] Carradine) to [[Primal]] Park . A [[secret]] project mutating a [[primal]] animal [[using]] fossilized DNA, like ¨Jurassik [[Park]]¨, and some [[scientists]] [[resurrect]] one of nature's most fearsome [[predators]], the Sabretooth [[tiger]] or Smilodon . [[Scientific]] [[ambition]] turns deadly, [[however]], and when the [[high]] [[voltage]] [[fence]] is [[opened]] the [[creature]] escape and [[begins]] savagely stalking its prey - the human [[visitors]] , [[tourists]] and scientific.Meanwhile some youngsters [[enter]] in the [[restricted]] [[area]] of the [[security]] center and are [[attacked]] by a [[pack]] of [[large]] pre-historical [[animals]] which are deadlier and [[bigger]] . [[In]] [[addition]] , a [[security]] agent (Stacy Haiduk) and her [[mate]] (Brian Wimmer) [[fight]] [[hardly]] against the carnivorous Smilodons. The Sabretooths, themselves , of course, are the [[real]] [[star]] [[stars]] and they are astounding terrifyingly [[though]] not [[convincing]]. The giant [[animals]] savagely are stalking its prey and the [[group]] run afoul and fight against one nature's most fearsome [[predators]]. Furthermore a third Sabretooth more [[dangerous]] and [[slow]] stalks its [[victims]].

The movie delivers the goods with lots of blood and [[gore]] as beheading, hair-raising chills,full of scares when the Sabretooths [[appear]] with [[mediocre]] [[special]] [[effects]].The [[story]] provides exciting and stirring entertainment but it [[results]] to be [[quite]] boring .The giant animals are majority made by [[computer]] generator and seem [[totally]] [[lousy]] .Middling performances [[though]] the players reacting appropriately to becoming [[food]].Actors give vigorously physical performances dodging the beasts ,running,bound and leaps or dangling over walls . And it packs a [[ridiculous]] final deadly scene. No for small kids by realistic,gory and violent [[attack]] scenes . Other films about Sabretooths or Smilodon are the following : ¨Sabretooth(2002)¨by [[James]] R Hickox with Vanessa Angel, David Keith and [[John]] Rhys [[Davies]] and the much better ¨10.000 BC(2006)¨ by Roland Emmerich with with [[Steven]] Strait, [[Cliff]] Curtis and Camilla Belle. This motion picture filled with bloody moments is [[badly]] directed by [[George]] [[Miller]] and with no originality because takes too [[many]] [[elements]] from previous [[films]]. Miller is an Australian [[director]] usually working for [[television]] ([[Tidal]] wave, Journey to the [[center]] of the [[earth]], and [[many]] others) and occasionally for [[cinema]] ( The [[man]] from Snowy river, [[Zeus]] and Roxanne,Robinson Crusoe ). Rating : [[Below]] average, bottom of barrel. The film starts with a [[administrator]] ([[Nikola]] [[Campana]]) giving welcome [[capitalists]] ([[Roberto]] Carradine) to [[Primordial]] Park . A [[secretive]] project mutating a [[primitive]] animal [[utilizing]] fossilized DNA, like ¨Jurassik [[Playpen]]¨, and some [[scientist]] [[resuscitate]] one of nature's most fearsome [[predatory]], the Sabretooth [[tigre]] or Smilodon . [[Science]] [[aspiration]] turns deadly, [[still]], and when the [[supreme]] [[tensions]] [[fencing]] is [[started]] the [[creatures]] escape and [[launched]] savagely stalking its prey - the human [[travelers]] , [[traveller]] and scientific.Meanwhile some youngsters [[penetrate]] in the [[confined]] [[regions]] of the [[assurance]] center and are [[slammed]] by a [[packs]] of [[colossal]] pre-historical [[wildlife]] which are deadlier and [[greater]] . [[Among]] [[supplement]] , a [[insurance]] agent (Stacy Haiduk) and her [[comrade]] (Brian Wimmer) [[fighting]] [[almost]] against the carnivorous Smilodons. The Sabretooths, themselves , of course, are the [[authentic]] [[superstar]] [[celebrity]] and they are astounding terrifyingly [[despite]] not [[persuade]]. The giant [[animal]] savagely are stalking its prey and the [[grouping]] run afoul and fight against one nature's most fearsome [[predatory]]. Furthermore a third Sabretooth more [[risky]] and [[slower]] stalks its [[fatalities]].

The movie delivers the goods with lots of blood and [[gora]] as beheading, hair-raising chills,full of scares when the Sabretooths [[appearing]] with [[lackluster]] [[peculiar]] [[influence]].The [[tales]] provides exciting and stirring entertainment but it [[consequence]] to be [[rather]] boring .The giant animals are majority made by [[computers]] generator and seem [[fully]] [[wretched]] .Middling performances [[although]] the players reacting appropriately to becoming [[foods]].Actors give vigorously physical performances dodging the beasts ,running,bound and leaps or dangling over walls . And it packs a [[absurd]] final deadly scene. No for small kids by realistic,gory and violent [[onslaught]] scenes . Other films about Sabretooths or Smilodon are the following : ¨Sabretooth(2002)¨by [[Jacobo]] R Hickox with Vanessa Angel, David Keith and [[Jon]] Rhys [[Davis]] and the much better ¨10.000 BC(2006)¨ by Roland Emmerich with with [[Stephane]] Strait, [[Ravine]] Curtis and Camilla Belle. This motion picture filled with bloody moments is [[sorely]] directed by [[Georgi]] [[Meunier]] and with no originality because takes too [[countless]] [[facets]] from previous [[movie]]. Miller is an Australian [[headmaster]] usually working for [[tv]] ([[Tide]] wave, Journey to the [[centre]] of the [[tierra]], and [[various]] others) and occasionally for [[films]] ( The [[dude]] from Snowy river, [[Chihuahua]] and Roxanne,Robinson Crusoe ). Rating : [[Beneath]] average, bottom of barrel. --------------------------------------------- Result 3030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really wanted to like this movie because the critics have been unkind

to it (to say the least)... but it was terrible. Really terrible. Badly

acted, a witless script, cack handed direction... Watching this film was

like watching a car crash- you want to look away but you keep staring

because you want to see how messy it's going to get. Well, the car is

wrecked and there are no survivors. On the plus side, the cinematography

was nice, made me want to go on holiday, if only to cleanse myself from

this unholy --------------------------------------------- Result 3031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wanted to punch the TV. Watching it was torture. I hated it. Never watch this movie. The terrorists are annoying. Adam Sandler is annoying. I normally like him but not in this one. I wanted to break the DVD. This is the most irritating film in the world. The comedian he's jealous of is obnoxious. The only remotely funny part is the rocker with the black teeth getting all the girls. It was so irritating I wanted to punch the TV. DO NOT BUY THIS MOVIE UNLESS YOU WANT TO ANNOY SOMEONE. If you even like Adam Sandler a little bit, Don't buy it. It will just make you hate him. Do yourself a favor, if you see it in the store, hide it to put everyone out of danger of buying it. Its a waste of the $1.99 I paid for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you have seen Dogtown and Z-Boys or have any interest in seeing the real, non-caricature, "Real American" side of America then Riding Giants will hit deeper than anything you've seen before.

This film is "unreal", a facile term if ever there was one, but hugely appropriate if you can derive any form of literal meaning out of it - it is a 100% factual documentary, but with all the drama of an opera, and the completely apparent sense of love, expert and knowing instilled by Stacy Peralta's direction and narration, this film expertly leads you from swell to big wave while keeping you completely enthralled in everything you are being given the privilege of seeing.

This film is a symphony, crafted as well as Beethovens 9th, beginning beautifully with its prelude in Hawaii, tugging deeply on human emotion in Santa Cruz and finishing with uproar, triumph and crescendo in Laird Hamiltons feats, again in Hawaii.

Like classical music; like Beethoven's 9th, Ride of the Valkyries or Barbers Adagio for Strings, this may be the only piece you like, but it's worth it. Trust me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Words]] can't describe how [[bad]] this movie is. I can't explain it by [[writing]] only. You have too [[see]] it for yourself to get at grip of how horrible a movie [[really]] can be. Not that I [[recommend]] you to do that. There are so [[many]] clichés, [[mistakes]] (and all other negative things you can [[imagine]]) here that will just make you cry. To [[start]] with the technical first, there are a LOT of [[mistakes]] regarding the [[airplane]]. I won't [[list]] them here, but just mention the [[coloring]] of the plane. They didn't even manage to [[show]] an [[airliner]] in the colors of a [[fictional]] [[airline]], but [[instead]] [[used]] a 747 [[painted]] in the [[original]] Boeing [[livery]]. [[Very]] [[bad]]. The [[plot]] is [[stupid]] and has been [[done]] [[many]] [[times]] before, only [[much]], [[much]] better. There are so [[many]] [[ridiculous]] moments here that i lost [[count]] of it really early. [[Also]], I was on the [[bad]] guys' side all the time in the [[movie]], because the [[good]] [[guys]] were so stupid. "Executive [[Decision]]" should without a doubt be you're [[choice]] over this one, even the "[[Turbulence]]"-[[movies]] are better. [[In]] fact, every other movie in the [[world]] is [[better]] than this one. [[Phrases]] can't describe how [[unfavourable]] this movie is. I can't explain it by [[handwriting]] only. You have too [[behold]] it for yourself to get at grip of how horrible a movie [[genuinely]] can be. Not that I [[recommendations]] you to do that. There are so [[various]] clichés, [[wrongs]] (and all other negative things you can [[imagines]]) here that will just make you cry. To [[beginning]] with the technical first, there are a LOT of [[faults]] regarding the [[plane]]. I won't [[listed]] them here, but just mention the [[colors]] of the plane. They didn't even manage to [[spectacle]] an [[aeroplane]] in the colors of a [[imaginary]] [[plane]], but [[however]] [[utilizes]] a 747 [[brushed]] in the [[initial]] Boeing [[barn]]. [[Much]] [[negative]]. The [[intrigue]] is [[dumb]] and has been [[accomplished]] [[several]] [[moments]] before, only [[very]], [[very]] better. There are so [[innumerable]] [[silly]] moments here that i lost [[counting]] of it really early. [[Additionally]], I was on the [[naughty]] guys' side all the time in the [[filmmaking]], because the [[alright]] [[boy]] were so stupid. "Executive [[Rulings]]" should without a doubt be you're [[selects]] over this one, even the "[[Disorder]]"-[[filmmaking]] are better. [[Among]] fact, every other movie in the [[worldwide]] is [[optimum]] than this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3034 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Neil Simon's THE ODD COUPLE set up a model for many of his [[later]] plays. [[Felix]] Unger and Oscar Madison were the unsuitably paired roommates in the original, the former being [[picky]] and neat, the latter being slovenly and [[loose]]. Simon [[would]] rewrite (less successfully) the [[play]] in the 1990s as THE NEW ODD COUPLE, with female [[roommates]]. He [[made]] it a mixed couple (a [[woman]] with her daughter, and a [[man]]) in THE [[GOODBYE]] [[GIRLS]]. He [[also]] [[gave]] it an [[additional]] twist in 1973 with THE SUNSHINE [[BOYS]], a Broadway hit starring Jack Alberson and Sam Levine as Al [[Lewis]] and [[Willie]] Clark, the aged, semi-retired Vaudevillians. Here the "[[apartment]]" problem is [[reduced]] to a teaming of two men who can't stand each other. The 1976 film starred Walter Matthau as [[Willie]], and [[George]] [[Burns]] as Al.

In [[actuality]], Al probably does not [[think]] [[totally]] badly of [[Willie]] - [[Willie]] is pathological on the [[subject]] of Al. First Al had little [[habits]], such as accidentally spitting slightly when pronouncing words [[beginning]] with the letter "t", and slightly [[jabbing]] Willie with his index finger, on [[stage]]. Secondly, Al [[retired]] when his wife died. Willie was not ready to retire (and has been forcing his nephew and agent, Ben (Richard Benjamin) to [[try]] to get him jobs in [[commercials]]. But [[Willie]] can't remember lines unless they are funny, and keeps flubbing them. [[So]] he rarely is able to [[stay]] to the [[end]] of a [[rehearsal]] for a commercial.

[[Ben]] is [[asked]] to [[get]] the two back together for a [[live]] scene of their most [[famous]] [[sketch]] on a [[television]] [[show]] about American [[Comedy]]. He does [[bring]] Al to see Willie, and the sparks [[begin]] [[flying]], as [[neither]] can [[figure]] out what the other is doing (and this is just in [[rehearsal]]. On [[top]] of that, Willie is insisting on [[changes]] ([[minor]] ones, but they [[throw]] off Al) such as [[saying]] "[[ENTER]]!!!" when Al knocks on the [[door]]. The [[initial]] [[rehearsal]] is a failure, but [[Ben]] [[manages]] to get them to the [[taping]] of the [[show]]. The [[question]] is if they will [[complete]] the scene in the [[finished]] [[program]] or will Willie wring Al's [[neck]]?

The three [[leads]], Matthau, Burns, and Benjamin, do very well with the one-liners, frequently reminiscent of vaudeville patter ([[example]]: "Chest pains...I'm getting chest pains Uncle Willie. Every Thursday I come here and get chest pains!" "So, come on Fridays!"). Benjamin strives to prove his deep affection for his uncle, although Matthau's rough outer shell makes it difficult (he only smooths down when he discusses the glory days of vaudeville). Matthau has a little better grasp on reality (at first) than Burns, who seems senile by his repeating himself - but in actuality Matthau's sense of rejection by the world that once applauded him make him less willing to behave properly. Burns is not senile - he takes things slowly. But he seems far happier in accepting his retirement.

I call this a final "[[Voyage]] of Discovery" for our modern Lewis and Clark. Al and Willie transcend their old skits, as they gradually [[end]] up realizing that they have more in common in their old age than they thought. Even the irascible Willie admits that Al may be (to him) a pain in the ass, but he was a funny man.

Burns was not the original choice for the part of "Al Lewis" (supposedly Dale of the team Smith and Dale). Jack Benny was. Benny probably would have done a good job, but ill-health forced him out (he died in 1975). Burns (whose last involvement in any film was in THE SOLID GOLD CADILLAC in 1956 as the narrator) turned in such a fine performance that he got the "Oscar" for best supporting actor, and was to have a career in movies in the next decade in such films as OH GOD!; OH GOD, YOU DEVIL; and GOING IN STYLE. He died in 1996 age 100, having proved that he was more than just a brilliant straight man for his wife Gracie Allan. Neil Simon's THE ODD COUPLE set up a model for many of his [[trailing]] plays. [[Geraldine]] Unger and Oscar Madison were the unsuitably paired roommates in the original, the former being [[selective]] and neat, the latter being slovenly and [[slack]]. Simon [[ought]] rewrite (less successfully) the [[playing]] in the 1990s as THE NEW ODD COUPLE, with female [[roomies]]. He [[introduced]] it a mixed couple (a [[wife]] with her daughter, and a [[mec]]) in THE [[BYE]] [[FEMALE]]. He [[apart]] [[provided]] it an [[extras]] twist in 1973 with THE SUNSHINE [[GUYS]], a Broadway hit starring Jack Alberson and Sam Levine as Al [[Luiz]] and [[Willy]] Clark, the aged, semi-retired Vaudevillians. Here the "[[condo]]" problem is [[slashed]] to a teaming of two men who can't stand each other. The 1976 film starred Walter Matthau as [[Willy]], and [[Georges]] [[Combustion]] as Al.

In [[reality]], Al probably does not [[thought]] [[perfectly]] badly of [[Willy]] - [[Willy]] is pathological on the [[themes]] of Al. First Al had little [[patterns]], such as accidentally spitting slightly when pronouncing words [[launching]] with the letter "t", and slightly [[jabbed]] Willie with his index finger, on [[phase]]. Secondly, Al [[retiring]] when his wife died. Willie was not ready to retire (and has been forcing his nephew and agent, Ben (Richard Benjamin) to [[seeks]] to get him jobs in [[advertisements]]. But [[Willy]] can't remember lines unless they are funny, and keeps flubbing them. [[Therefore]] he rarely is able to [[staying]] to the [[terminates]] of a [[repeat]] for a commercial.

[[Bin]] is [[wondered]] to [[got]] the two back together for a [[vivo]] scene of their most [[illustrious]] [[biographical]] on a [[tv]] [[displayed]] about American [[Farce]]. He does [[bringing]] Al to see Willie, and the sparks [[embark]] [[hovering]], as [[nor]] can [[silhouette]] out what the other is doing (and this is just in [[repetition]]. On [[supreme]] of that, Willie is insisting on [[modification]] ([[minimal]] ones, but they [[toss]] off Al) such as [[telling]] "[[INTRO]]!!!" when Al knocks on the [[porte]]. The [[preliminary]] [[repeat]] is a failure, but [[Bin]] [[administering]] to get them to the [[recordings]] of the [[exhibit]]. The [[issue]] is if they will [[finished]] the scene in the [[finalized]] [[programmes]] or will Willie wring Al's [[collier]]?

The three [[leeds]], Matthau, Burns, and Benjamin, do very well with the one-liners, frequently reminiscent of vaudeville patter ([[case]]: "Chest pains...I'm getting chest pains Uncle Willie. Every Thursday I come here and get chest pains!" "So, come on Fridays!"). Benjamin strives to prove his deep affection for his uncle, although Matthau's rough outer shell makes it difficult (he only smooths down when he discusses the glory days of vaudeville). Matthau has a little better grasp on reality (at first) than Burns, who seems senile by his repeating himself - but in actuality Matthau's sense of rejection by the world that once applauded him make him less willing to behave properly. Burns is not senile - he takes things slowly. But he seems far happier in accepting his retirement.

I call this a final "[[Itinerary]] of Discovery" for our modern Lewis and Clark. Al and Willie transcend their old skits, as they gradually [[ceases]] up realizing that they have more in common in their old age than they thought. Even the irascible Willie admits that Al may be (to him) a pain in the ass, but he was a funny man.

Burns was not the original choice for the part of "Al Lewis" (supposedly Dale of the team Smith and Dale). Jack Benny was. Benny probably would have done a good job, but ill-health forced him out (he died in 1975). Burns (whose last involvement in any film was in THE SOLID GOLD CADILLAC in 1956 as the narrator) turned in such a fine performance that he got the "Oscar" for best supporting actor, and was to have a career in movies in the next decade in such films as OH GOD!; OH GOD, YOU DEVIL; and GOING IN STYLE. He died in 1996 age 100, having proved that he was more than just a brilliant straight man for his wife Gracie Allan. --------------------------------------------- Result 3035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As an [[aging]] rocker, this [[movie]] mentions Heep and Quo - my 2 [[favourite]] [[bands]] ever - but with the [[incredible]] cast ([[everyone]]) - and the [[fantastic]] storyline - I just [[love]] this piece of creative [[genius]]. I cannot [[recommend]] it more [[highly]] - and [[Mick]] Jones added so much ([[Foreigner]] lead and [[primary]] [[songwriter]] along with the [[greatest]] [[rock]] singer ever - [[Lou]] Gramm) - I have [[watched]] this [[great]] [[work]] more than 10 times- Bill Nighy - what a voice - and [[Jimmy]] Nail - [[talent]] oozes from [[every]] pore - then [[Astrid]].... and [[Karen]]..... what more [[could]] an [[aging]] rocker [[ask]] for!! 10/10 - [[bloody]] [[brilliant]].

[[Alastair]], Perth, [[Western]] Oz, Originally from Windsor, [[England]]. As an [[ageing]] rocker, this [[cinematography]] mentions Heep and Quo - my 2 [[favorite]] [[band]] ever - but with the [[awesome]] cast ([[anybody]]) - and the [[wondrous]] storyline - I just [[amour]] this piece of creative [[engineers]]. I cannot [[recommending]] it more [[heavily]] - and [[Mike]] Jones added so much ([[Alien]] lead and [[primordial]] [[musician]] along with the [[biggest]] [[rocks]] singer ever - [[Lulu]] Gramm) - I have [[observed]] this [[wondrous]] [[jobs]] more than 10 times- Bill Nighy - what a voice - and [[Jimbo]] Nail - [[talents]] oozes from [[any]] pore - then [[Mrs]].... and [[Karin]]..... what more [[did]] an [[ageing]] rocker [[poser]] for!! 10/10 - [[homicidal]] [[wondrous]].

[[Ulster]], Perth, [[West]] Oz, Originally from Windsor, [[Brits]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Saving Grace" is never riotously funny, but it delivers quite a few good laughs and I enjoyed it to a significant degree. Brenda Blethyn is a fine actress, and does a good job at portraying widower Grace, who resorts to growing marijuana to pay off her massive debts. The supporting cast also does a fine job. French actor Tchecky Karyo has a funny little role. The premise alone is appealing. The idea of an over-the-hill woman growing and smoking pot sounds funny enough. And the film plays around with the premise wisely every now and then. Of course, there are flat moments, like one where two elderly women mistaken Grace's marijuana leaves for tea leaves and they start pulling childish antics at the store where they work. That was a mindless gag that didn't quite take off. The film's tone is downbeat and occasionally dull, but I got enough laughs to give this English import a recommendation.

My score: 7 (out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3037 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] It's not often I feel compelled to give negative criticism of a film; after all I often feel the maxim, "if you don't have anything good to say don't say it at all," would be apt advice for the many naysayers we listen to everyday who nitpick at things we like. [[If]] it's all the same to you the reader though I feel compelled to point out that with the lone exception of Christopher Walken in a returning role as [[Gabriel]] this movie is [[pathetically]] [[HORRID]]. I say this to you to warn you in [[advance]] that even if you are a fan of Walken's deadpan delivery and style or liked the original "Prophecy" that you will be sorely dissapointed. [[If]] you buy it, return it. If you rent it, make sure it's only ninety-nine cents.

What's wrong with this movie? A full list would take too long to read and would bore you to tears, but a [[short]] summary would be the following: the once rather crystalline clear picture of the relationship between angels and mortals of the first film is ripped to shreds. Gabriel is turned from the rather morbid right hand of God he once was (and in this role he is WICKEDLY funny in the first) to little more than a thug for heaven. Since Walken is so good at playing heavies (we all remember Frank White from "King of New York") he is still enjoyable but the supporting cast is an unmitigated and [[unconvincing]] mess of mortals and angels alike who couldn't buy a clue for 50 cents. If you can figure out the plot you're a smarter man than I. One gets the feeling we [[wander]] aimlessly from scene to scene just to move the film along to Walken's next [[big]] line. By the end of the [[movie]] you're actually wishing he'd blow his [[horn]] and make the walls of Jericho [[fall]] on the people who made this un-natural [[disaster]].

Bottom [[line]] - it's an [[insult]] to our [[intelligence]] that they [[made]] a sequel to this [[film]] in the first place. The [[original]] [[told]] the right [[story]], [[answered]] the [[questions]] that should have been, and [[left]] alone the ones you were [[meant]] to ponder afterwards. There are no [[compelling]] [[reasons]] to follow these [[characters]] that was in the first - the [[priest]] who lost his [[faith]], the [[little]] [[girl]] who kept the "big secret", the teacher who protected her [[children]] - even Lucifer himself was more interesting BY himself in the first film than all the other characters in the sequel put together. I feel sorry for anybody who sees this film and not the first because they'll probably never want to watch the original and that's a real tragedy. It's not often I feel compelled to give negative criticism of a film; after all I often feel the maxim, "if you don't have anything good to say don't say it at all," would be apt advice for the many naysayers we listen to everyday who nitpick at things we like. [[Though]] it's all the same to you the reader though I feel compelled to point out that with the lone exception of Christopher Walken in a returning role as [[Gabrielle]] this movie is [[ridiculously]] [[HORRIFIC]]. I say this to you to warn you in [[headway]] that even if you are a fan of Walken's deadpan delivery and style or liked the original "Prophecy" that you will be sorely dissapointed. [[Though]] you buy it, return it. If you rent it, make sure it's only ninety-nine cents.

What's wrong with this movie? A full list would take too long to read and would bore you to tears, but a [[terse]] summary would be the following: the once rather crystalline clear picture of the relationship between angels and mortals of the first film is ripped to shreds. Gabriel is turned from the rather morbid right hand of God he once was (and in this role he is WICKEDLY funny in the first) to little more than a thug for heaven. Since Walken is so good at playing heavies (we all remember Frank White from "King of New York") he is still enjoyable but the supporting cast is an unmitigated and [[feeble]] mess of mortals and angels alike who couldn't buy a clue for 50 cents. If you can figure out the plot you're a smarter man than I. One gets the feeling we [[roam]] aimlessly from scene to scene just to move the film along to Walken's next [[prodigious]] line. By the end of the [[filmmaking]] you're actually wishing he'd blow his [[trumpet]] and make the walls of Jericho [[autumn]] on the people who made this un-natural [[disasters]].

Bottom [[bloodline]] - it's an [[offend]] to our [[intelligentsia]] that they [[introduced]] a sequel to this [[filmmaking]] in the first place. The [[preliminary]] [[tells]] the right [[storytelling]], [[answering]] the [[issues]] that should have been, and [[gauche]] alone the ones you were [[intend]] to ponder afterwards. There are no [[cogent]] [[motifs]] to follow these [[traits]] that was in the first - the [[vicar]] who lost his [[creed]], the [[scant]] [[daughter]] who kept the "big secret", the teacher who protected her [[child]] - even Lucifer himself was more interesting BY himself in the first film than all the other characters in the sequel put together. I feel sorry for anybody who sees this film and not the first because they'll probably never want to watch the original and that's a real tragedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3038 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Loonatics Unleashed " is the worst thing that could happen to the classic characters created by Chuck Jones . The "Loony Tunes" have many spin -offs and different versions , some were good ,others not very much .But "Loonatics " it's the worst .The concept is stupid and derivative of shows as "The Power Rangers " and "Teen Titans " . There wasn't any similarity with the original characters and the stories are boring and poorly made . The new designs are ugly and the animation is pathetic . This show just doesn't work .This horrible waste of animation is a complete failure and this shouldn't have be nothing more than a bad joke . Lame ! Zero stars --------------------------------------------- Result 3039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] [[shows]] how [[racist]] [[John]] Singleton is. He portrays whites and other races that are not black as the evil that exists in our [[educational]] system. How quick he forgets that it is this same educational system that made him what he is and [[failed]] at it. Ice Cube's character is the epitome of an [[instigating]] black man that was responsible for most of the violence in this film. Singleton [[barely]] [[touched]] on the [[relationships]] between the white and black [[characters]] that were trying to reach out to each other. When Omar Epps says " I need to be with my people", that racist remark spoke volume. And John, don't think for a minute that the picture of Thomas Jefferson in the tower stairwell did not get my attention. Nice [[touch]]! This [[filmmaking]] [[showcase]] how [[racial]] [[Giovanni]] Singleton is. He portrays whites and other races that are not black as the evil that exists in our [[pedagogical]] system. How quick he forgets that it is this same educational system that made him what he is and [[faulted]] at it. Ice Cube's character is the epitome of an [[instigate]] black man that was responsible for most of the violence in this film. Singleton [[hardly]] [[impacted]] on the [[relations]] between the white and black [[attribute]] that were trying to reach out to each other. When Omar Epps says " I need to be with my people", that racist remark spoke volume. And John, don't think for a minute that the picture of Thomas Jefferson in the tower stairwell did not get my attention. Nice [[touches]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3040 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my [[opinion]], Hathaway did [[superb]] direction that [[conveys]] what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon [[philosophies]] and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.

I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will [[enjoy]] the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.

1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a [[unique]] quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial. Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my [[visualise]], Hathaway did [[funky]] direction that [[airs]] what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon [[stances]] and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.

I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will [[enjoys]] the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.

1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a [[sole]] quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial. --------------------------------------------- Result 3041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I've [[recently]] went back and watched this movie again from not seeing it in years. When I first seen the movie I was too [[young]] to understand what the movie was about. Now that I've seen it again I couldn't believe what I've [[missed]] all these years. For me being able to see [[movies]] for what they are, I think that this movie was [[great]]. [[Most]] people feel as [[though]] the music are the best part, but I don't [[think]] that's true. Most people don't realize how good the story is because it's [[judge]] by the acting. The truth of the matter is that no one in the movie were really trying to act [[rather]] they were just being themselves. The entire main cast were just playing themselves. They weren't trying to be anyone else, but themselves.

I've actually watched and analyzed the work and effort put into the movie. Now from my [[perspective]], the situations shown in the movie are pretty much based on what actually went on musically in Minneapolis at the time and it's most of the [[things]] that happen are actually [[true]] [[events]] that happened in Prince's career and who can tell it better than him? The music that was [[coming]] from the [[city]] at the time was starting to be recognized and be revolutionary. It was interesting to see how the music was very influential [[mainly]] at the club "First Avenue & 7th St [[Entry]]" where in fact Prince, [[among]] other musicians, [[got]] their [[career]] [[started]]. It's [[also]] a known fact that Prince and Morris Day [[always]] had a [[competition]] with each other in real [[life]], but it was a [[friendly]] competition. They were [[always]] [[friends]]. So the story basically plays off of that [[competition]] aspect of their rivalry [[rather]] than their [[friendship]] which [[shows]] the [[true]] [[competitive]] side of what [[occurred]] at club "First Avenue" for it's [[time]].

Another [[reason]] why this [[movie]] is good is due to the fact that some of the [[situations]] that occur in the [[movie]] are actually [[based]] on [[events]] that Prince has gone through in his life with the music aspect and the personal. To me, this made the [[movie]] more [[realistic]] as far as the emotion because he's [[telling]] his [[trials]] and tribulations pre-superstardom. [[Plus]], his [[dedication]] he [[puts]] into his performances is [[phenomenal]]. Prince [[made]] sure that [[every]] [[moment]] in the [[movie]] was done [[perfectly]]. Anytime you [[hear]] a [[song]] [[play]] in the [[movie]] it's in [[perfect]] [[sync]] with the situation at hand.

Prince is in all a musical genius and he has proved it on many occasions. This movie is what really put Prince on the map officially and he hasn't slowed down since. Anyone who has watched this movie or still (unbelieveably) hasn't watched it yet, when you sit down and view this film you have have to watch it with intellect or you will miss the whole aspect of the movie. If you really love music this is definitely the movie to watch. Above what anyone else says I think it's a great movie to watch and own. I've [[lately]] went back and watched this movie again from not seeing it in years. When I first seen the movie I was too [[youthful]] to understand what the movie was about. Now that I've seen it again I couldn't believe what I've [[miss]] all these years. For me being able to see [[theater]] for what they are, I think that this movie was [[wondrous]]. [[Longer]] people feel as [[despite]] the music are the best part, but I don't [[thinking]] that's true. Most people don't realize how good the story is because it's [[richter]] by the acting. The truth of the matter is that no one in the movie were really trying to act [[quite]] they were just being themselves. The entire main cast were just playing themselves. They weren't trying to be anyone else, but themselves.

I've actually watched and analyzed the work and effort put into the movie. Now from my [[viewpoint]], the situations shown in the movie are pretty much based on what actually went on musically in Minneapolis at the time and it's most of the [[items]] that happen are actually [[real]] [[happenings]] that happened in Prince's career and who can tell it better than him? The music that was [[come]] from the [[town]] at the time was starting to be recognized and be revolutionary. It was interesting to see how the music was very influential [[basically]] at the club "First Avenue & 7th St [[Inlet]]" where in fact Prince, [[between]] other musicians, [[gets]] their [[quarry]] [[starts]]. It's [[further]] a known fact that Prince and Morris Day [[steadily]] had a [[rivalries]] with each other in real [[living]], but it was a [[amicable]] competition. They were [[steadily]] [[buddies]]. So the story basically plays off of that [[rivalry]] aspect of their rivalry [[fairly]] than their [[goodwill]] which [[displayed]] the [[truthful]] [[compete]] side of what [[arose]] at club "First Avenue" for it's [[moment]].

Another [[raison]] why this [[flick]] is good is due to the fact that some of the [[instances]] that occur in the [[kino]] are actually [[predicated]] on [[incidents]] that Prince has gone through in his life with the music aspect and the personal. To me, this made the [[films]] more [[practical]] as far as the emotion because he's [[saying]] his [[lawsuits]] and tribulations pre-superstardom. [[Longer]], his [[pledge]] he [[raises]] into his performances is [[unbelievable]]. Prince [[brought]] sure that [[any]] [[time]] in the [[movies]] was done [[completely]]. Anytime you [[overheard]] a [[chanson]] [[playing]] in the [[film]] it's in [[faultless]] [[synch]] with the situation at hand.

Prince is in all a musical genius and he has proved it on many occasions. This movie is what really put Prince on the map officially and he hasn't slowed down since. Anyone who has watched this movie or still (unbelieveably) hasn't watched it yet, when you sit down and view this film you have have to watch it with intellect or you will miss the whole aspect of the movie. If you really love music this is definitely the movie to watch. Above what anyone else says I think it's a great movie to watch and own.